CATO ANTICHRIST: PART 2: ANTI-ENVIRONMENTALISM IS EVIL

The article entitled "Malthus' Minions" that we quoted in our post, "Anti-Environmentalism is Evil" of November 2, 2007, is just rife with falsehood. It is the blind leading the blind into the proverbial ditch. It is sinister. If you haven't already, we suggest you read that post followed by this one.

Let us not forget that there were those who called Christ the devil and who doubted he was a prophet and doubted his predictions. Of course, Jesus is not the only real prophet who was rejected whose prophecies of course were fulfilled.

Let us also not forget that Jonah was sent with a real prophecy and that it was the turning and repenting of the people that headed off the otherwise unavoidable consequences of continuing unabated down their selfish, wrong-headed path.

Let us also not forget all the predictions before the Iraq War that have come true.

What stance did the author of the article "Malthus' Minions" take before the Iraq War? Was he or she certain that the U.S. would uncover WMD? Was the war going to be a cake walk? Were the U.S. troops going to be met as liberating heroes? Had Saddam Hussein collaborated with Osama bin Laden in attacking the U.S.? Had Saddam Hussein sought nuclear materials from Africa? Were the aluminum tubes for making nuclear weapons? Were there mobile biological and chemical weapons labs? Did Hussein have deadly drones? Did the Bush administration avoid a quagmire?

Is the author now for bombing Iran based upon the proven poor judgment of that same Bush administration that hasn't admitted that it was spectacularly wrong?

What has George W. Bush been right about? Was he right to hear the dire warnings about Katrina and do nothing and lie by telling the people that he had not been warned? He did nothing on purpose so that what happened would happen? Wasn't he hoping that New Orleans would end up at least partially ethnically (racially) cleans for the sake of Bush's racist vision?

Was he right to hear the dire warnings about an imminent terrorist attack by hijacked planes into skyscrapers and do nothing and lie by telling the people that he had not been warned? He did nothing on purpose so that what happened would happen? Wasn't he hoping that the terrorist attacks would end up at least partially allowing him to have a pretext for going to war against Iraq for the sake of his imperial vision?

Does it go deeper than that? Yes. It will come out more and more.

We say these things not because we are stating that the author was for the Iraq War. We say it, because people do call things right. Many libertarians called it right about the Iraq War and many environmentalists also called it right about the Iraq War. Both were partially right.

Real libertarianism and environmentalism are one

What we are saying is that coerciveness is wrong whether used under the banner of liberty or environment. Absent coercion, libertarianism and environmentalism live as one — are one.

Buying and selling what?

The author of "Malthus' Minions" wants corporations to do whatever and the market will decide — meaning consumers will rule by virtue of what they choose or don't choose to buy. Well, that's right. That's exactly what Jesus said. He also said the blind follow the blind right through the gates of hell and down that wide path. Therefore, what are you selling and what are you buying? That's what matters. Are you buying and selling harm or harmlessness and even service, healing, and real benefit?

Did the author of "Malthus' Minions" sell and buy war? Is that author selling and buying war in any way? Is that author buying and selling only being as harmless as a dove or is that author buying and selling what is harmful? What's he pushing? In what is he trafficking? What exactly does the author identify that any ultra-rich capitalist corporation is doing that is harmful, or does the author say none is doing anything harmful — they don't pollute at all, they are all saintly, there isn't a crook in the bunch, they are all looking out for the welfare of human kind and the planet, they aren't at all about getting their while the getting is good since their time is short, their way is right?

What part of all the pollution does the author like and even love? That author loves all the pollution by all the companies in which that author invests. The author loves it all, because it all represents cost-cutting and short-term, short-sighted returns while that investor is still here in the flesh (but dead of the Holy Spirit).

Selfishness kills real capacity

As for Thomas Malthus, God alone knows the timing. The greater the selfish spirit of the author of "Malthus' Minions" brings darkness to the planet, the more the planet becomes finite in its ability to sustain and provide and even shrinks in its capacity at a geometric rate. God has no contract to continue forever provisioning evil. God is obliged for the sake of real knowledge of righteousness to let people end up more and more under their own standard — the world of their own making. God will not coerce people not to go to hell and the devil.

Time is running out for evil

Understand here that we are comparing time against eternity. What appears to be a long time isn't a long time when compared with eternity. That is why people begin falsely to imagine that the wrathful spirit won't return despite their wicked, selfish behavior that they begin to call good.

