Monthly Archives: August 2022

August 21, 2022 READING A PROVERB A DAY (PROVERBS 21) Adrian Rogers “How to Be the Father of a Wise Child” “When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise” (21:11).

August 21, 2022 – 2:56 am

—

Proverbs 21New Living Translation

21 The king’s heart is like a stream of water directed by the Lord;
he guides it wherever he pleases.

²People may be right in their own eyes,
but the Lord examines their heart.

³The Lord is more pleased when we do what is right and just
than when we offer him sacrifices.

⁴Haughty eyes, a proud heart,
and evil actions are all sin.

⁵Good planning and hard work lead to prosperity,
but hasty shortcuts lead to poverty.

⁶Wealth created by a lying tongue
is a vanishing mist and a deadly trap.^[a]

⁷The violence of the wicked sweeps them away,
because they refuse to do what is just.

⁸The guilty walk a crooked path;
the innocent travel a straight road.

⁹It’s better to live alone in the corner of an attic
than with a quarrelsome wife in a lovely home.

¹⁰Evil people desire evil;
their neighbors get no mercy from them.

¹¹If you punish a mocker, the simpleminded become wise;
if you instruct the wise, they will be all the wiser.

¹²The Righteous One^[b] knows what is going on in the homes of the wicked;
he will bring disaster on them.

¹³Those who shut their ears to the cries of the poor
will be ignored in their own time of need.

¹⁴A secret gift calms anger;
a bribe under the table pacifies fury.

¹⁵Justice is a joy to the godly,
but it terrifies evildoers.

¹⁶The person who strays from common sense
will end up in the company of the dead.

¹⁷Those who love pleasure become poor;
those who love wine and luxury will never be rich.

¹⁸The wicked are punished in place of the godly,
and traitors in place of the honest.

¹⁹It’s better to live alone in the desert
than with a quarrelsome, complaining wife.

²⁰The wise have wealth and luxury,
but fools spend whatever they get.

²¹Whoever pursues righteousness and unfailing love
will find life, righteousness, and honor.

²²The wise conquer the city of the strong
and level the fortress in which they trust.

²³Watch your tongue and keep your mouth shut,
and you will stay out of trouble.

²⁴Mockers are proud and haughty;
they act with boundless arrogance.

²⁵Despite their desires, the lazy will come to ruin,
for their hands refuse to work.

²⁶Some people are always greedy for more,
but the godly love to give!

²⁷The sacrifice of an evil person is detestable,
especially when it is offered with wrong motives.

²⁸A false witness will be cut off,
but a credible witness will be allowed to speak.

²⁹The wicked bluff their way through,
but the virtuous think before they act.

³⁰No human wisdom or understanding or plan
can stand against the Lord.

³¹The horse is prepared for the day of battle,
but the victory belongs to the Lord.

How to Be the Father of a Wise Child

Why do some children adore their dads and others hate their dads? What’s the difference in dads? I’ve observed dads, and there’s one characteristic I’ve found in almost all dads whose children love and follow them. I’m going to tell you what that characteristic is in a moment.

Sometimes children are caught up in the mistakes and mindset of fathers who won’t do what they should to guide those children into a safe, secure haven. Their own pride and arrogance make shipwreck both of their own lives and their children’s. It doesn’t have to be this way.

The book of Proverbs is a veritable owner’s manual on how to raise a wise child. In large part, that’s why the book was written. From the first chapter, it says:

²To know wisdom and instruction, to perceive the words of understanding; ³To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment and equity. ⁴To give subtlety to the simple and to the young man, knowledge and discretion.⁵A wise man will hear and will increase learning and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels… ²⁰Wisdom crieth without, she uttereth her voice in the streets. ²¹She crieth in the chief place of the concourse in the opening of the gates. In the city she uttereth her words saying, ²²“How long ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? And scorners delight in their scorning and fools hate knowledge?” (Proverbs 1)

Underscore three words in this passage: simple, scorners, and fools. A child isn’t born a scorner or a fool. Verse 22 reveals there’s a long road in the evolution of a fool.

THE IGNORANCE OF THE SIMPLE

The word “simple” in verse 22 means open and naïve; children’ minds and hearts are plastic—easily shaped, innocent.

They lack understanding.²²“How long ye simple ones will ye love simplicity?” There comes a time when the child must be guided out of his simplicity and into wisdom and maturity.

They are easily led into error. A child is an easy target for Madison Avenue, MTV, false religions, and sinful friends. Because they’re so open, they’ll believe anything. They’re like a sponge, you can trick them, flim-flam them, but they’re living in constant danger. “The simple believeth every word…” (14:15). “A prudent man forseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on and are punished” (22:3). The simple thinks he’s indestructible, never weighing the future, easy to lead to the slaughter.

THE DEFIANCE OF THE SCORNER

The scorner, however, has gone a step farther. Heads up, dads. If not guided by dad and mom, they take the next step down—they become the scorner. They get their jollies from being the teenage smart aleck, the cynic in business, the mocker at the university. It breaks my heart to say it, but most teenagers in America are now scorners.

They defy instruction because “scorners delight in their scorning” (1:22) “A wise son heareth his father’s instruction, but a scorner heareth not rebuke (13:1). A scorner will fire back at you (9:8). They won’t listen. It’s like talking to a brick wall—they’ll tune you out.

They despise the good and godly. “A scorner loveth not the one that reproveth him” (15:12). They’ll never come and say, “Dad, I need help. Will you help me out?” When you try to correct the scorner, they’ll look at you and say with their eyes, “I hate your guts.”

They’re destined for destruction. “Whoso despiseth the Word shall be destroyed” (13:13). If they laugh at the Word of God, they may laugh their way right into Hell. The scorner is very hard to reach, but there is yet hope; they can still be reclaimed.

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FOOL

First there was the simple—naive, open, and carefree. But if he’s not taught, he becomes the scorner. Then the scorner becomes a fool. The scorner is insolent, but the fool is immovable— rebellious, arrogant, and wicked.

The fool rejects wisdom. ²²“And fools hate knowledge.” “The heart of him that hath understanding seeketh knowledge, but the mouth of fools feedeth on foolishness” (15:14).

He ridicules righteousness. “Fools make a mock at sin” (14:9). This is why we have sitcoms that laugh at drunkenness, glorify adultery, mock marriage, promote homosexuality and relish perversion. Who does that? Fools.

He rejoices in iniquity. “Folly is a joy to him that is destitute of wisdom” (15:20-21). His moral sense has been so perverted, he calls good evil and evil good. His heart is hardened, conscience seared, mind defiled.

He rejects reproof. “Whom the Father loves, He chastens and scourges every son whom He receiveth.” God will chasten those who are His own, but “A reproof entereth more into a wise man than a hundred stripes into a fool” (17:10).Trying to reprove the fool will get you nowhere. Don’t even try. He won’t hear you. He is intransigent. If he were wise, when God chastised him, he would repent.

God gives us little children who begin life “simple”—innocent and open. But if you’re not careful, society will turn them into a smart aleck. If they’re not rescued, dad, when they becomes scorners or smart alecks, they’ll become fools. The fool is on the fast-track for Hell.

We are in serious trouble in America. In 1962, prayer in public schools was declared unconstitutional. In 1963, Bible reading in schools was deemed “unconstitutional” but the killing of pre-born children somehow became (1973) a Constitutional “right.” Then (1980) the Ten Commandments posted on school walls must be removed because—they said—“The child might be tempted to emulate them.”

Secular humanists have proven to be great strategists. They found the one segment of life almost every child will pass through—public education—and targeted it to become their “Sunday School” for humanist philosophy. To do that, they had to purge out any vestige of Christian influence.

To not to raise a fool, what can you do? With everything in modern culture fighting against you, you must gear up for this battle, dads.

1. Expound truth. Saturate them in the Proverbs. Emblazon the Ten Commandments onto their consciousness. Teach them the Beatitudes, that they might learn these simple, basic truths. The battle is for the mind. As the child thinks, so is he.

It’s your God-given responsibility (see Deuteronomy 6:6-9) is to teach these commandments to your sons and grandsons that your family will survive and your home endure.

2. Expose sin. The simple will learn by example when they see discipline falling upon the scorner. Children need to see what happens when sin is exposed and consequences are suffered. “When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise” (21:11). The worst thing would be for your child to live in a sinful society where he never sees the repercussions of sin. Our children today are insulated; often they don’t see the result of sin. You need to help them understand. Don’t only expound truth, but expose sin. Take him down to skid row. Take him to the prisons. Let him see the end result of bad choices. “Smite a scorner, and the simple will beware” (Proverbs 19:25). They will learn. He thinks he’s indestructible. He does not know. You need to pull back the veil.

3. Expel scorners. Do not let your children hang around with scorners and fools. Just don’t do it. Help him select his friends. That means you may have to be firm and cast out the scorner. Why? Impressionable children will succumb to peer pressure.

Open up your house to your child’s friends. Make your home the headquarters for happiness. And while they’re there, you can monitor those friends. Peer pressure is not bad if the peers are good. If there’s a scorner, a smart aleck, or a fool, you say, “Son, there’s the sidewalk.” “Cast out the scorner and contention shall go out. Yea, strife and reproach shall cease.” (22:10). Moms and dads, underscore this: “He that walketh with wise men shall be wise. But a companion of fools shall be destroyed” (13 20).

4. Express love. Love your children! Delight in them. “For whom the Lord loveth He correcteth, even as a father the son in whom he delighteth” (3:12). Be positive! Don’t be negative. Words can hurt your children more than a slap in the face. Learn to listen. Try to see life from their point of view. They’re facing things you never faced.

5. Be gentle. This is that one characteristic I mentioned at the beginning, which I’ve seen in all dads whose children love and follow them: They are gentle. That’s what children want out of their dad. Yes, they want a dad they can look up to, who’s the strongest, wisest, smartest, fastest, best dad in the world…but they want him to be gentle! Touch them, hug them, give them non-verbal affection.

6. Be transparent. Let them know your fears, joys, disappointments, failures, and goals. They already know you’re not perfect; they don’t want you to be a phony.

7. Be available. Make it a priority that you’re going to be available to your child.

You say, “Pastor Rogers, very frankly, I’m not adequate.”

I know—I’m not either. None of us has what it takes to be this kind of dad or mom. That’s the reason we need Jesus isn’t it? We’ve got to have Christ in our hearts! Because the Christian life is not difficult, it’s impossible. Only one can do it, and that’s Jesus. But He will do it in us and through us if we’ll let Him. The best thing you can do for your children is to love God will all your heart. Give your heart to Jesus.

Seeing Jesus in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job

July 16, 2013 – 1:28 am

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 10) Summing up Proverbs study

May 30, 2013 – 1:06 am

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. (I have posted John MacArthur’s amazing […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. It is tough to guard your […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 2) What does it mean to fear the Lord?

May 2, 2013 – 1:13 am

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. What does it mean to fear […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

The Wisdom of Solomon and the Book of Ecclesiastes

July 8, 2013 – 12:01 am

Ecclesiastes 6-8 | Solomon Turns Over a New Leaf Published on Oct 2, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | September 30, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider _____________________ I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Why is Solomon so depressed in Ecclesiastes? by Brent Cunningham

July 3, 2013 – 7:00 am

Ecclesiastes 1 Published on Sep 4, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | September 2, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider _____________________ I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I hope to show how […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Robert Leroe on Ecclesiastes (Mentions Thomas Aquinas, Princess Diana, Mother Teresa, King Solomon, King Rehoboam, Eugene Peterson, Chuck Swindoll, and John Newton.)

June 19, 2013 – 1:30 am

Solomon was the author of Ecclesiastes

June 11, 2013 – 1:55 am

Ecclesiastes: Solomon with Life in the Fast Lane

June 3, 2013 – 1:19 am

Ecclesiastes 6-8 | Solomon Turns Over a New Leaf Published on Oct 2, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | September 30, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider _____________________ I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Ecclesiastes a scathing and self-deprecating attack on hedonism and secular humanism by Solomon

May 31, 2013 – 1:17 am

Ecclesiastes 4-6 | Solomon’s Dissatisfaction Published on Sep 24, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | September 23, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider ___________________ I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I hope […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Solomon was right in his cynicism–unless……unless there is a God who created us and cares about us

May 22, 2013 – 1:34 am

The Humanist takes on Solomon and the Book of Ecclesiastes

May 20, 2013 – 1:13 pm

Tom Brady , Coldplay, Kansas, Solomon and the search for satisfaction (part 3)

December 23, 2011 – 11:12 am

Tom Brady “More than this…” Uploaded by EdenWorshipCenter on Jan 22, 2008 EWC sermon illustration showing a clip from the 2005 Tom Brady 60 minutes interview. _______________________ Tom Brady ESPN Interview Tom Brady has famous wife earned over 76 million dollars last year. However, has Brady found lasting satifaction in his life? It does not […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers on gambling

July 18, 2013 – 12:44 am

Adrian Rogers: How to Be a Child of a Happy Mother Published on Nov 13, 2012 Series: Fortifying Your Family (To read along turn on the annotations.) Adrian Rogers looks at the 5th commandment and the relationship of motherhood in the commandment to honor your father and mother, because the faith that doesn’t begin at home, […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Book of Ecclesiastes

July 17, 2013 – 1:40 am

Ecclesiastes 1 Published on Sep 4, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | September 2, 2012 | Pastor Derek Neider _____________________ I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I hope to show how secular humanist man […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers: Are fathers necessary?

July 16, 2013 – 12:43 am

Adrian Rogers – How to Cultivate a Marriage Another great article from Adrian Rogers. Are fathers necessary? “Artificial insemination is the ideal method of producing a pregnancy, and a lesbian partner should have the same parenting rights accorded historically to biological fathers.” Quoted from the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, summer of 1995. […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Tom Brady, Coldplay, Kansas, Solomon and the search for satisfaction (part 2)

December 22, 2011 – 11:56 am

Tom Brady “More than this…” Uploaded by EdenWorshipCenter on Jan 22, 2008 EWC sermon illustration showing a clip from the 2005 Tom Brady 60 minutes interview. To Download this video copy the URL to http://www.vixy.net ________________ Obviously from the video clip above, Tom Brady has realized that even though he has won many Super Bowls […]

—

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Britain’s ruling Conservatives have imposed some awful energy policies in recent years, but their cap on household energy bills deserves a special mention. The scheme has been an economic loser, and now it’s becoming a political loser in ways that illustrate the dangers when parties of the right play socialism lite. …The cap traces back to…when Tory Prime Minister Theresa May embarked on a campaign to position the Conservatives as a kinder, gentler party…Meanwhile, since it only raises prices at a lag rather than limiting them, the cap leaves households frighteningly exposed to recent movements in global gas prices… The moral: Even half-hearted energy price controls are political losers for conservative parties.

August 20, 2022 – 2:23 pm

—

Energy Policy and Big-Government Tories

I don’t like big-government Republicans in the United States, so it naturally follows that I don’t like big-government Tories in the United Kingdom.

Indeed, I wrote just a few days ago about the new leadership race for the Conservative Party in the U.K. and wondered whether either of the candidates has what it takes to reverse Boris Johnson’s failed statism.

I hope one of them is the reincarnation of Margaret Thatcher (just as I’ve been waiting decades for another Ronald Reagan).

We will find out relatively quickly. The race for Prime Minister will be decided next month and I will be very interested to see whether the winner fixes two very foolish energy policies.

The Wall Street Journal has a pair of excellent editorials this month.

On August 18, the paper opined about a bone-headed policy to cap energy bills.

Britain’s ruling Conservatives have imposed some awful energy policies in recent years, but their cap on household energy bills deserves a special mention. The scheme has been an economic loser, and now it’s becoming a political loser in ways that illustrate the dangers when parties of the right play socialism lite. …The cap traces back to…when Tory Prime Minister Theresa May embarked on a campaign to position the Conservatives as a kinder, gentler party.The effort didn’t work politically. In that year’s snap election she lost the majority… But the price-cap notion lived on and she implemented it in 2019. …The cap has exacerbated economic havoc in Britain’s energy market. As global gas and other commodity prices started to rise in 2021, energy retailers found it impossible to pass to consumers the prices retailers were paying for the energy they were supplying. This has contributed to a wave of bankruptcies… Meanwhile, since it only raises prices at a lag rather than limiting them, the cap leaves households frighteningly exposed to recent movements in global gas prices… The moral: Even half-hearted energy price controls are political losers for conservative parties.

It’s worth noting that energy prices are needlessly high in part because of bad government policy.

Which brings us to the WSJ‘s August 12 editorial.

Reports this week point to spiraling costs for households and businesses this winter, pushing millions of Britons closer to poverty. It’s a steep price for climate alarmism. …Politicians are eager to dodge responsibility for this disaster, and Russia offers a convenient excuse. …But these trends are inseparable from Britain’s homegrown fixation with achieving net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050. That’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s worst mistake… Various green charges add £153 to the annual household bill… But other net-zero costs lurk in household energy bills and budgets. The electric grid operator spent about £3.4 billion over the past year…a cost that tends to be higher due to the unreliability of wind and solar, and that’s passed to consumers… Another imponderable is how much lower gas prices would be if Britain produced more itself. Conservative Party administrations have flirted for years with proposals for shale-gas fracking in northern England only to lose their nerve. …So much for those who say conservative parties need to adopt the left’s climate agenda to court younger voters. Net zero has turned the Tories into the party that is impoverishing Britain.

In other words, bad policy is bad politics, which is the mirror image of my contention that good policy is good politics.

We will see whether the Tories have learned that lesson.

P.S. Some otherwise sensible people in the U.S. are flirting with making the same mistake with energy policy. Perhaps the failure of such policies in the U.K. will teach them something (but I won’t hold my breath).

Biden Overstepped Constitutional Authority When He Revoked Keystone Pipeline Permit, Multiple States Allege in Lawsuit

Thomas Catenacci / @ThomasCatenacci / March 18, 2021

A group of 21 Republican state attorneys general has accused President Joe Biden of overstepping his constitutional authority when he revoked the Keystone XL pipeline’s federal permit. Pictured: Biden delivers remarks in the State Dining Room of the White House March 15, 2021, in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

A group of 21 Republican state attorneys general filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday against President Joe Biden’s administration over its decision to nix the Keystone XL pipeline.

The states, led by Montana and Texas, accused Biden of overstepping his constitutional authority when he revoked the Keystone XL pipeline’s federal permit on Jan. 20 hours after entering office, in the lawsuit filed Wednesday afternoon in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.

“The power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce belongs to Congress—not the President,” Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen said in a statement Wednesday. “This is another example of Joe Biden overstepping his constitutional role to the detriment of Montanans.”

“There is not even a perceived environmental benefit to his actions—his attempt to cancel the Keystone XL Pipeline is an empty virtue signal to his wealthy coastal elite donors,” Knudsen said. “It shows Biden’s contempt for rural communities in Montana and other states along the pipeline’s path that would benefit from and support the project.”

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

Congress never granted the president the authority to revoke the pipeline’s permit, which is a regulation of interstate and international commerce, according to the lawsuit. The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the sole power to regulate interstate and international commerce.

Further, Biden violated the rules previously set by Congress on what actions the executive branch may take regarding the Keystone pipeline, the lawsuit said.

Biden had stated that keeping the pipeline’s permit would not be consistent with his “economic and climate imperatives,” which include solving the world’s climate crisis. The complaint Wednesday argued that he couldn’t alter U.S. domestic policy with the intention of conducting foreign policy.

“The President has certain prerogatives to act on behalf of the United States in foreign affairs,” the lawsuit said. “But as far as domestic law is concerned, the President must work with and abide by the limits set by Congress—whether he likes them or not.”

“This Administration has sought to leverage its power regarding U.S. foreign policy to unilaterally contradict Congress’s stated domestic policy regarding one of the most significant energy projects in a generation: the Keystone XL Pipeline,” the lawsuit said.

Former President Donald Trump’s March 2019 executive order approving the pipeline permit was constitutional because it fell in line with the “repeatedly expressed preferences” of Congress, according to Wednesday’s complaint.

The lawsuit also noted the damages incurred by Biden’s decision to nix the pipeline’s permit. The project was estimated to generate $55.6 million in property taxes across 27 counties in just three states and to create more than 42,000 jobs.

The project is an extension of an existing TC Energy pipeline that already transports crude oil from Canada to the U.S., according to The Wall Street Journal. The extension would carry crude directly from Alberta, Canada, to Steele City, Nebraska, where it would connect to existing pipeline that stretches to the Gulf of Mexico.

The part of the pipeline extension that crosses the U.S.-Canada border is mostly completed, the lawsuit said.

Montana, Texas, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming were listed as plaintiffs on the suit.

Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas were all listed as defendants.

On Feb. 10, 14 attorneys general, including many listed in Wednesday’s lawsuit, sent a letter “with alarm” to the Biden administration, urging the president to reconsider his decision to effectively kill the pipeline. The letter warned that the states had been reviewing all available legal options to protect their residents.

“Your decision will result in devastating damage to many of our states and local communities,” the attorneys general wrote in the letter to Biden. “Even those states outside the path of the Keystone XL pipeline—indeed all Americans—will suffer serious, detrimental consequences.”

Knudsen, the Montana attorney general, led the coalition, which included the top legal officers from Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas. Montana’s portion of the proposed pipeline would have been 285 miles long and was expected to generate more than 4,000 jobs.

John Kerry, the White House climate czar, recently said workers who lose their jobs due to the administration’s climate policies can find jobs making solar panels. The letter said the Biden administration’s insistence that laid off pipeline workers would be given green jobs in the future was a “cold promise.”

