The Lion of Judah (Volume VIII, Issue 9)
January – February 2004
By Don McAlvany
The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor
In the late 1990s, this writer wrote a book entitled Storm Warning: The Coming Persecution of Christians and Traditionalists In America. In Storm Warning, we analyzed the steady movement in this country against Christians, the Bible, the Constitution, and traditional Biblical values such as marriage, family, morality, etc. We discussed the anti-Christian juggernaut in America pushed by the political left, the atheists, the gay/lesbian movement, Hollywood, and liberals in government, the judiciary, the educational system, media, and advocacy groups such as the ACLU.
Over the past 40 years, we have seen prayer taken out of the schools; the killing of babies made legal; the mention of God in schools or public places or the placing of Bible verses in public places declared illegal by liberal judges who did not have the constitutional authority to make such rulings (which are then called “the law of the land”). We have seen homosexual marriage legalized, Christians and Christian values ridiculed and denigrated by the political left (which controls the levers of power in America); and Bible-believing Christians slowly but systematically pushed to the margins of society.
This is the way the persecution of the Jews began in Germany in the 1920s and ’30s: they were denigrated and ridiculed; pushed to the margins of society; isolated; legislated against; and finally persecuted. Storm Warning devoted several chapters to the parallels between the pattern of persecution of the Jews in Germany and the rising isolation, ridicule, and restrictions being placed on Christians and Biblical values in America today. [ED. NOTE: Copies of Storm Warning are still available ($15 plus $3 p&h, by calling 1-800-525-9556).]
Over the past year there have been accelerating attacks on Christians, the Bible, and the Constitution led by the ACLU, liberal Federal judges, and highly organized, well funded groups of atheists, liberals and homosexuals. Judge Roy Moore, the very courageous Christian constitutionalist Chief Justice of the Alabama State Supreme Court has become the lightning rod for these attacks. It began over a year ago when a liberal Federal judge, without legal constitutional authority (neither the U.S. or Alabama Constitution), ruled that a statue displaying the Ten Commandments in the Alabama Supreme Court building must be taken down because it violates “separation of church and state.”
[ED. NOTE: Incidentally, Hitler used the concept of “separation of church and state” to separate God from society and legislate against, neutralize and ultimately persecute Jews and evangelical Christians in Nazi Germany in the 1930’s and ’40s.]
The issues involved in Judge Moore’s stand against this unconstitutional, anti-God ruling by a liberal Federal judge who did not have the legal authority to make such a ruling go way beyond simply a statue inscribed with the Ten Commandments. The real issues are: 1) does our U.S. Constitution still exist and 2) is every vestige of God, the Bible, and Christianity to be stripped from American life. Already, the ACLU and the political left are moving to get liberal judges to rule that the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance and the Star Spangled Banner are unconstitutional violations of the “separation of church and state” because both say that as a people, we trust in God.
ONE NATION NO LONGER UNDER GOD?
On September 1, Pat Buchanan wrote in WorldNetDaily regarding the Ten Commandments issue: The granite monument of the Ten Commandments has been rolled out of the Alabama Supreme Court building in Montgomery. Chief Justice Roy Moore has been suspended. Yet, in his defeat there is victory.
For Judge Moore’s defiance exposed to all Americans the naked hostility of the court to any official expression of belief that we are a nation under God. His defiance revealed how far America has traveled from the Constitution of our Founding Fathers. We no longer see through a glass darkly. We can see clearly now.
Under the 9th and 10th Amendments, our Constitution reserved to the states and the people all powers not specifically ceded to the national government. Can anyone believe the Constitution gave to federal judges, who did not even exist in 1789, power to order sovereign states to tear down monuments that had God’s law, the Ten Commandments, engraved upon them? Does anyone believe the Constitution would have been ratified, had the free and independent states understood they were ceding such powers?
In the last 50 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has ordered a judicial dictatorship over a nation of 280 million, usurping powers never granted to it by the Constitution. Possessed of a deeply anti-Christian bias, that court has progressively de-Christianized America and established state atheism as our national religion.
In every election, every poll, every survey, Americans decry it. Now Judge Moore has forced us to face up to it. Only by repeated acts of courageous defiance like his will we force President Bush and Congress to restore to the republic what has been stolen from us.
Judge Moore’s stand has separated the sheep from the goats among [sic] out brethren. Some Christians cast their lot with Caesar, as others scattered like the disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane when the Roman soldiers came for Christ, sword in hand. Is it really right, our milquetoast brethren bleat, for us to defy lawful authority? Ought we not obey, as the Bible commands? But the question is: Whose law are we being ordered to obey?
