Searching for the Truth in the King James Bible;
Finding it, and passing it on to you.

EDITOR:
Steve Van Nattan

HOME PAGE

HOME - TABLE OF CONTENTS - WAR ROOM - THE GOSPEL - BIBLE STUDY - MORAL ISSUES - KING JAMES BIBLE - CULTS
HUMOR - PROPHECY - WORLD AFFAIRS - QUIET PLACE - STEVE'S YARNS - STEVE'S BIO - HEALTH - LADIES' PAGE - HEROES

WHAT IS A "CHRISTIAN COALITION?"

They harbor Reconstructionists,
but they also boldly violate the law of the land
in the name of Jesus Christ and his coming Kingdom.
Is this what Paul had in mind for the Church?

RECONSTRUCTIONIST LAW ENFORCEMENT

Posted by Jay Rogers-
Vallecito, California — The February issue of Chalcedon Report, published by R.J. Rushdoony, the father of Christian reconstructionism, featured a review of Politically Incorrect by Ralph Reed. Christian reconstructionists, in their advocacy for Biblical rule over the whole of society, make the Christian Coalition look moderate in comparison.

"Politically Incorrect is an excellent study on exactly what is wrong with the Christian conservative movement," the review said. "Ralph Reed fails to get the point of reformation. It is only Biblical law which can sustain a society."

"The law of God," the review continues, "requires only two punishments for law breakers: restitution or execution. Abortion would be a capital crime and would be considered murder."

"Is there hope for the Christian Coalition?" the article asks. "Yes! Ralph Reed does not stand for all members of the Christian Coalition. Many of its leaders on the grass roots level are, in fact, reconstructionists. This is an organization not defined by the people at the top. It has many strengths as a decentralized organization."

Chalcedon Report predicted that Pat Robertson and Ralph Reed "will complete the journey out of the wilderness" and "enter the promised land" — that is, embrace the tenets of Christian reconstructionism.

LOFTY BIBLICAL LAW NOTIONS APPLIED

Paul J. Hill-- Killer for Jesus???

 

Turning From 'Weapon of the Spirit'
to the Shotgun

By Kathy Sawyer
Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, August 7, 1994

PENSACOLA, FLA. -- Paul Hill spent his life crossing lines, veering abruptly from one view of the world to another.

On July 29, the minister turned auto pin-striper crossed a new line and ended up in the purgatory of Escambia County jail.

Police have charged Hill, 40, with first-degree murder in the shotgun killing of an abortion clinic physician and his escort.

Were there foreshadowings? That is always the question. In his middle-class youth, for a time, Hill let his blond hair grow long, used drugs and raised hell. Then, in a muddy swimming pool baptism, he found Jesus. He dated enthusiastically, watched what he ate, went through a body-builder phase. Later, he had his wife put him through seminary, but then he failed as a minister.

Still, neither longtime acquaintances nor, more recently, wary law enforcement officials sensed the turn from what Hill called the "weapon of the spirit" to the black pump-action shotgun. Even when he abruptly began to advocate the murder of abortion doctors, about 15 months ago, Hill vowed he would not commit such an act himself. Both friends and adversaries generally believed him.

"He has a frightening ... grin plastered on his face all the time," said Dallas Blanchard of the University of West Florida, author of a book on the Christian antiabortion movement. "The combination of the grin and this little gleam in his eye seemed to say, 'Here's a dangerous person'... . But I thought he was a ... coward."

"Until about a month ago, he never crossed the line," said special agent William Charles "Charlie" Griffith of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, who had been assigned to keep an eye on Hill (along with other extremists) since March 1993.

And yet, here are the stark facts of that morning nine days ago, as described by witnesses, Pensacola Police Department officials and Incident Report No. 94-04266:

By 7 a.m., Hill had taken up his usual protest station on the front lines of the abortion wars -- outside the weathered wood fence around the small, two-story clinic. He had been coming to The Ladies Center almost every Friday for a year.

The street is heavily traveled, with a supermarket, drugstore and numerous fast food outlets nearby.

Officer Bruce Martin, on patrol duty, found Hill that morning laying white crosses along the right-of-way at the clinic entrance. Martin asked Hill to move the crosses and he did so.

Shortly before 7:30 a.m., abortion doctor John Britton, 69, arrived for regular duty at the clinic, wearing a bulletproof vest. Driving the blue pickup truck was his unarmed volunteer escort, retired Air Force Col. James H. Barrett, 74, and Barrett's wife, June, 68, a retired nurse who also volunteers as a protective escort.

As they passed Hill, Barrett muttered, "Get out of the way, Paul Hill. You know us. You know this truck." They drove through the entrance and into the parking area behind the wood fence.

June Barrett noticed that Hill "had something up to his face," she told interviewers last week. "I did not realize it was a gun. Then I saw the recoil ... and heard the boom."

She hit the floor as a spray of glass shards exploded through the truck's cabin. "Oh, my God, he's shooting," she cried.

The doctor still sat upright in the passenger seat. But she saw a pool of blood forming near his head, and dripping between the seats. The shotgun blasts had caught both men in the head.

June Barrett had been wounded in the forearm and breast, and she also felt blood running down her legs from glass splinter wounds. She saw her husband lying on the ground beside the vehicle. The police would not let her near him to say goodbye.

Still on patrol nearby, Officer Martin responded to the report of the shooting. He saw Hill walking south toward him as he approached the clinic with his lights and siren on. Following Hill were three or four men who "began to wave frantically to draw my attention ... pointing towards {Hill}."

Martin stopped his patrol car in front of Hill, drew his gun, ordered Hill to the ground. Just as he responded when Martin had directed him to move his crosses about a half hour earlier, Hill complied and was handcuffed.

Martin found three spent shotgun shells at the entrance to the clinic property. Another officer soon found a black pump-action shotgun behind the trunk of a spreading oak that shades the property.

It takes only 10 minutes to drive from the manicured lawns of Confederate Drive, where Hill lived a seemingly comfortable existence with his wife and three children, to The Ladies Center, the focus of his personal jihad.

This glimpse of his bizarre pilgrimage comes from dozens of friends, fellow parishioners, activists on both sides of the abortion fight, law enforcement officials and others who knew him.

Paul Jennings Hill was born in Miami on Feb. 6, 1954, the son of Oscar Jennings Hill, an airline pilot, and his wife, Louise. Paul was raised in nearby Coral Gables.

Jeff Sloman, now an assistant U.S. attorney in Brevard County, grew up two doors away from the Hill family. "Paul was a serious type of guy, but I always felt that he was unconcerned with the consequences of things that he did," such as scaling the roof of a school. While others would worry, "he was kind of emotionless, and quite content with himself."

One occasion stuck vividly in Sloman's memory. Paul had a dog named Randy. "Once, when Paul was about 13, he called the dog and was getting him to roll over and he had him on his back and he pried his mouth open like a lion tamer. He spit in the dog's throat... . It wasn't a mean thing to do; it was just strange."

Sloman said Paul's father seemed very proud of him. "When Paul made the football team {at Coral Gables Senior High}, his dad came over to my house and ... was just busting out with pride. Not long after that, Paul quit the team."

Bob Travis went to junior high and high school with Hill, and both families attended Granada Presbyterian Church. In junior high, Paul was not yet interested in religion.

"He was interested in girls," Travis said. "He was very popular, he had long blond hair, he was carefree and rebellious back then. He was, however, a strong-willed person. He had a very fast-paced walk, a deliberate walk."

Once, Travis said, "he saved me from getting beat up by some bullies. Paul walked up and because he was big he got them to stop."

By high school, Paul Hill had become a member of the '60s counterculture. According to a Coral Gables police report (first disclosed in the Pensacola News Journal and confirmed by police): In April 1971, when Hill was 17, his father signed a warrant charging him with assault. The police report said Hill's parents took the action to get their son treatment for a drug problem.

When police searched Hill, a small bag of marijuana fell from his clothing, and his father turned over 11 more such bags, the report said. "Paul Hill's attitude has been getting worse and violent since he has returned home from the last incident," the report said. The earlier incident was not described. Hill's parents, now living in Atlanta, have declined to comment. At least one of Paul's friends said he has not been in touch with them for years.

John Leonard was a student in Paul Hill's class at Coral Gables High School and attended Granada Church. Now a Presbyterian missionary, based in France but teaching in Orlando for a year, he recalled last week Hill's description of his conversion in 1973.

"He said he had been working construction and they were cleaning out the mud and filth from a swimming pool and some guy was telling him to accept the Lord. He didn't think much about it.

"But when he got home, while he was washing the filth off of himself, he prayed to receive Christ and he was converted just like that. There was no warming up to it ... no gradual withdrawal from his drug lifestyle. It was immediate and complete."

As he told Leonard about his conversion, Hill also confided that he had earlier used marijuana and LSD. "He told me that he had had a couple of bad trips on LSD."

