Des Griffin's Newsletter - August 2009
To subscribe: e-mail Des Griffin at alert@midnightmessenger.com
 Dear Friends:
“What is truth?,” Pilate asked Jesus nearly 2000 years ago (John 18:38). That was an excellent question then. It’s a great question, an even more important question, in 2009! Unfortunately, it is also a question that the vast, overwhelming majority of people dismiss from their minds on initial contact. They have been brainwashed into accepting, without examination, the humanist belief that there is no such thing as ultimate TRUTH. Those who are touted as “authorities” declare that everything is “relative” — that everyone “should have a voice in developing the values and goals that determine their lives” (Humanist Manifestos 1 and 2, p.19). As faith in a Creator, Law-giving and Sustaining God is supposedly “an unproven and outmoded faith ... reasonable minds look to other means for survival” (p.13). “Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological and ideological sanction... Happiness and the creative realization of human needs and desires, individually and in shared enjoyment, are continuous themes of humanism. We strive for the good life, here and now” (p.17).
What is the ultimate objective of this “we shall be our own authority” declaration of those who reject belief in a Creator, Lawgiver, and Sustainer of all things? “We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and move toward the building of a world community... We look for the development of a system of world law... For the first time in human history, no part of human kind can be isolated from any other. Each person’s future is in some way linked to all. We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building of world community...” (p.21).
When all is said and done, and when all the hyperbole has been dispensed with, these God-rejecters are in fact promoting a plan that was first devised and promoted by Nimrod, the first would-be world dictator, back in the Plain of Shinar: the creation of a one world government. You can read about it in Genesis11:1-9. Notice that, in their overwhelming vanity, they wanted to “make a name” for themselves” (v.4).
Things haven’t changed much, have they? Like the modern humanists, they believed that, having rejected the rule of the Creator over their lives, their best option was to “move toward the building of a world community ... We look for the development of a system of world law...” Scripture reveals that, as a result of their wilful rebellion, God confounded their language and “scattered the people abroad on the face of the earth.” Thereafter the name of the city was called Babel (Confusion). That was the origin of the Babylonian World System of government, the governmental system by which Satan (aka Lucifer) “has deceived the whole world” (Revelation 12:9). A rhetorical question: if the “whole world” is deceived, what part of the world is not deceived? To ask the question is to answer it. Every phase of society is deceived — i.e. astray from the laws and principles that, when properly applied, produce the “more abundant life” promised by the One who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 10:10;14:6).
The question “what is truth?” was at the top of this writer’s list when researching material for his first book, Fourth Reich of the Rich, and its sequel, Descent Into Slavery? He had since youth very naively assumed that everyone in authority in politics, academia, finance, religion etc. was basically honest, above board and doing their best for their country or for the people they represented. That was a big mistake. Documented proof of his gross misconception was published in U.S. News and World Report (2/5/62). It carried a report of a speech made by Dr. Alfred H. Kelly, Professor of History at Wayne State University in Detroit.
The “history professor,” in a report to the American Historical Society in Washington, DC, related how he had been recruited by Thurgood Marshall, then general legal council for the NAACP, to produce “a plausible historical argument” that would “justify” the introduction of racial integration in the public school system. Marshall, who was black, told Kelly that it was “self evident that Congress in writing the equal protection clause into the Constitution [the Fourteenth Amendment] had not intended to destroy legalized segregation.” What was needed, said Marshall (who would later become an associate member of the Supreme Court, 1967-1991) was a legal argument that would twist the historical facts in such a way as to support the political aims of certain legislators on Capitol Hill.
What was Professor Kelly’s reaction? “I was facing the deadly opposition between my professional integrity as a historian and a contemporary question of values, of ideals, of policy, of partisanship, and of political objectives.
“The problem we faced was not the historian’s discovery of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; the problem instead was the formulation of an adequate gloss.”
Now notice the perverted reasoning and self-justification of this highly respected “history” professor: “It was not that we were engaged in formulating lies; there was nothing as naive and crude as that” [editor, how did the professor reach that delusional conclusion?], “but we were using facts, emphasizing facts..., sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts and, above all, interpreting facts in a way to ... ‘get by.’”
Now read this highly-respected historian’s circuitous reasoning in “justifying” the politically motivated conclusions reached by he and his fellow-travelers in deceitfulness: “I am convinced [he has, in his warped ‘reasoning,’ deluded himself] that this interpretation which we hammered out with anything but historical truth as our objective, nevertheless contained an essential measure of historical truth.”
