I believe one very important aspect of this debate has been completely missed. That’s the fact that the Holy Spirit works through God‘s word to inspire and instill faith. Unless the word is read and heard the Holy Spirit cannot do his work in this way. So like many other things in life reading scripture in school may not be something you like or your kids like to do. Give the Holy Spirit a chance to do his work.
Yes, of course—the Word is inspired, living, sharp, and convicting, and the Holy Spirit absolutely works through it to enact change.
However, as we see all the time (and this isn't exclusive to the Bible), if something is forced onto someone, human nature kicks in and we instinctively pull away.
If I said to my wife, “Hey, you need to eat this sandwich right now,” she’d look at me like I was crazy and say, "No, why?"
But if I ate the sandwich myself and said, “Man, this is the best sandwich I have ever eaten!” she’s probably gonna want to take a bite, if not just take the whole thing from me! Lol.
And this is what I’m getting at with mandates. When we try to force-feed people things meant to be tasted and seen as good, we accidentally create resentment instead of reverence.
Jesus spoke directly to this danger when He said, “Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; nevertheless, woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!” (Matthew 18:7)
We, as Christians, do not want to be the stumbling blocks that push people away from God because we tried to force a relationship by decree.
This is an interesting topic and I’m still not sure how I feel about it. Each of your points are helpful. I did a little searching and think I found that The Three Little Pigs and Pride and Prejudice are also on the list.
I’ve personally read very little fiction outside of it being assigned in school.
I feel that good storytelling allows us to walk away and wrestle with the meaning. I think that is what most of scripture and the New Testament does.
The more that those who wanted a precise dissection of truth pushed for contradiction, the more Jesus left it in their lap with a question that first challenged the unspoken assumptions underlying their questions or a parable which allowed both the genuine follower and the skeptic to walk away with everything they needed, something that would only make sense in waking it out.
Having scripture or any specific writing as a required reading hopefully fits the standards of the best stories that draw the reader to a place of deeper understanding of themselves and the world around them.
One good outcome could be the opportunity for a child to read scripture without being told what to think about it.
There may be writings from other cultures we already include that have deep roots in spiritual formation, I’m not sure.
Any time a class has any assigned reading, one has to learn to keep the love of learning intact and that is challenging.
I do hope it does not have the Josiah effect.
I think I trust the teachers more than anyone since they have the best teachers of all, the students.
When I was a child I certainly didn’t want to go to church early Sunday morning. I wanted to sleep in. But my parents made me go to church with them. Would you not consider that a mandate? The only difference here is the government is mandating it rather than parents. But is there really a difference? The Holy Spirit works in mysterious ways, which I don’t understand and you don’t either. Most people don’t like being told what to do even if it’s good for them and I think it’s the same in this case.
I do think there is a very real difference between parents requiring church attendance for their own children and the government mandating religious instruction for everyone’s children.
Parents have a God-given responsibility to raise and form their own children. The state does not have that same relationship to the child. So I don’t think the only difference is “parents versus government.” I think that difference matters a great deal.
But even with parents, the goal is not merely to force outward compliance. Parents can and should guide, teach, discipline, and form their children. But if faith is only experienced as something constantly forced onto them, that can often create resentment and rebellion rather than love. The deeper work is not just making a child sit in the right place, but patiently helping them see why what is true is also good and beautiful.
That is why the government comparison concerns me so much. If the state stands in the same position as parents, then where does that stop? Does the state get to decide a child’s religious formation in every area? Which passages? Which interpretation? Which teachers? Which moral conclusions? And what happens when the people in power change and use that same authority to mandate a formation we believe is false?
Most Christians would be deeply concerned if the state mandated Islamic, Buddhist, progressive secular, or any other formation they believed was untrue across every school district. And I would understand that concern. But that means the principle cannot simply be, “the government may mandate spiritual formation as long as it is my preferred formation.” The deeper question is whether the state should have that kind of authority over children’s consciences in the first place.
I also agree that the Holy Spirit works in mysterious ways. But that should make us careful, not presumptuous. God is free to work however He wants, whenever He wants, and through whatever means He chooses. We cannot force His hand by placing Scripture in front of people and assuming He must bless the method.
God can draw straight lines with crooked sticks, but that does not mean we should knowingly hand Him crooked sticks and call it faithfulness. Jesus could have thrown Himself from the temple, trusting that the Father had power to protect Him, but He refused to test God that way.