Hill did not drop his old friends. "He got along well with non-Christians, he mixed well."

Leonard and Hill roomed together for almost four years beginning in 1973, when they enrolled in Bellhaven College, a Christian liberal arts college in Jackson, Miss.

"Paul got up every morning at 4 a.m. for devotions and Bible study alone for two or three hours.

"He was hypoglycemic and if he ate the wrong thing it would throw him off." (Hypoglycemia is a low blood sugar condition that can be mild, with symptoms such as sweating or headaches, or it can lead to aggressive or uncooperative behavior.)

Hill had a very structured lifestyle, and "no tolerence for gray," Leonard said. "Everybody liked him, but ... he went to the extreme on everything. He was a body builder and he was extreme about that. When he got into health food, he became a fanatic. No one could ever change his mind about anything."

Hill tried to be the model Christian.

"Once, we had an argument because I had gone over the speed limit, because if I disobeyed authority, it was un-Christian," Leonard said. "Paul didn't come up with his opinions casually. He always thought about everything."

The two friends hunted and fished together. "He wasn't sadistic or violent, he enjoyed guns for sport."

In his senior year of college, Hill met his future wife, Karen Denise Demuth. He had just broken up with another steady girlfriend who suggested he go out with Karen, a certified public accountant (CPA).

The two were married in May 1978 in West Memphis, Ark.

Hill went from college to the Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Miss. He arrived in the midst of a controversy about Theonomy, the belief that God's law supersedes the laws of government, and he joined St. Paul Presbyterian Church, which espoused Theonomy. The pastor was his friend Michael Schneider, who had preached at the Hills' wedding.

Equipped with a Master of Divinity degree from the seminary, Hill in March 1984 was ordained as a minister in the Presbyterian Church in America.

Between 1984 and 1989, the Hills lived in Kingstree, S.C., where Paul was pastor of two Presbyterian churches before switching his allegiance to the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and being assigned to a church in Lake Worth, Fla., where he served as pastor through 1990.

But he was restless, impatient and confrontational as a pastor. In the end, he concluded that was not his true calling. He had also developed a strong belief that young children should be able to take communion, a belief not widely held in Christian churches.

Once again, he was drawn to a church where the pastor was his friend Michael Schneider, Trinity Presbyterian in Valparaiso. At Trinity, little children take the bread and wine, or grape juice, of communion as young as they are physically able.

There was no work for Hill close to the church, Schneider said, so the Hills moved to Pensacola, just over an hour away.

In early October 1992, Paul and Karen Hill purchased the white brick ranch house on Confederate Drive, a well-tended neighborhood shaded by tall oaks and pines. County records indicate they paid $76,500 cash.

Hill also bought an auto paint franchise. Like a number of such independent suppliers in the area, he operated out of the back of his truck, mixing the paints there. His services might include painting delicate lines called pin stripes, washing and cleaning, fitting chrome moldings and repairing vinyl.

Special agent Griffith said he had tried to talk to Hill once while he was on a job at a dealership. But Hill "flat told me he never talked to law enforcement. Anyway, most of the major dealers used Hill, but once they found out who he was, they decided it wasn't worth it." Independent artisans such as Hill typically make $30,000 to $35,000 a year, according to one dealer. Another said a real hustler might make $80,000.

This question arises because no one is sure how the Hills managed to afford their house, the auto paint franchise and Paul's protest activities, which included some travel.

Karen had a good income as a CPA, friends said, but in recent years she had given up her outside career to provide home schooling for the older children, 8 and 6. The youngest is 4.

During his years as a minister, Hill probably made no more than $30,000 a year, according to fellow ministers, although some churches provide a place to live.

In any case, such concerns no longer seemed to matter to Paul Hill after March 10, 1993. That's the day the first Pensacola abortion clinic doctor, David Gunn, was shot to death. The act galvanized Hill. Once again his life turned sharply. Within days, he contacted the Phil Donahue show and declared himself the new national spokesman for abortionist killers, whoever they might be. He appeared on ABC's "Nightline" and CNN's "Sonya Live." Abortion activists -- on both sides -- had never heard of him.

On March 15, 1993, Hill told Donahue on nationwide TV that if someone were killing children on a playground, "if you were to come up behind that man and shoot him in the back three times, you would have protected and saved innocent life from undue harm."

He said, "I'm advocating the consistent theology of the Bible, and that is that we must protect innocent life." He equated killing an abortionist with killing Hitler and said that a woman who has an abortion is "an accessory to murder."

