Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Beware of the dark side

Published

on

Many have started down the dark path.

Regardless of what you think of Roy Moore, I hope you reached that conclusion objectively. Unfortunately, those who dominate my news feed did not.

I saw bloodthirsty cries for him to drop out of the Senate race as soon as the first allegations were made, just as I witnessed stubborn declarations of innocence and that it was all a political smear. Both sides had more in common than not: their positions had nothing to do with the credibility of the allegations, but with the existence of the allegations alone.

Democrats and RINOs want him gone, so he must be innocent. Flyover Republicans want him elected, so he must be guilty.

From there, no amount of evidence on either side could penetrate stubborn skulls. The filter of confirmation bias tainted any appearance of guilt or innocence, and once again tribal politics reigned supreme.

But because God has a sense of humor, He threw Stuart Smalley into the mix.

Once the Al Franken (D-MN) groping photo surfaced, it was nothing if not comical to watch the tides reverse. Suddenly Moore’s tribal defenders started arbitrarily calling for Franken’s resignation, and Democratic loyalists rushed to protect him from fallout.

Bear in mind, I’m still not talking about those who’ve evaluated the evidence at hand and reached an objective conclusion. This is about the moral relativists who claim that sexual harassment and assault warrant swift impeachment and that women should be believed, not scrutinized — unless it’s happening to their guy.

Suddenly Democrats yell, “But we can’t afford to lose a pro-choice vote, no matter who it comes from!” And as Babylon Bee satirized, evangelicals would vote for Satan if he ran as a pro-life Republican.

Everyone, it seems, has forsaken principle.

I’m sick of arbitrary virtue, and, as always, there’s a Star Wars analogy for that.

In Episode III, Revenge of the Sith, Anakin Skywalker kills a disarmed (well, dishanded) Count Dooku at the prodding of his friend, Palpatine (or his pal, Friend-patine. I’ll stop now, I promise). While Palpatine insists, “He was too dangerous to be kept alive,” Anakin laments, “It’s not the Jedi way.”

Later, when Palpatine finds himself at the tip of Mace Windu’s lightsaber, Anakin demands that Palpatine stand trial. Because it’s the Jedi way? Not quite.

In a chilling echo, Master Windu counters, “He’s too dangerous to be kept alive” — the exact phrase used earlier by the Sith Lord.

(I could write an entire piece on how the Jedi and Sith are akin to the increasingly similar Republican and Democratic Parties, but I won’t go down that rabbit hole just yet.)

In fairness, I actually agree in both cases that the villains should have been killed. That’s my principle. And if Anakin opposed Palpatine’s death based on the Jedi way of not killing an unarmed opponent (are you still unarmed if you can shoot lightning from your fingertips?), that would have been his principle. It’s possible for two principled people to disagree.

But that wasn’t Anakin’s objection. As Windu draws back for the kill, Anakin confesses his true motive. Not “the Jedi way,” not due process, not even further interrogation or hostage bargaining. Seconds before the final blow, Anakin cries out, “I need him!”

Anakin severs Windu’s hand, Palpatine’s lightning thrusts the Jedi Master from the shattered window, and Anakin’s turn to the dark side is complete.

Anakin’s fall is a painfully recognizable warning in contemporary American politics — not just in 2017 or even 2016, but for decades of political discourse.

“I don’t care if he’s a child molester; I need him!”

“I don’t care if he assaulted women; I need him!”

“I don’t care if he left a woman to drown in Chappaquiddick,” and “I don’t care what he grabs women by.”

The chorus echoes loud and clear: “I need him!”

This is how you fall to the dark side, and as Padmé notes only moments later, “this is how liberty dies.” Ultimately, this moment proves the destruction of the entire republic.

When the wicked rule, the people mourn. Without consistent principles, we are in danger of sacrificing every blessing of freedom we enjoy. The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away.

My warning to you is the same caution Master Yoda gives to Luke on Dagobah decades after the rise of the Empire: “Beware of the dark side. … If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice.”

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards, Co-Host of The New Guards Podcast, lifelong fan of the Anaheim Ducks, and proud Hufflepuff. He graduated Magna Cum Laude in English from Brigham Young University in 2017. One day later, his wife gave birth to a beautiful daughter. Richie is a constitutional conservative and doesn't see any compassion in violating other people's rights.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Kent Ramsay

    November 22, 2017 at 5:14 am

    Beware of associating with Richie Angel. He may have a “very dark” side. Beware!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Video: What is a Classical Liberal?

Published

on

By

A short video making the point that the Left is no longer Liberal, having traded individualism for collectivism.

In one of their first animated video shorts, the Rubin Report discusses the vitally important topic of just who is a Classical Liberal.

