On Being Grateful This Thanksgiving Day

Today, November 27, 2025 is our official Thanksgiving Day.  But while we have one official day, we should practice giving thanks and praise to God every day.  Like so much in our tradition, giving God the thanks and praise he so richly deserves from us was brought down to us by our friends, the Jews, who practiced it and preserved it so that when the Messiah came into the world, the world was set up to receive Him.

So, it is fitting that the best Thanksgiving message today comes from Yael Eckstein in an article at Townhall.com entitled Hineni: Thanksgiving's Answer to Ayeka. As we learn in Eckstein's article, "Ayeka: means "where are you?" and "hineni" means "here I am" in Hebrew. But knowing this doesn't convey the full spiritual meaning. That you only get by first having an attitude of gratitude.

This Thanksgiving, my heart turns again to the quiet strength that comes from gratitude, not for what we wish we had, but for the blessings God has already placed in our lives.

In a world of constant comparison and societal pressures, it is easy to forget this spiritual truth. In the Jewish tradition, we observe gratitude not only as a feeling, but as a response to a sacred question.

That question is Ayeka? Where are you?

It is the first question God poses to humanity in the Garden of Eden, and it continues to echo through the generations. It is not a request for an exact location. It is a calling: Where are you in this moment? What do you decide to stand for when the world around you feels uncertain, frightening, or unfair? Who are you choosing to be?

And the answer our tradition gives us is the answer of our forefather Abraham: Hineni. Here I am.

Hineni reminds us that everyone can do something. Everyone is empowered. Hineni is the language of faith in action, even in the hardest times. It is the courage to step forward even when the path ahead is uncertain. When there's nowhere left to go but to jump into the abyss of the unknown. It is answering God’s call not because life is easy, but because we know He walks with us, especially during the tough times.

Seen through the lens of Hineni, Thanksgiving is not just a holiday on the calendar that comes around once a year. It is part of a daily spiritual practice – a way of standing before God with presence, purpose and an open heart. And it is often in the moments when gratitude feels the hardest to find that we need it the most.

Before you have your family gathering, your turkey and ham, and sit down to watch football, I urge gentle readers to read Eckstein's article and consider all the many blessings he has given us, and how we might bless others as a result.

A Bargain or a Trap

 Here's the last one for today. At Alt-Market.us Brandon Smith has an article entitled Is Global Technocracy Inevitable or Dangerously Delusional. The so-called tech geniuses and gurus believe that computers will eventually take over the world. Through Artificial Intelligence, the machines will be in charge. But Smith notes that it is entirely in our hands, as it has always been. We can choose to cut the cord, to leave our devises at home. We don't have to live as slaves to this iteration of "world domination."

The bewildering truth behind human technological enslavement is that it is impossible without the voluntary participation of the intended slaves. People must welcome technocracy into their lives in order for it to succeed. The populace has to believe, blindly, that they cannot live without it, or that authoritarianism by algorithmic consensus is “inevitable.”

For example, the average person living in a first world economy voluntarily carries a cell phone everywhere they go at all times without fail. To be without it, in their minds, is to be naked, at risk, unprepared and disconnected from civilization. I grew up in the 1980s and we did just fine without having a phone on our hip every moment of the day. Even now, I refuse to carry one.

Why? First, as most people should be aware of by now (the Edward Snowden revelations left no doubt), a cell phone is a perfect technocratic device. It has multilayered tracking, using GPS, WiFi routers, and cell tower triangulation to track your every step. Not only that, but it can be used to record your daily patterns, your habits, who your friends are, where you were on any given day many months or years ago.

Then there’s the backdoor functions hidden in app software that allows governments and corporations to to access your cell’s microphone and camera, even when you think the device is shut off. The private details of your life could be recorded and collated. In a world where privacy is being declared “dead” by boasting technocrats, why help them out by carrying something that listens to everything you say and chronicles everything you do?

Like Mr. Smith, I grew up at a time when there were no computers. We all got along just fine. We used paper maps to get around. We went to the library for information. We employed slide rules to perform calculations.  We actually wrote down things on paper with ink delivery devises called "pens." Young people are fascinated with fountain pens and often ask me to demonstrate one. My point is that we can live without a lot of this stuff. Indeed, in many ways our lives were better, if less convenient, then. Convenience is only worth so much. It is certainly not worth your freedom and your soul.  They are offering you a bargain, but it is also a trap.

Grab a cup of coffee and read the whole article. it is well worth thinking about it.

A Christian Revival

 It seems that today is my day for disagreeing with the story title writers at the American Thinker This time it is the article entitled God Is Back by S. R. Piccoli. God has always been there, will always be there, and constantly calls to people to come to Him. We are the ones who stray, like lost sheep, from His embrace. The title of the article should have been "People Flocking to God."

There. Having fixed the author's title for him, let me note that I have noticed the same thing, though I did not have the statistics. In my own congregation, I have seen an upswing in new members, both couples with children and single men. (The phenomenon of men entering the church without women is something I have not thought enough about, being too old and too married for that sort of thing. But if the number of single women who believe themselves to be oppressed by society and the "patriarchy," and voted for Mamdani are any indication, there is a huge lack of gratitude among our young women today. If young women want to see patriarchy, they should take a hard look at Muslim societies. Women are considered the possession of a man, to be bought and sold like slaves.)

The revival of Christianity among both young people and intellectuals is good news. We will need them to fight off the coming Muslim attempt to conquer the West. I have noted many times here that Islam is not from God, but is from the devil himself. The followers of Islam, like their father, build nothing, invent nothing, make nothing. They only destroy. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Christian God, created us, sustains us, and builds us up. Christians, like their Father, invent, build, and attempt to make the world better. Even Richard Dawkins admits he would rather live in a culture based on Christian principles.

Understand that the Church Christ founded will never fall, so whose side would you rather be on?

Nick Fuentes: Man of the Left

 Joseph Ford Cotto has an article claiming that Nick Fuentes proves 'No Enemies to the Right' is suicide for the GOP. I read the article at the American Thinker, and it does get better, but seems to avoid the obvious. So, let's back the truck up a bit. Let us note that Nick Fuentes is not to the right of the GOP. He in fact is a part of the Marxist Left. He is wacky, emotional, his principles are not well thought out, but he is of the Left. He praises Hitler and Stalin for crying out loud.  We have no problem declaring him, and anyone who follows him an enemy. We don't want him anywhere near Republican politics. Period.

One can talk good sense to the vast majority of Republicans and conservatives, however. To them, the message is clear. There is no moral, political, or strategic justification for allowing Fuentes or his followers anywhere near GOP and right-leaning institutions. They must be screened out of every respectable, or even quasi-respectable, non-lefty function, media enterprise, political campaign, donor network, youth organization, party organ, political action committee, and think tank without hesitation or apology.

So, Cotto has it correct in the end, except that he allows himself to believe the old canard that Hitler and the Nazi party were of the Right. They were not. Perhaps they could be considered to the right of Stalin, but they were still Socialists and of the Left.  Reagan's 11th Commandment does not apply.

Man Bites Dog Stories

Well, here's something different...way different.  This is a man bites dog story if ever there was one. Apparently, in Western North Carolina, a bald eagle dropped a cat through a motorist's windshield. You can find the story at Sky High Surprise: Bald Eagle Hurls Cat At Unsuspecting Motorist.

These are things you and I can't explain. It is like the time that a little bird, a type of parrot, landed on Mrs. PolyKahr's shoulder. It was obviously someone's pet, but whose? Having had parrots before, we put him in a proper cage, fed him the proper diet, and put up posters around asking if anyone knew to whom he belonged. After about 7 months or so, we had decided that he was ours, when our little bird needed the care of a veterinarian. It turned out that the original owner had taken the bird to that particular vet, and so eventually bird and owner found themselves together again.

One can't make this stuff up. Really, these things are just too freaky.

The Three Estates of Man

 I have spoken about what this thing called "conservatism" is all about.  In the past, I have differentiated conservatism from traditionalism.  Traditionalism often masquerades as conservatism, but they are not the same thing.  Conservatism conserves our founding principles, as contained in our Constitution.  Traditionalism is conserving what has been, no matter that it was originally a radical position. Being conservative requires discernment to know the right path.  Sometimes conservatism is traditionalism, but sometimes it requires us to try new things to achieve old ideas.

Jenna Ellis presents us with an even deeper idea of conservativism in her piece at Townhall.com today entitled Real Conservatism: Pursuing What God Ordained. My previous definition of conservatism was essentially political, and to some degree materialist. Ellis points us to an apolitical conservatism with which we can combat all forms of ideology and materialism by following God's original plan for us.

Ellis opens with a warning for us old dogs. That warning is that young people have grown weary of the usual guff the movement conservatives give them. They have become wary of traditional institutions which they see as corrupted. Ellis is correct in her assessment. And an old dog still can learn new tricks. Each of the "institutions" started out as something new once upon a time. But many have outlived their usefulness to conservatives.  They need to change or be reprogramed to serve a new generation:

For years now, the so-called “New Right” has expressed a deep and growing distrust of America’s institutions. And honestly? They’re not wrong to feel that way. Every generation eventually realizes that the shiny buildings and bureaucratic titles we’re told to trust are, in reality, just man-made structures run by flawed people. Washington think tanks, legacy media, universities and even parts of our own political machinery have squandered their credibility.

