Feast: How Did We Get This Way?
Is The Enemy Within?
John W. Ritenbaugh
Given 21-Sep-02; 75 minutes
We'll begin this sermon by turning to Psalm 2. I'm going to be reading the entire Psalm, and it's going to provide the foundation for the sermon this morning.
Psalm 2:1-12 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sits in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the LORD has said unto me, You are my Son; this day have I begotten you. Ask of me, and I shall give you the heathen for your inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron: you shall dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now therefore, O you kings: be instructed, you judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, [or submit to the Son], lest he be angry, and you perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
The thought that pervaded last evening's sermon was intended to be a lead-in to this morning's message. It focused on a very clearly perceived enemy both within and without our shores. This enemy I spoke of there is obviously different from us in virtually every area of our culture. What we're going to look at today is more complex. It is more subtle and a little bit more difficult to discern. We're going to take a look at another enemy that is both within and without, but focus on that which is within our nation's borders—Israel's borders—because that is where the damage is really taking place. This enemy is far more dangerous than the one focused on last night, because they fall very close to the poignant Pogo cliché that goes, "We have seen the enemy, and they is us!"
The enemy began to appear more publicly in the United States about 100 years ago and has been growing steadily in strength mostly through subtle and crafty maneuvering, away from the public spotlight. Over the past 40 years it has grown steadily more vocal, and today it is quite demanding. It is highly unlikely though, that even had the public known, it would have been an alarmed few, because most would not perceive them as being dangerous to their liberty. Now even though they are today right out in front about doing their maneuvering, most Americans are still apathetic, don't recognize the danger, or feel powerless to do anything about it. In fact, a large percentage of Americans approve.
These people that I'm speaking of have been insinuating themselves into every area critical to the well-being of this culture. They are most definitely in government—from the smallest principalities to the highest branches of government. They are in both political parties, but the Democratic Party especially has an overwhelming abundance of them. It is these people who authored the infamous Immigration Act signed by President Johnson in 1965, and it is these people who maneuvered it through Congress and enabled it to be signed into law of the land.
These people are undoubtedly sincere in their belief, and if they were your neighbors, I think that you would welcome them as being part of your neighborhood. They believe what they are believing in, and they feel that they are doing this for the overall good of the world, especially of the United States secondarily, but these people are most definitely revolutionaries.
Most people wrongly assume that revolutions are fomented in the mean streets of city ghettos, but that most assuredly is wrong. Revolutionaries are most frequently brought to birth in universities. These people with more specialized education then tend to become the leaders in society regardless of their field. The unfortunates in the ghettos merely become the cannon fodder to be used to carry out the better educated's plans to alter, in any manner they can, the iniquities that they perceive to be working in their nation. And if persuasion does not work, force is eventually the alternative.
Their better education is why these people, who are the subject of the beginning of this sermon, are spread throughout the entire culture. They lead churches of virtually every denomination, businesses of all kinds, and educational institutions all the way from kindergarten up through elementary, middle, high school, and university. It is in the universities and churches that they have been most effective. But because virtually everybody is educated in the government's elementary and high schools before they go on to university, everybody who goes into the work place has been effectively propagandized to some degree.
Many have noticed that they were able to direct their children along the "straight and the narrow" until they went to university, but their children came out profoundly changed. Later the changes began taking place in high school as these people spread throughout the culture. Now the radical changes are taking place all the way down in middle school. So profound has been their impact that Martin L. Gross, in his book "The End of Sanity," subtitled it "Social and Cultural Madness in America."
Vance Packard calls these people "the new establishment." He also says that they are in reality a secular religion. Even the military, with its firm governmental structure, has not escaped being influenced. In regard to military service, the new establishment has decreed that the men and the women are the same in the face of what is so obvious. They have a belief system that is so warped that it denies common sense.
The new establishment has all the tenets of a cult. It preaches of specious goodness, and asks only that one give up one's mind and reason in exchange for modern salvation. Do you know what salvation is to them? To them it means gaining the reputation among one's peers of being sensitive or concerned. "I feel your pain," a well-known man in the United States said. Their dogma are tied to secular power in government, in courts, in military, and in education. Violations of their faith, even by those who are not part of their secular religion, become matters of civil and criminal liability for those who break the code.