If human kind doesn't repent, there will be "sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague." There will be mass death. There has been mass death before. WWI was mass death. WWII was greater mass death. WWIII will be greater still by magnitudes of order. War won't be the only manifestation. The earth will be in general upheaval.

The only thing that begins to soothe is repentance. That requires conviction of conscience, the self-confession of complicity and ignorance and shameful pride. The author of "Malthus' Minions" would have you become even more prideful in human ability apart from God. That author is antichrist. Don't follow his or her path. It is the wide path to hell and damnation — the opposite of salvation.

That author will be shown that he has been spectacularly wrong. Will he see it and heed before it is too late?

Not the U.N., not capitalism, but the narrow way

He wrote that "we are wealthier, healthier, better-housed, better educated than ever thanks not to U.N. bureaucrats, but to our ability as free men and women to think clearly about problems, and solve them." Well, the Real Liberal Christian Church certainly doesn't believe that the only choices are slavery under the evil of U.N. bureaucrats or slavery under the evil of capitalist executives.

Semantical errors

Also, what is the definition being used here for wealth, health, proper housing, and education? Wealth is being defined as material and monetary possession regardless of the long-term and eternal consequences. Health is being defined absent the real healing that brought Jesus back from the death of the flesh after three days. Housing is being defined as with the incorrect definition of wealth. Being educated is being defined as having one's head full of only the very falsehoods that are the twisted definitions of that author.

The world is poorer and darker now than ever. Amassing for self is poor and dark. The masking of symptoms via drugs coming out of capitalist-spirited corporations all of which fight against the healing spirit of God is poor and dark. The evil-hearted living in larger and larger mansions for fewer and fewer of their own and with more and more slaves under their system and greater and greater technological devices created via more and more polluting and depleting means is poor and dark. Learning how to become poorer and darker in spirit is just more of the same poorness and darkness.

The Real Liberal Christian Church offers the solution of Jesus Christ that is diametrically opposed to the evil spirit spewing out from the heart of the particular editorial writer at Investor's Business Daily, Inc., who has a following and many kindred spirits.

Don't use evil against evil

The people at the U.N. and elsewhere are seeking to get voters to vote in coercive measures to save the planet from the selfish evil of unbridled and rabid capitalists. This is using coercion against coercion. This is using evil to fight evil. Jesus didn't do it and neither should anyone else. It is the wide path of hell.

Freedom is without evil

The advocates of unbridled and rabid capitalism call unbridled capitalism "freedom." It isn't freedom. Freedom is God. Only God is free. Freedom is being free of evil. Evil is the slave master. God is not a slave master. God is as Jesus said. God is the spirit of unselfish love in service to one's friends (those who love likewise — the just).

The Real Liberal Christian Church is for environmental extremism but totally uncoerced. It is only via the complete absence of coercion that heaven may be obtained. Only the total pacifist is worthy. Total pacifism comes as a package that includes necessarily crediting Jesus with being the Christ by the way. It is violence of heart that rejects the soft-heartedness of Jesus.

Manufactured sexual lust for procreation

As for having fewer children for the sake of all, it is right but must be voluntary and the result of real education about unselfishness. Then the real bounty will come forth. We must merit it. Humanity must sow for humanity to reap.

Plutocrats

The editorial writer wrote "Excuse us, but this seems like another attempt to foist centralized, global control over the prosperous, dynamic and fast-growing economies of the world — an attempt to shake us down and radically alter Western lifestyles, to get us out of our deluxe cars and designer clothes and onto bicycles and into bearskins."

There are those at the U.N. who, under the plutocrats, are being used for conflict with other duped minions of those plutocrats all for the ultimate short-term sake of those plutocrats who want as much as possible for self while doing everything they can to hold off the inevitable return of Satan who will collect what is owed for services rendered. They want their reward of sin for as long as possible. Jesus came to expose them to set into motion what has been set from the beginning with God. The time of the capitalist will come to an end, exactly when, God alone knows, but we can watch and will be able to see when harvest-time nears and is even upon us.

Jesus went to the cross, but this person won't give up any of his so-called creature comforts for the sake of anyone else. What selfishness!

Coercion is cancerous

It isn't the whole of humanity that is a cancer that will be cut off and burned up as Satan collects on his bargain. There are humans who reject Satan's offer and rather turn to face God instead. The cancer is the satanic spirit of selfishness that includes coercion. No one may take heaven by force. Only volunteers may enter. Force is cancer.