Are the federal courts acting constitutionally? Are they acting in a way that commands obedience when they declare that no state may in any way acknowledge God, when our own coins say “In God We Trust”? Just who and what is Judge Moore defying? The First Amendment, declares U.S. Judge Myron Thomson. But that amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibit its free exercise thereof.”
Was Chief Justice Moore really trying to establish a Church of Alabama when he had placed in the rotunda of the courthouse that monument of the Decalogue? What church? The Ten Commandments are taken from the Old Testament sacred to Christians and the Torah sacred to Jews. Catholics number the commandments in a different order than does the monument.
Chief Justice Moore was only acknowledging that God Himself is the supreme lawgiver and we are subject to his law. This may be offensive to Judge Thompson and Justices Souter, Stevens, Breyer and Ginsberg, but it was not offensive to the Founding Fathers. Finally, Judge Moore is saying, enough is enough. It is time to defy tyranny because all other recourse has been exhausted.
A half-century ago, the Supreme Court purged prayer from the public schools, an exercise of raw judicial power uncountenanced by the Constitution. Congress did nothing. The court then declared abortion to be a constitutional right. Forty-two million babies have since passed under the knife. Now, the court has declared sodomy to be a constitutional right.
This renegade court is not following the Constitution, it is distorting the Constitution, perverting the Constitution to impose its ideology upon an unwilling nation, and relying upon the spirit of obedience of a law-abiding people to get away with it. What are we supposed to do?
If you don’t like the decisions, they say, go pass a constitutional amendment. But that requires the approval of two-thirds of both Houses of Congress and three-fourths of the states in seven years. And who decides what the amendment means when it is ratified? The same justices of the Supreme Court.
By usurping powers never granted to it, the Supreme Court has imposed a revolution upon our nation. Congress has refused to resist it. Presidents have refused. It is time for a counter-revolution to overthrow this rule of judges and restore our Constitution. The Founding Fathers who overthrew a king, less odious and tyrannical, would have understood.
THE SECULAR HUMANISTS ARE ROCKING THE FOUNDATIONS OF OUR CHRISTIAN NATION
Phyllis Schlafly, president of the Eagle Forum, recently wrote: The secularists are gloating. They got a court order to remove the Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building and another court order to suspend Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore who put it there.
But anyone who thinks this confrontation in Montgomery is just about an inscribed rock and a defiant judge is out of touch with reality. The Ten Commandments dispute is the tip of the iceberg in the ongoing battle to obliterate every acknowledgment of God except behind the closed doors of churches. The goal of the secularists and the atheists is to treat religious people like smokers. You can continue to exist, but only if you are out of sight, out of hearing and out of smell.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and other anti-religious groups and atheists have instigated scores of lawsuits all over the country demanding that judges banish God from all public forums. The ACLU lost its efforts to remove the Ten Commandments from courthouses in Kentucky and suburban Philadelphia, but the Freedom From Religion Foundation got a federal judge to ban a Ten Commandments monument from a public park in LaCross, Wisconsin, even though the city had sold the land it sat on to a private group.
The city of Everett, Washington is being sued by Americans United for Separation of Church and State to remove a Ten Commandments monument from city property. It is one of many Ten Commandments monuments donated to cities during the 1950s, ’60s, and ’70s by the Fraternal Order of Eagles. The ACLU has already forced the removal of the Eagles’ Ten Commandments monuments from eight Utah cities and has announced a scavenger hunt to track down a ninth that the ACLU believes exists but can’t find.
The ACLU intimidated the National Park Service into removing plaques from the Grand Canyon that contained verses from the book of Psalms. It was agreed that the Park Service can continue to use the names of Hindu gods for some of the trails and canyon formations. The ACLU got the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to let stand a federal district court decision banning grace before meals at Virginia Military Institute. The Citadel then announced that it, too, would eliminate prayers before meals, and you can bet that the ACLU will now target prayers at our military and naval academies and on board ship.
The atheists and secularists are on the warpath to stop the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance because it contains the words “under God.” Atheist Michael Newdow was successful in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the ACLU won in Colorado, and we can expect similar lawsuits in the 33 states that require recitation of the pledge in public schools.
In Pennsylvania, a federal judge voided a state law that required teachers to lead students in reciting the pledge or singing “The Star Spangled Banner” each morning. The animosity against the national anthem is probably because its fourth stanza includes the words “our motto: ‘in God is our trust.’”
Suing on behalf of agnostics and lesbians, the ACLU got a judge to banish the Boy Scouts from a San Diego city park where they have met since 1920. The Scouts’ offense was that they include God in their membership oath.