Vance Packard insists that this is not a conspiracy, but he is not taking Satan into consideration. The enemy is primarily made up of professors in universities whose subjects touch on political and social concern. It was Hitler who was credited with saying that if he was given a child to educate until that child was about seven, that child would be a Nazi for life. The Islamists that we spoke of last night are following that same pattern both outside our borders and inside their borders, because there are films available that show the Islamists teaching their people, especially their children, the same tenets they are learning over in Israel, Iraq, and Iran, and so forth.
They are teaching their innocent children, with pliable young minds, at their youngest ages, to hate Jews and Americans. And young people will blow themselves into smithereens for the glory of killing people guilty of believing in a different religion and being part of a different family of mankind. They feel justified in doing this because of their education, and they are seething with a hatred that they do not perceive. They see it as something that they are going to be rewarded for.
Are you aware that this same sort of teaching (on a more subtle level) has been going on in the United States and that this is being taught to your children even though you are not Islamic? The only major difference, whether the advocates of this realize it or not, is that it is directed at Jesus Christ and the word of God. This has been going on a long, long time, and so it is not unusual that this should occur, but it is the subtly of it that escapes us, and we have to be sharp enough to be able to perceive it.
Matthew 23:37 is that chapter where Jesus took on the Pharisees.
Matthew 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stone them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and you would not!
I want you to look at the principle that is expressed here. When Jesus addressed the city, as though it were a person, you would think that those who had made the covenant with God would have been pleased to hear from the One they made the covenant with. But not so. This is a major perversity that is in human nature that shows itself in ways that we are unable to see. We are blind to it. But, no; the people of Jerusalem rejected the messages, and they killed the messengers.
By way of comparison, you would think that those who profess Christianity would be pleased to hear the truths from the One they made a covenant with—but not so. Even though they do not kill the messengers—yet—they still sneer at His truth, and reject the messages.
Over in the Middle East those killing the Jews are well thought of by their neighbors, and hail them as heroes. Do you know, are you aware, that there is a scripture in God's book here that says the time is going to come when people think that when they kill you they are doing God a favor? What kind of thinking—what kind of education—would lead them to believe such a thing? But the Jews did it, and the ancient Israelites did it. Do you think that is beyond us? Let me tell you, the United States, Canada, and Britain especially are being set up to be able to do it, and to do it with a clear conscience even though they may, on the surface, profess that they are Christians.
The people who killed the prophets of God had taken the same covenant as the very ones they were killing. There has to be a process at work that will lead people to do such a thing, and it has been underway, to my knowledge, for the last several hundred years, but it is beginning to show its ugly head above the surface. Those people over in the Middle East danced and cheered in the streets when news of the planes downing the World Trade Center Towers reached their ears. Their hearts are lifted when they hear of another suicide bombing.
I want you to notice Jesus' charge against His countrymen and those who lived in many generations preceding His birth—those who were supposed to be God's people—the people of Israel.
Matthew 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Like I said earlier, these people might be your neighbors, and they look good on the outside, but they have a belief system, even though they claim to be Christians, that is leading them to do the same kind of things that Jesus taught of here.
Matthew 23:28-33 Even so you also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore you be witnesses unto yourselves, that you are the children of them which killed the prophets. [In other words He was saying that they were going to follow the same pattern.] Fill you up then the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?
We have the same principle of disloyalty perpetrated within our nation as people within us—people we would consider as being part of us—are working to destroy the name that God gave us. I think that it only takes a little bit of an extension to think back on the Worldwide Church of God. Where did the enemy come from? They were within, and seemingly were a part of us until God exposed them before us. They didn't kill us, but I wonder how many people may be near spiritual death because of what they did, and maybe even have died that death.
Let us go now to James 4:4 and again we'll lift a principle out here as I continue to lay the foundation.
James 4:4 You adulterers and adulteresses, know you not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
The representatives of God have always lived rather dangerous lives, but I want you to understand that the opposite of what it says here is just as true. If one is the friend of God, the world makes that one its enemy because "the carnal mind is enmity against God." There is another parallel, and that directly involves you. In the Old Covenant sense, Israel and Judah are the friends of God simply because of the weak association between those two parties. Even today the world hates Israel and Judah simply because it hates God. Eventually this hatred is going to come against the people who truly are the people of God.
