Turn the other Cheek: the Third Way of Christ

June 17, 2017

I have some reactions to some things in the article at Lew Rockwell on the “third way of Christ”.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/06/yvonne-lorenzo/turn-the-other-cheek-2/

I agree with the idea of the “third way”, another way of referring to Christian “resistance”.

First, I must make an observation about Mr. Wink’s mention of the translation in “Resist not evil”. Picking on one word, “resists”, he throws out the baby (KJB) with what he thinks is bath water.

Every verse occurs surrounded by a context of scripture. I understand what Jesus is saying in this passage. If “Resist not evil” does not suggest docility in the whole of scripture any more than you can get docility from the passage that says to offer a second cheek after someone smites the first one, or giving somebody a second coat after he sues you for the first one. Reading along, the criticism of the King James translators in that one place falls flat in this context.

The Scholars Version as you quoted it is more confusing and adds nothing at all to the practical application of the guidance in the verse. How does one react, in context, to walking two miles with someone who only asked you to go one mile? How is that resisting evil non-violently?

Jesus clarified the whole idea a few verses down:

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. –Matthew 5:45

Romans 13 as you apparently must realize, also does not mean a doormat interpretation of blind obedience to government.

The translators of the Authorized Version spoke multiple languages from the area, Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Latin. They were the generation of the culture that sired Isaac Newton. They could sling around any of those languages for dinner. And yet their Preface speaks to the awe and reverence they took to the task.

Nobody can claim better credentials for making the Christian case for non-violent resistance to authority, such as demanding more disdain for America’s imperialist wars. I recommend his compilation of biographies of the KJB translators. He authors a directory of all the words that modern “scholars” claim are archaic. No longer used? He gives modern times references to them, using the same meanings as used in the Authorized Version itself.

“Free speech for me, but not for thee”, for example. If nothing else, the KJB beats out ALL the “modern” versions in accuracy of translation in the usage of the second person pronoun, singular and plural.

“Rightly dividing the word of God”, looking to Isaiah to find the answer to

…”Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine?”
He goes on to record the answer: “them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:” –Isaiah 28:9-10

One must be very prayerful before picking on a word like this to correct the Word, while realizing the truth that our adversary the devil now “goeth about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may destroy”. One must avoid straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. I suggest Laurence Vance’s writings on the issue of the KJB, and others at http://www.av1611.com.

And that the two biggest examples of temptation to sin in the Bible featured Satan using a deceitful interpretation of the word of God. The first of the two were when the Serpent asked Eve about the fruit of the tree of life, implying an unfair restriction, leading Eve to add “not touch it” to what God had said. And pouncing with more interpretation on the meaning.

The second of the two greatest temptations was when Satan quoted scripture to Jesus himself. In this case he quoted directly, but added an implicit meaning that was not there: permission to violate other passages.

If Mr. Wink thinks the translators advocated such passivity in this verse, he ignores all of the rest of that group’s anointed work. Like telling Pilate to his face that he was nothing before the power of God, even though he was also telling him his kingdom was not of “this world”. He was defiant before Pilate’s power in the way you describe in your article, and comported as the King of kings he is to this day, even as he let them lead him to the cross.

Even in the march to Golgotha, Christ was triumphant over both Pilate and the Sanhedrin. They were powerless to stop the “latter rain” of the spread of the Gospel. Just powerless. Christ’s salvation, his truth, his triumph over death and hell, sent wildfire into civilization and beyond.

Comfort for the broken heart, healing for the broken body, and salvation for the lost soul.

(Copied to my blog at http://www.trutherator.wordpress.com)

Mueller is disqualified by law from being Special Prosecutor; JFK on secrets and security

June 17, 2017

Bill Otis at a “Crime and Consequences” blog lays out the plain-truth case:
http://www.crimeandconsequences.com/crimblog/2017/06/my-view-mueller-is-conflicted-.html

Mueller is disqualified from investigating anything related to Comey because he has a very long personal and professional relationship with Comey.

