Don Boys Common Sense for Today Fri, 20 Oct 2017 19:31:31 +0000 en-US hourly 1 Baptists are not Protestants but Pious, Polemic Patriots! Fri, 20 Oct 2017 19:03:40 +0000 A generation ago, it was common for hospitals, jails, schools, and other institutions to have a place on their forms for a person to state their Religion–Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish. However, there was no Baptist designation. Many will say that Baptists are like Methodists, Assembly of God, etc., just another Protestant group; but that is not true. Baptists protested the Roman Catholic excesses as did other groups, but unlike the other groups Baptists were never a part of Rome. Baptist Churches or baptistic groups were always contemporaries with the Roman Church and never broke away since they were never in that religious group.

Since this is the 500th year of the anniversary of the Reformation, many have asked why so many groups split from the church that Christ established while others want to know what was the first authentic church. It is assumed by the uneducated that the Roman Catholic Church was the “mother church” but that is not an historical fact. Well, if not the Catholics, then who?

The first church was in Jerusalem and it was a Baptist or baptistic church! If not, what were they? My critics can tell me what the Jerusalem church believed and practiced and I will adjust to their beliefs and practices.

J. Porter wrote in 1914, “The first Baptist preacher was John the Baptist. We learn from the Scriptures that he was a Baptist and a preacher, and certainly it is impossible for a man to be a Baptist and a preacher and not be a Baptist preacher.” Can anyone argue with that statement? Since Christ was baptized by John the Baptist, did that make Christ a Baptist? Just asking.

The Encyclopedia Britannica revealed, “Baptists can be traced to 618 A.D. and it is presumed that they originated from the original source of the churches.”

In 1819, the King of Holland appointed Dr. J. Dermout and Dr. Ypeij to prepare a history of the Dutch Reformed Church and also to report on the claims of the Dutch Baptists. Following their research, they wrote: “We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists, and in later times, Mennonites, were the original Waldenses…On this account, the Baptists may be considered as the only religious community which has stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the gospel through all ages.”

The above account can be found on page 148, Volume I., of the work entitled History of the Dutch Reformed Church, by A. Ypeij, Doctor and Professor of Theology at Groningen, and I. J. Dermout, Secretary of the General Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church, and Preacher at The Hague, at Breda, 1819. Of course, they were not Baptists.

The best evidence for your position is when evidence comes from your enemy or opponent, and the Campbellites or Church of Christ people have been longtime opponents of Baptists. The following words of Alexander Campbell, founder of the Church of Christ movement, are taken from the authorized edition of the Campbell-McCalla Debate, “Clouds of witnesses attest the fact that before the reformation from Popery, and from the apostolic age, to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists and the practice of baptism have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced” (Alexander Campbell, in debate with W. L. McCalla, held at Washington, Mason Co., Ky., Oct. 15, 1823, p. 378).

Baptists have been fervently opposed to government control or involvement in their church affairs even when it would have benefited them! In colonial Virginia, everyone was taxed to support the established religion of the Episcopal Church (Church of England); however, Baptists refused to support that error by not paying the tax.

Those Baptists were hassled, harassed, and hunted; then fined, whipped, and even imprisoned; but they prevailed. They would not pay taxes to support the local vicar of the Church of England. In fact, they were told that they could receive tax dollars to support their Baptist Churches, but the principled Baptists refused the free money! That resulted with the Anglican Church being disestablished in Virginia. Now, no tax dollars would support any church.

In our day, almost all groups are taking “free” money, even Baptists! Day cares, Christian schools, homeless shelters, etc., are being financed with tax dollars. And even Baptists have learned to live with the attached strings–later to be called, chains. The strings always begin very tenuously; but it must be remembered that what the government funds, it runs. Maybe not at first, but eventually with the government’s nickel comes a noose.

Baptist History is not without its blemishes and stains. Because of its independence, some peculiar people with peculiar teachings attached themselves to Baptist Churches and baptistic groups going back before Baptist was attached to a church name. The lack of a hierarchal organization without a “pope” required every single Baptist Church to police its own affairs. That system has worked rather well; after all, it is the biblical system.

Baptists have been the loudest voices for religious freedom and separation of church and state (although not separation of God and state) from the very beginning of this nation. Honest, informed historians credit Baptists for that reality.

L. W. Bacon, in A History of American Christianity, wrote of the Baptists: “….that we are chiefly indebted for the final triumph, in this country, of that principle of the separation of church and state, which is one of the largest contributions of the New World to civilization….” High praise indeed and well deserved from a Congregationalist and later Presbyterian!

Baptists are also responsible for the ten amendments to the constitution not only the first one! Cathcart tells us in his Centennial Offering that “Denominationally, no community asked for this change in the Constitution but the Baptists….The Baptists asked for it through Washington; the request commended itself to his judgment and to the generous soul of Madison; and to the Baptists, beyond a doubt, belongs the glory of engrafting its best articles on the noblest Constitution ever framed for the government of mankind.”

The separation of church and state was enshrined in the Bill or Rights in the U.S. Constitution because of a Baptist preacher named John Leland. The Bill of Rights is comparable to England’s Magna Carta signed in 1215.

The Constitution was approved in 1787 at the Philadelphia Convention and was sent to the states for ratification. Virginia was by far the largest and most politically powerful colony so there would be no Constitution without Virginia. Each Virginia County elected two members to the state ratifying convention. James Madison and James Gordon, Jr. were candidates from Orange County (and there were two other candidates opposed to the Constitution) and Madison thought he was a sure winner. He was warned by his father and others that the Baptists had turned the citizens against the Constitution because it did not have a Bill of Rights. Madison headed home from New York through Philadelphia and stopped to spend a few hours with the Baptist preacher John Leland who was the major Baptist in Virginia and Orange County, home also of Madison.

The Penn State Law Review declared that religious liberty concerns of Virginia Baptists particularly the concerns of John Leland “…played a substantial role in James Madison’s elections to the Virginia ratifying convention in March of 1788 and to the First Congress in February of 1789. Those elections, in turn, were key events in the ratification of the Constitution and in the adoption of the Bill of Rights.”

Leland was a friend of James Madison, James Monroe, and Thomas Jefferson, and because of that relationship, he was asked to preach to Congress with President Jefferson in attendance in the House of Representatives. Pastor Leland met with Madison, a candidate to Virginia’s ratifying convention, to convince him of the need for a Bill of Rights to be added to the newly approved Constitution of the United States. Madison was lukewarm to the subject.

The preacher and politician, both Virginians, later met near Orange, Virginia, in what is known today as Leland–Madison Memorial Park. During that four-hour meeting, Leland was successful in extracting a commitment from Madison for a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. During that meeting, it was understood that Leland would oppose Madison’s election if he did not commit to a Bill of Rights. Madison knew the Baptist pastor was very popular in his district and agreed to his request. (He also knew his party had been trounced in the previous election in Orange County.) Leland supported him strongly and the two pro-Constitution candidates won: Madison had 202; his fellow candidate 187 and the two opposing candidates 56 and 34!

Madison kept his word when he went to Congress in the first congressional election in 1788; and America became the most unusual nation in the world: the first nation having a written Constitution that guaranteed freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, etc.

America has a Bill of Rights because of a persistent pastor and a principled politician! This nation is short on both today.

Madison submitted twelve Constitutional amendments to the Congress about a month after Washington promised his help to the Baptists. Two amendments were rejected, but the ten original amendments were approved on September 23, 1789 after much opposition and were then submitted to the states for ratification.

The eleventh state had approved them by December 15, 1791 and America became the most unique nation on the face of the earth! We became a nation that guaranteed the people their God-given rights and limited the power of government, and we did it with a written Constitution and Bill of Rights–thanks to a Baptist preacher.

Historian of the Episcopal Church Dr. Hawks wrote in the Ecclesiastical Contributions: “The Baptists were the principal promoters of this work, and in truth aided more than any other denomination in its accomplishment.” Again, praise from a non-Baptist!

When Methodists, Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, etc., pass a Baptist church, they should doff their hats in respect and whisper a word of thanks for the freedom everyone is guaranteed because of our Baptist forefathers. Even non-Baptists agree that the Bill of Rights was a fantastic achievement in the annals of government.

The smallest Baptist church in America can swell with justified pride and appreciation of Baptist forefathers who believed in personal liberty for everyone–even the right to be wrong!

