History Repeating Itself

The difference between the Old and New Testament is the difference between a man who said, "There is nothing new under the sun" and a God who says, "Behold, I make all things new."  --Ronald Knox

Have you ever seen a movie remake?  If you had seen the original, were you disappointed in the newer version?  Sometimes it seems like Hollywood has not had an original idea for 50 years, but copying successful media stories goes back even further than that. 

On October 30, 1938, Orson Welles wrote and directed a radio broadcast of HG Wells 1898 novel "War of the Worlds."  It caused quite a stir, because the story was not introduced a work of fiction.  Most Americans got their news from the radio, and Welles' direction was so realistic that many thought that the alien invasion was real.  It was not until the end of the broadcast at 9 p.m. Eastern Time that the audience breathed a sigh of relief, realizing that this had been, in fact, a radio drama.  For a few terrified listeners, however, the broadcast was so believable that they ran outside to witness the terrible carnage.  Some even grabbed their guns, intent on defending their way of life.

However, English theologian and author Ronald Knox had broadcast a very similar story in January, 1926. Knox broadcast a simulated live report of revolution sweeping across London, entitled Broadcasting from the Barricades. In addition to live reports of several people, including a government minister being lynched, his broadcast mixed supposed band music from the Savoy Hotel with the hotel's purported destruction by trench mortars. The Houses of Parliament and the Clock Tower were also said to have been flattened. Because the broadcast occurred on a snowy weekend, much of the United Kingdom was unable to get the newspapers until days later. The lack of newspapers caused a minor panic, as it was believed that the events in London caused this. Four months later there was considerable public disorder during the General Strike, so real was the possibility of a revolution at the time.

Disinformation creates discord, vagueness leads to violence, and what was meant to be entertaining became, for some, a terrifying reality.  As we can see, there really is nothing new under the sun.

One hundred years before I was born, the United States had just begun the Civil War.  For a child born today, one hundred years before he or she was born was the beginning of Prohibition.  The year I was born President John F. Kennedy was sending military aid and personnel to Viet Nam, and America was thrust into a war for which Congress never made a formal declaration.

Today, President Trump is criticized for selling arms to Saudi Arabia without congressional approval; he is also lambasted for sending additional troops to the Middle East without Congress ever declaring war.  Because of the failed impeachment attempt, liberals on the Coasts are pitted against conservatives in the South and Midwest.  If Trump is re-elected in November, there is a real possibility that this nation could take up arms again, and that the United States could be thrust into a second Civil War.

Over the past 50 years, America has thrown off prohibitions against abortion, Sodomy, and gay marriage.  Just like Prohibition being reversed in 1933, people have always chafed against rules designed to make them do the right thing.  The justification for reversing these morally based laws is that people do them anyway.  People in the 1920s made and consumed their own liquor, despite laws against the manufacture and sale of alcohol.  Women have always tried to find ways to end unwanted pregnancies, despite laws against medically assisted abortions.  Therefore, the argument goes, if so much effort is placed on breaking moral laws, let's just repeal the moral laws on grounds of "freedom".

Just as sin is a constant throughout history, so is God's grace.  "Noah found grace (unmerited favor) in the eyes of the Lord." (Genesis 6:8).  I love the KJV reading of Lamentations 3:22-23: "It is of the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed, because His compassions fail not.  They are new every morning; great is Thy faithfulness."

Different people respond to grace differently.  Some will continue in their sin, because there is no consequence.  The Apostle Paul warned against that: "What shall we say then?  Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?  By no means!  How can we who died to sin still live in it?" (Romans 6:1-2)  The Bible exhorts us to respond to grace by laying aside "every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shae and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God." (Hebrews 12:1-2)

You see, there will come a Judgment, either in this life or the next.  God's Judgment will not nullify His grace, but will merely "separate the sheep from the goats", the ones who respond to His grace by setting aside their will and putting on His nature, versus the ones who continue in sin because grace is so abundant.  Child of God, keep on being renewed by His presence and His power, and do not rely on yourself.

Foreign influence in elections

And He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction, having reduced them to ashes, having set an example of what is coming on the ungodly.  --2 Peter 2:6 (Berean Literal Bible)

I don't normally delve into politics in this forum, but this week I cannot help myself.  While most of the United States was distracted by the Senate impeachment trial, voters in Iowa were kicking off the primary season by elevating a dark horse candidate.  Statistically, since 1972 more than half of the Iowa caucus winners went on to win their party's nomination.

This year, the Democratic candidate with the most delegates from the Iowa caucuses is Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg, also known as "Mayor Pete."  He is a Democrat (obviously), appealing to voters tired of a divisive Republican President (Trump).  He is a centrist, who appeals not only to Democrats that are not ready for far left socialists in their party, but also could put an end to the tug-of-war between Democrats electing a more and more liberal candidate followed by Republicans choosing a more and more conservative one.  He is a combat veteran (like Bush) and a Rhodes Scholar (like Clinton).

He is also gay.

He married his partner Chasten Buttigieg in 2018 and took Chasten's last name.  If he won the Presidency, the first First Gentleman in the White House could, on occasion, wear a dress.  As a conservative Christian, I have a problem with that.

Now some of you may instantly label me as bigoted, prejudiced, or homophobic, but before you do, please read on.  I believe Christ died for all people, even Mayor Pete.  I believe people innately crave human contact, and once they find it, they call it "love" even if it is destructive, immoral, or unnatural.  I believe Jesus loves all people, but I also believe that He condemns sin, and wants to free us from the bondage of sin so that we can find God.  I believe that elevating a culture based on the way they have sex is putting the emphasis on sin rather than grace or redemption.

I do not go to parades and carry signs that say, "Proud to be a pornography user."  I don't know of anyone who would grab a megaphone and start a demonstration in favor of adultery.  If we are Bible believers, then we must recognize that these lifestyles are sinful.

In the Old Testament, Leviticus 18:22 says, "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."  Likewise, Leviticus 20:13 says, "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."  Now there are some who would discount the Old Testament laws, because we do not execute adulterers, homosexuals, or witches (mediums) in our culture.  They believe in a hyper-Grace that they infuse into New Testament teachings, like "God is Love" and "Jesus never condemned homosexuality."  These half-truths forget that Jesus preached on hell more than He spoke about heaven.  Did Jesus love the money-changers in the Temple?  Of course He did, but that did not keep him from overturning their tables, and using a hand-made whip (a weapon) to drive out the sacrificial sheep they were selling.

The New Testament does speak to this.  Paul said this about the human condition:

They are without excuse.  For although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.  Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man....Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions.  For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.  --Romans 1:20(b) - 25

We must agree that homosexuality is sin.  I do not believe it is the unforgivable sin, but if the sin is celebrated instead of repented from, then those people have chosen their sinful identity over God, and they are surely bound for hell. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."  Yes, God gives grace, but He cannot be in the presence of sin.  It is only by the blood of Jesus that we are washed clean, and can repent from sin and turn toward God.

In my lifetime, America has gone from listing homosexuality as a mental illness, to looking the other way while it was closeted, to people coming out but still looked at with some amount of disgust (anybody remember the sitcom Seinfeld, where the characters adamantly deny being gay, followed by "Not that there's anything wrong with that!"  If there was nothing wrong with it, why would they so adamantly deny it?).  Today it is no longer closeted but celebrated, to the point where we have a viable candidate for President who is in a homosexual marriage.

Instead of having a four month long trial and spending 45 million dollars trying to prove Ukrainian interference in the 2020 Presidential election, we should turn our attention to a more spiritual influence.  We have given ourselves over to a Satanic influence of our culture, to the point where the next President of the United States could be gay.  That is the foreign influence we should be most on guard against.