That is part of what I see in Josiah too. His motives were good. He loved God. He put the Word before the people. He brought real reform. And yet, when he was gone, the nation fell back into apostasy. Even one of Judah’s most righteous kings could not create lasting faithfulness by command.
So I am not saying the Spirit cannot work through Scripture read in schools. Of course He can. I am saying we should be careful not to presume that because God can use something, we are therefore justified in using state power to make it happen.
I want children to hear the Word. I want them to love Scripture. I want them to know Christ. But I think that work belongs first to parents, churches, families, and local communities through love, persuasion, discipleship, and faithful witness — not to the state acting as spiritual parent over everyone’s children.
While not disagreeing with you in any way I personally believe it’s important for the Bible to be available to anyone in public schools. Let’s face it. The Bible has influenced some of the greatest people in American history, including the founding fathers. The regularly deferred to the Bible for guidance in writing the declaration of independence in the federalist papers. So thinking you can take the Bible out of any logical educational system of the United States. Government is not realistic. Granted I graduated from high school in 1975 and things were very different than but the factory remains we were allowed to have a debate on whether the Bible was true or not in a social studies class and my team won the debate for proving the Bible is true. And this happened in a public school setting so the Bible can and should be taught in public school not mandated, but offered.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the point of the Texas law was to ensure students are taught about the Bible’s influence on American history and culture. That’s not the same as requiring schools to teach the Bible from a religious standpoint.
Yes, I think you’re right that this is the stated purpose: teaching the Bible’s influence on American history and culture rather than teaching it devotionally.
My concern is that stated legal reasons are not always the same as the real motivating reasons.
A local example comes to mind. In my area, a Muslim community wanted to build a mosque, and many people in town strongly opposed it. But because the city could not legally deny the project on religious grounds, people began saying the objection needed to be framed around traffic, density, zoning, and similar concerns. In the end, those were the official reasons given.
But everyone understood that, for many people, the real objection was religious.
That’s what I’m getting at here. I don’t doubt that biblical literacy matters for understanding American history and culture. It absolutely does. But I also have a hard time believing the same officials would be eager to mandate portions of the Quran, even if someone argued for its historical or cultural relevance.
So my concern is not only what the law says on paper, but what desire is actually driving it, and whether we’re being honest about that.
The problem here is that all your descriptions of the contrast between dragging and drawing apply to man, and not to someone who is unique in his sovereignty: God. Not only can God call into existence things that did not exist, but he can do the same thing with history. God writes history into existence.
I agree that God can draw straight lines with crooked sticks. He can use weak, imperfect, and even deeply flawed means to accomplish His purposes.
But I don’t think that means we should knowingly choose crooked sticks and then presume God will bless them. “God can use this” is not the same as “this is wise, faithful, or rightly ordered.”
That’s part of what I think we see when Jesus is tempted to throw Himself from the temple. The Father certainly had the power to protect Him. But Jesus refused to force the Father’s hand and call that faith. He answered, “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.”
So my concern is not that God cannot use a mandate. Of course He can. My concern is that Christians can begin to presume upon God’s ability to redeem our methods, rather than asking whether our methods are actually faithful.
God is sovereign and free. He is not bound to work simply because we have placed Scripture in front of someone. He works how He pleases, when He pleases, and by the means He chooses. And from what we see in Scripture, He delights to work through love, persuasion, faithful witness, and the Spirit’s inward work upon the heart.
I want children to encounter Scripture. I just don’t want Christians to confuse exposure with formation, or presume that the state can do what only God, working through love and grace, can do.
Amen! The LORD Potter created the Devil’s dishonorable clay vessels (i.e. the Devil’s lawless children of perdition) to be possessed by the Angel of Light’s religious spirits and to be demonically driven/drawn down Democracy’s anti-theocratic Broadway unto destruction. Under the powerful delusion of Big Brother-Uncle Sam’s Masonic DEI-Social Justice Gospel, these digitally-marked [MOB-SS#] chattel patriotically take up the bloody sword and violently fight in Democracy’s unceasing War for Independence from the Holy-theocratic Kingdom of Heaven’s sovereign governance over them.
Thank you for this clear call for living out our faith. I feel like sometimes people want the government to do the work of evangelism. A country can't be Christian. People can. We need to take a page out of the church that is thriving in countries where Christianity is illegal.
Your powerful message is logically thoughtful and lovingly rendered!
I have been a follower of Jesus since my junior year of high school, but my heart was truly opened by God when I found my place with believers in my little church.
I taught high school in Texas for almost a decade. At my school, we couldn’t even have a personal Bible on our desks, though we were allowed to keep one inside our desks for our break.
