Author: Timothy

I am a Christian, a husband, father, and friend, with the calling of an itinerant pastor. I also serve special needs kids in the public schools.

The Gospels were written much sooner than we’ve been told.

When Were the Gospels Written?

When were the gospels written? Decades after the ascension of Christ, later, or actually, earlier?

Let’s walk through this together.

First thing to understand concerning the dates of the Gospels is that it is all speculation and consensus, depending on where you stand. From the liberal camp, they will say that the gospels were written after 70 AD because Jesus speaks of the destruction of the temple, which took place in 70 AD. For them, Jesus could only speak of something like that if it had already happened. So their decision is based upon unbelief. They don’t believe that Jesus was a prophet, or knew the future. For them, He was just a good man.

For the conservatives, they always seem to claim that the gospels were written at the earliest, in the 50s or late 60s. Their reason for this is actually the opposite of the liberals. They actually believe that Jesus was and is a Prophet. This is why Jesus speaks of the destruction of the temple in the future tense. And since the gospel, book of Acts, or the rest of the NT speak of the temple actually being destroyed, they hold that all were written before 70 A.D.

I completely agree with this assessment. Jesus was THE Prophet. He foretold of His death, resurrection, and ascension. Foretelling the future of the Temple was child’s play. If He was right on the former, which He was, then the prophesies of the temple’s destruction were nothing for Him. He did ascend to the right hand of the Father. He also came again in judgment in 70 A.D. to carry out what He said would happen.

(Obviously, I’ve gone to preaching.)

Back to the date of Matthew, which is my main goal.

I hope you have seen that we have placed the Synoptic Gospels before the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. But why do we claim that the gospels were written in the 50s or 60s?

This is what I was told while in seminary. The reasoning given was that it takes a while to gather the money to buy the paper, which was rare and expensive. The paper that could be had, was only used on the most important things in the world, like… grocery lists, love notes, and reminders to wash chariot, taxes, court records, contracts, leases, wills, and other such things.

We know all those things were written down in the days of Christ because of the great treasure trove of papyri found in Egypt in the late 1800s, and early 1900s. That discovery was a gift that showed us the life of the average Greco-Roman citizen.

This destroys the false notion that paper was hard to come by and so expensive that the disciples had to save their pennies in order to get enough paper before they started writing.

This is where the faith of the conservatives falls flat. They are trying so hard to be acceptable, scholarly, and responsible in their discussions of such a topic, that they  rule out the possibility that our King already had a plan on how the gospels would be written, who would write them, and where the money would come from to do so. It is almost as if they think that the King of kings, the omniscient Second Person of the Trinity was sort of winging it, and only thought to have the guys start writing all that happened down during the 40-day stretch between the resurrection and His ascension.

The truth is that Jesus knew that the events of His ministry needed to be written down, and would have had His disciples doing just that during His ministry. We know this, because the same Person of the Trinity was having the prophets write things down before His incarnation. Every time YHWH moved in the lives of His covenantal people, He would raise up a prophet to write those things down.

For example, YHWH told Moses to write things down, Exodus 24:4. Moses writes down all the words of YHWH, so that he can read them back to the Israelites all that they had agreed to do.

In Exodus 34:27, YHWH instructs Moses to write down the covenant He just made with the Israelites after the golden calf incident.

YHWH Himself, actually writes the Ten Commandments: Exodus 31:18, 32:16, 34:1, 34:28.

This would continue with Joshua and the Prophets. It was done during the period of Joshua, Judges, and Kings. Even David had access to paper and was in the habit of writing things down to record the Psalms.

All this shows us that God established a pattern of writing down what He was doing in history. God always ensures that there is someone to record these events when He begins to move, forf covenant people. YHWH actually wants us to know about how He has moved in history. He wants us to remember, so that we declare His magnificent works to the nations.

So why is it, that we think that Jesus, as the incarnate YHWH, would not do the same?

Peter Leithart

Now please understand where all this begins. I confess that it is not from me. It was a short article by Peter Leithart that opened my mind to this truth. Blame him. Yet, what he writes, has a ring of truth to it. I never liked the idea that the gospel writers sat around for decades before putting pen to paper. This makes no sense. See his article here, where he writes:

Late dating of the gospels is historically preposterous. Even the most “conservative” dating assumes that Jewish Christians, who believed that the long-awaited salvation had finally occurred in Jesus, would wait over a decade before putting an ordered account on paper. On the contrary: The very first thing a Jew would do if convinced that Jesus was Messiah would be to pick up a quill and papyrus and start writing. Matthew, who wrote the book cleverly called “Matthew,” was a literate tax collectors who in all likelihood jotted down sermon notes as he followed Jesus around Galilee and Judea. Whyever would he keep those hidden for a decade before writing his gospel?

Why would he? We don’t. When something happens of significance, we write it down. This is because we know the importance of something that is written down. This was true of the Bible as well. Especially given… that the Messiah, whom the Jews had waiting for thousands of years, finally showed up.

Our scholars seem to think the gospel writers waited like modern historians do, waiting to get the full picture, which takes a few decades. For example, William Shirer, who wrote The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, was heavily criticized by academia because he put his book out so quickly after World War II. But why? Shirer was a witness to many of the events. He knew many of the people who lived under the Third Reich. He was writing down the events of history as they unfolded. And because of this, his book is one of the premier books on Hitler and the war.

I point this out to show it’s part of human nature to record great events in history. We should expect the same when the long-awaited Messiah shows up.

The Chosen Recorder

As for Matthew, I believe Jesus chooses him specifically to write down the things that Jesus is doing. Why is this? In general, we know that that all the disciples were chosen by Jesus for a specific reason. We may not know those reasons, but Christ does.

The best example of this is Paul. Jesus called him while he was on the Road to Damascus for the purpose of taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and to suffer many things for Christ. But Paul was also chosen because he was a Pharisee of Pharisees. He was trained in the Old Testament. He would go on to write much of the New Testament in his letters to the churches explaining the Christian life (I include Hebrews among his letters). But he wasn’t just writing them simple letters. Paul was writing to the explaining the Old Testament in light of the New Covenant, and Christ. His background as a Pharisee helped him explain life as a Christian.

Jesus choosing of Matthew was no less specific.  Matthew was chosen because he was a man who paid attention to details. He was a tax collector and was educated. He knew how to write. He also knew how to get paper. It was a part of the trade to keep records of the work he did as a tax collector. So the need to wait 10, 15, 20 years before writing what Jesus did, was not necessary.

As Leithart suggests, Matthew probably started writing down things the moment of his calling, and may have even wrote things down before he was called. We don’t know with any certainty, but Matthew may have been part of the multitudes who actually heard the Sermon on the Mount, or witnessed the miracles of Christ. He may have known the Centurion, or others, who experienced the mercy and power of Christ.

I don’t believe for a moment that when Jesus said, “Follow Me,” that this was the first time Matthew had seen Jesus. But then again, I don’t want to take away from the possibility that it was the first time Matthew saw Jesus. Jesus could command as much. His calling on a man is effectual whether the man has seen Jesus or not.

What we do know is Matthew did follow Jesus, and immediately threw a banquet for his friends, the other tax collectors and sinners. Luke’s gospel gives us more details than Matthew’s does.

And Levi gave a big reception for Him in his house; and there was a great crowd of tax collectors and other people who were reclining at the table with them (Luke 5:29).

This lack of the term banquet in Matthew’s gospel may be a testimony to his humility. He didn’t want to boast in being able to throw a banquet. Yet, he did just that. As a tax collector, he had the money to throw a banquet.

Why?

He threw the banquet so his friends could meet Jesus as he had done. He wanted them to know Jesus as He knew Jesus.

It is interesting how little we know of Matthew. His name is mentioned about five times in the Gospels and Acts, and his other name, Levi, three times. His name is found in the accounts of his calling, and in the list of the disciples. But no where else.

