The next earthquake in California may be in Hollywood where the elite pedophile ring might be exposed. But don’t count on it. That may be expecting too much of a return to sanity and decency.

However, in the heterosexual world, no one is talking about the women, victims for the most part, some of whom helped perpetuate the sexual assaults by their silence. Yes, they were fearful but they were complicit. Other women went along with the system to get to the top by climbing into bed with moral lepers–and are surprised they got “infected.” If they are screaming now, they are classic hypocrites and opportunists. They subscribed to the heresy that they could reach the stars by crawling in the mud and reach the top by going to the bottom. They are almost as repulsive as the moral lepers who took advantage of them.

Only God knows the few men who are totally innocent. Surely a few. While I am thrilled at the trend against sexual offenses, I must remind my readers that a charge is not a certainty and for sure not a conviction.

I find myself thinking the unthinkable: that we may see a return to yesteryear when life was simple, secure, and safe–when men were men and women were women. We liked it better that way.

I liked it when men stood in the presence of a lady; when men opened doors for all females; when a man always asked if it was all right to smoke in the presence of a lady; and when a man apologized profusely if he cursed in a lady (or a gentleman’s) presence.

I liked it when a young man asked permission of parents to date their daughter; when a young man always went to the door to get his date; when double-dating was the norm for couples thereby limiting the possibility of immoral behavior; when a date was taken home at a reasonable hour–set by the father; and when girls were modest and not rolling in mud with the pigs understanding that if they roll in mud with the pigs, then men will treat them that way.

I liked it when “thank you” notes for kindnesses done were sent after times of sickness, death, marriage, birth, and other life events; when anyone older was called Mr., Mrs. or Miss.; when Ms. was unacceptable; and when anyone in uniform was respected–even the mailman.

I liked it when Catholics, Jews, Protestants, and Baptists could disagree without being disagreeable; when you expected people of other religions to disagree; when there could be strong disagreement and not hatred of your challenger; when different races could actually disagree without some vacuous jerk throwing out the term racist, using it as his only defense; when feelings didn’t matter as much as facts; and when one could love his country but fear and criticize his government without it being considered treason.

I liked it when political correctness (raw intimidation) was unknown, unwanted, untoward and unnecessary–when no one forced us to think in an acceptable way; when one could think for himself without being considered ignorant, insensitive, and intolerant; and when the words bigot and racist were seldom used–only for bigots and racists.

I liked it when the most offensive word heard in the movies was damn; when actors kissed with their mouths shut; when you could watch television all day and never hear a curse word; when it was assumed by everyone that no sane person accepted same-sex “marriage”; when there was no doubt what gender a person was; when it was illegal for a man to be in a motel room with an unmarried, unrelated female; when a woman stayed at home if she and her husband chose to do so; when a wife knew she had a right to stay home without being considered a female wimp; when daycare was unnecessary; when families ate dinner together–at home and the menu was “Take it or Leave it”; when you married first then lived together; and when a husband’s major responsibility was to his wife–to love her, lead her, and lift her.

Yes, I admit my nostalgia for an America long gone.

I liked it when $20 would purchase groceries for a week; when gasoline was 30 cents per gallon and maps, air, and information were free–with a smile; when you went out at night unafraid; when you went out in daytime unafraid; when “made in Japan” meant junk; when “made in China” was unthinkable; when criminals went to jail and killers, rapists, traitors, and kidnappers went to the chair; when newspapers thrived on investigative reporting and usually it didn’t matter about the political party involved; when it was common to always have a gun in your car without someone calling a SWAT team; and when doctors made house calls.

I liked it when closets were for clothes, not for coming out of; when having a meaningful relationship meant getting along with your cousin; when you never locked your car or house; when schools were safe and peaceful; when girls never hitched rides with strangers; when babies were born out of wedlock but there was shame and regret; when a man went to the hospital if he desecrated the flag and was bruised and battered and almost buried if he burned or spat on it; when welfare was for the elderly, the sick, and the blind–not the young, the healthy, and the lazy; when the poor were too proud to take welfare; when grass was cut not smoked; and when AIDS were young volunteers in local hospitals.