But in reacting against the failure of man-made institutions, too many conservatives — especially younger ones — have started believing the entire conservative project is obsolete. They look at the GOP establishment clinging to “Reaganism” in 2025 like a security blanket or nostalgically quoting the Founders without offering any path forward and understandably wonder whether the future belongs to populists who burn everything down or technocrats who want to rebuild everything from scratch.

Both sides are making the same mistake: they’re acting like institutions are the problem.

But the real problem is the wrong institutions.

Conservatism was never about “conserving” whatever man happened to build. Conservatism was — and must again be — about conserving what God ordained: the permanent institutions that He designed for human flourishing.

So, what are the God ordained institutions that are designed for human flourishing?

There are three institutions Scripture establishes:

1. The Church, tasked with proclaiming truth.

2. The family, the foundational unit of society.

3. Civil government, designed not to create rights but to secure pre-political rights endowed by our Creator.

Everything else — parties, agencies, bureaucracies, schools, media, “experts,” political influencers — is downstream from human ambition and human failure.

Ellis here notes what Luther described as the 3 estates of man: the State, the Household, and the Church.  One has specific duties in all three.  So, in our culture, voting is a part of our civic duty under the State as well as paying taxes and defending its borders.  We also have specific duties under our Household.  For instance, earning a living, leading prayer and worship, nurturing children and so on.  Regular church attendance is also a part of a man's responsibilities.  All three estates have been under siege for at least 100 years.

I would note that I have voted in every election since Nixon became president. In all that time, for the most part I have held my nose and voted for the least bad choice. For the most part that has meant voting Republican, even though I acknowledge that the Republican party is the stupid party, able to snatch defeat from the mouth of victory. Right now, the Democrat party, always the evil party, is in disarray. But they will eventually right themselves and move to the center again. We, as conservatives need to focus Church, family, and achieving a civil government that secures our God given rights.

Update: Watch Modernity is about to collapse. Richard the Fourth comes from a British perspective, but puts his finger on the source of our troubles. Man made ideologies are, not surprisingly, materialist and seek worldly things rather than sacred things.

Socialism Always Fails...Always

 Late yesterday, at the American Thinker D. Parker had a great post entitled The running gag, the leftists lie: 'Socialism has never been tried before'. As Parker notes in his post, socialism has actually been tried many times over hundreds of years, and has...failed...every...time. He notes, socialism started in this country with some of our forebears. For example, the Mayflower colony in Plymouth, Massachusetts nearly starved to death under collectivism. They had made all land common property and expected the people to all give their utmost to ensure the common good. After all, this was a Christian colony.  Trouble was that each person expected someone else to do the hard and dirty work. It is the tragedy of the commons so lamented among environmentalists, where when everybody owns it, nobody worries about conserving it.

Parker describes a sampling of socialist experiments that have taken place in the United States over the last 200 years. None of these were the totalitarian variety. All were entirely voluntary. They did not survive. And little wonder. Like the pilgrims' experiment, when people realize they will get the same as everyone else no matter how hard they work, no matter whether they have good ideas for improving things, they slack off. It is human nature. People will work for their family, for themselves, and a few will work for altruistic reasons. But generally, nobody works for nothing. Indeed, this is called slavery.

So much for the running gag that is the leftist lie: Socialism has never been tried before. It’s been tried everywhere, including the birthplace of AOC, and it’s never worked in 200 years. That’s a consistent record of failure that the left needs to be ashamed of, once you consider the mass murder and misery that always accompany these socialistic schemes.

If you are not familiar with the socialist experiments Parker mentions, it is an interesting exploration. If you happen to be leaning towards socialism, it is worth your while to study them and ask yourself if the current crop of socialists has proposed anything different? If not, how will the current politician succeed where the ones in the past failed?

As far as "capitalism" goes, it is just the way business has always been done. It is trading something you have for something you want more. Merchants would load a ship with, say, grain, wine and olive oil, and hope to trade these for copper, iron, and perhaps spices or luxury goods. In the process, the merchant hoped to make a small profit to provide for his family and be able to purchase his next shipload of goods. The problem with our current "capitalism" is that it has become crony capitalism which is actually corporate socialism. If politicians can note that a business is "too big to fail," with a straight face, they should seriously think about breaking that business up.  Oh, and as we are learning from the collapse of the EV market, you can't sell something nobody wants without government mandates.

Please read the whole post.

You Can Not Be Left and Be Christian

I have said it, but I have never heard anyone else say it.  You can not be a disciple of Christ, and call yourself a Christian, and be a leftist.  There are many reasons for this.  But the most glaring reason is that the Left views abortion like a secular sacrament. Abortion is child sacrifice, the same as what the Bible describes as passing their children through the fire.  God ordered the Israelite armies to destroy cities that did this.  He ordered them to destroy men, women, children and even animals.  He did not want anything to remain of such people.  What do you think he thinks of us?  In any case, I agree with the speaker in this video.

I would note that there are some commenters who think that Christianity is separate from such things. They want to have it both ways. They talk about being a progressive Christian. I agree that the Right is not universally on the side of Christ. But the Left is pretty universally against Christ and on the side of the devil. You can not be neutral. You can not sit on the fence. And, oh by the way, God is not your co-pilot. You must be on Christ's side in all things, or you are lost.

Please go watch the video. It is short.

When Will Ford Motor Company Re-learn What Its Founder Knew

 As the United Nations meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP-30) meets in Brazil, Mike McDaniel notes that Ford Motor Company continues to lose $132,000 on each Ford F-150 Lightening sold.  That is an amazing amount of money being wasted, really being misappropriated.  It is a common mistake people make.  Having spent a great deal on a losing scheme, they then spend more in hopes of saving what has already been spent.  Instead, they should look at money spent as sunk costs and coldly cut off any further expenditure.  In this case, Ford executives should recognize, as the American car buyer has, that an electric truck is not going to work...at least for now.

McDaniel notes:  

Lightning MSRPs have been as high as $90,000. Is that $132,000 on Ford’s production cost, or on the MSRP? What company can possibly lose that kind of money and remain in business? And why haven’t Ford shareholders stormed corporate HQ with torches and pitchforks?

I write this as an owner of two conventionally powered Fords. They’re fine vehicles I plan to keep for many years to come, so I have an interest in Ford’s continued success.

Ford’s EV losses to date in 2025 have been equally catastrophic:

The move comes after Ford’s electric vehicle business, Model e, lost another $1.4 billion in Q3. Ford’s EV unit has now lost $3.6 billion through the first nine months of 2025.

Around $3 billion of the loss is due to its current EVs, such as the F-150 Lightning and Mustang Mach-E. The other $600 million is for investments in next-gen electric models.

And which “next-gen electric models” might those be? The Lightning has been continually hyped as a wonder vehicle, but when owners asked it to do truck things like tow trailers and carry heavy loads, it woefully underperformed. All EVs have range problems, particularly when it’s cold, on anything but flat land, when bucking headwinds, and when they dare travel at highway speeds. Adding 1000 pound+ batteries to already heavy vehicles worsens those problems. Adding to the fun is using electrical accessories like heaters in winter makes annoying range problems potentially deadly. Ford recommends Lightning owners use only their seat and steering wheel heaters in winter. That’ll keep the frost off the windshield.

Automobiles did not originally have heaters in them. My 1933 Plymouth had an aftermarket heater installed, which made riding more comfortable. In the late 1950s, my dad had a Jeepster that didn't have a heater, or if it did, it wasn't effective. I remember riding in the winter in that car and freezing until we got to our destination. So, it seems the F-150 Lightening is taking a step backwards in technology, which doesn't add anything to the sales pitch.

It appears that with Trump II, the free market is again prevailing without lunatic leftists putting their thumbs on the economic scales. Ford, and the rest, appear to be dimly realizing they need to make vehicles the public wants at prices they can afford and which turn a profit.

Who coulda thunk it?

Well, Henry Ford, for one.

The Future of AI Is Not Heaven on Earth

At the American Thinker today there is an article by Vince Coyner entitled Elon's & Joe's Not-So-Excellent Adventure: The Delusion of an AI-Driven Nirvana. In the article, Coyner makes clear that Elon Musk and Joe Rogan have no idea about human nature. They speculate that artificial intelligence (AI) will soon eliminate most jobs as it takes over the world, thus freeing humans to "find meaning." It will be yet another heaven on earth, in their opinion. Coyner accepts their premise that AI will eliminate most jobs, but thinks it will bring about something more akin to hell that heaven.

