35 thoughts on “News/Politics 5-24-23

  1. Impeach Wray and cut off the money.

    Do your damn job Republicans!

    “FBI refuses to provide subpoenaed document on alleged Biden ‘criminal scheme’

    The agency refused to provide the document Monday in a private meeting with the House Oversight Committee”


    “The Federal Bureau of Investigation failed to turn over a document subpoenaed by House Republicans that allegedly details a bribery scheme from then-Vice President Joe Biden.

    The agency refused to provide the document Monday in a private meeting with the House Oversight and Accountability Committee. The unclassified FD-1023 document details criminal allegations of a pay-to-play scheme related to the Biden family’s business dealings, according to a whistleblower at the agency who spoke with Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

    Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., who chairs the Oversight Committee, issued the subpoena to the FBI, which previously failed to provide the document by a May 10 deadline. Comer said he wants to work with Senate Republicans to hold the FBI’s budget “hostage” until the agency gets new leadership or provides the document.

    “They don’t respect anyone in Congress,” Comer said Monday on Fox News. “They’ve been able to get away with this for a long time. The media continues to turn a blind eye. The Senate Republicans continue to fund the FBI. Why would you change your business model when you’re getting everything you want?”

    House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said he had a call with FBI Director Christopher Wray on Friday and is confident the agency will eventually provide the document.

    “I explained to the director that we will do everything in our power, and we have the jurisdiction over the FBI, and we have the right to see this document,” McCarthy said Sunday on Fox News. “I believe after this call, we will get this document.”

    Comer said Monday he has spoken with McCarthy about holding Wray under contempt if he does not comply.”

    Just do it already.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Looks like HRW was wrong again. They are whistleblowers, and they were retaliated against, as the IRS chief now admits too.

    “IRS Chief: I Didn’t Retaliate Against Hunter Biden Probe Whistleblowers—It Was the DOJ”


    “In response to the whistleblowers who alleged that the IRS gave preferential treatment to first son Hunter Biden being abruptly taken off the case last week in what appeared to be an obvious retaliatory move, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Daniel Werfel said that it wasn’t his call.

    Instead, it was the Department of Justice.

    No surprise there, considering we’re living under probably the most politicized DOJ in our history, one that routinely applies two different standards depending on which side of the political aisle someone stands on.

    In a letter to the House Ways and Means Committee dated May 17 and obtained by Fox News, the commissioner explains what went down:

    “I want to state unequivocally that I have not intervened—and will not intervene—in any way that would impact the status of any whistleblower,” Werfel said.

    “The IRS whistleblower you reference alleges that the change in their work assignment came at the direction of the Department of Justice. As a general matter and not in reference to any specific case, I believe it is important to emphasize that in any matter involving federal judicial proceedings, the IRS follows the direction of the Justice Department.” [Bolding mine.]

    I love that phrase, “change in work assignment.” We know that means the whistleblower was punished and given some junk job like mopping the closets. Werfel proceeded to use the tactic that it seems all agency heads who appear before Congress use. Namely, cite the desperate need for secrecy:

    “When I first learned of the allegations of retaliation referenced in your letter and in media reports on May 16, 2023, I contacted the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). In light of laws and policies designed to protect the integrity of pending proceedings, I am unable to provide details on this matter,” Werfel wrote.

    As RedState‘s Bonchie reported last week, a whistleblower claimed that the entire IRS team working on the Hunter Biden probe was removed from the case. The whistleblower’s attorneys formally alleged that the move was “clearly retaliatory” in a letter to Congress soon after.

    The apparent punishment is in stark reality to what Werfel promised in the past:”

    “In an April 27 appearance before the committee, the commissioner said “I can say without any hesitation there will be no retaliation for anyone making an allegation or a call to a whistleblower hotline.”

    That didn’t age well.”

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Funny how it all benefits one side, huh?

    “D-D-D-D-DANG! A lot of Strange Magic going on with voter rolls and registrations lately…”


    “I do not know how it feels to be a Democratic official, to whom the improbable and miraculous seem to be daily occurrences. Most times, it appears that even if malfeasance is blatantly obvious as a root cause of said miracle, an “Oops,” or “Mistakes were made/lessons learned” or similar pablum is enough to extricate said officials or officials from any serious jeopardy. Then on they go to the next wonderous happening to appear out of the blue. Excuses, mind you, that would never in a million years fly for the opposition should they find themselves in similar circumstances.