There are no recorded words between Matthew and Jesus. He never asks any questions that we know of. He is, silent…

But we do know he wants people to know Christ. The banquet shows us this. He invites everyone he knows to the banquet… and he writes. He records, and writes, so that people will know about Christ.

And it is after the Day of Pentecost, that Matthew sees the real need for all that he has written. There are all these Jews who have just come to know Christ who need to be informed. The Spirit has moved in them, but they need instruction. And Matthew is ready. He takes all his notes, put them in book form, and starts sharing so those who have come to know Jesus through the preaching of the word, can read the gospel for themselves. Matthew fulfills the purpose for his calling.

Conclusion

What I’m hoping you see, is that there would be absolutely no reason at all to wait a decade or two in order to put down on paper the events of the long-awaited Messiah. There was an immediate need for the gospel of Matthew. And Matthew filled that need for his countrymen. He was the first because he was on the scene for many of the events. He was THE eyewitness for the job. It was exactly why Jesus called Him.

If you like, you can listen to the sermon I preached on the calling of Matthew here. This post was the background work for that sermon.

“Do Not Sound a Trumpet”

Preparation for Worship: Ephesians 2:8-10

Call to worship: Psalm 15

Reading of the Law: Proverbs 11:29 (The wicked hardens his own heart. He doesn’t tremble when he commits iniquity. He is bold in his sin, and unrepentant. He will seek his own way. He is captain of his soul… but only for a time. The righteous, on the other hand, do not direct their own paths. He relies on the Father to do so, and submits to His providence.)

AOPG: Psalm 116:5-9

Confession of Faith: The Apostles’ Creed.

Old Covenant Reading :  Deuteronomy 15:1-11

New Covenant Reading: Matthew 6:1-18

In the following sermon, we see Jesus expanding upon how the Pharisees twisted God’s Law for their own gain, when it came to their acts of piety. Jesus will address three areas in chapter 6, charitable acts, prayer, and fasting. In all three, the hypocrites turned these acts of piety into performance before men. Their goal was to make themselves see pious and holy. But because they were seeking the pleasure of men, and not God, their acts were considered abominable to God and rejected by Him.
This is not to say, we are not to do good works, especially charity, prayer, and fasting. Jesus expects us to do just that. But we are to do it with an attitude towards our Father in heaven, not man.
The Law is supposed to show us God’s perfect character—His holiness, His righteousness—and act like guardrails to keep us on track in living holy lives. It’s not about earning salvation; it’s about growing in sanctification, reflecting God’s light through our actions. Leithart calls this “redemptive righteousness”—good works that point others to God, not to us.
Then He zeros in on three acts of piety: giving, praying, and fasting. The problem wasn’t the acts themselves—those are good and expected—but the heart behind them. The Pharisees were doing them for the applause of the crowd, not for God. Jesus calls them out as hypocrites, saying don’t be like that. Don’t give to the poor to get a pat on the back. Instead, give quietly, secretly, for God’s eyes only.
He assumes we’ll be charitable, and the Old Testament backs this up, like in Deuteronomy where the Jews were told to care for the poor generously, but with discernment—not just handing out cash to the lazy, but helping those genuinely in need while preserving their dignity. It’s not about showing off; it’s about righteousness flowing from a heart that fears God and loves His commands, like Psalm 112 says.
When Jesus warns against “sounding a trumpet” to announce your giving, it’s like He’s calling out our tendency to crave recognition. I feel that—wanting people to notice when I do something good. But Jesus says that’s a dead-end reward, just fleeting praise from people. Instead, give in secret, and God, who sees it all, will reward you in His way. That’s the kind of righteousness that surpasses the Pharisees’—a heart focused on God, not the spotlight. It’s a challenge, but it’s how we store up treasures in heaven, not just chase vanity here on earth.
Listen to the sermon below…

“Take Courage, Son.”

The following is an excerpt from the Sermon: “Take Courage, Son,” in which Jesus heals the paralytic after declaring the man’s sins forgiven. 

Forgiven Sins

“Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.”

The second monumental statement is one the paralytic did not expect… But it is what the paralytic needed the most: his sins were forgiven.

Do you see that? We want the miracles, the relief from suffering, the healings. Yet, what we need most is the forgiveness that Jesus gives us. We need the atonement. We need the cleansing.

And so often, we forget this truth. We need the forgiveness Jesus brings, more than temporal success. We need forgiveness more that temporal peace.

While the temporal healings, peace, and provisions, are helpful to us in the here and now, the forgiveness found in Christ is the eternal blessing that we need the most.

You can listen to the full sermon here.

The Apostles Creed: The Quick and the Dead

I know that there are times when we need to update the language of our faith. However, so often, the updates don’t bring greater clarity or deeper understanding. This is why so many modern translations are so vanilla. The translators tend to soften as much as possible, thereby keeping the Bible from saying what needs to be said.

The same is true with the Apostles’ Creed and the earlier translations (yes, our Apostles’ Creed is translated from Latin into English.) And yes, one part of the newer version of the Apostles’ Creed bothers me. It is when they translate or modernize “the quick and the dead” into “the living and the dead.”

Now, I need to admit that I have been mistaken about the idea of the meaning of the word “quick.” I took it for the idea of made alive, or born again, which is found in the KJV’s translation of Ephesians 2:5.

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)… Ephesians 2:5.

My mistake was thinking that “quickened” in Ephesians was the same as in the Apostles’ Creed. But it’s not. Here is Strong’s on the word used in Ephesians:

συζωοποιέω syzōopoiéō, sood-zo-op-oy-eh’-o; from G4862 and G2227; to reanimate conjointly with (figuratively):—quicken together with.

This word is very unique to the Christian faith. It only belongs to those who are born again, made alive in Christ. The key is “in Christ.” The word is only used in one other place in the New Testament: Colossians 2:13.

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Quick and The Dead is Focused on Judgment

The two times the Greek word for being made alive in Christ, are both in the context of who the believer is in Christ. Yet, this is not what is being spoken of in the Apostles’ Creed.

The Creed is speaking of judgment when it uses the phrase “the quick and the dead.” Here is the context:

He descended into hell.
The third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

This is drawn from Acts 10:42.

42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

It seems like this would be a slam dunk for my earlier position. But the Greek word for “quick” in this instances is not the same Greek word that Paul is speaking of. It is actually the word for “alive” or “animated.” Here is Strong’s:

ζάω záō, dzah’-o; a primary verb; to live (literally or figuratively):—life(-time), (a-)live(-ly), quick.

We have two different Greek words, and two different contexts. In Paul’s writing, he is speaking directly to Christians, those in Christ. In Acts, Peter is stating what is to come through the risen Savior. He is to judge both the living, all those who are animaled with life, and those who are already dead. His focus is on the final coming of Christ, when the seas will give up their dead, and the graves will give up their dead, and all those who are living at that time, will stand before the great throne room of Judgment.

I’m Keeping It

Does this mean, that I prefer the new version of the Apostles’ Creed? Absolutely not. The newer version is far too vanilla.

I like the poetic nature of the older version. Yes, it is archaic, but it does remind us that “quick” once gave us the idea of vitality… not just among the breathing… as “living” can do.

And all those who are among the quick, will be judged by the same One who judges the dead. The phrase then, is eschatological in nature, not soteriological in nature, as I assumed.

All this to say that I was wrong about my assumptions, but I still prefer the older translation.

The Apostles’ Creed

We believe in God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth;
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord;
who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried.
He descended into hell.
The third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
We believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.
Amen.

Go!

My latest sermon is based on the incident in which the demons Legion confront Jesus on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. It not only deals with the spiritual warfare that is taking place between Jesus and the Legion, but also ties together the sin of the sons of God in Genesis 6, along with 1 Peter 3 and 2 Peter 2. Both those Petrine passages deal with the demons in Sheol. In the first, Peter preaches to them. In the second, we see that they are bound.

Legion wants nothing to do with Christ because they fear He will send them into the confinement of Sheol, with the other fallen angels of Genesis 6. You can access the sermon here.

