May 22, 2010

A young Christian researcher and film maker, Keith Thompson, has published an outstanding work on the topic of the one world religion movement.  His latest film, Aquarius: The Age of Evil, is a look inside the beliefs of One World /New Age occultists.

I am saddened that our young people have to deal with such subjects, but thankful that God has gifted young people like Keith Thompson to help his generation understand the times in which they live.

The following quote is from an interview Keith did last week:

“The global elite (that we call the New World Order) believe in certain things.   Their plan is not just political.  That’s a common misconception that people have.  They think that these elite are just in it for the money, the power, etc.  That’s not the case.  If you look at a lot of these individuals, they have very esoteric and occult beliefs. The main thrust of the New World Order is based on a concept that is known as “The New Age.”

Keith goes on to say that the New Agers believe that we are coming out of the age of Jesus (Pisces) and that we will have a new teacher in the Age of Aquarius.

“Many of these occultists say that the Age of Aquarius will be a one world utopia accompanied by a one world government and a one world ruler.  So, when you look at these New World Order people like Robert Muller, former Assistant U.N. General Secretary…they are all followers who believe that this new age is going to produce…this one world system.”

About a year ago, an acquaintance told me that I should watch the Zeitgeist “movie” on You Tube.  I did.  I found some of the information interesting.  The problem with it: Christianity is marginalized and discredited.  There’s a lot of that going on these days.

What makes Christianity unique is its risen Savior.  Anyone who wants to read about this matchless truth need only look as far as their nearest Bible and the book of Acts (Acts is directly after the four gospels).  The book of Acts describes events in the early church; after Jesus ascended into heaven.  Acts 4: 8-12 states:

8Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers and elders of the people,

9if we are on trial today for a benefit done to a sick man, as to how this man has been made well,

10let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead–by this name this man stands here before you in good health.


12“And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.”

This last verse is under assault from hundreds of different directions.

We hear a great deal about a New World Order these days.  Mr. Obama used a similar term in his West Point commencement speech on Saturday.  He said: “We have to shape an international order that can meet the challenges of our generation.”

Less than a minute later he said it again: “The international order we seek is one that can resolve the challenges of our times.”  The man was talking to talented young Americans who have chosen to defend this nation and he has the nerve to talk of an international order on the day of their graduation?

Here’s the video.  KARK played the clip on the 6:00 news. You can judge for yourself the intent of the statement:

(I had a link here but it was removed because of “third party copyright infringements.”)

Mr. Obama’s statement is a sign that a one world government is coming.  There as so many other signs.

We don’t hear much about a one world religion.  As a Christian, I believe that the scriptures are clear.  A one world religion will accompany a one world government.

This is the reason that Keith Thompson’s work is timely. His documentation is flawless and his theology is Biblically sound.  The film is well worth your time.

Chris Reimers

Added on 12/12/2010:

Keith’s original intent was to upload the movie to his You tube channel so that it would be free to all.  After uploading the movie into sections, parts of it were “flagged” and removed by You tube.  Someone complained that sections of the documentary made false statements.

What was false were the allegations as all of Keith’s work was backed by documentation.  Unfortunately, this fact didn’t stop parts of the film from being “flagged” and removed.

Keith ended up selling the DVD on two different websites.

Months later, all sections are up in various places on You tube and the documentary can be seen in its entirety for free.

This is a 2 ½ hour documentary. I have read the entire text of the documentary and have sent a review to Keith.  He was appreciative of my remarks.

The Movie – Aquarius: The Age of Evil


This probably won’t work, as the links surrounding this movie, including interviews, change constantly.

Your best bet is to go to YouTube and type in: The Movie – Aquarius: The Age of Evil


Related Article:


Christianity, Politics, and Religion

May 19, 2022
Babylon 1932,_1932.jpg
Babylon 1932,_1932.jpg

“Two things I don’t talk about are politics and religion.” I don’t know how many times I’ve heard this and I don’t know how many times I’ve wondered if anyone could get through a week without talking about something in either area. If they can, they are much more creative than I. This post was born from recent reading in Jeremiah, Wikipedia sources on Christians who hold certain conspiracy theories, and thoughts about the current war in the Ukraine.

My thoughts concerning the title of this article continue to change as life rolls along but I want to share with you where I am right now. Just how does a Christian view the contrasting effects of politics and their beliefs about God in their daily lives? It is a question that could fill an entire book but I’ll attempt to make it short and sweet here using only a few realities in our world.

The first reality is the war in Ukraine. If a Christian wants to hold a position or opinion about a war, they should do what anyone else would do, and that’s to attempt to find out the facts. One would think that, with all of the communication we have these days, this would be an easy task. It is not always the case. Propaganda abounds as each side tries to make its case. In Ukraine’s case, a country has invaded another country and has killed innocent civilians who had no interest in politics except that they wanted to live a free and undisturbed life. Their country has been torn apart by bombs sent by a leader with odd ambitions and have been dropped by those who are willing to follow his orders.

As a Christian, I look at the words of a godly prophet who preceded Jeremiah who said:

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
    And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
    and to walk humbly with your God.

Anyone can make the situation in Ukraine as complicated as they wish but, in light of this Bible passage, a Christian’s support for justice for the innocent is warranted.

A definition of “politics” can easily be found online:

“the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.”

It is obvious to me that justice must play a role in a definition like the one above. Thus, Christians need to be involved in certain aspects of politics.
Jesus was very clear about the civic duty of paying one’s taxes. He was not saying that all having government powers are righteous or just. He knew the book of Jeremiah well, having inspired it, where we find these words against Babylon, no question a political entity, written at the height of its power:

“cut it off, so that there will be nothing dwelling in it, whether man or beast, but it will be a perpetual desolation.”

Jesus knew that the picture of Babylon above would eventually be a reality and, from reading Jeremiah 51, it is obvious that the ruins of Babylon are a result of rebellion against God and His people, a second reality.

God’s people rebelled against Him so he allowed a political solution to help them learn a lesson; Nebuchadnezzar would grow strong and take Israel into captivity. Eventually, the evil in the Babylonian empire would cause them to be destroyed to the degree seen in the photo here at the top. It is a picture of God’s justice. The sovereignty of God is at play here but that is a deep subject for another day.

There are always two sides to a coin. Jesus was very clear on paying taxes but he was silent when asked to defend himself, a third reality. From a human standpoint, it seems that Jesus had every right to defend himself against false accusations of any political nature (which are hard to separate from accusations of a personal nature if one reads the definition of politics above). But, he didn’t. I would submit that we should generally defend ourselves from false accusations because they do neither us nor our accusers any good. In Jesus’ case, his silence was the best thing for all involved including all of humanity. It displays how God’s position as King of King and Lord of Lords is cemented forever. The reason for his silence is explained in Hebrews 2:

But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

Thus, God’s pronouncement that:
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts”
is true.

The Christian must accept that his/her understanding is limited so his/her wisdom regarding politics and religion and how they should interrelate is limited as well. At the same time, the Christian makes an effort to understand and make the best decisions he/she can in light of God’s Word.

Christians, or anyone else for that matter, will never figure out complete justice in politics or religion. In the end, complete justice will be decided by God. It is something we should ponder seriously but we should never put ourselves in the eventual role of God.

Just go out there and do the best you can, asking for the help of God, of course.

God’s blessings…

Chris Reimers


April 17, 2010

"Ye shall be as gods"

The following articles are excellent.  Done in two parts, Debra Rae gives us a good picture of “new” thought.  Many themes we are constantly bombarded with seem new, but she is right.  They sum up an old lie.  I, like her,  am concerned about where modern education is headed (see part 2).  Unfortunately, I think she is correct in her assessments.  Her statement:

“In but a few decades, America’s public education system has morphed from no spirituality (Dewey) to new spirituality”  is one with which I agree.  Macro-evolution is as much a religion as Christianity.  In my view there are actually more facts pointing to a great Creator than to the view that their is no God.   Both beliefs rely on faith in the end.  This debate is not the subject of Ms. Rae’s article, but I think it fitting to note. -CR

– By Debra Rae

– By Debra Rae

Accompanying these articles should be an article about the New World Order.  I was reading one last night that was very good and it wasn’t selling anything.  I’ve searched and have been unable to retrace my steps.  If I run across it again, I will attach it to this post. – CR

The Church’s Chief End

October 11, 2016

There is a popular false doctrine, among others, that is being taught in many “churches” in our day. It is called “Dominion Theology.” It is the belief that the “church” will take dominion (control) of the earth before Jesus returns. This “belief” maintains that the world should be brought under (reconstructed) the lordship of Jesus Christ in all areas: social, moral, political, judicial, military, family, art, education, music, etc. The problem with this idea is that certain men will supposedly be used of God to accomplish this feat.
This may sound wonderful but it is found nowhere in the Bible. Instead, we find Matthew 24 which describes a great tribulation on earth. We also find that, before Jesus comes, an evil ruler will gain great power and will deceive many. Some, including me, think that along with a government ruled by this evil man will be a one world religion of sorts. The Beast will have his false prophet.
The Bible teaches that when Jesus returns HE will rule and reign. It will not be a group of men using the name of Jesus (along with other “great teachers”) to influence and control others.
So, what is the mission of the church? Dan has found an excellent article originally posted at The Banner of Truth. I thought I would share it with you.

The Battle Cry

An Article by Peter Barnes, From The Banner of Truth

There is much debate in the modern church about what exactly is her mission. Often the answer that is given is not so much wrong as lop-sided, and exaggerated implications and conclusions are drawn from that. There are probably three main views: the Church exists to glorify God; the Church exists to build up the saints; and the Church exists for mission, to evangelize the world. These three views should not be played off against one another, and a grasp of each one will prevent us from misinterpreting any one of them.

The Church’s first task, surely, is to glorify God. Paul says that ‘whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God’ (1 Cor.10:31). Earlier in 1 Corinthians, Paul had said, in the context of sexual ethics, that we are to glorify…

View original post 776 more words

Easter and Freedom

April 17, 2022
Picture found at

It is Easter 2022. So much of the world finds itself in chains on this day. There is the dark country of North Korea where there is “no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, and widespread malnutrition.”1 There is Myanmar where one Christian states: “Every day I hear gunshots and grenades. The sound comes only one bus stop away from my house.”2 There is China which “is setting up a vast surveillance system that tracks every single one of its 1.4 billion citizens.”3 And, of course, on this Easter, many are thinking of the Ukraine where 4.1 million of its citizens have fled to save themselves and their children from the onslaught of Russian bombs.4

There are many other examples of places in our world where freedom is not allowed this Easter.5,6

Very soon after man began walking this Earth the oppression and outright murder of others has been the news of the day. Soon after this evil behavior started God stepped in and had a plan for the freedom of mankind. The plan goes back millennia and can be found in Genesis 3:15. It is the first forecast that a Savior would be sent into the world to save mankind from its bondage.

One doesn’t have to look far to find the bondage in our world. In my country, the United States, people are in bondage to sex, drugs, material wealth, power, wanting things that others have, and the list goes on and on. The plan of God to release people from bondage to these things is the reason for Easter. Most of the world knows the story of Jesus’ death on the cross and His resurrection days later. Unfortunately, many do not believe the story and do not understand the promise of freedom given for those who come to faith in the only One who can save the world from bondage.

For those who do believe and understand the story, true freedom is a process in the soul of becoming more like the Jesus. The only way anyone can know who Jesus is and was is found in the Bible.
The Bible simply states that all men are in bondage to sin and that the gift of God is eternal life in Jesus. Easter is God’s answer to man’s bondage. Jesus Christ took the punishment that we deserved for our sins (bondage) when he died on the cross. His resurrection made the promise of freedom a reality for all who believe in Jesus as their Lord.

In 2022, when so much of the world is in chains, there is a great promise. It is a promise of freedom and peace. It is not a freedom or peace that the world can give. It is a peace in the heart and soul. Before Jesus was crucified, he told His disciples:

“Peace I leave you, My peace I give you; not as the world gives, do I give to you. Do not let your hearts be troubled, nor fearful.”7

Even Jesus’ disciples didn’t understand His words at the time. As time went by they came to understand and experience the words that Jesus spoke. His disciples were sinful, just like every man. Eventually they understood just what Jesus had done for them. There was nothing they could give to repay God for his sacrifice. No amount of wealth or attempts at perfection or great works could save them. This is what makes Jesus different from all of the other “saviors” the world has to offer. The followers of Jesus trusted His promises and lived by faith. They were still sinful men but as they lived they grew to be more like their Savior. They prayed a lot. We can do the same thing today and ask God to help us with our struggles.

The lack of worldly freedoms that people face in North Korea, Myanmar, China, and the Ukraine can be offset by a freedom that much of the world does not understand. Christians in those countries bleed and feel pain just like everyone else but they have the promises in God’s Word. God’s promises bring comfort in times of great trial.