I liked it when we went to church and heard truth–not leaving church at noon with the depths unstirred, the heart untouched, and the conscience unpricked; when pastors were the moral voice and the churches the moral compass of a city; when preachers were preachers, not psychologists, politicians, propagandists, or publicists; and when men did right because it was right to do right without any concern about the results.

We live in a tired, troubled, and trembling nation. The more violent the storm rages around us, the more we must depend on God to remain secure, sure, and steadfast. Without a return to biblical standards, there is little chance of survival.

Yes, those were days of decency, but we now live in a vicious, vile, and violent nation–a natural consequence that follows the rejection of biblical principles. After all, you can’t kill the golden goose and still collect golden eggs.

Maybe, just maybe, we are seeing a measure of, if not revival, at least a return to decency.

Boys’ book Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! is available here. An eBook edition is also available.

But I digress from my point. The TV show featured music from the 50s with original musicians for the most part. In the 50s, I had trusted Christ and was busy working almost fulltime at a Gold Coast parking lot (on famous Rush Street) in Chicago’s entertainment-dining-shopping area and getting my education at Moody. I didn’t have the time or the desire to listen to secular music; however, I heard it on the car radio from time to time.

I put aside my work and watched the TV and heard many catchy, romantic, and often haunting melodies. I was taken back to the days of my youth while watching over-the-hill singers pressed back into formal attire as they belted out their hits of bygone years. Frankly, they were still very talented. I heard “Smoke gets in your eyes,” Unchained Melody,” “Blueberry Hill,” “Wheel of Fortune,” “Catch a falling star,” “Cold, cold, heart,” “Goodnight, sweetheart, goodnight,” “Earth angel,” “Secret Love,” “Three coins in a fountain,” “Mona Lisa,” “Love letters in the sand,” “The Yellow Rose of Texas,” and many more. Almost all of them were sentimental love songs with a few nonsensical ones like “Lollipop.” And a few others such as “Sixteen Tons,” and “This Old House.” Not very romantic.

What struck me was the innocence of it all. I did not hear one objectionable word! Not one outrageous outfit. Yes, the producer was heavy-handed in his appeal to “preserve the history” and “continue the legacy” of that great era. But listening to his pitch was the price to pay for the music. This is not a defense or plea for secular music although I don’t think every song we listen to has to be “Christian.”

My point is the comparison of that music with today’s music! I really sacrificed to do this column because I listened to many of the top fifty pop songs of 2016! It was more secular music than I had ever heard! I did not hear one song that was uplifting, inspiring, romantic, or understandable! Not one was worth whistling or humming. It was as inspiring, inviting, and interesting as a walk through our county dump on a day in August.

Not once did I hear a singer or group of singers that were impressive. Where did all the talent go? Has yelling, snarling, and grunting supplanted talent? Why is it permissible for “singers” to use nigger in a wrong way but I am wrong to use it in a right way? I would really like to hear an answer to that question.

However, the innocence was experienced again the following night when I went to bed and saw two episodes of “The Dick Van Dyke Show” in color! Wow, the innocence, the talent, the simplicity, the humor was astounding especially as compared with any show on television at this time!

The two episodes were one laugh after another. The first show dealt with Dick’s wife having a baby and Dick’s certainty after leaving the hospital that they had the wrong baby! It turned out that the other family was black! When the couple came to Dick’s apartment to exchange babies, it was hilarious! (Could that be racist? Probably, since everything else seems to be.) The second show dealt with Dick’s boss’ bald head and his wigs. I sat there realizing that there was not one second in the two shows that was objectionable to any normal person. My, my but we have come a long way, baby.

The writing was excellent and the lines were delivered superbly. That proves that cursing is not required; that double entendres are unnecessary; and sexual issues are without justification other than to titillate the sexually immature.

I have met a few Christians who believe that everything must have a biblical emphasis and teach a spiritual lesson; however, I think that cannot be supported by the Bible. Everything a Christian does must be done to God’s glory and we should never be involved in anything that magnifies or seems to recommend sin. All kinds of games have nothing to do with Christianity but we can play them with friends and enjoy the good time, the exercise, the camaraderie, etc.