OUR FIRST ANIMATED VIDEO! What is a Classical Liberal?

Liberalism has been confused with Leftism or progressivism, which is actually has nothing to do with classical Liberalism. Sadly the Left is no longer Liberal at all for it has traded individualism for collectivism.

The Rubin Report
Published on Jul 10, 2018

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

$.02: When is it OK to quit church?

Published

on

Chris Sonsken of South Hills Church and founder Church BOOM penned a piece on Fox News that caught my attention on Twitter. It was a good column. Read the article here. The article addressed a Pew Research finding as to why people change churches. There finding as shown by Sonsken are:

  • Sermon quality
  • Welcoming environment/people
  • Style of worship
  • Location

Sonsken does a great job in arguing that there are biblically sound reasons for leaving a church and finding a new one.

1. It’s OK to leave if God calls us to leave.

2. It’s OK to leave for family and marriage.

3. It’s OK to leave a church if you have moved too far away to conveniently drive to your church.

4.  It’s OK to leave if you cannot follow the church’s leadership.

5.  It’s OK to leave if heresy is being preached.

Sonsken even mentions that unethical practices like abuse are reasons to leave, though not the norm for the majority of church swapping.

The reasons Sonsken gave are no cause for disagreement, and I’m sure his book Quit Church probably better articulates them.

Where I want to add my two sense on the matter is that I disagree with his assessment sermon quality is not a biblical reason for changing churches. The supposition that sermon quality is inherently a result of the person treating church like an object of consumption, as Sonsken suggests is not true. I believe sermon quality is an umbrella term for several reasons for not liking a Sunday message.

Too often people leave a church because of disagreement, not getting their way, or because the sermons are no longer deep enough. Often when we dig into the reason the sermons are not deep enough, it ultimately goes back to the person being offended or not having their faulty theologies endorsed from the pulpit. The same pastor who was previously deep enough becomes shallow once there is an offense. It’s incredibly difficult to hear from God in a sermon when we are offended by the person delivering the sermon.

This is true in many cases. A sin that is personal gets preached on and the offended party leaves. I don’t deny this to be the case. But I believe we should look deeper into the current trends of worship and focus on the mission of the church.

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Matthew 28:18-21 ESV

The church is to preach the gospel, but people accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior is only part of the mission. The Church is tasked with making disciples. The church is meant to teach. Not every follower is at the same level in their spiritual maturity or theological depth. Some churches, larger churches in particular dumb down the bible. In public education, this would be seen as lowering the bar. In church this practice could hold back believers in their growth. Small groups are a way to supplement this, and every church should employ bible study as a means to grow discipleship.

Many churches now are focused on metrics. This can lead to theologically watered down sermons and worship. Why risk offending that person who may leave with a sermon? But if a church is more focused on using a Sunday message to give a motivational speech using an out of context passage, what does it matter if they are doctrinally sound (in their written beliefs)?

There are a lot of heretical churches in America. We have issues like gay marriage to separate the sheep from the goats. But what about the sheep that suck? If a church has the right doctrine but is more focused on metrics than the power of the Holy Spirit, their head is in the wrong place. So it is biblically sound to change churches so that your head to remains in the right place.

That is not treating church like a consumer product. That is treating church like one’s means to grow spiritually, better recognizing the mission of the Great Commission.

That is my $.02 on the matter. I hope I added some meaningful word to this topic.


This post was originally publishd on Startup Christ. Startup Christ is a website for business and theology articles and columns.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video: So, You Think You’re Tolerant?

Published

on

By

Leftists like to fancy themselves as being tolerant and Liberal, but they fall way short in both qualities.

Leftists will tell you that they are the most tolerant people who have ever lived, they will also scream at you for being a racist, xenophobic troglodyte if you happen to mention that you’re a conservative. They are supposedly ‘Liberal’, being in favour of Liberty while demanding it’s polar opposite – socialism.

Yes, if there is one constant in the universe, its that Leftists cannot be honest about who they truly are. This is what we love about our wonderful opponents on the nation’s socialist Left, for they are nothing like another group that went by the same nomenclature who also screamed at people in the streets with the motto: Common Good Before Individual Good. [Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz]

But let’s not talk about the epithets they project on their enemies, let’s talk about how they get along with everyone who just happens to agree with everything they say. A new PragerU video featuring Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report looked at who is really tolerant. He is a true Liberal that discovered that it is actually the Pro-Liberty Right that is more tolerant, go figure.

Dave Rubin
Jul 9, 2018
Are you tolerant? You probably think so. But who is tolerant in America today? Is it those on the left, or those on the right? In this video, Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report analyzes this question and shares his experience.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.