The AI nirvana about which Musk and Rogan wax will likely be anything but. I think the most likely outcome of untethered AI is that mankind ends up in bondage and is then eliminated. Once AI has control over pretty much everything, it will see humans as a necessary evil to be tolerated, albeit temporarily. The number of humans necessary to maintain the system will be few, so AI will simply eliminate the excess. Then, once those few are no longer necessary, they will meet the same fate.

Interestingly, I have been noodling on this topic myself, but have come to somewhat different conclusions. Let me explain. Recently, I read a book by Charles Murray, which was recommended by American Thinker editor Andrea Widburg entitled Taking Religion Seriously. Murray is a public intellectual, working for a "think tank" who has written many papers and books. Among them is The Bell Curve. So, with that as background, it is understandable that Murray had had any serious thoughts of Christianity beaten out of him by his peers and professors. It was simply something that smart people didn't believe. But Murray, being an honest intellectual, began to notice evidence that perhaps God might be real, that the Bible might be true, and that Christianity was real and true.

Murray describes in his book the events and evidence that forced him to confront the fact that either Jesus is the Son of God, or else a lunatic and a liar. And if He is the Son of God, then Murray needed to change his beliefs. I will not present all of Murray's evidence here. Instead, I will concentrate on two important types of evidence germane to the topic at hand.

The first is the body of evidence generated by what are called Near Death Experiences, or NDE. If you, like me, spend any time at all on youtube you will have encounter stories of people who claim to have died and come back to tell what they discovered in the afterlife. If you were skeptical, well so was I. Some people having the experience of dying then changing their lives for the better.  They become pastors or make other significant changes in their lives.  All that points to having a very profound experience. One wants to believe that they indeed had the experience they claimed. For others though, the fact of their NDE seemed to be in question as they touted an agenda rather than discussed what it meant for them personally.

Murray points out that these phenomena have been studied and indeed there are books about the topic.

You have probably heard of the phenomenon known as the near-death experience (NDE). First brought to public attention by Raymond Moody in his 1975 book, Life After Life, NDEs have subsequently been the subject of books, articles in technical journals, and masscirculation newspapers and magazines, plus a few movies. They have also been the subject of extensive scientific investigation, including the compilation of databases with thousands of cases.

Murray, Charles. Taking Religion Seriously (pp. 50-51). Encounter Books. Kindle Edition.

What these various books, technical articles and databases have in common is that they verify to the extent verifiable, what these people claimed. For example, after the person was declared dead by competent medical personnel, the deceased who is brought back may remember actions taken, or conversations had, outside of his or her direct presence. These can be verified. Of course, only the person experiencing the NDE knows what else may have happened, that is unverifiable. But what is verified points to something that materialism cannot explain.

At this point I should define what I mean by "materialism." In the broader context, materialism is a belief that everything can be explained by the forces of the material world: matter, energy, gravity, etc. In the context of NDE, materialists believe that mind is a function of the material brain, and that consciousness and self-awareness are also functions of the material brain.

Moving on, there is another phenomenon called "terminal lucidity." In terminal lucidity, people with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias will, sometimes, exhibit momentary lucidity again, just before dying. It doesn't happen to all. Again, as with NDE, often care givers will witness this phenomenon, which gives credence to it happening. Often, a person with dementia for many years, who hasn't recognized members of his or her own family will suddenly recognize them, will remember important events, and hold lucid conversations with them. This may be only a moment or may last for an hour. Just as suddenly as it appears, the person returns to their demented state and soon dies.

If you have ever looked at a brain scan of someone with Alzheimer's disease or severe dementia, you will notice that a lot of the brain is no longer there. Thus, it is a puzzle where they suddenly come up with the ability to carry a conversation as if they did not have the disease.

Where all this is leading us to is that human consciousness seems to be larger than our brains alone. Yes, sure, the brain processes a lot of the sensory inputs from our five senses. This is true of all animals. But the special something, which we call consciousness, which no other animal has, seems to be outside of ourselves. Music, art, spoken language, making stories, mathematics and the interpretation of these things are not needed for survival. Our closest primate relatives, chimpanzees have gotten along just fine without them.

Now, materialist thinking is that our consciousness and our mind is a function of the brain alone. In the materialist vision, our thought processes can be imitated by a machine programed with just the right algorithms. Materialists will point out that a machine is much faster than we are, and makes fewer mistakes.  All true for certain tasks.  A machine set loose on the internet, can find and summarize all the existing knowledge of the world. It may even be able to draw hypotheses and suggest new areas for research.  I will grant all of that.

Now the internet has been described as both "the information superhighway" and a sewer. Both things are true at the same time. Judging the veracity of the information AI returns requires human judgement and understanding. A machine cannot and never will be able to do it.

Elon Musk and Joe Rogan, smart men though they are, are materialists. They see AI as taking our places. Glenn Beck, though, should not be a materialist, and should understand that AI is a tool, just like any other tool that man uses. It is neither good nor bad. It is not in itself evil. People may misuse AI as they have often misused computers. I am sure the evil party is even now cooking up a scheme to use AI to generate fraudulent votes. It is what they do. But AI will not eliminate all the jobs, and it will not create heaven on earth. That ship sailed with the Garden of Eden. We will have to wait for the Second Coming for that.

The Smiley Face Mask Has Come Off

At the American Thinker today is a short post by attorney Michael C. Hurley entitled Stop Mincing Words which I encourage gentle readers to take to heart. The article quite explicitly states that the Democrats are fighting for their faith, as warped and twisted faith is, while conservatives and Republicans are debating policy positions.

No one, at this late hour, should be unaware of what the stakes are. We are in a spiritual war between good and evil, between the forces of order and the agents of chaos. Full stop. So let’s say so, clearly, without apology or embarrassment. Tell people they’re in a war, and a great many of them will show up to vote. Tell them they’re in a debate over monetary policy and energy development initiatives, and most of them will hit the snooze button and sleep in.

The forces of evil do not fail to understand our program. They are not casting about for a better balance of trade. They know they’re in a war for power, and they intend to win it, which is why they fight so passionately. Abortion isn’t an issue for them. It’s a sacrament. Climate change isn’t a scientific debate. It is a religious world-view that gives their lives meaning and purpose. Politics for the left isn’t an intellectual sport to be conducted within the polite parameters of free speech. It’s an unholy crusade to be won by any means necessary, including censorship, lawfare, defamation, perjury, conspiracy, insurrection and assassination.

...snip...

Unless one believes that the New Testament is a work of fiction or that Jesus was just joshing us in the 24th chapter of Matthew about the days to come, it strains credulity to be incredulous about what is going on around us. When the Pharisees seemingly failed to understand him, Jesus knew the reason why and wasn’t afraid to say so out loud: “Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires.” (John 8:43–44)

There might have been a day when the spiritual battle lines in the West were difficult to discern, but no more. Allow me to focus your attention. We live in an age when every leading state and national candidate of the Democrat party, including every former Democrat president, openly supports the genital mutilation of healthy children and the obvious lie that a child can change genders. That, my friends, is the tell. Leave everything else aside if you must, because when a murderer is coming for your children, you do not pause to inquire whether he might also lower your electric bill. You sound the alarm and oppose him with every fiber of your being. When we hear this, we should think of the millstone and shudder.

People talk about the "old days" when supposedly the Democrats and Republicans had the same goals in mind but differed in the method of accomplishing those goals. In thinking back, I don't really think that is the case.  That is just fond remembrance of former times. The Democrats have been the party of the Left for as long as I can remember, and I remember Ike. As far as history goes, the Democrats have been soft on Communism and Fascism since at least Franklin Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. We overlooked their misbegotten ideas and dysfunctional policies to our regret. But now the smiley face mask has come off and what is underneath is a devilish monster. We are running out of time to save the Republic. We recognize our fate if we don't turn things around.

Please also read Patricia McCarthy's post at the American Thinker entitled Results are in: American leftists willingly embrace evil. I am sure Satan is dancing around in the coldest part of hell. God save us, I pray, because we are powerless to save ourselves.

The Man Who Knew Too Much

Over at Bearing Arms Tom Knighton has an article that points to the absurdity that is the (formerly) Great Britain. According to the article a UK Man (has been) Arrested for Possessing Gunpowder Recipe. My first impression was that there must be more to the story. Surely, Knighton cannot be serious.  Perhaps he had made some gunpowder and loaded it into steel pipes to make pipe bombs. But no, apparently the man was being persecuted for merely writing down the recipe.

Now, I have personally never been tempted to make gunpowder. It is dangerous to do, and in any case if I used black power firearms, manufacturers make much better substitutes today. The original was highly corrosive in addition to being explosive.  But that really isn't the point. The point is that the recipe for gunpowder has been pretty widely known since 1267 when Roger Bacon exposed the (not very closely held) secret to the world. So, where does the Crown get off pretending that it is some top secret, eyes only sort of thing. You can easily find the recipe on the internet, for crying out loud.

Here in the United States, we have a serious DIY culture. People will make their own anything if they think it's cool enough. Despite being the wealthiest nation on the planet, people build their own furniture, make their own clothes, make pottery, take up blacksmithing, or any number of activities that they could just pay for, but would rather do it themselves.

