Security Guard with a Big Head

November 23, 2015

We went to the bus station yesterday, and there was a security guard I’d never seen before. I handed a tract to a guy that was talking to him, and the guard took it away from the guy, and said, “You can’t do that here.”

I told him that it’s public property and we have the right to do this as it has been worked out between our attorney and the city attorney. I asked to see the written policy. He said he’d show me and we walked inside.

As we were walking he said this is federal property. I told him that he’s wrong and it’s city property, and even if it’s federal property, it wouldn’t matter as government property is public property.


Assessor’s website shows ownership of the property as the City of Pueblo

So we got inside and he tried to interpret the document hammered out by lawyers. I thought it was the proper document at the time, but after reviewing my copy, I’ll have to verify that they actually have the correct version on display. Anyway, it’s a little bit confusing if you’ve never read it before, and he was befuddled. He thought it had contradictory provisions where solicitation was banned but distribution of non-commercial literature is acceptable. He thought we were doing religious solicitation, but solicitation is generally asking for money or selling something.

Since he thought it was contradictory, he said he’d meet us 50/50 and let us continue. I assured him that I wasn’t interested in his 50/50, we would be following the document 100%.

After that, I walked away and tried to talk to someone sitting on the first bench by the door. He said I was within 10 feet of the door (that is one of the provisions in the document–that we stay at least 10 feet from the doors and bus doors). I told him he better get his measuring tape, as I wasn’t within 10 feet, and 10 feet is 3 big steps plus 1 foot. He just scoffed. I told him if he’s going to be following me around that we’re going to have problems. Looking back, I guess that could have been taken as a threat, but I just meant that him following me around was unacceptable.

He went and talked to the ladies in the ticket booth, and he came back and said they don’t want me in the building. I just said I don’t care, call the cops. I went on passing out tracts, and the next time I walked by him, he was on the phone, and asked me my name. I said I don’t give out my name. I should have specified that I give out my name to decent people–not power hungry dorks.

That was the last time I saw him. I think his shift ended. I wish I would have recorded it.

More Unjust Taxation

November 4, 2015

Fremont County voters approved the indefinite extension of a 2% lodging tax yesterday. It seems perfect, because no one who voted for it actually has to pay the tax; I doubt there are many registered voters living out of motel.

Isn’t it great that we can “legally” steal money from people who most likely are just visiting. After all, when we go out of town, we are charged a lodging tax. Never mind the golden rule; the true golden rule of modern Christianity is, “Government can do whatever it wants.”

Ultimately all taxes are collected at gun point. But we Americans are a meek people, so it rarely ever comes to that. Nevertheless, that is what you voted for if you voted in favor of this tax–the use of force and violence to collect funds to advertise to tourists. While voters may have legalized this tax under man’s law, it remains illegal under God’s law.

Did Jesus Always Obey The Government?

October 12, 2015
I'm glad some Christians were willing to break the law.

I’m glad some Christians were willing to break the law.

This pdf from Abolish Human Abortion is fantastic. I want to quote part of it in answering the question in the title.

First, we have to know who the government in Jesus’ day was. The obvious (but only partial) answer is the Romans. They were occupying Israel. But, they weren’t the only government. The Pharisees were also governing.

Jesus declared the scribes and Pharisees “sit in Moses’ seat”–the place of civil authority (Matthew 23:2).

Rulers brought the woman caught in adultery to Jesus (John 8).

The Sanhedrin tried Jesus before turning him over to Pilate (Matthew 26).

The high priest put the apostles in common prison, beat them, and commanded them regarding their speech (Acts 5).

Saul was a bounty hunter commissioned by the Sanhedrin to deliver “law breakers” for trial and punishment–even death (Acts 26).

So to find examples of Jesus resisting authority and disobeying the government, you can pretty much just flip open to a random page in the gospels and find at least one example. He disobeyed them often and boldly.

Christians need to resist unjust laws, and the only standard for what is just and unjust is God’s law.

Quote from Bojidar Marinov

September 15, 2015

“If you are a Calvinist, you should know this corollary from Calvinist soteriology: The reprobate won’t become less reprobate because you were friendly and soft; but the elect will be driven to respond if you speak as one of authority, not like their academically-feminized seminary professors (Matt. 7:29).”

I Stand With Kim Davis

September 5, 2015

Below is the email I just sent to the Rowan County Sheriff (, which is the county where Kim Davis is the clerk. Maybe it’s too late for this sheriff to do anything, but I sent it anyway.

I don’t think Ms. Davis should have reported to the federal court where she was given jail time by an evil judge. She should stand on Kentucky law and ignore federal decrees, and hope that local people stand with her and protect her from federal intrusion.

Here’s the e-mail:

Sheriff Carter,

Jesus said to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. In our republic, the Constitution is Caesar. Kim Davis is doing the right thing and obeying the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of Kentucky, while evil judges try to legislate perversity from the bench.

It’s impossible for two people of the same gender to marry, even if Ruth Bader Ginsburg has decreed such from Washington DC. A judge can’t decree that two dudes can marry any more than they can decree that water now flows up hill.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg isn’t going to come down to the county clerk and force anyone to issue a license. She needs boots on the ground to enforce her evil decree. It seems wicked judges have never had a problem getting law enforcement to carry out their orders.

But maybe it’s time we just stop doing stupid things the judges say. Kim Davis has taken the first step, but she needs others to refuse to follow evil orders with her. She can’t do it alone. We must obey God’s law, and the Constitution, rather than men.

This country was founded on the idea that just governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. (That means if people work together, they don’t have to do stupid things judges tell them.) At this point, I don’t know if the population is so evil that they are offering their consent to the unjust laws, or whether the good people have just formed a habit of retreating from hills worth dying on. But this issue is so crystal clear that it’s time to take a stand and do the right thing.

Check out this article:

Bill Phillips

Theonomy Debate

July 14, 2015

I got to attend this debate in person last February (2015). I’ve learned a lot about theonomy since then, and there are a lot of silly objections to theonomy, but there really are no good objections. McDurmon’s opening argument really lays out the presuppositional arguments for theonomy, and they can’t be defeated, and JD Hall didn’t even try.

If God’s law is just, then it is obligatory. The Bible says it is just dozens of times, even in the New Testament.

If, modern nations are free to choose a range of laws, and they are still considered just (as an anti-theonomist would say), then a theonomist is just as free to choose to work to implement God’s law as a non-theonomist would be to work to implement whatever law they want. If theonomists are wrong, then, God’s law is just one political position among many that are valid. I don’t see why there is so much vitriol against it.

In reality, I do know why there’s vitriol. God doesn’t care about the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. He only cares about His law. There are Christians who realize that if theonomy is true, they will be called on to sacrifice. Some Christians have invested their entire lives into careers that, if theonomy is true, are sinful. So, it’s easier to just accuse theonomists of heresy.

And as someone who isn’t Presbyterian, I’ve been wondering why JD Hall and others have focused so much on whether the Westminster Confession is consistent with theonomy. The confession isn’t inerrant. My only question is whether it’s biblical or not. But Hall knew that he couldn’t really answer the presuppositional arguments for theonomy, so he changed the subject to whether theonomy is consistent with the confessions.

Here’s some things to look out for in the debate. I find a lot of agreement with Hall’s opening statement, but then he spends the rest of the debate contradicting what he said. Think about why JD admits that execution for buggery was just, but then goes on to accuse theonomists of all kinds of heresy. This is because he had to change the subject.

Then, check out this for some more info on some of the mistakes JD Hall made.

Instant Justice!

November 19, 2014

This is one of the best things I’ve seen in a long time. This crazy woman receives instant consequences for her actions.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.