I Corinthians 2:7-8 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: ...[princes being used for leaders. Which none of the leaders of this world knew,] ...for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
Jesus, our Creator, was the direct recipient of this hatred even as the prophets before him were. "Crucify Him!" "Crucify Him!" they shouted, and then they nailed Him to a cross and killed Him as an expression of their hatred. They didn't think of it as hatred, even as the Islamists of today do not think of it as hatred. They had to become convinced that Jesus was the enemy of the state. They had things exactly turned 180 degrees, for they were the enemies of the state, and He was the best friend they had, and He was their only hope.
It all depends on one's education. It all depends on one's perception of what is going on. It all depends how we are going to act and react. It all depends upon our perspective. Paul is saying here in I Corinthians 2 that these people did not have the perspective that Jesus was their Messiah, that He was their Savior, and they thought that they were doing God a favor by killing Him. So, just like the Islamists, they were unaware of their hatred, but it was there nonetheless.
That hatred against the Christ and His Father is still going on, because the Prince of the power of the air is working in all of the children of disobedience. Those people, of which each one of us was similar before our calling and conversion, expressed their hatred by murdering Him, ...and so the process continued.
Are you aware that there are many people in positions directly influencing the thinking of many in the United States who are sincerely trying to obey God and be faithful to Him, even though ignorant of the many vital truths of Christianity? Those who are in positions of influence openly sneer at and discredit these people.
I have here an article from Insight magazine written by Walter Williams. Many of you may have heard him on the radio, because every once in a while he substitutes for Rush Limbaugh. The title of this is: College Campuses Are Now Diversity Mills. Walter Williams says:
Diversity is a big buzz word on college and university campuses. Diversity has fogged and claimed the minds of campus administrators so much that they've created diversity fiefdom. Harvard University Medical School has an office for Diversity and Community Partnership. Brown University has a Diversity Institute. The University of California at Berkley has a Diversity Committee and Diversity Officer. At George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, where I teach, there is a Diversity Advisory Board and an office for Diversity Programs and Services. At most colleges and universities there is a diversity or multi-cultureless agenda to propagandize students.
According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, the word "diversity" means: diverseness, multi-formity, multiplicity, and variousness. The opposite of diversity is uniformity, or having individual identity. For the bulk of universities and colleges, "diversity" though means race and sexual quotas programs to ensure that representative forms of sexual deviancy become the accepted norm. To ensure this politically correct vision of campus life, there are forms of diversity that can't be tolerated.
Ideological and political diversity: In these cases there must be uniformity of identity. According to Karl Zinmeister's article, "The Shame of America's One-party Campuses" in the American Enterprise of September 2002, campus political, and hence ideological diversity, is all but absent. Zinmeister sampled faculty political affiliation obtained from local voter registration records at several universities. He classified faculty who registered as Democrats, Green, or Working Family Party members as belonging to the left, and those registered as Republicans, Libertarian, as members of the right.
Now this has nothing to do with their religion, but in a way it does. The result was that at Brown University 5% were party of the right, and 95% were party of the left. At Cornell, 3% the party of the right, and 97% the party of the left. At Harvard, 4% of the right. Penn State, 17%. Stanford, 11%. The University of California at Los Angeles, 6%, and the University of California at Santa Barbara, 1%. And then he goes on to show a bit more about the way these people vote, and so forth.
These people sneer at those who sincerely want to be faithful, trying to obey God and call them "the religious right." They do everything in their power to discredit them, blaming them of virtually everything that does not agree with their philosophy.
Are you aware that 90% of those personalities preparing and delivering the news to you every night are self-professed liberals? In other words, they are on the left. We wonder if news is slanted. Of course it is, and this has become a major outlet of these people's thinking, these people's perspective, so that it is propagandizing everybody who watches these news programs.
Ninety percent of the professors in major universities in the United States are members of the Democratic Party which is the bastion of liberality in the United States, and in turn the Democratic Party is the home of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), the National Education Association, the United League of Latin American Citizens, and La Raza.
I wonder if you are aware that the National Education Association, refuted to be the most influential union in America—the union which represents an overwhelming number of schoolteachers in America—suggested lesson plans for their members to use to instruct American children in their classes on the September 11 attack, that the United States was to blame for the bombings and the deaths at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
This ought to begin to suggest something to you about the kind of education our children and we have been receiving. We aren't alone in recognizing this, and this is why home schooling has sprung up all over the United States. Home schooling is becoming a major force for educating children at least far better than they would be getting in the schools, but they are still subjected to the influence through television. There is no escaping it. It's like a gas that has gone out into the atmosphere, and only parents and God can rightly protect their children from this.
