What Kind of King?

The central figure of Christmas – with all due respect to Santa Claus, Rudolph, and Frosty – has been and continues to be Jesus Christ, whose birth is marked by this universally recognized holiday. Both the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures of the Bible speak of Him as the King of the Jews, King of Kings, and most importantly, “King of Kings and Lord of Lords”, a phrase magnificently set to music in George Frideric Handel's masterpiece, “Hallelujah Chorus” from the Messiah:

And He shall reign forever and ever
King of kings (Forever and ever)
And He shall reign (Hallelujah! Hallelujah!)
And He shall reign forever and ever
King of kings! and Lord of lords!
King of kings! and Lord of lords!
And He shall reign forever and ever

Let us briefly look at what kind of a King that Jesus was and is:

What kind of circumstances – Earthly princes and kings are born surrounded by the trappings of wealth and privilege, in grandiose palaces of finely cut stone and marble that are erected in the center of the seat of power, but this unassuming king was not born in luxury or attended to by the best midwives and doctors in the land. Rather, He was born in the neglected rural village of Bethlehem (as predicted centuries earlier by the Prophet Micah).

Forced to travel in her 9^th month, for purposes of the Roman census, Mary and Joseph were forced to take shelter in a stable for her to give birth. The young couple even had to use a feeding trough as a bassinet for their baby. This was not the typical king.

Luke 2:6-7 “And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.”

What kind of proclamation – The birth of a king is typically announced with much fanfare to the powerful and the mighty. His presence would be proclaimed to noblemen, princes, and princesses; to commanders, generals, and scholars; to the glitterati and the illuminatti - but not this king. We probably all recall that the first announcement of His birth was to lowly, despised, and unimportant shepherds.

Well... not exactly. You see, while the social status of shepherds suffered due the nature and hardship involved in working continually with outdoor animals, these shepherds were different. The shepherds of Bethlehem were charged with the important task of raising the special animals perfect enough to serve as sacrificial Passover lambs. In fact, it was the kind of dirty job only Mike Rowe could fully appreciate. But it also foreshadowed a somber future for the little king Jesus.

The story continues in the book of Luke:

8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.

9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.

10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.

13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,

14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

What kind of ruler – Earthly kings 'Lord it over' their subjects. They busy themselves building cities, commanding armies, and conquering territories, as did Solomon (I Kings 9:15-22). They also erect palaces and monuments to themselves, even demanding godlike worship of themselves, as did Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. (Daniel 3:1-7)

But even though he would have been within his rights to do so, Jesus didn't wield such earthly power or claim an earthly kingship. When directly questioned before Pilate, who was himself a Roman king, Jesus responded thus to the question, “Art thou a king?”:

My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. (John 18:36-37)

Rather, this king asks for voluntary submission and then rules in the hearts of his subjects; and one day, we know not when, He will rule, reign, and restore justice to his creation:

Isaiah 9:6-7 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever.”

This will be a wonderful day for those counted among His people, and Scripture beckons us to willingly turn and come to Him. The Bible says, now is the time for repentance, “behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” (I Corinthians 6:2).

My friend, would you turn, repent, and join me and so many others in following Him?

 

 

Who's in Charge Here Anyhow?

This is a piece, the ideas for which, have been simmering in my mind for a while now.  Unfortunately, the more time I spend observing, the more obvious the problem has become.

Every week there seems to be some sort of new policy blunder or verbal faux pax committed by the current inhabitant of the White House.  This continual incompetence on display within the Executive Branch only reinforces what many of us had suspected well before last year's primary season - that Joe Biden struggles mightily in the area of mental acuity and capacity.

But now, the fact that the Emperor has no clothes is even being hinted at by as unlikely a source as the editorial page of the New York Times (12/14), whose center-left opinion columnist Bret Stephens was granted permission to call into question Biden's "fortitude" by publicly noting his often rambling incoherence, frequent mental lapses, and inability to inspire confidence. (1)   Mind you, this is no small thing.  It is rare indeed that the country's farthest left major newspaper would drop the protective shield instinctively reserved for their political allies and allow a dissenter to breach their Praetorian Guard-like defense of a Democrat Chief Executive.

What is on display for all to see is a seemingly aimless meandering from one disastrous policy failure to another and one incomprehensibly self-destructive executive order after another.  That, in combination with reports of a major rift between the President and his toxic Vice President in the midst of their plummeting poll numbers - all does little to inspire confidence with the American people.  While on the international front, the fecklessness and incompetent blundering displayed by this empty suit Commander in Chief does not escape the notice of the leaders of China, Russia, Iran and other belligerent and openly hostile foreign powers.  

So while the whole border reparations story itself may be old news for many of you, still, it is illustrative of the state of mind (or lack thereof) of the President.

In an administration known for it's divisive leftist political vision combined with a string of disastrously implemented policies - for instance the Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco, spiking crime rates, supply chain breakdowns, and spiraling inflation - perhaps none has been quite as flagrantly dangerous and destructive as the administration's blatant open border policies with Mexico.  And nothing about this man-made fiasco is quite so ludicrous as the proposal outlined in the Wall Street Journal late in October (10/30).  According to the article, three of the most corrupt and partisan agencies in the Federal government - the Justice Department, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services - were in talks to essentially pay human traffickers from south of the border nearly half a million dollars each for the "lasting psychological trauma" they endured attempting to illegally smuggle children into the United States. (2)

It was an idea so absurd that, even in what many think is the dementia-addled mind of President Biden, it was initially dismissed as ridiculous. When first confronted with the proposal, his response was that the report was to say"That's garbage," while emphatically adding when questioned by Fox News' Peter Doocy, “That’s not going to happen.” (3)

At least that's what Biden said before he was informed by his puppet-masters that it actually was going to happen, despite what he may have thought or wanted.  Lesson learned:  Don't put the parrot in the spotlight until you are sure he can repeat his lines.