Walk a mile in their shoes

The editor says we're thriving. Well, he wouldn't feel that way if he were on the receiving end of capitalist oppression in the third world. There are many people giving up as a direct result of having followed capitalists rather than Jesus. The editor may consider this just a matter of survival of the fittest, but that view fails to comprehend that the devouring spirit is evil: Unenlightened.

Selfishness is the curse

"Population isn't a curse; it's an opportunity," wrote the editor.

It depends upon the spirit. The spirit of selfishness is the curse. The opportunity lies in overcoming that evil spirit and curse.

Selfish technology is a curse

The idea that human technology out of the spirit of selfishness (self-interest rather than concern for others) is the savior and will out race the negative consequences of human greed and violence is a libertarian notion and an insult to God. It is the false-humanitarian spirit behind the Tower of Babel. It is Nimrod shaking his fist at Satan who collected those of his own spirit and calling Satan God. It is total confusion that leads to hell. It is death of the understanding of God. For such spirits, God is dead. They kill God in their own hearts. God lives on, of course. They just don't live with him.

Libertarian capitalism is antichrist

Many of these Cato Institute enthusiasts just don't know for whom they work. Alan Greenspan, the supposed libertarian/objectivist, knows though and so did Milton Friedman. Those two, and many others, know and knew that they are antichrist by conscious choice.

This is self-styled libertarian capitalism versus Christianity. Never the twain shall meet.

Materialism

The editor cites Julian Lincoln Simon (1932-1998). Simon wrote, "Progress toward a more abundant material life does not come like manna from heaven." You see here the emphasis upon the material life, which comes out of the selfish spirit and runs exactly contrary to the message of Jesus Christ who said, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. Luke 12:15.

Also, where did the manna come from? Where did the bread come from that fed the five thousand? If you don't believe in that manna and that bread, how are you going to be worthy of receiving the divine bread?

Covetousness

We say that the capitalists covet. We are to beware of them. Beware of Alan Greenspan. Beware of Milton Friedman's doctrines. Beware of the Cato Institute. Beware of Investor's Business Daily, Inc.

Taking credit they don't deserve

The capitalists are taking credit for things against which most fought. They've co-opted environmental amelioration, as if they were in favor of catalytic converters before their introduction. They've fought against everything for others and all for self. Then, when the others prevail and things get better, the capitalist say, see, we told you so. They say we told you things get better because of capitalism. They are such liars that they start to believe they're own lies. Nevertheless, coercing them hasn't opened the gates to heaven. The improvements have been mundane and much less than would be the case absent coercion.

The editor says some want them in bearskins. We don't. They say that some want them in straitjackets and to force-feed them "solutions under the rubric of 'sustainable growth' — a kind of friendly fascism...." We don't. We want real riches and freedom from evil for the righteous, unselfish souls.

God and the real state are one

These people don't understand that there is no separation of God and state. God is the right state. God is the right government and governor. It isn't whether or not God. It is what vision of God. God is infallible and can be trusted completely. God is completely about the welfare of the righteous. God is completely political if one understands the true definition of politics. God owns everything. You as an individual own nothing alone, apart from God. If you are one with God, you own everything sharing it completely.

Good for evil, not evil for evil

Jesus said to return good for evil. What is good? If someone is sick, confused, won't stop doing evil, and won't help to do the work of God, does a Christian deny that one food? No. A Christian will treat him or her as a heathen (not of the elect, not privy but properly segregated away), but the Christian won't watch him starve if the Christian can do anything about it. The Christian, however, won't forcibly take from one to give to another.

Paul's antichrist message

You see here where the Pauline Christians have fatally deviated from Christ. Paul mistakenly wrote the following antichrist message, "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:10.

If you are shocked, remember that Jesus called Peter "Satan." Peter ended up intimidated by Paul, just as he had been intimidated by the kangaroo court that tried Jesus. Peter stood up to the Sanhedrin but then shrank back at Paul whose doctrines were not always consistent with Jesus's. Peter then started touting the Pauline that flew in the face of some of Peter's earlier, more correct doctrines.

Don't make the mistake of taking Paul's words as spiritual that those who don't do the work of God won't eat the spiritual bread. That isn't what he meant. He was speaking about denying people the mundane food for the flesh if they weren't willing to do physical labor. Of course, a real Christian would always pitch in (remembering that there are different kinds of work and all Christians share the fruits of each other's labor and also remembering that ultimately physical labor won't be necessary and really isn't now).