The article only covers this narrow case, but opens up a can of worms for the entire political class in Washington D. C. and the other parasites in the Swamp. How many of them are Masons, and recognize the Masonry in their colleagues with their little signals, in their conversations and specifics of their body language? How many of them have reached the level where they swear an oath to cover up the crimes of their fellow Masons? Or worse, what about the other orders even more nefarious?

Or what about the snakes in the grass that John F. Kennedy warned about in more than one speech, including the “Secret Societies Speech”? Talking about obstruction of justice? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMbmdFOvTs

Who obstructed the justice investigation into the Clinton email national security crimes?

Another big lie from the Clinton campaign 2016 and Swamp Media is the “seventeen” intelligence agencies that purportedly surmised that the Russians “interfered” in the 2016 presidential election. Any security expert worth listening to will tell you that this is a bogus story, most especially in the effort to link it to the Trump campaign.

Which means that Comey, and now Mueller, and Rosenstein in his nominating a conflicted man, Mueller, to the office of Special Prosecutor.

Americans can now see even more that the imperial capital that rules over us is an enemy to the Common Man.

JFK blasted the idea of establishing a new Office of War Information. Obama did, of course calling it something else, just before leaving office, to fight against information that Deep State wants censored. But Obama’s move is not for national security, it is to control the minds of the people that is its legitimate boss. Like an accountant that lies to the CEO about company funds.

Comey-gate: another step in a coup e’etat

June 12, 2017

Did Comey investigate Jezebel Clinton’s email crimes like a real FBI director?

Did anybody on that panel yesterday ask Comey whether he thought Obama was obstructing justice when he said in an interview he was confident HRC would be cleared?

Did anybody ask how Jezebel knew in interviews, days before Comey’s surprise press conference, that she would not be charged?

Obama didn’t ask him to, but it’s a big leap to think Comey did right.

Did anybody ask Comey about his inept amateur bungling in the Email-gate criminal investigation?

And why:

He gifted FIVE immunity grants to potential witnesses against Jezebel in exchange for –NOTHING!

Agreed to only a partial review a part of the emails on one important HRC staffer’s laptop, and agreed to destroy the laptop afterward (so now nobody else can find anything that’s there). In exchange for –NOTHING AT ALL!

They never called a grand jury to decide on whether to bring criminal charges against Jezebel. THAT would be normal FBI procedure with so much strong evidence piled up of multiple crimes, if it were any other Joe or Jane Everyman.

Trump is right if reports are accurate that he is upset at House Republicans for their lackluster response to Comey’s self-serving Trump bashing testimony under oath, even revealing his own crime of leaking privileged information to the Press. (Sorry Judge Napolitano, sometimes you’re way too kind in evaluating these performances of political theater.) (JFK then, DJT now)

Pure speculation no, but think WHAT IF:

Comey kept his memos of all his conversations with Trump, not to cover himself against lies, but to see what he could get him on? In view of previous cover-ups of the Cintons’ crimes, including the email national security breach,

What if they thought their tricks and sticks would get Jezebel “elected” and crushing Trump’s shot at the elections would demoralize the ones who they considered their real enemies, the traditional, normal, American?

And Trump winning, in spite of dirty tricks like the now confirmed 6,000 non-citizens that actually cast ballots in elections in just one state (not counting the ones not caught), that moved them into Plan B, to hype and harp on the Russia thing to block Trump from keeping his promises.

Also, let me ponder. At some point they are going to use the Russian elections hacking cover, and this leak by Unreal Losers, the NSA girl, to call for treating the elections as a national security issue, that needs the help of the brilliant minds of NSA geeks to harden them against vote rigging.

Yeah, like we’re from the government and we’re here to help you. Thanks but NO THANKS.

This whole witch hunt against Trump is not against him per se. It is against him as a proxy against the electorate, that is, Forgotten Man.