His fellow antiabortion parishioners at Trinity were troubled. They went to their pastor and said they were having trouble refuting the theological logic of Hill's arguments.

After wrestling with the issue for several weeks, the church elders excommunicated Hill.

In March, he was a constant presence at the trial where a chemical plant worker was convicted of killing Gunn. There is no evidence that Hill knew him.

After the trial, some acquaintances have suggested that Hill was disappointed as the spotlight moved away and public attention wandered elsewhere.

Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, said that, in the midst of confrontations over abortion, he had engaged Hill in several stimulating discussions of their opposing views. "He was disarming, civil, articulate."

But Hill "had a thing about cameras," he added. "He knew where every camera was. He really got into the media thing. I'm sure he's thrilled today his picture's on the front page."

In June, Hill turned up the volume. He took to screaming "Mommy, mommy don't kill me," over the fence at patients at The Ladies Center. Pensacola police charged him with disorderly conduct and violation of the noise ordinance, but he did not go to jail.

Two weeks ago, two days before the killings, the Pensacola News Journal published a letter to the editor from Karen Hill, complaining about city police officers moonlighting as clinic guards. "These officers have abortion money in their pockets as they arrest pro-lifers," she said.

Police responded that they are trained to be neutral.

Neighbors have told reporters that Karen and the children were in North Carolina when the shootings occurred.

At the end of the Hills' shaded driveway, a basketball goal hangs limp. In a small shed, a blue powerboat on a trailer, a small red wagon and a child's bicycle sit idle.

There are a few -- a priest in Mobile, an activist in Jackson -- who openly echo Hill's grisly dogma. But their crusade may not have the desired effect.

On Tuesday, outside the clinic where Gunn was shot, there was an interlude in the war. A volunteer escort who supports abortion rights and an antiabortion protester chatted briefly as they passed each other. As they talked, they found common ground in their determination to watch for the next terrorist in their midst -- on either side.

The two old adversaries hugged.

Special correspondent Anne Day contributed to this report.
© Copyright 1994 The Washington Post

_____________________________________________________

HADLEY ARKES PHD NEARLY JUSTIFIES HILL

This is one of those melancholy cases in which we would need the equivalent of a Leo Strauss emergency box: break the glass, pull the lever, and quickly summon to our side a writer schooled in the art of covert teaching or "writing between the lines." Even with the most delicate hand, we run the risk of fostering vast moral hazards-and creating perils for many innocent, earnest people-if we are willing to set into print a truthful discussion of this issue. For the answer should be jarringly plain if we simply take seriously the understanding that is anchored firmly among the opponents of abortion: namely, that the child in the womb cannot be anything other than a human life from its first moments; that a human life may not be taken except for the most compelling justification; and that the justification can never be proportioned, in its gravity, to the height, or the social weight, of the victim.

If a person understood that innocent human lives were being destroyed in abortion clinics, without the need even to render a justification, what kinds of things, after all, might we expect him to do? Would the media, for instance, have been filled as they have in this case with reports of "religious zealots" if a band of Jews had killed guards and executioners on their way to work in Auschwitz? Would we have heard stories of the killing of innocent workers, who were merely carrying out orders, and pursuing a policy that was fully "lawful" under the laws of the Third Reich?

Of Mr. Hill's psychic balance, I cannot speak. What we can attribute to him however is this: He understood that the practitioner entering the clinic was willing to destroy innocent human lives, even for the most trivial reason-indeed, even without the need to give a reason. That enterprise had become his vocation, and that purpose was borne with him every time he entered the building. Mr. Hill did not engage in killing as his office work. He was moved to an awful, rare act, and he focused his lethal assault on a person who was about to engage directly, and deliberately, in the destruction of an innocent life. Unless we dismantle moral reasoning altogether, or remove the gradations that are critical to moral judgment, it should be evident that these two acts of killing cannot stand on the same moral plane.

But at this moment, the morality of the case is at odds with the law, and that must make a grievous difference. The members of the public who have now absorbed the premises of the law will not see even the rudiments of a justification in Mr. Hill's act. For them, the act cannot appear to be anything other than an act of lawless killing. Any endorsement of the act is bound to be misunderstood then as an endorsement-nay, even the tendering of a franchise-for lawless killing. Of course, the state of mind of the public looking on cannot supply the ground of our moral judgment. But writers and teachers, who help to shape the public discourse, cannot be indifferent to the ways in which they are likely to be misunderstood in the current cast of public opinion. From the lessonbook of Plato's Crito we must remind ourselves that there are concerns of prudence at the highest level for paying a decent regard even to the unimproved "opinions" of the public; and there are weighty moral reasons for preserving the willingness to respect even bad laws.