The attempt to remove God from all state constitutions is at the heart of the Montgomery dispute. Justice Moore took an oath to uphold Alabama’s constitution which in order to “secure the blessings of liberty,” invokes “the favor and guidance of Almighty God.”
The silliness of the arguments against Moore’s Ten Commandments 5,280-pound granite monument, known as “Roy’s Rock” is shown by the repeated assertion that he is trying to establish the Christian religion. The secularists seem unaware that the Ten Commandments predate Christianity.
When chief antagonist Barry Lynn was asked on television how he could oppose the Ten Commandments monument in Montgomery when the U.S. Supreme Court building shows the Ten Commandments on its walls, he said that’s different because the Supreme Court also shows the Code of Hammurabi. But Moore’s rock like-wise displays several other quotations from historical documents.
The secularists and the atheists seek out judges who pretend to find rights in the U.S. Constitution that no one else have seen for over two centuries. The federal judges who believe they can make law and punish, fine or imprison those who challenge their tyranny, display arrogance like King Louis XIV’s famous words. “L’etat, c’est moi” (I am the state).
The American people don’t have to tolerate the federal judiciary’s totalitarian grab for power. Congress’s first order of business should be to use its Article III, Section I power to pass a law withdrawing jurisdiction from all federal courts over whether an acknowledgment of God violates the First Amendment. The solution is really that simple. It’s not only perfectly constitutional; it’s Congress’s constitutional duty to stop the out-of-control federal courts.
THE REAL TEN COMMANDMENTS ISSUE
Don Hodel, President of Focus on the Family and former Secretary of the Interior under Ronald Reagan recently wrote:
Christians can’t afford to acquiesce again to an out-of-control federal judiciary that has already removed prayer from the public schools and declared abortion a constitutional right. Some are asking why we are speaking out about the display of the Ten Commandments in Alabama. Let me try to state clearly why we feel compelled to do this.
The foundation of our Constitution, our entire legal system, and most of the attitudes of our culture is the Judeo-Christian value system found in Scripture, including the Ten Commandments. There is ample historical evidence to support this proposition. It is no accident that many of the Ten Commandments are codified in law (such as murder, theft, lying) and, formerly, many others were as well (such as swearing, adultery, Sunday work). While there has been a whittling away at these laws, like Sunday closings, it is undeniable that for most of our history, both the states and the national government incorporated the rules of the Ten Commandments into laws.
People come to the United States of America precisely because of the tremendous freedom and opportunity the U.S. provides them. The foundation of that freedom and opportunity which is codified in our laws and which is incorporated into our culture is that same Judeo-Christian value system.
The United States Supreme Court began hijacking our society and hacking away at this foundation with its unwarranted and unprecedented school prayer decision. And Christians acquiesced, saying, “Well, I guess it’s the law. We have no choice but to obey it.” In Roe v. Wade, America was set on a course of infanticide. And Christians acquiesced: “Well, I guess it’s the law. We have no choice but to obey it.”
Case after case struck at the heart of the foundational religion in this country, removing religious symbols and observances in the cause of a doctrine totally foreign to our Founding Fathers and to our foundational documents: that the separation of church and state means the complete exclusion of religion from the public square.
Now, Chief Justice Moore has forced the issue by asserting the right of the state to acknowledge God. In fact, he relies on the clear words of the Alabama Constitution, which states in its preamble, “We, the people of the State of Alabama...invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following constitution and form of government for the State of Alabama.”
In spite of this clear language and in spite of the language in the United States Constitution leaving to the states those powers not given to the federal government, a federal district court judge has rendered his decision that the state does not have the right to acknowledge God.
Once again, some key Christian leaders are saying, “Well, I guess it’s the law. We have no choice but to obey it.” But, if we acquiesce this time in this decision, the enemies of our religious foundation will have reached a watershed event: the separation of God and state. Once that watershed event is achieved persecution of believers in Christianity becomes inevitable.
Chief Justice Moore could have taken an easier path, as many well-intentioned Christian counselors advised. He could have said, “The Ten Commandments are simply historical and educational. They have no religious significance.” After all, this is the argument made in the past that has permitted some Christian symbols to remain on public display. But, had he taken that course, several things might have occurred:
Some Christians are saying he chose the wrong strategy. No, he chose the right strategy. Enough is enough.
It’s time to state the case clearly: America was founded on Judeo-Christian values; its Constitution and laws are solidly based on that foundation; and our concepts of fairness and equity are founded on those values. Therefore, America must stop allowing false and mistaken leaders to expunge references to God. In fact, we must retake the high ground and insist that America restore its foundation.
The attack on learning history, the rejection of Western civilization as a worthy study in some universities, is all part of this same attack on our foundations. The attack on traditional marriage has the same purpose: to separate our society from the very roots that have made it the greatest, most open and tolerant, most productive, the most free society in the history of the world.
Even those who do not acknowledge the God of Scripture ought not to want to do away with these good things by the ultimate destruction of its foundation. [End of Don Hodel article.]
THE MISGUIDED ATTACK ON CHIEF JUSTICE ROY MOORE: PARALLELS WITH NAZI GERMANY
Hilmar von Campe, a personal friend of Dr. James Dobson, is a Christian, living in America today, who was forced to join the Hitler Youth Movement in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. He sees the parallels between the anti-God philosophy and so-called “separation of church and state” in Nazi Germany, and the same thing which is happening in America today:
| An August 25 editorial in The Miami Herald states that the placement of a monument to the Ten Commandments in the Alabama Supreme Court building in Montgomery “crossed the line between the permissible and the impermissible.” Then follows the well-known pagan reasoning of the wall between church and state according to the First Amendment, and that Judge Moore does not have the right, in the name of the state, to endorse Judeo-Christian beliefs.
Well, Judge Moore doesn’t endorse Judeo-Christian beliefs – he states the source of American law, which is recognized in the Alabama Constitution to be God and His commandments. As a foreign and a legal resident of this country, I have studied the U.S. Constitution, a supreme and mature political document, which should be a blueprint for all countries. One day, I shall swear formal allegiance to it. But since all articles apply to me already, including freedom of speech, I have taken my private oath of allegiance when I took up residence in America. This is the minimum I owe this country. Strangely enough, I cannot find any clause in the Constitution that stipulates a separation of church and state; the First Amendment certainly cannot be interpreted this way unless one does not mind lies. But the concept reminds me of the Nazi years in Germany where I grew up. In school and in the Hitler Youth – which I was forced to enter like any other youth – we were told that we could pray and sing hymns in our homes and in church as much as we liked. But as far as society was concerned, the national Socialists (i.e., Nazis) let it be known that they decided and declared what was right and what was wrong. People soon learned that you turned up in a concentration camp if you objected to the Nazi version of what was right. On Sunday mornings, Gestapo agents stood in front of our church to intimidate those who entered. Nazis spoke of “separation of church and state,” but they meant separation of God and society so that they could twist what was right and have their evil ways. The Ten Commandments were just another obstacle on their road to national and global power. Everybody knows how it ended. Hitler was unable to achieve what he had promised to do: to eliminate Christianity in Germany once he had won the war. Godlessness was the root of the Nazi evil and godlessness is at the heart of the attack on Chief Justice Moore. Judge Moore is upholding not only the U.S. Constitution, but also the Alabama Constitution. His fight is for the American people to honor their roots and be free as a nation and with God’s guidance, provide moral leadership to humanity. Since when can a federal judge force the chief justice of a state of the union to break his oath of office? [End of Hilmar von Campe article.] |
[ED. NOTE: On November 13, Alabama’s nine-member Court of the Judiciary voted unanimously to remove Judge Roy Moore from his position as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court – citing what they called his “violation of judicial ethical standards.” His crime, of course, was placing a statue of the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the state courthouse.
Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor, who prosecuted the case, had said during Judge Moore’s trial that Moore “had intentionally and publicly engaged in misconduct and deserved the severest penalty for his sensational flouting of a valid federal injunction.” Judge Moore stated in his defense, “My oath of office to the Constitution requires an acknowledgment of God – it’s that simple.” After the ruling, Moore responded: “It’s about whether or not we can acknowledge God as the source of our law and liberty. That’s all I’ve done. I’ve been found guilty.”
This is truly a watershed event in American history. Appeals are likely to follow in the Alabama and U.S. Supreme Courts. But in the final analysis, it is America, not Judge Moore, which is on trial. Or is it God who is on trial? Didn’t that happen once before 2,000 years ago?]
CONCLUSION
Most Americans and most American Christians and pastors do not understand the highly orchestrated, well financed national movement in America – spearheaded by the ACLU and implemented by liberal federal judges on behalf of the political left, atheists and gay/lesbian groups to destroy the U.S. Constitution; remove all references to God and the Bible and Christianity from public life in America; eradicate all Biblical values; and curtail the heretofore constitutionally protected free speech of Christians and traditionalists.
