BACK TO HOME

ã 1999, by P. Wells

Many have thought to themselves that it was not fair that God would command us to do something so difficult as to have warm and affectionate feelings for our enemies or anyone else who has injured us, insulted us, or caused us great grief. Yet, He does tell us to "Love our enemies." How can we possibly obey that command? Much easier than most of us think, because God’s love is by definition in God’s own Word, an action--not a feeling.

Please observe the following statements about God’s greatest Commandment. He says that if we obey it, then we will fulfill the whole law. Indeed, we cannot love one another as God intends and break any part of the whole law.

Jesus said, "Greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his friends." "Laying down one’s life" is an action and requires no particular emotions. We should lay down our lives daily in the name of the Lord to serve our fellowman, and to win souls for Jesus Christ. "Serve" is a verb or an action word. "Forgive" is a verb and an action word. We can "do" what Jesus commands, whether we feel like it or not.

If we seek to save our own lives, we will lose them, therefore we must seek to lose our lives, or lay down our lives daily, if we want to save them, Luke 17: 33. We love according to God’s will, when we are giving and serving, which are actions. Therefore, we cannot break God’s law when we put the welfare of others before our own, which is an action.

The Golden Rule given by Our Lord states that we should do unto others, as we would have them do unto us. "Doing" is an action and not a feeling! Anyone can make a decision to love by doing as God commands us to do. The important point here is that no one has an excuse to break The Golden Rule, because we can control our actions, no matter how we may feel. If we make the decision to put the welfare of others ahead of our own, then we cannot possibly fail to obey the commandment to love others as God loved us.

Think! Could you steal, covet your neighbors wife or goods, commit murder, or adultery, or bear false witness, or dishonor your parents (bring shame to them or neglect them in their old age), if you put their welfare ahead of your own?

Consider the religious leaders of the Jews, when Christ came into the world. The Lord accused the Pharisees of obeying the Commandments of the Lord down to tithing their goods to the last mint leaf. He accused them. He did not praise them for obeying God’s laws. Why? Because they were not motivated by concern for others which made them hypocrites. They obeyed the laws of God to the letter, but disregarded the spirit of God’s laws. They used the law to condemn, accuse, criticize, and put a guilt trip on others, so that they could take advantage of them.

They spoke in the Lord’s name to appease the poor, but sold them animals in the temple at a big profit for them to sacrifice to God for forgiveness of their sins, while they created rules and regulations for them to obey that no one could obey. At the same time they excused themselves from honoring their parents (caring for them in their old age) by saying that they were giving their services full time to the Lord (called Corban in Mark 7: 11-12), and therefore had no time for their parents. See Matthew, chapter 23, for a whole list of ways that the actions of the Pharisees indicated that they were concerned for their own welfare only.

Can’t you just see these hypocrites counting out the leaves on a sprig of mint--nine leaves for themselves and one leaf for God? Then they would parade in their embroidered gowns before the poor, whom they robbed and oppressed. They reserved the best seats for themselves, saying long pious prayers in loud resonant tones to impress others. And in their alleged prayers for others, they hypocritically "asked" the Lord to forgive the sins of all the poor rotten sinners in the congregation, while proclaiming themselves as being masters and teachers and practitioners of God’s laws.

"Hypocrites! Snakes! Vipers!" Jesus called them. Did they love the people God called them to serve? No, they used them to feather their own nests, line their own pockets, and even stated that they had "given all they had" to serve God.

They actually instituted their own laws, which Jesus called "traditions of men" in the name of the Lord as an excuse for breaking God’s laws. Jesus amazed the disciples by stating that unless the righteousness of men exceeded that of the Pharisees, they were unfit for the Kingdom of Heaven. The disciples were amazed, because the Pharisees had really deceived everyone into believing that they were the acme of perfection--by their outward show of godliness.

"How can we please God, then?" the disciples wanted to know.

Paul answers this question very specifically in I Corinthians 13, in which he defines God’s love as how we should act or not act, if we would obey the Commandment to love others. This chapter is called The Golden Key to all Scripture, because this definition describes how we would behave (not how we are supposed to feel), if we loved the way that we should love from God’s point-of-view. This chapter describes exactly how we must behave to fulfill the whole law by loving our neighbor and putting his welfare ahead of our own.

The above chapter is also a description of the nature of God Himself, because John stated in I John 4: 7-8, "God is love." Both the Golden Rule and the Golden Key describe God’s nature and what we should do and be to become more like the Lord.

Galatians 5: 22 also describes the nature of those who love, as joyful, peaceful, long-suffering (patient with the shortcomings or sins of others), gentle, good, having faith, being meek (teachable), and exercising temperance (self-control). These are all characteristics that we can be (an action), if we love (an action), just by choosing to do so. These are the fruits of the Spirit, which we cannot have without choosing to believe in Jesus Christ and accepting Him as our head, because we cannot love as God intends without God’s Holy Spirit as Christians.

If every Christian read one chapter a day, "The Love Chapter," I Corinthians, chapter 13, and nothing else in the Bible, that person could learn to please God by doing, being, and practicing daily the love of God. None of us would or could ever hurt another human being again, if we would choose to love our neighbor as we already love ourselves. Be assured: By nature, all of us are basically concerned for our own welfare. Therefore, we cannot learn to love unconditionally without the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Paul states in ‘The Love Chapter" that no matter what good works we do, or how much we sacrifice, it is of no value, if we are not motivated by concern for others. If we give our bodies to be burned just to self-righteously impress others, and no one benefits from that sacrifice, Paul states that we give our bodies to be burned for nothing.

The ascetics who preach giving up all material things, and living in poverty and deprivation for no other purpose than just to exercise a religious ritual, are "sacrificing" for nothing. Our sacrifices are of value only if done for the good of others. For example, fasting and praying for others in secret would be an act of love. Everything that we do should be to make others happy, healthy, and prosperous, or to relieve others from pain, misery, or poverty or our actions are worthless, because they are not motivated by love.

That is the secret of the meaning of life, and also the secret of having self-esteem. You know you have self-worth, if you are serving others, and no one can talk you out of it. On the other hand, no one can convince you that you have self-worth, if you are self-centered. At no time did Jesus say that you must love yourself before you can love others. He said just the opposite! He took for granted that we already love ourselves--are concerned for our own welfare--when He said that we should love others just as we naturally love ourselves.

Paul continues to explain that concern for others is being long-suffering (patient without condemning), and being kind. In The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5, 6, and 7), Jesus gives specific examples of what that means. He said one must turn the other cheek, give one’s coat to one who steals his cloak, walk an extra mile, if one is compelled to walk one mile, and bless those who persecute us, or try our patience, as spouses and children do daily).

Paul tells us that to love others, we must control our negative and sinful reactions to others by not being envious, and not making them envious by boasting about our accomplishments or worldly goods. We should not "behave in an unseemly manner," or attract undue attention to ourselves by interrupting others, being loud and offensive, being ostentatious, pretentious, or an exhibitionist, swaggering, strutting, showing off, being rude or cocky, or flaunting one’s wealth and/or power.

He admonishes us not to "seek our own" or only the company of one’s "own kind" to the exclusion of anyone who does not measure up to our self-imposed standards. All of us enjoy the company of those who share our interests, but that does not mean we have the right to feel superior to others, because they have different interests. We certainly should not scorn those of a different culture, race, color, creed, or economic and/or social status, or those who do not have our particular gifts. We cheat ourselves of enriching experiences, if we limit our company to our "own kind."

Loving others means that we should not be easily provoked, and should control our thoughts to see good in others instead of being condemning or judgmental. Love hates lying, hypocrisy, and all other wicked behavior, but rejoices in the truth. Loving others means that we can "take what others dish out," or can bear all things, and love is trusting or "believeth all things." Love hopes for the best (is optimistic), but may be prepared for the worst.

The one who loves has faith enough to endure to the end in spite of persecution by God’s enemies--Satan and all the fallen angels and those Satan uses to persecute us.

Love resists the wiles and torments of their enemies and does not succumb to stooping to their level-- "fighting back" by using the enemies’ methods and weapons of destruction. Love is always believing that God’s ways for resisting evil are the only ways, and that one must not yield to the temptations of the flesh, the devil, or the world by retaliating to those in bondage to Satan in his courtrooms on his own legalistic terms. "Courting" Satan will only cost a dollar for every penny’s worth of gain, and even greater losses in peace of mind.

Even though God’s love is made up of all of the above actions, we do feel or enjoy positive emotions known as fruits of the Spirit, as a result of those actions. We have warm, friendly, joyful feelings, and an inner peace that makes it possible to sleep well at night, regardless of our outward circumstances. Loving others ensures good health.

If you have been brain washed into believing that you do not love yourself, and must go through some kind of positive ritual of telling yourself that you are a good person, then forget it. Even newborn infants know how to get their needs met, and that is their number one concern. Their survival depends on it! We learn to dislike ourselves, because we concentrate on having and getting that which cannot satisfy, instead of sharing with others and giving that which will gain the respect and love of others that can satisfy.

Jesus said that we could recognize false teachers by whether they loved one another or not, and had other fruits of the Spirit—joy, gentleness, long-suffering, goodness, faith, and inner peace, listened to wise counsel, and exercised temperance in their habits. We should not follow after those so-called spiritual leaders who are always criticizing, condemning, and ridiculing other ministries or other Christian denominations while justifying their own.

We should particularly avoid those who criticize the way some congregations worship and/or pray, especially if they accuse them of not having the Holy Spirit. Any time someone makes such a broad accusation, he is definitely in danger of blaspheming the Holy Spirit, which Jesus said was the only sin that would not be forgiven. From such turn away.

In I Corinthians 6: 23-24, Romans 14: 5-8, and I Corinthians 10-31, Paul makes it clear that anything that we do should be done to glorify the Lord, and that sanctifies the behavior, because it expresses our love for God. Therefore, no one has a right to criticize anyone who builds expensive churches or praises the Lord by shouting and clapping their hands, dancing, lifting their hands, or using any and all kinds of musical instruments.

Nor should anyone find fault with celebrating the Lord’s birth and resurrection at Christmas and Easter in any manner that men have always celebrated joyful events--with decorations, costumes, gift-giving, dancing, singing, and feasting as long as men are doing these things to glorify the Lord. All men express joy in these ways, and it is right to be joyful unto the Lord, as long as our motive is to express our love and praise for the Lord Jesus Christ.

Religious leaders who condemn that which glorifies God are false teachers, because they do not have the fruit of the Spirit--love for God. It was Judas who condemned the woman who poured expensive oil on the Lord’s feet and said she should have sold the oil and given the money to the poor. Jesus rebuked Judas who was not at all concerned for the poor or the Lord, whom he later betrayed. Love of others must also include Jesus Christ, because without His love, we cannot love.

Misunderstanding the next truth concerning love may be the root of more false teachings and more false accusations than any other blindness to the real truth than has ever afflicted men. As I said before, all of us are born being concerned about our own welfare, and must learn to be concerned about others. We never stop being concerned about our own welfare, but we must learn that we benefit most by putting the welfare of others first.

