RUSH: How Did This Happen? The Left Corrupted Language, Undermined Morality - There was No Pushback

www.RushLimbaugh.com ^ | March 29, 2013 | Rush Limbaugh

[Yosemitest]

How Did This Happen?
The Left Corrupted the Language, Undermined Morality -
- and There was No Pushback
March 29, 2013, by Rush Limbaugh

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, back to this gay marriage and language business.
I don't mind having to re-explain this.
I have learned over 25 years that it takes oftentimes ten different ways to explain something in order for some people to understand it.
Now, yesterday I said that gay marriage is inevitable.
There are two elements to this.
One of them:
The Republican Party signaled there isn't gonna be pushback against it.
But, secondly,
we lost the language,
and that's just as important.

The institution of marriage has been targeted for destruction, essentially,
and the road to destroying it is being paved,
and the way that this has been started is to change the definition.
I'll tell you what's coming next.
After this "civil right," they'll move on to "liberating" illegal aliens, and then taking away our civil right to bear arms.
They will also continue to push a carbon tax on the basis of climate change and whatever else.
They'll continue to corrupt the public school system, however they manage to do that.

I've looked at it, and in all instances, one of the things that is fundamental in the attack on all of these institutions and traditions which have defined America's greatness, is
an attack on the language.
Here's another one that's under assault, and that is borders.
"Immigration" is being used to destroy the meaning of "borders."
Now we got open borders?
Without borders, there would never have been the United States of America in order to create the economy that is drawing people here in the first place.

"Food stamps" and "disability" are another couple of words that have lost their purpose and meaning.
"Food stamps" and "disability" now simply mean unearned money.
Food stamps and disability have a totally different meaning than their original intent. Deficit.
Deficit is now something that simply is triggering the printing of money.
That's all a deficit means:
An excuse to print money.
Unions.
Unions are used to destroy companies, entire industries on behalf of the Democrat Party.

Unions are formed to acquire unfunded "benefits," and the pretense of educating children is the vehicle for that scam.
Environmentalism is an excuse to acquire government grants to increase taxes and regulations, to grow government, and to limit freedom.
Environmentalism is another word for attacking the very fuel of the engine of freedom, and that would be fossil fuels --
and let there be no mistake.
Fossil fuels are under assault.
Fossil fuels have become a great enemy.

Oil and natural gas have become enemies, evil things that the left must wipe out!
They hide behind environmentalism, trying to clean up the environment,
and all oil has done is further the spread of freedom all over the country and the insurance of our own freedom,
and it has been fundamentally responsible for the vast increase in prosperity in this country and all over the world.
Crisis, as you know, is an excuse for government action.
Crisis here! Crisis there!

Everything's a crisis.
This is now a word used to justify the expansion of and the intrusion by government in every walk of life.
Every faction of the Democrat Party is now a battering ram.
Destroy the institution of marriage,
destroy borders,
destroy education,
destroy private sector health care,
destroy private property,
destroy the Constitution,
destroy free markets!
The Democrat Party is nothing more than a battering ram,
and they're using the language to disguise what they're doing.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, I'm gonna make b>an assumption, and I'm sure that it is applicable to some of you in the audience.
Some of you are probably sitting out there scratching your heads, asking yourself,
"How did this happen?"
I mean, you've heard about gay marriage all your life.
Well, not all your life, but for a long time.
You've heard about homosexuality, and you're aware of militant homosexuality,
and you remember back in the early AIDS days they would file into St. Patrick's and throw condoms at Cardinal O'Connor.

You remember all that, and one day you wake up and it finally hits you
that gay marriage is all of a sudden, out of nowhere, in the Top Five Most Important Issues to everybody under 30, or 35,
and you're wondering,
"How does this happen?
What is going on?"
Some of you might instinctively say,
"It's gonna be the education system.
It's gotta be the media.
It's gotta be Hollywood, television shows, you name it."
I have here a story in the Washington Times.

When I saw this, I thought,
"I better not mention this story.
This is gonna do nothing but get me into trouble,"
because it really is incredible.
But I figured in light of how I have now been made the pope on gay marriage in media and on Twitter and on Facebook -- even C-SPAN!
The next sound bite reports that I am official.
I'm not just a political analyst, but I've also crossed over now.
I am an official celebrity because I influence the celebrity crowd now.
All because of yesterday's program.

