Analysis by Kyle A. Lohmeier
Last night was looking pretty grim for the Left. The protests outside the Republican National Convention, despite a brief mid-afternoon flare up, had remained peaceful, denying many Lefties the bloodbath they desire. Worst still, it didn’t appear as though any of the speakers would be providing low hanging fruit for the mouth-breathers to prattle on endlessly about online. Then, just in time, Dr. Ben Carson steps up to save the day.
“One of the things that I have learned about Hillary Clinton is that one of her heroes, her mentors, was Saul Alinsky. Her senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky. This was someone that she greatly admired and that affected all of her philosophies subsequently. Now, interestingly enough, let me tell you something about Saul Alinsky. He wrote a book called ‘Rules For Radicals’. On the dedication page, it acknowledges Lucifer, the original radical who gained his own kingdom. Now think about that. This is a nation where our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, talks about certain inalienable rights that come from our creator. This is a nation where our Pledge of Allegiance says we are ‘one nation, under God’. This is a nation where every coin in our pocket and every bill in our wallet says ‘In God We Trust’. So are we willing to elect someone as president who has as their role model somebody who acknowledges Lucifer? Think about that,” Carson said in his speech at the RNC last night.
Naturally, the Left has pounced on this bit of idiocy. They won’t have as much fun with it as they did Melania Trump’s plagiarized speech, but already mainstream news outlets are buzzing about Carson’s invoking the Devil. Well, sort of, that is. I’ll explain.
The main reason the founders thought it a good idea to separate religion and politics is of course to avoid a theocracy. Another practical reason to keep the two separate is to avoid looking very, very silly.
Going back to the quote, Carson over-stated Alinsky’s allegiance to the Dark One. He did cite “Lucifer” as something of archetype for rebels, but the context makes it pretty clear he didn’t actually worship him.
“Lest we forget at least an over the shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
One does not typically refer to a deity they believe in, let alone worship, or even, “acknowledge” as “legend” or “mythology.”
Of course, while MSNBC etc. are having fun with the silliness of Carson’s comments, they’re missing something that you’ll probably only read here, you lucky boys and girls. I mean, as long as we’re going to talk about something silly all day, we might as well dig deep into it.
Here’s a fun game, try to find the word “Lucifer” in any version of the Bible other than the King James. Even in that version, the word only appears once, in Isaiah 14:12. Most versions other than the KJV have quietly corrected a centuries-old mistranslation that has elevated a lowly demigod of Roman mythology to the number one enemy of all mankind. “Lucifer” was never the name for “the Devil” which itself is largely plagiarized from Zoroaster’s Angra Mainyu, but that’s another matter
I’m neither a biblical scholar nor an etymologist, however, it is still pretty clear that whoever wrote the Book of Isaiah never jotted the word “Lucifer” within it. The Book of Isaiah, being part of the Hebrew Old Testament was written in, you guessed it, Hebrew. The word “Lucifer” is a smoosh of two root words from the Latin language, “lux,” meaning light, and “ferre,” or “to bring.” As a mythological being, Luciferi predates “Lucifer’s” first appearance in Judaeo-Christian works by centuries as Luciferi is the Roman cognate of the Greek god Phospheros, and both are a reference to the planet Venus as it appears in the morning sky. Since Venus is typically visible on the eastern horizon just before dawn, to the ancient Greeks and later Romans, this could only mean the star was a god responsible for bringing the light of morning to the world.
How did a minor Roman deity become the Devil as referenced in a work originally written in Hebrew? The first appearance of the name is in the Vulgate of St. Jerome, a very early translation of the Bible. Turns out, Isaiah was predicting the downfall of a Babylonian king, among whose honorary titles was “Son of the Morning,” and “Day Star,” and wasn’t talking about Satan at all.
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!” Isaiah 14:12, KJV
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning how art thou cut down to the ground, that didst lay low the nations!” Isaiah 14:12 ASV
Of course, as bizarre as the above line from Carson’s speech was, calling the Abrahamic demigod Satan by the wrong name wasn’t the dumbest thing he said. It is the height of absurdity to claim the founders of this nation intended to create some form of a Christian theocracy when most were themselves non-Christians. The founders didn’t intend for there to be a central bank, privately owned by a cabal of the mega-wealthy, printing bogus fiat currency – and they certainly didn’t intend for there to be a reference to the Judaeo-Christian god emblazoned upon said fiat currency. The Federal Reserve was created in 1913. “In God We Trust” was added to their worthless money by a law signed on June 30, 1956 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Two years prior, he signed a law adding “…under God…” to the Pledge of Allegiance. Both were efforts to stave off the “Godlessness” of communist soviets. Neither bears the fingerprints of any founding father, and both would have been vociferously argued against by most of them.
The worst thing one can do is think deeply about the things Ben Carson says. Too late for me, but save yourselves and stop reading now.
Still here? Fools. OK, let’s look at part of the above comments again.
“So are we willing to elect someone as president who has as their role model somebody who acknowledges Lucifer? Think about that,” Carson said.
Should we be willing to elect someone as president who has as their God that they worship somebody who created Satan? I mean, as long as we’re going to talk about something really silly when we’re trying to figure out who’s going to run the country for four years, let’s take it to its logical conclusion.
I mean, right? Read the Book of Job. Tell me who the bad guy is there.
There are countless actual, valid arguments against why Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be president of the United States. How in the hell Dr. Carson managed to come up with a completely illogical and invalid argument is either an amazing display of idiocy on his part, or an indictment of the state of American politics in 2016. It’s probably the latter.
We have a nation that is literally falling apart around us and a society that is figuratively crumbling just as fast. A massive and corrupt government is crushing the economic life out of all of us and the physical life out of many of us at an alarming pace. Forces within and without are stirring up the weak-minded and creating chaos. Our economy is on life support. And at the convention of one of the only two parties we’re given as a “choice,” a convention that meets only once every four years, a speaker is wasting time talking about things that don’t even exist. And the media is wasting time talking about that. And I’m wasting time writing about both.
I know Joseph Marie de Maistre said every country has the government it deserves, but c’mon, we can’t be THIS bad. And, there’s still two more days of this crap to come. And then, worse yet, it will be the Democrats’ turn.
I take it back, maybe we are this bad.
Leave a Reply