Being concerned for others is the wisest course of action for reaping blessings for ourselves. As long as we are seeking to satisfy the lusts of our flesh, desiring to receive love, money, goods, wealth, power, self-esteem, and health, we will soon learn that these desires are insatiable or impossible to satisfy. And we end up completely miserable, if we seek to satisfy these desires at the expense of others.

The Word of God tells us to seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all our other desires shall be added unto us--or supplied by our God, who is the source of all good gifts. See Matthew 6: 33. We must step out on faith to obey this basic action to love. That is why we are also told that "We are justified by faith"--not works--and not by our sacrifices.

Actually, most of us waver back and forth between humanistic ways of man and the ways of the Lord which require that we act in faith or taking God’s Word for it. Man is conditioned to fall for Satan’s lies by being bombarded on every hand by his arguments, put forth by some of the most "respectable" citizens of the world.

Without the leading of the Holy Spirit, none of us can resist the wiles of Satan. We must receive Christ first before we can love, according to the Lord’s will. It is just a matter of admitting that we are sinners, desire to turn away from those sins, and asking the Lord Jesus Christ to be Lord of our lives. At that point, we receive the Holy Spirit, and have power to love the way God intends for all men to love, and receive all His wonderful blessings.

I know two stories that are favorites of mine, because they illustrate in humorous ways the difference between Christian love and those who do not love as God loves.

A certain man had occasion to visit hell and he determined that what he saw was the heighth of torment. A large banquet was set with all kinds of delicious foods and delicacies. Around the table sat the inmates of hell with three-foot-long forks bound to their arms and hands so that it was impossible for them to feed themselves. Their faces and bodies were thin and gaunt and the expressions on their faces were ghastly. The man shuddered at the horror of the situation and left.

His next stop was heaven where he saw the same identical scene--a large banquet set before the inhabitants of heaven who also had the same kind of forks bound to their arms and hands. But to his amazement these souls were fat, jovial, and filled with joy and good humor. He could not believe his eyes until he noticed the saints were feeding each other!

The second concerns a story about a skinflint who received a letter from his church asking for a donation. He was always irritated by such requests and decided to respond to this one by writing a blistering note of accusation. He ended his diatribe by saying, "All you think about is money and gouging the members of your congregation. You think the whole duty of Christians is to give, give, and give until it hurts."

The pastor answered the man’s note by writing, "Thank you for the best definition of the duty of Christians that I have ever read. God bless you." Amen and Amen in Jesus name. Maranatha!

"Snob" is simply a more colorful word for "arrogant." Snobs come in all sizes, shapes, and forms, and in all varieties of mental, physical, social, and emotional backgrounds. What is a snob? A snob is anyone who tries to feel superior by implying that anyone who is different from him/her is inferior, regardless of that difference.

The scribes and Pharisees were arrogant snobs who thought they could build themselves up by putting everyone else down, and they invented their own standards of morality--aside from the Lord’s--to measure the inferiority of others. They had so much pride that it kept them from believing Jesus when He condemned their "traditions of men" and ultimately led them to murder their Lord.

Snobbism is probably the most hateful of all traits, because snobs are full of hatred and jealousy--envy that blinds them to any good in others, and to any evil in themselves. It is also the most difficult trait to recognize in our selves. Are you a snob?

Pride was the first sin and the sin that Satan used to tempt Eve. (Satan declared that He would be like the "Most High," and tempted Eve by saying she would be like God, if she ate the fruit.) It is the first sin, and probably the last sin to go. Pride is probably the reason men love money, which God’s Word declares is the root of all evil. Read on to discover if you are a snob in some respect. You may be surprised!

Do you take pride in being poor? Do you say, "I always wore my brother’s hand-me-downs," with pride in your heart--even though you pretend to be complaining? Do you entertain the idea that all wealthy or prosperous folks must be "crooks"? Do you take particular notice of rich men, whom you really resent, presuming they are stingy, lacking in compassion for close relatives, and always "get away with" criminal acts?

If you think anyone is superior just because they suffer from being poverty-stricken, rather than materially comfortable, you may be snobbish about being poor and unloving toward anyone who has money. You would find it impossible to be friends with a rich person, and might even turn down his help, no matter how much you needed it. The excuse that you might give for your "poor but proud" attitude is that the rich are arrogant snobs! This sinful attitude is a common reason why many paupers sabotage themselves from ever being prosperous. Prosperity is not a sin and poverty is not a virtue, per se. Making money one’s god or the LOVE of money is a sin, but earning money honestly by performing necessary services or providing useful goods is a requirement for godly living. Doing so is also a guarantee of prosperity.

Snobs are always critical of others and judgmental, getting their satisfaction from bringing others down to their mean level, rather than doing anything positive to become a better person or a more successful person themselves, but few are more annoying than the sports buff. Are you proud of your knowledge of all that goes on in the sports world, expressing contempt for those who do not keep up with the world series scores, the top players, the batting averages, thinking any guys that are interested in academics, art or music are nerds or squares?

You may be surprised to learn the you are a snob, when you thought that those who excelled in cultural pursuits such as art, music, and the theatre were snobs, and they often are! But so are you, if you have convinced yourself that you are more macho, masculine, and superior, because you prefer sports to any other interests. I have met baseball snobs, football snobs, basketball snobs, and wrestling snobs who were just as insufferable as intellectual snobs. I almost called them "pseudo-intellectual snobs"--revealing my own special brand of snobbism--sorry, Lord.

Yes, there are those who take "pride" in being humble. They put themselves down concerning their best traits, and even their most outstanding talents. Was Jesus filled with pride, when He announced that He would be sitting at the right hand of the Father? Hey! What a boast! No one can top that one! But we know that Jesus was without sin and that pride is a sin. His boast was not a boast. It was a fact!

Therefore, we know that being honest about one’s strengths and weaknesses is an example of humility, and denying our genuine strengths is an example of pride. False humility is as dishonest as one can get. Admitting one’s strengths is necessary before one can volunteer these talents to win souls to Christ. Being honest about one’s skills and gifts in teaching, cooking, or carpentry or strength to dig a ditch, and volunteering these gifts are acts of love. False humility and denying one’s gifts is pride and can be used as an excuse or a cop-out.

Remember the Pharisee who thanked God that he was not as evil as a poor beggar who had thrown himself down on the ground crying to the Lord for forgiveness? Jesus declared that the beggar was more righteous for honestly admitting his own sins than the self-righteous Pharisee, who was denying his sins--blinded by his pride.

We also have gardening snobs, who take pride in not using chemicals instead of natural means of fertilizing and destroying garden pests. Pesticides can be dangerous, but the pests that attack whole cornfields, wheat fields, and other vital crops may not be controlled in any other way. Extremism can result from pride that is destructive and environmentalists as well as conservationists have taken their "pride" to a very costly extreme.

And what about those environmental snobs who insist on preserving endangered species, such as a rat on the west coast, that ended up being destroyed in the next earthquake, anyway. Perhaps, they should leave the preservation of nature to God, who can and does create new species with a wink of his eyelash, and has the power to clean up the earth from pollution with one single number on the Richter scale. Another rat carried vermin that caused a plague in the southwest. Maybe these "endangered species" are endangered for a reason, that we do not know! Most rodents carry disease-bearing ticks and fleas.

I have heard gardening snobs make fun of Sunday golfers, joggers, and those who spend big bucks on health clubs, weight-loss programs, and other "unproductive" activities. I am one of those snobs myself, because "gardening is productive."

I admit that it hurts me to see strong, virile, young people wasting all that energy lifting weights, when their yard needs mowing, and they hire it done. I have noticed that these physical fitness fanatics do not have the strength to carry their fast food papers to the nearest trashcan, and even if they are next to it, they still miss the can. Yet, they lift weights, and hit hoops with ease. Am I a snob? Maybe! Maybe, I couldn’t lift weights or hit a hoop, if I tried. Who knows? But I make a point not to strew my trash around!

I cannot count all the occupational snobs I have met. Those who work with their hands--feel contempt for those who sit behind a desk--and vice versa. A college degree is highly over-rated, because it is primarily for the purpose of finding better employment, and developing specific skills and knowledge to engage in a highly specialized occupation, and what does a diploma prove? Do degrees make a good teacher? Or is teaching a gift like artistic or musical talent? The same question may be raised for plumbers, electricians, mechanics, and operators of big machines.

I knew a beekeeper, who loved his bees and made a good living selling honey and queen bees to pollinate fruit trees and crops. He could not read, tell time, or count, but he was content. Isn’t that the mark of a successful man?

Those who attend church assemblies think they are superior to those who do not attend--or superior to those who do not attend a church of the same denomination as they do. That kind of snobbism among Christians who should know better is almost inexcusable, but it does exist--and I am convinced that it breaks the Lord’s heart.

Everyone feels superior to attorneys and politicians, of course, because they really are all crooks--out for all they can get-- and probably fraternize with the mafia! And some do! Unfortunately, it seems that those who want to be honest cannot get elected, and that is also often true. The fact is that those in power, for whatever reason, evoke everyone else to find reasons to "feel superior." Unfortunately, men in power all to often attempt to abuse their power to exploit everyone else.

But is that reason for the rest of us sinners to despise them? They may need the Lord more than anyone else? Did I hear millions of "Amens" to that? Pray for them. I do. Yes, I really do--for the sake of the country! Nevertheless, we cannot tolerate the flaunting of the law by those in power without jeopardizing freedom and justice for all.

White-collar workers feel superior to blue-collar workers, because they don’t get dirty, and blue-collar workers feel superior, because they usually earn more money. Most college graduates resent the high wages of the laboring man, even though they wouldn’t be caught in their work boots. As if they deserve higher salaries, for the same number of hours they work!

The fact is that an hour of one man’s time spent in honest labor is just as valuable to him as an hour of another man’s time spent in conference rooms is to him. So, why does one man get paid hundreds of dollars an hour for his labor, and another is paid less than five? Is the highly paid man really worth so much more, or has he just conned us into believing that he is?

The Lord Jesus said we should love one another and accept one another in all things as He did. None of us are without sin, and no one is superior, because of his/her circumstances or any of his/her worldly accomplishments. Every man does have a right to engage in work that will make it possible for him to live in reasonable comfort.

I understand that Jesus used money, talents, coins, wealth, and prosperity as topics to illustrate his truths more than he used any other subject. I laughed, when I learned those facts, saying, "He certainly knew how to get our attention!" That is right! He did! However, He also recognized the need for money to carry on the business of the world and does not begrudge us that need, even though He doesn’t want us to sacrifice all other blessings to gain money and goods at the expense of others or just to satisfy our pride.

We could enjoy one another’s differences, if we would just see them as Rudyard Kipling did. In his poem "If," he called fame, power, and wealth, "imposters." These imposters are the reason for most snobbery, and they are worthless goals in themselves, luring all men to make fools of themselves--either because they have achieved or because they have not.