Now, this Washington Times story,
if anybody went on the radio, if anybody went on the TV and said this as though it was their own thoughts,
they would be vilified and run out of the country.
But it was published in the Washington Times. I'm gonna read portions of it to you.
It's by a writer named Paul Rondeau, R-o-n-d-e-a-u. Headline: "Hooking Kids on Sex: Start 'Saturation Process' in Kindergarten."

Here are a couple of pull-quotes:
"So if you ever wonder why more and more young people accept homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage as ho-hum, look no further.
.. Young children are encouraged to masturbate and explore their bodies with mirrors to introduce them to sexuality.
[educational video moderator Michael Hichborn] says of the graphic pictures used to 'educate' pre-pubescent children,
'If a dirty old man showed these things to a ten-year-old in a park, he would be arrested.


"But when Planned Parenthood shows them to kids in a classroom, it gets government money.' "
And that's the point of the story, that Planned Parenthood has a program that's promoting "anything-goes sex" to five-year-olds.
"While the White House says sequestration has eliminated funds for children touring the White House,
President Obama has no problem spending $350 million federal tax dollars for sexual indoctrination programs starting in kindergarten for those same children.

"This is not your grandmother's sex education about how things work and what can go 'wrong.'
In fact, the exact opposite is the essence of the Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP):
Obamacare funnels $75 million annually into PREP,
which must be used exclusively for Planned Parenthood-style 'comprehensive' sex-ed programs
where no type of sex is wrong
and the only sexual behavior [Planned Parenthood] considers 'unsafe' is becoming pregnant.

"More than one-fourth of the funds -- $20 million -- has been awarded to a coalition of six Planned Parenthood affiliates,
operating under the name Northwest Coalition for Adolescent Health,
to implement HHS's TOP program across Montana, Oregon, Idaho, Washington, and Alaska at over 50 sites.
In Oregon schools, Planned Parenthood is paying children cash incentives to participate.
PP is funded with our tax dollars to market sex to our children in our schools
under the guise of sex education, anti-bullying, diversity, and tolerance.

"Once sexualized, those children then become PP sex customers for contraceptives, STD testing, and abortion.
'A glance at the teacher outline for Lesson 1A ... shows exactly how abstinence plays out in the sex-encouraging scheme at Planned Parenthood.
'Abstinence,' it says, 'means choosing not to do any sexual activity that carries a risk for pregnancy or STD/HIV,' says Rita Diller, national director for STOPP.org.
'In other words, abstinence has nothing do with abstaining from sex acts.

"So long as the student avoids STDs and pregnancy, and is comfortable with what he or she is doing, it's an anything goes.'"
It is at this point in the story that even those who thought they knew Planned Parenthood will be shocked.
"American Life League (ALL), released a video titled 'Hooking Kids on Sex,' graphically detailing just what Planned Parenthood sex education is.
It went viral and was viewed almost one-quarter million times in the first week
before a [Planned Parenthood] activist got YouTube to suspend it.


"ALL(AmericanLifeLeague) came back with Hooking Kids on Sex (II).
Even those who thought they knew Planned Parenthood were shocked.
The video's moderator, Michael Hichborn, argues that
[Planned Parenthood] follows the same business model as a drug dealer,"
in the PREP program, Personal Responsibility Education Program, Planned Parenthood.
This is the video that was made to expose the program.
This is not a Planned Parenthood video.
This is a video that people alarmed about this made,
and Planned Parenthood got the video pulled off of YouTube.


(Right mouse click above video and watch in another window)

It's a video that critics made to illustrate what Planned Parenthood is doing as part of Obamacare,
and the moderator of the video is a guy named Michael Hitchborn.
He
"argues that [Planned Parenthood] follows the same business model as a drug dealer:
The Young children are encouraged to masturbate and explore their bodies with mirrors to introduce them to sexuality.
Hichborn says of the graphic pictures used to 'educate' pre-pubescent children,
'If a dirty old man showed these things to a ten-year-old in a park, he would be arrested.

"But when Planned Parenthood shows them to kids in a classroom, it gets government money.' "
I saw that story and said, "I can't tell people this. It's just over the top!
I don't even know if this is true."
I looked into it and that video was on YouTube, and it did get pulled down.
Again, it's not a Planned Parenthood video.
It was a video made by people who found out what's going on in the program to alert people,
and Planned Parenthood succeeded in getting YouTube to pull the video down.

So the Washington Times has the story.
If you're wondering why so many young people seem to have no problem with gay marriage and this or that,
it's 'cause unbeknownst to you (chuckling) kids have been exposed to this for years.
So that's part of the reason.
But it's not the entire reason.
There's also peer pressure, a number of other reasons for it.
It's just the natural evolution of things.
When you are able to blur... It's not even blur.

When you are successful in making fun of and laughing at something as old-fashioned and quaint as morality,
why, then, you are that much ahead.
Then when you play games with the language,
and are able at young ages to convince people that words don't mean what they mean,
and that people that want to hold fast to definitions are bigots,
then you can make serious inroads.
There's another story in the UK Daily Mail.
If this story showed up in the US media somewhere, whoever did it would be drummed out of the media.

Some reporter here for the UK Daily Mail went and found a guy who'd been adopted by two gay parents and was abused for ten years,
but the social workers ignored the complaints because the parents were gay.
Now, that's just one example,
and you can't extrapolate from one example and say this fits the bill for everybody,
but if you look hard enough this is the kind of stuff that is out there in the media.
That's the UK Daily Mail.

There's no pushback on any of it,
and in fact the Politico had that story yesterday quoting two Republican guys saying,
"Yeah, the best thing for the party would be for the court to just make it legal all over the country
and take the issue away
and that way we can't be called bigots."
It boils down to natural evolution of one half of the culture in this country
combined with the fact there's no pushback on where it's headed.
So it's inevitable.
Combined with the fact that they're not gonna let it go.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, to the phones, and it's Claire in Wilmington, Delaware. I'm glad you called.
Great to have you here. Hi.

CALLER: Hi. Uh, I want to make a debate with you.
I don't think we have lost the language.
What I think we have lost in this culture is both our religion and an honest media, and I'll tell you why.
If you appeal to the gay marriage thing on a man's level as a human,
you can make the arguments that make sense.
But if you take it to a biblical perspective that Christians, Jewish people, the Islam faith,
we all unite.
We've lost our God.

We all unite that marriage is between a man and a woman.
But no one seems to want to tie that.
Everyone's afraid to mention God, and I think the media is the other culprit.
Never do you see the media play the people that are against gay marriage, the people that are against abortion.
It's always that they play the people that are for it, and that's the only position you hear.
Now, California is the most liberal state, in my opinion, that's out there.
Maybe Massachusetts, too.

But even as liberal as they are, they united and said,
"We don't want this,"
but they're being overturned.
So that, I think, is trying to discourage people with,
"Oh, I guess everyone really wants it."
Oh, I don't want it. There's a lot of people that don't want this,
and it's not because I have anything against gay people.
I know gay people and I think some of them are wonderful.
But I do believe -- and I don't care how fuddy-duddy I sound -- that from a biblical perspective, marriage is between a man and a woman.

RUSH: Right.

CALLER: They are the two that can create a family.

RUSH: And the way you have just set it up now, in the common...
'Cause the language does matter,
and I'll argue this with you 'til the end of the program.
You are now a bigot by citing religion.

CALLER: You know what, Rush?

RUSH: You are bigoted because
you are wanting to deny happiness and freedom to human beings
who only want what you have in a country that promises them the pursuit of happiness.

CALLER: Rush, you know what?
This is how I feel.
I had to speak at a meeting the other night where I know when I walked out,
I was probably getting snickered at behind my back.
People have gotta get a backbone in this country.
We have allowed God to be removed.
We've allowed the education to be dumbed down.
We have told our children "acceptance"
rather than other people to come into our country for assimilation.
Is it any wonder we're losing our culture?

RUSH: You know what the Jesuits said?
I'm paraphrasing, but the Jesuits used to say,
"Give us a child to the age of 12, and they are ours for life."
Well, the left knows that, too.

CALLER: Well, that's true.
But you know, there used to be a day in this country where there were stay-at-home mothers, and I don't care...
This is another point:
No one's raising a lot of the children today.
There used to be a time when some things they're teaching our children,
you'da had a group of stay-at-home mothers that knew what was going on with the children in their schools in one meeting at the school.

RUSH: You're just confirming what I'm saying.
Wherever it's coming from, there isn't any pushback.

CALLER: Well, that's it.
I don't think the Republican Party and people in general want to push back.
No one wants to be shot down or made to look one way, but if you really believe these things --
and I found the strength in it myself the other night.
If you truly believe it, you can say it, and you don't care if you're laughed at.
You have to go in and just say it.
And, trust me, there are plenty of people that believe this,
and I believe it's still probably 50-50 in the country, or close to those margins,
that you might be able to convince an extra two to three percent you need.
But if you have to speak up.

RUSH: Well, wait a minute, now. Let's talk about that for a second.
What good does this really do?
Let's say that the country is divided 53-47,
but that division is stark and that there is no commonality between the two divisions?
Where are we as a country, anyway, in terms of what you're talking about?
You're saying
we've lost the moral code, we've lost the moral backbone, we've lost the moral foundation.
So where are we as a country?
Even if the morality side could muster a 3% majority victory,
where are we as a country anyway, with that great a division?

CALLER: Well, that I don't know. I don't know how to answer that question.
I guess, if I can make my point in a roundabout way, I'll try to come around to that.

RUSH: Feel free.
No, I'm not trying to argue with you.
You're hitting red buttons for me that are expanding my fertile brain.

CALLER: I AM A CONSERVATIVE. I'm NO LONGER Republican.
There was a time when I believed -- I was foolish -- that Republicans were always right.
I was a fool, and I don't side with a majority of them. I do side with a few of them today.
I like Ted Cruz.
I like some of the people that are fighting for the freedoms.
Rand Paul, sometimes I disagree with on things.
But you have to be able to speak, because there comes a time...
Yes, you look like a fool.
But there comes a time when the opposition that you're speaking against that has the majority --
especially when what they're trying to promote is so false -- will break down.
When it breaks down, people will go back and say,
"Hey, I remember this one saying that."

RUSH: When? When? (crosstalk)
Wait a minute. Well, I've gotta take a break.
I don't have time to ask it.
I've been waiting for it to break down for 35 years, and it's going the other direction.
Nothing's breaking down. That's the whole point.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Hey, Claire in Wilmington, I didn't have a chance to tell you,
but don't change and keep it up.
It's gonna be people like you who will engage in the pushback.
You describe that you have no fear of being laughed at.
Unfortunately, many people who push back get much more than laughed at.
They're targeted for destruction.
Their businesses get boycotts.
I mean, you name it.
So it ends up being much more than that,
and it becomes increasingly more difficult to do the more prominent you become.
But don't change.
Hang in.

END TRANSCRIPT

Related Links


• RushLimbaugh.com: We Lost Once We Modified the Definition of the Word "Marriage" - 03.28.13
  
  
• Washington Times: Hooking Kids On Sex: Start “Saturation Process” In Kindergarten - Paul E. Rondeau
  
  
• UKDM: My Adoptive Dad Abused Me For Years But Social Workers Ignored My Complaints Because He's Gay

[Yosemitest]

"Once the argument on gay marriage went from homosexuality/sodomy to ‘fairness’ and “equality “ on the rights of citizens, the rhetorical argument was lost."

Then don't argue the ‘fairness’ and “equality“ of the rights of citizens to commit sodomy.

"Personally, I don’t think the world will end when the gays get the right to marry.
Straight people will continue to marry and raise children, won’t they?"

Raise children? Have you not heard of "Agenda 21" and "Common Core" ?
Have you not read of Sodom and Gomorrah?
Have you not known of the destruction of homosexuality talked about starting in Judges 19, through Judges 20, and Judges 21 ?

Those who support homosexuals are against our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
These anti Christ people only bring destruction on us ALL.
I have NO sympathy for homosexuals!