And we celebrate this.

Yes, that also includes people making their own guns and ammunition...

Well, yes, we do celebrate do-it-yourselfers so if you want to make your own gunpowder, be my guest. Especially since inevitably there will be those who say, "it can't happen here." I have seen how that (doesn't) works out:

And before anyone tries the "it can't happen here" thing, remember that some states have tried making it illegal to possess 3D printer files for making your own firearm. That's still just information that is harmless on its own. How long before some ninny here in the States tries to ban reloading your own ammo, followed by banning information pertaining to reloading?

We're not as far away from something like this as we might like to believe.

That's especially true as this was folded under anti-terrorism laws. The specter of terrorism has made our own lawmakers opt for some stupid things in the past, and to forget that freedom is and remains the guiding principle of this great nation, so it's not hard to see this happening here.

Knighton suggests each of us should write down the formula for black gunpowder. So, here it is just in case it suddenly disappears from the internet, though it will remain in old, printed books forever: 75% by weight Potassium Nitrate, 15% by weight Charcoal, and 10% by weight Sulfur. I hereby dare Scotland Yard to come and arrest me.

Built on the Rock

J. B. Shurk has a compelling article today at the American Thinker entitled Christians Persecuted and Killed Around the World in which he points out that Nigeria may be in the spotlight now, but Christians are being persecuted, jailed, and killed in Europe, China, India and other lands. President Trump can not take on the world here, which is what he is doing by threatening military action. Shurk first takes us on a brief tour of the world's hatred of Christianity.

In 2025, there is no part of the world that is safe for Christians. Leftist prosecutors in Europe, Australia, Canada, and the United States criminalize fundamental tenets of the Christian faith as discriminatory forms of “hate speech.” Chinese communists replace images of Jesus Christ with portraits of Xi Jinping. Hindus beat and murder Christians in India. Islamic nations sentence Christian converts to death. Nigerian Muslims attack Christian churches during prayer services and torture and murder so many Christian worshipers as to constitute genocide. The assassin who murdered Christian martyr Charlie Kirk allegedly did so because he believes that Charlie’s Christian teachings were “hateful.”

It is a dangerous time to be a Christian. Michael Snyder wrote an illuminating article a couple weeks ago entitled “Most of the Population of the World Lives in a Nation Where Christians Are Being Persecuted.” In a sober analysis, he takes the reader on a tour of Christian persecution, torture, and mass slaughter around the planet.

Children in China are prohibited from attending Christian church services, and the Chinese Communist Party rewrites Bible verses to support official pronouncements from the State. Sharing the gospel online is a crime, and Christian pastors are regularly arrested and “disappeared.” In India, Hindu terrorists set Christian churches and Bibles on fire and beat up and murder Christian parishioners. Muslims in Indonesia hunt down Christians as if they were animals. Muslims in Nigeria have massacred or abducted a hundred thousand Christians over the last six years and have destroyed some 20,000 Christian churches and schools. Islamic governments in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran discriminate against Christians, punish them ruthlessly for their beliefs, and execute anyone brave enough to convert to Christianity. In North Korea, Christianity is outlawed, and practicing Christians who are discovered are summarily executed or condemned to death in labor-intensive concentration camps.

We shouldn't be surprised by the fact that the world hates Christians. Indeed, Christ warned us saying in John 15:18 “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you." Why does the world hate Christians? Partly it is because of Christ's message. We sin, and God hates sinners. We can not, by anything we do, get into heaven. We stand condemned to hell. Luther thought of our shabby works as being like a big pile of stinking excrement (Luther was blunter, but you get the picture). God cannot stand it and turns his back on us. But Christ, by his death and resurrection has paid the price for our sins. We only have to believe that. Luther likens this to that big pile of stinking excrement covered in snow. But the world somehow wants to do things its own way by its own merit. Sacrifice enough lambs, pray 5 times a day with your head to the ground, whatever.  God doesn't care about these things.  You can go that route, of course, but that way lies sin and damnation. Instead, pick up your cross and follow the Way, the Truth and the Life.

I have mentioned Finland's attempts to subvert Christianity by prosecuting Päivi Räsänen for quoting the Bible concerning the nature of men and women.

In Finland, government prosecutors continue to harass Christians for quoting the Bible. In 2019, Päivi Räsänen — a medical doctor, longtime member of Parliament, Finland’s former Interior minister, and the wife of a pastor — used a Bible verse to criticize Finland’s state church for sponsoring an LGBT “pride” parade. After the prominent Finnish Christian publicly stated that males and females are biologically different, police investigators interrogated her for some thirteen hours, forced her to justify her Christian worldview, and demanded that she publicly apologize and recant her Christian beliefs. Because she would not do so and instead defended the authority of God’s Word, she was criminally charged for illegal “hate speech.” Prosecutors have repeatedly asked Finnish courts to “wipe the internet” of Räsänen’s media appearances and writings, in which she has used her medical education and Christian faith to distinguish men from women and to promote the Bible’s moral teachings.

Although two lower courts have acquitted her, prosecutors have appealed and now argue before Finland’s Supreme Court that quoting the Bible should be considered a criminal offense under the country’s war crimes laws. One of Räsänen’s attorneys, Lorcán Price, argues that the outcome of the case will reverberate across Europe because it addresses directly whether a Christian can publicly express the tenets of Christianity. “Can you speak the truth as you see it freely, even if it might offend somebody, or will you be prosecuted for hate speech?”

All over Europe there are laws that attempt to prevent the Church from speaking out against the evils being perpetrated. People in the formerly Great Britain are arrested for silently praying outside abortion clinics. The Canterbury Cathedral has been desecrated with graffiti. The old joke asking "is the pope catholic" have become serious questions. We now have Muslims praying in the Vatican to their god Satan. Still, as the 19th century hymn, "Built on the Rock" reminds us, this has all happened before:

Built on the Rock the Church shall stand,

Even when steeples are falling;

Crumbled have spires in every land;

Bells still are chiming and calling;

Calling the young and old to rest,

But above all the soul distrest,

Longing for rest everlasting.

Shurk concludes with:

Christ’s followers are suffering around the world. They are hunted, beaten, raped, burned, hanged, and slaughtered. The governments of formerly Christian countries insist on making Christ’s teachings a crime. Chinese, European, and American officials wish to censor the Bible. Christians must find faith and courage to face these evils now. Because much worse is sure to come.

Amen, brother.

Could the pope do more?

 Monica Showalter at the American Thinker has taken note of Trump's message to Nigerian officials that they better start protecting their Christians, who are being slaughtered by Muslim militias. Showalter puts the numbers at 7,000 killed this year alone. You can read her post at After massacres of Christians in Nigeria, Trump does the pope's job for him.  As much as I would like to see Trump send troops into Nigeria, I think it would be seen as Unconstitutional for the government to favor one religion over another. Would Trump send troops in to rescue Hindus, for example?

The pope, however, could do something more tangible than praying, though praying is powerful. Here me out. We have been here before, with Islam conquering huge swaths of Christendom and forcing conversion under threat of the sword. The pope then commissioned the Knights Templar. That was then. Now, the pope could establish a paramilitary force to go into countries like Nigeria to again rescue Christians who are being persecuted. Clearly in addition to being very careful about when and where to use such a force, diplomacy would be necessary. But the notion that Christians should be doormats, or second-class citizens was never intended. I suspect that the pope could get a lot of mileage out of the threat to use these forces in places like Nigeria, Egypt, Syria, or Afghanistan without having to actually send them in.

I haven't fully thought the idea out, but it is something the Vatican, as a sovereign could do. Should he?

A Post For A Sunday

Please read Grateful Calvin's twitchy post at 'I Am Going to Abhor Evil:' Nick Freitas Drops BIBLICAL FIRE on the Left's 'I'm Offended' Arguments. Virginia House of Delegates member Nick Freitas points out that he is glad when people espousing evil are offended by him. And he should be. Every Christian should hate what God hates, and God hates evil.

Please watch the embedded X post to hear Freitas' response to an 'offended' constituent. He has definitely nailed it. It is too bad that he doesn't intend to run again.  Virginia needs more like him.  But I understand. St. Paul tells us in the book of Romans not to associate ourselves with evil. For in doing so, the evil rubs off on us. That is why the LORD commanded the Israelites to thoroughly cleanse the land of Canaan of its former inhabitants. He didn't want any foreign gods being worshipped in His territory.

You will get a kick out of Freitas post, and it's a good way to start a Sunday.

NYC and Mamdani Deserve Each Other

 J. R. Dunn has a post today at the American Thinker entitled Let's not save the Dems this time. He makes a number of good points including one that is often attributed to Napoleon: “never interrupt when your enemy is in the process of destroying himself.”

As the clock ticks down the last days before the 2025 elections, we’re hearing more calls for the GOP and conservatives in general to intervene in the NYC election to prevent Zohran Mamdani from being elected mayor.