William Bouguereau, famous French painter, painted a masterful oil of a beautiful woman in a white dress with a small child in her right arm and a small sheep in her left arm. Its appropriate title is L’Innocence. Children and sheep are reminders of innocence–something missing in our time.

Today’s entertainment industry is scandalous, sordid, squalid, sorry, and shameful! Perversion is presented as common, even commendable, with numerous homosexual characters who are almost never depicted as incompetent, irresponsible, or immoral. The persistent positive presentation of perversion has been inculcated into the American mind resulting in a generation known for its ignorance, immaturity, and immorality.

An additional shame is that many church members will consider this subject and this writer naïve for even broaching the subject.

Would I prefer a return to the innocence of the 50s if it were possible? In a heartbeat!

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

Genuine Fundamentalists are clean, caring, and committed Christians living according to the New Testament, worshiping in simple, relatively inexpensive buildings (or homes), and a few megachurches. Like early Christians, Bible-believers today generally eschew liturgy, human doctrines, vestments, and repetitive and meaningless gestures. They seek to reach others; but, at the same time, cautioning, contending, and confronting laymen and leaders who are too much involved in this world’s affairs. They are what the early Christians were and are willing to experience poverty, prison and persecution for the truth. Most of today’s Christianettes seek prosperity, preference, and popularity.

Even infidel theologians such as the late Kirsopp Lake, Professor Ecclesiastical History at Harvard Divinity School and author of the five-volume The Beginnings of Christianity, affirmed that Fundamentalism is original Christianity! He made an incredible statement that should shake mainline churches to their foundations: “It is a mistake, often made by educated persons who happen to have but little knowledge of historical theology, to suppose that Fundamentalism is a new and strange form of thought. It is nothing of the kind: it is the…survival of a theology which was once universally held by all Christians.” Lake added, “The Fundamentalist may be wrong; I think that he is. But it is we who have departed from the tradition, not he, and I am sorry for the fate of anyone who tries to argue with a Fundamentalist on the basis of authority.” He added that the Bible is on the Fundamentalist side. Remember, he was an expert on the New Testament and ecclesiastical history! Moreover, he agrees with me!

So today’s New Testament churches (that includes some Evangelicals) are original Christianity and should be making an impact on our culture as the early churches did, but the fact is our success is limited because the culture is driving us! Our churches are not the master or the servant of the state but are to be the conscience of the state and society. We must be the state’s critic but not its tool.

Most American and Canadian pastors are silent and most churches could close their doors without anyone noticing since they have become little, irrelevant, homogeneous groups that have monthly pitch-in dinners and weekly hot chocolate huddles in church basements. Maybe a revival meeting each year. Few preachers actually confront society with the Gospel and with Bible truths. That means America’s mess can be attributed directly to our pulpits!

Fact: if a preacher is not contending, he is not a true preacher of God. The truth is that every Fundamentalist is a fighting Fundamentalist. Not fighting everyone, not fighting all the time, and never being mean, but fighting by counseling, cautioning, confronting, and combating political, religious, social, and business leaders while also presenting the claims of Christ to them. We must be scriptural, sincere, strong, and never silent.

Many preachers are telling us that modern Christians are not to contend for the faith as the old timers did; after all, it isn’t cool and drives people away from the church. But then, people should be driven away from many churches! Such critics think they are obeying the Bible but they are not. Compromisers were wrong yesterday, are wrong today, and will be wrong tomorrow and will finally be convinced of it in eternity. These New Evangelicals and Very Mushy Fundamentalists (VMF) have digressed and departed and deserted Bible Christianity. True Fundamentalists (or if you prefer, New Testament Christians) stand where genuine Christians have always stood: upon the inspired, infallible, indispensable Word of God. The corollary is to obey New Testament instructions which involves contending, rebuking, and coming out from among them. But doing so according to Eph. 4:15: “Speaking the truth in love.”

The woods are full of Evangelicals or conservatives, even Fundamentalists, who desire peace above purity and unity over truth. They are willing to tolerate apostasy, not confronting others for their heresy, and are therefore not original Christians! The Bible commands us to “shun” some (II Tim. 2:16); and to “turn away” from others (II Tim. 3:5); then “mark them . . .[in order to] avoid” those who are not doctrinally correct (Rom. 16:17); furthermore, those who do not hold to the doctrine of Christ are not to be received “into your house neither bid them God speed” (II John 10). We are even told to not be involved with and to separate from Christians who walk in disobedience. (II Thess. 3:6.) Finally, we are to “come out from among” compromisers and evil doers (II Cor. 6:17); but that requires all who are members of an unbiblical church or denomination to leave. That means leaving family and friends and joining a fellowship that teaches truth.

The departure from Bible Christianity started at the very beginning of the church age and accelerated into the Middle Ages; however, it exploded during the 1900s until today. The major catalyst for this was the National Association of Evangelicals who were embarrassed to be associated with Fundamentalists. The loosey-goosey NAE wanted to present a soft, sophisticated, and scholarly persona to the world and they had eight complaints against Fundamentalists which were listed in Christian Life Magazine, March, 1956. There was a tinge of truth to some of their complaints but only a tinge. For example, no one could be against true scholarship; however, radical scholarship is really radical unbelief in amateurish disguise.

Get your barf bag ready. Each one is as dangerous as a landmine in a schoolyard: 1) a friendly attitude toward science; 2) a willingness to re-examine beliefs concerning the work of the Holy Spirit; 3) a more tolerant attitude toward varying views on eschatology; 4) a shift away from so-called extreme dispensationalism; 5) an increased emphasis on scholarship; 6) a more definite recognition of social responsibility; 7) a re-opening of the subject of biblical inspiration; and 8) a growing willingness of evangelical theologians to converse with liberal theologians. Ahh yes, converse but never confront.

Each of the eight screams compromise, collusion, corruption, and capitulation. The Evangelicals pulled away from the Fundamentalists which would not have a tragedy but they got a makeover strangely resembling the unbelieving modernists! The Evangelicals’ indulgent, irrelevant, implausible, and inaccurate preaching further added to their error.

Like insecure teens looking for approval, the renovated Christian leaders abandoned the high ground of the Bible for the slime pits of a mushy Evangelicalism. Mushy Fundamentalists march more slowly than the Evangelicals but they march in the same direction and eventually arrive at the same destination: compromise, collusion, corruption, and capitulation.

Too much preaching nowadays pats the back and tickles the ear, but does not get under the skin. There is no conviction and therefore no conversion. I am thinking not only of the ministry of reproof and rebuke but also of the message of inspiration, of encouragement, and of comfort. People leave church at noon with their depths unstirred, their hearts untouched, and their consciences unpricked. They leave church licking on a stone rather than chewing on bread.

Church goers need to hear from Heaven; instead they often hear from a denominational bureaucrat or warmed-over sermons from Rick Warren or Bill Hybels.

The further churches drift away from biblical truth, the more the hatred is dumped upon those who expose the drift away from original Christianity.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

The younger Nyquist whines, “the church has deeply hurt us.” No, the church did not hurt him, it was people. Moreover, maybe Carson is a little too sensitive. Maybe he is relishing in his victimhood caused by the older generation. He is sure proud of being a “Millennial” and opines that “few generations before us are so quick to acknowledge failure.” Well, yes, but their failures are so obvious. The previous generation, as all generations, generated massive failures but then, we are all broken, sinful people. The “Millennials” are the same, only younger and more whiney.

Carson declares, as if anyone questions it, “Perfection is a standard no one can meet.” Did it take a few years at Moody and Dallas to comprehend that truth?

Carson assures us, “We value the environment and are the most socially conscious generation in recent history.” That trivial statement would make Congregational pastor, Washington Gladden, (stimulus for the social gospel in the late 1800s) stand up and cheer. Wow, surely Carson could, if he would, be a little more biblical than boast about tree-hugging.