Now you know why Baptists are not Protestants and why I’m a Baptist.

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
What is Truth and Why it Matters! Sat, 14 Oct 2017 03:06:50 +0000 Pilate asked Christ, “What is truth?” but he refused to listen to His answer. Christ had said earlier, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” He was then, He is today, and will be tomorrow.

A lie doesn’t become truth, wrong does not become right, and evil doesn’t become good because it is accepted by the majority. Right and wrong are not decided by popular vote. Leo Tolstoy said, “Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.” The consensus theory holds that truth is whatever is agreed upon, but that is inaccurate, insidious, and insane.

George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit–telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” That is the day in which we live. People are often shocked when truth is revealed. There is general distain for truth and when a person gets to where truth doesn’t matter to him, he becomes a deceitful, despicable, and dangerous person.

Be aware of this fact: there is nothing that is going to make people hate you more, and love you more, than telling the truth. We should tell the truth because it is the truth, not because it will make our lives better.

I seldom quote a Roman Catholic but truth is truth even if spoken from the lips of an animal such as Balaam’s donkey. Bishop Fulton J. Sheen wrote in his 1931 A Plea for Intolerance, “Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth…or principles. About these things we must be intolerant….Right is right if nobody is right; and wrong is wrong if everybody is wrong. And, in this day and age we need, as Mr. Chesterton tells us, ‘not a church that is right when the world is right, but a church that is right when the world is wrong.’”

Both Sheen and Chesterton were right.

I often think of a story about the fellow who one day went to visit an old musician. He knocked on the musician’s door and said. “What’s the good word for today?” The old musician didn’t say a word. He turned around and went across the room to where a tuning fork was hanging. He took a hammer and struck the tuning fork so that the note resounded through the room.

Then the musician said, “That, my friend, is ‘A’. It was ‘A’ yesterday. It was ‘A’ five thousand years ago and it will be ‘A’ five thousand years from now.” Then he added, “The tenor across the hall sings off-key. The soprano upstairs is flat on her high notes. And the piano in the next room is out of tune.” He struck the tuning fork again and said, “That is ‘A’ and that, my friend, is the good word for today.”

Truth is truth yesterday, today, and forever. Truth does not need the law to prop it up since it stands on its own merits.

Truth is always the same. It never changes. Truth is defined as “that which has no distortion.” Truth is most often used to mean being in accord with fact or reality. Truth does not require acceptance to be true. Truth is not always beautiful. Truth is truth when I don’t understand it. Ignoring truth does not change it. Wanting and wishing and waffling about something do not make it reality; it is better to hear a cruel truth than a mild delusion.

The concept of truth is discussed, debated and often distorted as seen in philosopher Richard Feynman’s The Character of Physical Law, “We never are definitely right, we can only be sure we are wrong.” What a way to live: never knowing the truth but, for sure, knowing one is wrong. No wonder so many philosophers take their own lives.

Erich Fromm (1900–1980) believed “it is generally recognized that there is no absolute truth” but that is absolutely not true!

Decades earlier, Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) thought untruth was better than truth if it had current life enhancement as a consequence. If a falsehood has positive and constructive effects then it is preferable to truth according to Nietzsche. He also affirmed, “There are no facts, only interpretations.” He, Fromm, and others were wrong. There are facts or truths that are absolute: God created the world including man. Man fell, becoming a sinner. Every person inherits a sin nature. Sin brings death. Christ died as a propitiation for sin then physically rose from the dead. Everyone has an responsibility to receive Christ. Death is sure. Hell is hot. Eternity is long. Heaven is free on God’s terms.

If there is a sovereign God, then obviously, truth matters.

A statement cannot be both true and false and it is usually considered best to believe what is true. Some people think that believing a statement makes it true. We have seen this in our day as people have been brainwashed by secular education and the media. Politicians, preachers, philosophers, professors, psychiatrists, and prissy princes of the press think if they tell a lie long enough, and loud enough, it will become true: a butchered baby was not a live person; homosexuals are born that way; people have a right to determine their gender; same-sex “marriage” is as acceptable as normal marriages, etc.

However, they are wrong. No one group has the authority or ability to decide truth. There is no my truth, your truth, and their truth–just truth. Moreover, how one responds to truth does not change it. Truth cannot become more truth or less truth–just truth.

Something is not true because a man dies for it. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and Pagans have died for their faith as did Christians, yet all religions cannot be “true.” Because so many Christians have died for their faith does not make that faith more true. There is no such concept as “more true,” just as you can’t be “more dead.”

Philosopher and theologian Søren Kierkegaard was right when he wrote, “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” Today you have “stumbled” over truth, although truth is obvious if one opens his eyes. Truth can’t hide for long because, like the sun and moon, it is obvious to those who look.

Winston Churchill wrote, “Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.” That is easily seen every day. People say they hunger for truth but are often repulsed by the taste of it.

What will you do with truth today? Will you hurry off as if nothing ever happened?

Boys’ new book The World’s Best Jokes! was published last week as an eBook. To get your copy, click here.

]]> 0
Laughter is Good for the Body, Mind, and Soul! Thu, 12 Oct 2017 20:53:36 +0000 Humor is one of the greatest gifts from a sovereign God although most people see no connection between God and laughter. Ancient Hebrews knew the advantage of laughter. Proverbs 17:22 clearly teaches “A merry heart doeth good like a medicine: but a broken spirit drieth the bones.” If humans could not laugh, life would be a dreary experience.

Ancient Greek physicians sent their patients to the theater to be healed by listening to watching the comedians.

Some American Indian tribes had clowns who worked with the witch doctor in healing the sick. The clowns were considered number 3 of importance in the tribe. John Fire Lame Deer wrote: “For people who are as poor as us, who have lost everything, who had to endure so much death and sadness, laughter is a precious gift. When we were dying like flies from white man’s disease, when we were driven into reservations, when the government rations did not arrive and we were starving, watching the pranks and capers of Heyókȟa were [sic] a blessing.”

In the middle ages, court jesters used humor to relieve the king or queen’s stress in the court. They were also known as fool, buffoon or clown. The jester often did his antics during the king’s dinner time to assist his lord’s digestion. This is now recognized as a healthy practice.

French surgeon Henri de Mondeville in the 14th century used humor therapy to help patients recover from surgery. He wrote, “Let the surgeon take care to regulate the whole regimen of the patient’s life for joy and happiness allowing his relatives and special friends to cheer him and by having someone tell him jokes.”

Martin Luther used humor therapy during his pastoral counselling of depressed people. He advised them not to isolate themselves but to surround themselves with friends who could joke and make them laugh.

Then, in the 1930s, clowns were brought into U.S. hospitals to cheer up children who had been hospitalized with crippling and deadly polio.

It is generally known that humor contributes to higher subjective wellbeing (both physical and psychological) as supported by Humor-International Journal of Humor Research.

It is now an axiom, touted by medical experts that laughter is good for your health since it boosts the immune system; however, it also relieves pain, tension, and stress while it stimulates the heart, lowers blood pressure and much more. Laughing instead of crying pays off bigtime.

Studies have proved the above to be true: there is a potential relationship between humor and having a healthy immune system. SIgA is a type of antibody that protects the body from infections. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine reported an experiment where the participants were shown a short humorous video clip and then tested for the effects. The participants showed a significant increase in SIgA levels.

In 1964, Dr. Norman Cousins was diagnosed with a crippling and extremely painful inflammation of his body, which doctors diagnosed as Anklyosing Spondilitis. He did not accept his doctor’s death sentence of one chance in 500 for recovery. He checked himself out of the hospital, hired a nurse, and moved into a hotel. Along with taking massive doses of vitamin C, he watched comedy movies such as Candid Camera, the Marx Brothers, Laurel and Hardy and other comedy movies.

He recovered from his illness and spent 20 years teaching about the merits of humor and laughter in healing. He declared, “I made the joyous discovery that ten minutes of genuine belly laughter had an anesthetic effect and would give me at least two hours of pain-free sleep.”

Studies have shown that persistent humor as one ages produces health benefits such as higher self-esteem; lower levels of depression, anxiety, and perceived stress; and a more positive self-concept as well as other health benefits.