A Christian life is full of ups and downs. We fail and find ourselves back in bondage until we remember, once again, the freedom that God has to offer us. We ask God for forgiveness and His mercy is constant. As life goes by, we find ourselves becoming a little bit more like Jesus. It is a humbling experience. Then, the next moment we can be like Peter who denied that he knew Jesus. We regret our actions and return to God, once again, remembering the words of Psalm 103:

“Bless the Lord, O my soul,
And all that is within me, bless His holy name.
Bless the Lord, O my soul,
And forget none of His benefits;
Who pardons all your iniquities,
Who heals all your diseases;
Who redeems your life from the pit,
Who crowns you with lovingkindness and compassion;
Who satisfies your years with good things,
So that your youth is renewed like the eagle.

The Lord performs righteous deeds
And judgments for all who are oppressed.
He made known His ways to Moses,
His acts to the sons of Israel.
The Lord is compassionate and gracious,
Slow to anger and abounding in lovingkindness.
He will not always strive with us,
Nor will He keep His anger forever.
10 He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.
11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth,
So great is His lovingkindness toward those who fear Him.
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.
13 Just as a father has compassion on his children,
So the Lord has compassion on those who fear Him.
14 For He Himself knows our frame;
He is mindful that we are but dust.”

May God grant you a freedom that only He can give on this Easter day.

Chris Reimers

7 John 14:27

“Say no to the evil, gender politics of the ‘Equality Act'”

February 26, 2021

Yesterday, in a “discussion” online with a young friend who asked what I thought about the “Equality Act, he informed me that it was a very bad thing.  Thankful that a person of his age could see the danger of such an Act, this morning has been spent reading articles about the results of the passing of such legislation.  Being aware of the Act for some time, it was important to read the text of H.R. 5 too.  It sounds as bad as it has been portrayed by many.

Twenty years ago, the idea that same-sex marriage would be legalized in America seemed almost impossible.  That the House of Representatives’ majority vote has passed H.R. 5 on to the Senate is another indicator of how far Christian ethics in America have eroded.  Many seem to think that this dark legislation will not pass in the Senate.  Those who are praying against the opening of yet another of “Pandora’s boxes” (a source of endless complications) are hoping these folks are correct about how the Senate will rule.  The fact that we are at this point, with a president who can’t wait to sign the legislation into law, indicates where we are as a nation.

After having read several articles on the topic, Michael P. Orsi’s in the Washington Times made an impression and his title is the title of this post. Below is the beginning of that article with a link to the remainder of it, a link to the text of H.R. 5, and links to a few other related articles.

This is an important issue.

Chris Reimers

Say no to the evil, gender politics of the ‘Equality Act’

House Resolution 5 bill covers ‘gender-related identity regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth’

– – Wednesday, February 24, 2021

The famous story of Jesus being tempted in the desert makes a point that’s relevant to our current politics, that evil always comes packaged as good, and carries a heavy price.

Satan points out to Jesus how easy it would be to use his special powers to relieve hunger. “Just turn these rocks into bread,” he urges.

Then he takes Jesus to the highest point of the temple, and suggests that he demonstrate his unique status by jumping off and letting angels catch him. Finally, Satan gets to the bottom line, offering Jesus dominion over all the world’s kingdoms, if only he’ll bow down and become a devil worshipper.

Jesus will have none of it.

Unfortunately, we humans aren’t as clear-seeing as the Lord. All too often we’re susceptible to evil ideas when they come wrapped in appealing images and comforting words. Such a deceptive proposal is House Resolution 5, a truly insidious piece of legislation known as the “Equality Act.”

This bill amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect individuals from discrimination not only on the basis of race, color, religion and sex, but “sexual orientation and gender identity.”

The name “Equality Act” is a triumph of ideological packaging. Who could possibly be against “equality?”


The Text of H.R. 5

5 Things You Need To Know About The Extremist ‘Equality Act’ House Democrats Just Passed

Why The ‘Equality Act’ Democrats Want To Pass This Week Should Really Be Called The ‘Destroy Our Daughters Act’

‘Blessings Of Liberty’: How ‘The Equality Act’ Viciously Attacks Christians, Freedom, Society, Sex, And You

Equality Act: ‘The Left’s New Woke Heresy Code’

Here is the first day of Senate hearings on HR 5 (March 17, 2021):


HR 5 has become S.393

It is now May 19th, 2021, two months after the 1st and only Senate hearing (the video above) thus far on the Equality Act.  After two months of no news I checked  Seeing nothing new there I called my Senator’s office (Tom Cotton) and found out that nothing more has been done regarding this bill.  In the Senate it is tagged as S.393.  For those of you following this bill I recommend Googling “S.393” occasionally to try and find the latest.  All news outlets should be publicizing any upcoming Senate vote.

Here is the text of S.393, the Equality Act.


China Set to Pass “National Security Law” for Hong Kong Residents

June 3, 2020

Hong Kong
Photo by Ray in Manila/Flickr
(Click on Photo to enlarge)
At the bottom slightly right is Government House, constructed in 1851 and previously the official residence of The Governor during British Rule.

The development of new legislation aimed at the citizens of Hong Kong can be compared to decades of continued “Chinese Water Torture.” The constant and deliberate pace of Chinese intrusions into the freedoms of Hong Kong residents, is similar and more maddening than the torture named after the Chinese people (although, it probably didn’t originate in China…Link). The upcoming unveiling of the “National Security Law” will only make things much more difficult for the freedom loving people in Hong Kong.

Here is a brief history leading to the current state of affairs in Hong Kong:

1842 Hong Kong became a colony of the British Empire at the end of the First Opium War.

1898 After the Second Opium War, British influence was further extended when Britain obtained a 99-year lease of Hong Kong and New Territories.

1949 The Communist Party took control of mainland China.

1984 British Diplomatic negotiations with China resulted in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, in which the United Kingdom agreed to transfer the colony in 1997 and China would guarantee Hong Kong’s economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer.

1987-1997 The impending transfer triggered a wave of mass emigration as residents feared an erosion of civil rights, the rule of law, and quality of life. Over half a million people left the territory during the peak migration period, from 1987 to 1996 before Hong Kong was transferred to China.

1997 (July 1) With the end of the 99-year U.K. lease, The whole territory was transferred to China after 156 years of British rule. “One country, two systems” became a constitutional principle of the People’s Republic of China describing the governance of Hong Kong (and other “new” territories).

2003 An attempt to introduce anti-subversion legislation (referred to as Article 23) drew fierce criticism by those in Hong Kong who were concerned about losing freedoms. After 500,000 people protested on July 1 to oppose it, the bill did not have enough support to pass and was suspended indefinitely.

2016 Protests resulted from Beijing’s ruling in August that voters would only be able to vote for their chief executive in 2017 from a list of pre-approved candidates. (Timeline of events…Link)

2019 In April, an extradition bill triggered the first protest of many. It would have allowed for criminal suspects to be extradited to mainland China under certain circumstances. These protests continued throughout the year possibly becoming the largest-scale political protest movement in Hong Kong history with organizers claiming to have attracted more than one million Hong Kong residents. (The Hong Kong protests explained in 100 and 500 words…Link)

2020, May 21 The Chinese Government proposed a new law on national security regulations that may be enacted in Hong Kong under the provisions of Annex III of its Basic law. It may set up the legal framework to prevent and punish subversion, terrorism, separatism and foreign interference.

Here is a description of the current events in Hong Kong by someone who lives there:

“The Chinese government is ending the ‘one country, two systems’ arrangement in Hong Kong. This idea is guaranteed by the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It is a legal agreement submitted to the United Nations. ‘One country, two systems’ means that Hong Kong maintains its autonomy (self-determination) except in diplomatic and military affairs. The Chinese government has NO RIGHT to involve itself in any part of Hong Kong’s self administrating affairs, including the law. (This is clearly stated in the BASIC LAW of Hong Kong…Link) The basic law, is a ‘constitution’ for Hong Kong. It states said that laws in mainland China cannot be applied in Hong Kong directly.

“Now, this new national security regulation legislation will bypass and override the basic law (as well as the legislative council in HK), and will apply mainland China’s law to Hong Kong directly. What does it mean? It means that China breaks its promise that it will not intervene in Hong Kong’s affairs (promised in Sino-British Joint Declaration). It means that the ‘one country, two system’ arrangement will become ‘one country one system.’ It means that the Chinese government will directly rule Hong Kong, in effect, stealing Hong Kong’s sovereignty. It is the same thing that the Chinese government did in Tibet. The Chinese invaded Tibet in 1950 and allowed for an autonomous administration led by the Dalai Lama. The Chinese government broke its promises and the 14th Dalai Lama had to flee the country to escape. What happened in Tibet is happening in HK right now. It is the same thing.”

2020, May 28 China’s legislature has approved a proposal to impose a highly contentious national security law in Hong Kong, in an unprecedented move that critics say threatens fundamental political freedoms and civil liberties in the semi-autonomous territory. The legislative process of writing this law will take some time and only then will it be known what the written specifics are.

2020, June 3 (TODAY)(English starts at 20 seconds.)

Predictably, the people of Hong Kong are back in the streets en masse. In the video above, Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (a pawn of Beijing), says that the new law must be passed and states:

“The International community and some of the foreign governments have been adopting blatant double standards…(The U.S. and U.K. are mentioned)…why should they object, resist, or even condemn and take the sanctions against Hong Kong and the People’s Republic of China?”

The U.S. and United Kingdom on Friday urged the U.N. Security Council to take action against China’s crackdown on freedoms in Hong Kong — after China initially stopped the matter being discussed by the body…(Link)

Chief Executive Lam’s statement about “blatant double standards” appears to be directed at the U.S. because of the George Floyd Protests (timeline link). Some might think that the events in the U.S. are tied to some sort of communist takeover like the attempt occurring in Hong Kong. Just like the good protesters in Hong Kong (we are not talking about sinful looters now) most of the protesting occurring in the U.S. is nothing like the socialist effort in Hong Kong. The evidence of communist propaganda is evident for all to see.

The Future of Hong Kong

Apart from a miracle, this legislation will be written. The people of Hong Kong are very resourceful. Many facts about the success of the people of Hong Kong could be stated. One, in particular, summarizes the community there well. The last List of countries by Human Development Index (Link) has Hong Kong as 4th on its list. A country that is in the top ten in several worldwide statistics has the Chinese communist government foaming at the mouth.

So, how much credibility with the world will the Chinese be willing to sacrifice in order to “control” the people of Hong Kong? Hong Kong is not North Korea. We will find out what happens in Hong Kong. If the Chinese show themselves to be as tyrannical with the people of Hong Kong as they have been with people of different religions in their own country (Christians and Muslims in particular) the world will know. Will the world care? I know that Christians will care. Please pray for the people of Hong Kong. Ask God to allow them to keep their beloved freedoms. Ask God to help their leaders to have wisdom. And while you are at it, please pray for the people of China.

I would like to thank my Christian friend in Hong Kong for keeping me up to date on the things happening in his country.

Chris Reimers

According to Open Doors, here is the situation in China:

Region: Asia
Persecution Type: Communist and post-communist oppression
Persecution Level: Very High
Population: 1,420,062,000
Christians: 97,200,000
Main Religion: Atheism
Government: Communist state
Leader: President Xi Jinping

Wikipedia “Hong Kong”,“Handover of Hong Kong”“New Territories”
Sky News
RFA 自由亞洲粵語 (Mr. Trump’s recent comments on the situation)
Hong Kong Free Press
BBC “Hong Kong protests: Timeline of the occupation,” “The Hong Kong protests explained in 100 and 500 words”
South China Morning Post
Open Doors USA

The Protestant Reformation – 500 years

October 30, 2017

The above videos are 3, 30, and 70 minutes long, respectively. The 2nd video was found at Maria Tatham’s blog. Her blog, previously called “Pilgrim’s Progress revisited – a former Catholic on the narrow way,” is now called “Pilgrim’s Progress revisited – Christiana on the narrow way.” Each video can give you a timely summary of the Reformation and why it is vitally important to Protestants. If anyone is able to find anything historically wrong with any of the three, please leave a comment.

What do you believe about God? I think it is the most important question. Having been raised in the Protestant church named after the man who is remembered today, The Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod in my case), I have been somewhat familiar with this topic for a long time. It is why I have included the fourth video. Influential “protestants” in today’s world are attempting to ignore important doctrines, rediscovered by the reformers, in an attempt to create unity. Unity without truth is worthless. If this seems harsh, one should read the words of Martin Luther. As I read his words in a search for material for this post, I was struck at how biting many of his words would seem to people today. It is obvious why his words put his life at risk at the time.