As Professor Kelly readily admitted, the objective was not “the discovery of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” There sole objective was “the formulation of an adequate gloss ... (to achieve) political objectives.” Thankfully for him, but unfortunately for the country, his “expert” testimony was not given under oath. Had it been, he would clearly have been guilty of perjury!
But then, to “achieve political objectives,” the end is said to justify the deceitful means. Or, put another way, the results prove the means to be “effective.“ That is frequently true in the short-term. But frequentely such plans begin to come “unglued” when the basic premises upon which they are built are revealed to be erroneous. Inevitably, under such circumstances, the end result (the alleged “cure”) is worse than the original problem. But then, what else is new?
ON A PERSONAL LEVEL
Ultimately, we must bring this down to a personal level. Are we, personally, any “better” than Professor Kelly and his companions? How many times has each of us, individually, battled in “deadly opposition” to something we know is wrong but for family, business, or job-related reasons, decided to “go along to get along” for the alleged purpose of “keeping the peace”? How many times have we deluded ourselves into believing that as long as there is a “measure of truth”in what we believe everything is alright? How often have we decided to compromise our personal integrity under the delusion that we can “adequately gloss over” our actions and thus make them appear to be sincere and honorable in every way?
Once we accept the fact that, as the Bible says, “The heart is deceitful above all things and is desperately wicked...” (Jeremiah 17:9), we can at last begin to understand the basic motivation behind such behavior. In whatever area of human activity we see this reality at work, it’s “politics a usual.” When viewed in a broader sense, whether in children or “old” people, this “political” aspect of human nature is seen to dominate in the human experience.
Currently, the human proclivity to cover up, gloss over, or just ignore what may be inconvenient truths about ourselves or those close to us, is best illustrated in the political realm.
As is generally known, there has been much talk over the last year regarding the fact that President Obama has adamantly refused to produce a verifiable birth certificate — or, it should be added, his medical and university records.
For a president, or any contender for high office, to produce such important documents should go without saying. Such information should be up front and center. But not when it comes to Mr. Obama and the establishment media. Instead of asking logical questions and demanding to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing the truth, they follow the course taken by Professor Kelly more than a half century ago. They reveal a lack of personal integrity by resorting to smear tactics, and by sliding off facts, ignoring facts, and burying facts to achieve their political objectives. A few examples will suffice to illustrate the point.
Those who ask annoying questions about the absence of a verifiable birth certificate and other documents are sneeringly referred as “birthers.” Reputedly “conservative” talk show host Michael Medved ranted against “birthers” as “crazy, nutburger, demagogue, money-hungry, exploitative, irresponsible, filthy conservative imposters. It makes us look weird. It makes us look crazy. It makes us look demented. It makes us look sick, troubled, and not suitable for civilized company” (Politico, 3/1/09).
Doug Thompson of Capitolhillblue condemned “birthers” for allegedly being part of the “Looney world of conspiracy theorists ... nut cases... (They engage in an) “incredibly stupid debate over BO’s citizenship ... fueled by hatemongers, racists, bigots, and incurably stupid ... (They are part of) a lunatic fringe (which) feed(s) the lurid fantasies of gullible fools” (7/31/09).
Having read other assertions of a similar nature, but never having seen proof of their veracity, your editor is reminded of a quote ascribed to a Joseph Bullinger. We have used it previously, but it bears repeating: “Those who deem it necessary to smear betray a fundamental weakness and defect in their character, an insecurity and lack of confidence in their ability to intelligently defend their position. Smear is a weak’s man excuse. It is an asinine, sophomoric form of emotional purging or release, but an extremely poor substitute for reasonable dialogue and debate.”
Unless we have documented proof of some assertion, and can back it with factual evidence, we should place information in the “possibility” slot and than wait for evidence to emerge. Credibility is paramount in today’s sad world of fantasy and make-believe.
It has been said that “truth is stranger than fiction.” But in today’s greatly deceived society, fiction is often embraced as “truth,” and truth is often despised as “fiction” — a sad reflection on our so-called “education” system. It is also testimony to the “success” of the one-worlder’s program to “dumb down” our population in preparation for America’s absorption into the planned Godless new world order. A declaration of that simple, proven truth is often mistaken for an alleged “hatred” of the United States. Thus, truth is frequently interpreted as “hate” by those who hate the truth. Truth is something hard to get people to listen to, and harder to get them to believe.