If you are jealous, envious, desire special recognition, or even experience fear of losing anything that you have, you are probably a snob of one kind or another. Love casts out fear and heals jealousy, envy, arrogance, and even pride. Love is an action that you can demonstrate, by believing the Lord, receiving His Holy Spirit, and by walking in faith.

The happiest man or woman is the one who rejoices over the success of others.

October l4, l997

Andy Rooney scoffed, sneered and mocked the gathering of Promise Keepers in Washington D. C. in his own inimitable affable manner, which I am sure evoked laughter. Referring to "such movements" as the gathering of over one million men, Rooney suggested cynically, "They don’t last."

The Pharisee, Gamaliel, suggested the same to persuade the Pharisees not to waste time persecuting the Apostles, saying that if they were not of God, they won’t last. However, genuine believers in Jesus Christ are the only ones in history who built free schools, hospitals, and housing for the indigent and the homeless, and established the most powerful free democracy in the world.

Without Jesus Christ, those who do "good deeds" do so for their own glory, having discovered that obeying universal laws is good for business, gains love and respect from others, and is conducive to peaceful relationships, health, and long life. However, Jesus taught that any service or act of charity that is not motivated by unconditional concern for the welfare of others "does not last"--is "nothing."

Furthermore, Jesus demands total allegiance before enabling anyone by the power of His Holy Spirit to perform these unselfish acts and that he/she gives Him all the glory to win others to do the same to receive comparable Spiritual blessings. You are right, Andy, God does not need OUR worship--WE NEED TO WORSHIP GOD!

Scoffers reveal their spiritual poverty, that Jesus called "nakedness, starvation and death," manifested by an unforgiving and spiteful spirit. Believers, having a personal relationship with the Lord, would never trade that experience for any worldly pleasure. Yes, Andy, Jesus Christ lives. He is Everlasting, and I pray that you come to know Him.

If you cannot control your fear, envy, thoughts, suspicions, or any negative emotion, then work out a positive action or behavior that is opposite the way you feel.

Make a decision not to be afraid, envious, suspicious, angry, and ask the Lord to give you the strength to behave in the positive way that you want to behave. If you slip, try, try, again. DO NOT GIVE UP! With God all things are possible.

The fact is that if you act in positive ways, you will be amazed at the effect that your changed attitude has on others, whom you imagined disliked you! Their positive reaction can give you the courage, strength, and resolve to continue. Your feelings will change to match their reactions. Long ago, I heard a psychiatrist say on the radio (before TV), that if we go through the motions, then we will soon feel the emotions.

Faith will replace fear. Trust will replace suspicion. Peace will replace anger. And admiration and appreciation for the good traits of others will replace envy and jealousy. Love is an action that indicates our concern for the welfare and feelings of others. That is the truth. And the Truth will set you free from your negative emotions. Do not knock it, if you haven’t tried it, we used to say. Obeying God begins with actions, and the rewards for obedience are positive and healthy feelings.

We left a congregation once, and this is the reason why!

The charismatic preacher told a story from the pulpit to justify what he must have known was unjustifiable. He described a scene in which an old friend with his family was visiting his family. They were about the same age and had young families in the same general age group. They were all laughing and talking and waiting for dinner to be served--catching up on old times. Both men were successful ministers, and thought they had it all! One boasted that kids often mistook him for Jesus Christ (He wore a beard!).

The visiting minister was teasing the four-year-old son of our minister and the roughhousing apparently got out of hand. The lad became boisterous in what had been described as a somewhat boisterous environment to begin with. Our minister told his son to calm down, but the lad was apparently too keyed up to respond, and so was the minister’s friend, no doubt. In any event, the pride of our minister was offended, and he ordered his son to the room where he expected corporal punishment to be carried out.

Our minister had deliberately chosen for his subject that morning, the necessity for disciplining one’s children with the rod. I am certain he was trying to justify his behavior from the pulpit. He quoted Proverbs and canted on and on about the subject before giving the above illustration. Then he described how he made his son wait in torment--knowing that he would be punished severely.

He then proceeded to describe how he always held his four children tightly between his legs while he pounded on their behinds. Finally, he forced them to hug him as he lied to them, that he was acting in "love." He made crude jokes about applying the "Board of Education." Some of the men laughed. I know that none of the women thought he was funny. He was gross, and I was embarrassed. I know that I caught a glimpse of filth running down the corners of his mouth and a sadistic smirk on his face as he took absolute pleasure in describing his abominable behavior in gruesome detail.

Regarding his account as an example of pornography from the pulpit, I insisted that we leave the building at once. He agreed. I could see the pain in my husband’s eyes, but none of us could speak of the unspeakable cruelty expressed by that filthy man just to impress his friend that he was a "good father." Pride is a sin, and so is sadism!

Our children were also very embarrassed and muttered sympathy for that man’s son. My husband nodded in agreement, and said something that surprised us all. He said, "Doesn’t Proverbs say that the rod is for the fool’s back? The preacher who provoked the boy was the fool!" I had the feeling that my husband wanted to take both of those fools to the woodshed! If he had, I would have cheered!

My husband had a gift for saying the right thing at the right time for making us all laugh. He was a gentleman who helped me raise six kids without ever laying a hand on any of them. GENTLENESS is one of the fruits of the Spirit. The Word of God clearly states that we can recognize false teachers by their fruits. We left that church for good reason and for good--period. We did not need to listen to a false preacher.

The Lord told me that our children are our neighbors and our brethren and they deserve the same respect. In fact, He said that every verse in the Word of God that tells us how to behave toward our neighbors, our brethren, and other Christians are instructions for how he expects us to rear our Christian children who have the same rights by the Holy Spirit that we claim. That makes sense to me!

September 9, 1998

In Stan Clapp’s letter in which he listed his virtues (did not use foul language, tote a gun, engage in violence, and respected his elders), he attributed his Thank-God-I- wasn’t-like-kids-today tirade to razor-strap therapy. He used the same means to control his own--presumably perfect angels. My mother was reared the same way, and tried using the same methods.

I became a Christian when I first sang "Jesus Loves Me," and believed "because the Bible tells me so," meant that Scripture was infallible (Mom didn’t.). Therefore, I began reading The Holy Bible at the age of four.

I understood the commandments (except adultery), and giving my only penny in Church was the Lord’s will. I wasn’t a widow, but I understood that "the widow’s mite" was better than gold, and that prodigal’s were forgiven by God, if they were sorry.

Mom threatened me occasionally with "If you do or don’t, you’ll get." I was offended that she thought I would stupidly disobey God, who knew every hair in my head. My first reaction was to "do or don’t" out of resentment. Instead, I prayed that God would deliver me from "who must be my step-mother," but God reminded me to honor her.

God calls rebels into service because they have the courage to resist the devil. Only cowards obey God (or parents) for fear, and they will worship the devil (or Hitler), if he should appear. Jesus sets us free from fear.

I believe that people need to become involved in creative activities and projects that help them forget themselves and to demonstrate concern for others. Adults may need to provide low-cost housing with gardens for strolling, with nearby gift and grooming shops, and a soup-salad-and-sandwich kitchen on the premises for senior citizens. They also could provide for a shuttle bus to go shopping, a greenhouse for puttering, and even a nearby pond stocked with fish for those who like to fish.

Such a facility should be non-profit and tax-free, even though it could pay for itself, if maintenance of the grounds, light housekeeping, errands run, and reading or just listening to these senior citizens were part of the local high school’s program. Students who take the "course," performing various duties in turn, would receive credit for doing so. The experience would be beneficial for the kids as well as the seniors.

The kids could learn about gardening while working with seniors or may even enjoy fishing with a "Grandpa," because they do not know their own. I am almost a fanatic about the wisdom of putting kids in the company of senior citizens, because many parents do not have time, even if they are so inclined. The elderly love to talk about the past, and can be frank about their mistakes, which delights the young who have been conned into believing that adults never make any mistakes, and wisdom is imparted.

The students could plant fruit trees, vines, and vegetable gardens. I know they can, because I took teen-agers into my home that were rejected by practically all authorities. They laid patios, made simple repairs around the house, planted, built raised beds, and mixed soil with compost. Then they called their friends to boast of their accomplishments.

Any small town or neighborhood could promote such a project to save the kids and help the elderly. Any time kids are given constructive things to do they are no so inclined to indulge in destructive behavior. They do need guidance, which shop, home economics, agriculture, and mechanics teachers could provide.

I know without any doubt that such projects would require much less tax money than prisons, court sessions, more police, and surveillance, in general. Why are so many politicians preaching about saving rodents, and even whales, when our kids are going down the tubes? We need to get our priorities straight.

Incidentally, kids that learn how to prepare meals, clean, or do simple repairs, and plant gardens have a good chance of surviving in almost any environment without resorting to theft. This letter is just a germ of an idea that I literally practiced and know that it works. Anyone with imagination and the energy and strength of a younger person could do so much more--if that person were also truly concerned about the welfare of kids--called love--which is an action. Ben Franklin said, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," which we don’t hear anymore.

Instead, we spend billions of dollars for superficial cures, such as bigger prisons, detoxification centers, hospitals, a cure for AIDS, and over thirty other venereal diseases. The cures for diseases that are caused by alcohol and drugs, population control by murdering the unborn, and saving rats with disease-causing fleas that live in the desert represent even more profligate spending. It should make us sick, and it does--literally!

We are all sick from drugs, alcohol, depression, suicide, and grief over sick family relationships. Not to mention how sick we are of living at the poverty level because of wasted tax dollars on alleged art that benefits no one but those who could afford to pay for it--if it is "art."

We are indeed talking about gross poverty, of course, from taxation without representation that robs over a half-year of hard labor from the majority of families--even one-parent families. Jesus asked if there would be any faith in the world, when He returned. My question is, "Will He find any love in the world?

If you put a lobster in cold water, and turn the burner on under the pot, the lobster is cooked even before he feels the heat. That is a metaphor for what has happened in this country in the last forty-odd years.

Over forty years ago, humanism (based on Nietchske’s allegedly brilliant "God-is-dead.--Man-is-his-own-god" philosophy), Shavianism (George B. Shaw’s unisex ideas in which elite women had masculine traits, and peasant women "should be paid to bear the children"), and sexual gratification without any taboos was touted as being "safe" because of condoms and penicillin to cure venereal diseases), became the new standards of "freedom."

One leading proponent of this "new philosophy" was Hugh Hefner in his magazine, Playboy, in which he opened the door to pornography by winning the freedom to publish his naked women as an "art form" in the name of freedom of the press. He still boasts that he set women free. We now have all the ingredients for gourmet lobster fare.

How Shaw’s misogynic philosophy, Shavianism, became corrupted into Chauvinism or fanatical patriotism (Chauvin was not a woman-hater, but a pawn of Napoleon’s,) is anybody’s guess. But the fact that it happened is evidence that few men, if any, think for themselves, and repeat what they hear like parrots. "male Shavianist pig" would have been more accurate. My target is "female Shavianist prigs," who sold all women into slavery.

