Attacks on Our Roots

I find the recent attacks on our history through the destruction of our historical monuments extremely discouraging. This is something we should not take lightly. It is in fact, something that is dangerous to our nation due to the loss of something that serves as evidence and proof of actual events. I feel it imperative that this be addressed, before even more is altered and ultimately lost forever.

In light of the defamation and destruction of these monuments, another issue needs to be considered. Because also at risk, are the future loss of our cemeteries and the history and faith that is displayed there.

I have long had concern about the loss of our cemeteries. And now there is even talk of destroying Arlington National Cemetery in light of what has happened in recent days. Have we lost all sense?

Burial And Cremation

In regard to the loss of our cemeteries, the move toward cremation instead of burial can have the same detrimental effect on our nation that the destruction and loss of our monuments can have. And truthfully, I believe they are linked. Yes, there has been a lot of discussion in recent days about our monuments, but for this post I am going to direct my comments to the issue of cremation as opposed to burial. Because after the monuments have all been destroyed, the loss of our cemeteries will be next. History, as well as our faith, manifestly evident through our cemeteries will be lost forever via the continuing trend of cremation.

I am a Christian, so first and foremost in importance to me is what the Bible says about this issue. All historical facts, for me, are of utmost importance in light of what the Bible says.

With the recent promotion of cremation, I believe there is something deeper that has been occurring for some time. And that is this: One of the most important principles of our Christian faith can more easily be challenged when we destroy this respectful and symbolic gesture toward the deliberate care of the body after death. And that principle is the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is the single, most important aspect of the Christian faith that gives us our hope. Traditional burial is symbolic of the fact that as Jesus was buried and raised from the dead, we also will be.

 

Most importantly to this discussion, I believe the danger for our nation in its recent acceptance of cremation over burial, is the fact cremation negates the symbolic meaning of the Resurrection from burial to life. It is to destroy another tenet of Christianity that has traditionally been vitally important. And personally, I believe that is the goal. The Resurrection of Jesus Christ and also that we who believe and put our faith in Jesus will be raised from the dead is a key precept of Christianity. It is the demonstration of victory over death. To allow cremation over burial is a subtle attempt to minimize and change the principles of Christianity. And if not an intentional goal, it is still a consequence of allowing cremation to become the norm.

Furthermore cemeteries are, in fact, a witnessing tool to attest to the reality of a nation's belief in God. How many headstones do you see without a mention of God? Not many. Cemeteries are also a historical record; showing our nation's faith in Jesus for generations. They are important to not only our faith, but the complete accuracy of our history, showing that we are and always have been a Christian nation.   

I would like to show some Biblical reasons as to why burial is important to not only the Christian, but to our nation as a whole.

Biblical Examples

The Bible does not expressly forbid cremation and we are free in Christ to chose either. However, the Bible is clear about God's intent; not by forbidding one, but by EXALTING the other. All Old and New Testament saints were buried setting an example for us.  Jesus was buried. John the Baptist was buried. Other examples we are given for burial in the New Testament are Lazarus, and the rich man. More, Ananias and Sapphira were buried even after they sinned by lying to the Holy Ghost. Acts 5:1-11 

In the Old Testament, Abraham, Joseph, David and all notable Old Testament saints were buried. God buried Moses. God wanted Moses hidden and buried without a monument. This could have been done more easily by cremating him. But Moses was buried, and for me, that demonstrates the importance that God places on burial over burning a life that He created. This clearly shows the importance that He places on respect of life. Deuteronomy 34:5-7 Now this Scripture has been used to say that God doesn't approve of monuments for fear of idol worship by the Israelites. But the Bible clearly doesn't state that. Actually, the opposite is true. God often required commemorations of ceremonies with a stone. Genesis 28:18; 1 Samuel 7:12; and Joshua 4:5-9. God had no problem with monuments. We have to take things in context and remember with whom we are dealing. Moses' life began in hiding when he was placed in the river by his mother in order for his life to be saved. And for whatever reason God saw fit to bury him in hiding, as well. However, He still accomplished that task with burial over burning.

Another important example we see of burial is through Joseph. At his time, Joseph's body was saved for 200 years in order that he be able to be buried in Canaan. Obviously his body meant something and had a purpose. Genesis 50:24-26 and Exodus 13:19. Joseph claimed it would happen; Moses preserved Joseph's bones to bring back to the Promised Land; and Joshua eventually buried Joseph in Shechem, 200 years later. Joshua 24:32. Furthermore, earlier on, the body of Jacob (Joseph’s father) had been taken from Egypt and buried in Machpelah (modern Hebron) in Canaan. Genesis 50:5; Genesis 50:13-14. The body is important to God.