This is the way it began in Nazi Germany, where weak-kneed Christians also refused to speak out against the anti-God, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian edicts of the Third Reich. After all, ‘weren’t those edicts the law of the land?’ – which is exactly what American Christians are saying today. But in America’s case, the rulings and edicts of liberal Federal judges today are not (according to the U. S. Constitution) the law of the land.
But what if they were? What if sodomy, homosexual marriage, baby killing, and not praying, referring to God, or reading Scriptures in public places really were “the law of the land” in America – as the U.S. Supreme Court and many liberal Federal judges claim these issues are today? Who’s law do you obey when they are in clear conflict – God’s law or man’s law?
If you lived in Nazi Germany in the late 1930s, and “the law of the land” said to turn in your Jewish neighbor – and his family, so they could be gassed, who’s law do you obey – Hitler’s law or a higher law (i.e., God’s law)? Think about it, because if the anti-God, anti-Bible, anti-traditional values movement in America continues to have its way, many of us will have difficult decisions to make in the not too distant future – who will we obey – God or the Fourth Reich? And if these trends continue unchecked, the persecution of Christians and traditionalists in America, discussed in this writer’s book Storm Warning and alluded to above by Don Hodel, will become a reality.
By Victoria Thacker
www.brokenarrowministries.com
I recently spoke in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where I taught a class titled “Roses Will Bloom Again” for widows.
At the beginning of the class, I asked each widow to share how long she had been widowed, As each story unfolded, the tears began flowing, which confirmed to me how much we widows need one another. As the most recent widows listened intently to what those who had been widowed longer had to say, it gave them a sense of hope and direction. After I returned home from the conference, the Lord dealt with my heart about writing an article concerning widows.
There are countless books written about having a successful marriage, and in addition to all those books, hundreds more are written on how to have a successful remarriage. Then, of course, there are the numerous books written for the stages of grief. However, where are the writings that contain Biblical insight defining how to be a successful (content) widow? Have we even explored widowhood in that light before? Is our only choice for happiness and contentment remarriage?
Grief is not a smorgasbord where you go down the row picking and choosing a little of this or a little of that. Grief is more like a jigsaw puzzle, and there are so many various ways to put the puzzle together. My personal favorite is finding all the edge pieces and putting them together first, working the puzzle from the outside inward, Others may dump all the pieces out on the table at once and dive right into the middle. Then there are those who organize their puzzle into color groups. I have even watched some just stare at the picture on the lid of the box and wonder if they will be able to complete such a complex, complicated puzzle.
“Widow,” what an ominous, foreboding, gloomy title. This unwelcome title came into my life over nine years ago. Widow is such an unwanted, undesirable, dismaying title, one which seems to carry with it the following feelings: “What do I do the rest of my life; my reason for living is ended; is life now meaningless? Starting life over again at my age was like approaching a mountain far too high to climb – a mountain I did not even want to attempt to scale. In its place I desired what my life once held: love, laughter, a sense of hope, and a sense of future, but my mind knew this was impossible and could never be again. Although knowing this didn’t stop my heart from wishful thinking or yearning for my past to be restored. As a result, my heart was unwilling to set sail for a new land, a new normal. I didn’t want to let go of the man I loved. (I just stared at the cover of the puzzle box.) No matter how frustrating or unwelcome I viewed this journey, God had ordained this course, leaving me no choice in the matter. The day my husband was murdered, the ship was launched, and the long voyage was underway. It took months for me to grasp what had transpired in my life. Without my “Honey” by my side, I felt lost at sea, swimming in endless circles. “Help me, oh God!” I prayed, “Where do I find the new path for my life?”
Mind a Blank
I found myself sinking deeper each day into the shadows of despair. Suddenly it was difficult to make even the smallest of decisions. Was I losing my mind? No! My husband, Clyde, and I were a pair for thirty-six years of my life. Every thought, action, and decision that I had made in the past had considered another person, and now that equation no longer existed. That is why a widow’s entire thought patterns need to change. The rhythm and routine of life, which once was familiar, has vanished. The configuration, which was plural, has now become singular. What an impact this has on a person’s sense of balance. No wonder a widow is thrown off balance. Is it similar to losing a limb? All sorts of activities and pleasures that were once taken for granted and enjoyed with ease suddenly are difficult for one who is beginning to learn to walk with a prosthetic limb. A person can stumble and fall many times on the long, difficult journey of getting used to walking with an artificial leg. When Clyde’s feedback was instantly removed and no longer existed, it took some time to recover a sense of balance in my life. During this adjustment period in a widow’s life, both the widow and her family may get the feeling that she is unable to handle her affairs, and for a short time, that might be the case. The positive news is that this instability isn’t permanent; this too shall come to pass. This is why it is so important to make no rash decisions until the uncertainty passes and the mental confusion subsides. Don’t despair! Depend upon the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the source of ALL comfort! Eventually, sorrow will stop controlling your life, decision-making returns, and resolution begins. No! This doesn’t mean that love disappears or that waves of sadness won’t enter your life again. It means that sorrow will no longer be the focal point of your life. Rays of joy will peek through those dark clouds of sadness.