What if they are sucking up the news cycle, and the loot they stole from us (taxes) against us, in a fake investigation? How many tax-extorted dollars are they using against the electorate in this Deep State operation to engineer a de facto coup, some call it a “soft coup”, against the Republic?

What if this is

Stop the Coup

June 11, 2017

Universities have prostitutes their science departments for government money.
There are some honest guys around still, like James Watts, but government money has sacked up the best of new entrants and old, into a politicized entry working for the benefit of the bureaucrats who decide how the budget is disbursed.

Then the academics and universities become shills for the political money. There is absolutely no way to clean that dirty money. It’s a circular money laundering scheme, in which each piece thinks it’s motives are so pure.

There are a few shadow power brokers who know though, at the top of this food chain, hidden in the clouds of power: “spiritual wickedness in high places”. But God is not mocked, Whistle-blowers are yelling that the emperor has no clothes, and people are starting to mock the ludicrous fake news, fake science, false flags, the virtue signaling that they use to hide their atrocities behind.

For example, the Clinton-Obama-DNC hatched a new prop to “explain” the election loss that was set up for them, for the sake of the people they still have under their spell. They hatched the term “fake news”.

Jezebel and Barry were the first ones to mouth it in explanation. “Fake news”. For a propaganda, this band of bungled used the Washington Post to publish a list of Web sites they said were sources of “fake news”. Turned out they credited the list to an obscure group they gave authoritative credence to. Turned out to be a nobody source.

Quick as lightning, they got the deserved blowback. “We the people” blew it right back in their lying faces until one CNN Mockingbird Media shill whined that the president calling them “fake news” was one of the worst things he could say about them. Memo to CNN: no its not. There’s more truth where that came from, like the revelations of the German Fake News whistleblower Udo Ulfkotte.

EXPOSE THE SOFT COUP ATTEMPT BY DEEP STATE, POLICE STATE.

STOP THE WAR MACHINE, STOP THE WARS, STOP THIS STEALTH COUP!

MAKE PEACE, NOT WAR!!

Army of Goliaths gang up on consumer-friendly Brave browser

June 11, 2017

Newspapers are using the stinking copyright laws to blast away at the Brave browser.

https://www.cnet.com/news/newspapers-to-brave-browser-dont-mess-with-our-ads-or-else/

Here’s an idea, guys: Go back to taking all that stuff in-house like you always did before the Internet, eh? Advertisers paid you directly. Oh, wait, cheaper to threaten lawsuits and sic the big bad big dog of government on them?

The ads and especially onerous lyrics the tracking malware they sneak into the browsers steal bandwidth by fraud. So too the text SMS ads that some bigger stores now pop up upon tour phone when you shop then leave a store if you have location flagged on.

Those newspapers are lying too, as are all the biggest content providers like Google, Facebook, Twitter, newspapers, in their push for “Net Neutrality”. That hidden tracking software they want to hide.

Consumers are obviously demanding a better solution. Brave is offering that solution. Content companies will fight this using the corruption inherent in copyright.

Cable companies made a business of charging customers for their content. Why not try It? By the way, some of you are already doing this, like WSJ and WP, and Netflix. People used to pay for newspaper copy.

Maybe you giants are afraid the people you constantly insult so much in your content will refuse to pay for YOUR content and will pay more for content that treats them with respect.

Michael Crichton: When they say “consensus”, reach for your wallet

June 9, 2017

I’ve added the link to this great video about the Climate Change hoax to my Pages section, to keep it available. I posted it some days agone, but wanted to have it available on the right for new readers’ viewing pleasure.

https://trutherator.wordpress.com/the-great-global-warming-swindle-full-movie/

 

 

Comey caught in a lie?

June 8, 2017

Comey said he shared his memo notes with a friend for the purpose of leaking it to the Press after Trump’s tweet.

But according to one report, apparently based on the public self-outing of that friend, a Columbia University law professor, the memos were given (or shown) one day before Trump’s tweet.

In the Fox News commentary following the Comey testimony, Jennifer Griffin, the national security correspondent, noted that it was the first time she had ever heard of an FBI director admitting to leaking private executive conversations carried out in exercising the functions of government, to an outsider.

