In my campaign for Congress I advocate sweeping radical social
family, and in every area of life. My proposals are based on the
belief that the Bible is the Word of God and a blueprint for all human
From time to time I am asked about the appropriateness of mixing
Christianity and politics. Many Americans mistakenly believe that the
it illegal (or at least inappropriate) to endorse
religion rather than false
religions, and certainly inappropriate (or even illegal) to promote
the true religion.
These assumptions are myths, as the links above demonstrate. America
was established as a Christian nation, on the belief that God had
communicated His Word in the Bible.
In the early 1600's, public schools were formed in America to make
sure everyone knew the Bible. Review
the history here. Since America
was a Protestant nation, America agreed with the rallying cry of the
Protestant Reformation, "Sola Scriptura."
The purpose of this webpage is to explain why I believe the Bible is
not just another book, but is the Word of God.
Greater minds than mine have come to this conclusion. Among them, Simon
Greenleaf, a founder of the Harvard Law School, as well as nearly
every Signer of the Constitution. They gave us an "Experiment
in Liberty" that produced the most prosperous and admired
nation in history. Their experiment was replaced in the 20th century
with a secular experiment in government central planning, which
has brought poverty and mass death wherever it was tried. Some of the
Founders toyed with deistic and "Enlightenment" ideas against
the Bible, but if they were here today, they would see where these ideas
have led us, and would whole-heartedly repudiate them.
What did America's Founding Fathers mean when they spoke of "the
Laws of Nature and of Nature's God?"
They were talking about the Bible.
John Locke (1632-1704) was a Christian philosopher who had a great
influence in America. He said:
[T]he Law of Nature stands as an eternal rule to all men,
legislators as well as others. The rules that they make for other
men's actions must . . . be conformable to the Law of Nature, i.e., to
the will of God.
[L]aws human must be made according to the general
laws of Nature, and without contradiction to any positive law of
Scripture, otherwise they are ill made.
Two Treatises on Government, Bk II sec 135. (quoting Hooker's Ecclesiastical
Polity, 1.iii, § 9 )
William Blackstone (1723-1780) was
cited more frequently than Locke by America's Founding Fathers. In 1810
Thomas Jefferson wryly commented that American lawyers used Blackstone's
Commentaries on the Laws of England with the same dedication and
reverence that Muslims used the Koran.
Blackstone described the Laws of
Nature and of Nature's God in a chapter in his Commentaries
the Nature of Laws in General." An excerpt is
found here. Among the highlights:
Man, considered as a creature, must
necessarily be subject to the laws of his Creator, for he is entirely
a dependent being. And consequently, as man depends absolutely upon
his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all
points, conform to his Maker's will.
will of his Maker is called the law of nature.
law of nature, being coeval [existing at the same time
- ed.] with mankind, and dictated
by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any
other. It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all
times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and
such of them as are valid derive all their force and all their
authority, mediately or immediately, from this original. The doctrines
thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they
are to be found only in the holy scriptures. These
precepts, when revealed, are found upon comparison to be really a part
of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences
to man's felicity [happiness].
these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation,
depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be
suffered to contradict these. [more]
|3. “Behold, I have taught you
statutes and judgments, even as Yahweh my God
commanded me…. Keep therefore and do them;
for this is your wisdom and your understanding
in the sight of the nations, which shall hear
all these statutes, and say, Surely this great
nation is a wise and understanding people. For
what nation is there so great, who hath God so
nigh unto them, as Yahweh our God is in all
things that we call upon him for? And what
nation is there so great, that hath statutes
and judgments so righteous as all this law,
which I set before you this day?”
4. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in
America, 2 vols. (New York: NY: The
Colonial Press, 1899) vol. 1, pp. 36-37.
5. John Clark Ridpath, History of the
United States, 4 vols. (New York, NY: The
American Book Company, 1874) vol. 1, p. 181.
6. William Holmes McGuffey, McGuffey’s
Sixth Eclectic Reader (New York, NY:
American Book Company, 1879) p. 225.