Humor is not only great for healing; it also has a practical impact on our lives with the opposite sex. Sex Roles revealed that humor and honesty were ranked as the two most important attributes in a potential mate or date. More specifically, Marriage and Family Living reported that 90% of men and 81% of women, all college students, said having a sense of humor was an essential distinctive required when choosing a romantic partner.

I didn’t know all the facts about the positive effects of humor when I wrote my joke books. I did so because I have always used humor in my messages, lectures, debates, books, and columns. For most of my life, I have started the day with saying, “Today, I have a choice of being miserable or being happy and I choose to be happy.” I really enjoy humor and try to use it productively.

Last week my seventeenth book was published titled, The World’s Best Jokes! and I honestly believe the title to be true. I have accumulated the best jokes I have used for more than 40 years and put them in my ebook of almost 300 printed pages of leg slapping humor without a curse word or sexual innuendo but maybe a little hyperbole. I found myself laughing even though I knew the punch lines!

The table of contents includes One Liners, General Humor, Rednecks, Seniors, Religion, Love and Marriage, Blondes, Family, Politicians, Animals, Attorneys, Crime, Death, Doctors, Economy, Education, Good Old Days, Media, Military, Verse, Put Downs, Sports, and Truth with Humor.

Some may ask why a preacher would produce a joke book when there are so many serious problems in the world. There are sex crimes, family problems, murder, child abuse, drug abuse, etc. None of the foregoing is funny except etc. But humor is not only acceptable but also essential to a person’s sanity–if that humor is in good taste.

I make no apology for my book being politically incorrect. I am a Baptist but I make fun of Baptists as well as Catholics, Jews, Palestinians, Muslims, faith healers, etc. I will probably “offend” West Virginians (my birthplace), Kentuckians, Poles, Arabs, Norwegians, Blacks, Mexicans, homosexuals, etc. The Klan, Liberals, and Conservatives are the brunt of some of my jokes.

After all, every group has dummies and incompetents, and it is a joke book!

Boys’ new book The World’s Best Jokes! was published last week as an eBook. To get your copy, click here.

]]> 0
Some Reformers Are an Embarrassment to Christians! Tue, 10 Oct 2017 03:58:14 +0000 This year is the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation and even Pope Francis is excited about it; although some Catholics think it is rather strange that he would celebrate the catastrophic split in their group.

The Roman Catholic Church has received major body blows yet still survives. The early conflicts with the Greek Orthodox Church in Constantinople; the virulent, violent, and vicious Crusades against the Muslims and later against “heretics” within the church; the bloody Inquisition; some vile popes (as many as three at a time); the frequent battles with European emperors; and the uneducated, unspiritual, and uncontrolled priests who often bought their positions–all made the church bleed profusely.

Sexual immorality was one of the biggest complaints (along with the selling of indulgences) against the Roman Church as admitted even by Roman Catholic historians. It was common for priests to solicit sexual favors from women in the confessional! Historian Will Durant revealed the alarming fact, “Thousands of priests had concubines, in Germany nearly all. In Rome it was assumed that priests kept concubines, and some reports estimated the prostitutes there at 6,000 in a population not exceeding 100,000.”

He suggests that the convents and monasteries differed “little from public brothels.” It seems the Catholic clergy had a taste for good food and bad women.

Then entered the Reformers!

The early reformers were led by John Wycliffe (died 1384) of England and John Hus (executed in1415) of Bohemia and William Tyndale (executed in 1536) of England who were the forerunners of the Reformation with their emphasis on personal piety and producing the Bible in the common language. Wycliffe died in his sleep following a stroke in 1384 but his bones were exhumed in 1428, burned, and cast into the River Swift as ordered by the Pope.

John Hus was summoned to the Council of Constance and had received a promise of safe conduct by the Emperor and had that assurance from the Pope who declared, “Even if he had killed my own brother…he must be safe while he is at Constance.” The Pope and Emperor lied and Hus was arrested when he arrived at the council. Hus refused to renounce his alleged errors unless he could be shown otherwise from Scripture. To the council he said, “I would not, for a chapel full of gold, recede from the truth.” He was burned at the stake.

Wycliffe, Hus, and Tyndale are called “Pre-reformers” but they were more than that. They set the stage for the major Reformation in the 1500s led by Martin Luther, John Calvin, and others. They were all Reformers and the world owes them much gratitude.

It should be remembered that while Reformers were great men, they were still men and made many mistakes in their lives and ministry. Those mistakes, not to be excused, must not negate the major contributions they made to the Reformation. Readers should realize that most great leaders are complex people whom God uses in spite of their “clay feet.” Just like today.

Martin Luther shockingly wrote in On the Jews and Their Lies, “What shall we Christians do with this damned, rejected race of Jews. Since they live among us and we know about their lying and Blasphemy and cursing, we can not tolerate them if we do not wish to share in their lies, curses, and blasphemy. In this way we cannot quench the inextinguishable fire of divine rage nor convert the Jews. We must prayerfully and reverentially practice a merciful severity.”

His rant continued, “Perhaps we may save a few from the fire and flames [of hell]. We must not seek vengeance. They are surely being punished a thousand times more than we might wish them. Let me give you my honest advice.…their synagogues should be set on fire, and whatever does not burn up should be covered or spread over with dirt so that no one may ever be able to see a cinder or stone of it. And this ought to be done for the honor of God and of Christianity in order that God may see that we are Christians, and that we have not wittingly tolerated or approved of such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of His son and His Christians.”

I am appalled that a sane man would make such a statement, but for a Christian leader to do so is beyond the pale.

He added: “Let their houses also be shattered and destroyed…Let their prayer books and Talmuds be taken from them, and their whole Bible too; let their rabbis be forbidden, on pain of death, to teach henceforth any more. Let the streets and highways be closed against them. Let them be forbidden to practice usury, and let all their money, and all their treasures of silver and gold be taken from them and put away in safety. And if all this be not enough, let them be driven like mad dogs out of the land.”
He even said, “We are at fault for not slaying them!”

Obviously, good men say and do some stupid things.

In Luther’s Works, he wrote a letter stating, “If you are a preacher of grace, then preach a true and not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly…as long as we are here [in this world] we have to sin….No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.”

Luther was correct to make the point that nothing can separate a Christian from Christ; however, it is astounding, and abhorrent and not accurate to suggest that any truly born again person would “commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.”

It is believed by many that Luther was given to hyperbole since he often spoke of God’s grace covering our sins. He was not saying, “Go out and paint the town red. Live it up. Eat, drink, and be merry.” Whatever he meant, it was a stupid thing to write.

Concerning his position on the Peasants Revolt, he wrote Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants urging, “Therefore let everyone who can, smite, slay and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful or devilish than a rebel. It is just as when one must kill a mad dog; if you do not strike him, he will strike you, and a whole land with you.”

He added, “To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog! If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs.”

By 1531, Luther believed that blasphemy was punishable by death and he included “false teaching” into that definition. He got that from his time in the Roman Catholic Church. In 1536, Philip Melanchthon drafted a memorandum demanding death for all Anabaptists and Luther signed it. Wow, now he’s getting close to me because my theological ancestors were Anabaptists.

Luther was not patient with the Roman potentates. He wrote, “We should take him—the pope, the cardinals, and whatever riffraff belongs to His Idolatrous and Papal Holiness—and (as blasphemers) tear out their tongues from the back, and nail them on the gallows.” It was one thing to point out the errors and crimes of the Roman Church but there was no excuse for Luther’s excessive ranting and encouraging physical violence. That’s what the Catholics were doing!

Luther’s problem was not only a problem of discretion but also one of doctrine. He wrote in On Marriage, “As to divorce, it is still a debatable question whether it is allowable. For my part I prefer bigamy to it.” In his Of Married Life, he wrote, “The word and work of God is quite clear, viz., that women are made to be either wives or prostitutes.”

“I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.”

How would you react if your pastor taught those thoughts last Sunday?

Thomas Muentzer, usually identified as an Anabaptist, was a reformer in Germany and often was in opposition to Luther especially in the Peasants Revolt that Luther criticized and Muentzer championed. Muentzer wrote, “curse the unbelievers…don’t let them live any longer, the evil-doers who turn away from God. For a godless man has no right to live if he hinders the godly. The sword is necessary to exterminate them…if they resist let them be slaughtered without mercy…the ungodly have no right to live, save what the Elect choose to allow them…Now, go at them…it is time…The scoundrels are as dispirited as dogs…Take no notice of the lamentations of the godless! They will beg you… don’t be moved by pity…At them! At them! While the fire is hot! Don’t let your sword get cold! Don’t let it go lame!”