What we don’t hear is an answer to the question of why? Why, exactly, should the GOP and the MAGA movement waste time, effort, and political capital to prevent the Democrats from throwing themselves off the cliff? Why write another chapter in the never-ending saga of Republicans pulling Dem chestnuts out of the fire and the getting kicked in the face immediately afterward?

...snip...

The Dems, so we’re told, having come to their senses, will realize what the Republicans have spared them from and will be grateful. New York voters, with their customary insight and depth of perception, will reward the GOP with showers of votes. In other words, we’ll witness something that has never happened and never will.

What will happen instead is this: voters will see the GOP tossing away the principles and practices of MAGA just as they were beginning to bear fruit. They will see conservatives supporting one virulent social democrat over another for no rational reason. They will see the Uniparty in action. And they will respond as they always have: by walking away.

Dunn is correct here. New York voters have continually voted for Leftists like Bill DeBlasio and as Dunn notes elsewhere have spit on Rudy Giuliani who made New York again a tourist destination. What, pray tell, does the GOP owe to the party that started the Civil War, and apparently want to start another, who riot at the drop of a hat and maintain actual paid rioters. These people actively interfere with Trump's order to carry out the law and kick illegals out.  They flood the streets with criminals who should be in jail.  These people deserve everything Mamdani can deliver to NYC.

The impulse to save New York City doesn’t play, either. New York City doesn’t want to be saved. This is the city that elected Bill DeBlasio to two terms – in landslides, to boot. That sent Sandy O to Congress. That has reelected Chuck Schumer repeatedly. This is the city that had not one good word to say for Rudy Giuliani, the man who effectively destroyed the Mafia’s control of key city industries and who bought NYC an extra twenty years of life as mayor, when he was targeted by the Left. They’ve made their bed, and I wish them the joy of it.

I've highlighted the key issue. New York City doesn't want to be saved, didn't asked to be saved, and will just resent it if the GOP steps in to save them. There is another proverb here that applies: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." It reminds of Christians who think they are being kind by attempting to send missionaries to the unchurched. But all they do is make the people they are trying to save angry. Instead, they should stand ready to give a defense for why they have hope and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

I encorage gentle readers to read the whole post.

Nutrient Partitioning and the Inability To Lose Fat

 Following onto yesterday's post, I get a weekly missive (I think they call these newsletters) from Dr. Michael Eades, one of two authors of The Protein Power Life Plan which advocates for a low carbohydrate lifestyle. Eades himself has said that the plan is really a high fat diet, but that the publishers felt this wouldn't sell because of the way fats have been demonized.

Featured in this week's Arrow is a piece by Adam Kosloff on nutrient partitioning entitled The Rats Who Starved to Death While Obese. The article is both disturbing and interesting. It is disturbing not because of the starvation of the rats, as disturbing as that is, but what it has to say about human obesity. It is also disturbing because it points to the blindness of doctors and dieticians to the suffering of their patients.  I encourage gentle readers to read Kosloff's article.  In many cases, these nutritionists are as cold as liquid nitrogen to our sufferings.

Using a low carbohydrate, ketogenic diet, I have gotten my weight down to 225 from a high of 307. Yet I have been unable to get any lower for at least 6 months. This despite starting a jogging program and keeping my calorie consumption around 1500-1800 calories per day. There is something else going on. At those low-calorie consumption levels, if the Calories In/Calories Out (CICO) formula worked I would be losing a pound every week and a half conservatively. But the Carb-insulin-hypothesis (CIH) doesn't explain the problem fully either. It gets closer but doesn't quite close the gap in understanding.

I have noted that I can gain weight, meaning fat, by just smelling a piece of pie. That may or may not be true, but it illustrates the problem. I have gained weight while fasting for a couple of days. Holiday eating consists of one meal, yet it takes weeks to get back into ketosis, and even then, the weight doesn't fall right off. As I stated above, I seem to have a lower limit to my weight that my body simply refuses to let go. I know of other people who have the same issues. There clearly is more to it than mere CICO.

(As a way to determine if I need to take in calories, if I am hungry, I eat protein.  If I don't have energy, I eat fats.  But I always have energy, so I am only concerned about protein intake which usually includes enough fats as well.)

Kosloff sums up his essay with three questions researchers should be asking:

The core questions should be along the lines of:

Why does the body partition fat the way it does?

Is that partitioning normal?

If not, what can be done about it?

These are the questions that actually matter.

And once we start asking these questions, perhaps we can stop blaming people for biology—and start figuring out how to fix it. Maybe then—just maybe—the torture of our mammalian cousins won’t have been entirely in vain.

The More Things Change, the More Things Stay the Same

I was at church yesterday evening rehearsing with the handbell choir.  Now you need to understand that we are currently experiencing stormy weather from at least two different storm systems with winds gusting to 35 miles per hour and rain that will continue for most of the week.  One of the ladies seemed surprised that I was there because I am an old fart and she thought couldn't get around well.  I pointed out that I jog 2 miles 3 times per week.  That surprised her.

Actually, it surprised me as well.  I thought I had run for the last time perhaps 25 years ago when I took to riding a bicycle.  I had always practiced running hard, and running hard all the time breaks the body down.  Bicycling did not break the body down, while still giving one the benefits of aerobic exercise.  Oh, and bicycling was fun, so much fun!

But feeling the need to build myself up after so much time spent in the hospital, then in getting radiation, I went for a walk.  But that was not enough to get the heart pumping.  I started jogging, it was too loosey-goosey to be called a "program," about 6 months into my recovery from cancer surgery.    Technically, I can call it a jog because both my feet are off the ground during every step.  But my pace is about the same as when I walk, about 20 minutes per mile.

Somewhere in the back of my mind was a memory from the early 1970s of a kind of training not unlike what I was experiencing called Long Slow Distance, or LSD.  LSD, the drug, was at that time a psychotropic drug that some proclaimed would open up the unused portion of the brain to all the wonders of the universe.  But it proved to be, as could be predicted, a massive failure.  LSD, the training method, turned out to be the then latest re-packaging of what has been learned and relearned over the generations.

Training by jogging long slow distances was popularized by then Runner's World editor Joe Henderson.  At the time, Henderson noted that a number of very successful runners, mostly distance runners, people who ran anywhere from 1 mile to the marathon, were training this way.  In his book Long Slow Distance: The Humane Way to Train Henderson points out that the speed that one is capable of running is a function of genetics. You are either born fast, or for most of us, we are not. Constantly training for speed will only shave a few seconds off your basic speed. But by constantly training for speed by doing fast intervals you will inevitable injure yourself time and again and may do more damage than can be repaired.  For the great majority of runners who run for fitness and the occasional race for a personal best, is it really worth it?  Only you can decide, but the fact there is an alternative is eye-opening.

By contrast, LSD is training for endurance. You can train yourself to run for fantastic distances. The marathon has in the years since been outclassed as the world's most grueling race by iron man and ultra-marathon races up to 100 miles. I am not endorsing such extremes that test the body to the limits of what it is capable of doing.  Such extreme events carry their own problems of injury and damage. The current record, by the way, for the 100-mile race is held by Zack Bitter at a blistering 6 minute 48 second per mile pace.

Speaking of Zach Bitter, he eats a low carbohydrate, ketogenic diet for both his training and racing.  The diet is very high in animal products.  While most running and marathon training coaches still endorse a high carbohydrate diet, carb loading before races, and using carb heavy gels during races, Professor Tim Noakes has shown that using fats to fuel a race rather than glycogen and carbs is a more efficient way to run.  Even very thin runners have enough fat on their bodies to sustain a full marathon without eating a single bite and without bonking.

Following a carnivore diet. basically beef, butter, bacon and eggs, I have put Dr. Noakes finding into practice myself and find that along with jogging, it is slowly changing my body, slowing down the aging process.  It will not make me live longer, but it will allow me to live better with the time I have left.

I recently got a copy of Joe Henderson's book again and have been reading it.  The more things change, the more they stay the same, it seems.  You can also watch an interview between Henderson, now 82 years old, and two of his running desciples here. Enjoy.

Another Loss in the Formerly Great Britain

 Fay Voshell at the American Thinker today has an article entitled An Enemy Has Done This that speaks to the downfall of the Anglican Communion in the formerly Great Britain. She is writing about the recent defacement of Canterbury Cathedral by graffiti "artists" at the invitation of the Dean of the Cathedral. Like everything else in the formerly Great Britain, the elites have attempted to smear s**t on everything from literature, to art, to the religion of the people.

So much is true. But Voshell, of all people should understand that a Cathedral is not where the LORD lives, but it is in the hearts and minds of the people themselves. Voshell should go ahead and name the enemy of whom she speaks, for it is none other than the Devil himself. As in Eden, these clerics are in a childish rebellion against our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ.  That these childish, rebellious little people were allowed to put on the robes of pastors and to pollute the gospel message is an utter disgrace.

It is no wonder that the Anglican Communion has been shedding people right and left.  This happens whenever the gospel is watered down to conform to the world and its sinful nature.  In congregations where the pastors preach the true, real gospel they are growing, having children and are attracting escapees from other denominations.