It’s hard to see things in their true perspective when your eyes are blurred with tears. This is why it takes time after the death of a loved one to cope with ordinary activities and adjust to the many behavioral changes that must take place. How passionately you grieve will be directly related to how long the grieving process will last. (Sorrow is not a state, but a process!) The customary advice given to a widow is to wait for one year before making any major decision. This message gave me the false impression that, after the first anniversary of Clyde’s death, my life would magically be on track again. Then, when my grief and confusion lasted longer, I felt defeated. In retrospect, my husband, Clyde, and I shared our hearts, our hands and our very spirits. He was my trusted comrade and my best friend. It was unrealistic to believe that, poof!; somehow in one short year I would be all mended. The notion that grief is on a time schedule is erroneous information. Go easy on yourself; we all heal at different rates. It is only as we live with grief day-to-day, week-to-week, and month-to-month, that the loss sinks in and becomes real. Only then are we able to deal with that loss. The positive, encouraging message I want to shout louder than any other is that God Himself is with you every step of the way. He gives you His strength so you can withstand this.
Refining Process
As I reached across the bed, hoping to touch my husband, his place was painfully empty. His physical touch was gone forever. Feelings like, “There is no one in the world who ever loved me more than he loved anyone else, and there is no one to whom I will ever again be first,” flooded my mind. Our companionship, love, and commitment were all gone. (‘Till death do us part.’) With the loss of affection and physical love, emptiness began gripping my heart. I was being swallowed up in a sea of loneliness. Father, what is the solution for these agonizing feelings? (Romans 12:2). “And be not confirmed to this world…” During this stage of grief and loneliness, many may feel that the first answer for escaping the pain is remarriage. We must not conclude that remarrying is the only answer to loneliness. When we consider how God works in all things for the good, transforming us into the image of Christ, we can begin to see that He is refining us for a purpose.
This tremendous void was brought into my life so that I would build a deeper relationship with the Lord and fill it with God-centered priorities, not necessarily another human being. This powerful hurt drew me closer to His side, to His Word, and to fellowship with Him. God made it known that, if I so desired, I could have an intimate relationship with Him, just as I had once had with my husband. I strained to understand what He was talking about. I already loved Him! I had known my Lord and Saviour for many, many years. So what did I need to comprehend? I began thinking about Jesus’ motive in asking Peter three times if he loved Him. Peter had already declared his love for the Lord; however, each love God spoke of in those three questions held a different, deeper meaning.
One of God’s Holy names is the great “I Am.” I Am whatever you need. I will be your lover, friend, and companion. Place your dependence solely upon Me, not another human being. The helplessness, emptiness, and loneliness that I experienced were so great that I would run into His outstretched arms. He drew me with bands of love! Finally, I knew what the Lord desired from me: a marriage bond like I had shared with Clyde. He was asking for the remainder of my life, in which my sole ambition would be to serve Him only. “And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.” (I Corinthians 7:35).
In the chapter, The Cup of Consolation, page 72-73 of my book Tea and Sympathy, I wrote the following: “I want to ask for your tolerance until you finish hearing me out. We must not assume that the only way of handling our loneliness and physical longing is to rush into marriage. Paul gives us another perspective. (I Corinthians 7:7-8). “For I would that all men [women] were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.” For those who are unable to restrain their physical desires, Paul then says in verse 9 “But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.” However, that is not the end of the matter. The thought continues in verse 27. “Art thou bound unto a wife [husband]? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife [husband]?” seek not a wife [husband]. Then Paul concludes with these final thoughts in chapter seven. “Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well. So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.” (7:37-38). “But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.” (7:40). (It is Paul’s counsel that, if at all possible, it is better to care for the things that belong to the Lord and how we may please Him than to marry again.) Even though a widow is at liberty to marry, Paul contends that she will be “HAPPIER” if she remains as he did. He spoke for our profit, not to make us miserable or to ruin our lives. This is a completely different aspect from the one which the world will give us. We need to be aware of this perspective. “But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord.” (7:32).
As I read and reread the above Scripture verses containing the words happier and better, I asked the Lord, “How does remaining unmarried make for a happier life? The prospect of living all alone seemed as though it would be dismal, dreary, and pointless. What reason would I have to get out of bed every morning? What purpose would I have for living?