By the next day, however, one of his spokeswomen, deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, assured the press that the President was - or had become - “perfectly comfortable" with the concept of paying off foreign criminals for the troubles they may have endured in the process smuggling children into this country.  And by Saturday, November 6, Biden was emphatically denying that he had even called the outrageous proposal, "garbage". (4)  Of course, that is likely just another example of his short-term memory loss.

Lest you think this is being over-hyped, Fox News' Bill Hemmer reported that within hours of Biden's original denial, the ACLU suggested that President Biden may not have been 'fully briefed' about the actions of the Justice Department he is supposed to be in charge of.  (Or perhaps he wasn't awake during any such briefing.)  Anyway, a few days later, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas would confirm at a speech before the Aspen Security Forum (11/04) that they were not merely negotiating for cash payouts, but - in lieu of serious jail time for felony child endangerment - also discussing a 'path to citizenship' for these reckless lawbreakers and potential Democrat voters who were caught sneaking into our country using innocent children as a shield. (5)

Perhaps some historical review is in order.  During the previous administration, As part of the attempt to quell the lawlessness and chaos at the border, someone had the profound idea to simply enforce existing law as written.  The Trump administration's answer was the 2018  'zero tolerance' policy:  Arrest, prosecute, and deport all those caught sneaking into the country between our ports of entry.

At the same, decades of selective non-enforcement, meant that potential illegal aliens were becoming increasingly aware of the fact that special treatment was being granted to those who crossed the border accompanying a child.  The law of unintended consequences meant this policy encouraged drug runners, child traffickers, and others with evil intentions to beg, borrow, and sometimes literally steal a child to gain preferential treatment in their attempt to illegally enter our country.  Perhaps many - or even most - of the groups illegally sneaking into the country may well have been actual biological families.  However, the shear numbers of illegals overwhelming the system made it very difficult to determine if groups claiming to be family were actually blood relatives or merely criminal drug runners using innocent children as Saddam Hussein-type human shields - and in some cases, human traffickers smuggling kidnapped children across the border for even more evil purposes.

In arresting, prosecuting, and holding these criminal aliens for trial, innocent children were indeed separated from their criminal parents - instead of being held with them in jail.  (The same parents, incidentally, who had risked their children's lives sneaking through the drug-cartel controlled Mexican desert.)  On the other hand, children were also separated from child traffickers, drug runners, and their captors.  This, in much the same way as the children left behind in a bankrobber's getaway car, are not imprisoned awaiting his formal charges, bail hearing, and trial.  So despite the faux outrage from the left - the practice of imprisoning an entire family for the crimes of the family patriarch mostly ended (at least in the west) sometime during the age of enlightenment. (6)

But back to original point, when one contrasts the President's initial response with the actual policy, it leads one to wonder if Mr. Biden is even a full participant in the role of the Presidency.  Was this simply just a case of him not being fully briefed, as his defenders stated?  Could he really forget something this potentially explosive, or was he never in the loop to begin within?

He was caught completely unaware, and certainly not in control of, a highly controversial policy being pursued by his appointees and/or handlers.  Without the aid of a prepared script projected on his large print, Jumbotron-sized teleprompter, he was caught unaware of what his people were doing, presumably on his behalf.  Time and time again, left to his own devices, he quickly meanders into unintelligible gibberish and demonstrably false anecdotes.  However the internal machinations of the Biden White House are contrived, it's clear his handlers need to better brief and instruct the President concerning his core principles.

But perhaps even more important than individual policies, the question to be pondered here is who it is actually hiding behind the curtain in the White House, who is to be held responsible for making all these destructive decisions?  Decisions to try to spend our way out of an inflationary spiral, decisions to leave hundreds of U.S. citizens and tens of billions of dollars of military equipment for the Taliban, and in this case, decisions to financially incentivize and reward those criminals who unapologetically risk children's lives by dragging them through the drug cartel-controlled Mexican desert and illegally smuggle them into this country.

Who is in charge here, anyhow?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/opinion/biden-age-election-2024.html

2.  https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-administration-in-talks-to-pay-hundreds-of-millions-to-immigrant-families-separated-at-border-11635447591

3.  https://news.yahoo.com/peter-doocy-presses-biden-admin-212503925.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-calls-report-to-pay-separated-immigrants-450k-garbage

4,  https://news.yahoo.com/biden-gets-heated-over-proposed-152115632.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall 

5. https://news.yahoo.com/border-sheriff-apos-perplexed-apos-134533586.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall

6. https://www.npr.org/2018/05/10/610113364/transcript-homeland-security-secretary-kirstjen-nielsens-full-interview-with-npr  "First of all, the law says if you cross between the ports of entry, you are entering without inspection and that is a crime. First time is a misdemeanor. After that it's a felony. And then it goes on from there. So that hasn't changed, that's the underlying law. Our policy has not changed in that if you break the law, we will refer you for prosecution. What that means, however, is if you are single adult, if you are part of a family, if you are pregnant, if you have any other condition, you're an adult and you break the law, we will refer you. Operationally what that means is we will have to separate your family.

That's no different than what we do every day in every part of the United States when an adult of a family commits a crime. If you as a parent break into a house, you will be incarcerated by police and thereby separated from your family. We're doing the same thing at the border." - Kirstjen Nielsen