Several prominent trade unions, which endorsed Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign, strongly condemned the executive order. The unions ignored requests for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation asking why they supported Biden despite his campaign promise to nix the job-creating pipeline.

“Well, I wish he hadn’t done that on the first day,” Richard Trumka, the president of the powerful AFL-CIO, told Axios. “Because the Laborer’s International was right, it did and will cost us jobs in the process.”

The Teamsters, the Laborers’ International Union of North America, the International Union of Operating Engineers, and the United Association of Union Plumbers and Pipefitters signed the Keystone pipeline’s labor agreement in August. The agreement promised the creation of 42,000 “family-sustaining jobs” in the U.S. and $2 billion in total earnings for the all-union workforce.

The Laborers’ International Union of North America estimated that Biden’s executive action would kill thousands of union jobs. LIUNA General President Terry O’Sullivan called the action “insulting and disappointing.”

Meanwhile, 12 states sued the Biden administration over its climate policies on March 8. One day later, two states sued the administration over its immigration policies.

A group of Republican attorneys general threatened additional legal action against the Biden administration in a letter to Department of Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen Tuesday. The 21 attorneys general demanded clarity on Biden’s position regarding state tax policy.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature.

Joe Biden Signs COVID Bill With the Greatest Expansion of Abortion Funding in a Decade

NATIONAL STEVEN ERTELT MAR 11, 2021 | 4:59PM WASHINGTON, DC

Share this story:https://www.facebook.com/v2.6/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=172525162793917&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df3e89f2c1f35cee%26domain%3Dwww.lifenews.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.lifenews.com%252Ff12984aafd2427%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F11%2Fjoe-biden-signs-covid-bill-with-the-greatest-expansion-of-abortion-funding-in-a-decade%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joeyhttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.0edc1ef9f8b82d9b79c6115bda79f63f.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-1&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F11%2Fjoe-biden-signs-covid-bill-with-the-greatest-expansion-of-abortion-funding-in-a-decade%2F&size=m&text=Joe%20Biden%20Signs%20COVID%20Bill%20With%20the%20Greatest%20Expansion%20of%20Abortion%20Funding%20in%20a%20Decade&time=1615776366791&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F11%2Fjoe-biden-signs-covid-bill-with-the-greatest-expansion-of-abortion-funding-in-a-decade%2F%23.YE7KbrQHlz8.twitter

Joe Biden today signed the so-called COVID relief bill that is the greatest expansion of abortion in a decade. Although he claims to be a “devout Catholic,” Biden just signed a bill that forces Americans to fund abortions and the Planned Parenthood abortion business. It is the largest expansion of abortion funding since 2010, when Democrats passed Obamacare.

The COVID relief bill that spends all but 9% on COVID relief and will spend tens of millions, perhaps over $100 million on funding abortions and the Planned Parenthood abortion corporation.

In the Senate, Democrats defeated a pro-life amendment that would have stopped the COVID relief bill from using tens of millions and perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars to fund killing babies in abortions. Democrat Senators Joe Manchin and Bob Casey, who both claim to be pro-life, voted for the abortion-funding legislation after the amendment was defeated.

The Senate voted 52-47 to defeat the pro-life amendment offered by Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma to apply the Hyde Amendment to the COVID bill. Every Republican voted for the amendment along with Democrat senators Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Tim Kaine of Virginia, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Senator Sullivan of Alaska did not vote. despite voting for the amendemnt to stop abortion funding, Casey and Manchin eventually voted for the abortion-funding bill.

The amendment failed because it did not reach the 60-vote threshold needed to waive budget rules associated with the legislation. Without the 3/5 majority necessary, the amendment fails and the COVID bill will fund abortions.

Yesterday, the nation’s Catholic bishops slammed Democrats for passing the bill without any protections against abortion funding.

It is “unconscionable” that Congress passed the bill “without critical protections needed to ensure that billions of taxpayer dollars are used for life-affirming health care and not for abortion,” wrote the bishops in a statement.

“Unlike previous COVID [coronavirus] relief bills, sponsors of the American Rescue Plan Act refused to include the longstanding, bi-partisan consensus policy to prohibit taxpayer dollars from funding abortions domestically and internationally,” the bishops declared.

The policy was needed, they continued, “because this bill includes many general references to healthcare that, absent the express exclusion of abortion, have consistently been interpreted by federal courts not only to allow, but to compel, the provision of abortion without meaningful limit.”

“The many important, life-saving provisions in the American Rescue Plan Act have been undermined because it facilitates and funds the destruction of life, which is antithetical to its aim of protecting the most vulnerable Americans in a time of crisis,” they state.

The $350 billion state bailout funds are particularly problematic as the bill doesn’t prevent states and localities from using taxpayer funds to pay for abortions. Under the current guidelines, liberal states like New York and California, which are likely going to receive the lion’s share of the bailout, can funnel millions to abortion giants like Planned Parenthood if they choose.

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gabfor the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

The Family Research Council released a lengthy analysis of the funds in the bill that could be used to pay for abortions:

The American Rescue Plan Act lacks key abortion funding restrictions on over $459 billion, breaking decades of congressional precedent on restricting federal funding for abortion.

1. Funds that Can Directly Pay for Abortions (Up To $386.7 Billion):

$350 billion in funding for state and local governments with little to no guardrails against funding abortions. The funding formula is tilted towards blue states like California and New York who are more likely to abuse this money to fund abortions directly and bail out Planned Parenthood the abortion industry.
$8.5 billion for the Provider Relief Fund, which could be used to directly finance abortions as well as to bail out abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood
$7.66 billion for public health workers
$7.6 billion for community health centers
$800 million for National Health Service Corps
$750 million for global health activities under the Center for Disease Control
$500 million for rural health clinics
$330 million for Teaching Health Centers that operate Graduate Medical Education
$200 million for medical reserve corps
$200 million for the nurse corps
$200 million for programs related to sexual assault and domestic violence
Amounts of $10 billion for COVID medical supplies that remain after September 2022 are allowed to be spent on other public health-related activities which can include abortion.

2. Funds that Can Subsidize Abortion ($704 Million) and Abortion Lobbying ($10 Billion) Overseas:

$10 billion in foreign assistance funds not subject to the Siljander Amendment, allowing these funds to be used for international abortion lobbying.

Of these funds, $500 million in humanitarian response activities for migrants and refugees by the United Nations also lack Helms Amendment protections to prevent the UN from using these funds to pay for abortions.
Of these funds, $204 million for State Department Activities also lack Helms Amendment protections, allowing these funds to be used for abortions abroad.
Of these funds $8.7 billioncan be spent on contraception and sterilization procedures overseas and are likely to go to the major abortion business like International Planned Parenthood and MSI Reproductive Choices that provide these services.

3. Major Subsidies for Health Plans that Cover Abortion ($81.7 Billion):

For 2021 and 2022, vastly expands Obamacare’s premium tax credits and cost sharing reduction payments, which subsidizes plans that cover abortion. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimatesthese subsidies to cost $45.624 billion.

Those under 150% of federal poverty level (FPL) would receive a 100% taxpayer subsidy to enroll in silver plans.
Those unemployed of any income level (for 2021) would receive a 100% taxpayer subsidy to enroll in a silver plan, and enhanced cost-sharing reduction payments.
Those between 150% and 400% FPL would receive a much more generous subsidy than current law.
Middle class taxpayers above 400% FPL, ineligible under current law, would become newly eligible for a significant subsidy so that the benchmark silver premium doesn’t exceed 8.5% of household income.
For six months, subsidizes 100% of the cost of COBRA continuation coverage. This subsidy covers the cost of health care premiums for the newly unemployed to remain on their employer sponsored health plans, which includes many plans that cover abortion. JCT estimates these subsidies to cost $35.095 billion.

4. Bailout for Abortion Businesses ($50 Million)

$50 million for the Title X family planning program – The Biden administration will likely direct these funds to Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses that withdrew from Title X over pro-life changes that were made by the Trump administration. Longstanding requirements on political lobbying, encouraging parental involvement, and reporting sexual abuse are not included.

The pro-life group SBA List wrote to senators ahead of the Senate vote urging them to adopt pro-life amendments to curb abortion funding.

“While prior bipartisan COVID relief packages have included Hyde protections on funding streams that fall outside of existing limits on abortion funding, this bill departs from the status quo by leaving funds open to use for abortion. COVID relief money should be used for life-affirming purposes… we strongly support and will score in favor of amendments to mitigate the funding of abortion, abortion coverage, or abortion providers,” it wrote.

SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser added: “Pro-abortion forces emboldened by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are shamelessly exploiting the COVID-19 crisis to expand abortion on demand, paid for by taxpayers. By failing to include Hyde Amendment protections and forcing taxpayers to bail out the abortion industry, their so-called ‘rescue plan’ abandons some of the most vulnerable Americans – unborn children and their mothers. Their agenda will divide, rather than unite our nation as this administration promised.”

Tom McClusky, president of March for Life Action also told LifeNews that the pro-life group opposes the bill without pro-life amendments to stop abortion funding.

“The current COVID-19 relief package has the potential to be the largest expansion of abortion funding since Obamacare. Less than 10% of the ‘relief’ actually goes towards combatting the pandemic. Instead, pro-abortion politicians are using this bill to open the floodgates to abortion funding, with billions of dollars unprotected from being used for the life-ending practice both here in the U.S. and abroad. This is radically out of step with the majority of Americans who oppose their tax dollars funding it. Americans who have been suffering from the effects of the pandemic deserve authentic relief, not this pro-abortion bonanza,” he said.

Follow LifeNews on the Parler social media network for the latest pro-life news!

Fortunately one of the abortion funding provisions was removed from the bill prior the Senate vote.

Senator Rand Paul has forced Democrats to remove a pro-abortion provision in their massive $1.9 trillion COVID bill that would have allowed every Planned Parenthood across America to receive free money through the Paycheck Protection Program. Last year, the Planned Parenthood abortion business improperly applied for and received $80 million in federal funds meant to support small businesses as they battle the economic fallout from the coronavirus.

That is despite the fact that the rules and regulations associated with the program specifically prohibited affiliates of larger organizations with more than 500 employees from applying. That covers Planned Parenthood as Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PFFA) alone has had more than 600 employees.

Shockingly, only 9% of the bill’s funding will go to public health issues, and almost half of the funding, not including the proposed stimulus checks, won’t be distributed until 2022 at the earliest.

Recent Marist polling, though, shows Americans overwhelmingly oppose taxpayer funding of abortion overseas. The survey reveals 77 percent of Americans reject the idea of taxpayer dollars funding abortion abroad while a majority of Democrats—55 percent—also oppose taxpayer funding of abortion abroad.

Share this story:https://www.facebook.com/v2.6/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=172525162793917&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df164e6197e72f68%26domain%3Dwww.lifenews.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.lifenews.com%252Ff12984aafd2427%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F11%2Fjoe-biden-signs-covid-bill-with-the-greatest-expansion-of-abortion-funding-in-a-decade%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joeyhttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.0edc1ef9f8b82d9b79c6115bda79f63f.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-2&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F11%2Fjoe-biden-signs-covid-bill-with-the-greatest-expansion-of-abortion-funding-in-a-decade%2F&size=m&text=Joe%20Biden%20Signs%20COVID%20Bill%20With%20the%20Greatest%20Expansion%20of%20Abortion%20Funding%20in%20a%20Decade&time=1615776366792&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F11%2Fjoe-biden-signs-covid-bill-with-the-greatest-expansion-of-abortion-funding-in-a-decade%2F%23.YE7KbotmJ2E.twitter

March 1, 2021

Office of Barack and Michelle Obama
P.O. Box 91000
Washington, DC 20066

Dear President Obama,

I wrote you over 700 letters while you were President and I mailed them to the White House and also published them on my blog http://www.thedailyhatch.org .I received several letters back from your staff and I wanted to thank you for those letters.

I have been reading your autobiography A PROMISED LAND and I have been enjoying it.

Let me make a few comments on it, and here is the first quote of yours I want to comment on:

The 1973 Roe v. Wade decision focused further attention on Court appointments with every nomination from that point on triggering a pitched battle between pro-choice and anti-abortion forces.

—

I know that you are a professing Christian but I wonder how you the view the Bible? Do you believe like evangelicals that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and is historically accurate? Tony Dungy is an evangelical and like me he is pro-life. Take a look at this article below:

—-

Ex-NFL coach Tony Dungy skeptical about Warnock’s faith after ‘pro-choice pastor’ tweet

DECEMBER 11, 2020 BY RYAN GAYDOS

Former NFL coach Tony Dungy is a man who takes his Christian faith very seriously, and when it comes to Rev. Raphael Warnock, who is running for U.S. Senate in Georgia, he wasn’t so sure about him.

Warnock, a Democrat and pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church, is in the middle of a runoff election against Sen. Kelly Loeffler, R-Ga.

Warnock tweeted Tuesday he was a “pro-choice pastor,” which inherently goes against the pro-life views of most Christians.

WARNOCK COMPARED AMERICA TO COMMUNIST CUBA, SAID FIDEL CASTRO HAD ‘COMPLEX’ LEGACY IN RESURFACED VIDEO

When a Twitter user pointed out on Wednesday that “pro-choice pastors” do exist, the Super Bowl champion head coach appeared skeptical.

“Rev Warner may be a pastor. My question would be ‘Is he a Christian?’ That is, does he follow the teachings of Jesus and does he believe that the Bible is the absolute word of God?” tweeted, who is a football commentaror for NBC.

He added: “I would think it would be difficult for someone who believes that God sees us when we are in the womb (Psalm 139:13-16) to think that it is OK to choose not to bring that life to fruition.”

On Thursday, another Twitter user said being pro-choice didn’t mean that a person was pro-abortion. Dungy replied, “Please read Psalm 139:13-16. Then tell me if you think God puts babies in the womb or man does? If you believe they randomly get there then I have no argument. But if you believe God puts them there, then how does anyone have a right to ‘choose’ which ones survive?”

LOEFFLER AD BLITZ TARGETS WARNOCK’S ALLEGED PAST DISMISSALS OF CRITIQUES ON SOCIALISM

He then clarified his position in another way.

“What if I was advocating for the right to kill someone who was already born? Would that be morally OK? Of course not. The only question in this debate is what we think of the unborn baby? Is it a life or is it not?”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM

Dungy is not one to shy away from his faith. In 2006, it was noted that Dungy nearly put his football career on pause to join the prison ministry. And over the course of his career he worked in community service organizations and was a public speaker for the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733 everettehatcher@gmail.com

Open letter to President Obama (Part 293) (Founding Fathers’ view on Christianity, Elbridge Gerry of MA)

April 10, 2013 – 7:02 am

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. There have […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit |Comments (0)

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 5, John Hancock)

May 8, 2012 – 1:48 am

There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 4, Elbridge Gerry)

May 7, 2012 – 1:46 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 3, Samuel Adams)

May 4, 2012 – 1:45 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 2, John Quincy Adams)

May 3, 2012 – 1:42 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 1, John Adams)

May 2, 2012 – 1:13 am

President Obama and the Founding Fathers

May 8, 2013 – 9:20 am

President Obama Speaks at The Ohio State University Commencement Ceremony Published on May 5, 2013 President Obama delivers the commencement address at The Ohio State University. May 5, 2013. You can learn a lot about what President Obama thinks the founding fathers were all about from his recent speech at Ohio State. May 7, 2013, […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the founding fathers and their belief in inalienable rights

December 5, 2012 – 12:38 am

Dr. C. Everett Koop with Bill Graham. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (1)

David Barton: In their words, did the Founding Fathers put their faith in Christ? (Part 4)

May 30, 2012 – 1:35 am

America’s Founding Fathers Deist or Christian? – David Barton 4/6 There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Tagged governor of connecticut, john witherspoon, jonathan trumbull | Edit | Comments (1)

Were the founding fathers christian?

May 23, 2012 – 7:04 am

3 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton There were 55 gentlemen who put together the constitution and their church affliation is of public record. Greg Koukl notes: Members of the Constitutional Convention, the most influential group of men shaping the political foundations of our nation, were […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)

John Quincy Adams a founding father?

June 29, 2011 – 3:58 pm

I do not think that John Quincy Adams was a founding father in the same sense that his father was. However, I do think he was involved in the early days of our government working with many of the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann got into another history-related tussle on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today, standing […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part E “Moral absolutes and abortion” Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 5(includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

July 6, 2013 – 1:26 am

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (0)

Article from Adrian Rogers, “Bring back the glory”

June 11, 2013 – 12:34 am

I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the possibility that minorities may be mistreated under 51% rule

June 9, 2013 – 1:21 am

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ____________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book really helped develop my political […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

—-

—

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

AFTER LIFE 3 Review and Open Letter to Ricky Gervais Part 46 KATH: He’s a lawyer! He had the costume and everything. I can’t tell him I work for a free local paper. He’ll think I’m a loser. TONY: Tell him you’re an investigative journalist.KATH: No, that’ll frighten him. He’ll think I’m looking into him. What would a lawyer want me to be? TONY: …Just be yourself. Tell the truth. Always tell the truth.

August 20, 2022 – 1:16 pm

—

—-

After Life TV Show on Netflix: canceled or renewed?

—

World Exclusive: After Life Season 3: The First few Minutes

After Life | Season 3 Official Trailer | Netflix

—

episodes will be released on January 14th.

Just Three Things. Written for #Afterlife by Ricky Gervais and Andy Burrows

August 5, 2022

Ricky Gervais

London, W1F 0LE
UK

Dear Ricky,

KATH: He’s a lawyer! He had the costume and everything. I can’t tell him I work for a free local paper. He’ll think I’m a loser.

TONY: Tell him you’re an investigative journalist.

KATH: No, that’ll frighten him. He’ll think I’m looking into him. What would a lawyer want me to be?
TONY: …Just be yourself. Tell the truth. Always tell the truth.

LATER AT FIRST DATE BETWEEN CHARLES AND KATH:

Kath: : Um, so you’re a lawyer?

Charles: Uh, yes, a barrister.

Kath: Right. I’m not a barrister.

Charles: Okay. Uh, what is your job?

Kath: Oh, my job? Hmm. Um, okay, I… I’m not gonna lie. I’m a doctor.

Charles: Wow. Yeah. You got a practice?

Kath: No need! Done all that! Got my certificate and everything.

Charles: What? What did you say? Oh, um, do you have a practice? Are you a GP or a surgeon in a hospital?

Kath: Oh, yeah. ( chuckles ) Um, I work in a hospital as a doctor.

Charles: Right.

—

I grew up at Bellevue Baptist Church where since 1927 we have have had 4 pastors (Robert G.Lee 1927-1960, Ramsey Pollard 1960-1972, Adrian Rogers 1972-2005, and Steven Gaines 2005 to present).

R.G.Lee, Ramsey Pollard and Adrian Rogers in 1972 in front of Bellevue Baptist.

I got to attend Robert G. Lee’s funeral in 1978, and in 1975 heard him preach his famous sermon PAY DAY SOME DAY, and in many ways it reminded me of Adrian Rogers sermon THE FINAL JUDGEMENT. Today I want to look at another great sermon by Dr. Lee on Hell. He really makes a great point that even though this subject is unpleasant the real issue is truth and if the Bible is true then there is a hell.

Tony Johnson is right about the importance of telling the truth no matter how it will be received. Let me share an excerpt of a letter I wrote to your good friend Richard Dawkins!!

November 3, 2019

Richard Dawkins c/o Richard Dawkins Foundation,
Washington, DC 20005

Dear Mr. Dawkins,

I have enjoyed reading about a dozen of your books and some of the most intriguing were The God Delusion, An Appetite for Wonder: The Making of a Scientist, and Brief Candle in the Dark: My Life in Science.

I enjoyed your latest book Outgrowing God which is one of my favorite books that you have written.

However, there are some some weak parts of the book. For instance, on page 99 you write:

What if the fear of God is not just fear of upsetting him but of something worse—much worse? Both Christianity and Islam have traditionally taught that sinners will be tormented for all eternity in hell. The Book of Revelation talks about a ‘lake of fire burning with brimstone’.

What do you think of people who threaten children with eternal fire after they are dead? I’d say those people are lucky there is no such place as hell, because I can’t think of anybody who more richly deserves to go there.

The late, great Dr. Robert G. Lee said,

I know some people call the preacher who stands squarely upon the teaching of Christ and His apostles narrow, harsh, and cruel. As to being narrow, I have no desire to any broader than was Jesus. As to being cruel, is it cruel to tell a man the truth? Is a man to be called cruel who declares the whole counsel of God and points out to men their danger? Is it cruel to arouse sleeping people to the fact that the house is on fire? Is it cruel to jerk a blind man away from the rattlesnake in the coil? Is it cruel to declare to people the deadliness of disease and tell them which medicine to take? I had rather be called cruel for being kind, than to be called kind for being cruel.

The cruelest thing we could do would be to fail to warn people about Hell and what the Bible has to say about it. To ridicule a preacher who warns of Hell is like ridiculing a doctor who warns of cancer. Hell is not a pleasant subject, but it is a reality.

—

Extract from Chapter 9 of The God Delusion(2006) by Richard Dawkins

‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.’ The adage is true as long as you don’t really believe the words. But if your whole upbringing, and everything you have ever been told by parents, teachers and priests, has led you to believe, really believe, utterly and completely, that sinners burn in hell (or some other obnoxious article of doctrine such as that a woman is the property of her husband), it is entirely plausible that words could have a more long-lasting and damaging effect than deeds. I am persuaded that the phrase ‘child abuse’ is no exaggeration when used to describe what teachers and priests are doing to children whom they encourage to believe in something like the punishment of unshriven mortal sins in an eternal hell.

