Pope Francis says the right to private property is “a secondary natural right derived from that which everyone has,” which in turn arises from the “universal destiny of created goods” and affirmed that “the Christian tradition never recognized as absolute and the right to private property untouchable.” Pope Francis’ thinking on the topic of private property is muddled and contradictory. Private property is not a “natural right.” Private property follows directly from God as the Ultimate Property owner and His sovereign right to declare how property is used and maintained.
FrontPage Magazine is one of my favorite go-to sites. It was started by former Communist David Horowitz. Horowitz is Jewish, as are many of the site’s writers. In addition to his memoir Radical Son, he has written Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America as a warning to once Christian America. He understands that the United States was founded on fundamental biblical principles even if those advocating for them were not believers.
I realize that the election isn’t over, but it isn’t looking good for President Trump. Let me say something about that. Despite all of the investigations of more than fifty years, which included the Warren Commission Report, the recent release of public documents never originally provided to the public, and dozens of other private probes, none ever demonstrated clearly that there was a conspiracy to kill President John F. Kennedy. Yet, most Americans believe that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone.
When Mary Tudor (Bloody Mary) became queen of England in 1553, she was determined to roll back the Reformation and reinstate Roman Catholicism. Mary had strong ties to Catholic Spain. She married Philip II of Spain and induced the English Parliament to recognize the authority of papal Rome. Mary met with a great deal of resistance from Protestant reformers in her own country. Mary showed no signs of compromise. The persecution of Protestants followed.
Leftists get the story of Robin Hood all wrong. The claim is often made that Robin Hood and his merry men stole from the rich to give to the poor and that somehow if we empower people through government to do the same thing then they will be equally right and righteous. Trillions of dollars have been taken from income earners over the years in an attempt to help the poor.
Atheists are in a full-court press to take a public stand and declare their belief that God does not exist. The long-term implications of such a belief are horrendous to think about, but I’ll save my comments on that topic for another time. A few years ago, the American Atheists set up a monument to “no God” but couldn’t find an American founder who was an atheist. The monument includes the following:
The usual dissenters come out of the woodwork every October to disparage Columbus and November to attack Thanksgiving. Here’s the latest: Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is being called “a racist piece of trash” and a “white supremacist” after defending the legacy of the Mayflower Compact and criticizing an article in the New York Times that called the story of the Pilgrims a “myth” and re-examined the “cruel history” of Thanksgiving.
400 years ago this month, a weary band of Christians from England came ashore in New England after a grueling 66-day voyage aboard the Mayflower. The Pilgrims came for one purpose, which they spelled out in writing: “for the glory of God and the advancement of the Christian faith.” It was all about religious freedom. They wanted to worship Jesus in the purity of the Gospel. 150 years after the Pilgrims came, the founders of this nation enshrined religious freedom in our national charter, the Constitution.
“Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him. Answer a fool as his folly deserves, so he won’t be wise in his own eyes” (Prov. 26:4–5). The news is out, and it was expected. “Joe Biden is expected to roll back several of the Trump administration’s changes to sexual and reproductive health programs, undoing a large portion of the president’s executive actions on abortion and women’s health.
Rejecting God’s laws and their moral implications does not mean that laws and their moral implications are done away with. With the rejection of God’s commandments new commandments replace the old and a new set of sanctions that go along with them. The more things change, the more things stay the same but with new masters and a different whip. These new laws and sanctions are implemented and enforced by the State.
Like clockwork, when something bad happens in the world, Bible prophecy prognosticators start with their end-time claims. They are part of a “thought collective” where adherents share their beliefs in a closed system using the same language and shortcut responses to those who criticize their conclusions. When challenged with this question, “Where in the Bible does it say that?,” they avoid answering directly by offering a formula response that comes from the safety of the “thought collective” bubble.
Atheism is a worldview driven by faith in a system of thought supposedly generated by a brain that evolved from a pre-biotic soup of chemicals that randomly emits electrical impulses through its gray matter no different from a build-up of electrical energy that is discharged through a lightning strike. But how can a materialist know that an evolved brain can be trusted to know anything authoritatively or claim that certain behaviors are morally right or wrong given purely materialistic assumptions?
There once was a man who hated his wife. He nit-picked everything she ever did. He had friends to spy on her. With the help of others, he continuously plotted against her. He lied about her, stirring up rumors and stoking the fires of gossip. For more than three years, he abused her and grossly disrespected her person and place as a wife. Sometimes his wife’s personality was perceived as boorish, but she proved by her actions over and again her sacrificial love for the family.
The following article is my third response to a journalism and political science major who sent me questions to answer for a research paper she was writing. (Read Part One and Part Two) Here’s the multi-part question: Roy Moore also landed himself in some controversy when he began refusing to recognize federal court orders regarding marriage equality. Does American Vision believe that Moore’s actions aid in the restoration of America to its Biblical Foundation?
If Joe Biden and company indeed have won, the more radical among his cadre will demand vengeance. AOC already has announced the intent to hold President Trump supporters “accountable.” Those of us who didn’t support Biden will be given options. Either suffer the wrath of the winners or “come together” in “unity.” There will be a lot of rhetoric about healing and coming together. After all, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
I’m generally a skeptical guy. As I’ve gotten older, I’ve become even more skeptical when I come across a story that seems too good to be true or even false. The 2020 election is a good example — everything from skewed poll numbers to reports of events that turned out to be fabricated. I learned my early skepticism by watching classic films about real people and events that weren’t as they are depicted in most films after reading a number of biographies about inventors.
The following is the second question I was asked by a journalism and political science major at a major university for a research paper (you can read my answer to the first question here): How did American Vision feel about former Alabama Judge Roy Moore’s display of the Ten Commandments at the Alabama Judicial Building in Montgomery in 2003? Did this display align with American Vision’s goal to restore America to its Biblical Foundation?
Almost daily I get questions about prophetic topics. In most cases, I’ve already dealt with them in my books Last Days Madness, The Early Church and the End of the World, Why the End of the World is Not in Your Future, Wars and Rumors of Wars, 10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered, The Rapture and the Fig Tree Generation, Prophecy Wars, Identifying the Real Last Days Scoffers, and Left Behind: Separating Fact from Fiction.
I received a request for an interview from a college student majoring in journalism and political science who is doing research paper. Here’s some of what she wrote to me: I just wanted to reach out to your organization because I have noticed that American Vision has written extensively about some of the religious controversies in politics. I am writing a research paper about how religion has shaped southern politics, and I am hoping to touch on Roy Moore’s placement of the Ten commandments at the Alabama Judicial Building in Montgomery, opposition to same-sex marriage, and the HB2 “Bathroom Bill” in North Carolina (and elsewhere) which deals with transgender rights.
Most of us have heard of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939), about a naïve Senator who ends up taking on the political establishment. It’s a reminder that there’s nothing new under the political sun. It stars Jimmy Stewart and Jean Arthur and was directed by Frank Capra who also directed Stewart in It’s a Wonderful Life. It’s one of AMC’s Top 100 films. It was not popular with the political establishment crowd when it first came out: