A Petition from the Church to Donald Trump--or is it?

Here is the stunning transcript of a video available on Youtube. I provide the relevant part:

Hello everybody! Welcome back to another episode of Anabaptist Perspectives. We're here in Boston, Massachusetts at Sattler College. We're with Dean Taylor. You're the president of the college here. We're in your office, and you did a lecture on this earlier this year that really caught our attention, and we wanted to talk to you about that and and see if we can hit some of those high points. So, during that lecture you said—and it was obviously rhetorical just kind of make a point—you read a petition to our president Donald Trump. Can you just read that and then explain kind of what you're getting at there and then how that all ties in with with parts of our Mennonite history.

 Alright. Well excellent. OK. I'll start with a letter, and then I'll explain what I was thinking. Sure. OK. The idea was, it was bringing out that, you know, there's been a lot of, you know, negative things against the president, and, you know, we know we're supposed to pray for our president and pray and the government, and so the idea, you know, that all these attacks on the president that we should say something. But, in that, I wanted to make a point though because I was... what I was feeling was that too many of our people are imbibing—they're taking on this whole way of thinking of the current presidency, and that's very scary. So I wrote this petition. Here it goes.

To the president, Donald Trump:

We, the conference of Anabaptists, assembled today in Shipshewana and the free state

of Indiana, feel deep gratitude for the powerful revival that God has given our

nation's through your energy and promises joyful cooperation and the

upbuilding of our fatherland through the power of the Gospel, faithful to the

motto of our forefathers, "No other foundation can anyone lay than that

which is laid which is Jesus Christ." With greatest excitement, we are following the

events of our beloved country and experienced in spirit the national

revolution of the American people. We are happy that, in America, after a long time,

a government that freely and openly professes God as creator stands at the

head of the nation. With special sympathy, we hear that the

government takes seriously the realization of Christian principles in

social, economic, and cultural life, and especially emphasizes the protection of the family.

And signed the conference that I was with]. 

So, the point that I was

making is that, with just a couple words changed, that was a telegram—

that was sent from the Mennonites of Germany to Adolf Hitler. 

Lisa Miller update

 Even though, as I pointed out in a recent post, her daughter is now of age and free to resume enjoyment of her American citizenship, Lisa Miller is still a wanted felon. News out of Nicaragua is that the federal authorities have committed resources to putting pressure on people thought to possibly be hiding them, even to the point of arresting and interrogating an American citizen. To the extreme frustration of all involved in the hunt, and despite winning convictions and harsh prison sentences for all charged with their escape, every attempt for the last several years has failed to uncover anything new. It is as if the Millers had vanished into another dimension. 

Who are the false teachers in Acts 20:30?

 As I posted earlier (here, here, and here), The Newer and Improveder International Version has a hard time being consistent with its translation of the Greek word for 'men', being unwilling to exclude women altogether from that designation, but not showing any good reason for why it does or doesn't. An excellent example is in Acts 20:30.

First, let's back up and see how various translations handle 'men' in Acts 17:34 (from blueletterbible):

However, some men joined him and believed, among them Dionysius the Areopagite, a woman named Damaris, and others with them. - NKJV

But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them. - ESV

But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them. - NASB

So, the more literal versions were okay with translating ανδρες as 'men', despite the associated difficulty of including a woman in their number. How about the least literal translations?

but some joined him and became believers. Among them were Dionysius, a member of the council, a woman named Damaris, and others with them. - NLT

Well, that was pretty safe, Just leave off translating the word, as the NIV did in Acts One. But most of them tried to translate it with something:

However, some people joined him and believed, including Dionysius the Areopagite, a woman named Damaris, and others with them. - CSB

But some people joined him and believed. Among them were Dionysius, who was a member of the Areopagus, a woman named Damaris, and others with them. NET

Some of the people became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others. - NIV

So, to the CBD, ανδρες could, and presumably should, be either left untranslated, or at least translated vaguely as 'some people', whenever women could, or should, be included in the referent. So what happened in Acts 20:30, when Paul warned the Ephesian Elders about the coming of false teachers?

Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. - NKJV

and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. - ESV

and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. - NASB

Again, the more literal versions translate ανδρες as 'men', despite the difficulty that false teachers of a female sort would likewise arise (Revelation 2:20). Surely, though, the translators of the more progressive versions would be able to see women in this verse? Let's check.

Even some men from your own group will rise up and distort the truth in order to draw a following. - NLT

Men will rise up even from your own number and distort the truth to lure the disciples into following them. - CSB

Even from among your own group men will arise, teaching perversions of the truth to draw the disciples away after them. - NET

Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. - NIV

Well, suddenly all their problems with a literal translation of ανδρες seem to have vanished at this verse. Despite the difficulty, all are agreed that only those Ephesians of the male sort were in any danger of becoming false teachers. But Paul himself, later writing to Timothy in Ephesus, specifically spoke of

"gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth." - NIV 2 Timothy 3:6-7

Global search-and-replace has failed them once again. 

EDIT Oct 2, 2020
It has been brought to my attention that (at least in the 2005 Edition), the TNIV  did in fact read "some will arise" and this was one of the reversions made in the 2011 NNIV. 

The Elizabeth Smart Effect

 Elizabeth Smart is an amazing woman. Abducted at age 14 through her bedroom window one night by a drifter whom her father had hired for some odd jobs, she spent the next nine months being raped several times a day. When she was finally found by investigators hidden in plain sight on the streets of Sandy, Utah, she had been so utterly brainwashed that, thinking her family would never take her back, she initially refused to even admit who she was.
But from that low point, she made an amazing comeback. After making up the year of school she'd missed, she went on to graduate from BYU and flew back from a Mission in France to testify at her abuser's trial for kidnapping and rape. Then, incredibly, she became a journalist for NBC, interviewing women like her who had been kidnapped by sexual abusers. Unlike abuse victims who desire anonymity, she has never been afraid to tell her story and in fact used it to catapult her to national attention, using that platform to advocate against sexual assault.
In honor of Elizabeth and her willingness to share every facet of her horrifying experience, I'm naming a little-understood phenomenon after her: The Elizabeth Smart Effect. Simply put, this is the tendency of traumatic rape victims not to have functioning reproductive systems during the time they are under the control of their abusers. Despite the daily rapes, Elizabeth never fell pregnant until after she had married her legal husband. How could this be?

Some may offer the obvious answer that her abuser wasn't fertile himself, and was thus unable to impregnate her. But what about numerous other victims who demonstrate the same effect? In The Slave Across the Street, Theresa Flores relates her experience of serving as a teenage concubine to an entire underworld crime network for over a year--without ever falling pregnant. And the anecdotes are countless; despite pregnancy resulting from single rapes that happened to coincide with a woman already being fertile, rapes that are part of an ongoing abusive situation really do sometimes seem to shut down a woman's reproductive system, so that she never does go through a fertile cycle until the abuse ends.

More study on this is definitely needed--but will it ever come? The political establishment, particularly the pro-abortion wing, clings desperately to the idea that women who are raped NEED the option of snuffing out of any life that results from that rape, and anyone referencing the Elizabeth Smart Effect is likely to get shouted down--or, in the famous case of Todd Akin, even voted out of office just for mentioning it. If there is a biological phenomenon behind the Elizabeth Smart Effect, isolating it, describing it, and publishing it will face some formidable political hurdles.

Another One Gone

2020 is turning out to be an annus horribilus in many ways, one of which is the news that yet another kidnapping/rape/murder* has apparently occurred to a Mennonite girl who was supposedly under the protection of her head covering. To add to her indignity, the one photo the police was able to acquire of Amish teen Linda Stoltzfoos was 'rumspringa-progressed' to show her without the church attire she was wearing when she went missing, in 'street clothes' and with her hair down--showing their reluctance to admit to the possibility that she had in fact been kidnapped, rather than just running away on her way home from church to change her clothes--showing their woefully inadequate understanding of Amish culture.
Someone has suggested, tongue in cheek, that the head covering may have a similar magical quality as that found in Sampson's hair--that is, one is powerless to abuse a girl so long as she remains covered, but if he can in any way get the covering off her, she's fair game. I don't think that theory will hold any water in Linda's case. She appears to have come under Justo Smoker's power while still fully dressed in her church outfit.

The magical piece of cloth just isn't working.

UPDATE AUGUST 24: More information has been disclosed in both of these kidnapping cases. It turns out that Sasha Krause was tied up and beaten, then shot in the head--and both her underwear and her head covering removed and kept as trophies--but the autopsy indicates she died a virgin. That must be some comfort to her family--and may even strengthen their belief in the magic piece of cloth. In Linda Stoltzfoos' case, she has not been recovered, but some of her underclothing was found buried in the woods--indicating that she could have been raped; there was no sign of her head covering.

Why there's no such thing as a Stone Age Tribe

This post has been percolating for many months, so I decided to go ahead and give it a go now, but subject it to revision as I continue to ponder the question.
Two videos have brought about this rush to print: one a series actually, to which I will get shortly; the other being this National Geographic Special about the Waorani tribe of Ecuador. In a documentary like this, the narrator typically gushes that they live as they did 20,000 years ago, and are just now finally emerging from the Stone Age.
These claims not only have no historical basis; they defy logic. The lifestyle of the Waorani is totally incompatible with the evolutionist's claim that they are descended from people who crossed the Bering Straight tens of thousands of years ago. They make their living by using darts (made from one palm) dipped in poison (scraped from the bark of a certain vine, and only deadly if injected) shot through a blowgun (made from another palm). That, for their meat supply; their vegetable staple is manioc, a domesticated crop that only grows in the tropics. Granted, they have been doing this from time immemorial, but only since their ancestors took up residence in the rain forest of the Amazon. It's impossible that their ancestors could have lived any such way before arriving there--and the forensic evidence from this video series (especially beginning with video #10) indicates that their ancestors only arrived there a few centuries earlier than the conquistadors--and that the people whom they displaced were accomplished agrarians.
Just one of the bits that jumped out at me from the movie was that the "uncontacted" Waorani no longer use stone axes or earthen pots--they trade for steel versions of the same. Only the oldest man in the community can even remember how to use a stone axe, and he made a startling revelation---the tribe had no knowledge of where stone axe heads even came from!  They found the heads abandoned in the jungle by a previous civilisation--just as my sons like to comb newly plowed fields every spring for stone arrowheads--and assumed that they fell from heaven or something. A "stone age" tribe equally dependent on outside civilisation for their axe heads, whether they be of stone or steel--incredible!
Elisabeth Elliot, half of the first team of outsiders to live among the Waorani and record their culture, reported that the Waorani told her their ancestors also had worn clothes, but had eventually abandoned all clothing but for a single string around their loins, and perhaps--to dress up--one around each arm. Obviously their ancestors would have needed quite a bit more than that to make the trek to North America!
The native ability of evolutionists to suspend the use of logic continues to astound me.
Another bit that jumped out to me: an anthropologist, who learned the language from the Waoroni civilised by their contact with Elisabeth Elliot and Rachel Saint, led the documentary team eastward to contact their downriver relatives. His research indicated that 70% of the males in the past five generations had died of homicide (oral history traces this murderous tendency back to a falling out over a tribal celebration about ten generations back). Clearly outsiders who bring in diseases that kill off a quarter, a third, or even half of the population are not the major threat to their continued existence. And those who do survive modern diseases will tend to pass their resistance to the following generations.
Again, a wee bit of logic would be helpful. How could a tribe that has lived on this land, disease-free for centuries, still only number in the hundreds--while the descendants of just a couple dozen men on the Mayflower now number in the tens of millions? Obviously murder, from conception onward, is a serious threat to population growth--in the case of "uncontacted tribes" still numbering only a few hundred individuals, clearly the greatest threat. It is notable that, the documentary reports, word filtered back to the uncontacted members of the tribe--along with the steel pots and axes--that there's no need to kill each other any more; so they've stopped the carnage (else, obviously the team would have never made it back out alive with their footage). Note: Mincaye, who had been one of, if not the oldest man in the tribe for over sixty years, has finally died of old age in his 90's. He manged to live long enough to give up his murderous lifestyle shortly before his life expectancy ran out, and "walk Waogongi's path" for the next two-thirds of his life, and on into the hereafter.
Everything in the documentary trumpets the same thing: this is not an ancient tribe peacefully perpetuating the lifestyle of their ancestors--a way of life under threat only by outside intrusion--but instead, a degenerate community in serious danger of completing the process of self-extinction if they are NOT contacted by outsiders.

Happy Birthday, Isabella!

Isabella Miller is now legally an adult, having spent most of her life in hiding from her evil stepmother. Although the clock only now begins to tick on the statute of limitations for charging her mother with a long list of felonies for helping her escape, Isabella is already free to enjoy the privileges of her American citizenship without risk of being imprisoned. And, significantly, free to testify against Janet Jenkins in her still ongoing civil suit against those who aided in her escape.

The following has been circulating in emails to those following the Miller Kidnapping Saga. I reproduce it without the variously added comments:

Isabella's story:
When she was 9, her mom fled the United States with her for parts unknown to everyone except the people that helped them escape the judicial tyranny of the Vermont Federal Court. Let’s hear the story in Isabella’s own words:
 "You see, my mother (before I was even a thought) had a lesbian relationship with another woman and they went to Vermont to get a civil union because same-sex marriage had not yet been legalized in Virginia. I was born in Virginia in 2002, and my mom, Lisa, is my birth mother. Janet Jenkins was ‘my other mother.’ Something marvelous happened to my mom – she was gloriously saved and became a committed Christian, leaving the homosexual lifestyle, dissolving the civil union, and that’s when all the trouble began. Janet wanted visitation with me. She wasn’t my real mom; she wasn’t even a relative; in fact, given the opportunity twice, she refused to adopt me. So the court battles began – first, in Virginia, then in Vermont, then in Virginia, then in Vermont and on and on. Visitation was set up and began erratically and haphazardly – missed visits, miscommunications. Finally, there were unsupervised visitations. As a 7-year old, I started wetting the bed, having nightmares and wanting to commit suicide; I was under terrible emotional distress, which the courts totally ignored. My mom stopped the visitation. The judge in Vermont was not happy, and he was going to give me to Janet as a result of my mom’s disregard for the court orders. On September 27, 2009, my mom and I fled the country."

Is Answers in Genesis a Christian Ministry?

It's been along time since I wrote about why I won't be going to the Creation Museum, but I recently ran across a public post by a young woman on social media that explains why one of their employees quit and won't be going back. I reproduce it here in full:

My experience of employment at Answers in Genesis

In December 2016, I began work in the housekeeping department at the Answers in Genesis Creation Museum. I worked for three years as a seasonal employee (working up to 10 months each year, usually 40 hours per week, no benefits) and then the last month, December 2019, as a technically full time employee.
I generally enjoy cleaning, did some fun projects, and liked talking with guests from around the world. But it was often physically demanding and the hours that I worked were always difficult. For the first two years I worked shifts that varied daily from as early as 07:00-15:30 to as late as 13:00 to 21:30, and for the third year I worked 3rd and 2nd shifts.
As a child I grew up visiting the Creation Museum, reading Answers in Genesis books and magazine, watching their videos and even attending the conferences in my teens. As a 20 year old I was very excited to work at what I believed to be a Christian ministry.
During my employment, I did have many positive experiences and made good friends with some very kind people. Workmates helped fix my car, went to the doctor with me, or gave hugs and spent some time with me.
However, there are serious problems with the way that Answers in Genesis operates and especially in the way that it treats employees. I personally experienced and/or had workmates who experienced dishonesty, bullying, overwork, illegal discrimination, harassment, and blackmailing. Here are a few of many examples that I personally experienced:
June 2017. The Creation Museum is open on Sundays, and most employees who work on Sundays are unable to attend church, which forces hypocrisy because they are required upon hire to sign a statement promising to faithfully and regularly attend church.
There are several reasons that I and many workmates thought the Museum and its employees would benefit by being closed on Sunday. One day as we discussed this and considered bringing up our thoughts to management, one of my workmates said a joke about going on strike on a Sunday. We made it clear that we were NOT for a strike, but because we simply said the word “strike”, we were falsely accused of attempting to incite a strike. People who knew me well enough to know that it was something I would not do spoke up for me, and I only received a warning.
January 2018. There was a time during my employment that I struggled with serious physical and mental health problems, to the point that I was suicidal (unfortunately I felt too afraid to tell anyone). As I mopped the bookstore early one morning before the museum opened, a lady who was stocking shelves asked how I was doing and stopped to pray for me for 2-4 minutes, then we both continued with our work. It was going to be a slow day, and no one was in a rush to get things done.
She received a warning from management for “being idle and chatting” for praying for me.
May 2018. Once when my car was broken down, a workmate who happened to get off work at the same time as me gave me a ride home. I’ve known this man for years and have always felt completely safe and comfortable with him. He got into trouble with management for it for zero reason other than that he was alone with a woman, and was forbidden from giving women rides in the future, even when off work.
It would’ve been okay if it had been his own choice, but it was nonsense for AiG to force the Graham rule on him. It resulted in inconvenience for me, and totally unnecessary shame for him.
December 2019. I injured my back one evening while lifting bags of trash. I had to lift them out of a deep container that goes up to my waist, which made it impossible for me to lift while bending my knees rather than my back. I had to lift them out of the container and onto a cart. Most bags had an average weight that I was used to but one was much heavier than usual (it probably weighed more than half my own weight).
I filed an injury report and asked for a rule to be made limiting how much the bags could be filled (I was told that cafe workers filled that bag as much as possible to save themselves time), or that they would have to notify us of unusually heavy bags so that a stronger person could be the one to lift them.
Several days later when I was unexpectedly asked to be on trash duty again, nothing had been done and... so what that I had recently been injured doing that task.
Being short-staffed was always a problem that worsened. For quite some time I was the only person on housekeeping night shift when there should have been 3-4 people, and got very overworked and lonely (it was worth it to me at the time for consistent schedule). By the time I left I was the longest remaining employee in the department besides the manager.
At the end of December 2019, I broke down with a mental health crisis and the physical pain from the back injury, suddenly making me literally unable to work.
I’m glad to finally be out of that situation and wish I had gotten out sooner. I’m not sure how and why I stayed for so long. Part of it was the seasonal opportunity which enabled me to take a couple of months off each year for overseas missions trips. Also, I was used to similar environments and treatment from the past so it felt normal to me. I have a usually quiet and submissive personality, am highly motivated and gave my best effort for work.
I often looked for other jobs in the area, especially so that I could afford my own place to live (AiG is known for its low pay). Except for a couple of times that I stayed with friends who were safe and kind, my living situation was incredibly stressful and is a long story itself.
I also tried a few times to transfer into other positions within AiG and always got either turned down for unknown reasons or talked out of it.
Answers in Genesis has been confronted by many people for mistreating employees, and given professional counsel on how to change. They haven’t cared to listen, and continue to be a corrupt organisation that subsists on manipulation and unconditional submission to authority.
My main purpose for writing this, rather than to confront AiG, is to promote awareness and freedom of thought among the employees. I want them to be able to protect themselves and realise that their personal well-being is massively more important than AiG and its true ambition. A person is a worthy image-bearer created by God, an organisation is not.
Those who know me know that I’m personally very much for making sacrifices for the Gospel, but at AiG the sacrifice is for upper management’s dream to build something “bigger and better than Disney” and awe the public.
“It’s God’s work.”
The talk is contradicted by the walk and even by itself.
I haven’t approached AiG as described in Matthew 18. AiG couldn’t have made it more clear both to myself and to others that it is closed to any criticism or dialogue. While there are some Christians who work at AiG, I do not consider it to be a Christian organisation.
Christians are individual PEOPLE, not families, organisations, or governments.
I haven’t heard this discussed before and think it should be discussed: AiG claims that questions about evolution cause young people to leave Christianity/church. First, leaving church is not necessarily the same thing as leaving Christianity. Going to church doesn’t make you a Christian. Not going to church doesn’t make you not a Christian. It is entirely possible to worship God, listen to Bible teaching, and get regular fellowship/discipleship without attending church services. I’m glad for Christians who attend church services, but I have a problem when they accuse those who don’t of disobeying God.
Second, AiG is the only place that I’ve heard that claim. Since my early teens I’ve talked about Christianity with many people who grew up Christian and later left it, but never has one told me that evolution had anything to do with it.
I think that creation ministries, while they can be somewhat useful, are way over-prioritised and are a huge distraction from helping young people in ways that we actually do need help. The problem of evolution has been turned into a distraction from the real problems in Christianity... whether intentionally or not, I don’t know.
Close friends out west are helping me with a place to rest, heal and get professional help. I’m so grateful for them and for my friends who patiently talk and empathise with me. Trying to process the pain and confusion is quite unpleasant, and at this point thriving is mostly unimaginable to me. I’m honestly struggling in my faith, but I’m sure that with time my relationship with God will be strengthened and I’ll be back to working and sharing the Gospel with people.
I apologise to anyone who feels surprised by this. I didn’t want to openly talk about this because I don’t want to be negative and because of the personal things in it.
I won’t think less of anyone for choosing to use AiG resources, visit the attractions, or work there, however if you actually try to excuse or minimise the abuse then I won’t trust you. AiG preaches good messages and makes a positive impact on some people, and I wish for that to continue. But it does not justify their bad actions against some other people. Only cults teach that good can outweigh bad, and only those who have things to hide have fear when silence is ended.
I love and miss my friends and former workmates at the Creation Museum and am so thankful for you and everything you’ve done to show me kindness. I think of you every day.
Please do think and speak for yourself. It is very hard to recognise the damaging effects of any religious and authoritarian group while being in it.
Be brave. You are meant to live free!
A caution to anyone currently working at AiG: this post will be monitored by AiG. If you publicly comment on or react to this post, you could be targeted by management as others have been in the past.

The Magic Piece of Cloth

The abduction and murder of Sasha Marie Krause has raised an issue that comes up every time something like this occurs: What About Her Protection?
Conservative Mennonites (CM) have many beliefs and practices that set them apart from the general population. Shasha's family, for example, doesn't use social media. But unlike most Amish, they are okay with photos--thus we have a good idea of what Sasha looked like and how she dressed. Visible in every photo of her is the headdress that conservative Mennonites refer to as a veiling, also commonly called a head covering. A CM woman would not think of appearing in public without being covered, based on a belief that, when you come right down to it, treats it is a sort of talisman. Young conservative Mennonites reading Sunday School literature are regaled with tracts, tales, and poems about harm that DIDN'T come a Mennonite woman's way because of her Covering.
What isn't talked about so much is that sometimes, even doing everything right isn't enough. Mennonite girls wearing the most modest clothes possible, and a covering that barely even reveals their hair color, still suffer from the occasional rape and murder. If that Covering is a magic piece of cloth, it doesn't appear to be completely effective.
Sasha appears to have been specifically targeted for abduction. Who knows what was going through the mind or minds of the person or persons who made off with her so suddenly? But if they thought anything about her modest attire, it was probably how easy it would be to remove, once they had her in their control. And since CM girls are raised to submit to the authority of men--the covering itself is supposed to serve as testimony of that--they actually make rather easy pickings for predators who get them in their sights.
Will conservative Mennonites continue to  teach their children the doctrine of the Covering as Protection? Or will they bow to the reality that it's not a magic piece of cloth?

UPDATE May 16: It's been commonly reported that Mark Gooch, and now his brother Samuel, have been arrested in connection with her murder, with at least one other family member involved. What isn't so well known is that the Gooch family has past relations with the Conservative Mennonites, and that Mark has a known animosity against them. Thus it's pretty clear that she WAS targeted, at least in part, due to her head covering--which is part of the evidence against Mark: he did indeed rip it off her and it was recovered in his possession.

UPDATE May 20: As reported elswhere, it's apparent that Sasha was only murdered, not raped. Did her head covering perhaps tip the balance in that direction? CM women aren't taking any chances.