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835:
“They [the 17th-century Christian Colonials] exercised the
rights of sovereignty; they named their magistrates, concluded peace or
declared war, made police regulations, and enacted laws as if their
allegiance was due only to God. Nothing can be more curious and, at the
same time more instructive, than the legislation of that period; it is
there that the solution of the great social problem which the United
States now presents to the world is to be found [in perfect fulfillment
of Deuteronomy 4:5-8,3 demonstrating the continuing veracity
of Yahweh’s moral law and its accompanying blessings, per Deuteronomy
“Amongst these documents we shall notice, as especially
characteristic, the code of laws promulgated by the little State of
Connecticut in 1650. The legislators of Connecticut begin with the penal
laws, and … they borrow their provisions from the text of Holy Writ
… copied verbatim from the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and
John Clark Ridpath, History of the United States,
1874: “In June of 1639 the leading men of New Haven held a
convention in a barn, and formally adopted the Bible as the constitution
of the State. Everything was strictly conformed to the religious
standard. The government was called the House of Wisdom…. None but
church members were admitted to the rights of citizenship.”5
William Holmes McGuffey, McGuffey’s
Sixth Eclectic Reader, 1879: “Their
form of government was as strictly theocratical insomuch that it would
be difficult to say where there was any civil authority among them
distinct from ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Whenever a few of them
settled a town, they immediately gathered themselves into a church; and
their elders were magistrates, and their code of laws was the Pentateuch….
God was their King; and
they regarded him as truly and literally so….”6
Public schools were originally created to
teach everyone the Bible. America's Founding Fathers believed a
Bible-based education was "necessary
for good government and the happiness of mankind."
I agree with influential Americans of centuries past rather than the
pretend-Americans of today.
In 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville made these observations concerning
American civilization and the Bible.
At the extreme borders of the Confederate States, upon the confines
of society and of the wilderness, a population of bold adventurers
have taken up their abode, who pierce the solitudes of the American
woods, and seek a country there, in order to escape that poverty which
awaited them in their native provinces. As soon as the pioneer arrives
upon the spot which is to serve him for a retreat, he fells a few
trees and builds a loghouse. Nothing can offer a more miserable aspect
than these isolated dwellings. The traveller who approaches one of
them towards nightfall, sees the flicker of the hearth-flame through
the chinks in the walls; and at night, if the wind rises, he hears the
roof of boughs shake to and fro in the midst of the great forest
trees. Who would not suppose that this poor hut is the asylum of
rudeness and ignorance? Yet no sort of comparison can be drawn between
the pioneer and the dwelling which shelters him. Everything about him
is primitive and unformed, but he is himself the result of the labor
and the experience of eighteen centuries. He wears the dress, and he
speaks the language of cities; he is acquainted with the past, curious
of the future, and ready for argument upon the present; he is, in
short, a highly civilized
being, who consents, for a time, to inhabit the backwoods, and who
penetrates into the wilds of the New World with the
Bible, an axe, and a file of newspapers.
America, Part I., Chapter
XVII: Principal Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part III
It's a True Story
There are three reasons I believe the Bible is the Word
First, I like the story.
If I look at myself, the world around me, and the history of the
world through the lens of the Bible, it makes sense in an attractive
But a nice story is just a fairy tale if it's not really true. How do
I know the Bible is the Word of a true and trustworthy God?
One reason I believe the Bible is because unbelief is horrifying.
I don't like the idea of being created by random, meaningless,
impersonal forces of "nature," that make me fundamentally
no different than a rat or a pig.
I don't like the idea that there's no significance to one
randomly-mutated collection of chemicals raping, stabbing, and
killing another randomly-mutated collection of chemicals. Or an
entire nation of evolved chemicals.
I don't like the idea of the military-industrial complex killing
millions of human beings to protect overseas corporate investments.
I don't like the idea of a world where everyone thinks he's his
own god, and all these would-be gods plunging the world into
violence and chaos.
- Human beings have value.
- They have value because they are
created in the Image of God.
- They have value because God
commands us to value them.
- Human beings do not have value if
they are meaningless conglomerations of chemicals and water,
randomly mutated when acted upon by the blind collision of
impersonal forces of the universe over billions of years.
- If I am my own god, and I chose not
to value other human beings, then they have no value. They are dead
meat if I choose to exterminate them. Human beings have no value if
"Smith" -- a meaningless conglomeration of chemicals and
water -- chooses to rearrange the molecules of another meaningless
and blind conglomeration of chemicals and water -- "Jones"
-- from a state of being which we call "life" to a state
of being which we call "death." This meaningless
re-arrangement of molecules has no real significance in a cold,
random, meaningless, blind, impersonal universe.