Richard, wouldn’t be wise to further investigate the accuracy of the Bible? Your hero Charles Darwin also got mad about the teaching of hell.

—

Dr. Dawkins, you have a 150 year advantage over your hero Charles Darwin and the archaeologist’s spade has continued to dig. Take a look at this piece of evidence from the book WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? by Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop:

TRUTH AND HISTORY (chapter 5 of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?)

In the previous chapter we saw that the Bible gives us the explanation for the existence of the universe and its form and for the mannishness of man. Or, to reverse this, we came to see that the universe and its form and the mannishness of man are a testimony to the truth of the Bible. In this chapter we will consider a third testimony: the Bible’s openness to verification by historical study.

Christianity involves history. To say only that is already to have said something remarkable, because it separates the Judeo-Christian world-view from almost all other religious thought. It is rooted in history.

The Bible tells us how God communicated with man in history. For example, God revealed Himself to Abraham at a point in time and at a particular geographical place. He did likewise with Moses, David, Isaiah, Daniel and so on. The implications of this are extremely important to us. Because the truth God communicated in the Bible is so tied up with the flow of human events, it is possible by historical study to confirm some of the historical details.

It is remarkable that this possibility exists. Compare the information we have from other continents of that period. We know comparatively little about what happened in Africa or South America or China or Russia or even Europe. We see beautiful remains of temples and burial places, cult figures, utensils, and so forth, but there is not much actual “history” that can be reconstructed, at least not much when compared to that which is possible in the Middle East.

When we look at the material which has been discovered from the Nile to the Euphrates that derives from the 2500-year span before Christ, we are in a completely different situation from that in regard to South America or Asia. The kings of Egypt and Assyria built thousands of monuments commemorating their victories and recounting their different exploits. Whole libraries have been discovered from places like Nuzu and Mari and most recently at Elba, which give hundreds of thousands of texts relating to the historical details of their time. It is within this geographical area that the Bible is set. So it is possible to find material which bears upon what the Bible tells us.

The Bible purports to give us information on history. Is the history accurate? The more we understand about the Middle East between 2500 B.C. and A.D. 100, the more confident we can be that the information in the Bible is reliable, even when it speaks about the simple things of time and place.

Two things should be mentioned about the time of Moses in Old Testament history.

First, consider the archaeological evidence that relates to the period. True, it is not of the same explicitness that we have found, say, in relation to the existence of Ahab or Jehu or Jehoiakim. We have no inscription from Egypt which refers to Moses being taken out of the bulrushes and removed from the waterproof basket his mother had made him. But this does not mean that the Book of Exodus is a fictitious account, as some critics has suggested. Some say it is simply an idealized reading-back into history by the Jews under the later monarchy. There is not a reason why these “books of Moses,” as they are called, should not be treated as history, just as we have been forced to treat the Books of Kings and Chronicles dating 500 years later.

There is ample evidence about the building projects of the Egyptian kings, and the evidence we have fits well with Exodus. There are scenes of brick-making (for example, Theban Tomb 100 of Rekhmire). Contemporary parchments and papyri tell of production targets which had to be met. One speaks of a satisfied official report of his men as “making their quota of bricks daily” (Papyrus Anastasi III vso, p.3, in the British Museum. Also Louvre Leather Roll in the Louvre, Paris, col ii, mentions quotes of bricks and “taskmasters”). Actual bricks found show signs of straw which had to be mixed in with the clay, just as Exodus says. This matter of bricks and straw is further affirmed by the record that one despairing official complained, “There are no men to make bricks nor straw in my area.”

We know from contemporary discoveries that Semites were found at all levels of Egypt’s cosmopolitan society. (Brooklyn Museum, New York, no. 35, 1446. Papyrus Brooklyn). There is nothing strange therefore about Joseph’s becoming so important in the pharaoh’s court.

The store cities of Pithom and Raamses (Rameses) mentioned in Exodus 1:11 are well known in Egyptian inscriptions. Raamses was actually in the east-Delta capital, Pi-Ramses (near Goshen), where the Israelites would have had ample experience of agriculture. Thus, the references to agriculture found in the law of Moses would not have been strange to the Israelites even though they were in the desert at the time the law was given. Certainly there is no reason to say, as some critics do, that these sections on agriculture were an indication of a reading-back from a latter period when the Jews were settled in Canaan.

The form of the covenant made at Sinai has remarkable parallels with the covenant forms of other people at that time. (On covenants and parties to a treaty, the Louvre; and Treaty Tablet from Boghaz Koi (i.e., Hittite) in Turkey, Museum of Archaeology in Istanbul.) The covenant form at Sinai resembles just as the forms of letter writings of the first century after Christ (the types of introductions and greetings) are reflected in the letters of the apostles in the New Testament, it is not surprising to find the covenant form of the second millennium before Christ reflected in what occurred at Mount Sinai. God has always spoken to people within the culture of their time, which does not mean that God’s communication is limited by that culture. It is God’s communication but within the forms appropriate to the time.

The Pentateuch tells us that Moses led the Israelites up the east side of the Dead Sea after their long stay in the desert. There they encountered the hostile kingdom of Moab. We have firsthand evidence for the existence of this kingdom of Moab–contrary to what has been said by critical scholars who have denied the existence of Moab at this time. It can be found in a war scene from a temple at Luxor (Al Uqsor). This commemorates a victory by Ramses II over the Moabite nation at Batora (Luxor Temple, Egypt).

Also the definite presence of the Israelites in west Palestine (Canaan) no later than the end of the thirteenth century B.C. is attested by a victory stela of Pharaoh Merenptah (son and successor of Ramses II) to commemorate his victory over Libya (Israel Stela, Cairo Museum, no. 34025). In it he mentions his previous success in Canaan against Aschalon, Gize, Yenom, and Israel; hence there can be no doubt the nation of Israel was in existence at the latest by this time of approximately 1220 B.C. This is not to say it could not have been earlier, but it cannot be later than this date.

END OF LETTER TO DAWKINS

Ricky you are right to tell people things they may not want to hear even if they call you names, and your defense is you will not play a pretend game with them but you stick to the truth!!!

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted.

Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher, everettehatcher@gmail.com, http://www.thedailyhatch.org, cell ph 501-920-5733, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part I “Old Testament Bible Prophecy” includes the film TRUTH AND HISTORY and article ” Jane Roe became pro-life”

April 12, 2013 – 5:45 am

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit|Comments (0)

John MacArthur on fulfilled prophecy from the Bible Part 2

August 8, 2013 – 1:28 am

I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too. I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry King’s Show. One of two most popular posts I […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit|Comments (0)

John MacArthur on fulfilled prophecy from the Bible Part 1

August 6, 2013 – 1:24 am

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

April 5, 2012 – 10:39 am

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology | Edit|Comments (1)

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 2)

August 1, 2013 – 12:10 am

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 2) I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too. I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit|Comments (0)

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 1)

July 30, 2013 – 1:32 am

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 1) I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too. I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit|Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers: “Why I believe the Bible is true”

July 9, 2013 – 8:38 am

Adrian Rogers – How you can be certain the Bible is the word of God Great article by Adrian Rogers. What evidence is there that the Bible is in fact God’s Word? I want to give you five reasons to affirm the Bible is the Word of God. First, I believe the Bible is the […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Biblical Archaeology | Edit|Comments (0)

The Old Testament is Filled with Fulfilled Prophecy by Jim Wallace

June 24, 2013 – 9:47 am

Is there any evidence the Bible is true? Articles By PleaseConvinceMe Apologetics Radio The Old Testament is Filled with Fulfilled Prophecy Jim Wallace A Simple Litmus Test There are many ways to verify the reliability of scripture from both internal evidences of transmission and agreement, to external confirmation through archeology and science. But perhaps the […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology, Current Events | Edit|Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part M “Old Testament prophecy fulfilled?”Part 3(includes film DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE)

April 19, 2013 – 1:52 am

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit|Comments (0)

Evidence for the Bible

March 27, 2013 – 9:43 pm

Here is some very convincing evidence that points to the view that the Bible is historically accurate. Archaeological and External Evidence for the Bible Archeology consistently confirms the Bible! Archaeology and the Old Testament Ebla tablets—discovered in 1970s in Northern Syria. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology | E

On Saturday April 18, 2020 at 6pm in London and noon in Arkansas, I had a chance to ask Ricky Gervais a question on his Twitter Live broadcast which was “Is Tony a Nihilist?” At the 20:51 mark Ricky answers my question. Below is the video:

—

Ricky Gervais 25/07/2021 Facebook Live at 28:29 mark Ricky answers my question about Sam Harris

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Is Hell a Myth? – Robert G. Lee (historic sermon 1886-1974)

August 20, 2022 – 1:12 pm

________

Adrian Rogers: The Final Judgment – RA2213

R.G.Lee, Ramsey Pollard and Adrian Rogers in 1972 in front of Bellevue Baptist.

_________

I grew up at Bellevue Baptist Church where since 1927 we have have had 4 pastors (Robert G.Lee 1927-1960, Ramsey Pollard 1960-1972, Adrian Rogers 1972-2005, and Steven Gaines 2005 to present).

Dr. Robert Green Lee was born in South Carolina in 1886. After a couple of brief pastorates, Lee went to pastor at First Baptist Church of New Orleans. During his four years there, over 1000 new members came into the church.
In 1927 Lee was called to pastor Bellevue Baptist Church of Memphis, TN. Lee would stay 33 years at Bellevue, not retiring until 1960.

He served an unprecedented four terms as president of the Tennessee Baptist Convention and then an unprecedented three terms as president of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Lee preached another 18 years after his retirement. He traveled 100,000 miles a year preaching in small and large churches, and places like the Moody Bible Institute.

Is Hell a Myth? – Robert G. Lee (historic sermon 1886-1974)

ByBible Blender

JUN 17, 2017 Robert G. Lee, sermons

At a glance

hide

III. Actuality

IV. Attestations

V. Adjectives

VI. Assistance

VII. Agonizing

VIII. The Antithesis

“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”—Matt. 10:28.

I. The Asking—”Is Hell a Myth?”

A myth? Like Aeolus imprisoning in a leather bag tied with a silver string such winds and tempests as might be hurtful to the further voyage of Ulysses? Like the cranes of Ibycus? Like the Minotaur, the fierce animal with a bull’s body and a man’s head, which demanded a tribute of seven young men and seven young women—and the killing of this beast by Theseus with the aid of Ariadne?

A myth? As when Proserpina cried for help and her voice was heard by all the mothers of earth? As Laocoon, the priest of Neptune, and the serpents of the sea in fierce attack? As Nemesis, the avenging deity of mythology? As the three Furies -Alecto, the relentless -Tisiphone, the avenger -Megaera, the grim –three woman-like creatures, with writhing snakes for hair, a whip of live scorpions in the other?

A myth? As Hercules and the poison garment of Nessus? As Hercules strangling two serpents with his hands at birth? As Hercules and his “Twelve Labors”? As Midas and his golden touch? As Sisyphus who made a chair with automatic workings -so that when a creditor called upon him to collect a debt, Sisyphus invited him to sit down, and no sooner had the fellow taken a seat when one hundred ligaments of steel darted out and bound the fellow fast -and Sisyphus kept him there until he canceled the debt?

A myth? As the winged feet of Mercury? As Ulysses who filled the ears of his crew with wax and bound himself with knotted thongs to the mast -as they neared the sorcerer’s shore?

Asking , “Is Hell a myth?” is but an interrogatory way -on the part of some -of stating the Hell is a myth -as much as the wild mythologies of the Greeks. With playful raillery do many speak of the fact of Hell. With a blighting barriken do many speak of the fact of Hell, With many hell is the wild nightmare of a disordered brain -the fanciful fake of an erratic mind. A myth? Just as well say a lion has the mouth of a mouse! A myth? Just as well say an eagle has a sparrow’s wings! A myth? Just as well say you can cradle a furnace in a thimble! All of which brings us to consider some…

II. Asseverations

Asseverate means “to affirm, to aver positively or with solemnity.” Many there are who, with ridicule of those who disagree, declare that there is no Hell. Atheists tell us that we die like dogs – that our souls perish with our bodies -that when the earth has swallowed us up, we become part and parcel with clay; and that is the end of the whole matter. We, believing not what the atheists say, doubt if the atheists believe themselves.

But note what some say: “Milton’s conception of Hell was inconsistent with the character of God as revealed in Jesus Christ.” “The pulpit teaching about Hell is an unauthorized accretion to the true doctrine -and repugnant to reason.” “Hell-fire is a riot of imaginative genius.” “The Dantesque picture as a place of penal flames, smoke, and physical torture is an absurd picture.” “Indeed, it is to be doubted whether men ever believed fully in the existence of such a Hell, for if preachers believed in the Hell they taught thirty years ago, and had any humanity in them, they would have been unable to sleep in their beds. To talk of a Hell so horrible that no man with a heart in him would throw a dog into it, and yet to preach that the Almighty Father casts the bulk of the human family into it to burn for ever and ever, was to insult the very name of the Being whom we are taught to love.”

And more: “Hell is a state -and not a place. To live in harmony with what we understand to be God’s law is the truest Heaven. To live out of harmony with that law is Hell.” “Heaven and Hell might be the same place -and Heaven will be Hell to the man who loves evil things.” “Many of the terms describing Hell are allegorical or metaphorical or poetic -and imply the spiritual state which is the antithesis of salvation.” “If the Bible teaches ‘everlasting punishment,’ so much the worse for the Bible, because we cannot believe it! We are no longer the slaves of a book, nor the blind devotees of a creed, we believe in love and evolution!”

Now let me ask, if there is no Hell, is not the Bible a bundle of blunders, a myth, a book of fairy tales? Are not the prophets, who spoke of God’s mercy, liars? If there is no Hell, does not Jesus Himself deserve to wear the label of the impostor? Into the valley of Hinnom, outside the city of Jerusalem, the Jews threw the refuse of the city and the dead carcasses of animals -where the worms would eat them and a fire was kept continually burning. Jesus used this great valley of offal to describe the awful reality of Hell.

“And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off” it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into Hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” Mark 9:43-44

If there is no Hell, is not Calvary, with all its suffering and sacrifice and finished atoning work, a blunder and all the voices thereof a babel of incoherence? By every contemptuous mouthful of spit that befouled His face, by every hair of His beard which cruel fingers tore from His cheeks, by every bruise of His face, by every mark of the scourge upon His back, by every thorn that punctured His brow, by every nail that held Him to the tree, by every breath He drew which was a pang of death, by every beat of His heart which was a throb of agony -by all the shadows that covered the earth when black midnight came at noon-day, we say that if Calvary be not the way of escape from an eternal Hell, then Calvary is a mistake!

It is not credible that the Son of God should have become man and died on the cross merely to save men from the short and temporal consequences of sin. The infinity of the sacrifice implies as infinity of punishment as that from which the sacrifice was intended to deliver those who would accept the sacrifice. If a man accepts the atonement of Christ -how can he doubt the dogma of Hell? Let us ask, can there be a Heaven if there be no Hell? The Bible, book above and beyond all books as a river is beyond all books as a river is beyond a rill in reach speaks of Heaven. But the same Bible also speaks of Hell. The same Bible that speaks of the glories and bliss of Heaven speaks of the woes and pains and miseries of Hell-as the portion of those who reject Christ. So let us consider thee…

III. Actuality

Though some today in the theological and educational world are “fond of a mist that rises from the ground” and rebel against the concrete, the definite, the actual —still there is a Hell. Though many vaporize every great fact and doctrine of the Christian faith and talk as though they believed that only when these great facts and weighty doctrines have been “sublimated into the mythical and poetic” are they worthy of the intellectual–still there is a Hell.

We need realities to meet realities –and we find them in the New Testament, which is not “a collection of Photographed mirages” and does not “tantalize wit vapors a world perishing of thirst.” Watkinson says” To take away Hell is to reject the physician and leave the plague, to overthrow the lighthouse and leave the hidden rock, to wipe out the rainbow and leave the storm, to take away the firelight and leave the fire to rage, to take away the vaccine and leave the smallpox. To take away Hell is to meet the tragic blackness of sin with a candle gospel, to make a mild twilight out of eternal retribution, to take away the trumpet and open the gate to enemies, to take away roses and leave the thorns, to throw away gold and press bankruptcy upon human life.”

In the light of Bible truth, consider the actuality of Hell. If there is NOT a Hell, I do not want to preach that there is. But I would rather believe and preach unpleasant truth than to believe and preach error. And as awful as the thought is, I can have no other conclusion than that there is a Hell –because I believe the Bible is the very Word of God. The Bible is the only book that makes the death room bright. The Bible is an oasis in a desert of despair. I must believe it! In the original purpose of God, there was no manifest provision for Hell. Every being, bearing the image of the Creator, was with Him about the throne of Heaven. There was no necessity for a Hell. Necessity arose when His hosts rebelled in Heaven and were cast out. Then was the “everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”

“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared, for the devil and his angels.”—Matt. 25:41.

“And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.” —II Thess. 1:7-9

Hell is a terrible actuality.

Yet some say: “Scholarly preachers have given up belief in an orthodox Hell.” If so, they did not give up that belief for reasons of Greek or New Testament scholarship. If so, they gave it up for sentimental and speculative reasons. No man can go to the New Testament and not find Hell there. But suppose it is true that some preachers have given up a belief in Hell. That would not prove anything. Religious scholars have been wrong more than they have been right.

None of the scholars in Noah’s day believed a flood would come. But it did. No scholars, except for Abraham and Lot, believed that fire would fall on Sodom and Gomorrah. But it did. No scholars, except Jeremiah and Baruch, believed Jerusalem would be destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. But it was! Four leading schools of thought in Jesus’ day scoffed at Jesus’ prediction concerning the coming judgment of God on Jerusalem. But secular history tells us that in spite of the dissent of all the scholars, it came true just as Jesus predicted. No university in the world in the days of Luther and Huss believed in the doctrine of justification by faith. But it was so –and Luther was right –and every university of Germany, France, England and Scotland was wrong. So if all the scholars, preachers, scientist, artists, statesmen, politicians, musicians, and teachers on earth gave up belief in the doctrine of an orthodox Hell, it would not prove anything.

Some say: “I hate hell.” So do I. But nobody can hate Hell out of existence. I hate snakes, but my hatred does not exterminate them. I hate rats, but rats still live. If we are Christians, we hate hypocrisy. But hypocrisy continues. Christians hate all manner of sins, but that hatred does not alleviate the sins. The hatred of Hell does not alter the fact that THERE IS A HELL!

Now consider some…

IV. Attestations

1. The Bible. We have looked at some scripture on the subject already. Here are more verses:

“And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be iveeping and gnashing of teeth.” Matt. 25:30.

“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” Matt. 25:41.

“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Matt. 10:28.

See also, Rev. 20:15; Mat. 13:40-42; Rev. 14:10-11

2. Dr. R.A. Torrey: “I claim to be a scholarly preacher. I have a right to so claim. I have two degrees, specializing in Greek in one of the most highly esteemed universities in America. I have read the Bible in three languages for many years. I have written between thirty and forty books that have been widely read. I have a right to claim to be a scholarly preacher. Yet I believe the old-fashioned Bible doctrine regarding Hell.”

3. D.L. Moody: “The same Christ that tells us of Heaven with all its glories, tells us of Hell with all its horrors; and no one can accuse Christ of drawing this picture to terrify people, or to alarm them, if it were not true.

4. T. DeWitt Talmage: “Not having intellect enough to fashion an eternity of my own, I must take the word of the Bible. I believe there is a Hell. If I had not been afraid of Hell I do not think I would have started for Heaven.”

5. Charles Spurgeon: “Our joy is that if any one of us are made, in God’s hands, the means of converting a man from the error of his way, we shall have saved a soul from this eternal death. That dreadful Hell the saved one will not know, that wrath he will not feel, that being banished from the presence of God will never happen to him.”

6. Paul Stewart: “The preaching that ignores the doctrine of Hell lowers the holiness of God and degrades the work of Christ.”

7. B. H. Lovelace “There are foregleams of Hell all around us (Rom. 8:22). Read the tragedies that besmear the front pages of our daily newspapers, behold the victim of drink writhing in the tortures of delirium tremens, see the human wrecks strewn all along life’s highway, and hear the sobs and sighs of a sin-cursed world. These are but a few sparks from the Lake of Fire, the eternal abode of the lost. Hell is a logical necessity. It is the ultimate and inevitable consequence of the law of moral gravitation, which begins in life and ends in eternity. What was said of Judas Iscariot will be true of all men, ‘he went to his own place.’ ”

8. William Elbert Munsey “There is a Hell. All principles of quality, character, and state exist in correlative dualities. God and evil are correlates. The very argument which makes Heaven the saint’s reward beyond the grave must, give a correlating punishment to the lost beyond the grave.”

9. Billy Sunday: “You will not be in Hell five minutes until you believe that there is one.”

10. Sam Jones: “I believe in a bottomless Hell, and I believe that the wicked will be turned into Hell. The legitimate end of a sinful life is Hell. Every sinner carries his own brimstone with him. How many men can meet Truth without a tremor in their muscles?”

The popular theory of this age is: “I die like my dog. I die a sinner, and am nowhere ever after. The coffin holds both body and soul so any kind of eternal punishment is an impossibility.” This theory denies the immortality of the soul. God says, “The wicked shall be turned into hell…where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” Go to your Bibles, men and women! Let us have the truth about the matter, whatever it be! I cite God himself, “The wicked shall be turned into hell..” You may scatter the everlasting mountains or split the sun in two, but you cannot alter God’s Word. I cite the tenderhearted Savior; and three times in one chapter! (Mark 9) He speaks of a worm that never dies, and a fire that never shall be quenched. Take time, you, whoever you are, to read the 9th chapter of Mark. Read it and then tell me, did the Lord Jesus lie when he spoke of unquenchable fire? Did the Son of God picture a lie when He showed us the rich man lifting up his eyes in torments, and begging a drop of water to cool his tongue? Did He purposely put fright in our souls with lying pictures of something which never existed? Scripture says, “It is impossible for God to lie.” Well, then, it is impossible that there is no Hell, and let that forever settle the question.