A Voice of Reason

As I was working my way through the steps to get ready for LORD’s Day worship, I came across the following Proverb.

He who walks with wise men will be wise,
But the companion of fools will be destroyed (13:20).

I think this is the battle of the age at the moment. As you look at a previous post, you can see that in conservative circles there is a lot of confusion about whom we should follow. In many sectors of the far right, the answer is Nick Fuentes. I don’t get it at all. The man is nothing but a spectacle, who appeals to the base nature of a man’s flesh in the worst of ways.

In Paul’s first letter to Timothy, he warns the pastor about those “who give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in the faith.” Fuentes does this in our modern context, and shows a real lack of godly wisdom.

Fortunately, there are those who do put forth a voice of reason.

Victor Davis Hansen is a voice of reason, at least when it comes to political conservatism. In the video below,  he nails it on the issue of anti-semitism, and actually goes through an explanation of why we want Israel as an ally. It has been a while since I’ve heard anyone put forth the reasons why we have always been behind and allied with Israel. I know many try to tack on a religious component, claiming them as God’s special people and all, but that is not the reason. Israel is strategic. Israel is an ally.

 

Hansen also points out that what many in our society are given over to are the voices of those who are revisionist historians. They are not historians at all, but simply put forth history as truth without any basis. (This is what Fuentes does concerning the number of deaths in the Holocaust, offering no real evidence, put forth as evidence, without actual evidence. In other words, all he does is offer questions and more questions without any truth to his arguments).

Now what Hansen misses in the discussion, is not just that that men like Fuentes are antisemites, but that they are not Christian at all. This is my biggest concern, since so many young men in the church are listening to Fuentes. I’ve heard enough of him to know he is not a Christian. He does nothing to build up the body of Christ. He does nothing to further the cause of Christ. His entire MO is destruction and the fruit he is putting forth is not Biblical.

Not some might say I don’t have the right to declare that about Fuentes. But Jesus made it clear: you can tell a tree by its fruit. This is why I put forth that he does nothing to build up the body of Christ.

I was also thinking: what is the best way to understand Fuentes? Let us ask a few questions of our own.

Would you want Fuentes dating your daughter, given his unstable, hateful nature? Would you want this man to be a part of your family, this man who has no regard for authority (thereby breaking the fullness of the 5th Commandment)? Would you want him in your church, bringing division, casting dispersion, seeking the destruction of others?

As men of the church, is this who we want to follow? Is this who we want to emulate? It doesn’t matter that he has a large following or not: Hitler had a large following. Large followings mean nothing. After all, Jesus said and says, “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destuction, and there are many who go in by it, because narrow is the gate and difficult which leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

Fuentes is the voice of a fool. Let us be those who saturate ourselves into the way of Christ (see Psalm 1), and not sit in the counsel of the wicked.

 

 

All Are Guilty: Including King Charles

On Good Friday, I was perusing through the newsfeeds and two things caught my eye. Both of them were news stories that make you immediately say: “That’s not right.”

The First Offense

The first story came from The King of England, Charles. AS the King of England, he was supposed to give a message to all the Christians in his realm about Good Friday and Easter. He is, according to their government, the head of the church of England. Therefore, you would think he would understand the obligation to encourage those who were members of the Church of England.

But King Chuck refused to do so. His excuse was that he thought it might be offensives to the Muslims in his country, so he remained silent.

I had to remind myself that this lack of declaration should not surprise anyone. Remember who Charles is? He is the royal adulterer. Not only was he in an adulterous relationship with Camila before his marriage to Princes Diana, but also afterwards. The man’s full depravity has been on display for decades. He even made it known long before he became king that he would be the head, not only of the Church of England, but also all religions in the realm.

Apparently, after his non-declaration declaration, he is no longer the King of the Christians in the realm… just the Muslims.

The last thing that King Charles would ever want to do, is affirm the true King of kings, who condemns Charles and his adultery.  Charles refuses to Kiss the Son… He is in rebellion against the true King.

This is what refusal to bend the knee looks like.

The Second Offense

The second offense comes a little closer to home, by the way of Houston City Hall. They were in the habit of giving a proclamation about Good Friday and Easter, but also decided not to do so because it would offend the Islamic population of the city.

They gave no proclamation all.

Again, this should not surprise us. The Houston City Hall has been the center of depravity for years. The people of the city had no problem with a lesbian mayor, who served a number of years ago. For those of you who remember, at one point, she tried to demand that all the pastors of the city, submit copies of their sermons to see if they included hate speech against the Sodomites in the city.

We must understand that this is what we should expect from those who are outside of Christ. The resurrection condemns them. They hate Christ and His followers.

Why is this?

The simple answer: They love the darkness, rather than the Light of the World.

John 3:19-20

9 And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light lest his deeds be exposed. 

Why would we expect anything more of the Houston City Council, or the adulterous King of England? They have done nothing but emulate the depravity and darkness for the last 50 years. Yes, they made their proclamations at times, but Christ rejects their proclamations.

As Jesus said:

Matthew 15:7-19

7 You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you:

8 ‘This people honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
9 But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commands of men.’”

The beauty about the King of England and the Houston City Council is that they are no longer hypocrites. They are being honest about who they are. Their darkness is complete. They can try all they want to silence the good news. But it shall not work.

Nothing New

Realize that the attempt to silence the news of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ has been going on since His death on the cross. The Pharisees tried the best they could to silence the possibility of the resurrection and then reality of the resurrection.

Matthew 27:62-66 shows their attempt to seal the tomb, thereby keeping Christ inside for good.

62 Now on the next day, the day after the Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together with Pilate, 63 and said, “Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I am to rise again.’ 64 Therefore, order for the grave to be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’ and the last deception will be worse than the first.” 65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.” 66 And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone.

The seal they placed and the guards who were there failed in their charge. The tomb was opened, and Jesus rose from the grave.

Once that happened, then they tried to silence the reality of the resurrection. Turn to Matthew 28:11-15.

11 Now while they were on their way, behold, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened. 12 And when they had assembled with the elders and took counsel together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, 13 and said, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep.’ 14 And if this is heard before the governor, we will win him over and keep you out of trouble.” 15 And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread among the Jews, and is to this day.

They chose a lie instead of the truth.

King Charles and the Houston City Council are attempting the same thing. They are attempting to silence the reality of the resurrection, and if necessary, lie about it as well.

But what they are also doing, is joining hands with Pilot and Herod in the death of Christ. They become partakers as the ones who put Him to death.

Representative God

What do I mean by the fact that they join hands with those who put Jesus to death? Let’s back up a bit so that we understand how God deals with mankind.

First, we need to understand that He deals with us through representatives. This is often referred to in theological circles as federal headship. It is the driving principle in which our government was formed upon by the founding fathers of this country.

What it means is that throughout history, YHWH has used federal heads in place of all mankind, to represent all mankind. The first instance of this is with Adam in the Garden of Eden.

As the first man, Adam is our representative, so that when he willfully and knowingly fell into sin, the rest of mankind fell into sin as well (see Romans 5:12-21).

Most of us know that. WHAT I’M TRYING TO SHOW you now, is that this federal representation is also true when it comes to Christ’s death.

The question is: who is responsible for the death of Christ on the cross?

Peter gives us the foundational truth about where the responsibility of Christ’s death is found. in Acts 4.

Acts 4:26-28

26 The kings of the earth took their stand,
And the rulers were gathered together
Against the Lord and against His Christ.’

27 For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur.

Just as Adam was our representative in the Garden of Eden, so too, were Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles and the Jews, representatives of the world in bringing about the death of Christ.

  • King Herod represented the Jewish leadership in putting Christ to death.
  • Pontius Pilate represented the Gentiles, the city halls, the adulterous kings, in putting Christ to death.
  • The Gentiles who were involved, the Roman soldiers, were our representative in putting Christ to death.
  • The Jews that were there, were the people of Israel’s representatives in putting Christ to death.