My journey took me to a hopeful potential for widows. “…let thy widows trust in me.” (Jeremiah 49:11). Trust Me to be your provider, protector, problem solver, comrade, and comforter. Trust Me to give your life meaning and purpose. Now here is a big one: “Trust Me to fill that hollow place down deep in the depths of your heart.” As I began reading God’s verses in the Bible, which have the word widow/widows in them, I found that I belonged to a select group of people. God has made exclusive provision for widows and the fatherless. “Thou shall not afflict any widow...If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry… And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword...” (Exodus 22:22-24). “Thou shalt not...take a widow’s raiment to pledge.” (Deuteronomy 24:17). “Learn to do well...plead for the widow.” (Isaiah 1:17). “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction…” (James 1:27). Awesome!
If God pays so much attention to widows, how can the name widow be ominous or foreboding? It is amazing to me how many verses single widows out. The Lord Jesus has given us individual attention. Could this also mean that He has given us an individual purpose for our lives?
Anna gives us the following beautiful illustration of a widow’s life:
| “And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity; And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” (Luke 2:36-38). |
Anna was totally committed to God. She was always in a praying spirit, always ready to testify about the saving blood of Jesus, in all things always readily available to serve God! By remaining single, Anna was able to drop everything at a moment’s notice to answer God’s beck and call. Anna had no other responsibilities other than her service to the Lord. What a pur-r-fect picture of the verse in 1 Corinthians 7:32. Anna attended to the Lord without distraction. She made a voluntary offering of herself to the Lord. Anna accepted God’s proposal. I believe each widow needs to carefully consider what Anna did. This was not a Biblical requirement for a widow, but she offered herself to the Lord of her own free will.
As each widow in my “widow’s” class conveyed the circumstances surrounding her widowhood, she concluded her brief testimony with what she was presently doing with her life. It was noticeable to me that the words useless and meaningless were never used once in their conversation. Instead, they gave glory to God for how He was using them in different capacities to serve Him. They lifted their voices, testifying of the sufficiency of Christ and how He had faithfully attended to all their needs. Yes, our role in life has changed, dear widow, but that doesn’t mean it has diminished.
My fervent prayer is that the words contained in this book will be an oasis of hope, comfort, and help to many hurting people as well as a tool God will use to mend broken hearts and heal wounded spirits.
$12.00 pp
To order Tea and Sympathy, please contact
Purrfect for Women
P O Box 469
Pearce AZ 85625
(520) 826-3347
www.brokenarrowministries
By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com
The Middle East struggle is not about right against right. It is about a fifty-year effort by the Arabs to destroy the Jewish state, and the refusal of the Arab states in general and the Palestinian Arabs in particular to accept Israel’s existence. If the Arabs were willing to do this, there would be no occupied territories and there would be a Palestinian state.
Even during the “Oslo” peace process – when the Palestinian Liberation Organization pretended to recognize the existence of Israel and the Jews therefore allowed the creation of a “Palestine Authority” – it was clear that the PLO’s goal was Israel’s destruction, and not just because its leader invoked the Prophet Muhammad’s own deception. The Palestinians’ determination to destroy Israel is abundantly clear in their newly created demand of a “right of return” to Israel for “5 million” Arabs. The figure of 5 million refugees who must be returned to Israel is more than ten times the number of Arabs who actually left the Jewish slivers of the British Mandate in 1948. In addition to its absurdity, this demand has several aspects that reveal the Palestinians’ genocidal agenda for the Jews. The first is that the “right of return” is itself a calculated mockery of the primary reason for Israel’s existence – the fact that no country would provide a refuge for Jews fleeing Hitler’s extermination program during World War II. It is only because the world turned its back on the Jews when their survival was at stake that the state of Israel grants a “right of return” to every Jew who asks for it. The claim of a “right of return” is little more than a brazen expression of contempt for the Jews, and their historic suffering. More importantly, it is an expression of contempt for the very idea of a Jewish state. The incorporation of five million Arabs into Israel would render the Jews a permanent minority in their own country, and would thus spell the end of Israel. The Arabs fully understand this, and that is why they have made it a fundamental demand.
The most glaring expression of the Arabs’ bad faith is their deplorable treatment of the Palestinian refugees and refusal to relocate them, or to alleviate their condition. While Israel was making the desert bloom and relocating 600,000 Jewish refugees from Arab states, and building a thriving democracy, the Arabs were busy making sure that their refugees remained in squalid refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza, where they were powerless, right-less, and economically destitute. Today, fifty years after the first Arab war against Israel, there are 59 such refugee camps and 3.7 million “refugees” registered with the UN. Despite economic aid from the UN and Israel itself, despite the oil wealth of the Arab kingdoms, the Arab leaders have refused to undertake the efforts that would liberate the refugees from their miserable camps, or to make the economic investment that would alleviate their condition.