Knowing the faculty as I did, I would not have trusted any of the solid curriculum-focused teachers to teach the Bible to my own children. Why? Some were not believers. Some were unfamiliar with the overarching themes of the Bible. Others would have been so resentful of the requirement that their lessons would have likely been counter-productive.
Thank you for reaching out with such wisdom and grace.
I hear what you’re saying, but if the Word of God is totally absent from our schools, something else moves in to try and fill that “desire for truth, goodness and righteousness” that exists in every heart.
Lately, the things being taught in many schools border on criminal-encouraging children to be and do whatever is right in their own eyes, under the teaching of a world system that is bent away from solid truth in pursuit of me first.
Lifting up a standard is not evil-we are created in the image of God, surely there is reason for His truth to replace the enemy’s lies.
I’m not supporting Christian nationalism movements, simply sharing that God is good and worthy of praise.
Children live what they learn. Let’s give them a solid foundation to stand on, instead of mucky waters to wallow in.
I hear you, and I agree that children need truth, goodness, righteousness, and a solid foundation. I also agree that the Word of God is good, beautiful, and worthy of being known.
My concern is not with Scripture being present in children’s lives. My concern is with the state becoming the instrument that mandates sacred formation across communities that have not freely agreed together.
I absolutely believe parents, churches, families, and local communities should be putting the Word before children with love, faithfulness, and conviction. I just don’t think a statewide mandate can do the deeper work we actually want done. It can place Scripture in front of a child, but it cannot create love for Scripture in the heart.
That’s the distinction I’m trying to make. I’m not arguing for mucky waters. I’m arguing that the foundation has to be built through faithful formation, persuasion, and love, not merely imposed by political power.
Thank you. I remember taking an AP English test and a passage from Psalms was the prompt. Scripture is valuable. I think it was in the test because the Bible is also literary/descriptive and poetic expression.
A concern for the future is that any group could now have a precedent "why not study/read another religion in school?"
I agree that Scripture has real literary, poetic, and historical value, and I’m not against a community freely choosing together to read the Bible in school.
My concern is when that decision is made over the objections of a large portion of the people being governed. At that point, even if the stated purpose is “literary,” it starts to feel less like shared education and more like one group using public authority to settle a question of conscience for everyone else.
And I think your last concern is exactly right: if the standard is literary value, then consistency would require allowing other religious texts with literary value too. If we only make room for the Bible, then the argument probably isn’t merely literary after all.
I have yet to hear a more balanced view of the Great American Controversy. We didn't have home devotions and never formed the habit to my loss. So this is the starting point with children. At home. Read to them from the Word, starting with well known simple passages, and then explain it to them.
This was excellently written! From the insight into the differing thoughts and accounting for many factors to the overall message. May God allow people to find wisdom and let them see the negative result of man trying to take the role that is God's alone. Excellent and enjoyable read!
But when Israel’s rebellious people, seeking independence from the sovereign will of Elohim’s holy theocratic governance, said, “Give us a king to judge us,” their demand was displeasing in the sight of Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. And the LORD said to Samuel, “Listen to the (anti-theocratic / democratic) voice of the (carnal-minded self-willed) people in all that they say to you. For it is not you they have hatefully rejected, but they have rejected Me as their sovereign theocratic king. Just as they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking (obedient and faithful dependence upon) Me and (in idolatrous democratic independence) serving other gods, so they are doing to you.…1 Samuel 8:7
And let me, Cole Nielsen, just say as well, that there is nothing wrong, in Freemasonic principle, with a democratic community freely choosing to have the Bible read in its DEI Common Core schools. If the UN-global village population of digitally-marked [MOB-SS#] chattel, that are happily held captive and enslaved cradle-to-grave within Big Brother-Uncle Sam’s antichrist Socialistic-eugenic Security System, is genuinely convinced together that this is good for them, then that isn’t demonic delusion or oppression. That’s a free people independently governing themselves according to their own carnal-minded, self-willed democratic convictions—something Freemasonry’s United States America (i.e. Lucifer’s Great Whore-Mystery Babylon) has built and prided itself on.
I believe one very important aspect of this debate has been completely missed. That’s the fact that the Holy Spirit works through God‘s word to inspire and instill faith. Unless the word is read and heard the Holy Spirit cannot do his work in this way. So like many other things in life reading scripture in school may not be something you like or your kids like to do. Give the Holy Spirit a chance to do his work.
Hi Trainwreck!