Now along with these attestations, I would have you think of some…

V. Adjectives

Here are some adjectives that describe the severe nature of Hell.

1. “Everlasting Fire” I am not going to split hairs to prove the fire of Hell is literal fire any more than I would split hairs to prove the gold of Heaven is literal god. I believe when God says “fire,” He means “fire.” When He says “gold” he means ” gold.” Those who would deny the “fire” of Hell have only removed part the physical pain, which is the least significant feature of its character. Hell is the madhouse of the universe where remorse and an accusing memory cause unspeakable torture. All words are incapable of describing that awful place. The very thought of Hell ought to make one uncomfortable. No music -but the weeping, wailing gnashing of teeth. No rest -but the wicked wanting rest, yet forever tired. No fragrance -“smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever.”

2. “Everlasting fire is a real PLACE.” The rich man of Luke 16 is in Hell bodily. He wanted his brothers to know that where he was after death was a PLACE. Jesus taught that the body would be in Hell along with the soul. (Mat. 10:28)

3. A place of TORMENT. “The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.” Rev. 14:10-11

4. A place of VILE COMPANIONSHIPS. “But the fearful, and unbelieving and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and birmstone: which is the second death.” Rev. 21:8 The Devil will be there with all his demons. Read the list of the wicked persons in Romans 1:29-31…

5. A place from which there is NO EXIT. In public halls we find in bold letters, “EXIT.” But “exit” is a word not in the vocabulary of Hell. In other places there may be signs to help point the way out. But there are no exit signs in Hell. Jesus says “there is a great gulf fixed…” It is impossible to escape from Hell to a better place.

6. A place that is ETERNAL. ” And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” Matt. 25:46 No one has any trouble believing the “eternal life” part of this verse. But by every known law of exegesis, it must mean the same thing in the other part of the verse. This word means “unto the ages of the ages.” It is an unimaginable duration, a length of time that cannot be expressed. Sometimes it is used to describe the duration of the blessings of the saints, other times it describes the suffering of those in Hell. Eternal… Without end…. There are 10,000 grains of wheat in one bushel, let us day. Multiply that by all the grains in the millions of bushels of wheat grown every year. Multiply that by all the leaves on all the trees of the world. Now multiply that number by all the grains of sand on all the seashores of the globe. Now take that number and multiply it by the number of stars in the sky. The number you would get after making such a calculation, if you could, would not even begin to count the length of eternity. Hell would not be Hell if it were just a 10-year sentence.

The Greek word “Gehenna” means a place of everlasting punishment. Southeast of Jerusalem was a valley where, for a long time, the idol Molech was worshipped. Little children were thrown into his fiery arms and consumed in the flames. Because of their cries it came to be know as the Valley of Lamentation, or the Valley of Hinnom. Those horrible sacrifices were abolished by Josiah. (2Kings 23:10) The jews so abhorred the place that they cast into it all manner of refuse, dead bodies of animals, and of criminals who had been executed. Fires were constantly needed to consume the dead bodies and so the place was called “Gehenna of fire.” It is the word “Gehenna” that the New Testament uses to describe the place of punishment appointed for the unsaved after death.

What a terrible place Hell must be. A world where the Holy Spirit never strives, where every soul is fully left to its own depravity; and where there is no leisure for repentance, even if there was a desire for it. Richard Fuller called it “An immortality of pain and tears: an infinity of wretchedness and despair; the blackness of darkness across which conscience will forever shoot her clear and ghastly flashes -like lightning streaming over a desert when midnight and tempest are there; Weeping a wailing and gnashing of teeth: long, long eternity, and things that will make that eternity seem longer, making each moment more miserable than the last…”

But now I would have you to think of the….

VI. Assistance

Now I speak of the assistance the doctrine of Hell is in preaching to win the lost. The preaching of this doctrine is ever an asset -never a hindrance- to the success of gospel preaching. The minister of the Gospel is under obligation to preach the whole truth of God’s Word. If he does, God will take care of the results. We are to preach “as a dying man to dying men,” as Richard Baxter wrote. If we are to preach at all, we must preach the whole message, and that includes the doctrine of Hell.

Mary Slessor, who became a missionary to West Africa, heard a message on Hell. She feared for her soul and turned to Christ. Look at the thousands who have been saved because of Mary Slessor’s ministry. Preachers must preach the doctrine of Hell to wake up sinners to their lost condition. Salvation implies a danger. There is a place for fear in preaching if the danger is real. If we are never to preach on Hell, what is one saved from?

A.C. Dixon said, “If we had more preaching on Hell in the pulpit, we might have less hell in the community.” General Booth said, “If I had my way I would not give any of my workers a three-year training in a college, but I would put each of you twenty-four hours in Hell -the best training for earnest preaching you could have.”

We need to preach this doctrine along with the truth of the cross. Preach it -not as dainty tasters of intellectual subtleties. Preach it -not as dealers in finespun metaphysical disquisitions. Preach it -not as administrators of laughing gas for the painless extraction of sin. Preach it -not with stammering tongue but as a trumpet that gives no uncertain sound. Preach it -with broken heart and yearning soul. Believing in the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ for the sins of the whole world, we must accept the doctrine of Hell -for no lesser fate can they expect who, having heard the offer of the Gospel, deliberately reject it. How great the folly of suppressing the revealed fact of Hell!

But think now of the…

VII. Agonizing

Not only of those agonize in Hell, but the agony of soul we should have in prayer and in preaching with concern to save the lost. If this city had a pestilence descending on it -what would we not do to stop its onslaught? If your children were in danger of smallpox -how concerned you would be! If a mad dog were loose in a school -how you would risk your life to save children from the virus of rabies from the dog’s fangs! How much more when there are souls in danger of Hell -eternal Hell!

Who can arrange or describe fitting funeral obsequies of a lost soul? All the tears ever shed by all the graves and tombs of earth cannot. All the moans and sobs and sighs ever uttered cannot. If the inanimate world could break her silence—would that do it? If all seas should utter their deep and dreadful wails—would that do it? If all the mountains should lift up rumbling voices—would that do it? If the sun should drape in darkness—would that do it? If the moon should refuse to give her light—would that do it? If all the stars turned to clay—would all these fitly show the dire catastrophe of a lost soul? No songs on earth, no prayers, no words can fitly show what it means to be lost!

Yet I fear we agonize not as did Abraham over the wickedness of Sodom and Gommorah. Nor as Moses who pleaded for God to blot him out rather than the people. Nor as Jacob over the disappearance of his son Joseph. Nor as Samuel wept all night over Saul. Nor as David who cried all night over Absalom. Nor as Jeremiah who wept like a brokenhearted archangel. Nor as Ezekiel who ate filth to show the horrors of slavery. Nor as Job who asked God questions through lips that festered with disease. Nor as Paul who counted all things but loss.

I fear that we as Christians treat our main business as an incidental. We should be like Whitefield who said, “I am willing to go to prison and to death for you, but I am not willing to go to Heaven without you.” When fishermen are sent to the river, they fish. When nurses are sent to the hospital, they nurse. When painters are sent to a house, they paint. When soldiers are sent to the battle, they fight. But when our God sends us into the world to win souls, we sing “Throw Out the Lifeline” but do not throw. We sing “I Love to Tell the Story” and do not tell it. Our singing and our practice are so strangely at variance.

We need the passion that girded Francis Asbury as he traveled a distance equal to five circuits around the world every five years, on the average, for forty-five years -and that mainly on horseback. We need the passion that fired Livingstone and kept him aflame amid jungle dangers and twenty-seven attacks of African fever -the passion that was the power working in the heart of David Brainerd who said: “I care not what hardships I endure, if only I can see souls saved” -the passion that drove General Booth who said, “God shall have all there is of William Booth.”

And lastly let us examine the…

VIII. The Antithesis

We cannot leave speaking without giving the antithesis to Hell. Allow me to say a word about Heaven. Heaven is the place where no hostility can reach us, where no temptations can assail us, where no pain can pierce us, where no night can shadow us. Heaven is the most beautiful place the wisdom of God could conceive and the power of God could prepare.

Dr. Biederwolf tells us of a little girl who was blind from birth and only knew the beauties of the earth from her mother’s lip. A noted surgeon worked on her eyes and at last the operations were successful, and as the last bandage dropped away she flew into her mother’s arms and then to the window and the open door. As the glories of earth rolled into her vision, she ran to her mother with tears, crying, “Oh Mama, why didn’t you tell me it was so wonderful?” “I tried to tell you,” she said, “but I couldn’t do it.”

And one day when we go sweeping through those gates of pearl and catch our first vision of the enrapturing beauty all around us, I think we may hunt up the Apostle John and say, “Why didn’t you tell us it was so beautiful?” And John will say, “I tried to tell you when I wrote the twenty-first and twenty-second chapters of the last book in the Bible after I got my vision, but I couldn’t do it.”

Heaven -the land of no heartaches, no graves, no wars or poverty, no hearse rolls its dark way to the tomb. Let us have and hold and preach the Bible conception of Hell. Let us have and hold and preach the antithetical conception of that perfect vision of God which we call home -Heaven. Every human must make his choice. We pray that choice is Heaven!

The late Adrian Rogers was my pastor at Bellevue Baptist when I grew up and I sent his sermon on evolution and another on the accuracy of the Bible to many atheists to listen to and many of them did. I also sent many of the arguments from Francis Schaeffer also.

Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names included are Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996), Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-), Brian Charlesworth (1945-), Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010), Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-), Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-).

THIRD, there is hope that an atheist will reconsider his or her position after examining more evidence. Twenty years I had the opportunity to correspond with two individuals that were regarded as two of the most famous atheists of the 20th Century, Antony Flew and Carl Sagan. I had read the books and seen the films of the Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer and he had discussed the works of both of these men. I sent both of these gentlemen philosophical arguments from Schaeffer in these letters and in the first letter I sent a cassette tape of my pastor’s sermon IS THE BIBLE TRUE? You may have noticed in the news a few years that Antony Flew actually became a theist in 2004 and remained one until his death in 2010. Carl Sagan remained a skeptic until his dying day in 1996.Antony Flew wrote me back several times and in the June 1, 1994 letter he commented, “Thank you for sending me the IS THE BIBLE TRUE? tape to which I have just listened with great interest and, I trust, profit.” I later sent him Adrian Rogers’ sermon on evolution too.
The ironic thing is back in 2008 I visited the Bellevue Baptist Book Store and bought the book There Is A God – How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, by Antony Flew, and it is in this same store that I bought the message by Adrian Rogers in 1994 that I sent to Antony Flew. Although Antony Flew did not make a public profession of faith he did admit that the evidence for God’s existence was overwhelming to him in the last decade of his life. His experience has been used in a powerful way to tell others about Christ. Let me point out that while on airplane when I was reading this book a gentleman asked me about the book. I was glad to tell him the whole story about Adrian Rogers’ two messages that I sent to Dr. Flew and I gave him CD’s of the messages which I carry with me always. Then at McDonald’s at the Airport, a worker at McDonald’s asked me about the book and I gave him the same two messages from Adrian Rogers too.

in many of these letters that I would send to famous skeptics and I would always include audio messages from Adrian Rogers. Perhaps Schaeffer’s most effective argument was concerning Romans 1 and how a person could say that he didn’t believe that the world had a purpose or meaning but he could not live that way in the world that God created and with the conscience that every person is born with.

Google “Adrian Rogers Francis Schaeffer” and the first 8 things that come up will be my blog posts concerning effort to reach these atheists. These two great men proved that the scriptures Hebrews 4:12 and Isaiah 55:11 are true, “For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” and “so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.”

Critics – Part 1
By Dr

In my ongoing debate with other bloggers on the Arkansas Times Blog, I had an interesting response from Dobert:

You can’t have it both ways. If the Gospel writers were allowed to adapt their message to a particular audience then it can’t be claimed that God literally took their hand and wrote the scriptures. If we allow the Gospel writers to adapt their message, then we had better get ready to accept the fact that Paul interjected his own opinion about so many matters that he was personally opposed to or were culturally dominant at the time he wrote it. God would not have written inconsistencies in His Scriptures unless we want to admit that God has a sense of humor.

I responded with this:

Hank Hanegraaff the director of CRI has noted:

“Can anything involving human beings contain the inerrant Word of God”?

The short answer to that question is “yes.” It’s true that humans are fallible vessels that they’re prone to error, but that in no way precludes the inerrancy of the Bible. All Scripture is God breathed. All Scripture is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17). The Apostle Paul there puts a very significant premium of the accuracy of all Scripture.

The Apostle Peter does essentially the same thing. He says that prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

The doctrine of inspiration tells us that God did something miraculous in inspiration. He worked through fallible human prophets, He utilized their individual personalities, all to pen what is authoritative, infallible, and sacred as Scripture. In fact we can demonstrate that the Bible is divine as opposed to human in origin. If you look just at archeology, you find what is concealed in the soil, corresponds to what is revealed in the Scriptures, and that with minute precision. I’m talking about people, and places, even particulars. So we know, we have evidence that the Bible corresponds to reality, and therefore it is truth, and a miracle—the miracle of infallible inspiration, the inspiration that comes from the Holy Spirit.

Now we don’t suppose that the disciples walked around with tape recorders, or we’re programmed automatons, but what we do suppose is that the believers who are used by God to pen the Scriptures captured the essential voice of God in the Scripture. Not the exact words they heard. For example, if you look at the Sermon on the Mount, you’ll see that there are various versions of the Sermon on the Mount given by Mark, Matthew, and Luke. And you see that the Sermon on the Mount is given in a different way but is essentially the same, because through their own personalities Matthew and Luke capture the essential voice of Jesus not the exact verbiage that Jesus used, and that’s why there can be differences and yet complete agreement because there’s no difference in the message that is being communicated in either case.

_________________________________

I remember listening to a 90 minute lecture by Francis Schaeffer on the conclusions the great American archaeologist (William F. Albright) who changed his views over the years because of the archaeological evidence. Below is some of that evidence. (You can access some of the evidence that convinced William Ramsey concerning the Book of Luke and Acts here.)

I went and secured a copy of the interview and read it myself. In a 1963 interview with Christianity Today magazine, William F. Albright (1891-1971) stated:

In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D. (very probably sometime between about 50 and 75 A.D.)(Christianity Today, VII, 359, January 18, 1963, “Toward a More Conservative View,” interview with William F. Albright.)

. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon

Biblical Archaeology, Silencing the critics (Part 1)Significantly, even liberal theologians, secular academics, and critics generally cannot deny that archaeology has confirmed thebiblical record at many points. Rationalistic detractors of the Bible can attack it all day long, but they cannot dispute archaeological facts. Consider the weekly PBS series “Mysteries of the Bible.” Despite some shortcomings, such as the theologically liberal experts and non-Christian commentators, this program has offered example after example, week after week, of the archaeological reliability of the Bible.To further illustrate, probably the three greatest American archaeologists of the twentieth century each had their liberal training modified by their archaeological work. W. F. Albright, Nelson Glueck, and George Ernest Wright all “received training in the liberal scholarship of the day, which had resulted from the earlier and continuing critical study of the Bible, predominantly by German scholars.”¹ Despite their liberal training, it was archaeological research that bolstered their confidence in the biblical text:Albright said of himself, “I must admit that I tried to be rational and empirical in my approach [but] we all have presuppositions of a philosophical order.” The same statement could be applied as easily to Gleuck and Wright, for all three were deeply imbued with the theological perceptions which infused their work. Albright, the son of a Methodist missionary, came to see that much of German critical thought was established upon a philosophical base that could not be sustained in the light of archaeological discoveries…. Nelson Glueck was Albright’s student. In his own explorations in Trans-Jordan and the Negev and in his excavations, Glueck worked with the Bible in hand. He trusted what he called “the remarkable phenomenon of historical memory in the Bible.” He was the president of the prestigious Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion and an ordained Rabbi. Wright went from the faculty of the McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago to a position in the Harvard Divinity School which he retained until his death. He, too, was a student of Albright.²Glueck forthrightly declared, “As a matter of fact, however, it may be clearly stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact details historical statements in the Bible.”³In fact, “Much of the credit for this relatively new assessment of the patriarchal tradition must go to the ‘Albright school.’ Albright himself pointed out years ago that apart from ‘a few diehards among older scholars’ there is hardly a single biblical historian who is not at least impressed with the rapid accumulation of data supporting the ‘substantial historicity’ of patriarchal tradition.”⁴And, in fact, this is true not just for the patriarchal tradition but the Bible generally. The earlier statement by assyriologist A. H. Sayce continues to hold true today: “Time after time the most positive assertions of a skeptical criticism have been disproved by archaeological discovery, events and personages that were confidently pronounced to be mythical have been shown to be historical, and the older [i.e., biblical] writers have turned out to have been better acquainted with what they were describing than the modern critics who has flouted them.”⁵

Millar Burrows of Yale points out that, “Archaeology has in many cases refuted the views of modern critics. It has been shown in a number of instances that these views rest on false assumptions and unreal, artificial schemes of historical development….” And, “The excessive skepticism of many liberal theologians stems not from a careful evaluation of the available data, but from an enormous predisposition against the supernatural.”⁶

Many other examples could be given of how firsthand archaeological work changed the view of a critic. One of the most prominent is that of Sir William Ramsay. Ramsey’s own archaeological findings convinced him of the reliability of the Bible and the truth of what it taught. In his The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testamentand other books, he shows why he came to conclude that “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness” and that “Luke is a historian of the first rank … In short, this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.”⁷

As part of his secular academic duties, Dr. Clifford Wilson was for some years required to research and teach higher critical approaches to the Bible. This gave him a great deal of firsthand exposure and insight to the assumptions and methodologies that go into these approaches. Yet his own archaeological research was found to continually refute such skeptical theories, so much so that he finally concluded, “It is the steady conviction of this writer that the Bible is … the ancient world’s most reliable history textbook….”⁸

In a personal communication he added the following,

I was not always the “literalist” I am today. I’ve always had a profound respect for the Bible, but accepted that the use of poetic forms meant that the record could often be interpreted symbolically where now I take it literally—though of course there are times when symbolism is clearly utilized. Thus in later Scriptures “Egypt” can be a geographic country or a symbolic term.

That liberalism is especially true in relation to Genesis chapters 1 through 11, often considered allegorical or mythical, where my researches have led me to the conclusion that this is profound writing, meant to be taken literally. There was a real Adam, creation that was contemporaneous for the various life forms as shown in Genesis chapter 1, and a consistent style of history writing—such as the outlines given in Genesis one, then zeroing in on the specifics relating to mankind in Genesis chapter 2; the history of all the early peoples in Genesis chapter 10, then the concentration on Abraham and his descendants from Genesis chapter 11 onwards. Early man, “the birth of the lady of the rib,” long-living man, giants in the earth (animals, birds, and men), the flood, the Tower of Babel—and much more—point to factual, accurate recording of history in these early chapters of Genesis.

Over 40 years have passed since I first became professionally involved in biblical archaeology and my commitment to the Bible as the world’s greatest history book is firmly settled. As Psalm 119:89 states, “Forever O Lord, your word is established in heaven.”

Indeed one of the most valuable contributions of modern archaeology has been its reputation of higher critical views toward scripture. Consider for example the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls.

J. Randall Price (Ph.D., Middle Eastern Studies) currently working on a forthcoming apologetic text on biblical archaeology writes, “Those who expect the [Dead Sea] scrolls to produce a radical revision of the Bible have been disappointed, for these texts have only verified the reliability and stability of the Old Testament as it appears in our modern translations.”⁹

He further points out how the Daniel fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls should require scholars to abandon a Maccabean date. The same kind of evidence forced scholars to abandon Maccabean dates for Chronicles, Ecclesiastes, and many of the Psalms. But so far, most scholars refuse to do this for Daniel: “Unfortunately, critical scholars have not arrived at a similar conclusion for the Book of Daniel, even though the evidence is identical.”¹⁰ In fact, according to Old Testament scholar Gerhard Hasel, a date for Daniel in the sixth or fifth century BC “has more in its favor today from the point of view of language alone than ever before.”¹¹ The Dead Sea Scrolls also provide significant evidence for the unity and single authorship of the Book of Isaiah. Dr. Price concludes, “The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, then, has made a contribution toward confirming the integrity of the biblical text and its own claim to predictive prophecy. Rather than support the recent theories of documentary disunity, the Scrolls have returned scholars to a time when the Bible’s internal witness to its own consistency and veracity was fully accepted by its adherents.”¹²

(to be continued)

Notes:

1 Keith N. Scoville, Biblical Archeology in Focus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1978), p. 163.

2 Ibid., p. 163.

3 Norman L. Geisler and Ron Brooks, When Skeptics Ask: A Handbook on Christian Evidences (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1990), p. 179.

4 Eugene H. Merrill, Professor of Old Testament Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary, “Ebla and Biblical Historical Inerrancy” in Roy B. Zuck (Genesis ed.), Vital Apologetic Issues: Examining Reasons and Revelation in Biblical Perspective (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1995), p. 180.

5 A. H. Sayce, Monument Facts and Higher Critical Fancies (London: The Religious Tract Society, 1904), p. 23, Cited in Josh McDowell, More Evidence That Demands a Verdict(Arrowhead Springs, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ, 1975), p. 53.