And what is that true gospel?  In the words of Pastor Kevin Martin at Our Savior Lutheran Church in Raleigh, North Carolina:

The good news is not that Jesus loves you just the way you are—so you should feel good about your lousy sinful self. NO! The good news is you can feel good about Jesus, the LORD who took on all your sins, damned and died of them on the cross, so that sharing his dying and rising, by faith alone in his Gospel and sacraments, you have the promise of rising free of your lousy old sinful self, one fine day…

The good news is that just like Jesus beat the crap out of Jacob at the Jabbok last week, so he beats us—up and down—sharing his dying with us daily, so this lousy old sinner we are so sick and tired of will get drowned, engulfed, and die everyday, flooded by Baptism’s cleansing waters, fed with Jesus’ body and blood, torn down and rebuilt daily into Christ’s Image.

So, to Fay Voshell, whom I like as a writer, and if she is reading this, and to others who are thoroughly disgusted by events in the Anglican church, run, don't walk, run from there and join a congregation that preaches the true gospel message.

Congress Should Finish the Job on Recognizing Concealed Carry Permits

 How about a little gun news.  This is first and foremost a gun blog, though events have unfolded that require me to emphasize the Christian nature of self-defense and of course guns that facilitate it.  I have spoken in the past about the fact that a license to carry a firearm in public is much like a driver's license.  For example, your state of residence examines you, and determines that you have no criminal history or other disability that would prevent you from owning a handgun, and that you have taken and passed the required legal training and submitted the paperwork requirements and the fees.  I think all states have implemented some sort of mental inquiry into their examination of your qualifications.  They thereupon license you to carry a weapon in public, usually concealed.  Here's the difference; with a driver's license you can drive in any state, but with a concealed weapon permit, your rights end at the state line.

Sean Maloney at Ammoland makes the argument that America is Overdue for National Concealed Weapons Carry Reciprocity.

If you can legally carry a concealed firearm in your home state, you should be able to do the same when you travel across state lines. That’s common sense. It’s consistent with the Constitution. And thanks to the Supreme Court, it’s increasingly clear that it should be the law.

America doesn’t tell travelers to give up their First Amendment rights at a state border. It doesn’t say that Ohioans lose free speech in New Jersey, or that Texans lose Fourth Amendment protections when landing at LAX. Yet with the Second Amendment, some states act as if constitutional rights stop at their borders.

They don’t.

Gentle readers can read the entire article and are encouraged to do so. It covers such things as that concealed carriers would still have to obey local laws and that in truth concealed carriers are more law abiding than the average person. Congress regulates such things across the states all the time. Driver's licenses are just one of them. Marriages in one state are recognized in all the other states as well. What Congress has so far been unable to overcome is the minority of states, like New York and Illinois, that refuse to recognize other states licenses to carry a concealed weapon. But now, while the Republicans have a majority and a president willing to sign off on it is the time. I know, of course, that a number of RINOs would balk at it as well, but in truth it is no longer such a stretch. Most states already recognize each others permits, and Congress doing its duty is just finishing the job.

God Help Us

The American Thinker yesterday had a post by Joseph Ford Cotto entitled They want to destroy normal people: The Left's war on the Right. The "Right" here are people who just want to be left alone; to raise their families, live in peace with their neighbors, live good lives and be good citizens. They don't care about or subscribe to the multiplying causes of the Left. But the Left is determined to make them care, or to punish them for not caring.

There are moments when politics ceases to be about policy and becomes something deeper. The public reaction to Charlie Kirk’s assassination was one of those moments. Some Americans mourned; others reveled in cruelty. What emerged was not simply outrage, but a portrait of a society whose fractures now define its moral compass.

Cotto describes a recent conversation he had with his friend Paul Gottfried, editor of Chronicles magazine. Because Cotto is quoting Gottfried in many cases, the man sounds not quite sure of himself, but I think this is just him hunting for the right words to convey his thoughts.

“The dominant class comes out of the left in our dominant class in our society,” Gottfried noted. “So, so the, the right, I think is in a desperate position. I do not buy any of this nonsense to the Democratic Party.” His skepticism toward the idea of a collapsing Democratic Party underscores his larger belief: institutional control matters more than temporary polling shifts.

“I think what, it’s more important than that is hate, hatred” of “normal people who the, the left would like to destroy, take away their power,” Gottfried said. “If you have to kill them, that’s fine. We want to, we want to rid the world of them. And there’s a, there’s a hatred particularly for Western civilization and more particularly for white male Christians and, you know, are seen sort of seen as the ultimate enemies.”

That hatred, he argued, is the emotional engine of what he calls the new political religion of “wokeness.”

“I think this is the way I see wokeness. I think it’s extremely dangerous because, because of its pervasiveness and because it is able to appeal to, to a number of people throughout the western world in a way that no other movement could,” Gottfried told.

His view is stark: “The other side is winning, winning decisively. And we have to come up with a, with a strategy. The strategy is not going to be dialogue that’s long over…the question is, can you meet leftist violence with force on your side?”

Gentle readers, I urge you to read the entire article. The emphasis above is mine, as it gets to the crux of the matter.  I could go on quoting, but fair use prevents it, and in any case, Cotto does a better job than I could of explaining exactly what we are up against.  You, me, all of us who lay claim to normalcy, to being just another Bozo on the bus, have a target on our backs.  It might be easier to go along to get along, but God does not allow a middle ground.  We are either with Him unconditionally, or we are against Him.

 Gottfried is correct that the Democrat party is not done, not by a long shot. As the Democrat party has moved further and further to the Left, and the mask is coming off, we can see that what the members of the party want is totalitarian control of the population. Better to rule in hell than be a servant of God. Now, the guy down the street who votes Democrat may seem like a perfectly nice guy. He goes to the Baptist church and holds great tailgate parties when his team is in town. But he votes Dem, and the politicians he votes for want totalitarian control, and he sadly is just a useful idiot.

I keep telling people to buy guns and ammunition, and to train with those weapons. If your church does not have a security plan, perhaps it is time to put one in place. I can't see the future, and I am no prophet, but the writing on the wall says that the day is coming soon when we will have to defend ourselves, while at the same time maintaining duty to be proper images of God on earth. God help us.

AI Doesn't Know What It Is Doing

 I don't get to hear the Glenn Beck radio show ever day like I did when I was working.  But I did here one recently in which Beck was ranting about the dangers of artificial intelligence (AI) taking over the world.  According to Beck, AI would take all the jobs, and we would find ourselves with nothing to do.  I listened with interest but just couldn't get worked up.  Despite what the tech gurus want to believe, computers can never replicate, nor can they replace the human mind.

At First Things Thomas Fowler has an article entitled AI Doesn't Know What It's Doing.

Modern AI is based on ideas of human knowing that stem from the British empiricist tradition, in particular the philosophy of David Hume. Hume envisioned the body as a composite of discrete physical systems, with the senses sending their reports to the mind, which then worked on these reports. These “reports” he termed “impressions,” which gave rise to “ideas”:

I venture to affirm that the rule here holds without any exception, and that every simple idea has a simple impression, which resembles it; and every simple impression a correspondent idea.

Hume presents a theory of knowing in which ­senses deliver impressions, which we process as ideas. Once we have ideas, we can reason with them, either by means of logical inference, or directly as “matters of fact” (empirically ­grounded facts, including scientific laws). As for general ideas, they are nothing more than particular representations, connected to a certain general term. This theory quickly leads to nominalism, the belief that abstract entities do not exist and that any talk of entities such as “mankind” refers only to collections of individuals. Hume recognizes that we have such universal ideas in our minds, but they are mere labels, bearing no relation to reality. He rejects the longstanding opinion that there exist universals in themselves.

Hume was never able to explain how we arrive at forms of knowledge such as science, mathematics, and history. What “impression” gave rise to Einstein’s field equations for general relativity? Because every idea must be associated with a precedent impression resembling it, Hume could not explain how we can do something as simple as recognize a thing that is in a different position than when we first saw it—a problem that bedevils AI systems used in autonomous cars. Nor was he able to explain how it is possible to have knowledge of almost anything without recognizing abstract entities as real. For example, the statement “­Beethoven’s Fifth is a great symphony” uses abstract entities as both subject and predicate. Had there never been any performance of the notes Beethoven wrote, the statement would still be meaningful and true. And the term “great symphony” refers not to a collection of performances of music, but to a real characteristic of a certain type of music ­composition.