Carson said, “Christian morals are not held as they once were…. In fact, I would argue, as many others do, that this [new morals] is exactly what the church needs.” He is getting ready to hit his stride with his main issue as he discusses morals: homosexuality. “The Christian reputation, established primarily by the previous generation, has been known to show judgment and doctrinal separation. Few would describe this conversation as loving.” But is it biblical? The Millennial and Emergent Church pitch is “don’t be judgmental” even if the Bible demands it. That doesn’t go well with his generation. Adjust, be flexible. “Don’t be so hardnosed” is their mantra.

Another string they constantly strum is their reproof, revulsion, and rejection of doctrine and doctrinal separation. All the loosey-goosey Evangelical groups detest the message of Paul: “Come out from among them.” The Millennials want to stay in and well, not fight but fellowship and fraternize with the ungodly. Might win one now and then. To what?

He adds that the church, because of its harshness and labeling homosexuality as “sin,” has alienated the homosexual community. “I want nothing to do with that reputation.” He writes about the church’s negative reputation in the “gay” community. He approvingly quoted a pro-homosexual blogger who was present at a “gay” pride rally: “I hugged a man in his underwear. I think Jesus would have too.” No, Jesus would have told him to get saved and put on some clothes. The man would have clothed himself as did the demoniac of Gadara. When people get right, they get dressed. The further away from God, the less clothing.

The blogger went on: “I spent the day at Chicago’s Pride Parade.” He and some friends wore shirts stating “I’m sorry that Christians judge you.” “I’m sorry the way churches have treated you.” “I used to be a bible-banging homophobe, sorry.” Well, since all Christians are to follow Bible commands, I wonder how such compromise can be defended in light of Gen. 19 when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities of the plain. Has God changed or has Moody changed?

Carson goes on: “Pietistic compulsion to share our convictions does not lead to relationship or reconciliation.” How about repentance? Repentance must precede relationship and reconciliation.

He then deals with the woman in Luke 7 who kissed Christ’s feet and wept. Carson is trying to make a comparison of homosexuals visiting a church and being rejected. Of course, Christ accepted her but Carson doesn’t seem to understand that she had repented and had been forgiven. He added, “What would others think if their community group welcomed a lesbian? Image management rises to the surface and trumps all.” No, truth trumps all and any lesbian would be accepted after repentance.

Some think this was Mary Magdalene but with no biblical reason. The woman in the passage was probably a heathen, a Gentile and maybe a prostitute. She kissed Christ’s feet which was not a Jewish custom. Polybius reported on ambassadors from Carthage who supplicated the Romans for peace in the early 200s B.C. With a humble and abject mind, they fell down and “kissed the feet of the council.” Kissing the feet was a heathen practice and was not part of a Jew’s practice.

Carson does not want to be connected to a faith that takes an anti-homosexual stand. Of course, many Millennials don’t want to stand for anything. He doesn’t want to be identified with that faith. I don’t think he has much to worry about.

Paul added, “We don’t want a watered-down version of God’s word,” however, that is exactly what the Nyquists have and evidently Moody Bible Institute, Moody Press, and Moody Radio have the same. The father declared on the radio program, “We both hold strongly to the biblical standards on homosexuality and any form of sexual perversion.” What a statement! Both men know what the Bible teaches about fornication, bestiality, homosexuality, necrophilia, so how could an honest person make such a statement? They are public apologists for abnormality.

Closing the program, Carson spoke of his tattoo (on his side) saying it was a spiritual experience! He defended tattoos by saying that most of his friends had tattoos and “It’s like wearing a tie.” No, it is not. According to one writer in the Pacific News Service, tattoos are a “new reverence for pagan beliefs.” Lev. 19:28 clearly commands “Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.” Carson’s dad, president of Moody Bible Institute said of his son’s body marking, “I am fine with that.”

The book is recommended by Glenn R. Kreider, professor at Dallas Seminary. It is not recommended by me! And neither is Moody Bible Institute, Publishing, or Radio recommended by me. And in quiet moments I wonder how any Dallas professor can recommend such a book.

Millennials want to break with their rigid past and have a warm, fuzzy, Christianity. They don’t like to be pressured into a pure, biblical life. They prefer to be uncommitted, unconnected, and unaccountable.

Their book deserves to be unread.

Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.