Now why would Americans do such a thing? It's because, as we move toward the end, the United States, Canada, and Britain are the only nations that even come close to being Christian nations. The United States especially is envied and hated by virtually every nation on earth. But the United States has never been a truly Christian nation. The separation of church and state is clearly written into our Constitution in order that a state religion could never be formed and imposed on the public. But what's happening? As Vance Packard said, a secular religion has been formed to become the state religion.
The United States has always been a secular nation, but one with strong undertones of Christian law, policies, and philosophies that have been at the foundation of our culture, giving us some measure of guidance by God's truth. Now that slim foundation is one of the reasons why we are so envied and disliked, because it has helped shape what we are as a people. But people within us have been steadily undermining for many years what little faith American people do have.
In one sense this undermining had its beginning in a fellow-Israelitish nation—France—in the writings of the philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It was in Rousseau's writings that these people found very much of the philosophical base for their belief. Rousseau could even be said to be the father of the French Revolution, because it was his writings on the inequities of French life in the 18th century that lit the flame that burst into the revolution, much like the writings of Thomas Paine in America, preceding the American Revolution.
Rousseau saw the inequities clearly, but by biblical standard Rousseau was a very confused man—a bundle of contradiction, and his solutions are not biblical at all. In his personal life he fathered at least five children. He never married, and all five children were at birth put into an orphanage for others to rear. This is literally nothing more than an extreme precursor of today's day-care centers which are an outgrowth of this kind of thinking.
Now Dinesh D'Souza, an Indian immigrant in the United States who became a citizen, began a long section of his book titled "What's So Great About America?" by saying "Rousseau was a deeply strange man."
Rousseau received a fairly thorough Calvinist education in Geneva, Switzerland as a youth. In his teen years he converted to Catholicism almost entirely because he fell in love with an older woman. Later in life he saw the error of his ways, and re-converted back to Protestantism. There was a good reason why he did that, and that is, by his perception, Protestantism gave him more liberality than the Catholic Church would.
This man fell in love so quickly, and out of love so often, that one cannot help but conclude that the man was unbalanced. He lived virtually his entire life on the generosity of friends. In one sense, we would call him today a bum! He was a sucker, taking from people. The reason was because he was so unstable in his work habits that he was constantly being dismissed.
I want to read you the opening paragraph from Will and Ariel Durant's "The Story of Civilization." It comes from Volume 10, Page 3. I don't know whether you are familiar with that work, but it is an awesome historical work of eleven volumes. They thought so much of this man's impact on Western civilization that they named the entire volume upon Rousseau. Listen to this paragraph.
How did it come about that a man born poor, losing his mother at birth and soon deserted by his father, afflicted with a painful and humiliating disease, left to wander for twelve years among alien cities and conflicting faiths, repudiated by society and civilization, repudiating Voltaire, Diderot, and the Encyclopedie, and the Age of Reason, driven from place to place as a dangerous rebel, suspected of crime and insanity, and seeing in his last months the apophasis, [meaning the exaltation of his greatest enemy who was Voltaire], ...how did it come about that this man, after his death, triumphed over Voltaire, revived religion, transformed education, elevated the morals of France, and inspired the Romantic Movement and the French Revolution, influenced the philosophy of Kant, and Schopenhauer, the plays of Schiller, the novels of Goethe, the poems of Wordsworth, Byron and Shelly, the socialism of Karl Marx, the epics of Tolstoy, and altogether had more affect upon posterity than any other writer or thinker of the 18th Century, in which writers were more influential than they had ever been before? Here, if anywhere, the problem faces us. What is the role of genius in history of man versus the mass and the state? Europe was ready for a gospel that would exalt feeling above thought. It was tired of the restraint of custom, convention, manners, and law. It had heard enough of reason and arguments and philosophy. All this riot of unmoored minds seemed to have left the world devoid of meaning, the soul empty of imagination and hope. Secretly men and women were longing to believe again.
The unanswered question is, "Believe in what?
Rousseau made a major mistake at the very foundation of his philosophy in believing that human nature is good. In addition to that he also worshipped nature. Does that sound familiar? Nature undoubtedly is beautiful, but his perception of it is perverted.
Romans 1:20-26 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful: but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creation more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections, for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.