- Nobody gets alarmed if an eagle
grabs a gopher and feeds it to its young. Why should we get alarmed
if "Smith" makes "Jones" his prey?
If the Bible is the Word of God, I have a good reason for believing
that man has value. If the Bible is false, the idea that
randomly-mutated conglomerations of chemicals have value is a fairy
Of course, if you want to rape and kill whenever you
feel like it, denying the inspiration of the Bible is a necessary first
step in avoiding cognitive
dissonance. The next step is to reduce absolutes to personal
Chocolate or Vanilla?
Birth or Abortion?
It's all just a matter of personal taste.
Arguments Against the Reliability of the
I've never heard an argument against the Bible that is compelling
enough for me to reject the Bible and embrace the alternative of meaninglessness.
In fact, my
Second reason for believing in the Bible is that it is
demonstrably a miraculous book.
Most of the arguments against the Bible share common traits with one of
the most common: "The Telephone Game" argument.
At a party, the first participant in "the Telephone Game"
will whisper a sentence to the person in the next chair, who whispers the
message to the person in the next chair, and so on around the circle. The
final person in the "phone chain" reveals the message, which is
compared with the first participant's real message. The two are found to
be totally different, and everybody laughs.
As the argument goes, this is like the transmission of the Bible over
the centuries. Nobody involved in copying the Holy Scriptures took it all
that seriously, they whimsically changed words, sentences, or paragraphs
to suit their fancy, and the Bible we have today bears no resemblance
whatsoever to what Moses, Isaiah, Matthew (or whoever started the chain)
had in mind.
This argument can be made to sound very educated and sophisticated, but
it is pathetic and juvenile.
is some information on the actual transmission of the Biblical text.
In 1912, Frederic Kenyon was knighted Sir
Frederic Kenyon for his service as Director and Head Librarian of the
British Museum. He describes how the Jews meticulously copied the Old
Besides recording varieties of reading, tradition, or conjecture, the
Massoretes undertook a number of calculations which do not enter into
the ordinary sphere of textual criticism. They numbered the verses,
words, and letters of every book. They calculated the middle word and
the middle letter of each. The enumerated verses which contained all the
letters of the alphabet, or a certain number of them; and so on. These
trivialities, as we may rightly consider them, had yet the effect of
securing minute attention to the precise transmission of the text; and
they are but an excessive manifestation of a respect for the sacred
Scriptures which in itself deserves nothing but praise. The Massoretes
were indeed anxious that not
one jot nor tittle, not one smallest letter nor one tiny part of a
letter, of the Law should pass away or be lost.
In Kenyon's day, the oldest copy of the Old Testament was a copy from
the 10th century after Christ. But in 1947 the Dead Sea Scrolls were
discovered, and they contained a complete copy of the Book of Isaiah,
dating over one thousand years earlier than that 10th century copy. The
results astonished the scholarly world. Gleason
Archer, in comparing the manuscript variations of the Hebrew text with
pre-Christian literature such as the Egyptian Book of the Dead, states
that it is amazing that the Hebrew text does not have the phenomenon of
discrepancy and MS change of other literature of the same age: "Even
though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead
Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript
previously known (A. D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical
with our standard Hebrew Bible" with the exception of minor
variations in spelling, on a par with the British "colour" and
the American "color." "Even those Dead Sea fragments of
Deuteronomy and Samuel which point to a different manuscript family from
that which underlies our received Hebrew text do not indicate any
differences in doctrine or teaching. They do not affect the message of
revelation in the slightest."
In other words, the Old Testament we have today is virtually
letter-for-letter the same Old Testament Jesus had in His day. And the
copy of Isaiah that Jesus read from (Luke
4) was virtually letter-for-letter the same as the one Isaiah himself
wrote. Ditto for the Proverbs of Solomon, the Psalms of David, and the
books of Moses.
All this about the Bible being filled with corruptions and changes is
the polar opposite of reality. There is no ancient manuscript evidence to
support this view; all the evidence is against this view.