While we must remember the era in which these men lived, that is no justification for such outrageous and unchristian activities.

Muentzer was a leader in the Peasants’ War (1524-1525), and was later imprisoned by the Roman Church. He did not accept infant baptism and believed in additional revelation. He and his followers are usually described as Anabaptists, although there is no evidence that he re-baptized anyone. He recanted his “heresy” and accepted the Catholic mass just before his beheading, and his head was displayed outside the city for years as a warning to others. Muentzer is a good example to believers to be balanced in political matters and to keep one’s eyes on Christ and His teaching.

Ulrich Zwingli (died 1531) was a prominent reformer in Switzerland who had major personal problems. He had a brief affair with a barber’s daughter; slept with a woman from a previous church; was secretly married to Anna Reinhart which was commonly known. They were publically married three months before the birth of their first child. He defended his womanizing by saying he had never defiled a “virgin, nun or married woman.”

That is as bad as, “It depends on what the meaning of is is.”

Under Zwingli in Zurich beginning in 1518, Catholics were forbidden but so were Anabaptists. The city council declared, “It is our will, that wherever they be found, whether singly or in companies, they shall be drowned to death, and that none of them shall be spared.” Felix Manz was an Anabaptist who was arrested and executed for baptizing adults who had trusted Christ after having been sprinkled as babies.

John Calvin (died 1564) was a major reformer in France and Switzerland but influenced Europe and America. He was an intellectual, preacher, author, theologian, attorney, and statesman. His Institutes of the Christian Religion has made an incredible impact on the world. In 1541, Calvin was chosen by the city of Geneva to be their religious leader to supervise the religious education of the cities’ children and to implement his version of church order.

When Michael Servetus (medical doctor and preacher), who did not believe in the Trinity or infant baptism, mentioned that he would come to Geneva, Calvin wrote a letter to a friend noting that if Servetus were to come, “as far as my authority goes, I would not let him leave alive.” Strange talk for a Christian preacher.

Servetus went to Geneva and was arrested, tried, and found guilty of heresy. He was burned at the stake on the outskirts of Geneva. That was indefensible but Calvin’s followers make a feeble attempt to justify the murder. They still do!

While the Reformers were courageous and committed men, they were also challenged men who often failed in choosing to do right when faced with wrong.

The Reformers did their job that shook the world but their results have faded, after all, nothing lasts. Moreover, they failed when they formed state churches that still exist which should be disbanded today. Thank God for the reformers with all their flaws but with the modern sexual perversion endorsed by religious leaders, apostasy by all the mainline denominations, general unbelief and wicked rebellion of church members, it’s time for another Reformation!

It’s time to welcome the Reformers–again!

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
Finally, Fantasy Fiction that’s Fantastic! Thu, 05 Oct 2017 16:09:12 +0000 I don’t like fiction, especially fantasy fiction; however, I have read with delight Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress and Holy War many times and with less enthusiasm, Dante’s Divine Comedy, a three part poem considered a masterpiece. But those classics are an exception. I have finally found a new fantasy fiction series that in fantastic!

In a normal day, I do research all day; then at night, I do what I call “my non-essential reading.” I spend far more time in my library than any other room. I always have a stack of books beside our bed and read three or four hours nightly. Last week I finished a biography about Patrick of Ireland and just finished a second one dealing with Patrick. At the same time I finished New Testament Fragments amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. I am about half way through the massive biography–Napoleon by Andrew Roberts.

While reading those books, I managed to read a book given to me by my youngest daughter that all three of her children really liked. It was the first in a series of seven books, The Sword, the Ring, and the Parchment, written by Ed Dunlop. Ed lives in my town of Ringgold, Georgia yet we had never met. We both work out of that city traveling the nation and the world with our separate messages. His work is mainly to youth and it is a very appealing and worthy ministry.

Recently, our county library featured county authors at an all-day book signing and I met Ed at that event. I told him my Indianapolis grandchildren loved his books. We exchanged books as authors often do at such events. I had just started reading his first book in the series. I have now read his first two books in a couple of weeks during my “non-essential” reading time. I, not liking fiction or fantasy, found them to be fantastic!

Ed’s books are geared toward children but also interest adults. His series is The Terrestria Chronicles, a series of seven books that inculcate biblical principles in the readers using allegory as the vehicle.

My books are all controversial dealing with Islam, politics, history, evolution, Christian Apologetics, etc., although I have written three joke books to lighten up a little. I have always considered fiction a waste of my time or at least not a wise use of it. I was wrong at least as it relates to Ed’s books.

I believe the Terrestria books are more exciting, more readable, and more worthwhile than anything C. S. Lewis or J. R. R. Tolkien wrote for kids! That is not hyperbolic; it is my honest opinion. Up front, while those men were great writers, I did not like their stories, their lifestyle, or their Catholicism. I never liked talking animals except as cartoons, but never as real life. Animals don’t talk. They are not “close” to humans since they cannot smile, reason, plan, weep, appreciate, etc. I don’t like wizards, witches, halfings (hobbits), magic, etc.; but I really like Dunlop’s books because they are exciting, teach eternal truths–that children are missing even in most Christian homes, and are well-written.

In reading his first two books, I did not find one typo in them! That shows the author is concerned with quality. And I just discovered a typo in the best seller Napoleon biography! That is important to me because it shows character by looking at small things. I have written 17 books and edited more than 125 so misteakes jump off the page yet I did not even see won in Dunlap’s books!

Dunlop’s books are true to Scripture and very exciting. I was amazed when I realized one evening that I was enjoying what I was reading! I always considered fiction to be a waste of time because I find a history of Rome, or Greece, or England, or America far more exciting and a better use of my time than any fiction.

In this series, Terrestria is the realm of the good King Emmanuel, where knights and their ladies live in castles, and where dragons still roam occasionally. Yet the land is at war. Wicked Argamor wants to take the throne from Emmanuel and he has loyal followers placed strategically throughout the kingdom. Who will win the battle for Terrestria, and what part will Prince Josiah play in the constant struggle? Josiah’s struggle as a prince of Terrestria takes him into all kinds of challenging, combative, and contemplative events.

Josiah is constantly learning to be a more noble, dedicated, and profitable follower of King Emmanuel. The author with great subtlety teaches the most desirable traits to the readers in an exciting way.

As I read the first two books in the series, I kept thinking, “The author simply cannot continue with such high quality work and consistency.” But he did. Any child (or adult) will be challenged to become a person who is honest in all his or her dealings, genuine in all relationships, and gracious to all people; also, a person who will accept people as they are whatever their status, appreciate kindness from others, have gratitude for what one has received, excel in all endeavors, be steadfast for one’s beliefs, eschew all evil, exude courage in midst of danger, and not be deceived by overconfidence. The books teach that everyone should grow in respect for those in authority and for the elderly and generally be gracious, good, even godly individuals.

Every home school parent and Christian school administrator should look at this series. As an educator, I would teach these books in Kindergarten, third, fifth, and seventh grades. If I had small children, I would start reading the books to three-year-olds and expect older children to read them once a year. Obviously, I am excited about Dunlop’s books.

The series carries out II Peter 1:5-8 command: “And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

How can radical haters of Christ deny that our nation and world would be infinitely better if those principles were common in today’s youth?

I have never been motivated in such a way before but these books fill such a void in the lives of most people, I am compelled to recommend them without reservation. Of course, I need to add that I have no arrangement of any kind with the author or publisher.

The books are available at The books retail for $9.99 but they sell for 7.49 each on his website. The set of seven titles sells for $46.99. The spiral-bound study guide is $5.99 and covers all seven of The Terrestria Chronicles.

I will not profit in any way from the sale of these books or his other series; but I will guarantee that you and your children will profit.

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
Professional Athletes Are Pathetic, Not Professional or Patriotic! Mon, 02 Oct 2017 01:42:04 +0000 All the public uproar about “taking the knee” during the national anthem can be distilled very simply: it is about men without character who refuse to keep their written commitment. All players who do not stand silently during the singing or playing of our national anthem are rebels without a cause.