Recently over in Johannesburg, South Africa there was a worldwide meeting of environmentalists. I'm going to read a small portion of an article titled, "Putting Teeth in the Environmental Agenda". It is an analysis of the philosophy of those who held the Earth Summit there in Johannesburg just a little bit less than a month ago. It is written by Joan Deon. She is Brit and writes for one of the major newspapers over there. Joan Deon said this:
The environmental agenda and its underlying principles which were made public ten years ago in Rio De Janeiro are pagan based. For the first time in human history, and since the handing down of the Mosaic law centuries ago, a group of high-minded globalists, bent on re-creating the Tower of Babel, decided to play God. The Earth Summit's program of action, called Agenda 21, basically inverts, perverts Genesis 1, 2, and 3, by making the earth dominant over man and demoting man to the status of a plant or animal and a destroyer of the eco system.
That is almost exactly what Rousseau believed. It's not his words. It is a modern interpretation of his words. I said that he worshipped nature, but it was a perversion of it.
Continuing the quote by Deon:
While there is some overlap in these figures, since some of the mega conferences covered more than one area; twenty conventions of these groups of people says it all. Most of them are in some stage of being ratified and implemented globally. The impact of what this means is far too complex and onerous for most of us to even imagine. While most are being told that the UN is protecting the environment, they are really playing God and reordering what God created, and the balance of nature.
I don't know whether you heard it, but the UN has backed away from these people, at least publicly to some extent. They were so embarrassed by what went on over there in Johannesburg, that Secretary-General Kofi Annan told them, "No more global meetings. That's it." All that those people did was use this meeting as an opportunity to bash the United States. You see, the real bottom line is POWER—political power that these people are after. They want control of people's lives as they see it. Deon said, "They have taken this out of the hand of God and appointed themselves as God. They want to determine what is right and true."
Rousseau did not live to see what he spawned, because his fame and importance to Western civilization did not erupt until after his death. But in short, he played a major role in influencing Western thought because he wrote more eloquently and persuasively what men wanted to hear than virtually anybody who preceded him. Rousseau was the apostle of radical freedom that he called "inner freedom," and that inner freedom is moral freedom. Each person, he taught, must be free to determine what is good for him.
The central thought of his philosophy gave birth to The New Morality of the 1960s. He insisted that each of us has an original way of being human, and that it is choices made with this freedom that makes life far richer and more fulfilling. Rousseau argued, among other things, that in deciding what to become, whom to marry, how to live, that one should not consult even the dictates of God, that one should consult only one's interior guide. The self determines what is good.
In America his thoughts were passed on and found fertile ground and were expanded upon for the American culture by men like Harry Emerson Fosdick and Henry David Thoreau. They, and others besides them, expanded upon and adapted Rousseau's thoughts to the American culture. By the time the 1930s began—This was the decade that Evelyn and I started elementary school, and was the decade of The Depression and the preparations for World War II—there were sufficient numbers of people thoroughly schooled in this philosophy, administering them, and teaching them from influential positions in the universities of America.
These university students became the teachers in our elementary and high schools and the seminarians became the preachers and pastors. The leaven was spreading until today they have virtually taken over the highly respected and influential universities in America—the ivy league schools: Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Cornell, MIT, Princeton, Pennsylvania, Brown, Dartmouth. In addition, the California University system, Stamford, the University of Wisconsin, North Carolina, Duke, and many many more, until virtually all of education is in their grip.
This has become so obvious that I have seen news articles by highly respected conservative journalists demanding—not suggesting—that Harvard be named an official enemy of the United States of America. The concepts coming out of Harvard are so outrageous and offensive against God, against morality, and the United States and Israel, it's almost hard to believe.
But wait til you listen to another article by Paul Craig Roberts. It's title is Genocide With a Harvard Patina. It begins:
Is a multi-cultural campaign really about diversity, or is it about stamping out Western civilization and the white race itself? College students will tell you that a university education today is a guilt trip for whites. The purpose is to prevent whites from appreciating and absorbing their own culture, and to make it difficult for whites to resist the unreasonable demands [that is, quotas, reparations, etc.] from people of color. To the question, 'Who am I?' 'What am I?' the white university graduate answers, 'I am a racist.' 'I am a sexist.' 'I am homophobic.' 'I am an oppressor.' Neither parents, trustees, alumni, nor the public are aware of the anti-white propaganda that masquerades as education. When someone who is aware tells them, they think the person is exaggerating in order to make a point.
