Grade Your Pastor

By -
A reader writes in:
"Have you received any responses or feedback from the Open Letter to Pastors article?"

Yes. Quite a bit, in fact. So let's dig into what would be my opinion on how to grade your pastor. 

FAILURE
If your pastor did not even mention the assassination, he/she gets an "F" - and this is not negotiable. This "pastor" is a coward. Do not follow cowards, they are not leaders. 

MARGINAL
If your pastor made some vague allusion to "violence," "murder," or some-such, but did not mention Charlie Kirk by name; this earns a "D." This pastor is a coward, still. 

ACCEPTABLE
If your pastor said the words "Charlie Kirk" or "Assassination," or something like "Charlie Kirk was murdered;" then the letter grade for this is a "C." Still led by fear, but not a total coward. 

GOOD
If your pastor clearly said that "Charlie Kirk was assassinated," then this is good. That is exactly what happened. This deserves a "B." 

OUTSTANDING
If your pastor clearly stated that "Charlie Kirk is/was a martyr for Christ" then this earns an "A."

SUMMARY
This author is very hesitant to hand out an "A." 
I will listen to your suggestion, but without the term "martyr," and "Charlie Kirk" by name, then it is very likely not to earn an "A." There is still fear if they cannot bring themselves to use this term. 


What say you? 

Comments

Post a Comment

Your comment will be displayed after approval.
Approval depends on what you say and how you say it.

Popular posts from this blog

One Week After

By -
Image
Exactly one week ago to the moment, a martyr was made. Charlie Kirk was shot for his beliefs in Christ and in the Conservative way of life. This news has dominated the headlines for the past week, and rightly so. Charlie was a man of conviction. He was bold enough to debate, yet stay civil. And while there is most certainly a time and a place for a precise shot from a marksman, this was not it. The assassin was a coward, plain and simple.  By "cutting out Charlie's tongue," the assassin did not prove Charlie a liar. He proved that he feared what Charlie had to say. I got to meet Charlie, and have some interaction with him. And when someone I love and/or admire passes, I like to think about the good things. The fun memories. And that is what this is: a fun memory.  On Sunday, October 25, 2020, Charlie came to my hometown and spoke at my church at the time. It's funny in retrospect: the Facebook event states that 450 or so people responded to the event on that platform...
Read more

This Will Trigger The Weak

By -
Image
Seen on Social Media: Your Wife Is Your First Daughter—Treat Her Like a Baby, Or She’ll Break Your Home Let’s scatter the woke table: Your wife is not your equal. She’s not your therapist. And she’s definitely not your homeboy. She’s your first daughter—emotionally, mentally, and psychologically. And the moment you start expecting her to “reason like a man” or “carry half the weight,” you’ve already lost. The modern man is confused. He's told to be vulnerable, yet punished when he shows weakness. Told to be “emotionally available,” yet abandoned when he starts crying like a choirboy. Let’s get this straight: Women were designed to be nurtured. Not negotiated with. Let’s break it down like a real father would. — 1. Every Woman Is a Grown Baby Looking for Emotional Security She’ll talk tough. She’ll claim she’s independent. But when the bills land or the pressure hits? She’s curled up in your arms, needing your shoulder—and your wallet. Why? Because biologically, her system runs on h...
Read more

A Few Updates on an Older Post

By -
This post to serve as an update on a post that is over 10 years old. The Rifleman has a strong memory (from time to time). On that post, a reader asked, "Any word? How did the remand hearing go?" For reasons that are not pertinent to this post, the Rifleman did not neglect to answer this question, but instead, postponed the answer until a more appropriate time. This time has come.  In the remand, it is important to first state a particular fact: The judge that issued the ruling, Tom Gray, retired shortly after his errant ruling. As a matter of fact, four of his last five rulings (the author's brother's ruling being one of these) were overturned in appellate courts. Divorce ruling appeal successful . In a move that still strikes this author as exceptionally odd, Gray  requested to be the judge on the remand hearing. Brother's lawyer argued that it is extremely peculiar to allow a civilian to hear a divorce remand, and the Sumner county Court agreed, and the sittin...
Read more