The NFL’s 2017 Official Playing Rules prohibit players from “wearing, displaying, or otherwise conveying personal messages” or “which relate to political activities or causes.” That obviously means that when a man signs (usually a multi-million dollar contract) to play in the NFL, he agrees to limit his freedom of expression on game day to what the league considers appropriate. Protestors who refuse to keep their contract prove they have problems with commitment, conscience, and character.

The players insist that they have a right to express their views and of course they do but not as professional ball players on game day. They can surrender their million dollar salaries and spout off all they want about any subject. However, they are not that principled. The issue is not that important. If many of them walked out of their contract, they would have to get a normal job.

Commissioner of the NFL Roger Goodell called Mr. Trump’s criticism of kneeling players “divisive” and “demonstrate an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL, our great game and all of our players, and a failure to understand the overwhelming force for good our clubs and players represent in our communities.” But maybe it’s not Trump but the players that are “divisive.” After all, there would not be an issue if they had obeyed their contract and the law of common sense.

When hardcore Patriots fans boo their own team it is not a good sign and indicative that the NFL is going to lose big time in this Battle of Bended Knee. There has also been booing at the citadels of liberalism–Washington D.C. and Boston! Fans are speaking but the NFL is not listening.

By kneeling, these overpaid men are disrespecting the courageous soldiers who fought and died on battlefields without huge salaries, fringe benefits, cheerleaders, television interviews, bands, and cheering fans. They had their limbs torn off, were blinded, shell-shocked, and often came home to face resentment, ridicule, and rejection. Protesting players will only face empty stadiums.

It seems the NFL players are not too smart. Maybe they can’t read the reports that reveal that 64% of Americans think they are immature, and irresponsible, even immoral. Note that the issue of supporting young (or old), black (or white), male (or female), poor (or rich) people who get killed refusing to obey or threatening police officers is not being discussed. Maybe professional athletes would be more productive if they convinced our American youth to obey the law.

Fans pay outrageous prices to attend professional sport events and are not interested in the political, religions, or sexual views of the players. Play Ball! Players are making a political statement, even a shameful statement; yet, remember when the player was forbidden from wearing a shirt stating “Know Jesus, Know Peace” at an after game news conference? What about his rights?

This all started in late August 2016 when the San Francisco 49ers’ quarterback Colin Kaepernick refused to stand for the anthem saying, “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.” While in an imperfect society there will always be oppression, there is no systemic oppression of Blacks in America. We elected Obama twice to the presidency! In fact, it’s the other way around. All minority players have to do to get their way (and ten minutes on CNN) is to whine to a leftist reporter and Bingo, it’s done.

Now this is the same Kaepernick who wore socks depicting cops as pigs, and who wore a Fidel Castro shirt! He supports Black Lives Matter that demands cops be killed. Moreover, the London Daily Mail reported this week that he gave $25,000 to a group that honors a convicted cop killer who escaped prison and is living safely in Cuba! Is this man clueless or is he so insecure that he will do anything to get attention? For sure, principled he is not.

Following Kaepernick’s “brave” performance, other non-thinkers followed lemming-like over the precipice; and the contagion has spread to over a hundred protesting players all contrary to NFL rules. It is very interesting that the NFL would not permit the Dallas Cowboys to wear a decal supporting Dallas police on their helmets last year after five Dallas police officers were murdered since it would be a violation of their code. It is interesting that more than a hundred NFL players have been arrested for murder, domestic abuse, aggravated assault, drug possession, felony marijuana possession, or lessor crimes!

It has even spread to Congress when Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), always ready to play the race card, took to the House floor to kneel in solidarity with NFL players who chose to defy President Trump and protest police brutality. Lee said you “cannot deny that Trump calling players who kneel a ‘son of a b….’ is racism.” No, race had nothing to do with it and while Trump’s statement was inexcusably crude, it was not racist.

The gentlewoman from Texas said of the protestors, “I kneel in honor of them. I kneel in front of the flag and on this floor,” Jackson Lee declared. So, she made a fool of herself (again) never missing an opportunity to do so and knelt on the floor of the House.

Some players “bravely” raise a clinched fist at ball games but they do release their fist to pick the taxpayers’ pockets since taxpayers at all levels of government subsidize football stadiums to the tune of an estimated $1 billion every year. Furthermore, the NFL alone is a $14 billion-a-year machine that may slowly grind to a halt if they further antagonize their fans. The league uses some of that money to make sure the footballs are properly inflated, but permit their players to flaunt our laws repeatedly and insult our military and flag.

Frankly, I wouldn’t pay $5.00 to see a professional ball game let alone pay the league average of $82.00 per ticket and $31.00 to park. A bottle of cold beer averages $7.00 and while I’ve never drunk a bottle of beer, that seems a little high.

Remember when it was not “brave” to kneel at a football game. In fact, it was “sanctimonious” when Tim Tebow knelt on one knee after winning or making a good play. But he was sincerely thanking God and while I believe a case can be made that it was unnecessary, that is his business as long as he obeyed his contract with the NFL.

There is a definite time to kneel as Psalm 95:6 commands, “O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.”

That kind of kneeling is what really matters.

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
God Doesn’t Grade on a Curve! Thu, 28 Sep 2017 15:22:07 +0000 Famous philosopher-theologian Francis Schaeffer asked, “How shall we then live?” That is one of life’s most important questions. What is right and what is wrong and what should I do? And everyone down deep knows that right-living is expected, even demanded. Alexander Solzhenitsyn remarked that the demarcation line between good and evil does not pass between powers or principalities, but between people–through the heart of each person. Every person on earth has a responsibility to do right even when the “right” position is unpopular. But a man cannot unswervingly do “good” or “right” without a biblical foundation.

Bertrand Russell said that he decided between good and bad by his feelings. But in some cultures, people love their neighbors, and in others they eat them, both on the basis of feelings. Does that matter to you? It sure would if you were travelling to such an area. Feelings are unreliable.

As to personal salvation, there is no grade curve. God has already told us in John 3:3 that there are no exceptions for “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” That includes everyone, even religious leaders!

“If anyone is going to heaven, it will be Nick since he is a leader of the people with great responsibilities. He’s also very dedicated. He goes to church many times each week, tithes on all his income, prays many times daily, fasts often, always obeys the law–man’s and God’s, and is willing to get up from sleep and go help the concerned, confused, condemned soul. Yep, Nick will be sure to be in Heaven.” No, Nick went down the street to speak with Christ about salvation and Christ told him, “Ye must be born again.”

But God doesn’t grade on a curve and Nicodemus had to have an experience with Christ that changed his life and his destiny.

Additionally, comparing oneself with another is foolish, fruitless, and fatal.

After personal salvation, one is capable of doing good; but even then, it is a lifetime battle to obey God in our daily walk through a difficult, dark, and dangerous world. The Apostle Paul confessed in Romans 7:21: “…when I would do good, evil is present with me.” He was saying that even as a Christian, we struggle between good and evil all our lives.

We are told in Matthew 12:35 “A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” He is telling us that good people do good things and evil people do evil things. No surprise there. Admittedly, good people at times do evil things and evil people do good things, but both are an anomaly; neither is a permanent lifestyle.

God sets His standard as to how each person is expected to live and everyone is held to the same standard; there is no curve. The Apostle Paul reveals that standard in Phil. 4:8: “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.” If most of us lived that way, it would change the world!

It is far better to pursue the above standard and stand alone for veracity, value, and virtue than to stand for error, enmity, and evil in a crowd; however, few are willing to accept the jeers for righteous living. Everyone prefers cheers.

Most people don’t want any kind of personal accountability and in spades when it is spiritual and eternal. They wrongly think since they don’t believe in God, there is no accountability. They are wrong. Consequently, knowing there is a right and wrong, they align with wrong because it feels good; or it is profitable; or it delights friends; or it is the “normal” thing to do. They live in darkness seeking to hide their evil life.

Sigmund Freud was an atheist who agreed with my last statement. He said that people who appear to be decent often have a dark side when looked at in depth. Most people don’t look into the depth of their souls because men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil. They seem to think if they don’t see and admit their evil, it doesn’t exist.

Unregenerated people take a firm stand with their feet planted in mid-air! Anything goes. After all, who is to judge? Well, God judges and He doesn’t grade on a curve. To plead that there are worse people won’t cut it. Or “I didn’t really know any better way” won’t work either. Mankind just doesn’t get it: a day of accounting is ahead of everyone.