Along these lines, we also still have the location of David's tomb known and available as a witnessing tool to the factual proof of what the Bible has told us. Burial is first and foremost a witnessing tool for and to the God we serve. It demonstrates the importance of life and what He has created, and it gives us factual evidence of what really took place rather than having it all burned away.

The Bible is full of important examples. The story of Achan in the Old Testament allows us to see that those depicted as dying in there sin were still buried. Achan who secretly stole from his camp brought judgment on the camp, and though he was stoned then burned for this sin, his remains were, in the end, still buried by covering them with stones. Joshua 7:25-26

In contrast, it is rare to find an example of any righteous or even an unrighteous person that was cremated or burned in any fashion for the finality of their death. The  tradition of the Hebrews was not to cremate. We are told in 1 Samuel 31:11-13 that Saul and his sons were burned; but after, their bones were still buried under a tree. That speaks volumes to me. 

I believe these examples are given to us in Scripture to show us that death is not final. In fact, it is not even the end of the body. Of course at death, our bodies no longer hold our spirit, but the body is still to be respected and shown worth. That is apparent in each of these Biblical examples. The body through burial is a symbolic planting of what will be raised to eternal life. A key tenet of Christianity is that we will receive new bodies to live on with Jesus in Heaven. The symbolic meaning of this "planting" (to be raised and live forever) is lost to us through cremation. And equally sad, for some, cremation is symbolic of hell.

Christian Tradition

It is only in recent years that cremation has gained popularity and acceptance. Throughout the history of our Christian nation, not having a proper burial was considered a disgrace. It was devastating to families to think of their loved ones left unburied. Great strives were taken to be sure loved ones were properly buried, and shown respect by offering words about their life and encouragement from the Bible about the after-life. We have seen this throughout our history, even as settlers traveled west without benefit of cemeteries or cities. They buried and marked a grave for their lost loved one. That sacrifice of burial is to be honored, when a burning would have been so much easier.

The first cremation in America actually didn't take place until 1876.  Included in that cremation were readings from Charles Darwin and the Hindu scriptures. Christianity has compromised with the world on many fronts. For years, the numbers were small for those who chose cremation over burial and it was mostly from those who were liberal or outside of the Christian faith. Cremation once non-existent, became rare in the late 1800's, and now it has almost become the norm.

Tools of the Left

As time passes and we fall more and more away from Biblical teachings, it shouldn't really surprise us that the importance of burial is lost. With the decline in mores in our nation, the rise of cremation shouldn't take us aback. It is no coincidence that these two are connected at this time in history.

The left has often used environmentalism as a tool for their political agenda. As the world falls into the trap of diminishing life and elevating the environment, we should not be shocked at the push for cremation. When those with this mindset seek preservation of land over human life, and especially death, it is inevitable that burial will be challenged and cremation promoted.

Satan loves to change and distort Christian principles. He seeks to counterfeit all that God intended to make our lives better and use to bring us comfort. We have given Satan an open door on so many levels. And once open, it is difficult to close.

Counting the Cost

There may be a time where the cost of burial over cremation has to be considered. We have the freedom in Christ to know we are not sinning if we choose cremation over burial due to a matter of finances. If cremation is all one can afford, that should not be held against anyone. But cost should have nothing to do with this issue as a main reason to defend cremation over burial, either. Money should not dictate what is right. One should not be condemned or chastised for spending money on a funeral. Jesus allowed the woman to pour out expensive oil before his death. Choosing cremation due to costs may be understandable for some who cannot afford a burial. There is no condemnation for this, but neither should there be condemnation in the reverse. 

I use this post only to hopefully enlighten others, or cause one to think. It is not to pass judgment on those who have chosen or will choose cremation. I only want to show the problems in making cremation the norm, when burial could first be chosen.  

Death Represents Life

The human body has always been important to our nation. To change that is simply another open door to destroying (or at least, minimizing) what we have always believed as a God-fearing country.

My pastor tells of a time when this especially became real to him. He had been called to serve at Ground Zero, just after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. When he returned from New York, he spoke to his congregation of all that he witnessed there. He told of the countless days and hours where people searched continually and diligently for the bodies or even any remnants of those lost. The grief, but excitement, when only a finger might have been found will be engraved forever in his mind. Standing at attention at a funeral, to be stunned when it was only a small casket brought forward with only a portion of a body inside, painted an awesome picture of the importance of life for him and for us as he shared his experiences.