There were three famous “solas” (Latin word for “only”) that Martin Luther coined, which ultimately sparked the Reformation. Here they are below, as well as a description of each:

1. Sola Gratia (“only by grace alone”): Luther read scripture verses such as Ephesians 2:8 (“For it is by grace you have been saved…” ESV) and came to believe that it is only through God’s grace, not any works a person can do, that salvation is accomplished. One must rely on God’s free and infinite grace for his salvation and must not try to add to it through good deeds, giving money, etc.

2. Sola Fide (“only through faith alone”): Luther furthermore believed whole-heartedly that salvation only comes through a person’s faith in God. He came to believe this through continuing to read Ephesians 2:8, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (ESV). He argued that God’s great grace saves sinners, in conjunction with the faith that He also provides.

3. Sola Scriptura (“only through the Scriptures alone”): Finally, Luther was a strong advocate of the idea that to understand God’s grace and to have faith in Him, the common person must be able to have access to God’s Word, the Bible. During a time when only the priests and religious teachers could read the Scriptures, Luther, along with other reformers, believed the common man must be able to hear the Word of God in his own language and understand it for himself. He noted verses like 2 Timothy 3:16 which states, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and is profitable for teaching, reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (ESV). Therefore, since every part of Scripture is God’s Word, then the common man must be able to hear and understand it to have faith in God.


Modern man is no different than man who lived in Medieval Times. He needs the God of the Bible. Each must “be able to hear and understand it to have faith in God.”

Chris Reimers

Just last week:


May 30, 2016

Photo from Pat Howard's Facebook Page

Photo from Pat Howard’s Facebook Page

This was a four-part series that was published in the original Wings of the Wind News Blog around Veteran’s Day in 2009.  I thought it fitting, again, for this year’s Memorial Day observances.  The last time I saw Mr. Broniarczyk was at a local laundrymat that I no longer use.  He was doing well except for a knee that gave him some trouble.

About 18 months ago, I received a phone call from a complete stranger. He asked if I was the guy who had interviewed Mr. Broniarczyk. He informed me that he had the uniform pictured in this narrative and that he had bought it at a Goodwill store. I was sad. I brightened when the caller told me the reason for his purchase. He wanted a part of history to share with his son so that his son wouldn’t forget the sacrifices made by a past generation. He was thankful that he had found this article on the internet. So was I.


On this Veteran’s Day, there is no way to adequately thank those who have given so much to defend the Constitution of the United States of America.  An interview with a former soldier is the way the Wings of the Wind chooses, this year, to honor all of those who have fought in wars to defend this nation.  Our deepest gratitude is offered to those who have put on a uniform to help protect our freedoms.

The Wings of the Wind called and requested an interview with World War II Veteran, Mr. Anton Broniarczyk.  When his wife asked him if it was O.K.,  Mr. Broniarczyk declined.  She told the Wings of the Wind representative something already known; Mr. Broniarczyk was a modest man.  I explained that the story needed to be told.  It is important for our young people to know stories like this one.  It is important that we understand the sacrifices that many living among us have made.  It is important to hear about those who didn’t come home.  After Mrs. Broniarczyk shared this opinion, Mr. Broniarczyk approved.  The interview took place the next day.  It will be printed in parts.

Q:  Did you enlist?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.

Q:  Mr. Broniarczyk, were you born and raised in America?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes, I was born and raised in Cicero, Illinois.  I grew up during the depression. (It was) tough.

The Great Depression Photo by buyalex

The Great Depression
Photo by buyalex

 Q:  What does the pin on the jacket stand for?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Flight engineer, B-29.  I graduated from Lowery field near Denver, Colorado.

Mr. Broniarczyk then started the story from the beginning.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I didn’t have a job.  My mother was a heart patient. My father had tuberculosis. We were in really bad shape.  I bought a bag of cookies and I sat on the bench in Grant Park trying to decide what to do.  So I thought, “I’ll join the military if they’ll take me.”  You had to be a high school graduate.  I went to the recruiting outfit; they gave me a physical, and six choices of where I wanted to be sent.  (Mr. Bronarchik went on to name 4 of the 6 that he could remember.  One that he remembered was Hickam Field next to Pearl Harbor. Hickam Field, adjacent to Pearl Harbor U.S. Naval Base, was established in 1935 as Hawaii’s principal army airfield and bomber base.)  I’d never been to Texas, so I choose Kelly Field in San Antonio.

They fixed me up with railroad tickets and I took the train.  I had four dollars in my pocket and a new blue sweater.  I’d never been any place in my life. I got on the train, made it to San Antonio, and asked, “Where’s Kelly Field?”  I took a bus to the airfield because it was a few miles outside of the city limits.  I asked the bus driver, “Who’s the commanding officer?”  I was supposed to report to the commanding officer.  There was a wooden bungalow in the middle of the field. I knocked on the door with my envelope and a lady came up and asked what I wanted.  I told her that I needed to report to the commanding officer.  She said, “I’ll take the envelope.”  I said, “No, I’ve got to give it  to him personally.

Q:  Who had told you that you had to personally give your reporting papers to the commanding officer?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  They told me that at the recruiting center. She did some checking and I was allowed in to see the commander. He was a small man and he was reading the newspaper.  He was barefooted and he laughed when I gave him my papers.  His name was Lackland.  A base is named after him.

___________Interview break

Lackland Air Force Base Today Photo by the U.S. Army

Lackland Air Force Base Today
Photo by the U.S. Army

(See info on this picture here.)

Mr. Broniarczyk had crossed paths with a man who became well known.  The Wings of the Wind checked the Arlington Cemetery website and got this information:

Born on September 13, 1884, in Faurquier County, Virginia, he died on April 27, 1943 in Washington, D.C. While Lackland Air Force Base is named for him, the research continues. He is buried in Section 4 of Arlington National Cemetery.

 Lackland AFB — The base is known as the “Gateway to the Air Force,” as it’s the site of basic training for all Air Force enlisted personnel. It’s also home to the Military Training Center, the Air Force Security Police training program, the Defense Language Institute and Wilford Hall Medical Center. It’s named for Gen. Frank D. Lackland, the pioneer commander at what’s now Kelly AFB. Originally, the area now occupied by Lackland AFB was a bombing range for fliers from Kelly. During World War II, it became the San Antonio Cadet Center. It became Lackland in 1947.


Air Forces Officer, the Head of March Field First Wing at Retirement Last June, Dies

WASHINGTON, April 28, 1943 – Brigadier General Frank D. Lackland, an Army officer for thirty-one years at his retirement last June, died yesterday at Walter Reed Hospital, the War Department announced today.  His age was 58.

General Lackland, who was born in Fauquier County, Virginia, was commanding officer of the First Wing at March Field, California, when he retired.  Previously he had served as commandant of the Air Forces advanced flying school at Kelly Field, Texas, and as air officer for the Eighth Corps Area at Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

He entered the Army as a Second Lieutenant of Infantry in 1911 after serving in the District of Columbia National Guard for six years.  He transferred to the Aviation Section of the Signal Corps during the First World War and, after completing his training as an air officer was executive officer at Kelley Field and the School of Aerial Gunnery, Selfridge Field, Michigan.

___________Interview continues…

Q:  What was his rank at that time?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  At that time he was a colonel.  He made a phone call and a pickup truck came over and took me to the 61stSchool Squadron. They took me to the orderly room there, and the First Sergeant said, “Are you hungry fella?”  It was about 5 in the afternoon and I answered, “yes.”  I remember the Mess Sergeant’s name was Kasmyrick.  He fixed up a plate for me. I looked at it and I saw grapefruit.  I’d never seen grapefruit in my life.  Remember this is still peacetime.grapefruitsx

Q:  What year did this take place?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  It was 1939.

Q:  Did you have a feeling at that time that there would be a war?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Poland had been invaded on September 1st of 1939.

They took me to a six-man tent and that’s where I slept. The next morning, I reported back to the orderly room to a Sergeant Reynolds.  He interviewed me and asked me about my experience with airplanes.

Photo by the Holocaust Encyclopedia

Photo by the Holocaust Encyclopedia

German troops parade through Warsaw after the surrender of Poland in late September of 1939

Q:  I bet he found out that you knew nothing about airplanes.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  That’s right. Sergeant Reynolds said, “We’re going to make different outfits.  Some are going to Alaska, and some are going to the 24thAirbase in Puerto Rico.”

They began our preparation by drilling us. Corporal Britten, an ex-infantry man, gave us the drills; up and down and up and down. Now, this was in civilian clothes.  Lieutenant Bernard, a West Pointer, measured me up for clothes. Two weeks later I got my uniform.  That’s how unprepared we were.

After recruit drill, they assigned me to an airplane.  It was #19, a BC-1.  BC stood for “basic combat.”  We were at a training center for fliers.  I was a helper for a Sergeant Walski.  He was a Polish fellow, too.  He was a big, husky man.  We got along real well right off the bat.  He was a good friend of the mess sergeant.  They were buddies.

 Q:  You got good food then?

Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes, Walski, would say, “Come on Bronarchic, we’re going to have some nice rolls.”  He’d even say that when it wasn’t meal time.

Q:  He took good care of you, huh?

Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes, I stayed with that one airplane, the BC-1 for a while.

 Q:  You trained on that airplane?

 Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes, I was trained on that airplane.

 Q:  What was your job?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  We were raw recruits. We shined the airplane, changed the oil…

Q:  Basic stuff, huh?

 Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes, minor stuff.  I asked the first sergeant if I could try out for the baseball team.  “Sure,” he said.  “You know anything about baseball?” he asked me.   I said, “Sure.”

I played second base.  After three months, there was an announcement that we were to be sent to one of the two air bases in Alaska or Puerto Rico.  I was in the 61st squadron.

I got up real early the next day and sat on the stairs of the orderly room, waiting for the first sergeant.  In those days, it was difficult to know who had a higher standing, the first sergeant or God.  I sat there and waited to talk to the first sergeant.

Q:  What was the orderly room?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  That is where all of the paperwork was done.  I was there before it was open.  The first sergeant came and I said, “I realize, Sergeant Reynolds (a nice guy) that I’m a new man and that I’m bound to be transferred.  I’d like to request to be sent to Alaska in lieu of Puerto Rico.  He said, “You’re not going anywhere. You are a ball player.”

Q:  You got to play for the team?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  The other guys got transferred to Alaska and Puerto Rico.  In order to keep me at Kelly Field, he said, “I’m going to send you to school.  It’ll save you. They won’t be able to take you.”

I went to mechanic school for six months.

 Q:  This is because you could play ball?

 Mr. Broniarczyk:  Sports was a big thing.

 Q:  It’s still a big thing, except the guys get paid a lot more today than they used to.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I’ll tell you about my military pay in a while.

So, I went to school.  I was sent to Chanute Field in Rantoul, Illinois. It’s not there anymore.  When I finished school, I was sent back to Kelly field.  They gave me an exam at Kelly Field and I passed the exam.  They made me an Air Mechanic, First Class.

Chanute Field Photo at

Chanute Field
Photo at

Note:  The history of Chanute Field can be found here:

Q:  Is that what’s represented by the pin on your uniform?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  I received $84 a month.  It was the same pay as a five-striper.  I had no stripes.  My rating, Air Mechanic – First Class, determined my pay.  There was a Second Class for those who didn’t go to school.  They got $72 a month.

Q: At Eighty-four dollars, you’re pay was as much as the pay of someone who had five stripes?  What is five stripes?

Mr. Broniarczyk: That’s a Tech Sergeant. Anybody without stripes was eligible for KP duty.  We got two weeks of KP.

Q:  Peeling potatoes, is that what it was?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  It was everything from peeling potatoes to washing windows.

Captain Schultz was the head of the squadron.  I remember that he walked in between two airplanes; one was taxiing, and he lost his arm.

Sergeant Reynolds had requested a transfer to Panama and it had been granted.  The new Sergeant put me on KP.  Remember, I was Mechanic First Class but I had no stripes.  I was on KP for a couple of days.

Every Saturday, the crew chief of the airplane had to stand by the plane. The squadron commander was a man named Ives. Major Ives was the commanding officer of the 61st Squadron.

Q:  How many men were in that squadron?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  There were about 75.

Q:  That would represent how many planes?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Approximately 20 planes were in the squadron.

Q:  These were small aircraft?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes, it was the BC-1, a basic combat trainer.  It was a fine airplane that was made in North America.

Every Saturday morning, the commanding officer would go through with the first sergeant, carrying clipboards, and thoroughly check the airplanes.  If the plane was dirty, it was noted.

I had been put on KP by the first sergeant.

I had two helpers who were supposed to help with the plane.  They were both boozers.  Half of the time they were gone, and when they were there they were in the way.