Kimberly Guilfoyle noted that it is now unequivocally confirmed the truth of Trump’s tweet that Comey had told him on three different occasions that he was not under investigation in connection to the collusion with Russian though some in the campaign were.

It is also now confirmed again, now from the mouth of Comey, that there is zero evidence, zero, that any Russian government actions changed even one vote in the elections.

Comey also revealed that Trump did not try to stop any investigation into any evidence of wrongdoing by any of the people around him or his campaign in relation to the Russia-campaign investigation.

Comey’s memos quoted the president as saying “I hope you can see to let this go”, speaking of the probe into Michael Flynn. It was pretty obvious to me he was hedging in responding to the question of whether he thought Trump was engaging in “obstruction of justice”.

Now then, we can conclude a few things.

One, that Comey has done things in ways that cover his own rear-end, and not always in the best interest of the country.

Two, Trump was not trying to stop the investigation into questionable Russian connections with any of the staff around him.

Three, Comey never trusted Trump. He said he was uncomfortable when Trump sent away others from his office to talk to him alone. My question for him would be whether he had ever had a private conversation with a subordinate with no others present.

Four, Comey says he believes Trump saying he fired him because of the Russia “collusion” investigation. But Trump gave several other reasons too, which went unmentioned.

Five, possibly most important of all, Comey leaked his own notes to the Press in the “hope that it would result in the appointment of a special prosecutor.” That means he is a very dangerous man.

Six, the commentary from the Fox News panel was a bit disappointing in balance, Judge Napolitano more so for me, because I respect him so much as a champion for liberty. In his defense though, he is paid for presumably objective legal analysis, and his points sounded reasoned.

Background. Comey made a name for himself prosecuting Martha Stewart for “obstruction of justice”, because in questioning her, they could not get her on the crime for which they were supposedly interrogating her for. He said at that time he pursued the case with her to show the rich get equal treatment under the law. He demonstrated the exact opposite with his press conference during the campaign, in which he made a long list of crimes that Hillary had demonstrably committed, and at the end saying they were not enough to prosecutable because she did not “intend” to break the law. Not because she stayed within the law, but “intent”.

With that waiver for Hillary Clinton based on “intent”, he showed that he does give the rich and powerful a pass when he wants to.

THE BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENT NOW.

I don’t know if this should happen in that venue, but Comey should get grilled for his handling of the criminal investigation into Clinton’s national security violations. My disappointment now is that nobody is asking him questions under oath about this.

He never called a grand jury.

He gave out immunity like it was cheap candy, to FIVE of the people he should have been interrogating as to specifics in conversations.

He limited his subordinates in how many emails they could look at in one laptop acquired by the FBI as part of the investigation, and to cover up the evidence that might be in the emails he agreed they would not look at, by destroying that laptop. That by itself is not a normal procedure.

Comey stopped the FBI from auditing the DNC servers in their investigations into leaks or hacks. Instead he let them hire their own cybersecurity firm to review the server and deliver a report to the FBI.

They interviewed Hillary Clinton, but not under oath.

Most of the legacy media is saying Comey came off good from this and Trump not so much, even somewhat Fox News. I don’t see it that way. Even more so, Comey’s inept handling of the Clinton email investigation was never mentioned.

What do you expect.

The other day Megyn Kelly interviewed Vladimir Putin. When Putin was asked about Russian interference in the American elections, his answer was more or less to snicker. In so many words, he said it didn’t make much difference at all who got elected in the USA.

That was another way of saying he realized that there are influences and powers in the U. S. government –and in the political campaigns– that overwhelm any attempt to change the course of the powers-that-be in any meaningful way.

Journalists Challenge Censorship in Venezuela With ‘El Bus TV

June 8, 2017

Fighting censorship in Honduras:

http://www.wsj.com/video/journalists-challenge-censorship-in-venezuela-with-el-bus-tv/B93F93C5-FDBF-41C2-B53F-3C476234480E.html

Let’s pray for the oppressed and the poor in Venezuela, in North Korea, in Africa and wherever they are.