The refusal to address the condition of the Palestinian refugee population is – and always has been – a calculated Arab policy, intended to keep the Palestinians in a state of desperation in order to incite their hatred of Israel for the wars to come. Not to leave anything to chance, the mosques and schools of the Arabs generally – and the Palestinians in particular – preach and teach Jew hatred every day. Elementary school children in Palestinian Arab schools are even taught to chant “Death to the heathen Jews” in their classrooms as they are learning to read.
All wars – especially wars that have gone on for fifty years – produce victims with just grievances on both sides. And that is true in this one. There are plenty of Palestinian victims, as there are Jewish victims. But the collective Palestinian grievance is without justice. It is a self-inflicted wound, the product of the Arabs’ xenophobia, bigotry, exploitation of their own people, and apparent inability to be generous towards those who are not Arabs. While Israel is an open, democratic, multi-ethnic, multicultural society that includes a large enfranchised Arab minority, the Palestine Authority is an intolerant, undemocratic, monolithic police state with one dictatorial leader, whose ruinous career has run now for 36 years.
Only Jews are hated. It is a hatred that is increasingly lethal. Today 70 percent of the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza approve of the suicide bombing of women and children if the targets are Jews.
Moral Distinctions
In assessing the Middle East impasse, it is important to pay attention to the moral distinction revealed in the actions of the two combatants. When a deranged Jew goes into an Arab mosque and kills the worshippers (which happened once), he is acting alone and is universally condemned by the Israeli government and the Jews in Israel and everywhere, and he is punished to the full extent of Israeli law. But when a young Arab enters a disco filled with teenagers or a shopping mall or bus crowded with women and children and blows himself and innocent bystanders up (which happens frequently), he is someone who has been trained and sent by a component of the PLO or the Palestine Authority; he is officially praised as a hero by Yasser Arafat; his mother is given money by the Palestine Authority; and his Arab neighbors come to pay honor to the household for having produced a “martyr for Allah.” The Palestinian liberation movement is the first such movement to elevate the killing of children – both the enemy’s and its own – into a religious calling and a strategy of the cause.
The “Palestinian problem” is a problem created by the Arabs, and can only be solved by them. If a nation state is all the Palestinians desire, Jordan would be the solution as it is a state whose ethnic majority is Palestinian Arabs. In Jordan, Palestinians already have a state in which they are a majority but denies them self-determination. Why is Jordan not the object of the Palestinian “liberation” struggle? The only possible answer is because it is not ruled by Jews.
The Palestinian cause is itself corrupt. The Palestinians also want to destroy Israel. This is morally hateful. It is the Nazi virus revived. Nonetheless, the Palestinian cause is generally supported by the international community, with the singular exception of the United States (and to a lesser degree, Great Britain). It is precisely because the Palestinians want to destroy a state that Jews have created – and because they are killing Jews – that they enjoy international credibility and otherwise inexplicable support.
More than fifty years after the creation of Israel, the Jews are still the most hated ethnic group in the world. Islamic radicals want to destroy Israel but so do Islamic moderates. For the Jews in the Middle East, the present conflict is a life and death struggle, yet every government in the UN with the exception of the US and sometimes Britain regularly votes against Israel in the face of a terrorist enemy, who has no respect for the rights or lives of Jews. After the Al-Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center, the French ambassador to England complained that the whole world was endangered because of “that ... country,” Israel. This caused a scandal in England, but nowhere else. All that stands between the Jews of the Middle East and another Holocaust is their own military prowess and the generous, humanitarian support of the United States.
During the Gulf War, Israel was America’s staunchest ally while Arafat and the Palestinians openly supported the aggressor, Saddam Hussein. Yet the next two U. S. Governments – Republican and Democrat alike – strove for even-handed “neutrality” in the conflict in the Middle East, and pressured Israel into a suicidal “peace process” with a foe dedicated to its destruction. It is only since September 11 that the United States has been willing to recognize Arafat as an enemy of peace and not a viable negotiating partner.
America is good for the Jews as it is good for every other minority who embraces its social contract. But this history is why I am a fierce supporter of Israel’s survival and have no sympathy for the Palestinian side in the conflict in the Middle East. Nor will I have such sympathy until the day comes when I can look into the Palestinians’ eyes and see something other than death desired for Jews like me.