This proves that atheists live in a world of fantasy. Some atheists
believe the Bible is unreliable because that's what they've been taught,
and they want to be respected by those who told them. But there are some
atheists who are bad people and are just making this stuff up. The ones
who start these rumors about the Bible have a completely different
conception of history than historical reality, and a completely different
view of religious people than reality. If an atheist -- knowing even
one-tenth as much about the Biblical manuscripts as the Director and Head
Librarian of the British Museum -- makes up the story that the Bible is
untrustworthy and unreliably transmitted through the centuries, then he is
a liar who probably hates God and doesn't want to love his neighbor,
refrain from stealing, or be faithful to his wife. You would be wise not
to listen to such people.
Here's an analogy that better represents the analysis of different
copies of an ancient manuscript. Suppose you won the Pillsbury Bake-Off.
Everyone wants your winning apple strudel recipe. So you hand-write a
copy. Then another. Then another. You end up making 50 copies of your
recipe. Then you lose it. You call all your friends and tell them you lost
the recipe, and request that they give back the copy you made for them.
When you get the copies, you discover that on a couple of copies you made
minor mistakes. On one copy you put "2 Tbs" instead of "2
tsp." On another recipe you wrote "20 minutes at
350°" instead of "30 minutes at 350°." But since all the
other copies had the correct item, it's easy to see which copy had the
mistake. This is the science of "textual criticism."
"Textual Criticism" is how, in God's Providence, we can learn
what God wants us to learn, and what the original authors of the books of
the Bible wrote.
There are thousands of copies of the New Testament, some copied only
decades after the original. There are only a handful of copies of the
History of Herodotus (B.C. 488-428), and they are centuries older than the
long-lost originals. F.
F. Bruce notes,
Yet no classical scholar would listen to an argument that the
authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest
manuscripts of their works which are of any use to us are over 1,300
years later than the originals.
"Textual Criticism" looks at actual texts and compares them.
This is very different from "Higher Criticism," which
presupposes that there is no God who communicates with people created in
His Image, and speculates that the entire Bible evolved in a meaningless
universe -- even though there are no actual texts supporting this view --
much like Darwin speculated that species evolved -- even though all the
transitional forms were missing from the record. (And still are.)
The Third reason I believe the Bible is the Word of God
goes back to the first reason, relating to the story: I believe the
story-tellers. There are two reasons I believe them.
First, they appear to be people of integrity. Simon
Greenleaf, a co-founder of the Harvard Law School and the greatest
authority on the law of evidence in the 19th century, said that if the New
Testament were to be subjected to the Anglo-American laws of evidence in a
court of law, the resurrection of Christ would be an established fact. The
witnesses (the authors of the Gospels, for example) are credible
It has been said, "History is written by the conquerors." The
Old Testament is different. It is obviously not written by biased Jews who
only wanted Israel to look good. The Old Testament is in a sense the most
"anti-semitic" book ever written. It paints a picture of a group
of people who were chosen by God and given every favor, and still rebelled
and failed. They are portrayed as history's most faithless losers. And yet
their story was meticulously and faithfully copied over and over by those
very same folks.
This is because they believed the Bible was the Word of God, not just
the word of some man.
But one element of the story these credible witnesses report is that
God moved them to speak and to write exactly what God wanted written.
That's their testimony. I believe it. I believe it because I like the idea
of living in a universe that's lovingly controlled by a personal and
sovereign God. There are no credible reasons given by atheists why I
should not accept this entire worldview.
Peaceful and loving people want the Bible to be true. Rational people
believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Let's Be Honest about Jesus and the Bible
Most people -- especially those who deny that He is God incarnate --
will say that Jesus Christ was "a great religious teacher." But
they lie. They really HATE Jesus Christ. If you were to
quote some of His
more offensive lines, and attribute them to Jerry Falwell or some
other well-known controversial Christian figure, that figure would be
accused of bigotry, hate-crimes, and delusional behavior.
What would be the value of your life if you lived in Germany in the
years 1935-1945, and the only thing you had to say about Adolph Hitler was
"He's a really talented public speaker." You did not challenge
his rise to power. You did not criticize his evil reign. The only thing
your children and grandchildren know about you and what you thought about
Hitler, National Socialism, anti-semitism, and genocidal totalitarianism
was that Hitler was "a great public speaker."
Or suppose you lived in Calcutta, India, and like most others, ignored
the lepers and the dying. Your only comment about Mother
Teresa is that she kept her sari "appropriately laundered."
To deny that Jesus was God and affirm that He was "a good
teacher," is as irrational and morally vapid as the assessments of
Hitler and Mother Teresa above. If Mother Teresa claimed to be God she
would be reduced from a Nobel
Prize-winning humanitarian to a nut-case. Indeed, she (rightfully)
would have been denied the Nobel Prize. If Hitler were to claim to be God
he would be elevated from dictator to anti-Christ.
So why let Jesus off the hook?
The Jews of Jesus' day were not dumb. The Jews executed
Jesus because He claimed to be the Christ, the Anointed Messiah, equal
with God. If Jesus was not equal with God, then He was nuts. Whatever
other nice things He said, things that might sound good on a Hallmark®
Card, If Jesus was not who He said He was, then He was a liar or a
A few atheists have logically concluded that Jesus Christ was evil, not
good. They see Him as a mere man who claimed to be God.
Jesus predicted His own assassination, and said that all His claims
would be verified by His resurrection from the dead. If you are willing to
exercise your human abilities to study history, evaluate evidence, and
reach conclusions, you will conclude that Jesus did in fact rise from the
dead, that His claims are true, and that the Bible is reliable. One of the
architects of the Harvard Law School, whose 3-volume treatise on the Law
of Evidence was the standard authority on the subject for generations,
investigated the historical records which we call the Gospels, and
concluded that Christ's Resurrection was an historical fact and could be
proven so in any court of law. More
Any court, that is, which is Christian. A court that refuses to accept
the claims of Christ is a court which is committing suicide. Christianity
is the necessary presupposition of justice, the foundation of the very
concept of "proof." The Bible is the chronicle of human
rebellion against logic, facts, proof, reason, justice, and life itself.
Is Bible "outdated?"
Modern Americans have been trained to believe the Bible is
"outdated" or "primitive." The modern world, by
comparison, is "sophisticated," "scientific" and
"secure." Who would ever want to go back to the world of the
It only takes a little thought to realize that "the modern
world" is not all it's cracked up to be, and the world of the Bible
-- the world of Vine & Fig Tree
-- may have much to teach us. It is the "experts" of the modern
world who have taught us to pooh-pooh the Bible.
They are wrong.
They say we can't believe in miracles. They are wrong.
They say Biblical Morality is "harsh" and the God of the Old
Testament is "cruel." They are wrong.
The Issue Is Authority - "We Will Not Have This
Man Rule Over Us!" (Luke
Failure of Non-Christian Ethics
Are we being "Judgmental?" Yes,
From Moses to Malachi, the Bible sets forth an unchanging standard of Justice,
Mercy, and Faith (Matthew 23:23). When faithfully taught and obeyed,
observance of Biblical Law mends the torn fabric of life. Bringing our
lives under the total jurisdiction of the Bible is the key to social
renewal, not reforming the lives of others through the impersonal violence
of statist bureaucratic regulation. Biblical Law is God's pattern for
peace, justice, and harmony.
- The Comprehensive Scope of Biblical Law: Every
Area of Life, Every Activity
- Obedience in Life pleases God more than Ritual
and Sacrifices in Church
Can you be a Christian if you don't “worship” God?
Can you “worship”
God if you don't worship
The Word of God is Divine. Not the paper and ink. The
The Gospel Message is a Word from God. Every
Word of God is Law.
As we explain the "Vine & Fig Tree"
vision, there are many non-Christians who are attracted by the vision of a
decentralized society which beats its "swords
into plowshares." But as we examine with searching detail the
words of the Prophet Micah, many of them will ask,
Why bother trying to understand the Bible and some
peasant religious nut who lived three thousand years ago? I am
"modern" and "scientific" and I have no interest in
church or religion. Please don't give me the Bible. What do I
need with the Bible?
This is a question everyone asks. And I do mean everyone. Not just
those who are actively working to brainwash Christians and prop up their
"New World Order" military dictatorship, but church-going
Catholics and Protestants too. Even
Evangelicals and Fundamentalists — for all their Bible-thumping —
are a product of their culture, and our culture is at war with Micah.
Our culture is at war with the Bible.
Most "Bible-believing Christians" are part of this culture.
They are not aware of the fact that Jesus wants His followers to be "extremists."
So Third, we want to convince atheists and non-Christians
that they should seriously consider the Bible.
Vine & Fig Tree is a
movement in solidarity with Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Jesus, and millions of
working-class families who have given their lives to protect copies of the
Scriptures from the violent institutions of church and state, attempting
to live that revelation out in their homes and in the world. This is part
of what we refer to as Patriarchy.
It goes back to the book of Genesis, the Patriarch Abraham, and
ultimately back to the Creation
of the World.
If you're an atheist or if you're a modern Christian who believes the Fundamentalists
are totally out to lunch on their view of the Bible, then this page is for
you. You won't be convinced in the 15k that makes up this web page, but
hopefully the dialogue can get started. I hope you email your comments to
me at "KevinCraig @ KevinCraig.us."
There are two accounts of the Creation and Purpose of Man competing for
THE BIBLE SAYS that the human race was created
by a loving, Infinite-Personal God, Who placed Man into a beautiful Garden
to live in families and take care of the planet.
MODERN SCIENTIFIC DEMOCRACY SEZ there is no God, except
as you decide to create him/her/it. Man is the random mutation of genetic
material, emerging without purpose and without meaning from a
"primordial soup" of chemicals and energy. Marriage and families
are "oppressive," and the planet is to be (a) worshipped
[the "left"] or (b) exploited, "for
tomorrow we die" [the "right"].
What are the results? What has "modern"
These words come to mind:
* violent *
superficial * selfish * materialistic * conflict * secular *
cheap * undisciplined * lust for power * corruption * illiterate
* instant gratification *
* dictatorship * pollution *
* loneliness * disposable * kickback * hopelessness *
People everywhere feel it:
Something's not right.
People everywhere feel powerless:
What can be done? To whom can we
Who are our heroes? Where are true leaders?
People everywhere feel lost:
Are there no absolutes?
Are there no values
worth living for — worth dying for?
Conspiracy — as seen in Micah's Vine
& Fig Tree prophecy — is a movement which
self-consciously defends the Bible as an infallible revelation of the
hope, values, and love of God. The "Enlightened" Empire of the Status
Quo is at war with the Bible and with followers of Christ who for
centuries have believed it to be the Word of God.
Patriarch accepts as bedrock fact the Bible's historical chronicle of
Patriarchy vs. Politics
The Kingdom of God vs. the
kingdom of Caesar
To ignore these choices is to choose to die at the hand of the Status
But can I trust the Bible?
And, really now, PATRIARCHY!?!
I answer: Can we trust those who say we can't trust the Bible?
I'll say it again: I can't convince you to become a Fundamentalist
in one web page. All I can do is infect you with a desire to rethink your
opposition to the Bible, and indicate my own willingness to continue to
dialogue with you.
Let's take one of the most controversial issues surrounding the Bible: Creationism
vs. Evolutionism. I'm a six-day Creationist.
You take the Bible literally?
the world was created in six days?!?
What are you, some kind
DON'T YOU LISTEN TO SCIENCE?
It is precisely because my eyes are wide open to what
"scientists" have done to us that I reject their lies. I find it
far more comfortable to side with peasants who stood against powerful,
violent Empires — quite apart from any faith that God used them as
mouthpieces of His revelation to us.
Anyone who's honest will admit that scientists were not
"forced" to abandon Creationism by "the facts."
Evolution was a "scientific"-sounding philosophical
rationalization for a hatred of the Bible which resulted from an
unwillingness to submit to its Authority. It is simply not a case of "The
Facts" vs. the Faith. The issue is ethics, not knowledge.
The unwillingness of scientists and philosophers to bridle their wills
under the Standard of God's Commandments resulted in the
"Military-Industrial Complex," the technocratic
institutionalization of violence; the quest for god-like power.
What do I think of when I hear the word "science"?
* The Atomic Bomb *
monosodium glutamate * smog * MTV * HMO's *
* "The Death
of God" *
* "safe" abortions *
"safe" sex * "assisted" death *
Death of Man *
But it's not the inventions; it's the ideology. It's the
religious values upon which modern science is built.
The powerful and well-trained minds of the military leaders and
politicians who plan their wars and turn the wheels of their war machine
in an unmovable path toward death and destruction are dominated by a view
of the world — indeed, of the entire universe — which is
self-consciously at war with reality — God's reality as it is
described to us by God through Jesus and the Prophets.
Scientists want all the world to believe as they do, to accept their
view of the universe — its origin, nature and destiny — and, having
accepted this view, to place our trust in them as those who understand
best the path to health, prosperity, safety, security — in short, to salvation.
Everybody wants "salvation." Call it "the good
life," or "the American Dream." The question is, How do you
get it? Modern science says, "Better living through chemistry."
Politicians have learned the lesson: Salvation comes through the barrel
of a gun. Urban twelve-year olds carry machine guns in pursuit of this
faith. The structures of our society teach Salvation through Power.
Members of The Christmas
Conspiracy are committed to
resisting their propaganda.
There are some people today who consider themselves
"radicals" or "resisters." They have not resisted as
they should have. Most people in the "Peace Movement" believe
that the universe is as the President and his generals and scientists
describe it. Conservatives listen dutifully to the prophets of the Empire,
and spend great sums of money to send their children to their seminaries
(Harvard, Stanford, Yale, etc.).
The priesthood of the Bush/Clinton regime — in their white coats or
silk ties, working in their university degree-lined offices — has
convinced nearly everyone that Jesus and the Prophets of God are
hopelessly misinformed concerning reality. Rather than accepting their
Word as an Absolute Authority, we have been taught to choose for
ourselves. We are all "liberals" now, not
The simple fact is that there are two competing
religions here: Biblical Christianity, and an idolatry which we might call
We must understand these two religions, see that they are in complete
opposition, discern which one leads to life, and then begin to live in
terms of the one we choose.
Who believes in Neo-Baalism?
Who believes in Creationism?
Those who work with their hands
Nearly everyone before 1776
BATF / FBI / IRS
What is the True Religion?
The Apostle James says,
If any man among you seem to be religious,
and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's
religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father
is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to
keep himself unspotted from the world.
As a conservative Bible-thumper, it took me a while to realize that
True Religion is not a mind full of facts and crafty arguments ready for
rapid deployment in a theological debate. I still believe that we ought to
strive for "doctrinal purity," but the ultimate goal is to be
"unspotted" from the Empires of the world. A bridled tongue and
compassion for the weak are among the Christ-like
character traits we must develop. The Apostle
Paul says that when we develop these traits, we will not be "carried
about" by the Modern World, by defenders of the
Status Quo, which is founded on "the trickery of men, in the cunning
craftiness of deceitful plotting."
I want my children to choose Micah's religion, not Caesar's. I want
them to look forward to a day — indeed, to make today the day —
we beat swords into plowshares. I want them to resist those who hypnotize
us all into forging spears for killing instead of hooks for pruning. I
want to see them live in terms of Micah's Vine
& Fig Tree vision. I am naive if I expect them to be
indoctrinated in this vision in any institutional church or Empire-run
To the extent our thinking has not been clarified, and as we are not
consistent with our foundational principles, we will not experience the
harmony that God intends for us and described through the words of the
We have already seen this in the 20th century. We have seen it, but we
refuse to see it. Over 200
million people have been deliberately killed in this century alone; a
greater percentage of the population than any previous century. The
century of atheism is the century of mass death. Evolutionism
But modern man seeks the Tempter's fantasy: "to be as gods"
(Genesis 3:5). Anything is better than admitting that God is God and we
are not. Even death.
All they that hate Me, love death. Proverbs 8:36
And so I write with a sense of urgency.
And yet I don't write all I could because I don't have the strength to
face the battle. When a known adulterer and crack user becomes President
and tells a nation that "I didn't inhale," and when the nation
can apathetically view televised scenes of the government bringing tanks
against Waco, Texas citizens whose only "crime" is
non-conforming thought, we are only days away from the time when those
same viewers will hear the televised call to take up arms against any and
all who will not confess that man is god and the State is his savior.
Jesus said His followers must be willing to "take up your
cross." In our day He would have said, "take up your firing
I am ready.
Is Modernism a
Force for Peace?
I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you,
I have set before you
life and death
blessing and cursing
H E R E F O R E C H O O S E L I F E
both you and your children may live;
that you may love the LORD your
that you may obey His voice,
and that you may cling to Him,
He is your life and the length of your days.
Vine & Fig Tree is my choice; the Bible, not the Status
Now therefore, fear the LORD, serve Him in sincerity and in truth,
and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the
River and in Egypt. Serve the LORD! And if it seems evil to you to serve
the LORD, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether
the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the
River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for
me and my house, we will serve the LORD. Joshua 24:14-15
- Click here
for a Bible-Centered Curriculum on the history of Libertry.
- Click here
for a Biblical vision of a humane society.