Many people are like the man who said, “I’m not the best guy in the world but I’m not as bad as Peter. I’m so respectable, I’ve been chosen as an officer of the group. Peter is always spouting off about something and spends much of his time extricating his foot out of his mouth. He has a foul mouth and has been known to curse when confronted with his sins. He’s cocky–even arrogant and he’s spent time in the slammer. In fact, he carries a sword all the time and is willing to use it if pushed too far. Yea, I’m as good as Peter or my name isn’t Judas.”

If Judas ever had those thoughts, he was counting on Christ grading on the curve. He doesn’t. His Word is the standard for goodness.

However, men want to compare themselves with others since they experienced that during their school days. They always wanted the teacher or professor to grade on a curve. The curve mentality is still with us in the spiritual or religious world.

The curve is often used in academia but not in the real world. In the real world, the curve is a disaster.

What if student pilots were graded on a curve? The top ten percent of the class are chosen by ABC Airlines but none of the group is qualified to fly! The airline hired the “best” but who wants to fly with them?

Man has a responsibility to God (to worship, attend church, work hard, help the poor, study the Bible, obey the laws of God and man, love people, follow instructions, etc.), so an honorable person will fulfill his responsibility to God whom he loves. He is overwhelmed with gratitude toward a loving God for providing an eternal salvation after a lifetime of peace, purpose, and a perfect plan for his life, even through rough times. Wow, that’s winning here and hereafter!

Whatever one’s lot in life, whether great or small, he will be held to an account one day. Few people understand that and order their lives in that way. Few are committed to duty, a four-letter word not heard any more–or practiced. C. S. Lewis said it well, “When the Lord returns, it matters not whether we are in a great crusade to free the slaves or whether we are tending the pigs. The important thing is that we would be found at our posts.”

It doesn’t matter if you are preaching or slopping hogs (for liberal preachers, not much difference); writing books or tilling fields; doing brain surgery or clerking in a store–are you at your post?

How much better this world would be if we spent as much time being good as we do looking good. Of course, being good as defined by God.

But mankind meanders merrily through life with Frank Sinatra’s mindless boast on their lips, “I did it my way.” but your way is the wrong way and always ends up in the wrong place.

Don’t count on God grading on a curve. If you do, your final grade will be F and F is for failure, folly, futility, and finality.

And you’ll never get to “take the test” again.

Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
Trump is Wrong: Tax Dollars Should Not Go to Churches for Storm Relief! Mon, 25 Sep 2017 02:34:11 +0000 In recent weeks, America has been pummeled by many natural disasters that have caught the attention of the world. The amount of help from faith-based groups has also come to the attention of the world. Author Arthur Brooks points out that “Religious people are far more charitable than nonreligious people. In years of research, I have never found a measurable way in which secularists are more charitable than religious people.” Other researchers have revealed the same results: Christians are gracious, generous, and giving of their money and efforts, and they have been throughout history.

The atheist groups never seem to show up to help those in need.

History is replete with examples of Christians responding to those in need during times of destruction, disease, and death.

During Katrina, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) Disaster Relief teams distributed aid and food and otherwise ministered to survivors. In fact, the SBC channeled at least $40,000,000 into Katrina relief plus millions of volunteer hours in clean-up. The Salvation Army, Adventist Relief Organization, the United Methodist Committee on Relief and Samaritan’s Purse were also heavily involved. About half of the shelters in the first few weeks were operated by Christian groups.

Recently, Samaritan’s Purse was the first relief group to land on St. Martin with food, water, and other supplies. The Southern Baptists and other groups are deeply involved with relief efforts because of Harvey, Irma, and now Maria even before the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) arrived.

According to Greg Forrester, CEO of the Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOAD), “About 80% of all recovery happens because of non-profits, and the majority of them are faith-based.” However, some of those churches who helped in Texas following Harvey want to be reimbursed by the federal government for their losses! Three Houston Texas churches sued FEMA for barring them from relief funding and the President took their side as do almost everyone–except me. The President is wrong.

Churches helping those in distress is one thing but getting reimbursed with tax dollars for that service or receiving money to rebuilt is something else. President Trump and many other political and religious groups want to provide financial support for churches damaged by Harvey. But churches should never get taxpayer money for any reason: day cares, schools, feeding the homeless, etc.

The churches’ attorneys claimed, “The churches are not seeking special treatment; they are seeking equal treatment.” Well, just a minute. The many other businesses that were destroyed do not enjoy tax exempt status. While it is praiseworthy that the three churches served 8,000 meals and housed the homeless, they do not deserve cash–a commendation is sufficient. Some will declare not getting reimbursed to be unfair and unreasonable, but in my mind it is unconstitutional to reimburse church benevolence.

The U.S. Supreme Court was wrong in its decision to fund a Missouri Lutheran Church school playground. Why should atheists help fund a Christian school? Why should Jews or Baptists support with their tax dollars a Christian school? The school’s supporters pled that all kids have a right not to get skinned knees. However, if a school does not have to use its money to provide a safe playground, then they can use their money for religious and educational purposes. Government should not be in the business of supporting churches or church schools.

No one has mentioned that the churches could have purchased insurance–another reason not to have taxpayers rescue them from their difficulty that any prudent person would have covered with insurance.
Someone asked, “Why would the government turn away humanitarian assistance from one of the biggest pools of support?” However, the question is not based on a solid premise. No one is saying churches cannot help during disasters; it’s just that they can and should help but should not expect to be reimbursed for their work or their losses. They should even refuse reimbursement! What would we think of the Good Samaritan if he’d been reimbursed?

Yes, Christian groups have been ubiquitous during the cleanup; however, they should be remembered, respected, but not reimbursed. I agree with my old “friend” and debate partner, Barry Lynn who said, “We know a lot of people in Texas are suffering, and we are sympathetic. But the fact that something bad has happened does not justify a second wrong. Taxpayers should not be forced to protect religious institutions that they don’t subscribe to.” Barry is right and Trump and most of my Christian Conservative friends are wrong.

Christians should want to help others and that attitude is taught in the Gospels but it is to be without reciprocity, reward, or recognition. A Christian’s attitude toward helping others is exemplified in Luke 10 where Christ told of the Good Samaritan who helped a hated Jew. The Samaritan (a hated minority) found a wounded man on the Jericho Road. The Samaritan cleaned and bandaged his wounds after applying medicine to them. Then placing the suffering Jew on his own beast (while he walked), he took him to an inn and paid for his care and promised to pay for any additional help. The kind Samaritan paid about $300 in our money to help a suffering stranger. And he didn’t expect to be repaid.

This was an astounding act of kindness since there had been visceral hatred between Jews and Samaritans for hundreds of years. While travelling to Galilee in the north, Jews would go out of their way to not go through Samaritan country lest they make contact with a despised Samaritan.

During this period, the whole land of Judea was infested with hordes of banditti; and it is not unlikely that many robberies had been committed on that very road to which our Lord refers, the major road that still unites Jerusalem and Jericho. In fact, that road that I’ve travelled many times was known as the “way of blood” and was fifteen miles from one city to the other with many opportunities for ambush.

At least twelve thousand priests and Levites lived in Jericho, and as their business was at Jerusalem, they constantly travelled that road. You would expect a priest or Levite to show compassion for a fellow Jew but they were too busy, in too much of a hurry, or too callous to stop and help a suffering man. After all, the Samaritan was “out of place” since he was not in Samaria. It is noteworthy that both the priest and Levite were “full time” religious servants but had no time for a suffering human.

This teaches that how we treat others should have no relationship to their religion, race, or rank; not that these are unimportant but they are irrelevant when it comes to common decency, kindness, and benevolence–even when the sufferer is considered an enemy. Otherwise, many suffering people will be left dying in a ditch along the Interstate of life.

Had the Samaritan sent the Jew a bill for his kindness or expected the state welfare system to reimburse him, it would have destroyed the lesson Christ was trying to make. Any church that asks to be reimbursed because they helped the unfortunate or seeks tax funds for help in repairing, or rebuilding, or replacing their damaged buildings is a shock to the principle of benevolence.