    Getting busted on something blatant is a bump in the road to political dominance for Democrats.

    It’s been a good couple weeks for examples.

    The biggest miracle of the week was in the Republican stronghold of Nassau County, New York.

    It was MAGIC.

    Human Error Turns Every Registered Nassau County Voter Democrat
    A spokesperson called it “an isolated event, but we apologize for our mistake, especially to Nassau County officials, who bear no responsibility for this problem”


    …Many voters in the GOP-leaning Long Island county got their voter ID cards in the mail on Tuesday, and a half-million who got their cards saw a pretty glaring typo: All the cards say voters are registered Democrats, when in fact they might be Republican, independent or members of another political party.

    And with the primary a month away, the mistake is sparking confusion.

    It has the potential to be more than “confusion” for primary voters. If I’m reading NY state election law right, they are still a closed primary state, which means you have to be registered to the party for the primary you wish to vote in. Now, if they don’t get this squared away lickety spilt, there might be Republicans (or others) turned away at polling stations who were rightfully registered to the GOP but could this have jacked up their registration? In some cases, I could see this confusing folks who didn’t even look at the card they received – or perhaps even just disgusting them so – that the primary has a big old shadow cast over it in any event.

    So odd how these sorts of snafus never happen on the GOP side of the registrations – like, say, turning all of Manhattan red.

    …For one registered Republican, the typo now has him questioning the election process.

    “I have no faith in this country today, as far as what the politics are,” said George Klein. “I’m going to vote Republican primary day, and Democrat on that is not going to affect it.”

    Just what we need – more bad faith engendered with the election process. Even something as simple as a registration/polling place card can be the catalyst for a person to flip out. There’s no excuse that it’s not right the first time.

    In Colorado Springs, Colorado, this past week, a really acrimonious run-off election for mayor saw Democrat and Nigerian immigrant Yemi Mobolade triumph over his opponent, GOP candidate Wayne Williams. Even though Mobolade had been endorsed by both Dems and Republicans, and beat Williams by about 20K votes, there are lingering questions in the air because of something the CO secretary of state’s office had done last September.


    Liked by 1 person

  4. Williams and his wife Holly are deep in the pockets of developers here. He aligned himself with SOS Jen Griswold during the Biden vote grab saying our elections are safe and fraud could never happen! Holly is supposed to represent my district within the county… she does not….she represents developers not constituents. They both enjoy their government paychecks and perks.
    Yemi came to this country as a child. His family was sponsored by the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Will he be a strong mayor ? Time will tell. I didn’t get to vote because we live in the county.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. I am not sure why your quote from the designer at Target makes a difference, Kizzie. The only thing it really shows is the erroneous view that we can use names and terms and personally deem what they mean according to our own inclinations. How others perceive the names and terms on items can be totally different, too, under this worldview. Whatever, it is introducing evil to young children and certainly unnecessary. It is not surprising to anyone who has seen the trend. Just absolutely sad. That they remove ‘some’ items is not much of a victory. Two steps forward and one back still leads to victory eventually. In this case, it is a victory to capture the minds and hearts of children. We vote with our pocketbook whether we want to or not.

    The pros or cons of Capitalism is totally irrelevant to the discussion. No one who supports Capitalism supports freely buying and selling anything and everything. Nor are any countries that support it, let alone ours, against any and all regulation.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. apologies, that was me.

    ~ … The Bible shows believers as holding important posts in pagan governments — think of Joseph and Daniel in the Old Testament. Christians should be involved politically as a way of loving our neighbors, whether they believe as we do or not. To work for better public schools or for a justice system not weighted against the poor or to end racial segregation requires political engagement. Christians have done these things in the past and should continue to do so.

    Nevertheless, while believers can register under a party affiliation and be active in politics, they should not identify the Christian church or faith with a political party as the only Christian one. There are a number of reasons to insist on this.

    One is that it gives those considering the Christian faith the strong impression that to be converted, they need not only to believe in Jesus but also to become members of the (fill in the blank) Party. It confirms what many skeptics want to believe about religion — that it is merely one more voting bloc aiming for power.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. … ~ Another reason not to align the Christian faith with one party is that most political positions are not matters of biblical command but of practical wisdom. This does not mean that the church can never speak on social, economic and political realities, because the Bible often does. Racism is a sin, violating the second of the two great commandments of Jesus, to “love your neighbor.” The biblical commands to lift up the poor and to defend the rights of the oppressed are moral imperatives for believers. For individual Christians to speak out against egregious violations of these moral requirements is not optional.