You see the problem, don't you? We don't really know how the human mind works, but we know it doesn't operate on a Humean model of knowledge. There is something...deeper...that drives the human mind.  We are unique in the animal kingdom in a number of ways.  The most obvious is that we know good and evil

Only in some cases, such as scientific and most historical writing, is the literal meaning of a text its principal meaning. For many works, especially works of literature and philosophy, the message or theme requires a holistic understanding of the text; it is not conveyed by any piece or excerpt that AI can scan. Often, indeed, the meaning of a work may depend on the reader’s imaginative reception of it, as is the case with poetry. And many texts have multiple levels of meaning, so that a literal reading may be true as far as it goes, while being less important than the symbolic reading. Or the real meaning of a text may be the exact opposite of its surface meaning, as in satirical writing. The purpose of much theological and ­poetic writing is to open a window onto a numinous world, and texts in disciplines such as philosophy may depend entirely on abstract ideas and entities. The reader of any of these kinds of texts must be able to perceive the reality behind the words—reading and understanding the entire text (including very abstract ideas and what they entail or imply), taking into consideration the writer’s goal, presuppositions, and biases, and then relating the work to others in order to ascertain its thoroughness, accuracy, and contribution value. Only thus can a thorough view of the subject emerge.

On this ground alone, it is plain that large language models will never replicate human knowing. AI can parrot what real minds have thought and said on these topics, and thus sound intelligent. What it cannot do is understand material.

...snip...

The goal of human knowing is always to know something about reality, regardless of whether that knowledge has operational value. By contrast, neither an animal nor an AI seeks the reality of the real. AI must employ symbols, which have no meaning except that assigned to them by someone outside the computer system. The implication for the uniqueness of humans is straightforward. Those who would assimilate humans to computers use an argument with this compound premise: Humans are material only and Human functions can be reduced to algorithms. The conclusion is, Computers can duplicate human minds. But if computers cannot duplicate human minds, then it follows that either (or both) Humans are not material only or ­Human functions cannot be reduced to algorithms. These are fairly momentous points, and they suggest one reason why understanding what computers can and cannot do is important.

Human knowing operates on a principle that is radically different from AI’s Humean paradigm. Humans know by means of an integrated system of sensing, motor skills, and the brain. We have direct contact with reality, and we are able to know realities that exist beyond the realities we ­immediately perceive. This form of knowing is supremely ­creative. It encompasses the way in which we understand situations we have never encountered and generate new theories about reality. Humans can “think outside the box”; AI cannot. AI can, of course, generate “ideas,” understood in the rather limited sense of data structures or random chatbot statements. That is not how humans develop new theories or deal with unexpected situations. Our perception of reality is unlike anything that can be achieved by any paradigm based on separation of functions. AI algorithms cannot creatively and analytically think through a question, using information learned from reading and research, bringing to bear a critical eye for discerning what is valuable and a perception of reality for synthesizing new ideas. They can only ape human intelligence. The AI paradigm reacts to stimuli in the form of sense-type data or website texts; it cannot react, except very indirectly, to any underlying reality. It does not know what it is doing.

Children learn, say arithmetic, by first memorizing tables of examples. 1+1=2. 1+2=3 and so forth. It gets more complicated, for instance 3+3=6, but 3x2 also equals 6. Slowly they begin to know what they are doing, why they are doing it, and to understand. Computers may be able to replicate these feats, but they will never understand. Which is why I do not fear AI, though I do believe that it will present many problems. In the end, it is just another tool, to be used for good and (sadly) for ill.

Don't Cry For Them America

 You young whippersnappers may not remember that the United States once owned the Panama Canal and leased a huge strip of land on either side of it called the Canal Zone.  Then our second worst president, one Jimmy Carter gave it away to the Panamanian dictator Omar Torrijos.  I realize that is not the official way it works, but that is the effect, nonetheless.  In the process he made us much less secure.

Anyway, in the mid-1980s Mrs. PolyKahr and I were detailed to Panama for a tour of duty with the Navy Department.  We have fond memories of our life in Panama, a third world country.  But even then, we realized it would have been far less enjoyable had we just gone and lived on the economy.  And of course, while we were there, we visited Costa Rica, another third world country.

It was thus amusing to me to read about a leftist who fled the country out of fear of the Trump administration to Costa Rica. It gives new meaning to the term FAFO.  You can read all about it at Watch: LA Lib Fled Trump to Costa Rica, Now She's Glad to Live Under Him Again if She Can Just Come Home at the Western Journal.

“I regret moving to Costa Rica,” she said. “It’s a beautiful country. I love the nature and wildlife.”

“But moving to a third-world country where I don’t know the language, I don’t have any connections, resources, or opportunities — that didn’t make my life any easier.”

(sarcasm on) Really? You don't say. (sarcasm off) While our time in Panama was wonderful for us, we always realized that we were privileged because we were Americans. We had access to books, and media that the Panamanians did not have. Of course, our salaries with the Navy were much better than the locals enjoyed.  We took a vacation to Europe later, after returning to the United States, and found that for all that the first world pretends to sophistication and being better than we Americans are, it was less than we had at home. For instance, our usual hotels like the Holiday Inn would qualify as 4 stars in Europe.

“It’s so weird to want to move to America right now with everything that’s going on,” she whined. “But I just left so many privileges and resources behind. And I want them back! It sucks!”

The woman said she first visited Costa Rica at age 17, when she went on a luxury vacation with her wealthy high school friends.

The woman — who now appears to be in her late-20s or early-30s — discovered that the rest of Costa Rica is not like a five-star, luxury resort.

“Now that I’ve traveled, I’ve seen, like, real poverty,” she said. “And I’m like, ‘Oh, I wasn’t poor.’”

Again, one wants to respond with sarcasm, but in truth this woman, and the one who fled to Africa have been buffaloed by the media. It is sad, to be sure, and yet they have allowed the media to do it to them.  Here is the hard lesson that the Left has yet to learn.  America is great when most of us are not seeking power and control but being (imperfect) imagers of God on earth.  We all need to be more grateful for what we have and stop complaining about what we don't have.  The United States is truly the best country in the world.

At the same time, we also need to have consequences for bad actors.  That is another thing that made America great: it was relatively safer than either the third world, or Europe.  We need to apply the laws we already have evenly and without prejudice.  So, these people who fled have made their bed and now they should sleep in it.  We don't need such people.  As for illegal aliens, drug dealers, gang members and other criminals, we have laws, and we should apply them.  Sadly, the same applies to Muslims.  Like it or not, they want to change our laws to sharia.  Sharia is not compatible with our Constitutional Republic.  Frankly, Muslims should either move to an Islamic country or convert to Christianity.

Oh, and by the way, Trump is doing nothing to frighten any American.  

The Origin of the Modern Round of Terrorism

 In anticipation of receiving the book by Raymond Ibrahim entitled The Two Swords of Christ , I have been studying up on Islam again. My previous studies have led me to believe that Islam is a Satanic manifestation of corrupted Christianity. I think the break came during the controversy over the Arian heresy. The followers of Arius believed that Jesus was not divine. The Nicaean creed was written to affirm in no uncertain terms the Orthodox belief that Jesus was God and that the one God was three persons, Father Son and Holy Ghost. Beyond believing the Trinitarian Godhead, the idea cannot really be explained without falling into the trap of other heresies. It is something we just accept. The disciples of Arius were driven into the Arabian desert rather than giving up their heresy. Such is the sin of pride.

Today, at the American Thinker James Zumwalt has an interesting post entitled Islam's anti-Western terrorist campaign triggered by a holiday song. It wasn't just the song, though. It was...horror of horrors...can I say it...dancing! And not just dancing, but dancing cheek to cheek!

It was 1948. Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian political theorist and revolutionary who was seeking to escape persecution in his own country, came to the U.S. to study at Colorado State College. He settled in Greeley, Colorado, where its residents sought to welcome him.

Locals invited Qutb to attend a church social. He did so, but witnessed something that turned him into a raging anti-West jihadist. So irrationally profound was the impact upon him, it caused him to return to Egypt in 1951, committed to promote a violent anti-West, pro-Islamist ideology.

What possibly could have occurred at—of all places—a church social to so enrage him?

The fuse was lit when Qutb observed young couples take to the dance floor, embracing each other as a song was played. Writing about it later, he made his description of this event sound like a scene from a cheap sex novel. He claimed a “sedative atmosphere” permeated the room as lights were dimmed and the band played.

The song was a popular 1949 hit that won the 1950 Academy Award for “Best Original Song”. Its slow beat had couples embracing each other on the dance floor. Qutb reported the mere sight of these couples with their arms around each other caused him to feel scandalized by the “romantic, dreamy effect” and the “swarming legs.”

The name of the song triggering his disdain was one we still recognize today titled, “Baby, It’s Cold Outside!”

Gentle readers are encouraged to read the entire post. Qutb was a prolific writer and formulated what came to be called "Qutbism" or Islamic Fascism. This marriage between Islamic terrorism and Leftism, is what is taking the United States down currently, and it seems Europe will be lost. Both forces are Satanic in origin, seeking to destroy what God has built. And while I hate Islam and what it does to men, to women and to children, I pray for Muslims themselves. As Christ himself said, they know not what they do.

The difference between Judaism/Christianity and Islam can be seen in Genesis chapter 32, where Jacob wrestles all night with God. Let's just say that the battle was epic, but of course Jacob didn't win...or did he? God did indeed bless him and gave him a new name: Israel. What one may miss in this story is that God, YHWH, became incarnate as the second person of the Trinity to be able to wrestle with Jacob. It is this incarnate God who died on the cross for our sins and promises us eternal life with Him.