Historically, Christians believed they had a responsibility to help others, so during times of famine they shared their food; in times of sorrow they wept with the bereaved; and in times of pestilence, they nursed the sick and dying. The non-Christians and the pagans took notice of such kindness–and at a time when other institutions were discredited and often dissolved, the Christian churches were enhanced. When William McNeill wrote of Christians reacting to suffering, he observed, “Pagans fled from the sick and heartlessly abandoned them;” however, Christians stayed and served–and died.

But nobody got paid for their Christian benevolence since if one gets paid, it is not benevolence and he loses his eternal reward!


Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
Prissy Princes of the Press Censored Me! Thu, 21 Sep 2017 01:11:05 +0000 When my book ISLAM: America’s Trojan Horse! was published, the Chattanooga Times Free Press asked for a copy and agreed to do a review a few days before I was to do a book signing at the local Barnes & Noble store. The paper, one of America’s best and most conservative, backed out of the review although they had reviewed two other books of mine positively. They danced all around the issue, but simply did not want to offend local Muslims.

They also refused to do a review of my book, Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! Can’t imagine why.

The same paper permitted a local Muslim to accuse Cal Thomas of bigotry comparing him to Jew-haters in Nazi Germany! What chutzpa! A Muslim “spokesperson” accusing a highly respected and talented Christian journalist of bigotry! That’s like a skunk accusing a rabbit of having bad breath! I wrote in defense of Cal but the editors refused to publish it.

Later, they ran a cartoon showing an “Evangelical Zealot” standing on the chest of a hapless and helpless Muslim as the “zealot” crams “Fundamentalist Christian Dogma” down his throat? For those who did not understand the cartoon, the heading informed readers the gist of it was “Converting the Muslims.” Again, I came to the defense of Truth but the editors refused to make a correction.

I called the editors and publishers and challenged them pointing out historical truth but they refused to budge. One editor did admit that the cartoon was a mistake but evidently, they didn’t have enough paper and ink to permit me to write a correction! It was a matter of courage or lack thereof.

ABC News commissioned me to write an article for their website dealing with creation and evolution since there had been much coverage dealing with the subject in various journals. Evolutionists had been hammered and major university professors had begun to ask embarrassing questions making evolutionists uneasy. Consequently, major journals cranked out hysterical propaganda pieces to do damage control for the Americans United for Separation for Church and State (who recently had their annual meeting in a New Jersey telephone booth), PAW, National Center for Science Education, ACLU, and assorted atheists, agnostics, and associates who bow before the idol of evolutionary science.

Galloping to the rescue of beleaguered evolutionists came Time, Newsweek, USA Today, New York Times, and others spouting untrue, unfair, unscientific drivel to con the gullible public into believing the humbuggery of evolution and that those who advocate creationism are Bible thumping fanatics. (I almost never thump my Bible and when I do, it is not really hard.)

Evolutionists trotted out weary accusations against creationists, implying all are “Fundamentalists” (gasp!), always denigrating them, often suggesting a belief in a flat earth! Really desperate evolutionists even suggested that we carry a bag of rattlesnakes to church each Sunday! I am shocked, shocked that educated scientists would stoop so low. This is further proof, if it is needed, that many scientists are asinine, arrogant, and audacious bigots in defending their religious philosophy called evolution. Of course, bigots are as easy to find in a secular university as a bowling ball in a bathtub.

With the above vicious libel of creationists, ABC News, after commissioning me to write an anti-evolution piece for their website, refused to use it because I was “too militant!” No, I was too accurate and had too much sting. They wanted a mild piece so they could point to it and say, “See, we are balanced. We provided a forum for the other side.” But they did not want a challenge to the evolutionary myth.

Evolutionists must never be presented as fools, fanatics, fakers, and frauds but creationists can be presented as inept, incompetent, and insane! That is dishonest and the major media moguls wonder why they have been abandoned by thinking people! Even an Oxford professor can understand the reason.

But the censorship continued.

I wrote the editor of Pulpit Helps, a major Christian publication with which most preachers are familiar. My concern was with a review done by the editor about a book of sermons by Martin Luther King, Jr. I enclosed a column that dealt with King that they could publish providing some fairness and balance. They refused to publish my column. The correspondence was very revealing and by no means unusual:

To the Editor:

I just read your message to me regarding Martin Luther King, Jr., and of course, we can disagree about King. I have fought for that privilege (to disagree) in Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism for 35 years.

However, I am surprised and amazed and somewhat disappointed that Pulpit Helps would be fearful of facing the truth of any matter. It is one thing for secular journals to worship at the shine of political correctness and another for Christian magazines to do so.

You mentioned that you were in high school when King was killed so you have grown up in an atmosphere where King has been idolized and almost beyond scrutiny especially in the public schools and the media.

You wrote, “I wanted to view King’s life in a balanced perspective and have an accurate view of him as a man, civil rights leader, and preacher.” You surely must be kidding! You did not do that in your review. Did you have “balance” in your review when every word was positive? You wanted accuracy when you praised his preaching and never mentioned his heresy! I assume that your reading of King was very limited; maybe only to the book you were reviewing!

You also wrote, “Neither do I agree with those who demonize him.” Is telling the truth demonizing him? You know, I believe between the two of us, I have a much more balanced, fair, and accurate view of King. I think some good came from some of his work while enormous harm also resulted. Unlike many conservatives and many haters, I think King was right in the bus boycott and I believe that because Blacks should have equal rights to public facilities (since they pay taxes) as do Whites. Blacks should not have been subjected to back of the bus status and colored water fountains. However, private businesses are something else altogether! The government has no authority (power yes, authority no) to tell a private businessman how he must run his business. But of course, that is another issue.

You said, “Since the piece in Pulpit Helps was a book review and not an article we will not print your submitted article.” Of course, that is a classic cop-out! Surely, Pulpit Helps is interested in balance, truth, and accuracy.

You did not deal with the various criticisms of King in my article. Please note that your book review dealt with King’s preaching. While you might like the particular book you reviewed, surely you were obligated to reveal to your readers that the book did not reflect King’s preaching and his beliefs. King was a life-long Liberal who rejected the virgin birth, deity, and resurrection of Christ. Do you take the position that one can reject those doctrines and be a Christian? If so, you have removed yourself from mainline, orthodox Christianity!

Remember that the Apostle of Love in his second epistle told us not to even bid one God speed if he did not hold to the doctrine of Christ. Do you disagree with John or do you disregard John? And to disregard means to disobey! It seems you are more impressed with the writings of King than you are of John! At this point, you are defending King and disobeying John! King often spoke publicly to radio and television audiences of Christ and “faith” but never did he challenge men to place faith in the propitiatory work of Christ to experience personal salvation! He did not because he did not believe that was essential for one to have eternal life. I assume you and the folks at Pulpit Helps do believe it.

You did not deal with King’s many adulterous affairs as he admitted to Parade magazine. How can you do a book review of such a man without one word of caution, without one word of suggestion to readers that further research might be helpful? And to emulate his life would be disastrous.

Do you think the fact that King was murdered wipes out the many sins in his life? Do you think that because Blacks were mistreated during that period, that fact somehow excuses his sins? Are you suggesting that because he made some positive contributions, his doctrinal errors and his wicked life should be overlooked?

Does King get special treatment because he was black or because he was murdered or because he was a preacher? What drives you and others to give him the “kid glove” treatment? Why not treat him fairly, honestly, and accurately? Why do you and others seem to have a mission to protect King’s image? Why not tell the truth as you do, I assume, in other matters? Question: If David Duke wrote a book that was true, fantastic, a classic and an incredible contribution to American literature, would you review it without mentioning that he was a former KKK member? I think not.

Another question: Bill Clinton writes a classic bestseller. Not one paragraph in it that any honest, fair, and informed person disagrees with. Would your review be totally positive without mentioning that he had been a moral leper, had been impeached by the House, had lied under oath, and had sold or given valuable information to the Chinese Communists, etc.?

Brother, why not treat people like people, not as white, black, rich, or poor? Just people. Why make decisions based on how you and the magazine will be perceived rather than on the merits of the case? Does truth matter anymore?

You refused to deal with King’s thievery of his Ph.D. dissertation at Boston University and many of his other writings that were plagiarized from others without even a suggestion of giving credit. If you did not know about that, it is inexcusable. If you did know about it and refused to mention it in your review, that too was inexcusable.