6 As cited in Josh McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict (Arrowhead Springs, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ, 1972) p. 66.

7 William M. Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Bookhouse, 1959), p. 91; cf. William M. Ramsay, Luke the Physician, pp. 177-79, 222 from F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1971), pp. 90-91.

8 Clifford Wilson, Rocks, Relics and Biblical Reliability (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan/Richardson, TX: Probe, 1977), p. 126

9 J. Randall Price, Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1996), p. 146.

10 Ibid., p. 159.

11 Ibid., p. 163.

12 Ibid., p. 164; cf. p. 157.

Featured artist is Anish Kapoor

Kapoor, Anish – by Nigel Halliday (videos, Anish Kapoor like Cage and Pollock has failed to show that universe is a chance universe and art should be too)

_______________________________

At the 55:00

[ARTS 315] The Fully Present Object: Minimalism – Jon Anderson

Published on Apr 5, 2012

Clement Greenberg mentioned and then minimalism

September 16, 2011

_____________

[ARTS 315] The Fully Present Object: Minimalism – Jon Anderson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RogfryPVWDk

Published on Jul 9, 2012

Contemporary Art Trends [ARTS 315], Jon Anderson

The Fully Present Object: Minimalism

September 16, 2011

[ARTS 315] Contemporary Liturgies: Performance Art and Embodied Belief – Jon Anderson

Published on Apr 5, 2012

Contemporary Art Trends [ARTS 315], Jon Anderson

Contemporary Liturgies: Performance Art and Embodied Belief

November 4, 2011

_______________

The mythological event from Hindu religion describes at 5:00.

Five Sculptors: Anish Kapoor

___________________________

Kapoor, Anish – by Nigel Halliday

Review of Anish Kapoor at the Royal Academy, 2009Royal Academy, Piccadilly, London, until 11 December 2009by Nigel Halliday Anish Kapoor is one of Britain’s leading talents in Conceptual Art. Whereas some exponents in this area seem flash and savvy, and others superficial or downright vacuous, Kapoor combines thoughtfulness, creativity and a traditional respect for beauty, even though the resultant forms are non-traditional. As Steve Turner says in his book Imagine, if Christians are going to engage constructively in the arts, our first question about a work should not be the narrow one, ‘Is it Christian?’ but the broader one, ‘Is it any good as a work of art?’ This exhibition certainly contains a number of very powerful and effective works, which we cannot help but admire, even if our understanding of reality and transcendence is very different. Kapoor was formed amongst an interesting range of influences. He was born and brought up in India, son of a Punjabi father. His mother was from a Jewish-Iraqi family who moved to India when she was a small child. As a teenager Kapoor spent time in Israel, before coming to Britain as an art-student. Kapoor’s work is not about his ethnicity, but it does seem to be shot through with a mindset influenced by Buddhism. The visitor is greeted in the Academy’s forecourt by Tall Tree and the Eye, a beautiful, towering arrangement of large silvery shiny balls, cleverly arranged with minimal physical contact between them, so they seem to float upwards. They sharply reflect the viewer and all that surrounds us, but with a weightlessness that suggests the ‘lightness of being’. Inside, in the first room, When I am pregnant is a large bump in the gallery wall, which emerges so subtly that one misses it at first. It seems to suggest a Buddhist sense of being merging seamlessly into nothingness. Yellow, a gorgeous, enormous construction in the second room seems to be on a similar theme. Recessed into a wall, it toys with being and nothingness, as solidity dissolves imperceptibly into space. The achievement of this imperceptibility is a sign of his genuine creativity and craftsmanship. In the main room a series of wonderful distorting mirrors invite the viewer to meditate on the different ways in which we perceive the world. These are both interesting and fun, inviting you to walk towards a mirror, appearing distorted, and then suddenly see yourself as you really are. The most eye-catching work is the home-made cannon, which every twenty minutes fires a twenty-pound projectile of red wax across the gallery, through a door way, and against the far wall. This is one of a couple of works which will actually change over the course of the exhibition: the red gunge gradually accumulates in the second room and spreads back over the floor into the first.There is no doubt, judging from the audience’s reaction, that this is seen as a piece of comic theatre, an entertainment involving suspense followed by release through laughter. But there is nothing in the work, and especially the po-faced studio assistant who loads and fires the gun like an officiant at a religious ritual, to suggest anything less than total seriousness. The assistant is clearly under instructions not to engage with, or even acknowledge the presence of, the audience. He steps through the crowd, avoiding eye-contact and deaf to any and every question. He loads the missile and charges the gun with a solemn efficiency of one laying out the eucharist. He then stands in perfect contemplative stillness while the air pressure builds, before with a single, decisive action he pulls the lever and the missile is launched.Kapoor notes that he is interested in the random, chancelike effects that this procedure will generate. To him, one imagines, the work speaks of a postmodernist loss of confidence in rationality and human control: that there are forces in the world which are far outside our capacity to predict, that we stand in awe and wonder at their effects, and in some way find meaning in them.In an earlier generation Christians would have revolted at this embracing of chance and rejection of rational control. But, as I watched, I wondered if this work is more in tune with a Biblical worldview than was probably intended. The work does not demonstrate that life is random and meaningless, because the very nature of its components – the building of the gun, the targeting, the control of the compressed air that fires the projectile – all speak clearly of rationality and control. But the uncontrolled effects of the work speak equally powerfully about chaos theory, the unpredictability of the effects of our actions. They also embody some of the ‘complaint’ of the writer of Ecclesiastes: that we labour away in the world, and yet seem to have so little certainty about it; we know God is in control of it, but we can’t grasp the meaning ourselves, nor control the outcomes of all our labour. Unlike this work, we can accept apparent randomness, and even sometimes enjoy its effects, without finding meaning itself in the randomness. But what I like about Kapoor is that he is clearly trying to engage with genuine issues, to put three-dimensional form on the perceptions that many people share: that they have lost confidence in their ability to grasp reality, or even to perceive themselves with confidence.And because Kapoor is a serious artist, reflecting on the human condition, there is much that is good in his work that Christians can engage with constructively. First published in Evangelicals Now, December 2009 www.nigelhalliday.org/anish-kapoor-ra-2009/

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part I “Old Testament Bible Prophecy” includes the film TRUTH AND HISTORY and article ” Jane Roe became pro-life”

April 12, 2013 – 5:45 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on fulfilled prophecy from the Bible Part 2

August 8, 2013 – 1:28 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on fulfilled prophecy from the Bible Part 1

August 6, 2013 – 1:24 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged Bible Prophecy, john macarthur | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

April 5, 2012 – 10:39 am

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology | Edit | Comments (1)

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 2)

August 1, 2013 – 12:10 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 1)

July 30, 2013 – 1:32 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers: “Why I believe the Bible is true”

July 9, 2013 – 8:38 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Biblical Archaeology | Edit | Comments (0)

The Old Testament is Filled with Fulfilled Prophecy by Jim Wallace

June 24, 2013 – 9:47 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part M “Old Testament prophecy fulfilled?”Part 3(includes film DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE)

April 19, 2013 – 1:52 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Evidence for the Bible

March 27, 2013 – 9:43 pm

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 53 THE BEATLES (Part E, Stg. Pepper’s and John Lennon’s search in 1967 for truth was through drugs, money, laughter, etc & similar to King Solomon’s, LOTS OF PICTURES OF JOHN AND CYNTHIA) (Feature on artist Yoko Ono)

April 2, 2015 – 7:05 am

The John Lennon and the Beatles really were on a long search for meaning and fulfillment in their lives just like King Solomon did in the Book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon looked into learning (1:12-18, 2:12-17), laughter, ladies, luxuries, and liquor (2:1-2, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20). He fount that without God in the picture all […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

March 22, 2015 – 12:30 am

______________ George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles: I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

March 19, 2015 – 12:21 am

The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles: I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

March 12, 2015 – 12:16 am

__________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

March 5, 2015 – 4:47 am

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

February 26, 2015 – 4:57 am

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted, ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

February 19, 2015 – 5:33 am

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

February 12, 2015 – 5:00 am

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

_________________

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Biblical Archaeology | Comments (0)

August 20, 2022 READING A PROVERB A DAY (PROVERBS 20) Adrian Rogers and John MacArthur on wisdom from Proverbs on alcohol “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise” (Proverbs 20:1)

August 20, 2022 – 1:50 am

–

Proverbs 20 New Living Translation

20 Wine produces mockers; alcohol leads to brawls.
Those led astray by drink cannot be wise.

²The king’s fury is like a lion’s roar;
to rouse his anger is to risk your life.

³Avoiding a fight is a mark of honor;
only fools insist on quarreling.

⁴Those too lazy to plow in the right season
will have no food at the harvest.

⁵Though good advice lies deep within the heart,
a person with understanding will draw it out.

⁶Many will say they are loyal friends,
but who can find one who is truly reliable?

⁷The godly walk with integrity;
blessed are their children who follow them.

⁸When a king sits in judgment, he weighs all the evidence,
distinguishing the bad from the good.

⁹Who can say, “I have cleansed my heart;
I am pure and free from sin”?

¹⁰False weights and unequal measures^[a]—
the Lord detests double standards of every kind.

¹¹Even children are known by the way they act,
whether their conduct is pure, and whether it is right.

¹²Ears to hear and eyes to see—
both are gifts from the Lord.

¹³If you love sleep, you will end in poverty.
Keep your eyes open, and there will be plenty to eat!

¹⁴The buyer haggles over the price, saying, “It’s worthless,”
then brags about getting a bargain!

¹⁵Wise words are more valuable
than much gold and many rubies.

¹⁶Get security from someone who guarantees a stranger’s debt.
Get a deposit if he does it for foreigners.^[b]

¹⁷Stolen bread tastes sweet,
but it turns to gravel in the mouth.

¹⁸Plans succeed through good counsel;
don’t go to war without wise advice.

¹⁹A gossip goes around telling secrets,
so don’t hang around with chatterers.

²⁰If you insult your father or mother,
your light will be snuffed out in total darkness.

²¹An inheritance obtained too early in life
is not a blessing in the end.

²²Don’t say, “I will get even for this wrong.”
Wait for the Lord to handle the matter.

²³The Lord detests double standards;
he is not pleased by dishonest scales.

²⁴The Lord directs our steps,
so why try to understand everything along the way?

²⁵Don’t trap yourself by making a rash promise to God
and only later counting the cost.

²⁶A wise king scatters the wicked like wheat,
then runs his threshing wheel over them.

²⁷The Lord’s light penetrates the human spirit,^[c]
exposing every hidden motive.

²⁸Unfailing love and faithfulness protect the king;
his throne is made secure through love.

²⁹The glory of the young is their strength;
the gray hair of experience is the splendor of the old.

³⁰Physical punishment cleanses away evil;^[d]
such discipline purifies the heart.

I love the Book of Proverbs and every day I read one chapter of Proverbs. Since there are 31 chapters, I start the 1st of ever month and read chapter 1 and then the next day I read chapter 2 and so on the rest of the month.

John McArthur said:

“First of all, number one issue in gaining wisdom is to fear God…is to fear God. How do you know that? Back in chapter 1 verse 7, we read this, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom and instruction.” The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. Proverbs 9:10, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and the knowledge of the holy one is true understanding.”

____________

One of the issues I have learned about in Proverbs is concerning the issue of alcohol.

Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise (Proverbs 20:1).

ryan dunn Jackass dead in crash

Ryan Dunn and his friends moments before they died.

Flickr user Eric Lewis posted the image below with a caption that says the photo shows what’s left of Dunn’s car.

Ryan Dunn tweeted a picture of himself drinking from a bar. At 2 am he left the bar and a few minutes later he was killed after running off the road in his car.There are three reasons that I do not drink and here they are.First,alcohol has brought a social plague on our country not matched by anything we have ever seen in the past. I will never forget the day I heard this statistic in 1975: “Drunk drivers are responsible for 50% of highway fatalities.”My pastor Adrian Rogers shared that statistic from the pulpit. I was only 14 years old at the time, but I was looking forward to driving. It caused me to realize that I had to abstain from alcohol and try to convince my friends and family to do likewise.Second, the Bible does condemn alcoholic wine. There were three kinds of wine mentioned in the Bible (grapes, grape juice and strong drink). Wine in the cluster which is equal to our grapes. Isaiah 65:8 ” “As the new wine is found in the cluster…” The point I am making here is very clear. The Bible does refer to nonalcoholic wine which is equal to our grape juice. Don’t take for granted everytime you read the word “wine” in the Bible that it is referring to the kind of wine we are used to today.Next we have the term “strong drink” which is equal to our wine today. Strong drink is condemned. .Proverbs 20:1 states, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise. ”

WHAT WAS “STRONG DRINK” IN BIBLE TIMES?

Distillation was not discovered until about 1500 A.D. Strong drink and unmixed wine in Bible times was from 3% to 11% alcohol. Dr. John MacArthur says “…since anybody in biblical times who drank unmixed wine (9-11% alcohol) was definitely considered a barbarian, then we dont even need to discuss whether a Christian should drink hard liquor–that is apparent!”

CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT DRINK STRONG DRINK!

Since wine has 9 to 11% alcohol and one brand 20% alcohol, you should not drink that. Brandy contains 15 to 20% alcohol, so thats out! Hard liquor has 40 to 50% alcohol (80 to 100 proof), and that is obviously excluded!

For documentation on this subject Google “alcohol” with the name of Adrian Rogers or John MacArthur. These theologians have covered this subject fully with biblical references.

Third, Romans 14:21 states, “It is better not to eat meat (that had been offered to idols) or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.” If a person rejects all the linguistic arguments, there is still Romans 14:21 concerning not causing a weaker brother to stumble..

It is consistent with the ethic of love for believers and unbelievers alike. Because I am an example to others, I will make certain no one ever walks the road of sorrow called alcoholism because they saw me take a drink and assumed, “if it is alright for Everette Hatcher, it is alright for me.” No, I will choose to set an uncompromising example of abstinence because I love them. The fact is that 1 of every 6 drinkers in the USA are problem drinkers. Maybe if my family of 6 drank, that could be me or one of my children?

Billy Sunday told a story that illustrates this principle and I heard this story while Adrian Rogers was my pastor at Bellevue Baptist:

I feel like an old fellow in Tennessee who made his living by catching rattlesnakes. He caught one with fourteen rattles and put it in a box with a glass top. One day when he was sawing wood his little five-year old boy,Jim, took the lid off and the rattler wriggled out and struck him in the cheek. He ran to his father and said, “The rattler has bit me.” The father ran and chopped the rattler to pieces, and with his jackknife he cut a chunk from the boy’s cheek and then sucked and sucked at the wound to draw out the poison. -He looked at little Jim, watched the pupils of his eyes dilate and watched him swell to three times his normal size, watched his lips become parched and cracked, and eyes roll, and little Jim gasped and died.

The father took him in his arms, carried him over by the side of the rattler, got on his knees and said, “God, I would not give little Jim for all the rattlers that ever crawled over the Blue Ridge mountains.”

That is the question that must be answered by everyone no matter what their religious beliefs. Is the pleasure of drinking alcohol worth the life of one of your children?

Here is a scripture that describes what will happen to a person addicted to alcohol:

Proverbs 23:29-35
(29) Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes?
(30) They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine.
(31) Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his color in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.
(32) At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.
(33) Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.
(34) Yea, thou shalt be as he that lieth down in the midst of the sea, or as he that lieth upon the top of a mast.
(35) They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not sick; they have beaten me, and I felt it not: when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again.

More alcohol statistics:

More than one-half of American adults have a close family member who has or has had alcoholism.
Alcohol is a factor in nearly half of America’s murders, suicides and accidental deaths.

The highest rates of current and past year heavy alcohol use are reported by workers in the following occupations: construction, food preparation and waiters/waitresses, along with auto mechanics, vehicle repairers, light truck drivers and laborers. 95% of alcoholics die from their disease and die approximately 26 years earlier than their normal life expectancy.

Up to 40% of industrial fatalities and 47% of injuries in the workplace are linked to alcohol consumption and alcoholism.
Absenteeism among alcoholics or problem drinkers is 3.8 to 8.3 times greater than normal.
More than three fourths of female victims of nonfatal, domestic violence reported that their assailant had been drinking or using drugs.
More than one third of pedestrians killed by automobiles were legally drunk.
About half of state prison inmates and 40% of federal prisoners incarcerated for committing violent crimes report they were under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of their offense.
Long-term, heavy alcohol use is the leading cause of illness and death from liver disease in the U.S.
Alcoholics spend four times the amount of time in a hospital as non-drinkers, mostly from drinking-related injuries.

Probably the most telling is the last statistic: 95% of alcoholics die from their disease and die approximately 26 years earlier than their normal life expectancy.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Comments (0)

DONALD TRUMP and BERNIE SANDERS STRONGLY AGREE THAT FREE TRADE IS HARMFUL but “As economist Milton Friedman says, protectionism discriminates against low prices!”

August 19, 2022 – 9:46 pm

–

Defending International Trade

As a fan of globalization – but not globalism, I endorse this new video from Reason, which punctures myths from protectionists such as Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders (and Joe Biden).

–

If you don’t have a spare seven minutes to watch the video, it addresses three specific points.

Does cross-border trade destroy manufacturing jobs?
Did liberalizing trade with China take American jobs?
Does trade make us vulnerable because of supply chains?

Plenty of good material, but I also would have challenged protectionists to provide a successful example of protectionism. Today or in the past.

Did protectionism work for Herbert Hoover – or anyone else – in the 1930s?

Did protectionism work for Juan Peron in Argentina in the 1940s and 1950s?

Is protectionism working for India’s economy in the 21st century?

Did protectionism work for Donald Trump between 2017 and 2020?

The answer is no in every single case. So it is no surprise that scholarly research (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here) shows that free trade is a better approach if a nation wants more jobs and higher income.

But protectionists make one accurate point. While free trade increases overall employment, that does not mean every worker in every industry benefits.

In his New York Times column, Peter Coy explores this topic.

The skepticism about free markets…has gotten only stronger…only 44 percent of Republican voters…viewed free trade mainly as an opportunity for growth through increased exports. …the standard Econ 101 argument for free trade… First, assert that trade increases prosperity by allowing each country to specialize in what it’s best at. …Second, acknowledge that not everyone wins from free trade… Third, state that this problem can be easily solved: Everyone in society can be made better off if the winners share some of their gains with the losers. …In reality, the winners from trade rarely share much of their gains with the losers. The losers remain losers, and they often vote for candidates who put up tariff walls. …the free traders have failed to deliver on their promises to make free trade and open markets work for all.

A reasonably fair article, but I don’t think “free traders have failed” for reasons I explained in one of my videos from earlier this year.

–

If you don’t want to spend three minutes watching the video, I explain that all trade destroys jobs. And that includes trade within a nation.

It’s part of “creative destruction,” which I’ve labeled as the best and worst part of capitalism.

Millions of jobs get destroyed every year, in part because new technology, new competitors, and new innovations.

That’s bad news for many people, but it’s also the process that creates even more new jobs.

And it’s the process that has made all of us so much richer than our ancestors. And that includes the ancestors of people who lost jobs because of domestic or international trade.

P.S. Click here, here, and here for some very sound observations from America’s best post-WWII president.

Larry Elder wrote in 2016: “As economist Milton Friedman says, protectionism discriminates against low prices!”

By Gabriella Beaumont‐Smith

The pandemic has shocked every sector of the economy. Trade restrictions enacted by the Trump administration and maintained by President Biden have rippled through the U.S. economy but have particularly impacted U.S. ports. The pandemic highlighted that American ports have broader efficiency problems and could use some serious policy and management reforms.

On the west coast in particular, ship congestion has caused severe delays, wreaking havoc on the supply chain. While factories and ports in Asia are working 24/7 to supply American consumers with valuable goods, U.S. ports have been open for far fewer hours because labor union contractsdictate the hourly terms. However, after months of backlog, the ports of Los Angeles (LA) and Long Beach (LB) are finally switching to 24/7 shifts to move goods more quickly.

As a result of these union contracts, government offices are also not open 24/7. The ports of LA and LB account for almost half of all U.S. imports. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials who must clear and admit goods do not work nights or weekends. These limits create additional pressure to have goods shipped to the United States during a prohibitive time frame, or leave ships idling around the ports until they can get in. The latter is the most common response. Recently, ships have been waiting an average of 12.5 days to enter the LA port. Ship idling has caused other problems too. Orange County, CA was affected by an oil spill that is suspected to have been caused by a pipeline hit with idling ship anchors. These differences in operating hours have caused huge ports efficiency losses that are felt across the country.

While it is positive that retailers, couriers, and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) are making changes to run ports more efficiently, permanent trade policy changes would help ease America’s coastal shipping problems.

The best policy would be to unilaterally remove tariffs by the United States. Simply eliminating tariffs would reduce an administrative burden both for traders and CBP officials. Duty‐free trade would increase imports and exports but all other things equal, the freed‐up CBP resources would help to move goods more swiftly through the ports.

However, a few smaller reforms could be implemented now that would considerably help the efficiency of U.S. ports. Removing Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum imports could temper the current domestic scarcity of some transportation‐related goods, including chassis (the frame of a vehicle that holds containers). These materials are vital inputs for such products and the Section 232 tariffs are affecting American manufacturers’ ability to meet domestic demand. Eliminating duties and tariffs on transportation‐related goods, including the 221 percent antidumping and countervailing (AD/CVD) duties and 25 percent Section 301 tariffs on Chinese chassis, could help increase the U.S. supply of chassis. While some freighters are paying the higher prices for Chinese chassis, the supply of transportation is still constrained, which has resulted in higher sticker prices on consumer goods.