Saturday came and I was on KP.  There was no man standing by the aircraft.  Major Ives said, “Where’s the crew chief?”  The first sergeant replied, “He’s on KP.”  Major Ives asked the first sergeant, “He’s on KP? What’s his rank?”  The first sergeant said, “He’s a private.”  Major Ives asked, “What’s his pay scale?”  The first lieutenant answered, “Eighty-four dollars a month.”  Major Ives responded: “What the XXXX is an eighty-four dollar a month man doing on KP?  Get his XXX off KP right now.”  I heard this story from one of my buddies.

I got out there and I said to the first sergeant, “Didn’t I tell you, you couldn’t put me on KP?”  Legally he could put me on KP because I didn’t have any stripes, but I was responsible for that airplane.

They took me off of air mechanic first class and gave me four stripes.  Four stripes took me down to $72 dollars a month but, they put me on flying pay.

Q:  So, you ended up being paid more than the $84 dollars that your monthly salary was previously?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  Yes.  One day, in August of the following year…

Q:  This was 1940?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  Yes.  They sent be back to Chanute Field to get trained as an ignition specialist.  Afterwards, I would also be considered an electrical specialist.  Then they sent me back to Kelly Field.  One day a phone call came through.  There were 5 hangers at Kelly Field.  One hanger was designated “Engine Change” and the others were 1,2,3,and 4.  I was on airplane #19 in hanger 4.  The phone call was clear, “Sergeant Bronairczyk, report to Colonel Bond’s office.”  Colonel Bond was one of the top officers at Kelly Field.  He had come from West Point.

Everyone said to me, “What did you do Sarge?  What did you do?”  Colonel Bond had a reputation as a mean man.  He was a full Colonel.  He was not a Lieutenant Colonel; He was known as a “Bird Colonel.”  I hurried back to the barracks and put my clean coveralls on and I went to his office.  His first sergeant asked me to state my business.  “Colonel Bond wants to see me,” I said.  I didn’t have any idea why I was called by the colonel.

Arriving to see Colonel Bond, I saluted and said, “Sergeant Bronairczyk reporting as ordered sir.”  “Take a chair,” the colonel repeated.  When he said to take the chair I thought, “Oh, this is no bawling out.”  He wouldn’t offer a chair if I was in trouble.

When I became a sergeant, I had my clothes made to order.

 Q:  You wanted them to fit perfectly?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  Yes.  Colonel Bond said to me, “I’ve selected you to assist me in building a new field.  Here are the tickets.  You’re taking a train.  You’re being transferred to Lake Charles, Louisiana.  He said, “I’m coming over there and we’re going to build a field there.”  It was to be called Chennault Field.  I ran to the library to see what Lake Charles looked like.  I was thinking about the fishing.

Note:  Chennault Field was closed in 1963

When I arrived there, I had to wear civilian clothing.  The infantry were involved in maneuvers.  They were put in one of two armies, the white army or the red army.  This is why I had to wear civilian clothes.

Q:  They were having war games?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  Yes. Since I wasn’t part of that, I looked around and found a boarding house.  I got a room with two meals for a dollar a day.  As soon as I got settled, I went to where they were planning on building the field.  There was one runway at the site.  A civilian was giving flying lessons when I arrived.  The runway was made of ground up oyster shells, tar, and oil.

They had a government run weather station there.  I approached the airport manager and said, “We’re going to build a field here.”  The airport manager was aware that he had to give up the field.

I waited a few days and Colonel Bond came in with an airplane.  I stayed there about six months while they were building the field. Colonel Bond and I would fly from Lake Charles to San Antonio and Randolph Field where all of the paperwork was being done for this new field.  Colonel Bond was a man about 60 years old.  We’d take off from this ground up oyster shell, tar, and oil runway.   After we were at a certain altitude, Colonel Bond would put up his hands and say, “Sergeant, you’ve got it now.”  I put the airplane on the correct heading, and I would fly the airplane.  I would fly over Houston.  The WAC was running the tower there.WOMEN'~1

Q: What’s a WAC?

Women’s Army Corps

Note:  Click here for more info on the Women’s Army Corp:

Mr. Bronairczyk:  A WAC was a woman.  I think it stands for the Women’s Army Corp.  “Elington Field calling…Elington Field…Army 111433,” she would say over the radio.  The plane I was flying was a volte (?), a low winged airplane with non-retractable wheels.  It was a good airplane with a big dihedral (that’s the wings).

When I saw the large tower at Randolph from a distance, I’d shake the stick and wake up Colonel Bond.  If they found out I was doing the flying, there might be trouble.  Colonel Bond would take control and land the plane.

Q:  How long was the trip from Lake Charles to Randolph Field?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  It took us between 1 1/1 to 2 hours.  He’d take care of business with the contractors and I’d be on my own.  I was personally responsible for Colonel Bond’s plane.  I would work on the airplane.

After the manager at Lake Charles left, only Colonel Bond, the airplane, and I remained.

 Q:  So no trainers were there yet.

Mr. Bronairczyk:  No, there was no hanger at the time.

Q:  Did the airplane you were in charge of have a single propeller?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  Yes.  It was my job to tie the airplane down and to take care of it.  About every third or fourth day we would fly to Randolph. Up and back.  So, I got a lot of flying experience.  While in San Antonio, I had the opportunity to go to town.  I met some friends there.  I had all of my uniforms tailor-made.  I’d go back to Kelly and see my envious buddies there.

Q:  They’d give you a hard time about your clothes, huh?

 Mr. Bronairczyk:  Yes.  They treated me pretty good.  When I was at Lake Charles in 1940-1941, I remember we were preparing for a trip to San Antonio.  Readying for the trip, I would always get the weather at the government station.  Someone said, “Hey, Sarge, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.” I said, “That’s bologna. That’s fake.” I didn’t believe him.  I walked into the weather station and looked at the teletype.  It was December 7th, 1941.  I saw that the man who told me about the Japanese attack was telling the truth.Pearl Harbor Attack

They brought a G.I. in from Camp Polk, an infantry base, to guard the airplane.  I was unaware that they put a guard there.  When I arrived to check the plane, the guy from Polk pointed his rifle at me. I said, “Come on.  That’s my airplane.”  I had to call the Colonel.  He came and explained everything to the G.I.

Mrs. Broniarczyk: (who had been listening to the interview) He was going to shoot him.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  He thought I was trying to steal the airplane.  I don’t blame the kid because I was wearing civilian clothes.Mr. Brons Stripes

Sergeant Broniarczyk’s Stripes

“He thought I was trying to steal the airplane.  I don’t blame the kid because I was wearing civilian clothes.”


Anton Broniarczyk

When the field was built, Colonel Bond called me in and he gave me one more stripe.  I had four stripes previously and was a staff sergeant.  The last stripe made me a tech sergeant.  One bottom stripe represents a staff sergeant.  Two bottom stripes meant a tech sergeant.  Three stripes means a master sergeant.

The hangers at Lake Charles were built and about five squadrons were stationed there. I was put in charge of inspection.

Q:  What type of aircraft were you inspecting?

Mr. Bronairczyk:  The BC-1 came into Lake Charles.  Then they changed to AT-6, advanced trainers.  After learning on the AT-6, a pilot graduated at Lake Charles.AT-6Frmtn

AT-6 Formation

Q:  Were these planes designed for pilots who were going to be flying fighters or bombers?

Mr. Bronarczyk:  The flyers could go either way.  At that time the government had a B-10 bomber.  It was a pitiful machine.  It also had a B-18.  It was just as bad.  Those were the only two bombers we had at the time.  They were terrible.  If they hit 200 MPH, they were really straining.

Q:  Did we have any good fighter planes at that point?

Mr. Bronarczyk:  No.   They came in with one fighter.  It was a P-35.  It was sent to Lake Charles accidentally.  I took care of the P-35.  I remember the major who flew it to Suffix Field in Detroit where it should have been.  I think he was drunk.  The pursuit pilots in those days had to be drunk to fly those things.  Anyway, he flew it away.

Photo by Armchair Aviator

Photo by Armchair Aviator

Curtiss P-36 “Hawk”

The P-36 became our top fighter.  I was there for a while and then a new field was constructed in Victoria, Texas.

They called me in one day and said, “They say you’ve got some flying time.”  They needed a pilot for tow target operations.  The tow target pilot would pull a long rope that had a sleeve at the end of it.  The cadets would dive at the sleeve and shoot it for practice.

I told them I didn’t have a pilot’s license.  The Colonel who interviewed me said, “We need somebody, and you’re the only one that can do it.  Fly around the field within gliding distance.  I had no paperwork, but I flew with a corporal.

I told you how unprepared we were for the war.  We had a rope with the sleeve way out there for them to shoot at and we didn’t have a winch to bring the sleeve back into the airplane.

Q:  How did you get it back to the plane?

Mr. Bronarczyk:  This is a fact.  He had a hunting knife.  I would tell him when to cut.  He’d cut the rope and it would float to the ground.  We’d re-tie it and go up again.  That’s how bad things were.  We didn’t even have a winch.  Imagine.

Photo by HO'OKLEE

Photo by HO’OKELE

A twelve-ship formation over the Guadalupe River in the vicinity of Foster Field, Texas, Summer 1942

They took me off of tow operations as more pilots became available.  They came up with a restriction that you had to be a college graduate to be a pilot.  That eliminated me.

Victoria, Texas is a nice town.

Note:  The WWII Air Base in Victoria was named Foster Field.  Today, it is the Victoria Regional Airport.

They started talking about the B-29.  They were building B-29s.  None were flying yet.  They sent me to school at Lowery Field.  I took six more months of schooling while the B-29s were being built.  We had B-17s.  We flew in B-17s and B-24s.  The B-24 was a good airplane.  They had lots of room in them.  They weren’t much better than the B-17, the airplane on which I received my training.  We graduated from school at Lowery Field and we were still waiting for the B-29s. They sent me to Lincoln, Nebraska to get a crew.  I got on a crew led by Captain Black. Nice guy!  A real nice guy! Our crew got shipped to McCook, Nebraska.  Cold!  Cold!!  Man, it was cold there!!!

Q:  Approximately what year was this?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I think it was the winter of 1942.  He let me have his golf clubs.  I liked him. He was a nice guy.  He had different hobbies.  He never played golf and I used his golf clubs.  The golf happened, of course, when the weather was warmer.  We got our training in B-17s because there were no B-29s yet.  Boy, that was some rough flying.  It was so cold, that we’d, start the engines, move the airplane forward a little, and I’d have to get out of the airplane and see how much rubber we left behind.  The Japanese had the rubber.  Our tires were mostly synthetic.  They’d adhere to the ice.  If we left too much rubber behind, we’d cancel the mission.

McCook Air Base Today

McCook Air Base Today

Q:  The tires would freeze to the runway?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  The synthetic rubber would adhere to the concrete.

Q:  There were times when you got out of the airplane that you saw the tires left behind on the ice?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  It was very cold.  I was the engineer.  I would inspect the airplane and the rest of the crew would go out to eat.  They’d bring me sandwiches.  I remember one time I checked the wing tanks.  Each tank cap had a gasket.  The gaskets were wearing out so I told Captain Black that they needed to be replaced.  “The gaskets are pretty bad,” I said. “We should get new gaskets before we take off.”  “That’s alright,” Captain Black said, “We’re not going to go very far.”

As soon as we took off, the caps flew off.

Q:  Both of them?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  A lot of people are under the impression that the air lifts the airplane up.  This is not altogether true.  A vacuum is what pulls the airplane up.  A vacuum is formed on top of the wings.  When those caps flew off, the vacuum was pulling the gasoline out of the tanks.  That and the combination of a red hot engine made me sweat.  We turned around and landed as quickly as possible.  I said, “Did I tell you Captain?  We should have had new gaskets.” “I know,” Captain Black said. “You told me.”  He was a good guy.

Q:  Everyone got back O.K.?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  We were very fortunate, that’s all.  Very fortunate.  That was one of the times that I remember escaping a close call.  All it would have taken was a little spark and…boom!

Q:  How many men were on that plane?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  This was a B-17.  The B-17 had at least six men: the navigator, bombardier, pilot, co-pilot, engineer, and radio man.




Note:  Mr. Broniarczyk probably trained on a B-17F.  The B-17G came a bit later.  The Famous “Memphis Belle” was a B-17F.  The gunners were obviously not a part of flight training.

The B-17F, with its frameless Plexiglas nose and other improvements was the first mark to be built in significant numbers (over 3400 were built by Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed Vega). However, the definitive Flying Fortress, bristling with thirteen .5in Browning machine guns, was the B-17G, with its distinctive chin turret to deter head-on fighter attacks. By war’s end, 8,680 G’s were built. Usually left unpainted to save weight and material, these later marks, now escorted by long-range fighters right to the heart of Germany, finally came close to fulfilling the late 30’s doctrine espoused by the Air Corps.

Crews in early daylight missions had a one-in-three chance of not returning. But even during the last six months of the war, there were often desperate battles, with the “Mighty 8th” armadas facing a host of new weapons and tactics including the rocket-powered Me 163 Komet and the Me 262 jet flown by the Luftwaffe’s best. By the end of the war, Fortresses had dropped a full two fifths of all ordinance delivered to the Reich by the US Army Air Corps and Air Force. A high price was paid. Casualties were severe. The 8th Air Force alone suffered 18,000 wounded, 28,000 POW’s and 26,000 killed in action.


Prior to 01 April 1944 – Original Crews – 10 Crewmen

A.        Officers:

1.        Pilot

2.        Co-Pilot

3.        Navigator / Flexible Gunner

4.        Bombardier / Flexible Gunner, Chin Turret Gunner (B-17G)

B.        Enlisted Men:

5.        Flight Engineer / Top Turret Gunner

6.        Radio Operator / Flexible Gunner

7.        Ball Turret Gunner

8.        Left Waist Flexible Gunner

9.        Right Waist Flexible Gunner

10.        Tail Turret Gunner

Flexible Gunners had one .50 Caliber Machine Gun.
Chin, Top, Ball and Tail Turrets had two .50 Caliber Machine Guns.
Some B-17F models had chin turrets.
B-24 Crews had similar crews and guns.



Mr. Bronairczyk: We got orders to go overseas.  I went on a C-54; a transport plane.

Q:  Do you remember the date?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  It was the 2nd of January in 1945.  We had Saipan and we had Tinian.



and Guam.

The Mariana Islands

The Mariana Islands

Mr. Broniarczyk continues:  I was on Tinian.  It was three miles away from Saipan.  You could see it off in the distance.  The 73rd was at Saipan.  I was in the 9th Bomb Group, 1st Squadron, 313th Wing, 20th Air Force.  We were sent out to bomb Truk  (See  I remember the 12th mission.  We came in and Colonel Hoagland, in charge of the 1st Squadron, made an announcement to “Report to the orderly room.”  So the whole crew went there thinking we were in trouble.  The colonel told us that new, inexperienced crews were coming in and he wanted crews to be intermingled.  This would put experienced men with those who had little or no experience.  The colonel said, “We’re taking only one man out of your crew,” and he pointed at me.

Captain Black didn’t like that.  We were buddies.  The colonel pulled me off and put me on Lieutenant Chippen’s crew.  I didn’t like it either, but Chippen was a nice guy. His father owned a hosiery mill in Pennsylvania.  He was a college graduate and a real nice guy.  I flew with him.

In March of 1945, I was put on Chippen’s crew.  In June of 1945, Captain Black and his entire crew got killed.

Q:  How did that happen?

Mr. Broniarczyk: They got hit by anti-aircraft as they were laying magnetic mines with a B-29.  A magnetic mine would be dropped in the water, sink down, and the first metal thing that passed over would arm the mine.

Q:  Where you on a B-29 in Lieutenant Chippen’s crew?

Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes.  The B-29 had 11 men.  (Mr. Broniarczyk showed the interviewer where he sat in a diagram of he B-29.)  The engineer sat in very close quarters.  There was a long tunnel through the bomb bays and the wings.  A gunner might say to me, “Number two is smoking.”  I’d have to crawl through that tunnel.  Before I did that, I would have to remove my chute.  I always feared that I would be in the center of that tube when we got hit.  I could see the engine from the gunner’s position.  (Mr. Broniarczyk was probably referring to the top gunner’s position.  See the diagram and #22)Mr. Brons position on B 29

Flight Engineer Broniarczyk’s position in the B-29 (21)

Q:  When the gunner said “Number two,” was he was referring to the second of four engines?

Mr. Broniarczyk: That’s right.

Q:  What kind of engines were on the aircraft?

Mr. Broniarczyk: It was a Wright 3350.  A pile of junk.

Note:  Early versions of the R-3350 were equipped with carburetors, though it was the poorly designed elbow, or entrance to the supercharger that led to serious problems with inconsistent fuel/air distribution. Near the end of World War II, in late 1944, the system was changed to use direct injection where fuel was injected directly into the combustion chamber. This change improved engine reliability immediately.  See:

Q:  Did they ever outfit the plane with a different engine?

Mr. Broniarczyk: When they came out with fuel injection, the engine improved.

Q:  (Mr. Broniarczyk had a newspaper clipping telling the story of a bombing run in which he had taken part.) In this bombing run over Tokyo on March 9th, the one you were involved in, you were in one of these B-29s that had engines that weren’t so good?Tokyo Raid 1

Tokyo Raid 2An informative news article printed long after the war

Mr. Broniarczyk: That’s right.  We lost a lot of airplanes because of engines.  When we took off, it was the engineer’s duty to call out the high cylinder head temperature.  We had overheating problems.

Q:  You had gauges that showed the temperature of each engine?

Mr. Broniarczyk: All of the engine instruments were mine.

Q:  How did you communicate with the other crew members?  Were you connected by radio to everyone on the plane?

Mr. Broniarczyk: No.  The airplane was pressurized.  Oxygen was flowing all of the time.  It was very comfortable and you could talk to others.  The engineer was very near to the pilots.

Q:  Who communicated to the bombardier?

Mr. Broniarczyk: (He pointed to the diagram.)  They were close to the front.B 29 entire

Q:  It looks like the tail-gunner was by himself.

Mr. Broniarczyk: He wouldn’t be at the far back for take-off.  Once he was told to take his position, he was in the only unpressurized section of the plane.  He had to wear an oxygen mask.

Q:  How many missions did you fly?

Mr. Broniarczyk: I don’t remember the total of all of the missions I flew, but I think it was four missions over Japan.  Fortunately, I was on what was called a “Pathfinder Mission.”  The Japanese didn’t think much of one airplane flying over.  The Pathfinder had the top navigator and top bombardier.  The rest of the planes would follow after the Pathfinder.

Q:  Did we lose our bombers due to anti-aircraft guns or fighters or a combination?

Mr. Broniarczyk: It was a combination.  At this point, they didn’t have many fighters remaining.

Q:  Did you have escort fighters?

Mr. Broniarczyk: We had P-51s.  It was a lot safer at this point in the war because Iwo was behind us.  We had to land at Iwo once because our engines weren’t synchronized.  Some stray shrapnel hit the prop and knocked it out of balance.  I couldn’t control the prop.  I cut the engine off and feathered the prop. By “feathering,” I mean that you shape it as an air foil.  We landed at Iwo and put on a new prop.

Q:  Iwo was taken when you landed there?

P-51 Mustang

Mr. Broniarczyk: It wasn’t taken yet.  The marines were fighting there.  An airplane from our outfit, Number 8 – “Dynamite” – was the first airplane to land at Iwo.  When it landed, it hit a pole and dented the wing but everyone was O.K.

That was about the time I got both of my eardrums busted.

Q:  How did that happen?

Mr. Broniarczyk: We had a leak in the pressurization system and we dropped 6,000 feet very quickly.

Q:  This picture of you with the Enola Gay, how did you get this?

Mr. Broniarczyk: This was taken in August of 1945.  The picture was taken on the island of Tinian.  A fella came to me and said, “Hey Sarge, the 509th dropped a bomb and wrecked a whole city.  I said, “Ah, bologna.” I didn’t believe it.  The next day I went over and had this picture taken.Mr. Brons Enola Gay

Sergeant Broniarczyk and the Enola Gay, August 7th, 1945

Note:  For more on the Hiroshima bombing, see:

Mr. Broniarczyk:  At this time, I was relieved from duty because I had 111 points.  This represented a lot of time.

Q:  Did you say this picture was taken the day after the bomb was dropped?

Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes, it was taken the day after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.

Q:  How old were you in this picture?

Mr. Broniarczyk: I was born in 1914.  I was around 30 years old.

Q:  After you completed your time, did you head back to the states?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  They didn’t have the planes or the ships to take me back.  Naturally, officers got preference.  So, they sent me to Saipan to await a ship.  They organized us into groups according to our region of the country. They put me in charge of 90 guys going to Chicago.


C130A Cargo Plane

“They put me in charge of 90 guys going to Chicago.”

 -Mr. Anton Broniarczyk

Part III

Q:  You were the baby sitter.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I had help. I chose a huge African-American sergeant whose name was Mac.  I said, “Mac, you’re in charge of the African-Americans.  We played baseball and I would assign some of the guys certain duties, but not many.  When the ship finally arrived, it was a “Liberty Ship.”  It was a scowl.  I remember that I was checking the guys off and I asked the minister, “How long will it take to get back to the states?”  He said, “If you’re lucky, 23 days.  I thought that was a bit long.  Our ship arrived at Oakland, California faster than he thought it would.  We took a train to Chicago.  It took us 21 days to get to Fort Sheridan, which was north of Chicago.

Q:  Did you have to keep track of those guys all the way to Chicago?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  We came into Fort Sheridan and the officer got up and said, “Now you’re going to get everything that you didn’t get on the island.”  He was talking about the food.  They gave us steaks and everything.  The German prisoners were there and they were the ones doing the tailor work.

Q:  Let’s go back to the B-29s.  How many were in the crew and what were their jobs?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  There was a crew of 11: the pilot, the co-pilot, the navigator, the bombardier, the engineer, the right gunner, the left gunner, the CFC gunner, tail gunner, and radar operator. If a gunner got shot, the CFC gunner could control any gun on the ship.  CFC stood for Central Fire Control.

Q:  You were the only man taken off of Captain Black’s crew?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  I was the only person.  The guy who replaced me; he haunts me at night.  His name was Balecek.

Q:  He had a name that was similar in origin to yours.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes, he was a short, stocky guy.  I picture them coming down.  You just can’t get out of the airplane.  Centrifugal force holds you in that airplane.

Q:  Did they have parachutes?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes, the difficulty of getting out depended on where you were hit.  You had your choice.  When you were in trouble, you could either parachute into the civilians and they’d kill you, or you could try to get captured.  The other possibility was a landing in the ocean.  Then there was a good chance the sharks would get you.

Q:  Not a lot of good choices.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  No.  If you landed in the water with that B-29, it would stay afloat maybe ½ hour.

Q:  Did anyone survive such a landing.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  I took part in what was called a “Dumbo Mission.”  It was a mission where the sole purpose was to look for survivors.  You were confined to a certain area.  That was rough because the flights were 16 to 18 hour flights.

Q:  I’m still curious about the number of missions you flew.  I know you were in the air quite a lot.  I know it had to have been more than 12 missions.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes, the Enewetak or Truk flights weren’t considered missions.


Note:  The interviewer forgot to ask what Enewetak was so it was researched. 

Truk Lagoon is part of the Federated States of Micronesian, and consists of 11 major islands and many smaller islets within a 40 mile wide lagoon surrounded by a protective reef. Moen is Truk’s capital.

Truk was the Japanese “Gibraltar of the Pacific” the seemingly impregnable base for its combined and Fourth Fleets. It was also used as a ferry point for aircraft from factories in Japan to theaters of operation in New Guinea and the Solomons. Five wartime airstrips and seaplane bases were built during the war. For Japanese aircraft, it was an important way point for flights from Japan to other South Seas bases. Aircraft carriers occasionally ferried planes through the Truk strips.

Atoll Defenses
Heavily defended Truk’s defenses were bolstered with additional sub and torpedo nets placed in the water along with more mines and even rocket launchers from Japan. There were over eighty 25mm guns and 12cm guns in emplacements along with many smaller guns. Kaiten units of manned suicide torpedoes were assembled to the outer islands and Daihatsu landing craft were converted into torpedo boats. Mine fields in the passes and lagoon along with beach defenses were the main defenses against possible American invasion.

Surprise Attack: Operation Hailstone
On the morning of February 17, 1944 a surprise United States Navy air attack code named “Operation Hailstone” caught a fleet of Japanese Merchant vessels and warships by surprise in Truk Lagoon. 400 tons of bombs and torpedo rained down on the lightly defended base. After a day of attacks, forty ships and thousands of men went to the bottom. Ten weeks later, a second successful raid added a score more ship to the bottom. For more than two years after the war, oil from the sunken ships covered the beaches and reefs. Truk was strategically bypassed and neutralized by encirclement, island hopping and aerial attack by the USN, 13th AF and 7th AF.


Enewetak Atoll (or Eniwetok Atoll) is an atoll in the Marshall Islands of the central Pacific Ocean. Its land consists of about 40 small islets totaling less than 6 km², surrounding a lagoon, 80 km (50 mi) in circumference. It is located at 11°30′N 162°20′E / 11.5°N 162.333°E / 11.5; 162.333, making it the second westernmost atoll of the Ralik Chain. It was the site of U.S. atomic tests from 1948 to 1954.  

 U.S. Military planes were constantly working to keep shipping lanes  in this area clear.