The Christian though doesn't give his child a serpent or a rock to eat or nothing even if that child is slothful. He makes the rain to fall on the wicked too. The dogs also eat what falls from his table.

Golden Rule

Feed them what you are able while always looking out for the spiritual flock first and foremost, but tell them the truth that they ought to help. Teach them the meaning of the Golden Rule — how they ought to want to be treated and why. Get them to help for the right reason and not because they are placed under duress or coerced to work.

If they refuse to help, feed the flock first and leave the torture to Satan.

Spirit first, God first

Will the Christian turn his or her back on Jesus and the spiritual family for the sake of his or her own immediate flesh-and-blood offspring whether right or wrong? No. Jesus said to forsake such for the sake of the just. If that offspring sees the light of unselfishness (giving and sharing — the Commons), then that offspring is of the spiritual family of Jesus Christ and God and will not be cut off and burned up with the immediate-blood-relatives-always-first tares. The family in spirit is first.

Evil Calvinism

What real Christians avoid is the twisted Calvinism that says the poor are their own fault and the rich are prosperous because they are the blessed of God. Such is an evil, antichrist message of the capitalists.

Working Righteousness

It isn't a question of whether or not to work. It is a matter of working for what necessarily translates into why. Jesus worked for God and his friends, because it was right to do that rather than to work for self first with others as an afterthought at best.

Wrong Big Brother

Just look at the result of the misguided Calvinism. Look where it was followed the most and look at the fruits. Those places are becoming Big Brother where Big Brother isn't Jesus but evil (selfish) intentions. The wrong beginning is manifesting and magnifying more and more. Calvinism and capitalism are wrong — plainly and clearly.

Libertarian capitalists avoid Jesus

You will note that when the libertarian capitalists cite The Bible, they will first steer clear of the verses from Christ that are in the right column of our website that have to do with the rich and with giving and sharing, etc. They will steer toward the Old Testament and verses from Paul that run contrary (antichrist) to Jesus. That's, because quoting Paul while ignoring Christ works to their private advantage. They are wrong, of course. Following Jesus is to everyone's advantage (private and public, as one and the same before God) only everyone can't see it. Many are too busy being selfish apart from God — meaning not self with God, as all those of the Christ-spirit.

Wide-ranging views on capitalism, libertarianism, and Christianity:

The Other Side of Capitalism
by jdproctor
I consider myself a Christian and a libertarian, so many of your thoughts strike a chord with me. My disagreement (if you can call it that) with you on capitalism is that it seems to me that you overlook a key part. ...


The Unsaved Have More Discernment Over Mitt Romney Than The ...
by healtheland
He is not doing as well in the more libertarian New Hampshire, but he can also be expected to win South Carolina. How quickly these religious right folks forget James 2:2-9 "For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, ...


What You Should Think About Ron Paul
by Demonweed
Libertarian thinking provides a valid, often insightful, perspective on governance. Honest and orthodox libertarians are at heart economic conservatives and social liberals. Yet many find themselves caught in an uncomfortable quandary. ...


WW II: The Nadir of the Old Right
by gunnyg
During World War II, I was an undergraduate at Columbia University, and it seemed to my developing conservative and libertarian spirit that there was no hope and no ideological allies anywhere in the country. ...


Helping the Poor: Partial Response to Monte
by renaissanceguy
I have said the same thing in my church and in other Christian venues. The church and Christians in 20th (now 21st) Century America have missed the boat on this point. I personally do quite a bit to help those in need, and my church ...


Where are YOU on the Politicial Spectrum?
by boviggs
I thought I was more libertarian - I believe essentially that a person can do as they please, as long as they do not harm other people. That's why, socially, I tend to be pretty liberal. Nothing wrong w/gays. Have whatever sex you want, ...


My Answer's a Firm Maybe
by cherylcline
There's been a lot of ink spilled on the relationship between libertarianism and Christianity, often to the effect that the former is morally dependent on the latter, so it would have been interesting, even refreshing, ...


Is my education sucking my will to revolt?
by philosonomics
It's not that I want to be an anarchist again, or a Christian, or a libertarian, or whatever. I don't think the answers to my questions are to be found in an ideology. But neither are they to be found in tacit collusion with authorities ...


One For The Horror File
by Andrew Russell
It is correct that biblical principles are incompatible with Capitalism. Regardless of the conservatives, and those unfortunately apologistic members of the libertarian community who insist otherwise, Capitalism is premised on "there is ...