Homosexuality is a "Mark" of disobedience.

It was given by our Heavenly Father to test us
to see ... if we will OBEY our Heavenly Father,
and abide by His commandments, statues, and ordinances.

Someone once asked

"Why are they [homosexuals] all so angry?"

The answer is in the definition of "REPROBATE".

rep·ro·bate \ˈre-prə-ˌbāt\ a. [L. reprobatus, reprobo, to disallow; re and probo, to prove.]

1. Not enduring proof or trial; not of standard purity or fineness; disallowed; rejected.


Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them. Jer. 6.




2. Abandoned in sin; lost to virtue or grace.

They profess that they know God, but in works deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate. Titus 1.

3. Abandoned to error, or in apostasy. 2Tim. 3.

And the reason"why" is given in the Bible.

God has a cure for homosexuals.

But will we OBEY our Heavenly Father?

[PapaNew]

Satan's deception of believing that God's Laws, The Ten Commandments are done away with.

Again, your argument is with the Bible, unless you think Satan wrote the Bible. The Bible calls the Ten Commandments "the ministration of death" and the "ministration of condemnation":

the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones (2 Cor 3:7).

The Bible also says the ten commandments ARE done away with:

But if the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excels. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remains is glorious (2 Cor 3:7-12).

[Yosemitest]

Contact them and let them know that THEY’VE LOST YOUR VOTE, and your financial support!

[Yosemitest]

You're done.
Read what the Bible says about the Catholic Church.

[RetSignman]

[THERE ARE NO GOOD UNION ORGANIZATIONS]

As obama leads us into a communist state, the LEADERS of unions does the same.

The majority of members of unions just tolerate their leaders to feed their families and way too many of our citizens look to obama to do the same in the form of handouts.

But I understand your frustration but, one day, this house of cards WILL fall.

[stevio]

All the right-wing talkers backed off the gay marriage thing years ago. I haven’t listened to Rush or Hannity for a while. The country needs more than tax cuts, we need to get back to God.

[wildbill]

I’m not sure why you were fainthearted about putting the quote from Leviticus in your post? If you think homosexuals should be put to death, then that is your opinion and you shouldn’t be coy about stating it.

I’m not religious myself, but I think everyone who professes to be religious has to resolve the problems within religious sayings and philosophy.

For example, if you want to quote the Old Testament sayings of Leviticus—and you are a Christian—then you have to consider the contrary admonishment that Paul preaches in Galatians:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” (Galatians 3:10)

If we rely on following the Law (the Torah, the first five books of the Bible) we are under a curse. The passage above, Galatians 3:10, contains a quote from the Law itself, Deuteronomy 27:26. According to Paul’s statement below, things have changed.

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us. (Galatians 3:13)

The philosophical and religious contradiction betweeen the Old Testament and the New doesn’t matter to me since I’m not a believer, however, before you start killing homosexuals you might want to give some thought as to whether your belief system puts you ‘under a curse’ according to a leading Apostle.

[Cosmo]

Im proposing the colour red be changed to blue...cuz I like blue and actually love the word red....But I hate the word blue ...So I want to be called red but be blue... Cool? I knew you’d understand .

[PapaNew]

You understand the grace of God better than many Christians. Why don’t you accept Jesus who loves you so?

[Yosemitest]

"I’m not sure why you were fainthearted about putting the quote from Leviticus in your post?
If you think homosexuals should be put to death, then that is your opinion and you shouldn’t be coy about stating it."

I have been adivised (look under Disclaimer) :

Free Republic does not advocate or condone racism, violence, rebellion, secession, or an overthrow of the government.

You know, with the ILLEGAL ALIEN IN CHIEF, his minions, and the Democrats, it's getting harder every day to abide by that "Disclaimer" .

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us. (Galatians 3:13)"

Let read Matthew Henry Commentary on the Whole Bible (Complete) on verse 13 of Galatians, chapter 3.