What this shows us is that fundamentally, we are all guilty of Christ’s death. Had we been there on that day, we too, would have shouted “Crucify Him! Crucify Him!”

But please notice that when Peter makes this statement, His major focus is with the kings of the earth. He is dealing with those who are set up to govern the people. He is addressing the King of England. He is addressing Houston City Hall.

Peter’s message is an all-inclusive message of federal headship. Listen to his quote of Acts 2.

26 The kings of the earth took their stand,
And the rulers were gathered together
Against the Lord and against His Christ.’

Peter changes Psalm 2, where it says “anointed” to the Greek version of that: “Christos.” He is making it clear that the governments of the world should Kiss the Son, and that Son is Jesus Christ.

Psalm 2:12

Kiss the Son, lest He become angry, and you perish in the way,
For His wrath may soon be kindled.
How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!

This is why those in leadership want nothing to do with Good Friday or Resurrection Sunday. They don’t want to acknowledge what took place and will seek to do whatever they can to silence the message of the empty tomb.

We know this because their forefathers in darkness worked doubly hard in attempting to squelch the reality of the resurrection. The King of England follows in the footsteps Pontius Pilate. In fact, it is more than that. He is joining hands in the death of Christ. This is quite sad given his heritage and his mother. But heritages is no guarantee against apostasy. So he delights in joining hands with Herod, and with the darkness of Islam.

We shouldn’t be surprised. Saddened yes, but not surprised.

Miriam’s Sin and the Greater Punishment

In the early days of Israel’s history, during the Exodus period, there came a real challenge for Moses from what many would call his inner circle: Aaron, his brother, and Miriam, his sister. The two siblings became disgruntled with the choice Moses made for his wife. Moses didn’t marry an Israelite girl, but married a Cushite woman. Cush is in the area we know as modern Sudan. It is also a nation that is part of the table nations given after the flood.

Aaron and Miriam objected to the choice Moses made. But it wasn’t just their objection to the marriage. Their pride also arose in the situation and they boasted that they were just as important as Moses was, since they too, offered prophecy.

Numbers 12:2

…they said, “Has Yahweh indeed spoken only through Moses? Has He not spoken through us as well?” And Yahweh heard it.

Miriam did indeed act as a prophetess in Exodus 15. She took a tambourine and led the women to dance in light of God’s victory over Pharaoh’s army in the Red Sea.

“Sing to Yahweh,
For He has triumphed gloriously!
The horse and its rider
He has thrown into the sea!”

That’s it. She is clearly correct in singing to YHWH. She had been given a wonderful privilege to declare to the people all that YHWH had done. This is very similar to when we partake of communion. While we don’t say it, as a congregation, we are proclaiming the LORD’s death until He comes again. This is a prophetic act of the congregation. We should rejoice we have the privilege act and speak as prophets. But that is all.

Miriam would have benefited from taking the same attitude.

Yet, here she is with Aaron claiming equality with Moses, their younger brother.

AS for Aaron, the Bible never declares him to be a prophet, but to be a prophet to the prophet. He is the mouth piece of Moses (Exodus 7:1) Revelation is given to Aaron, but he is also in the presence of Moses when that occurs. It should be clear whom God’s chosen prophet is: it is Moses, as YHWH will make clear in the passage.

But notice one other thing from verse 2: the short sentence after their declaration.

And Yahweh heard it.

This is like the times when children are complaining about mom, and suddenly, they realize that dad is standing right there and heard all their gripes. The children immediately know that things are not well.

On top of that, the author puts in a parenthetical clause of explanation about Moses. He writes: (Now the man Moses was very humble, more than any man who was on the face of the earth.)

That is an important detail because it helps us understand what is going to be said next. The great humility on the part of Moses is what you would expect from someone who stands in the council and presence of God. God’s holiness has an effect upon those who spend time there.

That one verse is a parenthetical thought about Moses, showing us his humility, which is in contrast to the arrogance and pride that Aaron and Miriam are demonstrating. This is the actual focus of the section.

YHWH calls all three of them outside. He is about to make something very clear. He is about to clarify who His prophet is.

6 and He said,

“Hear now My words:
If there is a prophet among you,
I, Yahweh, shall make Myself known to him in a vision.
I shall speak with him in a dream.
7 Not so, with My servant Moses,
He is faithful in all My household;
8 With him I speak mouth to mouth,
Indeed clearly, and not in riddles,
And he beholds the form of Yahweh. (The reason for his humility)
Why then were you not afraid
To speak against My servant, against Moses?”

9 So the anger of Yahweh burned against them, and He went away.

First, we see the relationship that Moses had with YHWH was special, above all before and after him until Christ. Moses had privileges, but he didn’t flout them. He is YHWH’s chosen prophet.

Second, we see the key point to all this: … the anger of Yahweh burned against them…

The Father found the children disrespecting the mother, and He was hot with anger.

YHWH’s Wrath Upon Miriam

10 But the cloud withdrew from over the tent, and behold, Miriam was leprous, as white as snow. And Aaron turned toward Miriam, and behold, she was leprous.

Now we see God’s wrath being poured out on Miriam. She is cover with leprosy. Her skin is as white as snow, and not in the sanctification way of white snow. YHWH’s wrath had poured uncleanness upon her. She was to be an outcast.

Now, why does YHWH pour out this level of wrath upon Miriam and not Aaron?

This is the key question and most in our culture will not like the answer.

The reason He pours out His wrath upon her, is because she has stepped out of her role as a woman, taken on the role of a man, and tried to sit in judgment of God’s chosen prophet.

Moses was not acting arrogantly in taking a Cushite wife, but Miriam saw it as an opportunity to lift herself up, and praise herself, and demand equal treatment with Moses. She was doing the same thing that Eve did in the Garden of Eden with the serpent. She had placed herself in the role of the man, and wanted to be a prophet on equal status, or greater than Moses.

YWHW would have none of it. He brings the most despicable disease on her, to show her that she is completely outside of the bounds of His will and the covenant community. Leprosy wasn’t just a disease, but something that revealed spiritual depravity. This is why the one who has leprosy has to go and be declared clean or unclean by the priests, not the physician.

Yet, it is the grabbing for power, the stepping out of the divine ordained role that we need to focus upon. In all the women in the Old Testament, only Jezebel compares to what Miriam had done. God’s word had spoken, showing just how sinful it is for a woman to assume the role of the man, and all but Jezebel realized that.

Miriam is given as a sign to the people of God showing us what is not acceptable. She is held to a higher standard because she was a prophetess, and was closer to Moses than the people. Therefore, it was incumbent upon YHWH to deal with her forcefully. This is similar to the way YWHW dealt with the sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu when they offered strange fire. They had more privileges as priests, and more responsibility. When they transgressed against YWHW, He brought greater judgment.

The beauty for Miriam is that Aaron appealed to Moses, who petitioned YWHW to heal her. She had to be separated from the community for seven days, but she was healed. I imagine that those seven long days, separated from the community and the blessings of YWHW, were quite painful emotionally. It gave her plenty of time to reflect upon her arrogance, and her grab for power, for she does recede from view.

The only time she is mentioned after this incident, is in Numbers when she dies, and in Deuteronomy as a memorial about the dangers of leprosy. Her rebellion is a reminder to us, that God will not be mocked.

The entire incident is a reflection of the fall, and a reminder of what happens when men and women reverse their roles. It angers God. The church would be so much better off if we could learn the lesson that those under the Old Covenant took for granted.

For more, listen to the sermon that this comes from: A Leper Came to Him

Best Photos of 2025

Well, this is photography blog, as well as other things. And I have been a bit absent minded when it comes to posting. So here are my favorite photos of 2025. Happy New Year.

We took Joey down to Galveston for New Year’s.

Kitchen Sunrise.

Celebrating our 10th Wedding Anniversary in Memphis, with some friends.

North Fork Holston River — Virginia.

Our granddaughter.

Our sleepy grandson.