Is the West too anti-geek to survive?
by oldatlantic
Four factors then: democracy, capitalism, a proper moral foundation and an enlightened legal system constitute the Jeffersonian paradigm. Any country on earth can be successful should it adopt this model. To the extent that any nation ...


I took a quiz today....
by Aurvant
You scored as Anarcho-Capitalist, Anarcho-capitalism is perhaps more closely linked the libertarian tradition than anarchism as it favours a free market and a stateless society. Private businesses would replace the functions of the ...


Christians and markets
by Lee
She argues that Christians, especially the Christian intelligensia, need to get beyond abstractions about "the market" and "capitalism" and look at the ways in which particular markets can serve or impede human flourishing. ...


Surprise Surprise
by Denis E. Ambrose, Jr.
Free Marketeers, also known as a fiscal conservative-believe in free-market capitalism, tax cuts, and protecting your hard-earned cash from pick-pocketing liberal socialists. Values Guardians, also known as social conservatives-believe ...


Two Words and a Comma
by jonnystar
I think all of us have gone through the educational factory of a racist (white dominated), sexist (patriachal and homophobic), religious (Christian primacy) authoritarian class-based society. We all have various levels of development, ...


Rethinking Revolution: Animal Liberation, Human Liberation, and ...
by leaderless
Operating on a global level - from the UK, US, and Germany to France, Norway, and Russia - the ALM attacks not only the ideologies of capitalism that promote growth, profit, and commodification, but the property system itself with ...


Social Ecology: Basic Principles, Future Prospects
by socialecologylondon
With the emergence of modern capitalism, all of these relationships are exacerbated to a breaking point. Whatever you can say about the past, there at least existed the ideal, whether it was Buddhist, Taoist, Christian, ...


Ben Gray
by Nathan Smith
It's a philosophical decision. I don't think it's right that companies hoard information and the sell it to those with the fattest wallets. It's just not nice. It's capitalism, and I'm admittedly a capitalist. Actually, I'm a Libertarian, ...


Something more than politics needed...
by lilarajiva
And, as Marx observed as along ago as the 1840s, it is the nature of this economic freedom, of capitalism, to undermine and eventually destroy the existing and established state of affairs in every other realm, including the social and ...


My CHRISTIAN Politic
by jimmymccarty
Recently I have been called a liberal, a conservative, an anarchist, a socialist, a libertarian, and a communist. People seem to be somewhat confused as to what my political beliefs are. Well, my political beliefs are based on my faith ...


Atheists, Conservatives, and Christianity
by budsimmons
In my view, the attack on Christianity in this country (like the attack on capitalism) is contrary to the American tradition. It was not until after World War Two, and especially during the 1960s, that American elites started to cast a ...


Radical Pathology: Extremism
by Alon Levy
Extremism sometimes manifests itself in the formation of fusions - for example, the radical right in the United States is a fusion of Christian fundamentalism, which used to be economically left-wing, and libertarianism, ...


A Progressive/Conservative Alliance?
by Jim Langcuster
Brice Lindsey's New Republic piece on liberaltarianism, a fusion of libertarianism and liberalism, remains the talk of the town. Even so, the "proudly eponymous" Matthew Yglesia finds the whole idea conceptually unsound. ...


Gay Republicans?
by skorpio
Ronald Reagan welcomed the Christian Right into his crusade to "get the government off the backs of the American people", but he never let the Christians rule the roost. While his administration was not particularly helpful to gays with ...


How I Went From Card Carrying Republican to Libertarian to ...
by justinmundie
I understood basic principles of capitalism before I was out of middle school. I was defending my point of view on internet forums at the age of 16 (debating socialists and communists much older than I was). ...


Liberalism, "Neo-Con" Conservatism, Randian Objectivism, Anarchism ...
by Coral Snake
3. Randian Objectivism -> The third political player is the philosophy of unhindered Capitalism proposed by Ayn Rand in her many novels. It was also the original guiding philosophy of the Libertarian Party when it first began. ...


Fjordman's Tired Tropes
by eteraz
Even today, Denmark, which boasts one of the most libertarian leaders in the region, has not gone further than to issue a platform that it intends to "save" the welfare state by reforming it. Norway is the most regulated economy in ...


No Bar Code
by fred
Joel Salatin's Polyface FarmJoel, who describes himself as a "Christian-libertarian-environmentalist-lunatic farmer," speaks of his farming as his "ministry," and certainly his 1000 or so regular customers hear plenty of preaching. ...

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.