 We found an example of a Marine bombing squadron patrolling the Enewetok (Alternate spellings include Enewetok or Eniwetok) area in July of 1945. See:


Q:  Did you ever count up your total hours in the air?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  No.

Q:  From where did you leave, and how long did it take to get to Tokyo?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  We took off at Tinian, and the trip took about 12 hours.

Q:  How long were you stationed at Tinian?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  We stayed until November of 1945.

Q:  Did any other family members serve in the war?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  One brother was in the Combat Engineers over in Europe and Japan.  My youngest brother was on convoy duty.

Q:  They survived the war?

Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes.  Here’s another indication of how unprepared we were.  (Mr. Broniardzyk showed the diploma with the word “Army” at the top.)

Q:  What did you do when you got out?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I was undecided whether to re-enlist or not.  I thought that I might need to take care of my parents.

Q:  Did you find a job right away?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  No.  I jumped around.  I worked for my brother.  One day I took the day off and went to the Main Post Office in Chicago, looked on the board, and there was a notice that read, “Jet Engine Inspectors Wanted.”  The jet engine was new.  I was interviewed by a captain and a civilian.  “What engines are you familiar with?” they asked.  I said, “The 3350, 2800, and the 985.  I have no jet engine experience.”  They said, “We haven’t any ourselves.  Can you start tomorrow?”

I ended up helping to manufacture jet engines; the J-65 in particular.  I worked in LaGrange, Illinois on the Wright J-65.Wright_J65_jet engine

Wright J-65 Jet Engine

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Buick.  Half of the plant was making cars and half was making engines.  These engines were made for military aircraft.  GM’s contract ran out and the jet engine side of the plant dwindled down to just a few of us.  I think I was the last guy left working there for the government.  I had been there about three years.

I wrote up my resume and sent it to Boeing in Seattle.  They accepted me.  I also sent my resume to Lockheed in Marietta, Georgia.  They were making the C-130.  I figured that was closer to home.  They accepted me so I went down there. I liked it there.  I liked the people there.  I think at the time it was the largest aircraft plant in the world.  I was an engine inspector. Do you know the size of a C-130?

Q: Yes.  (See picture at the top of this Part.)

Mr. Broniarczyk:  It’s huge. I bet they’re still flying some of the ones we made.  It’s the best airplane they ever built.  I was there through models A, B, C, and D, etc. There were many modifications through the years.  I liked it there.  The plant was all government owned. I’d get a whole meal for 50 cents.

Q:  It sounds like they took good care of you.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes. I was eventually transferred to O’Hare Airport in Chicago.  I went to school and became a cost analyst.  I worked there until I retired.

Q:  At the time of retirement, were you still working for the government or for a privately owned company?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I worked for the government.  Most of my work was on items that were paid for by government contracts.  A cost analyst dealt with airplane parts, etc.

Q:  When did you retire?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  It was sometime in the late 1960’s.

Q:  We live in a completely different world today.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  You’re tellin’ me.

Q: What happened?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  People take liberty for granted.  They take freedom for granted.  That’s what it is.  My father used to tell me, “They don’t know what freedom really means.” He lived under German and Russian rule.

Q:  From where did your Father immigrate?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  He came from Poland.  At the time, what is now Poland was divided into Austria, Germany, and Russia.Poland divided Map

The World that Mr. Broniarczyk’s Father Knew as a Child

Q:  He was raised in a communist country?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.

Q:  How old was he when he came to America?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  I think he was about 22.  He said good-bye to his mother and swam across the river.  The Russians and Germans patrolled the river.  The Warta River was the dividing line between the two countries.warta river

The Warta River Today

Mrs. Broniarczyk:  Please print this.  (She handed the “Wings” reporter a small piece of paper that contained a statement.)Americanism

Mrs. Broniarczyk’s Note

Mrs. Broniarczyk:  In 1899, my father joined the American forces and fought in the Spanish/American War.  He went to the Philippines. He was a member of the cavalry.

Q:  He was with Teddy Roosevelt?

Mrs. Broniarczyk: Yes. When they came they back, they were greeted by the father of General McArthur.  In 1958, I took my two grand nephews to the Presidio in San Francisco.  We drove all the way to California.  I took my father back to see the place where he had returned from the war.  He joined because he came to the United States at the age of 8.

Q:  From where did he come?

Mrs. Broniarczyk:  Poland.

Q:  Both of your families are from Poland?

Mrs. Broniarczyk: Yes. My father was eight years old when his step-mother brought him over with his brother.  It wasn’t until 1926 that he became a citizen of the U.S.

Q:  Why did it take so long?

Mrs. Broniarczyk:  I don’t know.  He never went to school.

Q:  Mr. Broniarczyk, did your grandmother make your father swim that river? 

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes.  The Russians had a man on horseback patrolling the border.  The Germans patrolled the other side.  The Germans didn’t care if the Polish crossed the river because the Poles were good workers and they needed workers at the time.  The Russians, however, subjugated the Poles.

Q:  How did your father make it to America?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  He had some relatives in Germany.  He stayed with them until he had enough money to come to this country.  The story that I heard was that it took the freighter 18 days to get here.

Q:  Did he come through Ellis Island?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Yes. When he arrived, he had a lot of cold sores and he was afraid he wouldn’t be accepted.ellis-island

Ellis Island Around the Time Mr. Broniarczyk’s Father Arrived

Q:  I know that many names got changed or shortened at Ellis Island.  Yours didn’t.  Why?ellis

Mr. Broniarczyk:  The original Polish name was Bronis.

Mrs. Broniarczyk:  In Poland they changed their names so that the Russians wouldn’t take their kids into the service.

Q:  They wanted the names to look more Polish?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  There was no Poland.  We lived under Russian rule.  The area eventually became Poland.

Q:  You mentioned that when you joined the service that your parents had it rough.  Your father had tuberculosis.  How did he make his living?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  He worked in an enamel factory.

Q:  Your mom was a homemaker?

Mr. Broniarczyk: Yes.

Q:  How many children were in the family?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  There were four of us: my sister, me, my brother Frank, and my brother Eddie.

Q:  What was your sister’s name?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  Her name was Cecelia.  My father married an American and she taught him English.

(At this point, the 2 hour limit on the recorder ran out.  The remainder of the interview is taken from notes.)

Q:  What do some of the symbols on your uniform represent?Mr. Brons Tech Uniform

Tech Sergeant Broniarczyk’s WWII Uniform

Mr. Broniarczyk: The stripes mean that I eventually earned Tech Sergeant.  The wings mean that I was a flight engineer.  The two bars on the lower left sleeve mean that I was in for two 3-year hitches.  I was in for a total of six years and ten days.

Q:  What would your father say about Americans today?

Mr. Broniarczyk:  He would say that the average American hasn’t the slightest idea of what freedom is.

Q:  Thank you for spending so much time with me.

Mr. Broniarczyk:  You’re welcome. 

A VETERAN SPEAKS – PART VIFreedom isn't free

Q:  What would your father say about Americans today?

 Mr. Broniarczyk (pronounced Brawn-r-chick):  He would say that the average American hasn’t the slightest idea of what freedom is.

This statement, by a man who is almost twice my age, made me think.  I could never appreciate freedom like Mr. Broniarczyk’s father, because I’ve never experienced what he did as a young man in Russia in the late 19th century.  I am thankful for my freedoms and I don’t respect Mr. Broniarczyk just because he’s older than I.pen writing

Honestly, I’ve come to understand that there are many of my elders who lack wisdom.  An example: Mr. Dingell standing up in the House of Representatives and making a statement defending a document that is socialistic in nature.  He was the final speaker used in an attempt to prop up a health care plan that would make us less free.  Mr. Dingell is representative of many of today’s “elders.”

I was taught to respect my elders, but I hope I would have the strength to do the same thing that Mr. Broniarczyk’s father did, if necessary.  I hope that I could run from misguided elders because of an opportunity at freedoms never experienced, even if it meant that I would probably never see my mother again.  This would take courage and, probably, prompting.  My life is more than half over.  I will face other challenges.

Anyone who read this three part series, or any part of it, should be able to sense my love of history.  I like history because it is the story of how people react in situations.  It’s about real world reactions.  It’s tells of valor, and it displays the sinful nature of man.  It is a reflection of the best and the worst.  In it are lessons to be learned.  I’ve come to understand that without experience, it is difficult to learn lessons.  Nevertheless, the lessons are there.  In the end, history is about people, not just a bunch of dates on a piece of paper.

Besides being “living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart,” the Word of God is history.  In it is found the most important historic event.  It is a deed that presents redemption to mankind.  The Word of God or “manual for life,”  as Dr. Baugh would call it, is being removed from every area upon which daylight falls. This is a story in itself.  It’s a lesson in history, if you will, and a sad one at that.

I know very little about Mr. Broniarczyk’s father.  I know more about Mr. Dingell’s father thanks to the internet.  Some may say that I can’t make a good comparison due to a lack of equal information.  After reading a short summary of John Dingell Sr., I can only make a judgment based on the information at hand.  Some may question, “I thought we were not supposed to judge others?”  You may look at this blog out of curiosity or you may like a certain thing you find here.  There are many reasons that people join a choir.

I am acutely aware of the scripture, “Do not judge, lest you be judged yourselves (Matthew 7:1).”  This scripture is found in one of my best loved sections of God’s Word. It is the greatest sermon ever preached in the history of the world.  It is called The Sermon on the Mount.  It would do well for all to learn the verses that follow the first verse of Matthew, chapter 7.  At the root is the real question: Are we right with God?  Before we can truly make perfect judgments, we have to perfectly understand God’s Word.  Who can claim they have such understanding?  Yet, we daily make, and must make, judgments about small and large things.  I believe “apart from God we can do nothing.”  These are the words of Jesus, not the words of a faulty man among the masses.  We are going to be judged and we must make judgments.  Jesus said, “in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it shall be measured to you.”  The question that is at the heart of God’s Word is:  “Are we right with God?”

The answer can only be given in the affirmative if there is an understanding of a simple truth.  Jesus said that “unless you are converted and become like children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.”  He said this when, the disciples, of all people, were arguing over who was the “greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”

The simple truth is reflected throughout the Word of God.  It is the truth of unconditional love.  God loves us in spite of ourselves.  He is waiting with open arms.  All we have to do is surrender.  Our culture has trained us that this surrender can happen in one night, at one crusade, in one prayer.  The Bible shows the opposite.  Peter is a great example.  In Matthew 16:16, Peter recognizes Jesus as the Christ, and receives one of the highest compliments a human is ever given.  It must be noted that Peter doesn’t get the credit, however.  “Flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven,” Jesus explained.

It is only seven verses later (Matthew 16:23) that Jesus says to Peter, “Get behind me Satan!  You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s.”

What’s the point?  Christianity is a lifelong, learning, Holy Spirit induced experience.  It’s not a one-night whammy, where all is made right in a single moment and we are at the height of our experience with God at that moment.  This belief is what has had such a negative impact on faith in our culture.  Thousands of people have marched to an alter and have been told that all is well.  They are told that they are at the end instead of at the beginning.  They are told that their sins are forgiven, a truth for the moment if they are sincere.  There is another side to the coin, as the good pastor Mark Cain would say.  This acknowledgement of sin doesn’t end with one prayer.

If we are aware of our true condition, we know that we are no better than Peter.  How can we be?  Jesus said of Peter, “upon this rock I will build my church.”  After we say the first prayer of repentance, we are going to find out that we really haven’t changed that much.  It is only because of God’s patience with us, the fact that he will never leave us or forsake us, that we begin to stumble in the correct direction.  The reason is an unconditional love that we will never completely understand this side of heaven.  Our eyes come off of Him, and we sink over and over.

The Christian’s experience is no different than Peter’s or Moses’.  We fail again and again.  The thing that keeps us on the narrow path is the same thing that saves us.  It is the work of God, the shed blood of the perfect Lamb, not our works.  This is what sets Christianity apart from all other “religions.”  Others must earn their salvation.  Ours is by grace.

We must say that first prayer.  It is a big moment.  Many remember the moment as I do.  It is only a big moment because it is the first moment.  We start as a lump of clay. That’s where we are at the first prayer. Between our first and last prayers there is a greater understanding of how much of a lump we are.  That’s how the pot is formed.

So, what does all of this have to do with Mr. Broniarczyk’s father and John Dingell Sr.?  I think it has a lot to do with them.  The key word is freedom.  Mr. Broniarczyk’s father understood freedom because it was something he didn’t have and hoped to gain.  Isn’t this really what all humans are looking for…true freedom?  A Christian understands that true freedom can be found in Christ alone.

Martin Luther’s understanding of this truth started a reformation.