Celebrating my 64th birthday at Tricky Fish in Fort Worth.

The LAST pair of Birthday Tecovas we will ever buy. See my previous post. AS a follow up, I did get my first pair resoled and the man who did it said I should buy Lucchesse next time.

Joey’s 18th birthday!

Joey’s graduation. I’m proud of him.

Our first visit to downtown Knoxville, with the rain shower option.

We found a quaint loft in downtown Knoxville.

Completely relaxed.

Picked up the boys for a drive over to Rockwall for some burgers and ice cream

One of the perks of my job: field trips to the petting zoo at the fair.

The absolute best breakfast of the year!

Ducking out of the wind, trying to enjoy the beach.

The best part of Galveston.

The best sunrise of 2025.

The best gift of Christmas.

Heidi and I found a great barbecue restaurant in Lebanon, TN. It was our last meal together before I flew back to Texas, in order to preach last Sunday. Alas, I was too sick to preach and slept all day. Heidi stayed in Tennessee with our daughter and grand children. We all ended the year under the weather.

All photos are copyright © Timothy J. Hammons 2025. 

Tecovas — Not Your Granddads Boots, or Shoes, or Anything Else That Lasted Longer Than a Common Cold.

My father told the story about how his father, my granddad, went into a Sears and Roebuck store with a pair of dress shoes that he had worn for 10 years. The shoes had a hole in the sole, and were beat up. He handed the shoes to the clerk in charge of the shoe department and said, “what are you going to do about these shoes?”

This was a time when the shoe clerk new my grandfather’s name. He responded, “Mr. Hammons, let me speak with my manager.” The clerk took the shoes back, spoke with his manager and came out and said, “Mr. Hammons, we’re sorry for the condition of these shoes. The manager has instructed me to give you a new pair.”

The clerk then went to the back room and brought out an identical pair of shoes, brand new, and gave them to my grandfather, who wore those for another 10 years.

I was hoping that when I went to buy a pair of Tecova boots, that I was getting the same quality. I believed their advertising. They gave me the impression that the fact that they were hand crafted, that one would be forever wearing the same pair. It was truly flashy commercialism.

The problem is, that I’m not an expert on boots. I outgrew my last pair of cowboy boots back in the early 1970s, when my mom would take me and my brothers out to the Round Up Rodeo in Simonton, Texas. Let’s face it, I’m a city boy. Our trips to the Round Up made it abundantly clear that I wasn’t a cowboy.

It’s not that I can’t ride a horse. I can. It’s not that I cannot saddle a horse. I can do that too. But the life of a cowboy, the title of the cowboy deserves more honor and respect than simply putting on a pair of boots and a Stetson. Not that there is anything wrong with wearing boots and a Stetson.

But let’s not kid ourselves. There are only a few men in the world who qualify as cowboys, and I ain’t one of them.

In buying a pair of cowboy boots, I was not trying to proclaim myself as a cowboy. I really, just wanted a footwear that was comfortable and would last longer than a pair of $350 Nike Air Jordans. The Tecovas I bought didn’t. But that isn’t entirely true. They did, and will last for many more years, but not without being resoled.

This is where the shock came home to roost. I imagined that I would have the boots resoled. But not after 2 and half years. I figured … 10 years should be expected? If my grandfather’s wingtips from Sears & Roebucks, which he did wear every day, could last 10 years, then certainly my handcrafted Tecovas would last that long, especially since I didn’t wear them every day.

But they didn’t.

Last week, I was looking at them more closely than normal and noted that the tips were worn off. Further more, the leather soles were splitting apart.

This was the opportunity to see if Tecova really supported their product. I planned to say the exact words that my grandfather used. It was a test. I was testing the company. They were so sure of their product that they not only boasted about them, they offered customers drinks of their choice while they sold their products. Yes, you could have a whiskey while trying on their boots. The first red flag: they didn’t have any Scotch to offer. As one obscure man once said, “American whiskey is nothing more than a hillbilly’s attempt at Scotch.”

But I digress.

I showed the woman in the store the boots. See the picture above. I asked her, what she was going to do about them? She told me, she would speak to her manager and went in the back. After 20 minutes or so, she came back and said that since they were so old, 2 1/2 years, they could not replace them. They could send them off to be resoled for $150, or give me a 20% discount on a pair of new boots.

This last offer was an absolute joke. They had been offering anybody and everybody 20% off for the past three weeks for the Black Friday sale. I let her know, politely, how disappointed I was in the company and made sure she knew that I was a repeat customer. I was wearing my second pair of Tecovas.

I took my boots and left.

In hindsight, my mistake was being enamored with all the claims made in their advertising, and all the flash in the store. They have all these young women selling their boots. They offer wine, whiskey, water, and soda for anyone who is thirsty. The smell of leather permeates. It’s a flashy place.

But when you think about it, Tecova hasn’t been around that long. There are only a few country songs with Tecovas mentioned in the lyrics, both in the past three years. Nothing like Lucchese which is mentioned in Amarillo By Morning (1982), George Strait, and in Much Too Young (1989), by Garth Brooks. Justin Boots, Ariat, and Tony Lama all have a much greater testimony to durability than Tecova.

This is all according to Grok. And yes, I told Grok about this, and asked which boots are better than Tecova. Those were the four he mentioned, and noted that the problem I was having with the Tecovas is a common problem with Tecovas. I guess this city boy should have asked Grok before shelling out a couple of hundred dollars on a pair of boots. Better yet, I should have listened to George Strait and his song, Amarillo By Morning more closely. Out of all the songs Grok listed, that was the only one I knew. But I have heard of Garth Brooks, and he suggested the same thing.

I should have asked my cowboy and rodeo acquaintances. But, like a city boy, I was enamored with exactly the things a city boy would be enamored with, and that is why Tecova is in business.

Before you buy a pair boots, have a listen to George or Garth Brooks.

Here is Grok’s comparison between Tecovas and other brands:

Brand
Why Better Than Tecovas
Key Model Suggestion
Price Range
Notable Features
Lucchese
Exceptional build quality with all-leather construction (no synthetics or fillers), steel shanks for stability, and a lifetime of heirloom potential—many owners report 10+ years before needing a resole. Superior customer service includes custom fittings and a robust warranty/repair program.
Madison (12″ shaft, calfskin leather, leather sole)
$450–$600
Handcrafted in Texas; molds to your foot like a glove; free 30-day returns and easy resoling at authorized cobblers.
Justin Boots
Over 140 years of reliability, with thicker leathers and welted soles that outlast Tecovas in wet/dry conditions. Their J-Flex system adds arch support for all-day comfort, and they offer a strong satisfaction guarantee with hassle-free exchanges.
Roper II (11″ shaft, full-grain cowhide, rubber-capped leather sole)
$200–$350
Affordable durability; wide size range (including EE widths); made in the USA with a focus on ranch-ready toughness.
Ariat
Modern engineering meets Western tradition—ATS tech for torque stability and cushioned insoles prevents fatigue, while waterproof/durable outsoles handle abuse better than pure leather. Excellent support with 90-day returns and a repair network.
Heritage Stockman (12″ shaft, premium full-grain leather, Duratread rubber sole option)
$250–$400
Breathable yet rugged; great for mixed use (office to outdoors); consistently high marks for longevity in 2025 reviews.
Tony Lama
Time-tested craftsmanship with genuine lemonwood pegs and brass nails for secure sole attachment, avoiding Tecovas’ reported glue issues. Boots are resole-friendly and backed by a solid warranty; users praise the even break-in and lasting shape.
Stallion (12″ shaft, smooth leather, leather sole with rubber heel)
$300–$450
Authentic Texas heritage; exotic skin options if you want variety; strong community endorsement for value over hype.