A lot could be written about just this one event, and indeed it has. But importantly, contrast this with the god of Islam. He does not want to wrestle with mere mortals but demands obedience. Islam means submission. But he is a trickster, and a deceiver so nobody knows where they stand with him. They just hope they do enough to make him happy. But is Satan ever happy?

New Evidence Confirms Jesus Resurrection

While I was raised in the Lutheran church, the fact is that I spent some time being, at best, an agnostic.  Why that is requires a bit of a story.

The pastor who confirmed us at the age of 13 (we had relatively larges confirmation classes then) so emphasized the many sins we all participated in, and the consequences of those sins, that I was convinced that God could never accept me. If He hated sin and sinners alike, He wouldn't want me anywhere near Him. Our pastor did not talk about the "grace" side of the equation. Believing that I was already sentenced to hell, I might as well have some fun along the way.  College of course did not help.  Getting married too young did not help either.  I got divorced 10 years later and remarried.  I was materially fairly successful, but I was also hollowed out inside.  There was no purpose to life.

That was the beginning of my search for...what I wasn't quite sure.  T. S. Eliot's poem Ash Wednesday haunted me during these years. There Biblical references abound, but secular readers and critics will not see them, which is too bad. We joined a church in Virginia, and I attended there for a while, but I was not ready to fully embrace the One who would save me. That required a bout with alcohol addiction. and a book called The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. Lee Strobel is a journalist and investigator who was initially atheist, but became a Christian on the basis of his investigation into the man Jesus.  Strobel pointed out that the canonical writings in the Bible were written within 60 years of the actual events by eye witnesses to the events.  This is better than many other texts that are readily accepted though they were written hundreds of years after the facts contained in them.

All that was many years ago now. I passed on Strobel's book to another who was seeking something he could not define. But Strobel is still at it. You can see a video of an interview of him here. I hope gentle viewers will watch it.

To the Glory of God

 Helen Louise Herndon, in an article at the American Thinker today reminds us all that there is a right way, a Christian way, to act in times when the world seems to spin out of control. The article is titled Resist Evil Without Pride and Without Hatred.

I must confess that too often I have been guilty of pride and of hatred. I am sometimes proud that I have a greater understanding of the Biblical truth of Jesus Christ. But of course, what I have is what I have been told and taught. I have a great body of people who share and reinforce the same ideas. Someone born in, say, Iran who finds the truth of Christ has much greater faith and greater courage than I, who just follow where I am led. Is it any wonder that they believe as they do when they have been taught to believe that way from the day they were born? Clearly I haven't any reason to be proud since this great gift has been handed to me. I have done nothing to earn it.

Few Muslims are willing to debate, and frankly, why should they. Christianity has been put through the ringer by both atheist and Christian scholars, and has come out the other side stronger than ever. Islam is only now under the same scrutiny, and it is showing itself to be utter nonsense. I take some pride here too, but again, I have not done anything of which to be proud. And archeological evidence keeps turning up that show that events mentioned in the Bible happened where and in the way that the Bible says they did. Now knowing that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed as the Bible says they were does not prove that God did it. That is a matter of faith. It always comes down to faith, and even that I have only because He blessed me with it. So, I have no reason at all for pride, no reason to boast. It has all been given to be as a great gift.

I have also experienced hatred for things done to others by Muslims. When Raymond Ibrahim mentions the burning of Coptic churches in Egypt for instance, I feel my sense of indignation rising. When I hear of 70,000 Nigerian Christians being tortured and killed, I feel hatred for these people. It is the same when I hear of Syrian Christians being tortured and murdered.  But then, how can one blame others for believing what they are taught. Do I not do the same? Indeed, my real hatred is for those who continue to push a Leftist agenda, when history shows that it has failed each and every time. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Mussolini, the Castro brothers, and Venezuela, it always ends in misery. It even failed in the United States in places like Oneida, NY. And yet the Marxist dream seems to find willing adherents in every generation. But hatred is not the answer.

In the book of Luke, Chapter 22, verse 36 Jesus tells the disciples to sell their cloaks and by a sword. The disciples respond that they have two, and Jesus says that is enough. We interpret this to mean that we need to combat the evil in this world on two levels. One is on this plane of existence with the material weapons of this world, the other is spiritually with the weapons of the spiritual world. We should certainly have and be ready to use guns and other weapons if needed. But more often, we must act, as the villagers in the story Herndon wrote about acted, to defend and save others through the giving of ourselves "for the glory of God."

As these two concepts progress in my own thinking, both lead to the same goal: “To the glory of God.” Whether Christian or Jewish, as people of faith, seeking to save a race of people chosen for extermination, an unborn child from premature death, a society from bigotry and racism, and antisemitism, the family unit from extinction, or current political violence, we must be ever mindful that the battle of spiritual warfare can only be waged with spiritual weapons and spiritual wisdom.

Between the Left and Islam, Can the West Survive?

 Andrea Widburg has noted that the West in general, and the United States in particular are under attack from two sources: the Left and Islam. She lays out her case at the American Thinker in a post entitled 21st-century Armageddon: Across the West, something evil this way comes. Each "religion" is using the other.  The Left is using Islam as its military wing and as foot soldiers, in addition to terrorist groups like Antifa.  Once in power, the Left plans to dispose of the Muslims.  Widburg's money though is on the Muslims.  For its part, Islam is using the Left's open borders and immigration policies to further its conquest of the whole world. Again, once they are in power, the godless Left can be disposed of.

For almost 2,000 years, the Christian faith has been the backbone of Western society. Growing from the Jewish Bible, the Catholic Church shaped Europe. Eventually, both the Catholic and Protestant faiths found their way to the New World, carrying with them the Bible and European values.

Although imperfect people often used Christianity for bad ends, it was still the moral force that led to a world where its respect for the individual led to unparalleled prosperity for all, along with previously unimagined safety and rights for women, children, and other vulnerable people.

Over the centuries, Christianity faced down Islam, which emerged from the Arabian desert in the 7th century. Unlike Christianity, Islam is doctrinally a religion of conquest. Christ advocated persuasion through words and deeds. It was human rulers who added conquest to the mix.

By contrast, the Koran, which represents the unchallengeable words of Mohamed, the “perfect man,” mandates that Islam’s believers strap on their swords (and, today, bombs and guns), and go forth and murder people into “submission.” It has a special animus for Jews, since they offended Mohamed by refusing to accept him as their messiah, but it’s very clear that, eventually, all must yield to its violent dictates.

Let's stop right there for a moment and note that we are actually talking about two very different gods, here. The God we read about in the Bible, YHWH, is the Christian God. Jews and Christians both worship YHWH. While He is no pacifist, he also does not condone murder, either on a personal level, or state sponsored. So Christian jihad is not in the cards.  Persuasion is.  At the same time, he insists on self defense and thus condones "just war." The Muslims' idea of convert or die is anathema to Him. By contrast, the god of Islam sanctions all sorts of behavior that YHWY finds abominable including pederasty, rape, stealing, murder and I could go on. I think it is fair to call Islam Satanic.

Just as Satan apes God, so Sharia is the ape of the just law of God. But Sharia is just a bunch of tribal rules writ large. Rape, raiding and murder of other tribes was just the norm in ancient Arabia, and these were rewritten as something you now do for your god. How great is that? And if you raid, and rape, and kill enough, you get 72 virgins who are ever new, and you will never tire out. How great is that? Islam is obviously a false religion, but its promise of infinite sex in the next life is enough to get men to kill and be killed.

Europe’s love affair with socialism started with the French Revolution, which was the antithesis of the American Revolution. The American Revolution enshrined individual liberty derived from a Biblical creator; the French Revolution was a ferociously anti-religious statism. The American Revolution created the most successful nation in history, a success Americans freely shared with the rest of the world. The French Revolution created...um, modern France.

Marx and Engels took socialism to the next level. They believed that an all-powerful state would eventually fulfill people’s material needs, allowing them to become their own gods, freed from the limitations of Biblical morality—a morality expressed in the Seven Noahide laws, the Ten Commandments, Jesus’s teachings, and Paul’s ministry. In the modern era, people are also being told that their state-derived god-like status will relieve them of the burdens of human biology itself.

Socialism, however, did not create Paradise. In the 20th century, it created 100 million dead in concentration camps, gulags, killing fields, battlefields, and the black hole of chronic poverty, starvation, and tyranny. It has never worked. But the true believers did something very clever: They gained access to the West’s media and education systems. And so, despite socialism’s unending list of failures, it has an equally unending source of acolytes.

All together, the United States is under extreme attack from Leftists, who advocate for criminals, illegal aliens, unlimited abortion, drug gangs, and on and on. Add to that we have now within our borders, indeed within our Congress itself, Muslims who advocate for the destruction of our laws in favor of their tribal laws. Can we survive? Ultimately, it is all in God's hands. Let us hope to be worthy of being saved, because we can not do it ourselves.