    However, there are many possible ways to help the poor. Should we shrink government and let private capital markets allocate resources, or should we expand the government and give the state more of the power to redistribute wealth? Or is the right path one of the many possibilities in between? The Bible does not give exact answers to these questions for every time, place and culture.

    I know of a man from Mississippi who was a conservative Republican and a traditional Presbyterian. He visited the Scottish Highlands and found the churches there as strict and as orthodox as he had hoped. No one so much as turned on a television on a Sunday. Everyone memorized catechisms and Scripture. But one day he discovered that the Scottish Christian friends he admired were (in his view) socialists. Their understanding of government economic policy and the state’s responsibilities was by his lights very left-wing, yet also grounded in their Christian convictions. He returned to the United States not more politically liberal but, in his words, “humbled and chastened.” He realized that thoughtful Christians, all trying to obey God’s call, could reasonably appear at different places on the political spectrum, with loyalties to different political strategies.

    This emphasis on package deals puts pressure on Christians in politics. For example, following both the Bible and the early church, Christians should be committed to racial justice and the poor, but also to the understanding that sex is only for marriage and for nurturing family. One of those views seems liberal and the other looks oppressively conservative. The historical Christian positions on social issues do not fit into contemporary political alignments.

    So Christians are pushed toward two main options. One is to withdraw and try to be apolitical. The second is to assimilate and fully adopt one party’s whole package in order to have your place at the table. Neither of these options is valid. In the Good Samaritan parable told in the Gospel of Luke, Jesus points us to a man risking his life to give material help to someone of a different race and religion. Jesus forbids us to withhold help from our neighbors, and this will inevitably require that we participate in political processes. If we experience exclusion and even persecution for doing so, we are assured that God is with us (Matthew 5:10-11) and that some will still see our “good deeds and glorify God” (1 Peter 2:11-12). If we are only offensive or only attractive to the world and not both, we can be sure we are failing to live as we ought.

    The Gospel gives us the resources to love people who reject both our beliefs and us personally. Christians should think of how God rescued them. He did it not by taking power but by coming to earth, losing glory and power, serving and dying on a cross. How did Jesus save? Not with a sword but with nails in his hands. ~

    Liked by 2 people

  8. I don’t see political parties as being “Christian” parties. It has been quite clear in the past few elections there is a choice of good over evil. I said “good” not “perfect”.
    How anyone can aligned themselves with the Democrat platform is beyond my comprehension. And I know there are some on here that have the same thoughts concerning voting for the man with orange hair and an outrageous ego.
    That being said, I do not align myself with a man nor a party. If one party stands for life, liberty , truth and the pursuit of justice and freedom under God…well I’m there.
    The other party with screaming constituents leaving GOD out of there official declaration….then screaming to keep the murder of innocent lives in the womb and those just delivered…well I’m out. A blind eye is turned at their evil, cheating, lying, criminal activity by all….as long as Trump isn’t in there all’s right with the world because God is in control. Let’s not stand for what is right and true … because God is in control.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. “The call was super quick, it was 15 minutes. The first 10 minutes was about how to keep your team safe and not having to advocate for Target. The last five was, ‘Move this to the back, take down the mannequins and remove the signage,’” the source told Fox.
    In response to the controversy, Target announced that it has also removed some products from its stores, which reportedly include a sweater that read “cure transphobia not trans people” and a “too queer for here” tote bag.
    “Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and well-being while at work,” Target said on Tuesday. ”Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior.”

    Volatile circumstances like boycotting? Hmmmm

    Liked by 1 person

  10. But NJ: “How anyone can aligned themselves with the Democrat platform is beyond my comprehension. ”

    No, there’s no formal “Christian” party, but in effect, is there not one now?

    It’s a matter of what “hill” we will die on. The faith should be that hill, not a political position or opinion. The Republican Party has become so identified with evangelicalism that it’s an issue we all are facing.

    One can biblically argue the issues, even capitalism I think, from some biblical principals. But it’s not the hill we die on, it does not — or should not — ever define the Christian faith and some of those domestic political views should best be held “loosely” to some degree. In this country, we have (I believe) some confusion that takes place on that issue.

    Especially in election season.