The curse is wrath revealed, and ruin threatened:
it is a separation unto all evil,
and this is in full force, power, and virtue,
against all sinners, and therefore against all men;
for all have sinned and become guilty before God:
and if, as transgressors of the law
we are under the curse of it,
it must be a vain thing to look for justification by it.
But, though this is not to be expected from the law,
yet the apostle afterwards acquaints us that there is a way open to our escaping this curse,
and regaining the favour of God, namely, through faith in Christ,
who (as he says, v. 13) hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, etc.
A strange method it was which Christ took to redeem us from the curse of the law;
it was by his being himself made a curse for us.
Being made sin for us, he was made a curse for us;
not separated from God,
but laid for the present under that infamous token of the divine displeasure upon which the law of Moses had put a particular brand, Deu. 21:23 .
The design of this was
that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ —
that all who believed on Christ, whether Jews or Gentiles, might become heirs of Abraham’s blessing,
and particularly of that great promise of the Spirit,
which was peculiarly reserved for the times of the gospel.
Hence it appeared that it was not by putting themselves under the law,
but by faith in Christ, that they become the people of God and heirs of the promise.
Here note,
1. The misery which as sinners we are sunk into-
we are under the curse and condemnation of the law.

2. The love and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ towards us-
he has submitted to be made a curse for us,
that he might redeem us from the curse of the law.

3. The happy prospect which we now have through him,
not only of escaping the curse, but of inheriting the blessing.

And,
4. That it is only through faith in him that we can hope to obtain this favor.

III. To prove that justification is by faith, and not by the works of the law,
the apostle alleges the express testimony of the Old Testament, v. 11.
The place referred to is Habak. 2:4 , where it is said,
The just shall live by faith;
it is again quoted, Rom. 1:17 , and Heb. 10:38 .
The design of it is to show
that those only are just or righteous who do truly live,
who are freed from death and wrath,
and restored into a state of life in the favour of God;
and that it is only through faith that persons become righteous,
and as such obtain this life and happiness-
that they are accepted of God,
and enabled to live to him now,
and are entitled to an eternal life in the enjoyment of him hereafter.
Hence the apostle says,
It is evident that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God.
Whatever he may be in the account of others, yet he is not so in the sight of God;
for the law is not of faith —
that says nothing concerning faith in the business of justification,
nor does it give life to those who believe;
but the language of it is,
The man that doeth them shall live in them,as Lev. 18:5 .
It requires perfect obedience as the condition of life,
and therefore now can by no means be the rule of our justification.
This argument of the apostle’s may give us occasion to remark that
justification by faith is no new doctrine,
but what was established and taught in the church of God long before the times of the gospel.
Yea, it is the only way wherein any sinners ever were, or can be, justified.

IV. To this purpose the apostle urges the stability of the covenant which God made with Abraham,
which was not vacated nor disannulled by the giving of the law to Moses, v. 15, etc.
Faith had the precedence of the law,
for Abraham was justified by faith.
It was a promise that he built upon, and promises are the proper objects of faith.
God entered into covenant with Abraham v. 8),
and this covenant was firm and steady;
even men’s covenants are so, and therefore much more his.
When a deed is executed, or articles of agreement are sealed, both parties are bound,
and it is too late then to settle things otherwise;
and therefore it is not to be supposed that by the subsequent law the covenant of God should be vacated.
The original word diatheke signifies both a covenant and a testament.
Now the promise made to Abraham was rather a testament than a covenant.
When a testament has become of force by the death of the testator, it is not capable of being altered;
and therefore, the promise that was given to Abraham being of the nature of a testament,
it remains firm and unalterable.
But, if it should be said
that a grant or testament may be defeated for want of persons to claim the benefit of it (v. 16),
he shows that there is no danger of that in this case.
Abraham is dead, and the prophets are dead,
but the covenant is made with Abraham and his seed.
And he gives us a very surprising exposition of this.
We should have thought it had been meant only of the people of the Jews.
"Nay,’’ says the apostle,
"it is in the singular number, and points at a single person
that seed is Christ,’’
So that the covenant is still in force;
for Christ abideth for ever in his person, and in his spiritual seed,
who are his by faith.
And if it be objected that the law which was given by Moses did disannul this covenant,
because that insisted so much upon works,
and there was so little in it of faith or of the promised Messiah,
he answers that the subsequent law could not disannul the previous covenant or promise v. 18):
If the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise; but,
says he,
God gave it to Abraham by promise,
and therefore it would be inconsistent with his holiness, wisdom, and faithfulness,
by any subsequent act to set aside the promise,
and so alter the way of justification which he had thus established.
If the inheritance was given to Abraham by promise,
and thereby entailed upon his spiritual seed,
we may be sure that
God would not retract that promise; for he is not a man that he should repent.