This is America. We are a Christian nation with Biblical values and precedents. The many days that he and countless others spent searching through the rubble with the ash and the stench and the wreckage are proof of that. The grief that was present in that place was in an ominous way, still tangible. There is an importance that is placed on the remains of our loved ones, and that made itself excruciatingly apparent there as they searched over and over through the ruins. "Hope" was the seed of that effort. "Honor" was the root. And "respect", the catalyst that allowed it all to take place. I will never forget his words.

"We dig", he softly and respectfully imparted to our quiet, listening hearts.

In Summary

The Bible doesn't necessarily speak to cremation. Rather it exalts burial to allow us to discern what it is we are to do.

Yes, we have the freedom in Christianity to do what we want. But, which action brings the most glory to God?  Burial has typically been the Judeo-Christian worldview in regard to the symbolic reflection of the Resurrection and respect for the life and body that God has created. Those cremated will still join the Lord and receive their new bodies, but to condone cremation is to support another loss of all that is God's best that He intended for us while here on earth. In my opinion, with cremation, we simply join the world in its digression and we slowly destroy another Christian tradition and belief. For me, cremation is, in fact, another attack on Christianity.

Now I have been to beautiful celebrations of life where someone was cremated. The emphasis on God and the after-life can still be the central focus. But it is after the celebration takes place for which I am concerned. There is no visual, public record, or statement of this life. There is no place to go and quietly grieve. There is no further tangible connection for us left behind here on earth. I find that heart-breaking.

Stored away in an urn, or carefully scattered at a place of importance to someone - both are options that still destroy the record and history. More importantly it destroys an opportunity for sharing God. What does one see over and over at a cemetery, but the historical record of the relevance of God to a nation that once reverenced Him. And that's important.

Russia, Russia, Russia

Judge Jeanine has had enough of "Russia, Russia, Russia" and so have I!

 Judge Tells It Like It Is!  Well worth the view! 

Skunks in the Chicken House!

What is a United States Senator doing sticking his nose in somewhere I don't think it yet belongs. Why is a senator trying to disrupt the vote that is first set and truly should first come forward in the House? No, really! Why? I don't get it.

Senator Rand Paul started his attention seeking theatrics weeks ago. He was dead set to paint the new healthcare bill as something disastrous. He was the first one to call it "Obamacare Light", wasn't he? Well, he was successful in bringing the damage he sought. The bill failed and he couldn't be happier. What was that all about? Why wasn't he working to make the bill something more successful, instead of aggressively fighting it every step of the way?

The Freedom Caucus (conservative members of the House) was very influential and indeed successful in getting some important changes to the bill. If the citizens had been educated about those changes, they surely would have wanted their representatives to support it. But I just don't think people understood. The misinformation out there that comments on social media reveal is unbelievable. I do understand why it was so difficult though. I really, really had to work at finding the correct information. It was terribly confusing. I was beginning to think no one understood.

But aligning themselves with Democrats, those that think of themselves as the most conservative members are, in fact, the ones that caused this bill to fail. It was extremely disappointing for me, because many of these conservatives are usually the people I like to support. But for them, the bill simply wasn't "pure' enough so they voted "no". They wanted it their way or the highway. They wanted it all or nothing. But actually, when does 100% ever work in government? It doesn't, and it never has. They were successful in making it look like it was only the efforts of the evil RINO's (Republicans In Name Only) who were pushing this bill forward and seeking passage. That simply isn't the case. I am tired of the intended division that is caused by name-calling and finger-pointing. The truth is, in my opinion, is that the members that voted "no", were far more concerned that they would lose their legislative seats, than passing this legislation. That fear seems to have controlled them and appeared more important to them than taking the time to educate their constituents about what the bill entailed. Politics before what is best for our nation.

There is no one that understands Constitutional Law with a Christian perspective better than Jay Sekulow and the American Center for Law and Justice. They came out in support of this bill. On Friday before the vote, Jay and his son, Jordan, did an excellent live review of the law and the reasons they supported it. It made more sense than anything I have seen, read, or heard. You can view it here and I recommend it to everyone.

 

Here is a quick break down in terms of the bill that someone as simple minded as me can understand:

• It got rid of the individual mandate.
• It got rid of the employer mandate.
• It put things back in state control.
• It rolled back taxes. This would have been repealed and taxes RETURNED!
• It eliminated the issues that were a problem for businesses like Hobby Lobby.
• It eliminated funding of Planned Parenthood.
• It would have helped the economy!

Many people have said they were concerned about the apparent rush to push the bill through the House. They lamented that it was happening so fast. But there was a reason for that. Federal funding comes up in April. Now that this bill has failed, Planned Parenthood will once again be funded. The passage of this bill would have prevented that funding and time was of the essence.