Yes, of course—the Word is inspired, living, sharp, and convicting, and the Holy Spirit absolutely works through it to enact change.
However, as we see all the time (and this isn't exclusive to the Bible), if something is forced onto someone, human nature kicks in and we instinctively pull away.
If I said to my wife, “Hey, you need to eat this sandwich right now,” she’d look at me like I was crazy and say, "No, why?"
But if I ate the sandwich myself and said, “Man, this is the best sandwich I have ever eaten!” she’s probably gonna want to take a bite, if not just take the whole thing from me! Lol.
And this is what I’m getting at with mandates. When we try to force-feed people things meant to be tasted and seen as good, we accidentally create resentment instead of reverence.
Jesus spoke directly to this danger when He said, “Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; nevertheless, woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!” (Matthew 18:7)
We, as Christians, do not want to be the stumbling blocks that push people away from God because we tried to force a relationship by decree.
Hope that helps.
God bless.
This is an interesting topic and I’m still not sure how I feel about it. Each of your points are helpful. I did a little searching and think I found that The Three Little Pigs and Pride and Prejudice are also on the list.
I’ve personally read very little fiction outside of it being assigned in school.
I feel that good storytelling allows us to walk away and wrestle with the meaning. I think that is what most of scripture and the New Testament does.
The more that those who wanted a precise dissection of truth pushed for contradiction, the more Jesus left it in their lap with a question that first challenged the unspoken assumptions underlying their questions or a parable which allowed both the genuine follower and the skeptic to walk away with everything they needed, something that would only make sense in waking it out.
Having scripture or any specific writing as a required reading hopefully fits the standards of the best stories that draw the reader to a place of deeper understanding of themselves and the world around them.
One good outcome could be the opportunity for a child to read scripture without being told what to think about it.
There may be writings from other cultures we already include that have deep roots in spiritual formation, I’m not sure.
Any time a class has any assigned reading, one has to learn to keep the love of learning intact and that is challenging.
I do hope it does not have the Josiah effect.
I think I trust the teachers more than anyone since they have the best teachers of all, the students.
When I was a child I certainly didn’t want to go to church early Sunday morning. I wanted to sleep in. But my parents made me go to church with them. Would you not consider that a mandate? The only difference here is the government is mandating it rather than parents. But is there really a difference? The Holy Spirit works in mysterious ways, which I don’t understand and you don’t either. Most people don’t like being told what to do even if it’s good for them and I think it’s the same in this case.
I do think there is a very real difference between parents requiring church attendance for their own children and the government mandating religious instruction for everyone’s children.
Parents have a God-given responsibility to raise and form their own children. The state does not have that same relationship to the child. So I don’t think the only difference is “parents versus government.” I think that difference matters a great deal.
But even with parents, the goal is not merely to force outward compliance. Parents can and should guide, teach, discipline, and form their children. But if faith is only experienced as something constantly forced onto them, that can often create resentment and rebellion rather than love. The deeper work is not just making a child sit in the right place, but patiently helping them see why what is true is also good and beautiful.
That is why the government comparison concerns me so much. If the state stands in the same position as parents, then where does that stop? Does the state get to decide a child’s religious formation in every area? Which passages? Which interpretation? Which teachers? Which moral conclusions? And what happens when the people in power change and use that same authority to mandate a formation we believe is false?
Most Christians would be deeply concerned if the state mandated Islamic, Buddhist, progressive secular, or any other formation they believed was untrue across every school district. And I would understand that concern. But that means the principle cannot simply be, “the government may mandate spiritual formation as long as it is my preferred formation.” The deeper question is whether the state should have that kind of authority over children’s consciences in the first place.
I also agree that the Holy Spirit works in mysterious ways. But that should make us careful, not presumptuous. God is free to work however He wants, whenever He wants, and through whatever means He chooses. We cannot force His hand by placing Scripture in front of people and assuming He must bless the method.
God can draw straight lines with crooked sticks, but that does not mean we should knowingly hand Him crooked sticks and call it faithfulness. Jesus could have thrown Himself from the temple, trusting that the Father had power to protect Him, but He refused to test God that way.
That is part of what I see in Josiah too. His motives were good. He loved God. He put the Word before the people. He brought real reform. And yet, when he was gone, the nation fell back into apostasy. Even one of Judah’s most righteous kings could not create lasting faithfulness by command.
So I am not saying the Spirit cannot work through Scripture read in schools. Of course He can. I am saying we should be careful not to presume that because God can use something, we are therefore justified in using state power to make it happen.