Feminism, the demanding of women’s rights, has also been the rabid rage for the past forty years. As if women being forced into the work place is a "right!" Initially, Adam had a "right" to provide a living for his family, and Eve had the "right" to experience painful childbirth. Now women have achieved the "right" to do both or commit murder. Thanks to the N O W and ERA crowd, not to mention the "Mzzzzzzz" Lesbians.

As for the heat that no one has felt for the last forty years, fear is rampant so that even the mayor, threatens to call out the police when a citizen makes a legitimate complaint. That’s right! It happened to me. I could not believe it. I could not run fast enough to catch him, if I tried, and I could not get away from him, if he chased me. So, what was he afraid of? Why did he think he needed the police? "The wicked flee, when no man pursueth," according to Proverbs 28: 1. The fact is that we are now living in a police state where everyone is terrified, and nobody felt the "heat" that caused this pot of water we are in to boil over.

I observed first hand that a police state does exist in this county. They have the power to search cars on suspicion without a warrant. "Suspicion" is justified if the driver is in his teens--and for no other reason. The police stop these cars--even if an adult is also in the car--and command the driver to convey threatening messages to others under "suspicion." That happened to me, also. If anyone complains, they are told that complaints are not recognized unless first approved by the local police.

I think we could call that hiring the fox to investigate "who stole and devoured the chickens." But that is exactly what happened to me with a teen-ager driving my car in Champaign County. Do not bother to complain about police harassment in Champaign, Illinois. It will get you nowhere. But our local politicians are hot and heavy after higher taxes for more police, prisons, and better law enforcement. And all the students aspire to be attorneys-- "where the real money is!" And to think, we aspired to be missionaries!

The Constitution was designed to guarantee real human rights and freedom for all citizens. Instead, the checks and balances that our forefathers intended have been totally nullified. Is the lobster complaining? Of course not! He is fully cooked and ready to be devoured! If you recall, I titled PART IV, "LOVE LETTERS as in LOVE YOUR ENEMIES." I dealt with what love is, and now I will deal with who the enemy is, or the enemies of the Lord. It is the same. I truly want ALL to be saved.

YOUR NEIGHBOR.

This message is for vicious, malicious, domineering women who know exactly how to push the buttons of men to provoke them to anger, when they do not get their way without question. They accomplish this with expressions of "righteous indignation"--no matter how unfair their selfish demands may be.

If the males involved become so provoked that they respond with a shove and a "get out of my face," or a shake of a fist, and a shout, "You bitch," then these vengeful females call the police, and lie blatantly, saying, "I feared for my life." Even though these men leave the house promptly, the police track them down and arrest them on the word of the alleged female victims.

By this time, I know I have the attention of many males out there who have been victimized by such women. Incidentally, the only definition of "bitch" that is ever used today is the one in Webster’s, "vicious, malicious, domineering female." No one would ever insult a faithful female dog by calling her a "bitch," considering the present-day connotations of that term.

My final word to these "bitches:" Man was created in God’s image, described as a God of wrath. If you do not believe Jesus ever became angry, read His scurrilous indictment against the self-righteous, hypocritical Pharisees in Matthew, chapter 23.

How are you "ladies" going to respond to the Lord’s anger on Judgment Day? Are you going to call the police and play "victim"?

May 7, l998

Several years ago, I watched a talk show in which four incarcerated-for-life burglars were asked the best way to protect one’s home from being burglarized. They discussed iron bars, gated properties, high-tech alarm systems, and courses in self-defense, but these professionals maintained they knew how to "get around" all of these. I remember what else they said, but not the name of the show.

First, join the National Rifle Association. I decided this letter was timely, because our Constitutional right to bear arms is under vicious attack, and the NRA is especially being maligned. These convicts said they were reluctant to invade residences that had NRA stickers on the doors and windows, because these residents were undoubtedly prepared to defend their families and property with guns which they probably knew how to use.

Secondly, beware of barking dogs. Alarm systems can be disconnected but barking dogs cannot. Even if everything else points to the absence of the owner (no lights, signs of life, or car in the driveway), that dog strongly suggests that someone willing to use a gun is probably home. Few dog owners leave a dog alone for long--especially, not overnight--because dogs need attention.

Finally, avoid little old ladies who have NRA stickers and a dog, because no jury in the land would convict a terrified helpless widow who shot first and asked questions later. Th interviewees were unanimous, "Don’t even think about it!"

October 7, l997

Thank you for publishing Peggy Patten’s letter concerning gun control laws alongside John Naese’s comments for the purpose of comparison. Patten reported that 5,254 children under age l9 died of gunfire in l995, and Naese reported that guns used defensively by peaceable citizens prevented from 700,000 to 2.6 million deaths. Patten said more children die from guns here than in Israel or Northern Ireland. Do they have gun laws over there?

Probably, many more lives of children were saved by guns used by peaceable citizens, as reported in Naese’s statistics (700,000) than 5254. After all, guns are used to protect families, not just individuals, and these lives were usually saved "without a shot fired," according Naese.

Criminals are not law-abiding. They obtain black market guns or manufacture their own lethal weapons--bombs from cutoff aluminum baseball bats and guns from lead pipes. Peaceable citizens who abide by the law are the ones left without any defense. Seven hundred thousand lives might have been lost--a few more than six thousand deaths-- preventable by safety classes, perhaps?

I never owned a gun, and do not know how to use one, but I support the NRA. They send me stickers for my windows. I believe that NRA stickers in themselves are a deterrent against criminal attack. My barking dogs would alert criminals that I could "grab my gun," if necessary. Reassuring, since criminals can accomplish their goals in seconds, before the police could arrive, if I were able to call them.

THAT IS A COMMANDMENT!

Why do I get discouraged? Because all men are motivated by self-love--whatever position they take on any question. The pendulum swings in a free society--from rebelling against tyranny of government, then religion, and/or big business, because men were born to be free. A two-year-old forced to sit as punishment is still standing up inside.

God was against the Jews’ having a king (political tyranny), but gave in to their demands. Jesus Christ condemned the religious tyranny of the Pharisees, and Jewish law stated that men who charged interest (usury) on loans to the poor were thieves to be stoned to death (tyranny by businessmen).

Jesus Christ said that if law and fear of torture, imprisonment, and death worked to create righteousness (tested for 4000 thousand years and failed), He would not have had to go to the cross to set men free.

The Sermon on the Mount was not given to condemn men but to make them realize that even the most law-abiding (outwardly) needed to change from being corrupt, adulterous, and murderous in their hearts and to become totally concerned for the welfare of others.

Knowing man’s basic nature, The Lord gave only one Commandment (paraphrased to explain the misunderstood word, "love"). Love the Lord (trust and obey his laws for OUR sakes), and be concerned for the welfare of all others as we are--by nature--concerned for our own welfare. Please tell me that you understand why "love" fulfills the whole law!

January 2, l998

I couldn’t stop laughing--even in the middle of the night--at the objections raised over a catalog that purports to identify Christian businesses; even though all Christians know that some folks would lie to be listed in such a directory to attract potential suckers. However, those critics who objected claimed to be conscientious label-objectors--not anti-Christian per se.

I couldn’t help wondering if these righteously indignant objectors have opened an Ameritech telephone directory lately, and if they write letters to Ameritech hotly decrying their use of labels? My directory is just full of labels, listing attorneys under "Attorneys," physicians under "Physicians," and used car dealers according to specific models, yet!

Religious organizations in the area are all listed under their respective faiths to give folks free choice, which is the reason for labels, I thought.

C’mon, Guys! Admit that labels have a purpose. If you wanted to buy a Ford SUV, would you really want to drive all over town looking for a business that sold your particular preference? Even Judeo-Christian labels are useful for alerting atheists and infidels as to which businesses to avoid, since they obviously prefer doing business with those who have no respect for obeying the Ten Commandments.

As for me, I would defend to the death those laissez-faire label lovers who make free choice possible. They are the peacemakers who most assuredly shall live long lives--even throughout all eternity--or so I choose to believe.

I could not believe the position taken in a letter, advocating the very measures--giving police the power to search without a warrant to deter crime--that drove our forefathers to endure unbearable hardships, and an extremely hazardous and lengthy (about three years) journey across the Atlantic to escape.

When threatened by government oppression, tyranny, and terror they escaped to this country, fought hard at great sacrifice (their very lives) for freedom in the Revolutionary War, and devised a Constitution with checks and balances that was designed to prevent such conditions in this country.

I think that the obviously very young and shortsighted critic does not have a clue as to what she was writing about. Those refugees from Europe risked everything to be free from police breaking into their homes and searching for anything they could use as an excuse to cart victims off to prison, because they did not need a warrant to search to do so. I am certain that they would have tapped phones illegally without conscience or reproach, if phones had been invented at the time.

Think about it, little girl. What is the most dangerous scenario that man can live under: Being terrorized by those who have a legal right to do so, or being terrorized by criminals that have no legal right to do so. Frankly, I prefer a government that has laws to protect citizens from the police. Any man with too much power without exception is always dangerous. I am certainly glad that our forefathers realized that, but I am equally appalled at the number of persons who want to nullify what freedoms we still have left.

If you read the previous letter, you will realize that the police are already searching without a warrant, which is against the Constitution. Unfortunately, no one can complain, because the police would not approve the complaint. I hope someone reads this letter in Champaign County who has the power to correct this appalling situation!

FREEDOM IS EARNED May 18, 1998

Our forefathers fled to this country from tyranny. They established a Constitution and the Bill of Rights to ensure that freedom from unwarranted government controls would be maintained. They also wanted freedom from high taxes to spend their hard-earned money as they saw fit.

They wanted the right to bear arms, not only to hunt, but also to prevent government from making decisions they believed belonged to individuals as to how they should worship or what they should teach their children. They wanted freedom of speech and the press so that they could speak out against abuses before they became dangerous.

They designed our government to protect all Americans from the most dangerous criminals on earth--dictators who usurp authority to legally drag thousands who question their power to prison, or to be tortured and executed.

We have a president who insists on "bigger government" because he cannot trust himself--hence nobody else--to handle freedom responsibly, so he and activists who agree with him insist on these "dangerous criminal rights" leading to an authoritarian government.

We don’t lose our freedom; we throw it away by behaving irresponsibly. Each time a man abuses his family members or a woman calls the police as a "power play" rather than because she "fears for her life and/or limb," he/she irresponsibly costs all of us more freedom. Because activists insist on more police, more jails, and more laws that are already included in the Ten Commandments. I pray that God will forgive us all for trusting more government instead of His laws.

I was astounded at Gene Silmone’s declarations that "liberals" were responsible for The Constitution, the Louisiana Purchase, end of slavery, Land Grant Act, Homestead Act, purchase of Alaska, vote for women, National Parks, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Whatever Silmone thinks is the dictionary definition of "liberal" is, the political definition has nothing to do with individual freedom. "Liberal" today means higher taxes, more government control, and robbing individuals of their right to keep their earned money and decide for themselves how to spend and invest it on the grounds that individuals are incapable of making these decisions themselves.

Our forefathers believed that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton), so they created a Constitution with checks and balances designed to limit the powers of big government at every possible turn, which is not an idea favored by "liberals" today.

Most of the acts of Congress, that Silmone mentioned, created more independent and responsible landowners, free education for all citizens, including women and blacks. Their goal was to prepare more citizens to be responsible enough to govern themselves, and ultimately shift power from government to more individuals, which is not the goal of modern "liberals."

The only ideas promoted by "liberals" in this century were welfare programs and socialized medicine designed to raise taxes so high that it is impossible for individuals to make decisions concerning the money they earn to care for their own--young or old--as citizens did in the past. "Liberal" is not synonymous with individual freedom, Silmone!

It was arrogant of Steve Smith to think he was qualified to give me a grade in history--"A" or "F"--because he obviously is oblivious concerning the present. I do not know any single mother who works only 8-hour days, five-day weeks, who isn’t a slave to two jobs just to put food on the table--thanks to the Democrats whom Smith call "liberal."

As for history, I remember well when F D R ran for office. I witnessed and experienced history, and remember the quality of life before the "liberals" raised taxes, and how they have distorted history to prove "their right" to continue a program intended only to aid victims of the depression, while making expensive promises just to get votes.

I took issue with the word "liberal" used to refer to lying, thieving, and murderous Democrats, who want to abort all babies on welfare (real reason for banning last-trimester abortions). General Powell wisely resigned, because he did not want new recruits to be subjected to sexual harassment by homosexual officers, because Clinton made promises to gays to get their vote, knowing their concern was free treatment for AIDS in military hospitals. Blacks support all that?

"Liberals" raise taxes, so that very few can spend their money to meet their needs.

As for my being ungrateful for alleged benefits, I refused to teach in public schools that prevent teachers from teaching the truth about the quality of life deteriorating, because

"liberals" make promises they don’t intend to keep.

October 13,1998

WHAT? ANOTHER "F" IN HISTORY?

Steve Smith knows I have never pretended to be a history buff, but giving me an "F" in secular history is a compliment, because it is replete with lies, prejudices, omissions, and ignorance concerning the how and why events have occurred. Each author writes from his own narrow perspective and distorts facts, according to his idea of "the end justifies the means."

Examples of "politically correct" distortions include the minimizing that early Christian settlers fled European persecution to find religious freedom in America. Also,

Columbus recorded in his journals that he sought a new route to the Far East to fulfill Christ’s Commission to preach the Gospel worldwide as a condition of His return.

As for my affiliation with the "political right," I vote according to my Christian values, shared by Democrats many moons ago. I support pro-life, sanctity of marriage, equality of all men under God, and freedom from government interference in rights guaranteed all citizens by the Constitution and the high taxes attached to that "interference."

Smith obviously was brainwashed in the 60’s to reject traditional values that he calls the "progressive movement." His anti-defense posture is not based on the blood shed in the Revolutionary War to gain the freedoms he enjoys, but on his unfortunate experiences in Vietnam which made him bitter and shortsighted.

I call Smith’s "progress" regressing to the years Before Christ. Our present economy, "Stupid," is grand larceny of the quality of life we had, when men made the living and women made the living worthwhile.

October 30, 1998

Contrary to certain published presumptions concerning me, I don’t write strictly political or religious letters. I am a dedicated non-denominational member only of the body of Christ by faith. I obey His instructions befitting my personal calling (not necessarily applicable to all).

I write about issues that concern Our Lord. I know--and so does everyone else--exactly what those issues are, if they have read the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chapters, 5, 6, and 7.)

The Lord condemned the practices of hypocrites (e.g. If you look upon a woman with lust, you have committed adultery in your heart.). I know that this nation will pay, if voters continue to condone sinful practices for monetary gain.

I will quote Holy Scripture to support my unwavering position. God and my friends and family know I practice what I preach or daily confess and repent of my mistakes--at some cost-- but also with incredible spiritual blessings.

"The love of money is the root of all evil," I Titus 6: 10.

"Seest thou a man wise in his own conceits? There is more hope for a fool than for him," Proverbs 26: 12 (Clinton).

"He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous him shall the people curse. Nations shall abhor him, but them that rebuke (impeach) him shall be a delight and a good blessing shall come upon them," Proverbs 24: 24.

If you want our nation to be blessed by Our Lord, then vote against those who offend Him.

November 3, 1998

Letter-to-the-Editor:

Recently, I was accused of hiding behind God, because I was not "successful." I laughed, because we studied Rudyard Kipling’s poem, "If," in grade school. The line I remember best stated that the human ambitions, "fame," "wealth," and "power" were "imposters." Since biographies fascinated me, I learned at an early age the validity of Kipling’s philosophy.

My favorite "success" story is about a virtually blind young man who came to our factory-based home seeking work. He was twenty-one and a devoted husband and father of two children. He was also desperate but optimistic, and so were we, but my sympathetic husband offered him a job unloading bricks for one afternoon.

Months later, the young man showed up again seeking temporary work. He laughed merrily as he told us he had been in prison one year for breaking into eighty-seven filling stations in Champaign before he finally attracted the attention of the police.

I had read the story in The Champaign News Gazette (recognizing the culprit’s name), that the police were finally "successful" in solving eighty-seven robberies by catching the thief, who readily confessed to all.

The young man wanted to go to prison, because blindness prevented him from getting work, but his family could not receive welfare if he lived with them. He told his story to the authorities, served his sentence, and was to begin training the following week at the state’s expense for a job that a blind man could do. So, what is "success"?

THAT IS A COMMANDMENT!

November 7, 1998

I read John McGill’s letter several times explaining the Machiavellian principal of government, concerning his "Bread and Circuses" strategy for keeping the people from posing problems for the political elite. McGill stated that the Romans understood this Machiavellian principal of government’s provision for the masses very well. (As an "opiate of the masses"? Karl Marx said religion served that purpose!)

If McGill ever writes a history book concerning this philosophy and the ultimate effect it had on the Roman Empire, I promise Steve Smith--who gave me an "F" twice in history--that I will read every word. I think McGill understands history and the long-range effect of government’s wasteful handouts the same way I do, but he expressed this view so much better than I ever could.

With the fall of the Roman Empire, Europe was plunged into ignorance, poverty, and total enslavement of the masses, which historians dubbed, "The Feudal Age." I understood from my elementary history courses that Rome fell because of excessive concerns with prurient pursuits, sadistic entertainment, and inattention to military defenses so that marauding tribes from the north caught them off guard.

Mc Gill implied that taxpayers "must take notice" of the fact that history is destined to repeat itself, if we fail to check government’s unprofitable spending programs, because each alleged benefit by government for the people at their expense means more loss of freedom resulting in ultimate enslavement.

I hope Smith read McGill’s letter and gives him an "A" in history in his response.

THAT IS A COMMANDMENT!

If you do not know what egregious means exactly, do not worry. You will have a very good idea before you finish reading this love letter. What does it mean to protect the environment? Does it mean to prevent careless men from polluting it by wantonly dumping it toxic wastes without any concern for one’s fellowman? Or does it mean that men have a right to play God by attempting to control nature? Egregious environmentalists think they have a right to play God. They are extremists to the point of being absurd.

Farmers who raise grain, fruits and vegetables, and nurture cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, poultry, and even dogs, cats, and bees and those who manage forests and fisheries have always been the most constructive and efficient environmentalists--because it is to their financial advantage to be so. They cannot afford not to be!

Also, it is their job to provide all man’s most basic needs--including natural fabrics for clothing and wood fiber for the most effective tool for communication--paper. Until recently, they have been free to do their job without government interference.

Furthermore--at no cost to taxpayers--farmers prevent plagues that wipe out civilizations by controlling pests in domestic animals and plants. These same pests infest wildlife in all its forms; such as fleas, ticks, mites, fungi, mosquitoes and other blood-sucking parasites--reeking death and destruction all over the world. But farmers go a long way to prevent invasion by these pests into the products (animals, especially) most of us consume.

Incidentally, regardless of what you see on TV, the number one killer in the animal world is the mosquito, because it transfers disease-bearing blood from one host to another. Fleas, ticks, and mites, and some flies do the same, but the mosquito is the worst offender. Whole populations have been wiped out by yellow fever, malaria, and some believe that the mosquito may be a carrier of the AIDS virus, especially in swamp areas.

But I want to write about political parasites that are even more dangerous than the mosquito. Actually, man is the number one killer in the animal world. The mosquito is a poor second. This human parasite claims that he wants to spend your blood, sweat, and tears to protect alleged endangered species of both plants and animals.

In Illinois, the silver maple was named an endangered species. I had one large tree in my yard that sent its winged seeds fluttering by the buckets full into my raised flowerbeds, and required constant raking and sweeping on my terraces to keep them from sprouting between my patio blocks. It is a noxious weed, which chokes out desirable plants. However, they planted hundreds along the river that flowed through my property. Also, they labeled my property a wetland, which meant that I could not do anything on it, even if I wanted to do anything.

What I don’t understand is why they did not plant trees of value that used to be native to Illinois. Persimmons, wild cherry, peach, and plum, mulberry, sassafras, red oak, sugar maple, dogwoods, red bud trees, and crab apples are disappearing from our woods, because folks dig them up to put in their yards.

But they are not in the business of thinking of what is best for all, they just want to save alleged endangered species to impress the eggheads who do not have a brain-cell working, either, and to raise taxes for their own purposes. Millions would be saved in taxes, if these do-goodies were paralyzed by taking all laws that are designed to control owners of private property off the books, and let the farmers, ranchers, and foresters go back to deciding what should be encouraged to survive, and what should not.

In Illinois, a kid who finds a baby wild animal and tries to make a pet of it can be heavily fined and/or put in jail. Who benefits from that law? If you support these arrogant law-breakers instead of your Lord and true caretaker of the environment, then you deserve to pay egregious taxes you already pour into their "save-the-rat" holes.

THAT IS A COMMANDMENT!

Question: Why is it that those who want freedom of speech to prevent destructive, deviant, disease-spreading heterosexual and homosexual practices, and to protect impressionable children from being exposed to violence and pornographic materials, are accused by those who disagree, of "WANTING TO IMPOSE THEIR CONSTRUCTIVE VALUES ON EVERYONE ELSE?

These accusers are absolutely right, of course, but they are hypocrites, because the constructivists are not asking the destructivists to spend tax dollars to support their views. The destructivists want freedom to promote their ideas at the expense of the constructivists--and all other citizens via tax dollars.

The destructivists insist that the constructivists have a choice as to what they watch on TV, read in the newspaper, or check out at the library. But kids do not have a choice as to what they are forced to study in school or do not have a choice as to what they are allowed to read or study in school, if the destructivists have their way.

"Their way" is to force acceptance of deviant life styles that are dangerous at best. (I have in mind venereal diseases and unwanted pregnancies, which have increased to epidemic proportions, since the discovery of condoms and penicillin.)

The fact is that the destructivists also have as much choice as the rest of us do, but they do not have a right to impose their choices on the majority or force the majority to finance their choices.

Incidentally, it is time we stopped labeling according to political parties, liberal and conservative, or according to race, color, creed, religion, or denomination. Either our purposes are constructive and designed to promote the welfare of all, or they are destructive and designed to ultimately destroy us all. Even pre-school children know the difference.

Everyone is up in arms about polluting the earth, but no one seems to object to the polluting of the minds of people. Even now, Congress is seriously engaged in debate to approve the five-year budget for the National Endowment for the Arts, a federal agency which funds the artists, and the arts.

For example, tax dollars have gone to support a show that included a so-called artist who submerged the cross in his own urine. Another large sum was paid to a New York theater where hard-core porn actresses urinated on stage and masturbated with sex toys. Other funds have supported alleged art depicting Christ shooting heroin, and homosexuals performing the same acts on stage that resulted in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by God (anal and oral sex called sodomy).

It is your money, good people, if that is how you want your government to spend it in the name of free speech. But keep in mind, that same government dickers over cost-of-living increases on your Social Security and Veterans checks and cannot balance a budget.

Is that distant rumbling that I hear, the noise of a coming revolution over taxation without representation? Or is that noise just the grumbling of old men? No wonder the righteous are secretly stashing arms against the day Congress decides to take away the rights of Americans to bear arms and worship God as they please, while they defend the right to pollute minds in our schools, libraries, theaters and every other form of communication in the name of free speech.

Public monies should never be used for anything that does not promote the welfare and good of the majority in a democracy. If our representatives observed that rule, we could balance the budget.

I agree with Paul Vallandigham in general and in principle--that "censorship is no answer to society’s problems." But I do not agree with those that somehow construe the objections most of us have to the use of public monies to promote racism of any kind or distasteful and destructive sexual practices as being a form of censorship.

Our forefathers did not intend for the federal, state or local governments to be entertainment committees that spent public monies to satisfy the lusts and deviant pleasures of those who are sick or have criminal tendencies. We are guaranteed free speech in the Bill of Rights, but the Revolutionary War was fought over taxation without representation--not primarily for the squelching of freedom of expression.

If my tax money is being spent to entertain or promote racism and criminal sex activities, I am not being represented. Perhaps, Vallandigham is young or has a bad memory, but John Hirschfeld and I can recall when such terms as "sodomy," "lesbian," and even "rape" were so uncommon that even educated adults had to refer to Webster to determine their exact meaning. And my Second Edition of Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, purchased in l949, does not even have the word, homosexual, in it!

My old classmate, Hugh Hefner, opened the door to legalized pornography when he won the court’s approval of Playboy Magazine as a work of art and not pornography.

I do not think it is a coincidence that Hefner’s "New Morality" and the increase of pornographic materials in public schools, libraries, and institutions at taxpayers expense has occurred simultaneously with the very dangerous and destructive sudden rise in the "Old Immorality" in criminal proportions.

If I understood the tone of Vallandigham’s letter correctly, I don’t think he wants to support the habits of these poor devils either--even in the name of free speech.

September 24, l997

My first cousin was one of the more talented pianists in our family, most of whom sang, played musical instruments, and/or produced literary and/or artistic "masterpieces" for family, church, and community members to enjoy. When my beloved cousin and her fiance’ were killed in a tragic accident, the dormitory where she was living on the U. of I. campus was renamed in her memory, MARY ANN WOODS HALL.

Did she or any other member of our family request, receive, or even think they deserved a grant from the National Endowment of Arts to further their careers in the arts?

Of course not! A poet once wrote about gorgeous desert flowers blooming and dying without being seen to make the point that God has always been extravagant in bestowing beauty and talent for His own pleasure and ours--not to be exploited for money, fame, or power.

Every tiny community has talent that far exceeds that which can be viewed on TV or at the movies. A seventh grade classmate of mine in Newman, IL, painted Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs that equaled those drawn by Disney artists--just for us kids to enjoy--mounted on the seventh grade display border.

Why would anyone argue for higher taxes to promote the questionable value of fame, when other kids are starving, because their single parents are burdened with taxes? Truth and beauty are not to be bought and sold--only to be shared and enjoyed. I practice what I preach!

Concerning the library controversy: Children are not qualified to vote--according to most adults--because they have not developed enough judgment through education and experience to do so. The freedoms as described in the Bill of Rights were intended from the beginning to apply only to adults who were qualified to vote and who proved they were capable of making well-informed and wise decisions as responsible citizens.

Government by the people always has meant government by the responsible citizens in society who were to be guaranteed freedom of speech, press, religion, right to bear arms, etc. Our forefathers believed that freedom and responsible behavior were Siamese twins and could not be separated without causing death to both.

For that reason, the Bill of Rights was never intended to apply to children, criminals, the mentally ill nor was it intended to extend even to uneducated women and slaves. Actually, the main argument used at the time for free education for all was to create a society in which all men would be qualified to govern themselves. Fortunately, it was extended to girls and later to blacks, or they might never have been enfranchised!

In any event, all responsible adults of society were expected to deprive the irresponsible members of society of the freedoms that were intended to be guaranteed only to themselves, or license and fear would reign, depriving all of us freedom.

Apparently, library committees are taking a position contrary to the freedom of speech amendment as intended by issuing pornographic materials to children. That is just another reason why responsible citizens are forced to put iron bars on their windows and doors, and are losing their liberty, while the irresponsible are given license to destroy.

August 18, 1998

Nat Hentoff in his comments on the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s approval of vouchers to subsidize primary and secondary Christian schools indicated that they violated his idea of separation of religion and state.

As a Jew, Hentoff stated that he was uncomfortable being compelled to sing tributes to "Jesus, the Son of God," in public schools. Of course he was, because his parents indoctrinated him into the Jewish faith--their choice and their right. It is inappropriate to expect Jews to sing praises to Jesus Christ anywhere.

However, two important points are missing in Hentoff’s reasoning. First, his parents would have chosen (Trust me!) a private Judaic school where he could meet academic requirements without embarrassment, if available.

Secondly, each student’s share of tax money in private schools should equal any other students share in public schools, if we are committed to provide free education for all. Why shouldn’t public taxes be used to pay the cost of educating all children equally whether in private or public schools, if they meet the state’s academic standards? If parents choose Christian schools to indoctrinate their children into the Christian faith, they have that right of choice.

I doubt if Hentoff can name any Jewish child who was not indoctrinated by family and teachers, while Christians have been brain-washed, intimidated, humiliated and penalized (grades) for their faith in public schools, and who said that Jews encourage Christians to express their faith in Israel? Or who believes that our public schools meet minimum standards?

July 15, l998

Nat Hentoff wrote objecting to taxpayers funding religious schools by making it possible for Christian parents to receive tax money for tuition to choose private Christian schools.

Hentoff quoted James Madison concerning the First Amendment (against any government-established religion) that public money should not be used to support private religious institutions (his opinion).

Because I agree with the "Establishment Clause," I have objected to Christian tax money being used to ridicule Creationism, and to promote Darwin’s theory of evolution as "Gospel"(despite mounting evidence that it is mathematically improbable). Furthermore, I was outraged in l967 that Christian tax money was used for library books at Champaign Central High School promoting the major Oriental religions while Judeo-Christian literature, which inspired the greatest Western classics ever written, was banned. Also, tax money was used for books describing deviant sexual practices and extra-marital sex as an option (in Hentoff’s words, "for impressionable youngsters").

I taught Oriental literature to gifted classes at Central High, and the education department required me to take psychological tests and hours of psychiatric sessions conditional to being certified. Because I gave students the option to compare a passage from Kalidasa’s 16th Century play, Shakuntala, based on Buddhism, to I Corinthians, chapter 13 (a definition of love). I gave the assignment to demonstrate that "love" is a universal idea as demonstrated in literature, not to promote a religious idea.

Since then, dangerous homosexual practices are taught at the expense of Christian taxpayers. Incidentally, I was certified, and the psychiatrist expressed regrets that public schools lost (my choice) a righteously indignant but highly gifted teacher.

THAT IS A COMMANDMENT!

The 1996 election is over, and everybody got exactly what everyone wanted. Clinton is president for a second term--with a Republican Congress that he can and will blame for not keeping his promises when the country goes down the tubes.

Perot and all the Christians in the country got what they wanted--the opportunity to say "I told you so" in the near future, and Dole is probably relieved that he did all he could, and can now retire from the rat race. He probably did make a difference.

The rest of the country got what they wanted--one more excuse to celebrate the "happy hour," which is the story of their lives. Have a good day, even if it doesn’t last.

Oh, yes, the Lord got what he wanted, too! Millions will be crying out to him in desperation in the next four years to be saved.

That thought makes me happy, because I want all souls to be saved. These bodies are only temporal. The Lord is so good, and merciful.

September 22, 1998

I anticipated the White House scandal, because of my own private prejudices. I am equally certain that Southern white Christians have prejudices toward us Yankees, but we Northerners are less likely to admit our bigoted notions toward our Southern neighbors. We like to think that only Southern hard-shelled Baptist Democrats are bigots--which we are not!

However, after listening to President Clinton for 4 1/2 hours, repeatedly parroting his original declaration in response to all questions while defiantly biting his lip to reinforce his determination not to budge an inch, I decided I would confess and maybe someone will prove me wrong--I hope!

My unexpressed bigotry toward white southerners has been mostly directed toward women, who give the name "lady" a foul name. No doubt, historical novels have influenced me by giving the impression that these Southern belles loved to party while leaving all the home-making chores, nurturing of children, and satisfying their spouses sexually to their "inferiors."

Women knew their husbands exploited slaves in the past, prostitutes, and other women they called trash--unless they were retarded--but they were "ladies" and expected to be treated as such--not stooping to unselfishly serving.

I have secretly believed that hard-shelled Baptist Democrats were arrogant, hypocritical, and narcissistic preserving their own images at any price, while expressing their true natures under sheets and in closets, while justifying all of it with Scripture. Unfortunately, history will support those prejudices, thanks to the Clintons.

The following letters are warnings against Public Enemy # 1, Satan.

February 3, 1998

The statements made by various witnesses in response to inquiries made by any number of journalistic investigations continue to include President Clinton’s comment that he has never committed adultery. On one occasion, he allegedly stated that he had searched the Scriptures and is convinced that oral sex is not adultery.

Women who are saying that they have had "affairs" with the president confirm that these affairs do not include "penetration" or normal sexual intercourse. They do not disagree with the president that he does not "commit adultery" per se." However, they admit to performing oral sex on him, or invited to do so, and to being "fondled" by him.

In any event, The Lord God Jehovah did not destroy Sodom and Gommorah, because the citizens were committing adultery. He destroyed the cities because they committed what God considered to be much more degrading, sodomy.

In fact, the term sodomy was named after the city, Sodom, where that detestable, depraved, perversion--oral sex--was practiced to the degree that not one citizen could be found who was innocent--resulting in fire to rain down from heaven and destroy that city in a matter of seconds.

Isn’t it amazing how far some masters of self-delusion will go to convince themselves and others that they are innocent of wrongdoing! Prophets of old in both

The Old Testament and The New Testament insisted that there was definitely a connection between depravity and an increase in natural disasters. Hot lava doesn’t have to fall on my head to convince me! (See Hebrews 2: 11-12: "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.")

Satan can speak high-sounding words that are like Ivory soap, 99.99% pure, only softer, and capable of soft-soaping the most cynical and suspicious of skeptics. The .01% of what Satan has to say which is not so pure includes: pretense, hypocrisy, corruption in high places, flattery, fraud, sophistry, chop-logic, treachery, false teaching, betrayal, guile, underhandedness, deceit, subterfuge, duplicity, and collusion. He uses the Lord’s name in vain, promoting his vanities and lies for personal gain in the name of the Lord, as did the Pharisees and "money changers" in the temple at Jerusalem.

According to Proverbs 26: 18, even April fool jokes or lies told in jest are as a mad man who throws torches and death. You can understand why, if you think a minute.

Anyone who is lying in jest feels superior for making a fool out of someone--often a little child--who trusted him. Maybe the liar thinks it is funny, but the victim never does--when someone makes a fool of him--even if he laughs because he/she wants to be a good sport.

In any event, the child learns not to trust so quickly again, and that makes him lose the innocence that makes trusting children so charming. Teasing adults rob children of this precious gift. Cynical wiseacres--scoffing disrespectful children--are not born that way. Adults, who tease children just for the fun of it, create distrustful cynics. It is no wonder that children have become so suspicious and paranoid that they cannot get along with their parents or other children!

And hear this: Satan quotes Scripture exactly to prove lies unto the destruction of men. It is not the Scripture that is false, but the interpretation that Satan gives. If you have the Holy Spirit and knowledge of the whole Word of God in context, then you are much less likely to fall for false teachings.

Satan deceives by playing on your vanity, and flattering you. Sadly, pretentious intellectuals are most likely to be deceived in this way, because they pretend to know, when they do not know. Satan never uses simple language but prefers to confuse with flowery language and the jargon used in many professions such as legal and medical terms. Unfortunately, pseudo-intellectuals are so impressed by these absurd grandiloquent affectations that they quote them ostentatiously without a brain-cell of their own working.

Who is it that doesn’t understand anything Satan has to say? Fools, yes, but more than likely they are educated fools or "eggheads," who end up with egg all over their faces, too. These points are just two important ones that I failed to cover in my other writings. Therefore, I wrote this letter--just in case.

I wish I could remember who said, "Some ideas are so absurd that only intellectuals believe them." Since I cannot, I really shouldn’t quote him or her. Maybe, next time.

Satan has many names: Father of Lies, Deceiver, Destroyer, Devil (D-Evil) Accuser, god of this world, Murderer, Thief, Wicked One, and Old Serpent to mention a few. He is also known as the Antichrist, which should give you a clue as to who he is not. He deserves every one of those names, because his main object is to separate God’s people from Our Lord Jesus Christ. He is called the "man of sin" and the "son of perdition," which means eternal damnation or destruction--Hell.

His favorite way of deceiving is to accuse, tempt, and seduce man into believing that God does all the things that he himself does "in the name of the Lord." He uses the Lord’s name in vain--for his own vain purposes. For example: He murders blacks and Jews (K K K) and quotes Scripture to justify his evil deeds. He murders and destroys in the name of Jesus Christ, causing many victims to believe that The Lord is worse than Satan. Satan instills fear and he is behind all activity of terrorists.

That is the best reason I know for learning the names given to Satan and those given to Our Lord. If you know and understand their names and what their goals are, you will not so easily be taken in by Satan’s lies. Since Satan can turn himself into an angel of light, then you cannot recognize him by his eloquence, beautiful language that is so seductive, or by the way he dresses, and especially by the offices he holds or the professions he practices. He always manages to have the right credentials according to the standards of this world, and he promotes himself as an authority to convince the naive.

Your major defense is to know him by his goals and deeds. If anyone advocates murder, then he/she does not speak in the name of the Lord. If anyone puts a guilt-trip on you for your sins, then Satan is behind it. The Lord said that He came to save, not to condemn.

The Lord’s name is Savior, and Satan’s name is Destroyer. Satan would have you commit suicide by making you believe that you are worthless. The Lord is gentle and Satan is harsh and encourages revenge and violence. Satan is the author of "Don’t get mad--get even." He is known as the Antichrist, and his henchmen are called antichrists.

The Holy Bible says, "...the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."

That is his purpose, and he will agree with anything that Jesus taught except the Gospel--or the Good News that anyone who accepts Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior can be saved and will be given eternal life. Satan will not say or permit any unsaved person to say or believe that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh who came to save us from our sins and set us free.

If you do not believe that Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God and do not understand that Truth, then you are definitely enslaved by Satan. He is in control of your mind and thinking, and you are not free. The Word of God states that no one can say that Jesus Christ is Lord (Jehovah) but by the Holy Spirit. No one can have the Holy Spirit, unless he/she accepts Jesus Christ as his/her Lord and Savior on faith. Only the Holy Spirit can teach you the Truth after you confess your sins and agree to turn away from them by totally submitting yourself to Jesus as your Head.

I John 4: 2-3, "Hereby know ye the spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God. And this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come: and even now already is it in the world."

Do not think that "Christ," is Jesus Christ’s surname--like "Smith" or "Jones." "Christ" is a description of who He is. He is the "Christ" or the "Anointed One," who has God’s Spirit in Him, because He came out of the bosom of God the Father.

Satan will not permit anyone to believe in "The Christ," or recognize Him, because his goal is to destroy man or separate man from God. Since believing in "The Christ" is the only way man can be saved, Satan will do or say anything to prevent man from believing in Him.

Satan also tries to make us believe that God’s ways are a pain, boring, no fun, and will make us miserable, unhappy, emotionally ill, depressed, unworthy, poverty-stricken, lonely, and confused. But "God is not the author of confusion," I Corinthians 14:33.

One of the most important exercises you can do is study the names of the Lord, and confusion over the differences between the Lord and Satan will become clear. Confusion from trying to find your way in the dark will suddenly turn into the Light of day.

The Lord’s names are so many and so beautiful, that I cannot even begin to list them all. His best known names are Master, Teacher, Counselor, King of kings, Lord of lords, Savior, True Vine, The Anointed One, Emmanuel (God with us), Mighty God, Alpha and Omega, The Beginning and The End, Son of God, and Bread of Life. Please notice how many names that applied only to Jehovah in the Old Testament also apply to Jesus in the New Testament, because "Jesus" and "Jehovah" refer to the same God.

The Lord is Our Good Shepherd, The Lily of the Valley, The Door or The Only Way that we enter into the Kingdom of God. He is The Everlasting Father, The First and the Last, Head of the Body of Christ, Image of God, Judge, High Priest, Lamb of God, Lord of the Sabbath, Redeemer, Messiah or The Promised One who came to save the world.

He is the Prince of Peace, and the world will not be at peace until He returns. He is called a Great Prophet by all, but all do not believe His Word. He is the Resurrection and the Life, Rose of Sharon, and the Morning Star. He called Himself the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. He is the Light of the world, and no one can hide from Him, because His Light will expose all darkness and sin.

Finally, John said that He was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Then John said that the Word created all things. Read John 1: 1-5 and then read verse 14, which says, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the Only Begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." Now, do you have a better idea concerning the difference between the Lord and His archenemy (another of Satan’s names)?

If we know the Lord’s names, we begin to know who Jesus really is and we can begin to draw closer to Him. Best of all, knowing the Lord’s names helps us to worship Him more effectively and sincerely. I know that I can praise the Lord wholeheartedly as I call Him by His names, which are a reminder as to who He is, and what He has sacrificed for us. And what He is willing and eager to continue to do for us--comfort, protect, teach, counsel, and provide for our needs. He also is our healer. The best way to worship the Lord is to exalt Him and magnify His Holy names.

While in San Jose, CA, we visited Winchester House. Since Shirley MacLaine advocated spiritualism in her movie, Out on a Limb, I wrote her a "love letter," and enclosed an account of what a monstrosity Winchester House was. I advised her that a widow who had dabbled in spiritualism until her life became a living hell filled with dread and consuming terror built the house.

The widow of the inventor and manufacturer of the Winchester rifle turned to spiritualism for solace after losing her older husband and their very young child within months of one another. She actually contacted spirits of one sort or another in an attempt to communicate with the only two loves of her life.

She had been a very bright, energetic, optimistic, and charming leader in all the best social circles on the East Coast. She was loved by all as a young, attractive, and gracious hostess. She and her successful husband had been very popular and sought after. It would seem that they had it all, and then "all" was taken away in a single breath--all but the vast wealth that the sale of Winchester repeating rifles had brought them. She was totally devastated.

Spiritualism was a very popular past time with the elite in the Nineteenth Century, and her friends offered to take her to a seance with the idea that speaking to her loved ones might give her peace. Unfortunately, she became hooked, and kept returning for more readings, which became more and more condemning and terrifying. She was advised by the "spirits" that she was guilty of spending "dirty money," earned by selling weapons of destruction. Her earnings, incidentally, were about $3,000.00 a day, a goodly sum in that day and virtually tax-free (about $50,000.00 a day now before taxes).

The "spirits" called themselves "guides" and presumed to give her advice as to how she could "do penance" for her sins--that of having wealth from an evil source. They "led" her to buy a farm on the west coast near San Jose, CA where Winchester House is now located. She continued to keep in touch with "guides" in her new home.

The "guides" directed her every move and said that she would suffer serious consequences, if she failed to do exactly as she was told. Finally, they told her that she must build on to the old farmhouse that was originally on the farm and continue to build without rest. If she stopped, she would die. That was the way she must spend the "dirty money" as a penance. She did as she was told, and the result was Winchester House, which at one point was almost destroyed by fire. Nevertheless, the remains are incredible.

We know that Satan was behind this, because Jesus said that He died for our sins and we are not required to pay for them. Also, the good that could have been done with so much money--and was done by Winchester himself as he donated vast sums toward the building of Yale University and other good works--was consumed by the devil on a useless, though very expensive, project. Also, the "spirits" also accused her of profiteering from the carnage her husband had caused. Satan is the accuser, not Jesus.

She kept building until she had built one hundred and sixty or so rooms, plus intricate gardens and outbuildings, but her never ending terror had turned her into a very bad-tempered recluse who was almost impossible for the workmen to please. She had them on the job seven days a week, day and night, and screamed when they needed time off, or wanted to quit. Naturally, she suffered even more, because of the constant loss of men who were not willing to work under those demanding circumstances.

Winchester House is a monstrous monument to the dangers of spiritualism. I cannot describe this project which is the epitome of all haunted houses. Extraordinarily expensive stained glass windows which depict spider webs, and other symbols we associate with Halloween. Since the widow did not really need the space, she was not too particular what was on the other side of windows and doors--just as long as the workmen continued to build.

Doors open to blank walls, and so do windows, so that it is impossible for light to shine through the stain-glass windows. Stairs ascend to nowhere. The original staircase was wide, but as the widow became older, she became arthritic. So, she had the stairs divided and added half steps between the original steps. The narrow staircases were easier to climb but were also dark and eerie, and they ended on a level with no rooms. "O. K. we can go back down--now that we saw this stain-glass window which opens to a blank wall!" we joked!

In addition to what is in the house, a countless number of building materials is stored in the warehouses on the property. Anyone want to buy an expensive but colorful owl or spider web? Not that they are for sale! The whole grotesque project seems to shout the warning of Jesus Christ, "For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it." This lady definitely lost her life one terrible day at a time!

I never heard from Shirley MacLaine and did not expect to hear from her, but I do not believe that she is still "leaving her body." At least, we don’t hear as much about that anymore. Any attempts to seek guidance from spirits from the "other side" or dabbling in the occult (palmistry, astrology, numerology, Ouija boards, or other means of obtaining information from spirits) can be a means to inviting Satan to give the kind of guidance that will ultimately destroy. If you doubt that, go see Winchester House. It is an education as to how one should not spend one’s spare time. Why would anyone seek guidance from the Evil One, when Jesus offers so much more as a free gift?

The next letter was published in the local newspaper in response to the behavior of a presumptuous attorney, who thought he had heard it all!

Our son had called one attorney after another who could not for one reason or another represent him in a child custody case. One attorney agreed to an interview, and we accompanied our son to witness what was said, as the Lord Jesus Christ directed us to do.

The attorney was rude, crude, and insulting from the first word he spoke. He would not permit our son to explain why he wanted primary custody. Instead he asked irrelevant questions, permitting only "in one word" answers. (Yes or No). He concluded, "Unless your wife is on drugs, I see no reason why she should not have custody of the child."

I was so outraged that I interrupted, saying "No wonder our kids are getting pregnant out of wedlock, committing crimes, turning to drugs in their misery, and committing suicide, if everything goes but doing drugs!" Until that outburst, my husband and I had simply sat by and said not a word.

As I spoke, I handed the attorney a letter written to our son’s ex-attorney in response to a letter his ex-wife’s attorney had written him with false accusations and making unreasonable demands. Since our son had no attorney "of this world" at the time, and his ex-wife’s attorney asked him to respond to the letter immediately through his attorney, the letter’s heading stated it was from the Lord Jesus Christ by His Holy Spirit. We believe the Holy Spirit helped write the response, and that He did represent us.

(Mark 13: 11) states, "But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost."

This attorney took one look at me, scoffed, and stated, "I will have nothing to do with ‘Jesus ‘Freaks’." He abruptly left the room, and so did we!

(I should mention before quoting the rest of the letter that I was thoroughly convinced that the Holy Spirit led me to challenge this attorney, and hand him the letter. I also know that the Holy Spirit led me to write the expose and pay to have it published in the newspaper that is read by most of central Illinois. I know that, because the laws in the state of Illinois are a disgrace concerning the custody of children.

Attorneys and judges make no provisions whatsoever for the welfare of the child and make it impossible for a reconciliation to take place between the parents. But of course, there is no money for attorneys if the couple stops fighting and is reconciled! Satan is definitely in charge of the hell children go through in Illinois. Anyway--I’ll continue with the letter concerning that particular attorney’s outrageous and contemptible--but typical--behavior. The rest of my letter is addressed to the attorney’s remark about "Jesus Freaks.")

Both George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were "Jesus Freaks," who put their trust in the Lord and the Word of God. Washington flatly stated that no man could rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible as his guide. Lincoln also declared that the Lord led him in making decisions.

On the other hand, neither Saddam Hussein nor Hitler even pretended to be "Jesus

Freaks." Since "Birds of a feather flock together," I am totally convinced that the judges and attorneys of Champaign County are definitely not "Jesus Freaks." Make no mistake, persecution of Christians is being escalated and our children are being held as hostages by the god of this world, but Rejoice!

The Word of God states that increased activity on the part of Satan simply means that his time is getting short and he just wants to a get one last miserable lick in before Our Lord Jesus Christ returns and puts him out of business forever and ever.

I was called formally into service on my sixtieth birthday by the Lord to expose the deceptions of Satan. Since that time, the Lord has led me into one situation after another so that I would see for myself Satan’s wickedness and power to deceive. He even deceives Christians who are not walking close to Him.

Therefore, I cannot end this letter without asking all those who have been involved in battles in courtrooms, which is Satan’s territory (he is god of this world), to confess your sins, repent or turn away from them, and ask the Lord to be your Savior.

It is not too late until this fat lady sings her last song.

That is the end of the letter that was published, but I received more responses from it than from any other that I ever wrote. Since I lived out of town and our phone number was under my husband’s name (I write using my first name), it was not easy to obtain my phone number. However, many did!

But the one response I received that was the most rewarding one that I had ever received in my life was the result of this letter. A young man called and asked me if I was the lady who wrote the letter. I said, "Yes." He said that he had been contemplating suicide all night, trying to decide how to do it, when "something told him" to buy a Sunday morning paper.

He said that he did, and he opened it at once to the letter that I had written, which caught his eye (See headline above that caught his eye.). He said he read it over and over and over. Finally, he had a sense of peace, and decided he did have a reason to live after all. He concluded, "I called to thank you." It was about 4 p.m. in the afternoon. I was overwhelmed at his words, and stammered a question, "What was it that I wrote that made you change your mind or do you want to talk about it?"

He hastily repeated, "I just wanted to thank you." Then he hung up. I do not know who he was, but he certainly made me realize that the Lord is indeed with me, and if my writings never accomplish another thing, I will have that one phone call to reassure me that my efforts have not been in vain. This young man’s call also confirmed that some attorney may have almost caused a young man to take his own life!

This letter is a warning against PhD’s who write books. Unfortunately, inexperienced critics, impressed with credentials and masterful chop logic are too often deceived by the jargon of the worldly wise and the grandiloquent language of doctors and professors. So, they have nothing to say, but who cares? They say it so beautifully! Beware!

Have you ever played the game called "telephone" or "gossip" as a child? A dozen or so kids line up and the "head" whispers a brief message to the next child who repeats it to the next until the "tail" repeats what he heard aloud.

What began as a knock-knock joke is changed by a mischievous kid to "Margaret has knocked knees" and modified by one who pities Margaret to "Margaret’s dog has fleas" which is announced and all laugh. Note the subjectivity involved.

Psychologists, sociologists, and alleged educators are masters of this game. These "social scientists" ignore all the inductive methods of research, because they probably did not take (or could not pass) any science or mathematics courses beyond high school in the first place. Or so it would seem, considering the conclusions they reach.

Most of their books, which I tried to understand but they made no sense, rely on Mitler’s law ("Presume what you will, and obtain facts to prove the presumption."). The alleged authorities on the rearing of children and family problems are often single and divorced. If they do have kids, they obviously leave them with nannies and grannies.

Such "authorities" quote other "authorities" who quote others ad nauseum to prove their points. And they make a point to pick and carefully choose those statements that support their original presumptions (Remember: Mitler’s law?). To check that statement out, do as I did to qualify me to make it in the first place. Actually, look up their sources, which few people do, unless they are writing a book that they want to validate.

With diligence, persistence, and determination, you will "consider the source" and learn that much is lost in the translation or invented. However, the worst scenario is that these pseudo-scientists often base their presumptions on pre-historic relics. They "psych out" what pre-historic man allegedly thought on the basis of his thigh bone which is connected to his missing knee bone on one end and his missing hip bone on the other, yet somehow can emit vibrations given off by his brain, which has turned to dust.

They not only can tell you what the man thought and did, but they presume to know "why he did it" without any written records to support their "guessological" (I made that word up) conclusions. If you fall for that nonsense, ask God to save you. He shall, and that is a law that has been tested and proved by millions.

Statements and testimonies concerning God’s willingness to save us are well recorded and have survived at least 6000 years. But if you prefer to believe some modern guru who reaches his "scientific conclusions" by waving his magic wand above a jawbone, then why should I not shake the dust from my feet?

I probably won’t, because I hate it when little minds are deceived. It’s a

"God-gone" shame!

Unfortunately, these "old fools" are regarded as authorities, and are quoted without question by thousands of parrots all over the world who are more impressed with titles than they are with diverse and sufficient data to warrant logical and objective conclusions. The problem may be that it’s more like little boys playing games with other peoples lives than a case of "old fools" without a brain cell working. Maybe both!

I apologize for expressing what sounds like utter contempt for such apparent ignorance and/or innocence instead of being more compassionate, but does anyone really want pity or would they prefer to start thinking for themselves?

I implied that no one is stupid just because he/she believes those whom we all have been conditioned to believe since early childhood--doctors, attorneys, professors, the boss, and even the president! I just want to advise that all of the above authorities are mere human beings subject to the same prejudices, bigotry, character weaknesses, pride, and self-interest as all other men regardless of their station in life. Only the "elite" that I just mentioned can be infinitely more dangerous--may even cost you your souls!

Educated fools are more articulate in the art of deception, more likely to achieve positions of wealth and power, and--unfortunately--they are much more prone to exercise their authority to oppress, rob, and exploit.

It is not the troubled kids on the street or even the ones who are in gangs who can hurt you as much as the fools in high places that mankind is inclined to trust. I have learned over the years to test all that I read by comparing it to the Word of God. If the material is not according to God’s Word, then I just put it on a shelf in my brain, until more evidence is discovered. So far, science has come full circle to proving that God’s Word was right in the first place, and I have read nothing that has proved it wrong. Have you heard the latest about when dinosaurs roamed the earth?

Darwin’s theory is impossible to believe, unless man can believe that spontaneous generation is possible. The whole idea hinges on the fact that millions of years ago spontaneous generation occurred "when conditions were right" for the simplest form of life to come into existence--then subsequently evolved into higher forms of life.

Problem: Only one example of "spontaneous generation" has ever been recorded in the history of the world, and the "conditions for life" have vastly improved since the earth was nothing but bare rock surrounded by mist!

Yet, one scientist thought he discovered such a case, because he observed what he thought to be a horsehair swimming like a living organism in a horse tank, and submitted for publication his hypothesis that he had discovered a case of "spontaneous generation" from a horsehair. The publisher of the scientific journal obviously bought the story.

Later, a scientist investigating the case observed an organism that resembled the alleged horsehair emerging from a dead cricket. He suspected that the organism was a parasite of crickets and proved it.

I find it easier to believe that the most ideal conditions for spontaneous generation to occur is the womb of the highest form of life on earth--the womb of a woman--than to believe that a horsehair could suddenly become a living organism in a horse tank!

The egg in Mary’s womb had all that was needed to sustain life, except a trigger--a microscopic sperm. Man is an arrogant jackass to insist that his sperm is more potent than God!

The sex of unborn offspring is determined by