Let us thank God for the blessings we have for our own individual circumstances, and for the blessings of science and technology. (“True” science…)

The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie

June 8, 2017

Great exposure of the socialists pretending to be “concerned” about climate change:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-m09lKtYT4

It’s a political ploy among other things “to prevent development in the developing countries”. (That’s why China and India are exempt presumably)

aec

Statehood for Puerto Rico?

June 8, 2017

The Hill reports on the upcoming referendum in Puerto Rico on status: http://thehill.com/latino/336667-puerto-rico-goes-to-the-polls-for-statehood

The choices on the ballot: Statehood, Independence, or Status Quo. The status quo is referred to in Spanish as “Estado Associado Libre”, literally translated as “Associated Free State”.

In English we might refer to that wording as some form of autonomy. The name the governor put on the ballot for this calls it a choice on “Decolonization”, and the opposition party cried foul, saying the name spoiled the purpose.

The party of the governor is mostly based on favoring statehood. The main opposition party has been consistent in favoring the current status quo. The Independence Party has been marginal in elections for decades.

They contend that lack of statehood is a causation factor in the bankrupt status. Actually, government bankruptcies are always the fault of the intrinsic flaws of any governing power, but it is true that there are factors inherent in the current status that affect economic conditions there. One thing I was told is that there are certain rules they must abide by in matters of trade.

Another example: The pork barrel horse trading Congressmen do with budgets, where they negotiate who gets what and how much, never cuts Puerto Rico in. This is part of the bigger problem statehood advocates point out, which is that decisions are made at the federal government that Puerto Ricans must obey, but without any voice in the matter. There are U. S. maritime laws that “force Puerto Rico to import and export goods on U. S. ships”, rules that increase the prices of goods imported or exported. Federal Courts established by the U. S. Congress have jurisdiction in many matters affecting the island. When I was there, there were some in the Press that called for independent control over immigration; there were some complaints about a large number of Cubans.

Somebody should tell them that there are LOTS of Americans in the continental States that feel they don’t have a say in the rules Congress imposes on them, despite having apparent representation.

In my opinion, without knowing the details, that Mexico got a better deal with NAFTA than Puerto Rico ever had in many ways.

I met the president of the Independence Party once when I was there in 1971 and 1972, during my first few weeks on the island. As part of our preparation for missionary work in Latin America, we formed teams of two or three and traveled around the island. My group of three just happened to be in the town of Lares during a “Grito de Lares” rally. The schedule this event on the anniversary date of a brief spontaneous uprising for independence from Spain in Lares in 1868.

Ruben Barrios, who told their members in a plebiscite then, to vote for statehood. His reasoning was that the U. S. Congress would refuse statehood to Puerto Ricans, in his mind because of racism, and this would offend Puerto Ricans enough to move them to demand an immediate referendum to vote for independence.

In my mind, Puerto Ricans always voted until more recent times for the status quo as a way to postpone the decision to later, since either statehood or independence would be more permanent. Reinforcing that factor was that the standard of living was better than of most Latin America, something generally attributed to the relationship with the United States and their citizenship. The citizenship guaranteed they could migrate to greener material pastures in the United States. Which they have, and still do, in such great numbers that in the 1970s when I was there, the air fare to New York was much cheaper than the air fare to Miami, Florida.

My preference would be to see them become independent. In fact, I would like to see the creation of fifty new independent states created on the carcass of the D. C. imperial government, in the general movement for localization of government.

All that being said, I must say that I have great pleasant memories from my time there. Puerto Ricans were very generous with us, with their time, their food, their resources, and generally accommodating to us. It was a great place to learn Spanish. Spanish is still their native tongue on the island. They do have an accent that is unique to them, and yes, there are a number of anglicisms in their conversations, but it is still Spanish.

I wish them the best.