  11. There is never an excuse for making threats. Boycotts are not in the same vein, whatsoever. I have never thought any party is the ‘Christian’ party. However, I wonder how many people bother to even read the platforms and think through their vote. Regardless, of what anyone says, most politicians are held to what their platforms outline. Some brave souls do try to straddle the line.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Both parties fall way short of the Scriptures. Again, fallen world, fallen people.

    We vote our conscience, we pray, we argue (respectfully) in the public square if we feel called to do that.

    The rest, as NJ says — well, all of it, really — is under God’s providence. Even when our “side” loses. All for a larger purpose.


  13. Kathaleena – The only reason I pointed out what I did yesterday was because the person’s own words were being ignored, first by the tweet (although if someone clicked on the photos in the tweet, the whole quote appears), and then the Washington Examiner article skipped over that paragraph in quoting him.

    Often, the part of a quote that mitigates the whole (completely or at least somewhat) is left out to make the quote seem more egregious than it is. That happens with media on both sides of the spectrum. To my way of thinking, if we dislike it when a liberal source does that to a conservative voice, then we should also dislike it when a conservative source does it to a liberal voice.

    As I tried to make clear in my first comment on it, I was not advocating for that person, but see them as deluded. (“They don’t know what they are doing/saying. 😦”)


  14. NJ – In case you missed it, this was my reply to you last night: “My source is what AJ posted at 8:47am. If you click on the photo of the tweet, then on the tweet itself when it comes up, and then click on the photo, the whole quote appears.”


  15. … Question: How do we respond when it appears that “good” is losing?

    Not an easy thing.

    But again, it’s the larger view, the Scriptural lens, that keeps even that in proper perspective.

    Yes, God has a purpose in all of that (and judgement sometimes is one of those purposes, though it isn’t for us to “know” what He is doing).

    Christians throughout the ages have all had to deal with things going sideways in sometimes the worst ways. Through that, our call is to keep the faith.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Since the concept of righteous anger came up recently, I was thinking about that this morning as I went about my morning duties. Here are my thoughts, if anyone cares. 😀

    (Please excuse me if any of this sounds lecture-y. It is hard to share these thoughts without coming across that way.)

    It seems to me that righteous anger should be expressed righteously, however that can look in a given discussion. Calling one’s opponents certain epithets may feel good, but is that a righteous way of reacting?

    The Bible tells us to have the fruit of the Spirit control our words, thoughts, and actions. When Christians put down their non-Christian opponents – (such as accusing them of lying rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt that they may be mistaken, or that the Christian himself may be mistaken and not realize it) – is that exhibiting the fruit of the Spirit?

    Or reacting to fellow believers in a similar way, such as attributing bad motives to them? That is not how believers should treat each other.

    Another thought that came to me this morning was how often some Christians will use the story of Jesus turning over the moneychangers’ tables in the temple to excuse their harsh words or “righteous anger”. But it strikes me that Jesus’ righteous anger was aimed at those in His own religion, His own “tribe”, so to speak. He did not go into pagan temples and tear them down. What He was righteously angry about was not politics or a difference in theology or opinion, but that those moneychangers were desecrating His Father’s house.

    Even if we have what we think is a legitimate dispute with a fellow believer, there are plenty of scriptures about how to treat each other – with grace, self-control, and in a spirit of love. We should also remember Psalm 4:4a – “Be angry, and do not sin.”

    Well, these are the thoughts that came to me this morning. I don’t feel like I expressed them quite as well as I would like, and again, I apologize for any lecture-y tone. God bless.


  17. Alton Mills spent 29 years in jail for drug trafficking. The judge was forced to give him life due to mandatory minimums and three strike laws. Its an excessive sentence for the crime. If he was sentenced to a lesser term say 5 years would he have returned to drug dealing – perhaps. Did he emerge from 29 years of prison a more violent man? – most likely. Criminal justice reform is still needed.


  18. A whistleblower who has disappeared alleges that a document exists which will prove the existence of the Biden “crime family”. Perhaps the FBI isn’t handing over the document because they don’t know if it exists or which FD 1023 document the whistleblower is referring to. I’d like to see them indict Wray over this – they would have to provide the evidence to prove their own allegations.