Now what does all of this mean?
Well, the way I read it is:

I am not under "the Law" as you might say.
I am under "Faith".

Has "the LAW" been done away with?

No. I should OBEY the Law.
The man that doeth them shall live in them,as Lev. 18:5 .

"The Curse" of the Law ( ? ) :

I believe the Law is NOT "the Curse",
but rather the BREAKING OF THE LAW that requires "the Curse" of punishment of DEATH.
So "the Law" is not "the Curse", but rather SIN is "the Curse".
The Law is Godly and Perfect.

Does living ''By Faith" give my License to BREAK the Law?

GOD FORBID! and this covenant was firm and steady;

[Yosemitest]

I think you blew my mind.

[Yosemitest]

Try this example Rush stated:

"Once you decide to modify the word 'marriage,'
then the other side has won,
or at least they're 90% of the way home.
The best thing that 'marriage' had going for it was basically what they teach you the first day in law school:
'If you hang a sign on a horse that says "cow,"
it does not make it a cow,'
although today it might."
That's where we are:
5 + 5 could = 11, if it works for the Democrats.
A cow could be a horse, if it works for the Democrats. The thing is,
discrimination has never been a part of marriage.

[A CA Guy]

IMO it is time for Rush to once again write a book about why this country is F’d, who is F’ing it and what the outcome of all this will be.

It will make millions and the left would sneer, but years after he's gone when people read the book they will say Rush was right! He almost always is IMO.

[Yosemitest]

You may be right.
I know that Rush reads Free Republic, so maybe he'll act upon your suggestion.

[fortheDeclaration]

Yes, but that isn't the New Covenant, that is the dispensation of grace we are now living in.

The New Covenant is a specific Covenant made to Israel for the Millennial reign of Christ.

The New Testament, the shedding of Christ's blood, is the basis for the New Covenant, but the New Testament isn't the New Covenant.

[fortheDeclaration]

The curse of the Law is that we are unable to keep it!

So it convicts of sin.

A Christian is now able to live lawfully because the Holy Spirit within him keeps the Law and bears fruit, when we yield to him.

We have moved from lawkeeping to a personal relationship with God.

[fortheDeclaration]

Yes, Paul says the Law is good, but it condemns us because we are unable to keep it perfectly.

So, the Law has exposed us as sinners.

[Colonel_Flagg]

"Nothing's breaking down. That's the whole point."

In terms of the Republican Party, nothing is breaking down because conservatives do nothing to MAKE things 'break down'. Conservatives line up behind the "R" and enable those who are trying to drive conservatives out of the party.

It's time to stop talking about taking our ball and going home and actually DO it. The Priebus Capitulation of last week shows that the Republican Party as a vehicle for social conservatism is dead, dead, DEAD.

[Yosemitest]

"... but it condemns us
because we are unable to keep it perfectly.

So, the Law has exposed us as sinners."

The Law doesn't condemn us, but rather, OUR ACTIONS condemn us.
The Law is good and perfect. We're not.

You're beginning to get there.

[Yosemitest]

"It's time to stop talking about taking our ball and going home
and actually DO it."

I think that's what the caller was saying that she was doing.

CALLER: I AM A CONSERVATIVE. I'm NO LONGER Republican.
There was a time when I believed -- I was foolish -- that Republicans were always right.
I was a fool, and I don't side with a majority of them. I do side with a few of them today.
I like Ted Cruz.
I like some of the people that are fighting for the freedoms.
Rand Paul, sometimes I disagree with on things.
But you have to be able to speak, because there comes a time...
Yes, you look like a fool.
But there comes a time when the opposition that you're speaking against that has the majority --
especially when what they're trying to promote is so false -- will break down.
When it breaks down, people will go back and say,
"Hey, I remember this one saying that."