Why has America’s experience been, arguably, the greatest occurrence of freedom since the creation of the universe?  The answer lies in the beliefs of those who put this experiment together.  Yes, a few of the smart ones were Deists.  One of them was egotistical enough to write his own version of the Bible.  He took out the miracles, among other things.  He must have thought them not possible.

The majority, however, understood something of the grace of God.  They understood the importance of the Word of God.  Read their letters.  Read their speeches.  Note their actions. You could easily compile a complete Bible from their words.  They would be embarrassed if they had twice read their Bibles.  The embarrassment wouldn’t come from the admission of such a deed to a secular world.  The embarrassment would come from the admission of lack of study to a group of men who knew the Word of God well.


“In January 1995, John Dingell, Jr. became the Dean, or the longest-serving member of the House and, as of 2009, the father and son together have 76 consecutive years of service in Congress.

A hallmark of their service has been a proposal for a national health insurance system, first introduced by John, Sr. in 1933 and re-introduced since at every Congress by the father and then the son.

John David Dingell, Sr. (February 2, 1894, Detroit, Michigan – September 19, 1955, Washington, D.C.) was an American politician who represented Michigan’s 15th congressional district from 1933 to 1955.

Dingell was born in Detroit and worked as a newsboy, printer and newspaperman. He had also engaged in the construction of natural gas pipelines, was a wholesale dealer in beef and pork products and an organizer and trustee of Colorado Springs Labor College.”


This entry is from Wikipedia.  Personally, I wouldn’t have used the word “hallmark.”  Nonetheless, the fact that Mr. Dingell worked in the news business makes me think kindly of him.  On the other hand, I know enough about the media of the past and the present to know that an affiliation with “news” doesn’t give one a “get out of jail free” card.  The majority of Today’s media is untrustworthy.

I will not judge the destiny of any soul.  This is God’s job.  I do know that Mr. Dingell’s internment at the Holy Sepulcher Mausoleum in Southfield, Michigan will not guarantee his salvation.

I do not hold an unfavorable view of John Dingell Sr. because of the following additional excerpt from Wikipedia:

“Reflecting the prevailing prejudices of the period, a memorable letter from Dingell to President Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 18, 1941 suggested that ten thousand Japanese-Hawaiian Americans be incarcerated in order to ensure ‘good behavior’ from Japan.”

I think God would be as forgiving as the Wikipedia entry if an acknowledgement of error had been issued.  I’d guess that Mr. Dingell made such an concession.

Anyone who started as a newsboy deserves a good look.  It denotes a work ethic.  This is a good thing.  From where does the “Protestant Work Ethic” come?  It comes from the scriptures.  If you don’t work, you don’t eat.  An atheist would argue that many well-fed folks don’t work a lick.  I would reply that their food is that of the worldly kind.

Why pick on the Dingells?  I’m very limited on what I can write about the father.  But the son is pushing a law that would give a huge amount of power to a man who has not been placed in office by the people.  The man I’m referring to is the one created in the health care legislation that is heading for the Senate of the United States of America.  One man, some call him a Czar, would make important decisions about the nation’s health care.  The man would be appointed by the President.

I do not want one man, Republican, Democrat, or otherwise, deciding for me if I am to live or die.  That is God’s job.  To give an unelected official that kind of power goes against every intention of our Constitution.  The godly men who framed our Constitution understood the sinfulness of man.  Thus, the checks and balances between the branches of government.  To give one, unelected man this kind of power takes  freedom from the people.  It seems that there are a great number of Americans who don’t understand this.  I think that Mr. Broniarczyk’s father was right.  He was right because most of us have not experienced the oppression of a socialist regime.

It is not surprising to me that our country is considering laws that are socialistic in nature.  Socialism is based in godlessness.  As our laws force us to remove the words that made this country great from the walls of our important buildings, including our schools, we will continue to decline in every way.  The words that made this country great were God’s words.  The words that made this land the most blessed experience in freedom are being put away.

We can blame our leaders and politicians.  They aren’t the problem.  The problem is with the “Christians.”  When churches accept or remain silent on subjects that are clearly defined as sin, then the church has ceased to be salt and light.  Whose fault was it that prayer was removed from our schools?  Whose fault was it that abortion was legalized?  Whose fault is it the homosexuality is becoming an acceptable lifestyle?  It wouldn’t have taken 100%.  It wouldn’t have taken 90%.  It wouldn’t have taken 80%.  Honestly, I don’t know the percent required, but if those who call themselves “Christian” had taken a stand on issues like these, God’s laws wouldn’t be coming off of our walls.  It started when the commandments of God started coming off of church walls.

If you are this far into the ride, I’m going to now try and express my thoughts about a main subject in this series: war.  It must be stated at the start that I will never understand a man like General Patton.  I’ve read that he loved war.  Supposedly, the historians write, he was restless unless he was in the heat of battle.  It is obvious that God can use a man like Patton.  Many German leaders didn’t fear God but they feared Patton.  Another example of an unlikely warrior who was used of God is Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon.

I must admit that I am not like these men. I am near the opposite end.  I have generally tried to avoid conflict.

How is a Christian supposed to view war?  There have been thick books written on the subject.  I’ll try to do it in less than a page so that you don’t decide to do what most do with those lengthy books.

I’ll start with a Pixar film.

Some of you have seen the animated movie entitled “The Incredibles.”  If you haven’t, I want to share one scene with you.  Here’s a quick set-up:

Mr. Incredible and the other superheroes, called “supers,” are no longer allowed to use their abilities to stop crimes.  Why?  Well, Mr. Incredible saved a man who tried to commit suicide.  In stopping the man’s leap off of a high building, Mr. Incredible supposedly injured the man’s neck.  Instead of the warranted appreciation for saving the man’s life, Mr. Incredible was sued.  He hadn’t allowed the man to end his pain.  The government is involved in the situation and shuts down the supers.

Here’s the scene. Mr. Incredible has become an insurance salesman.  He hates his job. Picture a huge guy standing in an office with a tiny boss screaming at him for being honest, hurting the company’s bottom line as a result.  While the boss is jumping up and down, Mr. Incredible spots a mugging going on outside.  Every impulse in him wants to help the person in need.  The boss threatens to fire him if he leaves to help.  The mugger gets away.  Those of you who have seen the entertaining movie know that Mr. Incredible doesn’t handle the fact that he’s been scared by his boss very well.

The right thing to do is to help those in need.  When we see others mistreated, we should help.  We often don’t because it is inconvenient, time consuming, or costly.  We aren’t God and we have limitations.  There are times, however, when we are capable of intervening and for whatever reason, we don’t.

In 1939, Germany invaded Poland.  For a short synopsis, see:  The last time I walked through a public school, there were signs in strategic places that said, “No bullying allowed!”  Hitler was the bully on the block in 1939.  Some folks had seen it coming, but few did anything to stop him.  Hitler had planned it all very well. The poor Poles didn’t fight because they knew they would be massacred.  Those who had promised help were nowhere to be found.

I asked a veteran of the Vietnam War about WWII.  Interestingly, I just met him today.  “What would have happened if we hadn’t responded by bombing Pearl Harbor?” I asked.  “We would be speaking another language,” was his answer.

I haven’t agreed with certain things our military has done over the years.  But, I have the same question that my new friend asked me today.  Did Japan ever pay money to the families of those who died at Pearl Harbor?  The United States helped rebuild Europe and helped spread the ideas of Freedom in the post WWII years and now people are asking us to make payments to the families of civilians that were killed.

I hate war.  I don’t like it one bit when civilians are killed.  War is necessary for the same reason that the Constitutional balances of powers are necessary:  if bullies are not restrained, there will be tyrannical rule and, in today’s world, the possibility of something much worse.

I know the Sermon on the Mount well.  I know the “turn the other cheek” verse.  I am also aware of the story of the Good Samaritan and the anticipated return of Jesus Christ.  The first was an illustration to teach us what to do when others are in need.  The second is not going to be a peaceful event.  The scriptures are in perfect balance.  For each verse, there is a counter verse.  To rightly divide the Word of God involves study.  I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t know the only living document (in spite of what they say about our country’s founding statements) as well as I should.

The Revolutionary War was supported and fought by men who had prayed for years for a peaceful resolution to tyranny.  The bully kept turning up the heat.

There is a situation in the world today that is much worse than the one those in the colonies faced in the late 18th century.  There is a free nation in the Middle East that has been threatened with extinction.  It is a nation that has existed since 1948.  Actually, it’s the oldest nation on earth.  It was scattered for centuries.  A nearby “neighbor” is working on a bomb that can destroy the little nation that espouses freedom.  The bully is very close to having the devastating weapon.  What is the little nation to do?  If it does nothing, there is a chance that everyone in the country will die.  Other nations have put pressure on the bully.  The bully continues to plot the destruction of the little country.  If it was your family, and you had the capability to stop the bully from the inevitable, what would you do?  Wouldn’t it be better for even the folks in the bully’s own nation if he were stopped before bombs started falling?

I do have some good news.  The bully will not kill all of the people in the small country.  How do I know this?  Prophets who have thus far been correct 100% of the time have written so.

“There is an appointed time for everything.  And there is a time for every event under heaven-

A time to give birth, and a time to die;

A time to plant, and a time to uproot what is planted.

A time to kill, and a time to heal;

A time to tear down, and a time to build up.

A time to weep, and a time to laugh;

A time to mourn, and a time to dance.”

The interview with Mr. Broniarczyk was a wonderful experience.  The memory of the 95 year old gentleman was impressive.  Granted, some of the subject matter wasn’t pleasant.  War is not a pleasant thing.  I’ve found that most men who’ve experienced true war don’t want to talk about it.  As I talked with Mr. Broniarczyk, he smiled a lot.  He wasn’t smiling about the war.  He was smiling about the fond memories of the dedicated and humble people he had met during his war experience.  He spoke mostly of the people he met.  He mentioned dropping bombs once that I can recall, and he did so with caution.

War is a horrible thing.  We should teach this to our children.  We should also teach our children about the price that’s been paid for the freedoms that we enjoy.  They should know about the people who have paid that price. If we don’t teach them, who will?  We can’t leave it to the schools.  There are things in our history books that would make the most hardened soldier angry.

Does the average American citizen know the difference between self-determination and despotism?  I would have to agree with Mr. Broniarczyk’s father.  We’ve been living in a dream too long.  If we don’t wake up soon, we’ll be living in a society similar to the one from which Mr. Broniarczyk’s father ran.

Chris Reimers


February 9, 2014

Photo found at the Corwall Alliance

Photo found at the Corwall Alliance

by E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D.
October 9, 2013

Recently Certified Consulting Meteorologist Anthony J. Sadar, a Contributing Writer for the Cornwall Alliance, committed an unpardonable sin for scientists: he appealed to the Bible as support for his understanding about manmade global warming. Yes, he gave some evidence from temperature measurements, too, but his primary argument was this:
… rather than having faith that God will sustain His environment so that the liberating word of Christ can go forth, [gullible] Christians have put their trust in the U.N.’s ‘arm of the flesh.’

The IPCC has been preaching for decades that human souls are guilty of raising temperatures worldwide. Yet the IPCC’s prophecy has not materialized. Why not? Because the high priests of climate science have too little faith. They trust in carbon dioxide, which comprises only 0.04% of the atmosphere, to perform miracles.

(I am posting the article because I’m having problems with the link I’ve placed at the end.)

The reason why the global temperature trend has been nearly level for more than 15 years now as paltry carbon dioxide increased is quite likely explainable by water’s role in climate control. It seems likely that God wisely assigned the role of climate regulator to water in all its phases and characteristics—water in the invisible vapor form, liquid form (oceans, rainfall, clouds), and ice form (glaciers, snow, clouds); water transport and distribution across the globe; and, the energy of conversion associated with water’s phase changes. Because of water’s immense complexity, venerated climate models do a poor job properly simulating water’s role in long-range global climate reality. Yet so many of the faithful continue to trust in the power of man-made “carbon pollution” and continue to fret about “climate justice” nonsense.

Advice to Christians: Go tell it on the mountain. Preach the Word, both in season and out of season, for: “While the earth remains, / Seedtime and harvest, / And cold and heat, / And summer and winter, / And day and night / Shall not cease.” [Genesis 8:22, NASB] Now, there’s a long-term, global climate forecast you can really trust.

Sadar will no doubt come under attack for that, not only by atheist secularists but, sadly, also by some Christians who naively think religious sources should play no role in shaping our scientific understandings.

For example, not long ago two evangelical climate scientists, Katharine Hayhoe and Thomas Ackerman, wrote, “For us, global warming is not a matter of belief—it is about applying our understanding of science to the climate of this planet. The author of Hebrews tells us, ‘faith is … the evidence of things not seen.’ We believe in God through faith. Science, on the other hand, is the evidence of our eyes.”

Two Cornwall Alliance Senior Fellows, David Legates and Roy Spencer, also climate scientists, rebutted their scientific claims, and I provided a Biblical/theological response.