    Comer admitted 9 out of 10 whistleblowers were missing, in court or in jail. Is the whistleblower referenced in Red State the one they could find? Although if you read the IRS Chief’s actual words, he has no idea who the whistleblower is or if they exist. The chief said “he would not intervene in any way that would impact the status of any whistle blower”. He’s making a general statement there. Then he said the whitsleblower the committee references “alleges that the
    change in work assignment came at the direction of the DOJ” Again its obvious the IRS chief has no idea who the whistleblower is or if they exist.

    If the whistleblower has already been punished, he has nothing to lose by testifying so where is he? And where are the others?

    Meanwhile Gaetz produced his whistleblowers but did not release the transcripts of the statements they gave the Republicans. Again not much of a blown whistle if they aren’t being released.


  19. Why do US voter cards list your party membership or support? I’d think you’d like to keep that secret just like your ballot. Have the parties run their own primaries and keep their own lists, don’t have the state or gov’t know your political preferences.

    DJ’s story of the man from Mississippi finding his Scottish Prysbeterian co-relgionists to be socialist reminds me that the political spectrum is different throughout the world and even within one country. Often what we think are political ideas grounded in our belief system are mere products of the environment we live in. And often American Christians are an exception to how Christians elsewhere adhere politically and economically. Health care would be the easiest example; only American evangelicals argue against state provided or run health care. Meanwhile in Europe, its the Christian Democrat parties that established universal health care and in Canada it was a Methodist preacher turned politician.


  20. Do we suppose some see one party in particular is saturated with “evangelicals” for a reason? Perhaps because that party publicly is not ashamed to speak the name of God? To stand for life? Stand for a moral character more than the other parties? Why should we not expect Christians to vote that way?
    And yes some of us have seen it all go south politically when those in whom we have no confidence nor respect take over. Such as what is happening now….there was Bush, Clinton, Obama…and now the worst of the worst….a “President” who clearly is and has been in mental decline for years! Oh how the left was aghast when Regan was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s…..”just think of the decisions he was making as President”!! Oh the hypocrisy!!!
    God is in control and that does not negate our standing for truth during an election.

    “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

    Liked by 2 people

  21. And I agree Kathaleena that there is never cause for violence or harassment such as … BLM comes to mind.
    I do believe the corporate heads are trying to make it sound as though the opposers of their marketing ploy are violent and hunting them down like a dog. I have seen no such reports.
    Not shopping there (which I do not anyway) is a hill I’m willing to die on.

    Kizzie I didn’t see the quote cited. Who published the quote? And is that source of quoting reliable? See what happens when everyone decides which source is credible..discernment …..

    Liked by 2 people

  22. NJ – It was in the tweet that AJ shared yesterday (his third post). I clicked on the tweet, and from there, clicked on the tweet that it was retweeting. I don’t know how else to describe how to get to it.

    Let’s see if I can copy that page here:


  23. Well, that takes us to the tweet AJ shared. Now if you click on the text that is shown, it should bring you to the whole quote.


  24. Just got around to reading this today. From Cal Thomas:

    “Not only does a soft answer turn away wrath, but to quote Mary Poppins, “A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.” Dissuading secularists of the stereotype that Christians are humorless, hall-monitor types has been a lifelong practice of mine. You would be surprised how many doors it opens, leading to many honest questions.”

    There was a liberal commentator, Bob Beckel, whom Thomas befriended (rather than treating as an ideological enemy). Eventually, after some serious trouble in Beckel’s life, Thomas led him to the Lord. Thomas would not have had the credibility to Beckel if he had treated him like an enemy, with various insults that are so popular these days.


  25. NJ — God is in control and that does not negate our standing for truth during an election.

    I haven’t seen anyone here argue against that statement.

    Standing for truth may be seen differently by individuals when weighing various candidates in different elections, however.

    And HRW @3:17 makes the point the author of my earlier post was also making; we see things here through our own national lens and experience and that’s fine. But our faith is global — every nation, and tribes, and peoples, and tongues — and so on issues not specifically laid out by Scripture, there will be some differences.

    Those can be debated respectfully, but should be viewed with grace.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. I hit that tweet thing and this is what I see:

    “Satan is hope, compassion, equality, and love. So, naturally, Satan respects pronouns. He loves all LGBTQIA+ people. I went with a variation of Baphomet for this design, a deity who themself is a mixture of genders, beings, ideas, and existences. They reject binary stereotypes and expectations. Perfect.”

