Quotes (786)

A few years ago the Moral Majority was the rage. The expressed goals of the group appealed to fundamentalists who were against pornography, homosexuality, and abortion and were for restoring morality, strengthening defense, and opposing communism. Why not join in? Answer: It would not practice biblical separation. Any fundamentalist knows that we are a minority. The world’s way is always to win with a majority. Stop to think for a moment. Can you name any time in Scripture where God followed that policy? . . . The battles of Scripture were always won by an obedient minority, not a diverse majority.

– John Ashbrook

11 thoughts on “Quotes (786)

  1. Deuteronomy 7:6-8–“For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth. The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to your fathers, the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. “


  2. “Then he said to me, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel saying, ‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ says the LORD of hosts.” Zech 4:6

    “”Woe to the rebellious children,” declares the LORD, “Who execute a plan, but not Mine, And make an alliance, but not of My Spirit, In order to add sin to sin;” Is.30:1


  3. Two comments unrelated to each other, but I couldn’t decide which one to post, so here they both are.

    1) Curious thing I came across years ago was a claim that the very act of voting was blasphemous on the claim that when you vote, you are attempting to appoint the leaders, a right reserved for the Lord. Whether you like it or not, a democratic nation – unlike Israel back in the Old Testament – tends to be ruled by whatever the largest group that cares wants. God works through many means, and while it is true that true Christians are NEVER going to make up a majority of a nation – or a city, for that matter – we can influence people toward our way of thinking.

    2) I remember that at a big Christian Coalition convention years ago, back when they mattered, one of the speakers making the statement, “The danger is not the Christian Right taking over the Republican Party, but the Republican Party taking over the Christian Right.” It seemed that in many ways, that very thing has happened. Sure, I think there should not be a tax on inheritance, but if there is, the name of Christ is not affected.


  4. The fundamental flaw of any “Religious Right”, “Moral Majority”, or “Christian Party”, is in thinking they can somehow make this (fallen) world a better place for all to live if they would just have all those sinful temptations outlawed, and made to conform to “Christian” ideology. But such reasoning is an un-biblical concept.

    True Christians have the Spirit of Truth, which the world CANNOT receive (Jn. 14:17). Without Jesus, they have no Holy Spirit. No Holy Spirit, no Truth. Neither can we expect those who are hostile to God to abide by the truth of the God whom they are separated from. Nor can we expect to bring them any closer to God through legislating, or make lawfully binding, God’s laws upon them.

    “For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it CANNOT. Those who are in the flesh CANNOT please God. ” (Rom. 8:8). Yet, the flesh is the very way of the world: “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.” (1Jn. 2:16). We cannot change this situation through any amount of legislation. Therefore, to attempt to do so is mere folly. Worse, still, it can lead people to think that if they are “good”, “moral” people, then God will somehow be more pleased with them.

    Jesus never came to make this present world a better, more moral, safer, or happier place to live. Nor has He given His followers the commission to do so. Only the Gospel of Jesus Christ as given in the Bible has the power to save and transform man.


  5. DavidW:

    If you haven’t already, check out this previous DefCon post:

    Has the Religious Right lost its voice in American politics?

    Also, for those who want to read more on the subject, check out Independence Day and the state of the church in America.

    In spite of my stance on these issues, can you believe I’ve actually been accused of the opposite as seen on this link? Here’s a quote about me:

    . . . you’ve argued for the same Americanist religion Colson and Robertson stand for. DefCon is at least in part a political site, because the religion it seems to promote is largely Americanism.

    I not only oppose Colson and his Romish leanings, but I’ve even exposed Pat Robertson as a false prophet in this post and this post.


  6. Pilgrim:

    Thank you for the links to the past DefCon posts. They are so spot on.

    Regarding you being falsely accused:

    “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you FALSELY, for My sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” (Matt. 5:11-12)

    I stand with you, brother.


  7. Good night, I was hardly persecuting him. We were having a disagreement. I’m glad Colson and Robertson are opposed because of Romish tendencies and false prophecies. But we were talking about politics, nationalism, and how we view the world. I was arguing that despite the good things being said, it was still through an Americanist lens, and that was shaping how Pilgrim was/is viewing geopolitics and how the Church should respond to these issues.

    I actually appreciate much from this website, and Pilgrim’s posts probably most of all…but it seems like all I’ve been able to do is make everyone mad at me. Sorry I’ve been so offensive. But I don’t think I can be accused of persecuting anyone. That’s not accurate. Did I post our exchange on my website? Absolutely. Those are exactly the kinds of issues I’m focusing on and the exchange was instructive. Pilgrim argues well and I thought it helpful for my readers to view the interaction. Genuine Bible believers can have very different takes on big issues.

    I hadn’t planned to visit here anymore, but I felt like I needed to respond. Thanks…


  8. Dear John:

    You may have made someone else on DefCon mad in the past (as you say), but you certainly haven’t made me mad. And additionally, I don’t feel I was persecuted in this matter, just mischaracterized. If I disagree with what you’ve said about me, and my skin is too thin to handle it without becoming angry, then I need to find something else to do with my time. :o)

    In regards to what you have said about me seeing things through “an Americanist lens,” I would ask that you please cite where I have given you that indication, in addition to telling me what I’ve said that would show that my beliefs/views are “shaping how Pilgrim was/is viewing geopolitics and how the Church should respond to these issues.” Perhaps if you direct me to these areas, then I could better understand your accusations.

    And if I am indeed viewing the Christian faith through “an Americanist lens” and not a Biblical lens, then I will appreciate the admonishment and strive all the more to be a Biblicist over that of a patriot.

    – Pilgrim

    P.S. By the way, thanks for the compliments. :o)


  9. I think we already addressed this. That was the point in our previous exchange. I’m arguing that by looking at geo-politics starting with the premise that America is good and right is not Biblically accurate. Your support of Bush and the quote from Cal Thomas indicate this. Everyone here has no problem seeing America’s problems at home, and how the culture has compeltely corrupted the Church…because the Church doesn’t seem to know what it is. But I want to apply that right critique to a large picture and we’ll find America is not on any level the wonderful nation it purports to be. Temporally it may be a better place to live than totalitarian China, but Spiritually this place is nothing less than a satanic masterpiece.

    I know you wouldn’t agree with Colson’s ecumencism or Robertson’s blasphemies. I wouldn’t accuse you of that. But on another level, I would say, there is still a bit of the America-centered way of thinking. Just because I’m saying that…please don’t think I’m attacking you personally. I’m not. In our exchange was I direct and to the point? Sure. Am I passionate about these things? Sure.

    You and I should not be arguing. I’ve looked at your posts and like I said, I largely agree with you. It’s really only these realms of America vs. the world and how we interpret what’s happening with Islam…that we would find disagreement.

    I’ve even be pleased to find others commenting on your pieces who are arguing some of the same points I would. I’m thinking of the Haiti piece. Someone else mentioned America’s role in Haiti’s history. I go back in my 1 Sept 1939 post and talk about Wilson, Roosevelt and others and how American policy, quite wicked at that, was often couched in Christian terms.

    As I said before, the Americanism here….is the ‘lite’ version. I realize that technically what I’ve said has been accusatory and I also realize cyberspace doesn’t covey tone very well…but my purpose and even engaging was not to attack you personally…just to provoke some healthy discussion. Do I have some problems with some of the material at his website and the thinking of some of the people? Of course. The same would be said of my site. In fact, I’m sure some of the posters at DefCon would be very hostile to some of the things I say, and that’s fine. We can learn something even when we disagree. And even though I disagree with you regarding American policy and the roots of terror…I can still learn from what you say. You raise good points and argue soberly…something I often do not find.

    Like I said, I didn’t intend to revisit Def/Con, but I did see the comment made by DavidW, and I wanted to clear this up.



  10. When we stand before the Almighty, all-just, all-righteous God of all creation, we will be surprised (to say the least), at what He considers righteousness, and unrighteousness. The Lord God Almighty takes note of the thought and intent of the heart, and holds us accountable to it. For He said if a man were to look at a woman with lust in his heart he has committed adultery already in his heart (Matt. 5:28). Furthermore: “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.” (Matt. 5:22). No doubt, we have our own colloquial equivalents to those terms today, but whatever words we use, God holds us accountable.

    We can express our theories, concepts, concerns and ideas. And we can have honest disagreement. And we can have righteous indignation at evil. But when we, in our disagreement, resort to disparagement, insults, defamation, or falsely accusation toward a brother in Christ, we have sinned in God’s sight. We may think of persecution as relative to what we have known or heard of (Imperial Roman style persecution, Medieval persecution, or Communistic persecution). And so, if we have not received such extreme persecution, we dismiss it as not falling into that category. And blessed is the man who takes persection patiently and Christ-like. And if we have not inflicted such extreme of persecution on another, we consider ourselves innocent of the act. But our definition of persecution is irrelevant. It is what God has defined that is true. Therefore, when God equates being “reviled”, and “spoken evil of falsely” (for righteousness’ sake) with persecution, that’s how He sees it, and has so categorized it. We may not, but He does. He has said so in Matt. 5:11. And we will be judged by His word, and His word alone (John 12:48).

    Pilgrim, and DefCon contributors, you have been shining examples of Christ.

    May the Lord have mercy on me, and grant me the wisdom to always keep this in mind that I might not sin against Him, or my brother, in the future.


  11. DavidW,

    So what you’re saying then…is if I disagree, then I’m persecuting and disparaging?

    Based on your criteria… then certainly what has been said on other threads at DefCon hardly qualify as shining examples!…rather, they exhibit the very traits you’re accusing me of.

    In order to have a discussion, we have to employ terms, and in the case of a disagreement, terms sometimes have to be attached to the other person’s ideas. If you want to say I was defamatory…then fine, but I fail to see it. I’ve already apologized if I offended anyone, but is that not good enough for you? I have a feeling that unless I retract and agree with Pilgrim, nothing I say or do will be acceptable. Unbelievable.

    Good day.


Tell us what you think:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s