But now comes Harvard-educated Noel Ignatiev—an academic at Harvard's W.E.B. Deboise Institute for African-American Research. [He's white, by the way.] Ignatiev is the founder of a journal, "Race Traitor," which has as its motto, "Treason to Whiteness is Loyalty to Humanity." The journal's purpose is to abolish the white race. At the least, Ignatiev intends cultural and psychological genocide for the whites. It is unclear whether physical extermination is part of the program. A program by the editors on the website say that the new abolitionists do not limit themselves to socially unacceptable means of protest, but reject in advance no means of obtaining their goal. They are willing to kill, is what he's saying. Ignatiev does not believe his agenda is controversial. He writes:
The goal of abolishing the white race is on the face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.
Thus does he put whites on notice. If they oppose their own abolition, they are white supremacists. You see, the reasoning here is really twisted. According to Ignatiev,
The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race. Make no mistake about it. We intend to keep bashing the dead white men [That is, remove from view the heroes of this nation] and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as 'the white race' is destroyed; not be constructed, but destroyed.
And so Paul Craig Roberts says, "What social construct will be left? Will it be black? Will it be Hispanic? Will it be Muslim? Will it be Asian?"
What about the Jewish ones? Ignatiev himself is Jewish, yet Ignatiev believes that it is self-evident that whites in their homeland should be abolished. Now where did he get this view? His only education was at Harvard where he received two graduate degrees. Is Harvard embarrassed? No. Ignatiev is showcased in the current issue of Harvard magazine. Getting rid of whiteness is not controversial at Harvard, because it is the business of American universities.
Now who are the white people in America? They are overwhelmingly Israelites.
We witnessed the first fruits of these people's teaching about thirty years later after the beginning of the 1930s, so this would be 1960. In the rebellious 60s and 70s we witnessed the birth of the hippie movement, living in, dropping out, Woodstock, Haight Ashbury, free love, riots and burning cities, situation ethics, assassination, the New Morality, the birth of the Greens. It gave birth to abortion and divorce on a scale never before experience in this nation. And then we began hearing a new catch phrase for a concept that continues its evil work even to this day. It is called "moral equivalence." This too is drawn from Rousseau's conclusion. This is a devastating concept that teaches that no religion is better than another, that no economic system is better than another, that no set of moral standards is better than another.
We see and hear bits and pieces of this all the time: "We all worship the same God don't we?" they say. Whether they are Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Catholic, Protestant, or whatever, they now participate in services together. It is this concept that holds that homosexuality and lesbianism are not sin but merely life-style choices that appeal to those people. Alcoholism, according to them, is not a character flaw, but a disease, and marriage between same sexes is the equivalence of the normal man-woman union, or deliberately choosing to have a baby out of wedlock without benefit of a father to share in the rearing of the child is not wrong. It's just something that one feels one should do.
Turn now to Ezekiel 33:10. There is a great deal that precedes this verse of course, so we're kind of breaking into the middle of the thought. But I want you to hear God's plaintive cry, if I can put it this way. Please remember that the book of Ezekiel is written to MODERN Israel. It was written 120 or so years after Israel had already disappeared into captivity. Those people to whom it was written, seemingly on the surface anyway, could never had gotten it because they were already in captivity and probably already had begun their migrations into northwestern Europe, and so this is written to modern Israel. God says:
Ezekiel 33:10-11 Therefore O you son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; thus you speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live? [What's the right way to live? Is it The New Morality way?] Say unto them, As I LIVE, says the Lord GOD.
"Live the way I live." "Live the way I command." "Live the way I dictate." "Live the way that I lived when I became a man and set the example for all time as the way men ought to live."
Ezekiel 33:11 I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn you, turn you from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel?
What these people are teaching is devoid of common sense. That's why Vance Packard named the book, "The Death of Sanity". What's happened to us? You young people, you have no idea how life has changed over the last 50 or 60 years! I'm not saying that people weren't sinning then. They of course were, but it's nothing compared to the way sin creates fear in the country today.
My parents allowed me to do things, like going through the city of Pittsburgh late at night. I had a job that I didn't get home until one, two, or three a.m. sometimes in the morning. I was a 13-year old kid riding on my bicycle all the way across the city. I would walk out into the country, with no lights or anything for miles, until I got home. I never expressed any fear that I was in any kind of danger at all, because I wasn't. That's not the way it is today. Things have changed so drastically, and these people are at the root of those changes.