 

 

One Mediator

Over the past several weeks, the verse found in 1 Timothy 2:5 has really hit me at a deeper level all over again. I don’t know if this ever happens to you, but it does happen to me. It’s usually with a verse I have spent some time with, and I understood the meaning of the verse in my original passing. What changes is the implications of the verse after I’ve understood the meaning. Here is the verse:

5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

I’ve always understood the verse, in context, for what it was saying: that on the cross, Jesus was our Mediator. Verse 6 goes on to read: who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. So it is properly understood as, Christ is the one who intervenes between two parties who are at odds: namely, God and mankind, in His death on the cross.

Jesus gave Himself as a sacrifice in order to reconcile us to God. This holy sacrifice by Christ was the penultimate act of mediation on behalf of those who are saved.

But what hit me, is tied up in the implication of there being only “one Mediator.” There is only One Mediator. The implication of what hit me is that Jesus, as the Second Person of the Trinity, has always been, the only Mediator between God and Man. We should not understand His office as Mediator as something that He only took on in His earthly ministry, since mankind has always needed a mediator since the fall. This means the even at the fall of man, the same Mediator who died on the cross, was the same Mediator who said: “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you not eat?”

And even in that, we see that the same Mediator was the One who gave the command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Old Testament Implications

Where this really helps us out, is that we see the role of the Second Person of the Trinity in the Old Covenant. When YHWH tells Noah to build an ark, Christ was speaking. When YHWH tells Abram to leave UR, it was Christ telling him. When He makes a covenant with Abram, it was Christ making the covenant. When He meets with Abram along with two angels, it is Christ who met with Him. When Jacob wrestled with YHWH, he wrestled with Christ.

When YHWH tells Moses from the burning bush, “I Am who I AM,” it Christ who spoke the words (as He clarifies to us in John 8). When He leads them through the Red Sea by a pillar of cloud during the day, and fire at night, it was Christ.

The neat thing about this is that it begins to develop our understanding of how Christ relates to the Old Testament. We all know of His words to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, “O foolish ones, and slow to heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!… And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.”

We read these words but are at a loss what Jesus said. Yet, when we understand that He was the Mediator all throughout the Old Covenant period, we begin to see how it was that the Scriptures were all about Him. We see His actions, hear His words, and know that it was Christ who said them.

We also get a glimpse of this reality in one of the few references to the Father. In Psalm 110: 1, it reads, The LORD said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

King David could write “My Lord,” because he knew the Second Person of the Trinity. The Mediator had spoken to him, revealed truth to him, and guided David in life. So the concept of knowing and hearing the Mediator was not beyond David. He knew and was known by the Mediator.

The new revelation for David was hearing the Father say to the Son, “Sit at My right hand…”

There is a lot more to the realization of what it means that Christ is the One Mediator between God and man. Hopefully, you will start to see the implications for yourself as you read through Scripture.

Nick Fuentes vs. William L. Shirer

When I wrote the two blog posts on the post-war consensus, World War II and Hitler, and Hitler, True Evil, and the Post-War Consensus, I didn’t realize that I was laying the groundwork for this post. This is because I had yet to be introduced to the reason for those two post: Nick Fuentes. I confess, I was ignorant of who he was. I was simply responding to those who were making arguments that Fuentes has put forth, and trying to put them into perspective.

I was beside myself as to why anyone in this day and age would argue that the number of those Jews killed in the holocaust was nowhere near 6 million.

Then Nick Fuentes was featured on Tucker Carlson, and I watched it. Fuentes seemed… decent and well-spoken. But something wasn’t right.

If I’ve learned anything about human nature in my 60+ years in life, anyone can present themselves in a good light when they really put their minds to it. And this is what Fuentes did on Tucker Carlson. He sought to build a case that he was a victim after The Daily Wire sent him packing for his views on Israel. The piece was given in a way that was meant to make us feel sorry for Fuentes simply because he was “just asking questions.”

In a lawsuit the first to speak seems right,
until someone comes forward and cross-examines. Proverbs 18:17

And of course, others have examined Fuentes, and continue to do so.  Ben Shapiro really brought the receipts against Fuentes. I’m not a huge fan of Shapiro, but I don’t discount what he says at times. After watching what he said, this is one of those times. And if you don’t like what Shapiro says, how about Doug Wilson? He doesn’t give Fuentes a good report either.

If you reread the previous section, you will see and understand why I believe that there is no way for Fuentes to display openly and publicly the kind of demented attitudes toward sex and women the way that he does without having multiple black mold closets in his life, filled with the rotting debris of gangrenous lusts. The portrayals of gay porn that he has accidentally broadcast in the past provide just a glimpse of what is obviously going on. He has offered various explanations, of course—of the “aliens kidnapped me, what year is it?” variety—and anyone who accepts such explanations at face value might be the very chumpiest of chumps. Nick Fuentes is bad news, and one very lost puppy.

Read the rest of the article here.

But for my purposes, watch the video that Shapiro put forth. It’s only 5 minutes long.

Shapiro On Fuentes

Hopefully you see that Fuentes condemns himself in a lot of areas in that clip. He is atrocious. What I want to comment on, what I feel like I have some knowledge of, are his comments about Hitler and the holocaust. What he says, shows he knows nothing of Adolf Hitler, the Third Reich, the Nazis, or the holocaust. He is just spouting absolute ignorance to all of it. What does he say? (It begins at minute 3:14 if you want to skip to that part).

  • “Buddy, it’s Führer Friday. It is Hitler Friday. Shut up. It is Heil Hitler Friday, n*gga. Heil Hitler. All my n*ggas [are] Nazis. Hitler was a pedophile? Kind of. It’s like, well, he was also really f***ing cool. So, you know, time to grow up. We’re not children anymore, am I right, boys? Let’s go. He…”
  • “It takes one hour to cook a batch of cookies (Jews), and you have 15 ovens, probably in four different kitchens, right? Doing 24 hours a day, every day for five years, how long would it take you to make six million? Hmm, I don’t know, it certainly wouldn’t be five years, right, the math doesn’t seem to add up there.”

And for some reason, he has a following. That following really is ignorant of history and the facts of the holocaust. But more on that in a moment.

Really F***ing Cool

Let’s start with the first statement. Sorry for the f-bomb, but I think we need to quote this man in context and say what he says. He thinks Hitler is “really f***ing cool.”

Instead of giving my opinion, let me quote from William L. Shire, who wrote the book, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

“The man who founded the Third Reich, who ruled it ruthlessly and often with uncommon shrewdness, who led it to such dizzy heights and to such a sorry end, was a person of undoubted, if evil, genius.”

The one who follows Fuentes will focus on the word “genius” and completely miss the word “evil.” Let’s not make that mistake. Hitler was truly evil (however, he is not the ultimate of evil or the definition of evil. His evilness, in the grand scale, is actually quite normal evil and what is in the heart of every man, apart from the Spirit and grace of God.)

I think Shirer is a good person to turn to on the issue of Hitler. He lived in Germany before the war, and was a reporter there. He spoke German. He knew Germany. He knew the people. He heard Hitler’s speeches in person. Not things reported to him. He heard them and reported them to the world. He knew Hitler’s voice. He knew Hitler’s intention, and he knew Hitler’s intentions because he was one of the first historians to gain access on all of the Nazi documents and writings after the war. He was not only writing from personal experience, eyewitness testimony, but also the words of Hitler himself. He was documenting what they were intending to do. There was no speculation on the part of Shirer in writing his book. He was working with the facts of what the Nazis wrote themselves.

Knowing this, nukes the entire idea of the post-war consensus, since there as no consensus when Shirer wrote his book. In fact, he was criticized for writing and releasing his book so soon after the War ended. Perhaps this criticism comes about because he was not in consensus with anyone. The consensus had not had time to be formed, and he was defeating the purpose of those who were working to form a consensus. But this is just speculation. Please don’t put too much stock in that.

I point all this out, so we understand, that Shirer was an eyewitness to the things that happened in Germany before and after the war, and was in contact with many Germans during the war. He had to leave in 1940, but was back and in contact with many during the war.

We could say, that of the two men, Shirer was actually an expert on Hitler, whereas Fuentes? He has a podcast that he operates from his parents’ basement. Has Fuentes ever been to Germany? I doubt it. In his comments to Tucker, he was offered a free trip to Israel, and he refused to go, under the guise of “America First.” This doesn’t give him much credibility.

Yet, he admires Hitler, like some starry-eyed groupie.

Shirer never looks upon Hitler with any admiration at all. He called him a “madman,” after Hitler gave a speech. He said he was “evil, genius,” as I mentioned above. Shirer didn’t just call him a madman. He spent some 1,000 pages showing what a madman Hitler was. He recounted how his evilness played out on the German people, and the Jews, and the Poles, and the Czechs, and anyone else who stood in his way. And yes, that included Christians as well, especially the pastors who spoke out against him.

Was Hitler cool? Not in the least. There really was nothing likable about Adolf Hitler. Even those close to him, feared him, because he was so unstable. But cool?

Only a fool sitting in his mother’s basement in 21st century America, far removed from the ghettos, and trenches filled with Jewish bodies, would say something so stupid.

And for some reason, people think Fuentes is worthy of attention.

Now Fuentes’ speculation about 6 million Jews being destroyed like cookies is even more egregious than the stupidity of “Hitler is f***ing cool.” Why? Because Fuentes

trivializes what took place in the ovens in the concentration camps by calling Jews “cookies.” He doesn’t have the decency to call them human beings. He ignores that those bearing God’s image were being ruthlessly murdered, torched, and gassed. He gets cutesy over their deaths by using the metaphor “cookies.”

And he thinks he is something else by asking the “deep” questions: How could 6 million Jews actually be killed in a five year period in the ovens alone?

The problem with this genius observation of his is that no one was saying that 6 million were gassed. The six million Jews killed were killed during the Holocaust, of which, many died in the concentration camps. But the Holocaust didn’t just occur in the concentration camps. It occurred in the ghettos, in the streets, throughout the country side.

Shirer gives this account from an eyewitness of those who were line up and executed for being Jews:

“Without screaming or weeping these people undressed, stood around in family groups, kissed each other, said farewells and waited for a sign from another S.S. man, who stood near the pit, also with a whip in his hand. During the fifteen minutes that I stood near the pit I heard no complaint or plea for mercy… An old woman with snow-white hair was holding a one-year-old child in her arms and singing to it and tickling it. The child was cooing with delight. The parents were looking on with tears in their eyes. The father was holding the hand of a boy about 10 years old and speaking to him softly; the boy was fighting his tears. The father pointed to the sky, stroked his head and seemed to explain something to him.
At that moment the S.S. man at the pit shouted something to his comrade. The latter counted off about twenty persons and instructed them to go behind the earth mound… I well remember a girl, slim and with black hair, who, as she passed close to me, pointed to herself and said: “twenty-three years old.” I walked around the mound and found myself confronted by a tremendous grave. People were closely wedged together and lying on top of each other so that only their heads were visible. Nearly all had blood running over their shoulders from their heads. Some of the people were still moving. Some were lifting their arms and turning their heads to show that they were still alive. The pit was already two-thirds full. I estimated that it contained about a thousand people. I looked for the man who did the shooting. He was an S.S. man, who sat at the edge of the narrow end of the pit, his feet dangling into the pit. He had a tommy gun on his knees and was smoking a cigarette.
The people, completely naked, went down some steps and clambered over the heads of the people lying there to the place to which the S.S. man directed them. They lay down in front of the dead or wounded people; some caressed those who were still alive and spoke to them in a low voice. Then I heard a series of shots. I looked into the pit and saw that the bodies were twitching or the heads lying already motionless on top of the bodies that lay beneath them. Blood was running from their necks. The next batch was approaching already. They went down into the pit, lined themselves up against the previous victims and were shot. And so it went, batch after batch. The next morning the German engineer returned to the site. I saw about thirty naked people lying near the pit. Some of them were still alive… Later the Jews still alive were ordered to throw the corpses into the pit. Then they themselves had to lie down in this to be shot in the neck… I swear before God that this is the absolute truth.” (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich).

This is the results of Hitler’s leadership, and seeking the “final solution.” I know the followers of Fuentes might not know what the final solution was, so let’s look as the results of a quick search from Grok.

The “Final Solution” (often referred to as the “Final Solution to the Jewish Question”) was a euphemism used by Nazi Germany during World War II to describe their systematic plan for the genocide of Europe’s Jewish population. Implemented primarily from 1941 to 1945 under the Third Reich, it involved mass deportations, forced labor, and extermination through methods such as ghettos, mobile killing units, and concentration/death camps like Auschwitz, resulting in the murder of approximately six million Jews. This policy evolved from earlier anti-Semitic measures and escalated following the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941.

So what we have at this point, is a real historian, Shirer, vs. Fuentes, a bean-bag quarterback, commenting or speaking of the death of six million Jews in the holocaust. Shirer gives actual evidence. Fuentes just gives speculation. Idle speculation. He does not back his claim up with any evidence whatsoever. He just specualates.

Anyone can speculate. Anyone can ask unanswerable questions. Satan did that in the Garden of Eden. To ask speculative questions, in order to bring doubt and misunderstanding, is more of Satan than it is of Christ. This is what men like Fuentes do. They ask lots of questions. Unbelieving critics of Christ have been doing it for 2,000 years.

What is sad is that so many in the church are given over to the fleshly speculations of men like Fuentes. He is not interested in the truth. He is merely interested in his idle gossip so he can build his base. If we are truly in Christ, we shouldn’t give him a moment’s notice since Christ is the Truth. We should be those who seek the Truth, in Christ, and in the world He has given us, and refute those idle babbling basement dwellers.

I am glad I watched the Tucker Carlson interview. And that I’ve done a dive into who Fuentes is. We don’t need him in conservative circles, or in the church, without repentance on his side. He is a vile man and if we listen to him, the way he wants us to listen to him, he will end up becoming “really f***ing cool” just like his hero.

Hitler, True Evil, and Post-War Consensus

I admit that I struggled with the idea of post-war consensus. When I first heard the term, I was baffled.

Fortunately, Doug Wilson connected the dots for me. Post-war consensus is the idea that we need to proceed in society, after World War II, without any absolute beliefs. Those who put this forth, did so with the idea that it was hard-core beliefs that got us into the mess of World War I and World War II.

In moving away from this mistake, as they saw it, they made a play for the definition of true evil. Instead of looking to Scripture for that definition, they looked to Hitler. They set Adolf up as the standard for the greatest of all evil beings. This was, to warp what God’s word had said about that which is most evil. For Christians, the heart of unbelief in God, and His word, is the height of all evil. Not Hitler. Not Polpot. Not even Donald Trump, or even Douglas Wilson (for those of you who suffer from Wilson Derangement Syndrome). It is simply unbelief in God’s word.

12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. Hebrews 3:12-13.

True evil is the simple heart of unbelief. While we can look to Hitler as the embodiment of unchecked evil, then we can fool ourselves into thinking we are not that evil, so we must be pretty good. But Hitler, while evil, is not the standard of evil. Unbelief is the standard.

I admit, that I bought into their definition for a number of years. It wasn’t until I was preaching through the book of Hebrews that I realized my mistake and repented from thinking error. Hitler was evil. But so is the sweet little old lady who sits in the pews, week after week, with a heart of unbelief.

By the way, just so I’m clear, Hitler was in no way, shape, form or fashion a Christian. He sent enough Christian pastors to the concentration camps as well as Jews. His religion was was based on himself. He was a god to himself, and the Triune God gave him, and those who followed him, over to themselves.

Wilson’s Post Here

Other thoughts on Hitler and World War II can be read here.