“BAAAA HUMBUG”
As this writer goes through life he frequently exercises a biblical principle that many have proven to be immensely effective: “sowing seeds” (I Corinthians 3:6-7). As the opportunity arises, he drops “seeds” into people’s minds in the process of a conversation, while never immediately attempting to “water” those seeds so that they may grow. Those “seeds” may be nuggets of truth dealing with any aspect of life or the human condition. If the hearer is receptive and responds with a question or an expression of interest, it can lead to a stimulating conversation — one which the other party initiates. That way there is no “pressure” or “intimidation.” A response — or lack thereof — is always “in the court” of the other person.
Recently, he again tried this approach in e-mail form to a close relative who lives in a southern State. The message dealt with the clear evidence of the steadily increasing “socialization” of every aspect of American life. He suggested that it might help them understand what is happening to America.
The response was brief and very much to the point: : “Sorry ... but I say, baaaa humbug...” Translation into modern “Americanese: “Sorry, I don’t want to be confused with the facts. I just want to continue to live in my own little world of fantasy and misbelieve.”
“Baaaa humbug!” How many trillions of similar responses have sprung from the hearts and minds of men and women of all cultures and creeds over the 6,000 years of human history? God alone knows! However those of us with “eyes to see and ears to hear” can hopefully learn from lessons written by past generations. As scripture says, many of these things “were written for our learning, that we through patience and hope of the scriptures might have hope” (Romans15:4).
Two prime examples are the stories of Noah and Sodom and Gomorrah. In both, we read of circumstances virtually identical with those of today. The masses were busy “doing their own thing.” They ate, they drank, they married, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded — and adamantly ignored all the warnings about the consequences of their otherwise degenerate and depraved lives. In modern terms, they said “BAAAA HUMBUG” to those few “fanatical hate-mongering and incurably stupid bigots who engaged in lurid fantasies” by trying to warn them. That was, until two separate floods of destruction (one of water, the other of fire and brimstone) came and destroyed them all (Luke 17:27-28; Matthew 24:37-38).
THINKING LONG TERM
We would all be well advised to note that these latter day warnings came directly from the mouth of the Lord Jesus Christ, the one who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). He is “the same yesterday, and today, and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8). He is the only one who can — and who will — straighten out this present mess.
If we are wise, we will think “long term.” The short-term results of doing this may not be all that great, but if our assessment of the overall situation is valid the long-term results will be very much in our favor. Being human, we all have a tendency to void “unpleasant truths” as if they didn’t exist. To hear truth and not accept it does not nullify it. Basic realities won’t conveniently “disappear.” They will always come back with a vengeance, demanding full payment. Each time we ignore them the price increases. Truth may not always be popular, but it is always right.
TO STAND ALONE
It is vitally important that we remember that we are ultimately engaged in a spiritual battle. “We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness (or wicked spirits) in high places.” We must therefore take on the whole armor of God that we may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand ... having our loins girt (protected) with truth and having on the breastplate of righteousness. We must, above all, take the shield of faith, with which we shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. We must take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the spirit which is the word of God (Ephesians 6:12-17). Recognize that “the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit ... and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).
We will end by quoting from a piece titled To Stand Alone. It was written anomymously some years ago:
“It is human to stand with the crowd, it is Divine to stand alone...
“It is natural to compromise conscience and follow the social and religious fashion for the sake of gain or pleasure; it is divine to sacrifice both on the altar of truth and duty...
"No man stood with me, but all men forsook me," wrote the battle-scarred apostle in describing his first appearance before Nero to answer for his life for believing and teaching contrary to the Roman world.
“Truth has been out of fashion since man changed his robe of fadeless light for a garment of faded leaves.
“Noah built and voyaged alone. His neighbors laughed at his strangeness and perished in style.
“Abraham wandered and worshiped alone. Sodomites smiled at the simple shepherd, followed the fashion, and fed the flames.
“Daniel dined and prayed alone. Elijah sacrificed and witnessed alone. Jeremiah prophesied and wept alone. Jesus loved and died alone.
“Of the lonely way His disciples should walk, He said: "Strait is the gate and narrow the way which leadeth unto life and few there be that find it."
“Of their treatment by the many who walk in the broad way, He said, ‘If ye were of the world, the world would love its own; but because ye are not of the world, therefore the world hateth you....’
“WANTED TODAY, men and women, young and old, who will obey their convictions of truth and duty at the cost of fortune and friends and life itself.” — Author Unknown.
Best Wishes, Des Griffin
|