In many ways our previous president was like a rebirth of Rousseau himself. Do you know that if you had some engagement with President Clinton, you had better be ready to pay whatever costs were involved. He even stuck his chauffeur and his secret service men with the bills he ran up when he was out with them. That's the way Rousseau operated.
Have you ever corrected a child, and he says back to you, "Oh, whatever!" That's Rousseau coming out. The truth is what you say it is at the moment. It's relative. It's whatever fits your view of things. With Rousseau there is very little that is absolute. Everything is relative and personally subjective. "Define is," our former president said. By his definition, the sexual acts he had with that intern were not sexual acts at all. But did you notice how many people agreed with him?
Another catch phrase one hears today is "cultural relativism," and this is the notion that all cultures are equally valuable, that no basis exists for saying that one culture is better than another, and that to say one is better is insensitive—ethnocentrism—for even racism.
These are the people who assure us that Islam is really a religion of peace and of tolerance, but they neglect to explain that the price of that peace and tolerance is the individual's political, social, and religious submission to Islam's authority.
Directly attached to both of these are political correctness, multiculturalism, and environmentalism. All of these catch-phrases are used to give substance to a way of life whose aim is to deliver political and economic power to people espousing them without changing anything of substance in the human heart.
Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
What we are witnessing in our lifetime is an all-out blitz by Satan against the truth of God suddenly undermining the word of God, the doctrines of God, the dignity of His office, and the uniqueness and importance of our calling, so that people are confused and don't know what to believe. Conviction regarding truth has become very difficult for those deeply infected. By the 1930s everything was in place to teach this on a massive scale except the technology to do it quickly. That came along a little bit later with television, and then the computer, and then the satellites to spread it all over the world.
Revelation 12:15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
It's as though he has spewed forth a flood of words and the cultural movement from his mouth in a effort to overwhelm and sweep the people of the only nations that retained any semblance of Christianity, and that contained the remnant of the true church in one fell swoop. Where is the remnant of the true church? In the United States, in Canada, in Britain, some in Australia, and some in Northwestern Europe. And now because of television, and because of the computer, this foul education can be shipped all over the world, and God's people are scattered all over the world, but mostly concentrated in the Israelitish nations.
I want you to see something regarding the term "flood," because it has a symbolic meaning as well. We're going to go first to the book of Psalms.
Psalm 18:4 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men made me afraid.
Somehow you don't think of David as being afraid. We think of him as being strong, with sword in hand, going forth to conquer, killing left and right; but he was afraid from time to time, and he talks about the "flood of ungodly men." It was their threat. It was the things that they did to encompass him, and he felt as though he was drowning from all of the trouble he was confronting on every side. A "flood" biblically means "an overwhelming evil," and Satan has spewed a flood of words, and the real intention of that flood is to get YOU to be carried away in them. What we have to remember is that we have all likely been propagandized, and that it is around us, it is surrounding us like flood waters. It is everywhere, and somehow or another we have to beat it off.
Isaiah 43:1-2 But now thus says the LORD that created you, O Jacob, and he that formed you, O Israel, fear not: [This is a note of comfort and encouragement for you and me] for I have redeemed you, I have called you by your name, you are mine. When you pass through the waters [It could be a river. It could be a flood. It could mean overwhelming evil.], I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow you: when you walk through the fire, you shall not be burned, neither shall the flame kindle upon you.
Now D'Souza writes that intellectuals have been rebelling against the Christian religion for several centuries, but it wasn't until the 60s that the framework of the Christian religion collapsed (along with the old morality which was hung upon and supported by the Ten Commandments of the Creator God) and was cast aside.
Rousseau and his modern disciples' innovation to the philosophies of how to live effectively cuts off the quest for truth from any external source of authority, including parents, customs, and even belief in God. To Rousseau, the self defines what is good. Rousseau said, "We must get in touch with our feelings." Doesn't that sound modern? According to him, feelings never lie because they speak with the voice of nature. What a perversion! A perversion, because it turns every man into a god. Didn't he (the serpent) say to Adam and Eve, "You shall be as god, to know good and evil"? And how do you know? You get it out of yourself. What a clever trap!
Isaiah 59:14-15 And judgment is turned away backward, and justice stands afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. Yes, truth fails, and he departs from evil makes himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
There is a time in the life of every nation when truth virtually disappears. This does not mean that truth loses its validity, but rather that it is missing because it is ignored in the pursuits of one's desire, and it becomes pushed back from its rightful position that it should occupy.