I want children to hear the Word. I want them to love Scripture. I want them to know Christ. But I think that work belongs first to parents, churches, families, and local communities through love, persuasion, discipleship, and faithful witness — not to the state acting as spiritual parent over everyone’s children.
God bless.
While not disagreeing with you in any way I personally believe it’s important for the Bible to be available to anyone in public schools. Let’s face it. The Bible has influenced some of the greatest people in American history, including the founding fathers. The regularly deferred to the Bible for guidance in writing the declaration of independence in the federalist papers. So thinking you can take the Bible out of any logical educational system of the United States. Government is not realistic. Granted I graduated from high school in 1975 and things were very different than but the factory remains we were allowed to have a debate on whether the Bible was true or not in a social studies class and my team won the debate for proving the Bible is true. And this happened in a public school setting so the Bible can and should be taught in public school not mandated, but offered.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the point of the Texas law was to ensure students are taught about the Bible’s influence on American history and culture. That’s not the same as requiring schools to teach the Bible from a religious standpoint.
Hi Karyn!
Yes, I think you’re right that this is the stated purpose: teaching the Bible’s influence on American history and culture rather than teaching it devotionally.
My concern is that stated legal reasons are not always the same as the real motivating reasons.
A local example comes to mind. In my area, a Muslim community wanted to build a mosque, and many people in town strongly opposed it. But because the city could not legally deny the project on religious grounds, people began saying the objection needed to be framed around traffic, density, zoning, and similar concerns. In the end, those were the official reasons given.
But everyone understood that, for many people, the real objection was religious.
That’s what I’m getting at here. I don’t doubt that biblical literacy matters for understanding American history and culture. It absolutely does. But I also have a hard time believing the same officials would be eager to mandate portions of the Quran, even if someone argued for its historical or cultural relevance.
So my concern is not only what the law says on paper, but what desire is actually driving it, and whether we’re being honest about that.
God bless.
That makes sense. Thanks.
The problem here is that all your descriptions of the contrast between dragging and drawing apply to man, and not to someone who is unique in his sovereignty: God. Not only can God call into existence things that did not exist, but he can do the same thing with history. God writes history into existence.
Hi Lewis.
I agree that God can draw straight lines with crooked sticks. He can use weak, imperfect, and even deeply flawed means to accomplish His purposes.
But I don’t think that means we should knowingly choose crooked sticks and then presume God will bless them. “God can use this” is not the same as “this is wise, faithful, or rightly ordered.”
That’s part of what I think we see when Jesus is tempted to throw Himself from the temple. The Father certainly had the power to protect Him. But Jesus refused to force the Father’s hand and call that faith. He answered, “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.”
So my concern is not that God cannot use a mandate. Of course He can. My concern is that Christians can begin to presume upon God’s ability to redeem our methods, rather than asking whether our methods are actually faithful.
God is sovereign and free. He is not bound to work simply because we have placed Scripture in front of someone. He works how He pleases, when He pleases, and by the means He chooses. And from what we see in Scripture, He delights to work through love, persuasion, faithful witness, and the Spirit’s inward work upon the heart.
I want children to encounter Scripture. I just don’t want Christians to confuse exposure with formation, or presume that the state can do what only God, working through love and grace, can do.
Hope this helps.
God bless.
👍
Amen! The LORD Potter created the Devil’s dishonorable clay vessels (i.e. the Devil’s lawless children of perdition) to be possessed by the Angel of Light’s religious spirits and to be demonically driven/drawn down Democracy’s anti-theocratic Broadway unto destruction. Under the powerful delusion of Big Brother-Uncle Sam’s Masonic DEI-Social Justice Gospel, these digitally-marked [MOB-SS#] chattel patriotically take up the bloody sword and violently fight in Democracy’s unceasing War for Independence from the Holy-theocratic Kingdom of Heaven’s sovereign governance over them.
Thank you for this clear call for living out our faith. I feel like sometimes people want the government to do the work of evangelism. A country can't be Christian. People can. We need to take a page out of the church that is thriving in countries where Christianity is illegal.
Thank you for your kind words Joyce, and you make a great point yourself!
God bless you.
Your powerful message is logically thoughtful and lovingly rendered!
I have been a follower of Jesus since my junior year of high school, but my heart was truly opened by God when I found my place with believers in my little church.
I taught high school in Texas for almost a decade. At my school, we couldn’t even have a personal Bible on our desks, though we were allowed to keep one inside our desks for our break.