The Democrats Love Murder, They’ve Been Practicing it For Years

5 The boastful shall not stand in Your sight;
You hate all workers of iniquity.
6 You shall destroy those who speak falsehood;
YHWH abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man (Psalm 5)

The morning opened with more stories pouring out of North Carolina over the death of a Ukrainian woman at the hands of a ruthless murderer. The woman had been riding the train on her way home when a murderous thug cut her throat for no reason, other than the fact that he wanted to kill a “white bitch.” Those are his words, as quoted in the media.

That was hard enough.

Then as I was working on another post, my wife walked through the door and said, “Have you been on X?”

“No, why?”

“Charlie Kirk has been shot.”

Yahweh tests the righteous,
But the wicked and the one who loves violence His soul hates (Psalm 11:5)

Who is Charlie Kirk? I will let Grok answer:

Charlie Kirk is an American conservative activist, author, and media personality. He is the founder and president of Turning Point USA, a nonprofit organization that promotes conservative values on college campuses. Born on October 14, 1993, in Wheeling, Illinois, Kirk gained prominence through his advocacy for free markets, limited government, and traditional values. He is a frequent commentator on political issues, often appearing on conservative media outlets like Fox News and hosting “The Charlie Kirk Show,” a daily radio program and podcast. Kirk is known for his outspoken views on topics like immigration, education, and cultural issues, often sparking controversy with his rhetoric. He has authored several books, including The MAGA Doctrine and The College Scam. His influence is significant among young conservative audiences, amplified by his large social media following, particularly on platforms like X, where he engages with current events and political debates.

I only started listening to Kirk about 6 months ago, because I was attracted to the way he handled questions from the audience. He always respected everyone he spoke with, even though they may not have returned that respect. I also loved his ability to bring in the facts about in every situation. He didn’t argue from a feelings standpoint, as so many of those who opposed him did. And the facts for his positions were always well verified.

Today, someone shot and killed him. Since he argued from a conservative point of view, he was hated by the left. No matter how many stood before him, they could never hold their own against Charlie Kirk. Their only solution: kill him.

This is their solution for anyone who gets in their way. As Rush Limbaugh used to say, “they cannot win in the arena of ideas.” We saw this with the COVID scam. And we are seeing it now. They cannot win in the arena of ideas because they are ensconced in lies and murder. The Democratic Party has always been the party of lies and murder. It was founded on the principle of keeping blacks in their place, and used the KKK to do so. Now, it uses Black Lives Matters, and the government to keep blacks in their place.

The irony is that those in the Democrat Party are always in the habit of calling those of us on the right, like Charlie Kirk, Hitler. They love to throw that pejorative  around. Yet, while Hitler murdered his 6,000,000 Jews, they have slaughtered their 60,000,000 babies.

And that is the point. The Left is use to murder. They’ve been doing it for 150 years and those of us on the right, are not. We are led to believe that we can continue to live in our country with these murderers using civil discourse. Kind of like what Charlie Kirk did. He was the best there was. And they assassinated him.

Why?

Because it is what they do.

15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood,
16 Destruction and misery are in their paths,
17 And the path of peace they have not known” (Romans 3). 

Charlie Kirk was called home to be with our Savior today. From what I understand, those on BlueSky are rejoicing, but for all the wrong reasons.

Those of us in Christ, should rejoice, for all the right reasons. Charlie knew our Savior. He was a believer. I’m sure he heard the words: “Well done, good and faithful servant,” just a few short hours ago.

He does rest in peace. May our Savior give his wife and children the comfort that only those of us in Christ, truly know.

DIY: Workbench

Since we moved into our home three years ago, I’ve wanted to build a workbench so I would have an area to work on projects. I’ve done a few since moving in August 20, 2022: painting a lot of the rooms, painting the garage, making a spice rack out of a wooden pallet, painting book shelves, sanding down and painting a hutch, and more bookshelves. But I haven’t really built anything. The workbench would be the first building project.

I watched a lot of DIY videos on YouTube about building workbenches in preparation and finally settled on the following one here. I thought that one was simple enough to give it a go.

I bought the wood in early August and started on the 6th. Here are photos of my progress with commentary.

You can see the need for a workbench already. I had to start in the driveway.

Once I had the two sides put together, I had to put together the two sides. This is where the seeds of doubt began to sprout. I thought for sure the project would be a bust. Please notice the bungee cords I was using to try and hold it together while I put in the lag bolts. I ended up buying two large clamps.

My little helper.

It started to come together.

Once I had it set up, I realized that the way it was positioned, there would be no room to work off the edge of the table. My garage isn’t wide enough being only a single-car garage. I needed to turn it against the right wall, which caused a problem keeping it level. If you will notice down in the right-hand side of the photo, the big crack in the foundation of the garage? I had to use a brick to level it out once I turned it.

Once I turned the table and leveled it, I wanted it as flush as I could get it up next to the wall.

This was after I realized I needed more 2x8s.

Notice how solid the joints are. I had a man in my church tease me saying it was over-engineered.

The final piece was the backsplash against the wall. It was an extra piece that I didn’t want to go to waste.

Looking underneath.

Declaring it done!

If you watch the video, let me know how close I came to duplicating the table. I will say that I made my table higher and deeper. Bigger is better!

All photos © Timothy J. Hammons, 2025.

 

Chip & Joanna’s Fall and How Their Pastor Played a Part

It has been said that culture flows downstream from the church. More specifically, culture flows downstream from the pulpit.

This truth can be seen in the recent dustup over television stars Chip and Joanna Gaines.

For those of you who do not know, Chip and Joanna Gaines are local and national celebrities because of the show Fixer Upper, and because of their empire known as Magnolia. I have never seen Fixer Upper, but I have been to Magnolia. The cookies are worth the high price of $4 a piece. I’ve never tried the cupcakes, but I’m told they are splendid.

The problem for Chip and Joanna has come about because of a new show they are producing called Back to the Frontier.

The New Show

The new show features three couples who pretend to go back in time, and live in the 1880s. The problem with this scenario is that it involves a sodomite couple, who are pretending to be married, and who paid a woman to bear (sell) twin boys to them. My intent here, is not in discussing the couple. You can read more about them here and here. It is much worse than it sounds.

Also, please watch CrossPolitic’s presentation on the entire ordeal here. The guys at CP not only explain what is going on, but also show how wicked the entire show is. It is not as though Chip and Joanna were just providing money to produce the show. They are actively supporting and promoting sodomite marriage. The stated goal of the sodomite couple is to normalize sodomite marriage. This shows that they know it is not normal. It’s evil. In propping up this couple, Chip and Joanna are complicit in this normalization.

Yet, I think what is even more disturbing than all this, is the role their pastor is playing (or not playing). Chip and Joanna attend the church, Antioch Waco. And here is where the real problem begins.

The Pastor Bears the Responsibility

Now you do need to know, that the pastor of Antioch Waco, Jimmy Siebert, has come out against gay marriage, and has expressed that marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a bare minimum of what should have happend. Yet, there is more. He should not have just stated the positive of what they believe, but he also should have called both Chip and Joanna (and all who hold to sodomite marriage) to repentance.

This is what a true shepherd does. He should not just state what marriage is, but for those who are under his spiritual care who are supporting sodomite marriage, he should deal with them in such a way that either leads to their repentance or their excommunication from the church.

But to say nothing… is to neglect the calling of a shepherd.

I admit, church discipline may be going on behind the scenes. Yet, at some point, it has to be public since the sin was public. You cannot ignore the fact that other sheep are watching and need to see discipline in the lives of those who publicly sin.

The greater problem in all this is the fact that the pastor undermines his own stance on marriage every time he allows a woman to preach in the pulpit.

Women in the Pulpit Undermine Marriage

Gabriel Rench shares a video clip of the pastor of Antioch Waco introducing a woman to the congregation who “has a word for us today.” I strongly recommend that you watch it.

What you are seeing is the foundational problem that the pastor has embraced, of allowing women to preach, that results in the acceptance of sodomite marriage. How so?

It is so because the pastor is tacitly approving of role reversals when he allows a woman to preach.

Continue reading Chip & Joanna’s Fall and How Their Pastor Played a Part