Calling God a Liar

                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              

Some background for international readers:

Here in the United States, 30 years ago, we had a guy on the radio named Rush Limbaugh.  He
was a "conservative commentator," and gave his "conservative" views on events.  He was more
stridently (and usually, angrily) "conservative" than any of his party's polticians at the time: the
first George Bush, Bob Dole, etc.: and Rush attacked them relentlessly for not being ideologically
"pure" enough, and betraying the Reagan legacy.

But he saved his most violent attacks for "liberals" and "liberal" policies (on all the same questions
we are still dealing with: immigration, government regulation, social welfare, etc.).  At the time, it
was a level of rhetorical viciousness we'd never seen before.  Rush was a sensation.

Those who listened to him and agreed with his every pronouncement called themselves "ditto-heads."
We saw bumper-stickers...even in the church' parking-lot...that cheered, "Mega Dittos, Rush !"

I think Rush Limbaugh is still around; but his "movement" long ago left him behind.  "Conservative"
commentators eager for notoriety and political influence (not to mention market-share) quickly rea-
lized they had to be more unhinged and violent than Rush.  Breitbart News and InfoWars are Rush'
children.

Rush Limbaugh is only significant for one reason.  His followers unanimously agreed with his views
on public issues, and his contempt for those who had a different view.  The current president's ditto-
heads are required to agree with his moral view, of himself: agree first of all with his absolute conceit
that everything is always about himself.

Right and wrong are moral questions.  And the current president's ditto-heads who style themselves
arbiters of ideological "purity" make it clear in every day's news that no one is a true Republican or
true "conservative" unless they agree wholeheartedly in the Great Leader's moral view of himself:
that in every one of his words or deeds that might be considered morally questionable, he's "done
nothing wrong."

That was the current president's assertion even before he was his party's nominee.  At a "values-voter"
(i.e., Christian) town-hall in 2015.  He was asked if he'd ever asked God's forgiveness.  "I am not sure
I have," he replied; "...“I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.”

Trump on forgiveness 

 

He explained his answer a few days later to a national news-network:  "Why do I have to repent, why

do I have to ask for forgiveness, if you are not making mistakes ?"

 

Trump on his need for forgivesness

Surprisingly, 80% of "values voters" (i.e., Christians) didn't seem to find the teachings of Roman 3:23
("all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God") or I John 1:10 ("If we say that we have not sinned,
we make God a liar...") relevant in 2016 to their political choices.

Some Christians have since realized they were deceived, and have repented their choice.  But many...
more concerned with their "purity" as Republicans or "conservatives" that their faith in Christ...continue
to chant in chorus with him that the current president has "done nothing wrong."

We don't need to look at Jesus' separation of His followers from His false followers (Matthew 7:21-23)
as entirely a future event.  Every day is judgement day, and Jesus the Judge every day.


The Enemy is deceiving the unwary and unwise the same way he did in the Garden of Eden, and with
the same lie.  Whatever form it takes, and whatever route it comes, the enemy leads to death everyone
whom he deceives to believe what he himself believes, that God is a liar.

This judgement day in this place called America, the form his lie takes, and the route it comes, is political.


                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                              

Procedural Note

Some people have objected to my calling the incoming-president an "unrighteous" man.

My using that term comes from a recent conviction that human beings don't have moral "standing" to call any other human being "evil" or "good."  Both are assertions what someone's spirit IS, absolutely and without admixture.  At the most basic level of reality, that's a dishonest view of any human being.

Certainly Jesus forbids us to call anyone "good": even Himself in the days of His flesh: because "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18 and Luke 18:19).

But Jesus does speak of "evil" people.  In all the other gospels, His references are to men's evil deeds or thoughts: but in Matthew, there is an evil generation of men (12:39, 12:45, and 16:4), an evil slave (24:48), an "evil person" He tells us not to resist (5:39), an "evil man" who brings forth evil treasures (12:35).

Collective mankind on which the sun rises (5:45), and which the king invites to the marriage feast (22:10), includes evil people.  And Jesus is completely direct about who these people are, and what their nature is: "you, being evil" (7:11, 12:34).

I'll be the first to admit I don't understand everything about Jesus referring to people as "evil."  But knowing Who Jesus IS, I think He has the spiritual authority to make that judgement, which belongs to God Alone.  And I think His "...you, being evil" means no human being has spiritual "standing" to call any other human being evil.

I'm convicted we should rightly only characterize people by the nature of their deeds, and thoughts, and words.  We can call someone who does righteous things and speaks righteousness, "a righteous man."  Jesus has forbidden any characterization beyond that, for "no one is good except God alone."

And a man whose deeds, and thoughts, and words are manifestly evil and harmful is "an unrighteous man."  I'm convicted I'd be spiritually unwarranted in judging Donald Trump "an evil man:" but only as "unrighteous."

But that only explains the terminology I've chosen.  I could yet be factually wrong about Donald Trump.  God knows the thoughts of his heart.  My characterization is only based on what he's publicly done, and said.

So I here publicly invite correction.

If anyone who objects to my characterizing Donald Trump as "unrighteous" will make me aware of an instance I might have missed, in which he did or said a righteous thing, I will post it here.

In light of any verifiable evidence of his doing any righteous thing, or saying a righteous thing,
I will also re-think my characterization of Trump as "an unrighteous man."  And if anyone shows me proof that I have mis-characterized him, I will here publicly apologize.