As LA and LB move to 24/7 shifts, CBP offices should also be open 24/7. Given the sheer volume of trade these two ports process, it would seem sensible to make staffing 24/7 a permanent change at these ports, and at others depending on trade volumes.

Reforming the Jones Act could also help. All freight moved between U.S. ports must useU.S.-built, -crewed, and -flagged ships. As a result, traders circumvent these regulations by using alternative modes like trucks and trains. It would be prudent to reform the Jones Act to allow ships not in compliance with the Jones Act to pick up shipments in one U.S. port and unload at another. This would reduce pressure on inland transit that is currently being impacted by the aforementioned tariffs.

These bottlenecks have provided insight into the problems that exist at U.S. ports and with coastal shipping more broadly. Improvements in trade policy have a role to play and policymakers would be remiss not to consider permanent changes that would be beneficial now and could preempt pressures during future economic shocks.

Milton Friedman – Free Trade vs. Protectionism

Free to Choose Part 2: The Tyranny of Control (Featuring Milton Friedman

Donald Trump: Clueless about free trade

Larry Elder rebuts candidate’s ‘they’re taking our jobs’ claim

Published: 02/03/2016 at 6:39 PM

One of Donald Trump’s talking points and biggest applause lines is how “they” – Japan, China and Mexico – are “beating us in trade” and are “taking our jobs.” He proposes tariffs, for example, on Chinese goods in retaliation for that country’s alleged “cheating.”

To someone who is out of work in an industry where foreign workers do what he or she once did, Trump-like protectionism sounds appealing. But Trump actually proposes punishing the American consumer. As economist Milton Friedman says, protectionism discriminates against low prices.

It is certainly true that many countries prop up or subsidize companies or even whole industries by providing capital or special privileges. This allows them to produce goods and services “below cost” – or at prices below what a competitor could charge and still make a profit. But doing so also means that taxes in that country, which could have gone to a more productive use, are squandered to keep a company in business that otherwise wouldn’t exist or would have gone out of business. This means consumers in other countries with which the “cheater” country trades can buy those imported goods at a cheaper price.

Trump proposes to retaliate by placing tariffs on those imported goods. But this prevents American consumers from benefiting from the “cheater” country’s folly of propping up companies that would not survive but for the taxes spent to keep it alive. Why compound the stupidity?

Another justification for this kind of protectionism is that a foreign country “exploits” America through the use of “slave labor” which, as to wages, causes a “race to the bottom.” Certainly forced labor, as when “blood diamonds” are mined by workers with guns pointed to their heads, is criminal and immoral. But free laborers offering to work for less money than others is how poor countries become wealthier – by allowing other countries to buy goods more cheaply.

NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, established in 1994, has become exhibit A on how “we lose” on trade. After all, many American jobs have been “outsourced” to Mexico. But that looks at but one side of the ledger. That an American pays less for certain things frees up capital to spend on something or on someone else. A machinist sees his job “shipped to Mexico,” but the planner or analyst hired by a company with the “savings” might not see the direct relationship between free trade and the fact that he or she has this new job. When NAFTA was debated, businessman and presidential candidate Ross Perot predicted “a giant sucking sound” as jobs and incomes would be lost to Mexico.

The American Enterprise Institute writes: “It is an article of faith among protectionists that NAFTA harmed American workers. … The justification may be that NAFTA went into force at the beginning of 1994 and the U.S. trade balance with Canada and Mexico, two of our top partners, then deteriorated.

“But the American job market improved as these trade deficits grew. Unemployment fell more than two points from the beginning of 1994 through the middle of 2000. Already high labor force participation edged higher to its all-time record by early 2000. Manufacturing employment rose until mid-1998 and was above its pre-NAFTA level until April 2001. Manufacturing wages rose. The strength in the American job market from 1994 to 1999 is not due primarily to NAFTA, but it is plain that the job market, including manufacturing, strengthened after NAFTA.”

Trump is also schizophrenic on this issue. On the one hand, he opposes illegal immigration, which most often is an economic decision where, for example, a poor, unskilled worker from Mexico sneaks into America to make money. On the other hand, Trump deems it unfair and a form of “cheating” if an American company relocates to or builds a factory in Mexico to take advantage of that unskilled Mexican worker’s willingness to work for less.

If Trump were talking about the excessive taxes or regulations that induce American companies to leave the U.S. or to put factories in foreign countries, that would be one thing. The U.S. general top marginal corporate income tax rate is the highest in the industrialized world – and, worldwide, is only exceeded by Chad and the United Arab Emirates. Unnecessary regulations also increase the cost of doing business stateside. But this is not Trump’s argument.

About free trade, the father of modern economics, Adam Smith, in 1776 wrote in “The Wealth of Nations”: “In every country it always is and must be in the interest of the great body of the people to buy whatever they want of those who sell it cheapest. The proposition is so very manifest that it seems ridiculous to take any pains to prove it; nor could it ever have been called in question had not the interested sophistry of merchants and manufacturers confounded the common sense of mankind. Their interest is, in this respect, directly opposite to that of the great body of the people.”

Trump means well. But so what?

Trump vs Friedman – Trade Policy Debate

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE “The Tyranny of Control” Transcript and Video (60 Minutes)

March 20, 2015 – 1:40 am

Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE “The Tyranny of Control” Transcript and Video (60 Minutes) In 1980 I read the book FREE TO CHOOSE by Milton Friedman and it really enlightened me a tremendous amount. I suggest checking out these episodes and transcripts of Milton Friedman’s film series FREE TO CHOOSE: “The Failure of Socialism” and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 7 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “I’m not pro business, I’m pro free enterprise, which is a very different thing, and the reason I’m pro free enterprise”

November 14, 2014 – 1:16 am

In 1980 I read the book FREE TO CHOOSE by Milton Friedman and it really enlightened me a tremendous amount. I suggest checking out these episodes and transcripts of Milton Friedman’s film series FREE TO CHOOSE: “The Failure of Socialism” and “What is wrong with our schools?” and “Created Equal” and From Cradle to Grave, […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 6 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “We are the ones who promote freedom, and free enterprise, and individual initiative, And what do we do? We force puny little Hong Kong to impose limits, restrictions on its exports at tariffs, in order to protect our textile workers”

November 7, 2014 – 1:19 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 5 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “There is no measure whatsoever that would do more to prevent private monopoly development than complete free trade”

October 31, 2014 – 1:13 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 4 of 7 (Transcript and Video) ” What we need are constitutional restraints on the power of government to interfere with free markets in foreign exchange, in foreign trade, and in many other aspects of our lives.”

October 24, 2014 – 1:09 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 3 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “When anyone complains about unfair competition, consumers beware, That is really a cry for special privilege always at the expense of the consumer”

October 17, 2014 – 1:04 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 2 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “As always, economic freedom promotes human freedom”

October 10, 2014 – 1:57 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

FRIEDMAN FRIDAY “The Tyranny of Control” Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 1 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “Adam Smith’s… key idea was that self-interest could produce an orderly society benefiting everybody, It was as though there were an invisible hand at work”

October 3, 2014 – 1:46 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 654) “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 7 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “I’m not pro business, I’m pro free enterprise, which is a very different thing, and the reason I’m pro free enterprise”

August 22, 2014 – 1:17 am

Open letter to President Obama (Part 654) (Emailed to White House on July 22, 2013) President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 650) “The Tyranny of Control” in Milton Friedman’s FREE TO CHOOSE Part 6 of 7 (Transcript and Video) “We are the ones who promote freedom, and free enterprise, and individual initiative, And what do we do? We force puny little Hong Kong to impose limits, restrictions on its exports at tariffs, in order to protect our textile workers”

August 18, 2014 – 1:20 am

Open letter to President Obama (Part 650) (Emailed to White House on July 22, 2013) President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

__________

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Comments (0)

Dan Mitchell: people in government value taxes more than growth, jobs, competitiveness, and all sorts of other factors!

August 19, 2022 – 9:24 pm

–

Summarizing the Mentality of Government in One Sentence

Back in 2014, I shared a meme with a motto that was perfect for Washington, DC.

Today, let’s do something similar. But instead of a motto specifically for America’s unsavory capital, how about one sentence that summarizes the mentality of all governments.

I used a fill-in-the-blank format because there are so many possible answers.

After all, people in government value taxes more than growth, jobs, competitiveness, and all sorts of other factors.

And one of those other factors is public health, as we can see in this report by Rachel Pannett and Julia Mio Inuma in the Washington Post.

Japanese officials, worried about shifting demographics and a sharp decline in sin tax revenue, have come up with an unusual fix for their fiscal woes: encouraging young people to drink more. …Liquor tax revenue in the fiscal 2020 yearwas about $8.4 billion, a plunge of more than $813 million from the previous year, according to government data. That was the largest decline in three decades — and a cause for alarm for a government facing broad fiscal challenges. …The unorthodox push by bureaucrats to “revitalize the liquor industry” has faced a backlash…on Twitter. …“As long as they can collect taxes, I guess people’s health doesn’t matter.”

When I first saw this story, I thought it was a good fit for one of my columns highlighting “Great Moments in Foreign Government.”

But the final sentence of the excerpt caught my eye and motivated me to take a different approach.

Though the story gets added to my collection of “Strange Moments in Japanese Governance”:

Licensing regulations for coffee enemas.
Gimmicky tax and labor policies.
Amazingly incompetent subsidies.

Yet another reminder that you’ve asked a very strange question if more government is the answer.

In the Case of the IRS, Bigger is Not Better

Sadly, Joe Biden’s plan for a bigger IRS is becoming reality. As you might imagine, I’m not happy.

I’m motivated to share the above video, which was part of last week’s episode of The Square Circle, because it galls me to see some writers defend huge budget increases for the internal revenue service while simultaneously overlooking very serious problems.

Such as.

Scandals at the IRS
Criminal behavior at the IRS
Corruption at the IRS
The truth about the IRS budget
Partisan behavior at the IRS
Embracing dishonest numbers at the IRS
Abuses of power at the IRS

The latest example of IRS sycophancy comes from Paul Waldman of the Washington Post.

Here’s some of what he wrote.

…with the pending passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, we may finally begin to turn the tide in a war only one side has been fighting…this is something all Americans should celebrate.…The bill contains nearly $80 billion for the Internal Revenue Service… With this bill, it would be able to hire as many as 87,000 new employees…the wealthy and corporations don’t pay their fair share. …Americans don’t mind paying taxes, as long as they believe the system is fair.

It’s not just that Waldman fails to address problems at the IRS. He also is either very misinformed or very dishonest about who pays the lion’s share of income taxes.

For instance, even the IRS freely admits that upper-income taxpayers finance a hugely disproportionate chunkof the income tax burden.

And if he didn’t want to accept data the objects of his affection at the IRS he could peruse numbers from the Tax Foundation. Or rely on data from the Congressional Budget Office.

Sadly, facts don’t matter to some of our friends on the left. Too many of them seem to think government should have first claim on anything taxpayers earn, particularly if they are successful.

The bottom line if that envy and spite should not be guiding principles for taxation.

Let’s close by revisiting Waldman’s column and reviewing his assertion about “three things we should all be able to agree on.”

We need a government. …In order to have a government, we need to collect taxes. …If we’re going to collect taxes, the agency that does it should operate as efficiently and effectively as possible.

To which I respond.

We need a government, but not a bloated, ever-expanding leviathan.
We need to collect taxes, but we did just fine for more than 100 years with no income tax.
An efficient and effective IRS will be far more likely with a simple and honest tax system.

Needless to say, I won’t hold my breath waiting for #3 to happen.

P.S. If today’s topic is too depressing, here’s some IRS-themed humor to hopefully boost your mood.

P.P.S. Mr. Waldman is not the only IRS sycophant.

P.P.P.S. While readers will not be surprised that politicians such as Elizabeth Warren want a bigger and more intrusive IRS. But how many of them realize Trump and his team also were bad on this issue?

Open letter to President Obama (Part 644)

(Emailed to White House on 6-10-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

The federal government debt is growing so much that it is endangering us because if things keep going like they are now we will not have any money left for the national defense because we are so far in debt as a nation. We have been spending so much on our welfare state through food stamps and other programs that I am worrying that many of our citizens are becoming more dependent on government and in many cases they are losing their incentive to work hard because of the welfare trap the government has put in place. Other nations in Europe have gone down this road and we see what mess this has gotten them in. People really are losing their faith in big government and they want more liberty back. It seems to me we have to get back to the founding principles that made our country great. We also need to realize that a big government will encourage waste and corruption. The recent scandals in our government have proved my point. In fact, the jokes you made at Ohio State about possibly auditing them are not so funny now that reality shows how the IRS was acting more like a monster out of control. Also raising taxes on the job creators is a very bad idea too. The Laffer Curve clearly demonstrates that when the tax rates are raised many individuals will move their investments to places where they will not get taxed as much.

______________________

We can fix the IRS problem by going to the flat tax and lowering the size of government.

Why the IRS Persecuted the Tea Party and How to Fix the Problem

May 27, 2013 by Dan Mitchell

Did President Obama and his team of Chicago cronies deliberately target the Tea Party in hopes of thwarting free speech and political participation?

Was this part of a campaign to win the 2012 election by suppressing Republican votes?

Perhaps, but I’ve warned that it’s never a good idea to assume top-down conspiracies when corruption, incompetence, politics, ideology, greed, and self-interest are better explanations for what happens in Washington.

Writing for the Washington Examiner, Tim Carney has a much more sober and realistic explanation of what happened at the IRS.

If you take a group of Democrats who are also unionized government employees, and put them in charge of policing political speech, it doesn’t matter how professional and well-intentioned they are. The result will be much like the debacle in the Cincinnati office of the IRS. …there’s no reason to even posit evil intent by the IRS officials who formulated, approved or executed the inappropriate guidelines for picking groups to scrutinize most closely. …The public servants figuring out which groups qualified for 501(c)4 “social welfare” non-profit status were mostly Democrats surrounded by mostly Democrats. …In the 2012 election, every donation traceable to this office went to President Obama or liberal Sen. Sherrod Brown. This is an environment where even those trying to be fair could develop a disproportionate distrust of the Tea Party. One IRS worker — a member of NTEU and contributor to its PAC, which gives 96 percent of its money to Democratic candidates — explained it this way: “The reason NTEU mostly supports Democratic candidates for office is because Democratic candidates are mostly more supportive of civil servants/government employees.”

Tim concludes with a wise observation.

As long as we have a civil service workforce that leans Left, and as long as we have an income tax system that requires the IRS to police political speech, conservative groups can always expect special IRS scrutiny.

And my colleague Doug Bandow, in an article for the American Spectator, adds his sage analysis.

The real issue is the expansive, expensive bureaucratic state and its inherent threat to any system of limited government, rule of law, and individual liberty. …the broader the government’s authority, the greater its need for revenue, the wider its enforcement power, the more expansive the bureaucracy’s discretion, the increasingly important the battle for political control, and the more bitter the partisan fight, the more likely government officials will abuse their positions, violate rules, laws, and Constitution, and sacrifice people’s liberties. The blame falls squarely on Congress, not the IRS.

I actually think he is letting the IRS off the hook too easily.

But Doug’s overall point obviously is true.

…the denizens of Capitol Hill also have created a tax code marked by outrageous complexity, special interest electioneering, and systematic social engineering. Legislators have intentionally created avenues for tax avoidance to win votes, and then complained about widespread tax avoidance to win votes.

So what’s the answer?

The most obvious response to the scandal — beyond punishing anyone who violated the law — is tax reform. Implement a flat tax and you’d still have an IRS, but the income tax would be less complex, there would be fewer “preferences” for the agency to police, and rates would be lower, leaving taxpayers with less incentive for aggressive tax avoidance. …Failing to address the broader underlying factors also would merely set the stage for a repeat performance in some form a few years hence. …More fundamentally, government, and especially the national government, should do less. Efficient social engineering may be slightly better than inefficient social engineering, but no social engineering would be far better.

Amen. Let’s rip out the internal revenue code and replace it with a simple and fair flat tax.

But here’s the challenge. We know the solution, but it will be almost impossible to implement good policy unless we figure out some way to restrain the spending side of the fiscal ledger.

___________________________

At the risk of over-simplifying, we will never get tax reform unless we figure out how to implement entitlement reform.

Here’s another Foden cartoon, which I like because it has the same theme asthis Jerry Holbert cartoon, showing big government as a destructive and malicious force.

_____________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

We know the IRS commissioner wasn’t telling the truth in March 2012, when he testified: “There’s absolutely no targeting.”

May 27, 2013 – 7:17 am

We know the IRS commissioner wasn’t telling the truth in March 2012, when he testified: “There’s absolutely no targeting.”However, Lois Lerner knew different when she misled people with those words. Two important points made by Noonan in the Wall Street Journal in the article below: First, only conservative groups were targeted in this scandal by […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

A great cartoonist takes on the IRS!!!!

May 26, 2013 – 2:37 pm

Ohio Liberty Coalition versus the I.R.S. (Tom Zawistowski) Published on May 20, 2013 The Ohio Liberty Coalition was among tea party groups that received special scrutiny from the I.R.S. Tom Zawistowski says his story is not unique. He argues the kinds of questions the I.R.S. asked his group amounts to little more than “opposition research.” Video […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, Taxes | Edit | Comments (0)

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning what the First Amendment means

May 26, 2013 – 12:38 am

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book really helped develop my political views concerning […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Cartoonists show how stupid the IRS is acting!!!

May 23, 2013 – 10:27 am

We got to lower the size of government so we don’t have these abuses like this in the IRS. Cartoonists v. the IRS May 23, 2013 by Dan Mitchell Call me perverse, but I’m enjoying this IRS scandal. It’s good to see them suffer a tiny fraction of the agony they impose on the American people. I’ve already […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Edit | Comments (0)

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (“Thirsty Thursday”, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

May 23, 2013 – 1:43 am

Dear Senator Pryor, Why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? As you know that federal deficit is at all time high (1.6 trillion deficit with revenues of 2.2 trillion and spending at 3.8 trillion). On my blog http://www.HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com I took you at your word and sent you over 100 emails with specific spending cut ideas. However, […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Mark Pryor, spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Video from Cato Institute on IRS Scandal

May 23, 2013 – 12:51 am

Is the irs out of control? Here is the link from cato: MAY 22, 2013 8:47AM Can You Vague That Up for Me? By TREVOR BURRUS SHARE As the IRS scandal thickens, targeted groups are coming out to describe their ordeals in dealing with that most-reviled of government agencies. The Ohio Liberty Coalition was one of […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute | Edit | Comments (0)

IRS cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog

May 17, 2013 – 2:02 pm

Get Ready to Be Reamed May 17, 2013 by Dan Mitchell With so many scandals percolating, there are lots of good cartoons being produced. But I think this Chip Bok gem deserves special praise. It manages to weave together both the costly Obamacare boondoggle with the reprehensible politicization of the IRS. So BOHICA, my friends. If […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, Healthcare, Taxes | Edit | Comments (0)

Obama jokes about audit of Ohio St by IRS then IRS scandal breaks!!!!!

May 17, 2013 – 6:53 am

You want to talk about irony then look at President Obama’s speech a few days ago when he joked about a potential audit of Ohio St by the IRS then a few days later the IRS scandal breaks!!!! The I.R.S. Abusing Americans Is Nothing New Published on May 15, 2013 The I.R.S. targeting of tea party […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Taxes | Edit | Comments (0)

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (“Thirsty Thursday”, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

May 16, 2013 – 5:40 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Mark Pryor, spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

We could put in a flat tax and it would enable us to cut billions out of the IRS budget!!!!

May 15, 2013 – 6:04 am

We could put in a flat tax and it would enable us to cut billions out of the IRS budget!!!! May 14, 2013 2:34PM IRS Budget Soars By Chris Edwards Share The revelations of IRS officials targeting conservative and libertarian groups suggest that now is a good time for lawmakers to review a broad range […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Taxes | Edit | Comments (0)

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, President Obama | Comments (0)

Mar-a-Lago ‘Raid’: Two-Tiered Justice?

August 19, 2022 – 8:35 pm

——

There seems to be a separate system of justice for top Democrats than there is for former President Donald Trump, who is seen here speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Aug. 6 in Dallas. (Photo: Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

Attorney General Merrick Garland justified the unprecedented FBI raid of the residence of a former president by saying: “The department does not take such a decision lightly. Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search, and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.”

With the approval of former President Donald Trump and after a request by the Department of Justice, Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, who approved the warrant, publicly released it, as well as the inventory of items removed.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the FBI “removed 11 sets of classified documents, including some marked as top secret … and … took around 20 boxes of items, binders of photos, a handwritten note and the executive grant of clemency for Mr. Trump’s ally Roger Stone.”

The crimes the DOJ asserts include evidence of probable cause that Trump violated the part of the Espionage Act pertaining to classified information; removal of government records; and the destruction of records.

Generally, disputes between a departing president as to what documents and materials can be removed and what should be returned are worked out between the president and the relevant government entities.

The problem is the appearance of a two-tiered system of justice, one pertaining to Trump and the other pertaining to laws or subpoenas allegedly violated by top Democratic officials like then-President Barack Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder, who refused to comply with a congressional subpoena and became the only sitting AG to be found in criminal contempt of Congress; IRS official Lois Lerner, accused of withholding the granting of tax-exempt status to conservative charities and who refused to comply with a congressional subpoena; the treatment of Bill Clinton’s national security adviser Sandy Berger, who removed and destroyed documents from the National Archives in 2003; and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her alleged violation of the Espionage Act.

Take Clinton’s alleged violation of the Espionage Act because of the private server she installed in the basement of her home, a server on which she sent and received classified information.