Isaiah 59 focuses on the judicial system of a nation. I don't know whether he was writing about Israel or Judah—it really doesn't matter—in which the truths of God have either been outright rejected or passively ignored. But the result is judicial chaos, because a true constant basis for right and wrong cease to exist, and weird, foolish, patently unfair judgments are made, and quality before the law disappears. You can spill coffee on yourself now, and you can sue McDonald's, not for your stupidity, but because they made it too hot. What kind is reasoning is there?
This is happening, and has been happening in the Israelitish nations now for a while. In Luke 18:8, Jesus asked the question, "When the Son of man comes, shall he find faith on the earth?" Faith absolutely requires truth. Can one trust lies, hypocrisy, deceit, and malice? And so instead, cynicism, suspicion, skepticism, disparagement and distrust abound.
Many people hate what is going on, and they are fearful of its dangers. Yet, at the same time they grow increasingly tolerant of evil because they are no longer certain what is right or wrong. Do you know what eventually evolves from this kind of situation? People begin looking for somebody to restore order, and a dictatorship arises and proceeds to take away the liberties they once enjoyed.
Brethren, you're watching the formation of the Homeland Security Act. Is it taking away your liberties? Why? Because people are crying out for protection from the government, and the government becomes ever stronger and more distrusted.
Jesus also said (through the Apostle Paul) that the times would be perilous, and that evil men would grow worse and worse. He also said that because lawlessness would abound the love of many would wax cold. The Western world could be led as a lamb to the slaughter, because without truth there is no trustworthy guidance. Things can only get worse, more dangerous or more uncertain. Notice what Jeremiah said about his time just before Judah fell to Nebuchadnezzar.
Jeremiah 9:2-6 Oh that I had in the wilderness a lodging place of wayfaring men; that I might leave my people, and go from them! For they be all adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men. And they bend their tongues like their bow for lies: but they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, says the LORD. Take you heed every one of his neighbour, and trust you not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders. And they will deceive everyone his neighbour, and will not speak the truth: they have taught their tongue to speak lies, and weary themselves to commit iniquity. Your habitation is in the midst of deceit; through deceit they refuse to know me, says the LORD.
Brethren, it is truth that sets us apart from others. John 17:8 and John 17:17 say that. But merely having truth is insufficient for setting apart. Having something without using it profits nothing because it produces nothing that will set one apart. It is truth that sets free, and it is the use of truth that sets us apart so that we can be free.
Psalm 119:30 I have chosen the way of truth: your judgments have I laid before me.
This is a succinct statement as to why truth is so important. It gives us a way—the right way to live, and in so doing it sets us apart from others who are following the philosophies of men like Rousseau. It also protects us, but if truth is compromised, the protection of us is also compromised.
Psalm 91:4 He shall cover you with his feathers, and under his wings shall you trust: his truth shall be your shield and buckler.
Truth is what shields us, as well as setting us apart from others. However, there comes a time when truth must be personally guarded, and this occurs when it is challenged in an attempt to compromise its purity, and therefore its effectiveness as a guide. Sometimes truth is stringent regarding meeting its requirement. It is difficult, even painful and emotionally stressful to follow it. It sometimes requires a great deal of attention, effort and sacrifice that we are reluctant to give. But Solomon said in Proverbs 23:23 to "buy the truth." That is, be willing to pay a great price for it, and "Sell it not." Don't give it up for anything! Also wisdom, instruction, and understanding are included with that. Now whose advice are you going to be convicted to follow? God's, or this world's moral-equivalence doctrine? The die is cast. This world is crashing into chaos and warfare, and there is only one sensible way to choose.
Let's finish in Isaiah 2 as a brief reminder of what is coming, and what we are preparing for.
Isaiah 2:2-4 And it shall come to pass in the last days that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come you, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.
We are in the days leading to this time, and it is a time when the truth of God is going to be used by mankind. We've been honored, privileged, exceedingly blessed, enabled and gifted to know God's truth now so that we won't be taken in any further than we have been by the philosophies of this world.
Brethren, it is not easy, but our course is set before us, and we march to the beat of our Drummer—Jesus Christ. So let's make sure we make every effort to come out of this world, because we have nothing to do with it, except that we are to pray for it, and we are to overcome it.