You did not even try to deal with King’s love affair with Communist Party functionaries during his very public life. Note that he was not simply involved with Communists but with Party activists! He hired many Communists to run various field offices and even refused to fire them when he was told by his politically sensitive friends that such action would be wise. Your selective quote of his regarding Communism does not cancel his ardor for the Communist Party members with whom he climbed into bed.

King was a Black opportunist who used people: Blacks, Whites, union leaders, the media, etc., to further his own cause. You have helped perpetuate his false image by burning incense to him with your book review. I am disappointed in Pulpit Helps not being willing to stand for Scriptural truth regarding separation from doctrinal error as well as separation from personal immorality.


Don Boys, Ph.D.

Christ said that He was the Truth so how can anyone, claiming to know Him, be careless with the truth?

Censorship is alive and well in America.


Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0
Why Isn’t Special Treatment for Blacks and Hispanics Racial Discrimination? Mon, 18 Sep 2017 01:57:26 +0000 This month the media announced that the conservative Covenant Seminary in St. Louis was hosting a Leadership Development Resource Weekend “designed for and by people of color.” Pastor Joel Littlepage said that white claims of reverse discrimination are “frankly absurd.” The group conference is sold out. The seminary is connected with the Presbyterian Church in America, the group with which the late D. James Kennedy of Ft. Lauderdale was associated. If it is possible to weep in Heaven, James is weeping copious tears at such nonsense. Of course, all discrimination is wrong and only racists would disagree.

There would be a scream to high heaven if I demanded special privileges for Whites. No fair person would say that should be done. At the beginning, I will admit that white people have had it better and easier than people of color until recent years, and people of color have had to work harder and smarter to stay even with Whites. However, such an admission does not require special treatment for anyone in our day.

However, people who usually make sense are talking nonsense when they demand more and more special treatment for Blacks because of mistreatment in the past. This is called “affirmative action,” but it is really reverse discrimination. It is certainly nonsense.

This nation should reward achievement and do its best to encourage ambition in every sector of life. But, there is a hue and cry from the “knee-jerk” liberals throughout the land to reward the under-qualified and under-achiever and to do so at the expense of the more qualified. I tend to believe that the hue and cry has been raised by those who have a vested interest in reverse discrimination.

Detroit’s former mayor, Coleman Young candidly said, “The master and the slave cannot unite. It takes special steps to bring the slave up, then they can unite as equals….Some people say affirmative action is discrimination in reverse. You are d___ right, the only way to handle discrimination is to reverse it.”

If the mayor appeared to be a black bigot, at least he was an honest bigot. I reminded the mayor in a column that Blacks are no longer slaves and have not been for over a hundred years! However, race baiters such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are using slavery to excuse black problems: the dropout rate, drug use, unemployment, family breakdown, illegitimate births, and astounding rates of incarceration.

The Detroit News asked in an unsigned editorial: “How can society remedy economic injustice in a constitutional manner and without creating a new injustice? To reverse the blade of discrimination and cut down whites, as blacks were cut down in the past, is retribution–not a solution.”

That is exactly correct. If discrimination against Blacks was wrong sixty years ago (and it was) then discrimination against Whites is wrong today. I have never had that statement rebutted by any of the liberals I have debated on the subject.

Many years ago, I was challenged to a debate at Indiana University-Purdue University in Indianapolis, Indiana on the subject of affirmative action because of a bill I had introduced in the Indiana House of Representatives. I debated Dr. William Marsh, a white professor of law at Indiana University Law School in Bloomington, and Reginald Bishop, a black columnist for the Indianapolis News.

I asked Bishop how long America would have to give special treatment to Blacks to atone for past discrimination of them. He answered, “two hundred years.” I laughed at him. I suppose that makes me a racist.

Many people who advocate for racial discrimination against Whites and demand special treatment for Blacks because of mistreatment in the past don’t understand how inconsistent they are. I am called a racist because I believe in equal treatment for everyone regardless of color, but then people like Bishop appear as champions of civil rights!

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supposed to guarantee that people would no longer be discriminated against because of race or color. Finally, the law would be color-blind. Questions on job applications indicating race and national origin were now illegal. Children would not be placed in schools according to color. This was supposed to be a major victory for all people and a giant step toward equality. From now on merit and ability would be the criteria for advancement. Alas, that was not to be.

My position has always been that minorities should have the same rights (and responsibilities) that I have. It is incredible that any fair-minded person would think otherwise. But, it works both ways: there should be no special treatment for any special group because no group is special.

Affirmative action has created havoc in business and education. When I was administrator of a large Christian school in Indianapolis, race was not a factor in accepting students or in hiring staff. And some of our finest families were black. No black parent ever asked for special treatment as did a few of my white friends. (They didn’t get it.)

What self-respecting Black wants special treatment because he happens to be black? That is not American, not Christian, and not good business. Only havoc and chaos will result from such insanity.

I wrote (in my book Liberalism: A Rope of Sand), about a reporter who entered a third grade classroom of a black lady who was hired under federally ordered hiring quotas. The reporter pointed to a child and asked the teacher if she found him to be passive much of the day. The teacher only stared at the reporter. The question was repeated but again, no answer. The reporter then gently asked if she knew what the word “passive” meant. The teacher, a graduate of an illustrious Eastern college, admitted she did not know the meaning of the word!

There are teachers presently working in major city school systems who do not know how to write a decent paragraph and would have trouble reading and understanding the daily newspaper.

It is a crime to inflict such teachers on innocent, needy children. It is also unfair to put teachers in positions for which they are obviously unprepared.

Where will this lunacy end? Will Blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities be given a pilot’s license without a test because the exam is too tough? Will you ride with such a pilot? I suggest it is as criminal to put an incompetent teacher in the classroom, as it is to put an incompetent pilot in the cockpit of a crowded airplane. The crash only takes longer to see in the classroom.

I have no problem with special programs to help more Blacks go to college, although not everyone (Black or White) needs to go to college! I have no problem with trying to hire more minorities in the work place. The problem arises when race or sex is used to decide who gets hired. If a Black is better qualified than I am then he should be my boss.

Admitting students to college on the basis of race or hiring and promoting because of race is as unreasonable as demanding that 80% of the players on college and professional basketball teams be white regardless of ability! Don’t you think it is about time we accept people for what they are and not what color or sex they happen to be? I thought that is what America is all about.

No sane, honest person believes that discrimination is right even if it is “highly motivated” to help Blacks or others whose ancestors were mistreated. Eugene V. Rostow was a professor of law and former dean at Yale University Law School. In an interview with the U. S. News and World Report, he spoke on this subject of reverse discrimination. He said, “It is no kindness to anyone to put him into an environment where he’s under qualified and where he will feel at a disadvantage and feel more stupid than he should feel.”

Speaking of many minority candidates who drop out of college after meeting only a minimal admission standard, Rostow said, “They are bitter, bruised and badly hurt by their experience.” But what does that matter? Forget the irreparable harm done to these students. Full steam ahead. The do-gooders make poor doctors out of men who would make good architects and average lawyers out of men who would make excellent teachers. Roll over the constitutional rights of others calling it good and admirable while affirmative action nullifies feelings of accomplishment and merit calling it success. Then, when some soul dares question its fairness and legality, calling him “racist.”

After we cut through all the rhetoric and clear away the smoke screen laid down by the politicians and liberal do-gooders, it comes down to this: reverse discrimination is punishing a job seeker or student applicant for an act of racism he did not commit and for an ethnic heritage over which he had no control. With that “success,” liberals will have hung the albatross of affirmative action around the neck of every minority in this nation, qualified as well as unqualified. As the white liberal does this, he whispers in the minority’s ear, “I am your friend.”

But the liberal do-gooder does not sacrifice. He does not surrender his privileged position, money, and job so that an unqualified minority can enter into the main stream. He is guilty of much sermonizing–but no sacrificing. The price for unfair, unreasonable, and unbiblical affirmative action is being paid by unsuspecting Whites who were taught that all were equal before the law.

Case in point: It was revealed in a 2009 study that for Asian Americans to be on equal footing with their peers, they had to score 140 more points than their white counterparts, 320 points higher than Hispanic students did, and 450 points higher than Black students. That is the crazy, unfair world of affirmative action.

Informed Americans have now learned that some people are more equal than others.


Boys’ new book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy, click here. An eBook edition is also available.

]]> 0