Here, the badness runs deep, and the deeper strain has been set forth for us in these pages by Russell Hittinger: The Supreme Court has now established, in the case of abortion, nothing less than a private right to use violence, for any private reason, without the need, that is, to render any public reason. And now the rest of us are obliged to counsel the Paul Hills of the world that they may not make that same claim to the private use of violence, even when they are seeking not merely a private but a public end: the protection of innocent strangers. That the arrangement is not symmetrical is not to state the most damnable thing about it, or the degree to which it makes of us accomplices in a vicious project. For if we begin to express, even in part, what is morally dubious in this structure, we run the risk of sweeping away the inhibitions of prudence from many earnest people. We court the peril of propelling them to further acts of violence.

Of course, the case of Paul Hill could be used, with a legal design, to pose a challenge to the very premises of Roe v. Wade. But even that act of high purpose, attended by a legal defense fund, could beget in turn other acts of affirmation and martyrdom. And so we bite our lips and hold back-and by my own account I may have already said more than one should say without the arts of indirection. But our political men and women deceive themselves if they think that this issue can be quietened simply by being displaced to the periphery of our politics. They have not grasped quite yet that this issue can corrupt even parts of our law that do not seem connected to the issue of abortion; and it can be counted on, reliably, to generate a poison for our civic life that will not be abating.
___________________________

Hadley Arkes is the Edward Ney Professor of Jurisprudence and American Institutions at Amherst College. His most recent book is The Return of George Sutherland: Restoring a Jurisprudence of Natural Rights (Princeton University Press).

_____________________________________________________

GEORGE WEIGEL LEAVES ABORTION
AND MURDER DANGEROUSLY CONNECTED

Tragically and ironically, the murder of abortionists illustrates a point that the right-to-life movement has tried to make for years: namely, that privately authorized lethal violence is lethal for democracy. Abortion kills innocent human beings. It also has the potential to kill the civil society that makes democratic self- governance under the rule of law possible. Just as democracy is rendered impossible when states assert powers and legitimize "rights" that are somehow "beyond" the reach of the moral law, democracy becomes tenuous to the point of disappearance when individual citizens assert a right to lethal violence for the ends of personal convenience-or as an expression of personal conviction. Many molders of public opinion in America seem to understand this in the case of the murder of abortionists. They might ponder the principle (and the public impact of its persistent violation) a bit more carefully in the case of abortion on demand.

George Weigel is President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. and author, most recently, of Idealism Without Illusions: U.S. Foreign Policy in the 1990s (EPPC/Eerdmans).

_____________________________________________________

INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS A THREAT TO JUSTICE EVERYWHERE
You need to see how Black American leaders are in the battle for life of the unborn babies in their community. Yet, there is no suggestion of doing violence against abortionists. Are these people wimps because they do not see their battle as a crusage to bring in the Kingdom of the Missiah on earth?

Scott Philip Roeder shot and killed abortion doctor George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas as the doctor was ushering in a Lutheran Church he attended.

It was about 1991–92 when Scott Roeder basically couldn't cope with everyday life. He couldn't make ends meet, he couldn't pay the bills and didn't know why he couldn't do that. And someone told him that if he didn't pay his federal taxes, if those taxes were left in his check, he could make ends meet. And then he started investigating that and someone told him that it wasn't ratified properly in the Constitution, that it was illegal. And he went from there and got into the anti-government, got into the militia, got into the Freeman, and along those lines anti-abortion issues came up and he started becoming very religious in the sense that he finally – he was reading the Bible. But then, after we were divorced, his religion took on a whole new right wing of itself.

David Leach, publisher of Prayer & Action News, a magazine that opines that the killing of abortion providers would be justifiable homicide, told reporters that he and Roeder had met once in the late 1990s and that Roeder at that time had authored contributions to Leach's publication.[35][36][37] Leach published the Army of God manual, which advocates the killing of the providers of abortion and contains bomb-making instructions, in the January 1996 issue of his magazine.[38] A Kansas acquaintance of Roeder's, Regina Dinwiddie, told a reporter after Tiller's murder (speaking of Roeder), "I know that he believed in justifiable homicide." Dinwiddie, an anti-abortion militant featured in the 2000 HBO documentary Soldiers in the Army of God, added that she had observed Roeder in 1996 enter Kansas City Planned Parenthood's abortion clinic and ask to talk to the physician there; after staring at him for nearly a minute, Roeder said, "I've seen you now," before turning and walking away.[39] Roeder's former roommate of two years, Eddie Ebecher, who had met Roeder through the Freemen movement in the 1990s, told a reporter after Tiller's murder that he and Roeder had considered themselves members of the Army of God. Ebecher said Roeder was obsessed with Tiller and discussed killing him, but that Ebecher warned him not to do so. Ebecher, who went by the nom de guerre "Wolfgang Anacon," added that he believed Roeder held "high moral convictions in order to carry out this act. I feel that Scott had a burden for all the children being murdered."[40]