Knowing the faculty as I did, I would not have trusted any of the solid curriculum-focused teachers to teach the Bible to my own children. Why? Some were not believers. Some were unfamiliar with the overarching themes of the Bible. Others would have been so resentful of the requirement that their lessons would have likely been counter-productive.
Thank you for reaching out with such wisdom and grace.
Hi Vickie.
That is an excellent point you brought up and I appreciate you reading and offering your insight!
I always value you and your words.
God bless!
I hear what you’re saying, but if the Word of God is totally absent from our schools, something else moves in to try and fill that “desire for truth, goodness and righteousness” that exists in every heart.
Lately, the things being taught in many schools border on criminal-encouraging children to be and do whatever is right in their own eyes, under the teaching of a world system that is bent away from solid truth in pursuit of me first.
Lifting up a standard is not evil-we are created in the image of God, surely there is reason for His truth to replace the enemy’s lies.
I’m not supporting Christian nationalism movements, simply sharing that God is good and worthy of praise.
Children live what they learn. Let’s give them a solid foundation to stand on, instead of mucky waters to wallow in.
Hi Debi.
I hear you, and I agree that children need truth, goodness, righteousness, and a solid foundation. I also agree that the Word of God is good, beautiful, and worthy of being known.
My concern is not with Scripture being present in children’s lives. My concern is with the state becoming the instrument that mandates sacred formation across communities that have not freely agreed together.
I absolutely believe parents, churches, families, and local communities should be putting the Word before children with love, faithfulness, and conviction. I just don’t think a statewide mandate can do the deeper work we actually want done. It can place Scripture in front of a child, but it cannot create love for Scripture in the heart.
That’s the distinction I’m trying to make. I’m not arguing for mucky waters. I’m arguing that the foundation has to be built through faithful formation, persuasion, and love, not merely imposed by political power.
Hope that helps.
God bless.
Got it-thanks for the clarification
Thank you. I remember taking an AP English test and a passage from Psalms was the prompt. Scripture is valuable. I think it was in the test because the Bible is also literary/descriptive and poetic expression.
A concern for the future is that any group could now have a precedent "why not study/read another religion in school?"
I agree that Scripture has real literary, poetic, and historical value, and I’m not against a community freely choosing together to read the Bible in school.
My concern is when that decision is made over the objections of a large portion of the people being governed. At that point, even if the stated purpose is “literary,” it starts to feel less like shared education and more like one group using public authority to settle a question of conscience for everyone else.
And I think your last concern is exactly right: if the standard is literary value, then consistency would require allowing other religious texts with literary value too. If we only make room for the Bible, then the argument probably isn’t merely literary after all.
Appreciate your response Adriane!
God bless.
Well said! You have given voice to my heart's cry beautifully and graciously!
Thank you Matik! Much appreciated.
God bless.
I have yet to hear a more balanced view of the Great American Controversy. We didn't have home devotions and never formed the habit to my loss. So this is the starting point with children. At home. Read to them from the Word, starting with well known simple passages, and then explain it to them.
Thank you Ed!
Couldn't agree more.
God bless.
This was excellently written! From the insight into the differing thoughts and accounting for many factors to the overall message. May God allow people to find wisdom and let them see the negative result of man trying to take the role that is God's alone. Excellent and enjoyable read!
Thank you Saint!
God bless.
Beautiful Cole!
Thank you Christina!
God bless.
But when Israel’s rebellious people, seeking independence from the sovereign will of Elohim’s holy theocratic governance, said, “Give us a king to judge us,” their demand was displeasing in the sight of Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. And the LORD said to Samuel, “Listen to the (anti-theocratic / democratic) voice of the (carnal-minded self-willed) people in all that they say to you. For it is not you they have hatefully rejected, but they have rejected Me as their sovereign theocratic king. Just as they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking (obedient and faithful dependence upon) Me and (in idolatrous democratic independence) serving other gods, so they are doing to you.…1 Samuel 8:7
And let me, Cole Nielsen, just say as well, that there is nothing wrong, in Freemasonic principle, with a democratic community freely choosing to have the Bible read in its DEI Common Core schools. If the UN-global village population of digitally-marked [MOB-SS#] chattel, that are happily held captive and enslaved cradle-to-grave within Big Brother-Uncle Sam’s antichrist Socialistic-eugenic Security System, is genuinely convinced together that this is good for them, then that isn’t demonic delusion or oppression. That’s a free people independently governing themselves according to their own carnal-minded, self-willed democratic convictions—something Freemasonry’s United States America (i.e. Lucifer’s Great Whore-Mystery Babylon) has built and prided itself on.