About Clinton and her staff, then-FBI head James Comey said, “There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” But he concluded that Clinton was not engaged in “clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information.”

But does the relevant part of the Espionage Act require “intent”?

Political columnist and commentator Charles Krauthammer wrote: “This is baffling. Under the statute (18 U.S.C. section 793(f)), it’s a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or ‘through gross negligence.’ The evidence, as outlined by Comey, is overwhelming.”

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy wrote: “The question is whether she knew classified info would end up on the server, and her set-up made that inevitable. … Clinton could’ve been prosecuted either for willfully mishandling classified info or for doing so through gross negligence.”

Peter van Buren, a 24-year veteran of the State Department, wrote: “While Comey maintains there was no intent or gross negligence by Clinton to violate the law, it is difficult to reconcile her actions and his statement. … The standards applied in the Clinton case are at variance with how classified information violations elsewhere in the government are handled.”

Harvard Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz wrote: “Berger was administratively fined, and Mrs. Clinton was rebuked by James Comey, then director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which might have cost her the 2016 election. But neither was subjected to broad search warrants or criminal prosecution.”

There is much we still don’t know about the underlying affidavit for the warrant and whether Trump broke laws in removing material from the White House. But given the treatment of top Democratic officials versus the treatment of Trump, did the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago meet what Garland called the “standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search”?

At the very least, the optics look bad, really bad.

———

The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)

Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.

As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.

A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.

After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?

Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?

The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?

Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?

The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.

Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?

New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”

The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?

In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.

Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.

The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.

The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.

Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.

At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.

In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.

Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.

Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.

All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.

The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.

We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.

Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.

Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,

I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.

I recently read about your impressive pro-life record:

Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.

Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.

It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:

The January 6 Insurrection Hoax

September 2021 • Volume 50, Number 9 • Roger Kimball

Roger Kimball
Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion

Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:

That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.

Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”

Bingo.

You can google and get Roger Kimball article “The January 6 Insurrection Hoax”

NOW WHAT DID YOU DO TO TURN YOUR BACK ON OUR LIBERTY AND PERPETUATE THE HOAX THAT JANUARY 6TH WAS AN INSURRECTION? Read below!!

9 Republicans voted to hold Trump aide Bannon in contempt of Congress

There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.

Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.

Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.

WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 27: (L-R) Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol on July 27, 2021 at the Canon House Office Building in Washington, DC. Members of law enforcement will testify about the attack by supporters of former President Donald Trump on the U.S. Capitol. According to authorities, about 140 police officers were injured when they were trampled, had objects thrown at them, and sprayed with chemical irritants during the insurrection. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images) — From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.

Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.

The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.

Do you realize that Americans rights are being taken away from them and would you like an example? I am going to quote Mr. Kimball again. You can google and get Roger Kimball article “The January 6 Insurrection Hoax”

Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.

Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.

Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.

I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.

Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.

As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.

Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.

Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:

Sen. Johnson and Colleagues Request Answers from DOJ on Unequal Application of Justice to Protestors

June 7, 2021

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.

“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

June 7, 2021

The Honorable Merrick B. Garland

Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530

Dear Attorney General Garland:

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.

We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.

During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]

In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:

“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]

Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]

DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.

Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:

Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:

Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?

How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?

How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?

How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?

How many of these individuals have been released on bail?

How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?

How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]

How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?

How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?

January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:

Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?

How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?

How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?

How many of these individuals have been released on bail?

How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?

How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?

How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?

How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?

Sincerely,

Ron Johnson

United States Senator

Tommy Tuberville

United States Senator

Mike Lee

United States Senator

Rick Scott

United States Senator

Ted Cruz

United States Senator

###

[1] Jennifer Kingson, Exclusive: $1 billion-plus riot damage is most expensive in insurance history, Axios, Sept. 16, 2020, https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a455-4067-b06a-66f9db4cea9c.html.

[2] Conrad Wilson and Jonathan Levinson, Protesters, federal officers clash outside Portland’s courthouse Thursday, OPB, Mar. 12, 2021, https://www.opb.org/article/2021/03/12/protesters-vandalize-portlands-federal-courthouse-again/.

[3] Jennifer Kingson, Exclusive: $1 billion-plus riot damage is most expensive in insurance history, Axios, Sept. 16, 2020, https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a455-4067-b06a-66f9db4cea9c.html.

[4] Published in the Intercept, Jul. 15, 2020, https://theintercept.com/document/2020/07/15/preventing-violence-and-criminal-activity-in-protection-of-lawful-protest/.

[5] Id.

[6] Josh Gerstein, Leniency for defendants in Portland clashes could affect Capitol riot cases, Politico, Apr. 14, 2021, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/portland-capitol-riot-cases-481346.

[7] Madison Hall et al., 493 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far. This searchable table shows them all., Insider, accessed June 4, 2021, https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-capitol-pro-trump-riot-arrests-charges-names-2021-1.

[8] Capitol Breach Cases, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, accessed May 21, 2021, https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases?combine=&order=title&sort=asc.

[9] Josh Gerstein, Leniency for defendants in Portland clashes could affect Capitol riot cases, Politico, Apr. 14, 2021, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/portland-capitol-riot-cases-481346.

—-

I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:

How Should We Then Live | Season 1 | Episode 5 | The Revolutionary Age

Thank you for your time, and again I want to thank you for your support of the unborn little babies!

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher, 13900 Cottontail Lane, AR 72002, cell 501-920-5733, everettehatcher@gmail.com, http://www.thedailyhatch.org

——————————————————————————————

——

Dr. Francis schaeffer How Should We Then Live | Season 1 | Episode 5 | The Revolutionary Age

– Whatever happened to human race? PART 1 Co-authored by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop)

C. Everett Koop


13th Surgeon General of the United States
In office January 21, 1982 – October 1, 1989

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 2 | Slaughter of the Innocents

Francis Schaeffer – Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 3 | Death by Someone’s Choice

Mr. Hentoff with the clarinetist Edmond Hall in 1948 at the Savoy, a club in Boston.

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 4 | The Basis for Human Dignity

Image<img class=”i-amphtml-blurry-placeholder” src=”data:;base64, Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.

Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.

________________

______________________

March 23, 2021

President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.

___________________

The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.

Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthanasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

__________________________

I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

_____________________________________

Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture

Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer

________________

Jewish World Review June 12, 2006/ 16 Sivan, 5766

Insisting on life

http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.

“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”

Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.

The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.

“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”

This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”

That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.

The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.

I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.

On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.

Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.

As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.

Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.

He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.

“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”

“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.

“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.

The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”

And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.

______________________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,

Al Mohler on Kermit Gosnell’s abortion practice

May 15, 2013 – 7:46 am

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part U “Do men have a say in the abortion debate?” (includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS and editorial cartoon)

May 14, 2013 – 1:08 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part T “Abortion is a dirty business” (includes video “Truth and History” and editorial cartoon)

May 9, 2013 – 7:19 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Abortion supporters lying in order to further their clause? Window to the Womb (includes video ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE)

April 6, 2013 – 12:01 am

It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Francis Schaeffer, Max Brantley, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part D “If you can’t afford a child can you abort?”Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 4 includes the film ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE) (editorial cartoon)

April 5, 2013 – 6:30 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part C “Abortion” (Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 3 includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

April 3, 2013 – 6:07 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part B “Gendercide” (Francis Schaeffer Quotes Part 2 includes the film ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE) (editorial cartoon)

April 2, 2013 – 9:30 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

SANCTITY OF LIFE SATURDAY “AngryOldWoman” blogger argues that she has no regrets about past abortion

March 30, 2013 – 1:29 am

Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Arkansas Times, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” The Church Awakens: Whatever Happened to the Human Race? (includes the video ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE)

March 9, 2013 – 9:35 am

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part H “Are humans special?” includes film ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE) Reagan: ” To diminish the value of one category of human life is to diminish us all”

April 10, 2013 – 6:43 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part G “How do moral nonabsolutists come up with what is right?” includes the film “ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE”)

April 9, 2013 – 6:36 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (3)

Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part E “Moral absolutes and abortion” Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 5(includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

April 7, 2013 – 6:25 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (2)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

January 8, 2012 – 12:54 am

E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged francis crick, hitler and stalin, john kenneth galbraith, robert theobald, youtube | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

January 1, 2012 – 12:51 am

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged free speech movement, paris riots, personal peace., sproul plaza, www youtube | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

December 25, 2011 – 12:45 am

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged airplane design, http www youtube, marcel duchamp art, post impressionism, van gogh gauguin | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

December 18, 2011 – 12:41 am

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged french existentialism, humanist philosophers, humanistic philosophy, natural freedom, www youtube | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

December 11, 2011 – 12:37 am

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged biblical foundations., biblical influence, french prose, neo darwinism, www youtube | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

December 4, 2011 – 12:33 am

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged christian foundations, freedom of press, freedom of religion, lex rex, www youtube | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

November 27, 2011 – 12:26 am

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged authority of the bible, christian humanism, old testament prophets, school of athens., thomas cromwell | Edit | Comments (0)

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

November 20, 2011 – 10:03 am

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

November 13, 2011 – 12:13 am

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged byzantine art, conservative evangelicalism, gothic architecture., gregorian chants, naturalism in art | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

November 6, 2011 – 12:01 am

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Francis Schaeffer, President Obama, Prolife | Tagged Nat Hentoff | Comments (0)

August 19, 2022 READING A PROVERB A DAY (PROVERBS 19) THOUGHTFUL THURSDAY King Solomon’s Proverbs on Sleep Part 2 19:15 “Lazy people sleep soundly, but idleness leaves them hungry”

August 19, 2022 – 1:48 am

–

Proverbs 19 New Living Translation

–

19 Better to be poor and honest
than to be dishonest and a fool.

²Enthusiasm without knowledge is no good;
haste makes mistakes.

³People ruin their lives by their own foolishness
and then are angry at the Lord.

⁴Wealth makes many “friends”;
poverty drives them all away.

⁵A false witness will not go unpunished,
nor will a liar escape.

⁶Many seek favors from a ruler;
everyone is the friend of a person who gives gifts!

⁷The relatives of the poor despise them;
how much more will their friends avoid them!
Though the poor plead with them,
their friends are gone.

⁸To acquire wisdom is to love yourself;
people who cherish understanding will prosper.

⁹A false witness will not go unpunished,
and a liar will be destroyed.

¹⁰It isn’t right for a fool to live in luxury
or for a slave to rule over princes!

¹¹Sensible people control their temper;
they earn respect by overlooking wrongs.

¹²The king’s anger is like a lion’s roar,
but his favor is like dew on the grass.

¹³A foolish child^[a] is a calamity to a father;
a quarrelsome wife is as annoying as constant dripping.

¹⁴Fathers can give their sons an inheritance of houses and wealth,
but only the Lord can give an understanding wife.

¹⁵Lazy people sleep soundly,
but idleness leaves them hungry.

¹⁶Keep the commandments and keep your life;
despising them leads to death.

¹⁷If you help the poor, you are lending to the Lord—
and he will repay you!

¹⁸Discipline your children while there is hope.
Otherwise you will ruin their lives.

¹⁹Hot-tempered people must pay the penalty.
If you rescue them once, you will have to do it again.

²⁰Get all the advice and instruction you can,
so you will be wise the rest of your life.

²¹You can make many plans,
but the Lord’s purpose will prevail.

²²Loyalty makes a person attractive.
It is better to be poor than dishonest.

²³Fear of the Lord leads to life,
bringing security and protection from harm.

²⁴Lazy people take food in their hand
but don’t even lift it to their mouth.

²⁵If you punish a mocker, the simpleminded will learn a lesson;
if you correct the wise, they will be all the wiser.

²⁶Children who mistreat their father or chase away their mother
are an embarrassment and a public disgrace.

²⁷If you stop listening to instruction, my child,
you will turn your back on knowledge.

²⁸A corrupt witness makes a mockery of justice;
the mouth of the wicked gulps down evil.

²⁹Punishment is made for mockers,
and the backs of fools are made to be beaten.

King Solomon’s Proverbs Part

The wisdom of Solomon is there for those who want it.

_____________

What does Solomon say about sleep?

My son, do not lose sight of these—
keep sound wisdom and discretion,
and they will be life for your soul
and adornment for your neck.
Then you will walk on your way securely,
and your foot will not stumble.
If you lie down, you will not be afraid;
when you lie down, your sleep will be sweet.

—Proverbs 3:21-24

Do not enter the path of the wicked,
and do not walk in the way of the evil.
Avoid it; do not go on it;
turn away from it and pass on.
For they cannot sleep unless they have done wrong;
they are robbed of sleep unless they have made someone stumble.

—Proverbs 4:14-16

Go to the ant, O sluggard;
consider her ways, and be wise.
Without having any chief,
officer, or ruler,
she prepares her bread in summer
and gathers her food in harvest.
How long will you lie there, O sluggard?
When will you arise from your sleep?
A little sleep, a little slumber,
a little folding of the hands to rest,
and poverty will come upon you like a robber,
and want like an armed man.

—Proverbs 6:6-11

Slothfulness casts into a deep sleep,
and an idle person will suffer hunger.

—Proverbs 19:15

Love not sleep, lest you come to poverty;
open your eyes, and you will have plenty of bread.

—Proverbs 20:13

I passed by the field of a sluggard,
by the vineyard of a man lacking sense,
and behold, it was all overgrown with thorns;
the ground was covered with nettles,
and its stone wall was broken down.
Then I saw and considered it;
I looked and received instruction.
A little sleep, a little slumber,
a little folding of the hands to rest,
and poverty will come upon you like a robber,
and want like an armed man.

—Proverbs 24:30-34

Sweet is the sleep of a laborer, whether he eats little or much, but the full stomach of the rich will not let him sleep.

– See more at: http://scripturemenu.com/BibleVerseList.html?topicid=67#sthash.D0Ae56tQ.dpuf

Great website on Solomon’s wisdom from Proverbs:

Proverbs 26:14

As the door turneth upon his hinges, so doth the slothful upon his bed.

How does a door turn on its hinges? It moves back and forth, but it never goes anywhere! It turns from side to side, but it cannot get loose from its place! It moves back and forth, but it does not leave the doorway! So are lazy people, who will lie in bed, rolling back and forth, but dreading the thought of getting up to go to school or work (Pr 26:13-16)!

Here is a wonderful proverb with a great simile to condemn lazy persons that like to sleep too much. A simile is a comparison between two things that is clearly stated by the use of “as” or “like.” As a door turns back and forth, and from side to side, without going anywhere, so are lazy people who stay in bed, though they are through sleeping soundly.

What is the slothful? He is a lazy man that is slow, resentful of action or exertion, sluggish, idle, and indolent. He is named appropriately, for there is a mammal in the forests of Central and South America that is also called the sloth, which moves very slowly and often stays in the same position for extended periods of time.

Solomon wrote to young men, specifically his son (Pr 1:4,8). He knew by inspiration from God and observations in life that young men can sleep too much, so he wrote several proverbs against it (Pr 6:6-11;19:15; 20:13; 23:21; 24:30-34). Too much sleep will bring a man to poverty, so he ridiculed excess sleep by comparing it to a door turning on hinges.

What cures the love of sleep? Starvation (Pr 20:4; II Thess 3:10)! Depriving a young man of food will always work! His appetite and metabolism are at the highest levels of his whole life. Parents can easily teach sons to get up in the morning, though most pamper and feed their sloth, teaching him that laziness is acceptable and without painful consequences.

Lazy people are headed for poverty, unless they drastically change their habits (Pr 6:11; 19:15; 20:13; 23:21;24:34). The more a man sleeps, the more he thinks he needs to sleep, his metabolism slows, and he quickly experiences catabolism of muscular strength. The military knows how to turn soft boys into hard men, and it is not by sleeping in! While the first days of getting up early might be painful, good habits can quickly be formed.

There is more to this proverb than just a condemnation of excess sleep. Solomon also condemned the attitude, actions, and character of lazy persons by picking on their sleep habits. A sluggard will do anything but work! He will talk, take a break, pace himself, take a long time eating, get distracted easily, be unnecessarily concerned about details, and do easy things very slowly, lest he be forced to face a task that will take exertion!

If you are slothful spiritually, you will also suffer spiritual poverty just as surely. It is the man who hunts for wisdom as for hidden treasure – intense and persistent efforts – that finds it (Pr 2:4; 18:1). You must hear preaching with great care (Luke 8:18), and you must make diligent efforts to confirm and understand what you hear to be noble (Acts 17:11; I Thess 5:21). Are you able to get up and seek the Lord early to find Him (Pr 8:17)?

3 QUESTIONS FOR YOU:

1. Why is the simile with the door hinges work so well with laziness and sleeping?

2. What is the cure for the love of sleep?

3. What actions will a sluggard do in order to avoid work?

Seeing Jesus in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job

July 16, 2013 – 1:28 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 10) Summing up Proverbs study

May 30, 2013 – 1:06 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 9) “Love your neighbor”

May 28, 2013 – 1:23 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 8) “Manage your money”

May 23, 2013 – 1:35 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 7) “Pursue your work”

May 21, 2013 – 1:05 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 6) “Enjoy your wife and watch your words”

May 16, 2013 – 1:23 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Tagged Gene Bartow, John Wooden | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 5) “Control your body”

May 14, 2013 – 1:44 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 4) “Bad company corrupts…”

May 9, 2013 – 1:10 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 3) “Guard your mind and obey your parents!!”

May 7, 2013 – 1:43 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 2) What does it mean to fear the Lord?

May 2, 2013 – 1:13 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

The Wisdom of Solomon and the Book of Ecclesiastes

July 8, 2013 – 12:01 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Why is Solomon so depressed in Ecclesiastes? by Brent Cunningham

July 3, 2013 – 7:00 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Robert Leroe on Ecclesiastes (Mentions Thomas Aquinas, Princess Diana, Mother Teresa, King Solomon, King Rehoboam, Eugene Peterson, Chuck Swindoll, and John Newton.)

June 19, 2013 – 1:30 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Solomon was the author of Ecclesiastes

June 11, 2013 – 1:55 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Ecclesiastes: Solomon with Life in the Fast Lane

June 3, 2013 – 1:19 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Ecclesiastes a scathing and self-deprecating attack on hedonism and secular humanism by Solomon

May 31, 2013 – 1:17 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Solomon was right in his cynicism–unless……unless there is a God who created us and cares about us

May 22, 2013 – 1:34 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

The Humanist takes on Solomon and the Book of Ecclesiastes

May 20, 2013 – 1:13 pm

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Tom Brady , Coldplay, Kansas, Solomon and the search for satisfaction (part 3)

December 23, 2011 – 11:12 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers on gambling

July 18, 2013 – 12:44 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Book of Ecclesiastes

July 17, 2013 – 1:40 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers: Are fathers necessary?

July 16, 2013 – 12:43 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Tom Brady, Coldplay, Kansas, Solomon and the search for satisfaction (part 2)

December 22, 2011 – 11:56 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers and Billy Graham discuss Ronald Reagan (who was my favorite President who I named my son after)

August 18, 2022 – 9:52 pm

—

Baptist leaders remember Ronald Reagan’s optimism as being founded on faith in God

By Erin Curry, posted June 7, 2004 in

—

After being elected President of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1979, Adrian Rogers met with President Ronald Reagan.

Former SBC President Adrian Rogers, pastor of the Memphis-area Bellevue Baptist Church, recounted that he first met Reagan in 1980 when he was a candidate for president. Rogers and four others visited with Reagan in a hotel room.

“Someone asked him this question at the end of the meeting, ‘Governor, I want to ask you a very personal question. Do you know Jesus Christ? Not do you know about Him, but do you know Him?’

“He said, ‘Oh, yes. He is very real to me. I have trusted Him as my personal Lord and Savior, and I pray every day. But I don’t wear my religion on my sleeves.’

“I felt impressed to pray for him, and I put my arm around him and prayed,” Rogers recounted. “I got a letter from him, and I really appreciated it. … He said, ‘Thank you for remembering me in prayer before our Lord.’”

Rogers was in about a half-dozen meetings with Reagan. Once, in the Oval Office early in his administration, “I told him, ‘Mr. President, Southern Baptists love you and will stand behind you if you will stand for the things that mean so much to them. Stand for the home, for the family, for purity. Those are the things that mean so much to them, and I would hope that you would stand for them.’ And he said he would.”

Rogers described Reagan as “a man of principle. He was not driven by polls or political correctness. In that sense, I think he was comparable to our current president. I think the same mosquito may have bit them both.

“The other major thing I would mention about him was his genteel kindness and his ability to make you feel important and feel at home,” Rogers said. “I do believe he was one of the most affable persons I have met.”

——

—

Just as I am. Michael W. Smith (at the Lying in Honor of the Reverend Bi…

—

Touching Moments From Billy Graham’s Funeral

—-

Watch live: Billy Graham’s funeral

—

One of the thrills of my life was getting to hear President Reagan speak in the beginning of November of 1984 at the State House Convention Center in Little Rock. Immediately after that program I was standing outside on Markham with my girlfriend Jill Sawyer (now wife of 34 years) and we were alone on a corner and the President was driven by and he waved at us and we waved back. Since the rally that President Reagan held was filled with thousands of people I assumed Jill and I were on the corner with many other people but when I turned around I realized that President Reagan had only waved to us two because we were all alone on the corner and I felt deeply honored.

One of the reasons I liked Reagan was because of his conservative economic philosophy which he got from my hero Milton Friedman and his social views on abortion which influenced his pick for surgeon general which was C. Everett Koop who was Francis Schaeffer’s good friend. Ronald Reagan because of his pro-life views also attended a meeting in Dallas in 1980 with my pastor Adrian Rogers who was President of the Southern Baptist Convention at the time

—

Dr. C. Everett Koop pictured above and Adrian Rogers pictured below with Reagan.