    It appears the quote is some girl? And if this isn’t a statement from an enemy of Christ then I don’t know what is. Is it not obvious that this person “adores” Satan who to them is a “mixture” of genders, idea, existences? My summation is yep….he is a Satanist in opposite of me who is a follower of Christ.

    As believers we understand we are to be His witness to others. I have friends who are lost and we have in depth discussions about Christ and Who He is. They understand my faith is my very breath and I understand they do not understand. Bottom line it is the Holy Spirit leading the lost to Himself and it does not rely upon us. Yes a harsh word can offend yet in my own experience a stern admonition has caused me to think upon my position. Sometimes I see a weakness in my stance and other times I am fully convinced of Him that I’m not wrong. Boundaries must be established and we must not waver on truth in light of scripture.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. God is sovereign, but we still are also called to pray and to act.

    This is something I agree with as it is biblical — but it also also addresses the questions it logically will raise among all of us (the third point he makes specifically addresses the civil and government sphere):

    JUN 26, 2020
    God’s Sovereignty and Our Responsibility

    Derek Thomas

    ~ God is sovereign in creation, providence, redemption, and judgment. That is a central assertion of Christian belief and especially in Reformed theology. God is King and Lord of all. To put this another way: nothing happens without God’s willing it to happen, willing it to happen before it happens, and willing it to happen in the way that it happens. Put this way, it seems to say something that is expressly Reformed in doctrine. But at its heart, it is saying nothing different from the assertion of the Nicene Creed: “I believe in God, the Father Almighty.” To say that God is sovereign is to express His almightiness in every area.

    (But) …

    … The assertion of divine sovereignty is not without further questions that should be addressed.

    First, there is the question of evangelism. If God is sovereign in all matters of providence, what is the point of exerting human effort in evangelism and missions? God’s will is sure to be fulfilled whether we evangelize or not. But we dare not reason this way. Apart from the fact that God commands us to evangelize—“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19)—such reasoning ignores the fact that God fulfills His sovereign plan through human means and instrumentality. *** Nowhere in the Bible are we encouraged to be passive and inert. Paul commands his Philippian readers to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:12–13).

    Second, there is the question of ethics. We are held responsible for our actions and behavior. We are culpable in transgression and praiseworthy in obedience.

    *** Third, in relation to civic power and authority, there is the question of God’s sovereignty in the determination of rulers and government. God has raised up civil governments to be systems of equity and good and peace, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of them who do well (Rom. 13:3; 1 Peter 2:14). ** But this is also true of evil powers and corrupt regimes that violate the very principles of government itself; these are also under the sovereign government of Almighty God.

    Fourth, in the question of both the origin and continued existence of evil, the sovereignty of God meets its most acute problem. That God does not prevent evil from existing seems to call into question His omnipotence or His benevolence. Some non-Christian religions try to solve this problem by positing that evil is imaginary (Christian Science) or an illusion (Hinduism). Augustine and many medieval thinkers believed part of the mystery could be solved by identifying evil as a privation of the good, suggesting that evil is something without existence in and of itself. Evil is a matter of ontology (being). Reformed thought on this issue is summarized by the Westminster Confession of Faith:

    God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain what-soever comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the crea-tures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. (3:1)

    God is the “first cause” of all things, but evil is a product of “second causes.” In the words of John Calvin, “First, it must be observed that the will of God is the cause of all things that happen in the world: and yet God is not the author of evil,” adding, “for the proximate cause is one thing, and the remote cause another.” In other words, God Himself cannot do evil and cannot be blamed for evil even though it is part of His sovereign decree.

    God is sovereign, and in His sovereignty He displays His majestic glory. With out it, we would have no being, no salvation, and no hope. Soli Deo gloria.


  28. To be clear, my point was not to defend this person or his designs, but to point out what he actually said about being a Satanist. That part is pertinent to the post. (Not that it mitigates the rest of the story, but still an important aspect.) HRW also mentioned the fact that people who claim to be Satanists don’t actually believe in Satan. (Although I think there really are actual Satan worshippers, I think they are way more secretive than these folks.)

    Then the Washington Examiner piece quoted the part of his post right before the paragraph that says that he does not actually believe in Satan, and I think the one after that.

    But interestingly, when I just went back to look at the WE piece to double-check if it did indeed include the one after that, even the paragraph before it was no longer there in the article. But I specifically remember reading it there yesterday, because that’s what got my attention – that the next paragraph was not included. Interesting.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.