Wednesday, November 03, 2021
Tuesday, November 02, 2021
Monday, November 01, 2021
Should We Celebrate Halloween?
Well, played. A pastor claims Halloween is so evil that he can’t explain why it is.
Saturday, October 30, 2021
CBN Milks Satanic Panic For Click Bait Ratings
Foremost among his claims is that Satan use to talk to him and confided that all parents need to do for Satan to assert a legal claim to their children is to allow them to Trick or Treat even if they do not explicitly swear an oath of fidelity to the Prince of Darkness.
However, there are a few things that the discerning should take into consideration.
It is said that Satan is the father of lies and that in him there is no truth.
So even if “Satan” literally spoke to Mr. Ramirez about these matters, why should we then necessarily believe that this is all it takes for parents to lose their children to the Devil?
One would think God would be more ticked off about Pat Robertson's cold reading “Word Of Faith” scam (“I see someone on the viewing audience. The winds of the spirit are blowing coolly on their inflamed hemorrhoids” ) than on kids in costume trick or treating door to door.
Satanism is a real danger.
However, the average Christian child probably has a greater chance of being molested by the youth pastor than being snatched off the streets Halloween night by this variety of pernicious occultists.
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, October 29, 2021
Thursday, October 28, 2021
Hit & Run Commentary #136
It almost reeks of conspiratorial collusion that some of the worst riots in contemporary history just happened to transpire at the exact same moment when these destructive vagrants can’t be punished for concealing their faces with a mask but rather could be if they did not.
On the podcast “Pastoring In A Pandemic”, it was suggested that a church could stagger the concentration of congregants by placing them in different rooms throughout the church property. Individuals could be spaced sufficiently apart and extended the privilege of viewing a video feed of what was transpiring in the main sanctuary. But if you have to remain that far apart from one another while looking at the proceedings on a screen, how is that any better than watching from home? At least there in your own domicile it won’t feel like you are going to be shot from the guard tower overlooking the prison yard.
Sophisticates sneer that wearing a facemask indoors is no more an imposition upon legitimate liberty than requiring customers to wear pants. So what such intellects are insinuating is that your face hole is obscene as your tail hole. These articles of clothing and the anatomical regions they conceal are not inherently the same in terms of propriety. If they were, if one removes one’s trousers upon exiting the supermarket, does that mean one will no longer be arrested for nudity or placed on an offender registry forbidding you to be in the vicinity of young children? If facemasks and pants are the same, does that mean media professionals calling for federal muzzle mandates while not wearing one are as lewd as strippers or porn stars? If facemasks and pants are moral equivalents, does that mean you can expect a visit from the police should you forget to close your curtains and the neighbors catch sight of you prancing around your home unfettered without a mask with your lips dangling in the breeze?
The so-called “Black National Anthem” is to be played before the Star Spangled Banner at the commencement of NFL games. Will those refusing to stand before it or kneel be celebrated as heroes of conscience? Will a ditty be played in honor of every specific ethnicity or only for those prone to destroy private property and loot electronics when they don’t get their way in terms of public policy?
If jurisdictions eliminate police, how and on what grounds will facemask mandates which for the most part are not based upon actual laws but fiat executive orders be enforced?
An agitator interviewed on Fox News hypothesized in response to a mascot being eliminated because of allusions to “Gone With The Wind” that the university should be allowed to change it to whatever it wants if that is what a COMMUNITY desires. But are such changes being made because of a true consultation of prevailing sentiment or because those in a particular constituency are afraid of violent reprisals if the decision reached does not comply with that demanded by a cadre of violent revolutionaries? And if the COMMUNITY, heralded as morally superior to any mere individual, decides in its infinite wisdom, after a time of deliberation to reverse these hastily derived alterations?
Fox News pundit A.B. Stoddard remarked that she hoped President Trump would wear a mask as a show of solidarity with those fighting Coronavirus. So apparently the covering is not about preventing the spread of disease but about the imposition of an ideological conformity bordering on the religious after all.
In calling for defunding the police, if Joe Biden wins the presidency, does that include the Secret Service and, more importantly, the enforcement bureaucracies intended to impose the confiscatory tax policies and racialist agenda advocated by much of the Democratic Party?