The points in the above list are the simple terms that are important to me. These are the facts that I can relate to and figure out for myself. Below is a post I took from Facebook. It is written by someone that knows a whole heck of a lot more than me. I am sorry I did not get his name. He has outlined the bill and the three phases it was designed to reach in more official terms. He demonstrates what was to happen in each of the three phases that would have occurred had this first phase passed. This is what the gentleman wrote:

"Bottom line you and other Freedom Caucus members only want to repeal Obamacare with no replacement. That will require 60 votes in the Senate.

Executive summary of what you did not support:

The Three Phase Approach to Repeal and Replace Obamacare ...

Phase 1 ...

REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMACARE ...
(Budget reconciliation process requiring 51 votes in Senate):

▶ Eliminate Obamacare’s mandates and penalties.▶ Dismantle the trillion dollars of Obamacare taxes.
▶ Provide real assistance for the middle class through tax credits to help individuals and families purchase the insurance they want.
▶ Put Medicaid, the Federal Government's primary health care program for low income individuals and families on a sustainable foundation.▶ Give individuals and families more control over their healthcare dollars and decisions by expanding Health Savings Accounts (HSA).▶ Provide resources and flexibility to States to empower them to bring premiums down and help their vulnerable citizens.

Phase 2 ...

PROVIDE ESSENTIAL REGULATORY RELIEF ...
(HHS/Tom Price):

▶ Adopting regulatory reforms to stabilize insurance markets and increase coverage choices for patients, including insurance portability and purchasing across state lines beginning as early as 2018.
▶ Loosening restrictions on the financial structure of insurance plans offered on the Obamacare exchanges, which will give individuals and families access to lower premium options.
▶ Improving choices for patients and putting downward pressure on prices by curbing abuses of the enrollment processes and encouraging full-year enrollment.

Phase 3 ...

REFORM HEALTHCARE THROUGH ADDITIONAL LEGISLATION ...
(Outside of budget reconciliation process that requires 60 votes in Senate):

▶ Allow health insurance to be sold across state lines.▶ Allow Americans to use the money in their HSAs to pay for more healthcare costs.
▶ Streamline processes at the FDA, removing the red tape that slows down approvals of generic competitors to high-price drugs in order to lower the cost of medicine.
▶ Allow small businesses to band together, through Association Health Plans, and negotiate for lower health insurance costs for their employees .
▶ Reform the medical malpractice lawsuit system by ending doctors’ incentives to practice unnecessarily costly medicine.

Return power to the states to:

▶ Set the safeguards and other parameters governing their own health insurance markets, including repealing any of Obamacare’s insurance market distortions that could not be included in a budget reconciliation bill .
▶ Set priorities and enact creative solutions for serving their most vulnerable citizens in the Medicaid program.
▶ Lower premiums for everyone in their state through the use of high risk pools, reinsurance, health savings accounts, and other solutions, and provide assistance to lower income people."

Sounds pretty darn good to me.

So many (including Sean Hannity) were saying: "The Republicans have had 7 years to get this done!" Blame, blame, blame! "Why didn't they have something ready?" is the oft repeated refrain.

But the truth is Republicans did have the bill ready. It was the previously written Tom Price Bill and President Trump strategically appointed Tom Price as Director of Health and Human Services. The bill WAS ready! They were using the previous bill that Tom Price had helped prepare.

The attitude that we saw, yesterday, in the few Republicans that wouldn't support this bill is what kept it from moving forward and it is a dangerous attitude, in my opinion. It is the same attitude that we saw in 2008 and 2012 when the Ron Paul agenda so badly divided conservatives that people stayed home in the general election, rather than get out and vote for someone that Ron Paul had deemed as a RINO (Republican In Name Only). Because of that divide we got Obama - not just once, but twice. Yeah that claim to "purity" really worked well, didn't it?

Why is it always the Paul's that do the disrupting? Why is it yet another Paul that once again keeps a conservative plan, strategy, or answer from moving forward? You know, the Paul's that keep claiming to be not really Republican, but libertarian?

I still suspect a skunk in the chicken house, just as I did in 2008 and 2012. It is interesting to me it is two of the same name. Surely their disruptive efforts and continued success to those ends are just coincidental, but I am really getting tired of it. 

Rand's bill is supposedly ready; waiting in the wings to move forward. It remains to be seen if it is indeed anymore conservative than this one was, or if it will even get anywhere. It will be interesting to see. If it isn't, we can safely assume all the distraction and dissatisfaction Rand created was only about Rand and getting his name on the bill. That name. Things smell like a skunk to me.