HERE IS DAVID LEACH'S WEB SITE
This man stands for anarchy and murder, and he does so under the claim that he is doing God a favor.

Dave Francis Leach is an anti-abortion activist and publisher of the utterly insane, extremist newsletter Prayer & Action News. He also runs the web site The Partnership Machine. Both support the doctrine of “justifiable homicide” in the case of abortion doctors, and one of his subscribers was Scott Roeder, who cited the doctrine prior to the assassination of George Tiller. In the January 1996 issue, Leach reprinted the Army of God manual, which lists ways to damage abortion buildings from putting super glue in locks to two simple bomb recipes.

The Army of God, by the way, is a terrorist organization featuring members such as Clayton Waagner, Eric Robert Rudolph, Michael Bray, Donald Spitz, Shelley Shannon, and other known domestic terrorists.

Leach, while avoiding association with terrorists according to legal definitions, has nevertheless staunchly supported Roeder’s actions; he wrote a legal brief for Roeder, pointing out that shooting Dr. Tiller was justified by the Bible (and more obviously falsely, by various court rulings). Roeder was officially associated with the insane domestic terrorist organization “Operation Rescue”, which will be covered in more detail in a later entry.

Now, the connections:

Augustine did not call for the killing of the Donatitst in about 310 AD in North Africa where Augustine was a bishop. But he did approve of the beating of the Donatists to convince them to return to the old Mother Whore Church of Rome. Augustine is one of the dearest champions of Lutheranism and Reformed theologians to this day.

Thus, when the Anabaptists in the 1500s began to follow Felix Manns in rebaptizing one another, having decided that their baby baptism under the Roman Whore AND the Reformed leaders later, was not biblical..... these Anabaptists where drowned in the river as a joke by Ulrich Zwingli. Later other Reformed leaders killed Anabaptists and hounded them mercilessly until most of the fled to Pennsylvania at the invitation of William Penn. John Calvin also called for the burning of Servetus at the stake for disagreeing with Calvin on some point of doctrine. Calvin ordered him burned with green wood so he would die slowly.

The tender mercies of the Mother Whore of Rome have carried through the Reformed Movement right up to our day. Reconstructionists call for killing of various sinners who are guilty of various sins. They envision the coming Kingdom thy claim they are to build for Jesus Christ in which thousands will die at the hands of noble holly men like themselves.

Where did this killer instinct come from?

Not Jesus. Not Paul. Not Peter. Not John. Not Mark. Not Matthew. Not Luke. Not Timothy. On and on, one looks in vain in the New Testament for instructions how and why to kill anyone at the hands of members of Christ's Church.

Thus, our position at Blessed Quietness Journal regarding ALL Reformed (and otherwise) groupies who call for the death of sinners in the Church Age is:

THEY ARE DAMNED TO HELL AND POSSESSED OF DEVILS.

1 John 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

When a Reconstructionist, Reformed member, Dominionist, or any other late great usurper of the Kingdom of Messiah Christ calls for executions and killings of certain sinners, they are taking vengeance. They do not believe God is sane enough to do the right thing with sinners. God, through his Apostles, told us to submit to the authorities, AND THERE WAS NO CAVEAT to this command. The Reconstructionists and Dominionists will tell you that if civil leaders fail to live up the divine model, whatever they claim it is, they have the right to consign these leaders to death.

This is nothing but rebellion, and...............

1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

What are the Reformed and Reconstructionist pious snobs DISOBEYING as they call for killings and executions?

Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

And, who does the damning?

Answer: God

If you are in the damning and killing business in the alleged name of God, you are in deep trouble my friend. You are devil possessed and on your way to meet God. You will be ordered to explain why you took up the cause of murder instead of preaching Christ to sinners.

BACK TO RECONSTRUCTIONISM MENU PAGE

BACK TO WAR ROOM

BACK TO ENTRY PAGE OF THE JOURNAL