In a sermon on racism, a Baptist pastor lamented why must we feel the need to declare our way is the only way or to meet violence with violence? So just how many ways are we obligated to relent to as legitimate? The pastor rhetorically responded that we do so for fear or losing power or control. So to what extent are we obligated to compromise and to allow violence or the threats of such to be used against us as competing systems attempt to impose their preferred worldview and policy vision? Would the pastor gladly surrender the church building as an Antifa encampment should a cell of this revolutionary movement show up in the narthex demanding as such? Should the nation as a whole similarly refuse to defend itself should radical jihadists attempt to establish some sort of caliphate in areas where control by civil authorities might be precarious at best as we see beginning to take place in decayed urban environments?
In a sermon on racism, a Baptist pastor remarked that it is an attempt to grab personal glory to point out that a statement made by someone else is incorrect. As an example, he pointed out an individual that says “All Lives Matter” in response to the the slogan “Black Lives Matter” or when someone says that they do not see how someone could support President Trump. According to the pastor, such statements are a declaration that one person claims to possess greater knowledge of good and evil than someone else. But isn’t he himself making such an assertion by insisting that he knows the motivations behind all articulated ethical propositions? If one cannot point out the ethical implications of Black Lives Matter as a sociopolitical movement, then on what grounds is one justified in opposing similar sentiments when articulated by White power activists? And if the pastor really believes that any articulated verbal qualifiers that create a sense of “otherness” are unacceptable, why does he not condemn the ecclesiastical assembly that he leads for calling itself “Baptist Church” rather than simply “Church”?
By Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, October 27, 2021
Preacher Boy Blasphemes Christ
Hopefully he will come to the realization that what he does not like is organized church and not the Resurrected Christ.
He claims he’s now OK living in the gray area of “I don’t know.”
Hope he lives a very long life.
However, if I don’t know going to suffice as the seconds of his life click down as the inevitably do for all of us?
Tuesday, October 26, 2021
Sunday, October 24, 2021
Saturday, October 23, 2021
Friday, October 22, 2021
Thursday, October 21, 2021
Wednesday, October 20, 2021
Tuesday, October 19, 2021
Monday, October 18, 2021
Sunday, October 17, 2021
Saturday, October 16, 2021
Friday, October 15, 2021
Thursday, October 14, 2021
Just Because Pastor Doesn't Watch News Doesn't Mean We Can't
In a sermon, a pastor boasted that he no longer watched the news.
The purpose in so sharing seemed to be to insinuate that “since I don’t, neither should you.”
It was suggested that instead of paying attention to the social and cultural decay around us, our efforts should rather be directed towards bringing Jesus to the attention of the lost.
All well and good as that is the only way to prevent people from going to Hell.
But of those converted, will they be encouraged to return to those spheres of influence from whence they came or had an interest in as a sort of ministry or will they also be expected to join the chorus of only “Jesus, Jesus, Jesus”?
If that is the case, will things really improve to any considerable degree?
You will end up with pretty much the same diehard reprobates continuing to wield power for corrosive and destructive ends.
And those now with both the ability and insight to perhaps do something about it will find themselves shamed into embracing the pious nonengagement demanded by the prevailing herd mentality.
By Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, October 13, 2021
Does Autarch Intend To Impose Mandatory Reeducation Upon Ideological Dissidents?
Click On The Headline
Tuesday, October 12, 2021
Monday, October 11, 2021
Plague Cult Thralls Obligated To Embrace Alchemical Elixir With Revolutionary Fervor
To the dictatorial mindset bordering on the cultic, it is not enough for the tyrannized person to do as they are told.
Such souls must articulate that they rapturously agree with the imposition placed upon them or at least refrain from verbalizing their disagreement.
As proof that the House of Mouse most identifies with characters amidst its assorted franchises such as Thanos and Palpatine, Disney fiefdom ESPN suspended broadcaster Sage Steele in part for admitting that, while she dutifully acquiesced to requirements to submit to the Plague Cult elixir in order to retain the opportunity to put food on the table and a roof over he head, to demand such obedience on the part of corporate vassals is in a sense sick and scary.
Steele recanted of nothing more than what most discerning people have already thought in the following bit of rhetorical self-denunciation: “We are in the midst of an extremely challenging time...it's more critical than ever that we communicate constructively and thoughtfully.” <p>
Until recently, one would have thought that would have included vocalizing our concerns about governments and behemoth corporations in collusion forcing individuals to alter their very biochemistry ultimately against their will.
By Frederick Meekins