I have a son named Wilson Daniel Hatcher and he is named after two of the most respected men I have ever read about : Daniel from the Old Testament and Ronald Wilson Reagan. I have studied that book of Daniel for years and have come to respect that author who was a saint who worked in two pagan governments but he never compromised. My favorite record was the album “No Compromise” by Keith Green and on the cover was a picture from the Book of Daniel.

VIDEO OF MELODY GREEN (Keith’s widow) INTRODUCES RONALD REAGAN

President Reagan’s Remarks at a Briefing for Right to Life Activists on …

BILLY GRAHAM ON RONALD REAGAN:

Ronald Reagan is one of the most winsome men I have ever known. Our long friendship really started one day in 1953, when I was playing golf in Phoenix. Mrs. Loyal Davis, wife of a prominent Chicago surgeon, came up to me on the course.

“I want you to get to know my new son-in-law,” she said.

I asked who he was.

“Ronald Reagan.”

“You mean the film star?”

She confirmed that he had married her daughter, Nancy, some months before.

Ron (as most of his friends called him) and I actually met later that year in Dallas.

In the next two decades, my travels took me to California with some frequency, and often our paths crossed. As our friendship grew, I not only admired his quick wit and warm personality, but I also came to respect his keen insight and tough-minded approach to broad political issues. I also found him very interested in our work, even giving me friendly advice from time to time.

During the years before Ron was elected to public office, I had often detected a spiritual side to him. For example, I remember once when I gave a small dinner party at the Beverly Hilton Hotel and invited him. He brought up the subject of the Second Coming of Christ. The same subject came up with him on other occasions as well.

I have been told that where he grew up, in Dixon, Illinois, he did some preaching himself in his late teens. At the time, he was a member of the Christian Church, which was somewhat like the Baptist Church. I kept forgetting to ask him about it, however, something that I now regret.

During the eight years of Reagan’s presidential administration, we saw each other a number of times. I especially appreciated his kindness in inviting Ruth and me to several states dinners for visiting foreign leaders.

One night while I was staying at the White House, Nancy and the President got into a discussion about the question of salvation–who was going to be saved and who was going to be lost. He gave her his views on conversion and the new birth right out of the Bible. She turned to me.

“Billy, is that right?”

I said it was and expanded a little further.

While he was president, Ronald Reagan bestowed on me one of the highest honors I could ever imagine. On February 23, 1983, he presented me with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor our government gives to an American, for service to the nation. I felt unworthy of the honor, and still do. But whatever else it means, it will always remind me of the generosity and friendship of a remarkable man and a warm and enduring personal friend, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Pastor to Presidents: Billy Graham and Ronald Reagan

November 19, 2020

Categories: Billy Graham, Plan Your Visit

SHARE TWEET

Billy Graham described Ronald Reagan as “one of the most winsome men I have ever known.” Their friendship began long before Reagan’s political career, when he was still a film star in Hollywood. As their friendship grew over the next couple of decades, Billy “not only admired his quick wit and warm personality, but [he] also came to respect his keen insight and tough-minded approach to broad political issues.”

Billy Graham knew Ronald and Nancy Reagan well before their time in the White House

When Reagan was inaugurated as President on January 20, 1981, Billy joined him on the platform while he was sworn in. Throughout Reagan’s term of office, Billy and Ruth were invited to many state dinners, including one for Queen Elizabeth II, and another for Chinese president Li Xiannian.

Billy Graham at state dinner for Queen Elizabeth II hosted by President Ronald Reagan in 1983

In Just As I Am, Billy remembers multiple conversations with the Reagans regarding faith. “They were both interested in understanding more about the Scriptures, especially Ron. He often asked me questions about the biblical view on important topics. Abortion was one such issue he wrestled with. I always stressed the Bible’s teachings on the sacredness of human life, both of the unborn and of the born. We talked about other current issues, but always in terms of principles, not what specific policies or programs should be adopted or scrapped.”

On February 23, 1983, Ronald Reagan presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Billy Graham, the highest honor a civilian citizen of the United States can receive. Of the honor, Billy said, “I felt unworthy of the honor, and still do. But whatever else it means, it will always remind me of the generosity and friendship of a remarkable man and a warm and enduring friend, Ronald Wilson Reagan.”

Billy Graham receives the Presidential Medal of Freedom

The Billy Graham Library is featuring an exhibit Pastor to Presidents highlighting Billy Graham’s friendships with our nation’s Executive Office. The exhibit runs through December 23, 2020. For more information on the exhibit, visit www.billygrahamlibrary.org

—

Transcript: Ronald Reagan’s Friendship With Billy Graham

By | Fox News

This is a partial transcript of The Big Story With John Gibson, June 7, 2004, that has been edited for clarity.

JOHN GIBSON, HOST: President Ronald Reagan(search) was a man of deep religious faith. For many years, Billy Graham (search) was one of his closest personal friends. Reverend Graham will not be able to attend any of the Reagan memorials because of a broken hip.

Joining me now is Reverend Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham. Franklin, today’s big question, what was the special bond between your father and President Reagan?

REV. FRANKLIN GRAHAM, PRESIDENT, SAMARITAN’S PURSE: They first met in 1954. It was Nancy’s mother, Mrs. Davis, that met my father when he was playing golf… in Arizona and asked if daddy would take time to meet her new son-in-law who happened to be Ronald Reagan.

They met a few weeks after that and really became very close friends since 1954. My father loved him very much and enjoyed every opportunity had he to spend with him and to talk to him. He had a great interest in spiritual questions. He was a man of deep faith. He’s a man who not only believed in God, but he believed in God’s son, the Lord Jesus Christ. He believed that Christ died on the cross for our sins, and that God raised him from the dead and that he was coming again. And he looked forward to the second coming of Jesus Christ. And he often talked to my father about that subject. He was fascinated about that, so they had a lot of very deep theological discussions.

GIBSON: Reverend Graham, as you well know, the current President Bush is a Christian and makes no effort to conceal it, and in a lot of circles, especially in Europe, he is criticized for that. It seems to me that President Reagan wasn’t quite so public in his faith. Was there a reason for that, that you know of?

GRAHAM: Well, I think he probably was more public than we give him credit for. He spoke about God quite often, spoke about his faith. I think today where we have gotten into this realm of political correctness for some reason, somebody has said it’s not right to talk about your faith. If you are in public office. And, of course, when we come back to public office, we do bring our faith, we bring our character with us. And I think those all are important ingredients to a leader, especially to the president of the United States. Reagan believed in God, he believed in Jesus Christ.

Bush is the same way. He has a strong faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. You know, the Bible says that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son whosoever believed in him should not perish, but should have everlasting life. And that whosoever, it’s me, it’s you, it’s everyone who is watching, if we’ll simply believe and trust in him, God will forgive us of our sins. It’s faith.

You don’t have to work for your salvation. It’s simply by faith. And the President Bush understands this, and, of course, President Reagan, he understood it. He had just a very simple faith, which was very dear to him and very real to him.

GIBSON: Reverend Graham, your father, Billy Graham, met Ronald Reagan, as you said, in 1954. This is some years before Ronald Reagan was governor and then later president. What did your father see in him in 1954?

GRAHAM: Well, it’s interesting. He, of course, was a well-known actor, and my father had just finished a campaign in California in 1949, got to know a lot of folks in the industry. And when Mrs. Davis suggested that they meet, daddy was just fascinated in meeting him. He liked his movies and liked him as a person, and when they met, the two had a lot in common. And they shared the same type of jokes, both had great senses of humor. And they just liked each other, you know, companionship. They were just friends, and even after he left office, after he left Washington and went back to California, my father still stayed in touch, would go by to see the president. And then, of course, the last few years his illness was very — very difficult, but he continued to keep in touch with Nancy, to call her and go by to see her.

GIBSON: You know, your father is — one of the many things he is known for is being a friend to presidents. Did he envision — we’re looking at pictures of your father now. Did he envision this actor he met in 1954 who probably at that point was maybe involved with the Screen Actors Guild but not much more politically was going to be a major political figure?

GRAHAM: Of course not. He never dreamed that, and he just — I think he is very grateful for that friendship over the years, especially when the president — when he became president. Reagan had him at the White House on many occasions to visit him. My father has never sought really to be the friend of presidents. It has just happened to come his direction. And my father feels that it’s very important as a minister of the gospel that when you’re with a president or a member of Congress, of the Senate, whatever, to be a minister and to share our faith and to hold up our faith and God’s standards. I think it’s important for people who are in government to remember God’s standards that he has given to us and not to forget them, not to turn our back on them, but to take his standards and that should apply to the way we live our life.

When the Bible says thou shall not murder, we need to hold that standard. When the Bible says thou shall not steal, we need to hold that standard. When God says not to covet, we need to hold those standards. Of course, not everybody believes the Bible. Not everybody wants God’s standards, but as a minister, my father felt it was important that he at least represent God’s standards to those that were in leadership, and did he that to the best of his ability. And I admire him for staying with it all these years.

GIBSON: Reverend Franklin Graham. Reverend, thank you very much. Appreciate you coming on today.

GRAHAM: Thank you, sir.

Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2004 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2004 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user’s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.’s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.’s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

—-

Remarks at a White House Briefing for Right to Life Activists

July 30, 1987

Senators, Congressmen, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to you all. Before I get on with things here, I think I’d better explain a little bit. This is just a small billboard that says — it’s a reminder that says, “Stay out of the Sun.” [Laughter] Well, there’s one Congressman I see in the front row to whom I have to say a special word: Henry Hyde. Watching your contributions to the hearings, Henry, I couldn’t help thinking — [laughter] — forgive me for this — other politicians can run, but there’s only one I know who knows how to Hyde. [Laughter] It’s a great pleasure to welcome all of you to Washington and an honor to be able to speak to this assembly of Americans who are doing so much to declare and defend the sacredness of all human life.

One of the aspects of this gathering that impresses me most is that just a few years ago many of you, perhaps most, never dreamed of getting involved in politics. What brought you into politics was a matter of conscience, a matter of fundamental conviction, and that gives you an integrity that Americans of all views cannot help but respect. It also happens to make me feel a particular kinship with you. You see, there was a time in my own life when nobody who knew me ever expected me to go into politics myself. [Laughter] In fact, back in 1966 when someone told my boss, Jack Warner, that I was running for Governor of California, he is supposed to have said, “No, Jimmy Stewart for Governor. Reagan for best friend.” [Laughter]

But we come here today on an issue of the most fundamental importance. Many of you’ve been attacked for being single-issue activists or single-issue voters. But I ask: What single issue could be of greater significance? What single issue could say more about a society’s values than the degree of respect shown for human life at its most vulnerable: human life still unborn?

Many of the most compelling arguments against abortion are as old as our civilization. Indeed, I would submit that a reverence for all human life is one of the distinguishing marks of true civilization. In our own time, medical science has added to our knowledge of the processes of life that take place before birth, deepening our understanding of what abortion means to the mother and the unborn child. We know, in particular, that when an abortion is performed the unborn child often feels pain.

You might be interested to learn that when I first mentioned this in a 1983 speech there was an outcry, enraged criticism and angry denials. But criticism wasn’t the only response. It so happens that I also received a letter signed by 24 medical doctors, including eminent physicians like the former chief of pediatrics at the St. Louis City Hospital and the president of the New York State Medical Society. The letter stated that in recent years medical techniques have “demonstrated the remarkable responsiveness of the human fetus to pain, touch, and sound.”

And the letter concluded: “Mr. President, in drawing attention to the capability of the human fetus to feel pain, you stand on firmly established ground.” Well, in recent years medical science has taught us so much more about the individuality and responsiveness of the fetus, even at very early stages of development. My friends, isn’t it about time the law of the land recognized the medical evidence of 1987? [Applause] If there’s even a question about when human life begins, isn’t it our duty to err on the side of life?

The law of the land — that’s a phrase with special resonance for Americans. After all, ours is not a nation founded upon centuries of shared history, like the nations of Europe or Asia. No, ours is a nation founded upon a shared and basic law, the Constitution. And because it is the Constitution that must reflect our most fundamental values — freedom, equality before the law, and yes, the dignity of human life — because of this, the duty of everyone here today is clear. We must not rest — and I pledge to you that I will not rest — until a human life amendment becomes a part of our Constitution.

At the same time, we must continue to search for practical steps that we can take now, even before the battle for the human life amendment is won. I’ve submitted a bill to Congress that I know interests each of you keenly, and I’d like to talk about that with you in just a moment. But first, permit me to mention four other important steps our administration has taken, steps that I believe represent powerful examples of what can be done now to protect the lives of unborn children.

First, our position on international population policies — as you may be aware, some international organizations have chosen to support abortion as a means of population control. Well, the United Nations Fund for Population Activities, or UNFPA, for example, works with Chinese population programs, which include abortion. Our response to that? We cut off American funds from UNFPA and from overseas organizations that support or promote abortion. As I said in my statement to the 1984 Mexico City International Conference on Population — incidentally, one of the best parts about being President is that from time to time you get to quote yourself — [laughter] — but as I said then: “We believe population programs can and must be truly voluntary, cognizant of the rights and responsibilities of individuals and families, and respectful of religious and cultural values.” Well, that means no coercive measures such as involuntary sterilization and no use of abortion for population control.

Second, permit me to mention our recent actions concerning the District of Columbia. You’ll recall that the Congress has the responsibility to oversee and appropriate all funds in the District of Columbia budget, but each year Congress has chosen to restrict only Federal funds in the DC budget from being used for abortions on demand. Yet in practice, the record is clear. There is no way to separate Federal from locally raised funds, and this has permitted the District to go right on financing abortions. And you know, I just felt that the great beauty of this capital city meant nothing if right here, in this city that belongs to all Americans, the dignity of human life was being neglected and even attacked. So, this year we took action. You’ll be pleased to know that, in transmitting to Congress the District of Columbiabudget for 1988, we made it clear that both Federal and local funds must comply with the Hyde amendment.

I want, third, to restate our firm opposition to the so-called, Grove City legislation sponsored by Senator Kennedy. This bill, S. 557, would mean that all hospitals and colleges receiving Federal funds, even those with religious affiliations, would be open to lawsuits if they failed to provide abortions. In other words, the legislation would virtually force these institutions to provide abortion on demand. I don’t mind telling you this one really touches my temperature control. I don’t want to get started, but let me just say this: As far as I’m concerned, every Member of Congress should oppose this proabortion Federal intrusion. [Applause] Thank you. You just made the day for some Legislators here. [Laughter] We support an amendment offered by Senator Danforth, an amendment that would eliminate the proabortion aspects of that legislation. As I said before, this administration will oppose any legislation that would require individuals or institutions, public or private, to finance or perform abortions

Now, the fourth point is one that will come to you as especially good news, a set of initiatives that we will pursue immediately. The first of these is a revision of the title 10 Family Planning Program guidelines. Current guidelines require grant recipients to provide abortion counseling and referral. This policy has effectively barred family planning organizations that will not engage in abortion activity from participating in the title 10 program. I’m directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to publish regulations in the Federal Register removing this bias against groups that refuse to engage in abortion activities. In order to give effect to the statutory prohibition on the use of appropriated funds in programs where abortion is a method of family planning, I am also directing Secretary Bowen to make sure that the regulations specifically state that a program which does provide counseling and referral for abortion services as a method of family planning will not be eligible for title 10 funds.

Then there’s an initiative that represents an important change in the title 10 regulations so that any organization that provides abortion-related services will be required to clearly separate these services from title 10 programs that the Federal Government is paying for. At present, the coexistence of abortion with federally supported family planning services fosters the view that abortion is an acceptable and government-sanctioned method of family planning. In order to ensure that this will no longer occur, I’m directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to publish in the Federal Register regulations that require grant recipients to separate, financially and physically, their eligible and noneligible programs.

Now, a third initiative is the development of a thorough and solid body of public health information on the effects of abortion on women. Growing numbers of women who’ve had abortions now say that they have been misled by inaccurate information. Making accurate data on maternal morbidity available to women before an abortion is performed is an essential element of informed consent. I am, therefore, directing the Surgeon General to issue a comprehensive medical report on the health effects, physical and emotional, of abortion on women.

The final initiative is a restriction on the use of Federal funds for activities that advocate abortion. It is inconsistent with title 10 for Federal funds to be used to provide speakers to debate in opposition to pro-life speakers, to lobby for proabortionlegislation, to provide transportation to abortion clinics, or make reservations at abortion clinics, to bring lawsuits in support of abortion as a family planning method, or to provide or distribute materials that advocate abortion. And I am, therefore, directing Secretary Bowen to publish regulations in the Federal Register to ensure that no title 10 funds go to any program that encourages, promotes, or advocates abortion or which assists a woman in obtaining an abortion.

You’ll be pleased to know that Secretary Bowen is fully supportive of my position on abortion and of these initiatives. Secretary Bowen has agreed that all necessary work will be completed in time to publish draft regulations in the Federal Register within 30 days. And I’m also pleased to say that the Secretary’s newly appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs is NabersCabaniss. Nabers will be among those charged with implementing these new initiatives at the Department of Health and Human Services.

And this brings me to the bill I mentioned earlier. To begin with, a word or two of background. In the past, we’ve been successful in restricting the use of Federal funds for abortions on a department-by-department basis, making use of the Hyde amendment. Yet each year there have been a few departments and agencies not covered by the Hyde amendment. The bill that we’re submitting to Congress will change that. And listen, if you will, to the key provision: “No funds appropriated by Congress shall be used to perform abortions, except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.” In other words, this one piece of legislation would permanently restrict the use of funds for abortions throughout the Federal Government, with absolutely no exceptions.

And introduced in the Senate by Senator Gordon Humphrey, this bill has 12 Senate cosponsors. And in the House, the bill was introduced by Congressman Henry Hyde and has garnered cosponsors numbering 124. Yes, opposition is stiff. But the very fact that this bill has been introduced has drawn attention to the importance of the debate and demonstrated the growing strength of the prolife movement throughout the country.

Will the bill pass? The pundits certainly don’t think so, but I have to tell you, at this point in my career, I’m used to a little skepticism. [Laughter] “The Impossible Became Inevitable” — that’s what the Washington Post headline said when our tax reform was finally enacted. And I just have to believe that, given the fundamental goodness of the American people, given this great nation’s reverence for life itself, prolife measures like this legislation will become inevitable, too. So, I intend to push for these prolife measures just as hard as I know how. Can I count on your support? [Applause] Thank you. I knew that was a foolish question when I asked it.

Many who turn to abortion do so in harrowing circumstances, and we must remind those who disagree with us, and sometimes even ourselves, that we do not seek to condemn, we do not seek to sit in judgment. Yes, we must take our stand without apology. Yet at the same time, it is our duty to rise above bitterness and reproach, to call upon all Americans to come together in a spirit of helping and understanding. For we know that in this great and good nation, positive solutions to the tragedy of abortion can be found.

If I could, I’d like to leave with you a quotation that means a great deal to me. These are the words of my friend, the late Terence Cardinal Cooke, of New York. “The gift of life, God’s special gift, is no less beautiful when it is accompanied by illness or weakness, hunger or poverty, mental or physical handicaps, loneliness or old age. Indeed, at these times, human life gains extra splendor as it requires our special care, concern, and reverence. It is in and through the weakest of human vessels that the Lord continues to reveal the power of His love.”

The weakest of human vessels — surely there is no human life more frail and vulnerable than that of an infant still in its mother’s womb. And surely it is our task to appeal to the goodness we know we can find in every American and to call upon the power of His love.

I thank you all, and God bless you all for what you’re doing.

Note: The President spoke at 11:50 a.m. in Room 450 of the Old Executive Office Building. In his opening remarks, he referred to a basal cell carcinoma on his nose. He also referred to Representative Henry J. Hyde of Illinois, who participated in the congressional hearings on the Iran-contra controversy.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

	SLIMJIM on FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART…
	mosckerr on RFK Jr: “If Trump is kep…
	mosckerr on “Now whether the 14th Am…
	Everette Hatcher III on “Now whether the 14th Am…
	Everette Hatcher III on RFK Jr: “If Trump is kep…

Monthly Archives: August 2022

Proverbs 21New Living Translation

How to Be the Father of a Wise Child

TRUTH AND HISTORY (chapter 5 of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?)

Related posts:

ByBible Blender

I. The Asking—”Is Hell a Myth?”

II. Asseverations

III. Actuality

IV. Attestations

V. Adjectives

VI. Assistance

VII. Agonizing

VIII. The Antithesis

Featured artist is Anish Kapoor

[ARTS 315] The Fully Present Object: Minimalism – Jon Anderson

[ARTS 315] The Fully Present Object: Minimalism – Jon Anderson

[ARTS 315] Contemporary Liturgies: Performance Art and Embodied Belief – Jon Anderson

Five Sculptors: Anish Kapoor

Related posts:

ryan dunn Jackass dead in crash

–

–

–

–

Larry Elder wrote in 2016: “As economist Milton Friedman says, protectionism discriminates against low prices!”

Milton Friedman – Free Trade vs. Protectionism

Free to Choose Part 2: The Tyranny of Control (Featuring Milton Friedman

Larry Elder rebuts candidate’s ‘they’re taking our jobs’ claim

Trump vs Friedman – Trade Policy Debate

You can google and get Roger Kimball article “The January 6 Insurrection Hoax”

NOW WHAT DID YOU DO TO TURN YOUR BACK ON OUR LIBERTY AND PERPETUATE THE HOAX THAT JANUARY 6TH WAS AN INSURRECTION? Read below!!