What I didn’t do, though, was to point out the philosophical naiveté of Hayhoe and Ackerman’s contrasting “belief” with “science” and their faulty use of Hebrews 11:1 to support it. That, along with explaining the real relationship between religious sources and scientific understanding, is my topic here.

What Is Faith?
The words faith and belief actually mean the same thing. They differ only in their etymologies. The English word belief originated in the Twelfth Century. As the Online Etymological Dictionary puts it, belief (originally spelled bileave) replaced the “Old English geleafa ‘belief, faith,’ from West Germanic *ga-laubon’.” Notice that: geleafa meant “belief, faith”—i.e., the two words were interchangeable—and the modern English words belief and faith remain interchangeable now. The English faith originated in the Thirteenth Century and came “from Old French feid, foi ‘faith, belief, trust, confidence, pledge,’ from Latin fides ‘trust, faith, confidence, reliance, credence, belief,’ from root of fidere “to trust’.”

With that background in mind, it’s clear that to write, as Hayhoe and Ackerman do, “We believe in God through faith” is to be redundant. It means the same as “We believe in God through belief,” or “We have faith in God through faith.”

What is faith/belief? The late Christian philosopher Gordon H. Clark defined it carefully as “assent to a proposition.” One who assents to the proposition “2 + 2 = 4” believes, has faith, that 2 + 2 = 4. One who assents to the proposition, “A water molecule comprises two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen” believes, has faith. One who assents to the proposition “George Washington was America’s first President” believes, has faith. One who believes the proposition “God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, justice, holiness, goodness, and truth” (the Westminster Shorter Catechism’s definition of God) believes, has faith. And one who assents to the proposition, “Jesus Christ died for my sins, was buried, and rose again from the dead” believes, has faith, that Christ did those things for him—that is, he believes the gospel.

Notice that believing a mathematical proposition, a chemical proposition, a historical proposition, or a religious/theological proposition differs not as different mental acts but solely in the sorts of propositions believed. Consequently, belief in God and belief in global warming are the same sort of act—assent to the propositions that God exists and that the earth is getting warmer.

For Hayhoe and Ackerman, then, to say, “For us, global warming is not a matter of belief” is for them to reveal that they don’t know what belief is. They seem to think it is something inherently and exclusively religious. But that is hardly what one has in mind when he’s asked, “What time is dinner?” and replies, “I believe it’s at 6 o’clock.”

Ah, but Hayhoe and Ackerman support their belief about the nature of faith/belief by quoting the Bible—Hebrews 11:1, to be precise: “faith … is the evidence of things not seen” (ellipsis original)—as if somehow this distinguished faith from whatever we might call the mental act of assenting to the truth of “Elephants are large mammals.”

Hebrews 11:1’s traditional English translation, going back to the King James Version, as “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,” is neither clear nor an accurate representation of the original Greek. Does substance there mean the same thing as substance in the statement, “Wheat is the substance of this bread”?

The New American Standard Bible and English Standard Version offer a better translation: “faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Assurance denotes an intense belief, and evidence is a ground for believing something. According to Hebrews 11:1, then, the particular faith in mind in this context is strong belief in things hoped for, a ground for belief in things not seen. But even that, as Clark points out, “is no more a definition than ‘A triangle is something one studies in geometry courses.’” The following verses indicate that, rather than offering a definition of faith, Hebrews 11:1 tells us something about its function or usefulness:
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the people of old received their commendation. By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible. By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. (Hebrews 11:1–5)
Notice: “by [faith] the people of old received their commendation.” The clincher comes in verse 6: “And without faith it is impossible to please [God], for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.”

What is faith? Assent to a proposition. What is its function? How is it useful? Well, among other things, it pleases God and brings us near to Him. And that is how it is “evidence of things hoped for.” Since faith in God pleases God, someone’s faith in God becomes a ground for another belief: that he will receive or experience things he hopes for—like reconciliation with God and life after death with God in heaven.

On the one hand, faith is a mental act—the act of assenting to, believing, a proposition. That is its definition. On the other hand, that faith (faith in God) is also evidence that the one who has it will receive things he hopes for. That’s one of its functions.

“We believe in God through faith,” said Hayhoe and Ackerman, redundantly. “Science, on the other hand, is the evidence of our eyes.” Try applying that antithesis between faith and sight to this:
I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. (1 Corinthians 15:3–8)

To refute the notion that Jesus didn’t—and couldn’t—rise from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:12–13), the Apostle Paul offered multiple eyewitness testimony. “Jesus Christ … was raised on the third day.” That’s a historical statement. It’s also a religious statement. And eyewitness testimony is part of the ground for believing it as both historical and religious, as illustrated in Caravaggio’s famous painting of “doubting Thomas” putting his finger into the spear hole in Christ’s side (after which he was no longer “doubting Thomas” but “believing Thomas”). But notice, too: Paul also says Christ died and rose “in accordance with the Scriptures”—the Scriptures that the disciples were so “slow of heart to believe” until they had seen the risen Christ (Luke 24:25); the Scriptures that were, because they were the Word of God, “more sure” than seeing with their own eyes (2 Peter 1:16–21). Paul wove together empirical observation and divine propositional revelation to make his case—which brings us to our next question.

Can Religious Sources Inform Scientific Judgment? Should They?
Okay, so there’s no difference in definition between faith that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere absorbs heat and re-radiates it, thus sending some back toward the earth’s surface and so warming it, and faith that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Each is assent to a proposition. But can religious sources like the Bible assist a scientist in understanding how the world functions?

Those familiar with the philosophy and history of science know the answer to that question right off the bat: Yes. Absolutely.

The Biblical worldview and no other could and did give birth to science. Paleoanthropologist and philosopher Loren Eiseley (1907–1977), who though religious in the tradition of American Transcendentalists Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau was certainly no orthodox Christian theist, on reflecting on the kind of soil in which science could flourish, wrote in Darwin’s Century, “In one of those strange permutations of which history yields occasional rare examples, it is the Christian world which finally gave birth in a clear, articulate fashion to the experimental method of science itself. … The experimental method succeeded beyond men’s wildest dreams, but the faith that brought it into being owes something to the Christian conception of the nature of God. And science today [is still] sustained by that assumption.”

Why? Philosopher Nancy Pearcey and biochemist Charles Thaxton, in The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy, specify ten ways in which Biblical thought—and Biblical thought alone—served as the soil in which science could grow:1.“To begin with, the Bible teaches that nature is real.” Pantheism and idealism, whether Platonic, Gnostic, or neo-Platonic, see the physical world as illusion and so dampen incentive to investigate it.
2.“Science rests not only on metaphysical convictions but also on convictions about value. A society must be persuaded that nature is of great value, and hence an object worthy of study. The ancient Greeks lacked this conviction. The ancient world often equated the material world with evil and disorder; hence, it denigrated anything to do with material things.”
3.“In Biblical teaching, nature is good, but it is not a god. It is merely a creature. The Bible stands firmly against any deification of the creation.” In contrast, “Pagan religions are typically animistic or pantheistic, treating the natural world either as the abode of the divine or as an emanation of God’s own essence. … The de-deification of nature was a crucial precondition for science. As long as nature commands religious worship, dissecting her is judged impious. As long as the world is charged with divine beings and powers, the only appropriate response is to supplicate them or ward them off.”
4.“To become an object of study the world must be regarded as a place where events occur in a reliable, predictable fashion. This, too, was a legacy of Christianity. Whereas paganism taught a multitude of immanent gods, Christianity taught a single transcendent Creator, whose handiwork is a unified, coherent universe.”
5.“Belief in an orderly universe came to be summed up in the concept of natural law. The phrase ‘laws of nature’ is so familiar to the modern mind that we are generally unaware of its uniqueness. People in pagan cultures who see nature as alive and moved by mysterious forces are not likely to develop the conviction that all natural occurrences are lawful and intelligible.”
6.“One of the most distinctive aspects of modern science is its use of mathematics—the conviction not only that nature is lawful but also that those laws can be stated in precise mathematical formulas. This conviction, too, historians have traced to the Biblical teaching on creation. The Biblical God created the universe ex nihilo and hence has absolute control over it. … In all other religions, the creation of the world begins with some kind of pre-existing substance with its own inherent nature. As a result, the creator is not absolute and does not have the freedom to mold the world exactly as he wills. … Thus the application of geometry and mathematics to the analysis of physical motion rests on the Christian doctrine of creation.”
7.Not only belief in a rational, comprehensible nature, but also belief in a rational, comprehending observer of it—man—was necessary to the rise of science. “… science cannot proceed without an epistemology, or theory of knowledge, guaranteeing that the human mind is equipped to gain genuine knowledge of the world. Historically, this guarantee came from the doctrine that humanity was created in the image of God.”
8.Christian belief in human rationality and in nature’s susceptibility to rational analysis does not, however, lead, as might first be expected, to the Aristotelian idea that once one knows some things about nature he can derive the rest by infallible deduction. Nature comes with surprises, not because it is inherently irrational but because it is the work of a free and personal God who does with it as He pleases. … Experimental science had to await a shift away from Aristotelianism”—a shift that “began when some Christians became troubled by the Aristotelian concept of Forms” that “appeared to limit God’s creative activity,” a notion that eventually the Christian Church repudiated, leading to the theology of voluntarism, “which admitted no limit on God’s power” and “regarded natural law not as Forms inherent within nature but as divine commands imposed from outside nature.” God’s freedom entailed a nature that required not only deductive inference but also specific observation to be known by man.
9.“As theologian Thomas Torrance writes, ’The contingency of the creation as it derives from God is inseparably bound up with its orderliness, for it is the product not merely of his almighty will but of his eternal reason.’ The world does not have its own inherent rationality, but it is intelligible because it reflects God’s rationality.”
10.“… the transition from science to technology itself required certain presuppositions about the world. It required a set of beliefs that sanctioned active intervention in natural processes to advance human purposes.”
Not only the historical fact of its philosophical foundation in the Biblical worldview but also the actual practice of scientists demonstrates that science is far from the naïve “scientific method” that gets summed up as “hypothesis, experiment, observation.” As philosopher of science J.P. Moreland points out in Christianity and the Nature of Science: A Philosophical Investigation:
… there is no formalized method, no step-by-step method by which scientists form their ideas. Sometimes scientists discover things by accident. On other occasions they generate their ideas in more bizarre ways. It is well known, for instance, that E.A. Kekule (1829–1896) came up with the hexagon formula for the benzene ring by having a trancelike vision of a snake attempting to chase its own tail ….

More frequently, scientists generate their ideas by a creative process of educated guesswork known as adduction. …

Frequently in the history of science, [scientists] have derived their conceptual ideas from the metaphysical aspects of philosophical or theological theories. …

James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879) … proposed that light be pictured as a wave wherein electric and magnetic waves oscillate back and forth as the wave travels through space. Maxwell’s field picture was derived metaphysically from his theological convictions of the Trinity and incarnation. …

It’s not people like Anthony Sadar—or Congressman John Shimkus (R-IL), who cited Genesis 8:22 during a House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment hearing March 27, 2009—who are naïve about the relationship between religion and science. It is, all too often, scientists who may be very good at their practice of science but have inadequately, if at all, considered what the philosophy and history of science tell us about how science actually works.

Assent to the proposition that raising atmospheric carbon-dioxide concentration from 27 to 54 thousandths of a percent will warm the earth enough to cause grave harm to humanity and the rest of life on earth is belief, faith. Assent to the proposition that a wise, faithful, powerful God so designed the earth’s climate system that it is not so fragile is also belief, faith. Neither is scientifically privileged. Neither is philosophically privileged. Each must seek its support from a variety of sources, whether divine propositional revelation (the Bible) or divine natural revelation (the creation). And no historically or philosophically informed understanding of the methods of science can exclude Biblical propositions from the evidence to be considered.

Ironically, it is those who wish to exclude Biblical propositions from the evidence who are unscientific, not only because they thus fail to comprehend both the history and the philosophy of science but also because they unscientifically exclude, a priori, some potentially relevant data. Temperature readings, chemical analyses of air, readings from the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer aboard NASA’s Aqua satellite, for which Cornwall Senior Fellow Roy Spencer is U.S. team lead scientist, are all data. And so are Biblical propositions. Epistemologically consistent Christians, by taking into account Biblical propositions as well as empirical observations, are dealing not with less data but with more. There is nothing unscientific about that.

E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D., is Founder and National Spokesman of The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. He edited J.P. Moreland’s Christianity and the Nature of Science for publisher Baker Book House.

You can read the rest of the article HERE.

My comment:

I have followed Mr. Beisner’s career since he worked with the great Walter Martin. He is a brilliant man and I think he makes some very good points in this article.



%d bloggers like this: