The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: http://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/1105696
The Press-Dispatch Wednesday, April 17, 2019 B-5 OPINION Submit Letters to the Editor: Letters must be signed and received by noon on Mondays. Email: editor@pressdispatch.net or bring in a hard copy: 820 E. Poplar Street, Petersburg Uplifting Lenten breakfasts My Point of View by Dr. H. K. Fenol, Jr., M.D. Having attended all the Lent- en Breakfasts except for one, which I missed because of a pre- vious commitment, I must say it has been quite an uplifting experi- ence. This project has been spon- sored for years by the Pike Coun- ty Ministerial Association in an ef- fort to unite all people of faith who love Christ. One could not help but admire the ministers and staff of different Churches for their dedi- cation and sacrifices. We thank all those who wake up early to prepare the sumptuous breakfasts and do the clean-up af- terwards. Breakfasts consisted of a healthy variety of foods such as scrambled eggs, biscuits and gra- vy, sausages, ham, pancakes, and fruits. Of course coffee, milk, wa- ter and orange juice were served to wash down these goodies. It felt good to see old friends and meet new friends who year after year faithfully attend these events. There is also a noble aspect to this program, and that is the gener- ous contribution of everyone to the Rev. Sam Taylor Scholarship Foun- dation which benefits students who pursue higher education. Indeed this activity has been a blessing to this great community. Another benefit to this spiritual activity is the sharing of faith and testimonies by different speakers who present different topics such as scripture readings and its les- "Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrec- tion of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not ris- en, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable." – I Cor- inthians 15:12-19 Within 20 years of the resur- rection of Jesus, the apostle Paul was confronting heresy within the young Church at Corinth and felt it necessary to refute head-on, the gnostic teaching Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave. The resurrection is the founda- tion of the Christian faith. It is a historical event locked in time and declared by eyewitnesses whose testimony has stood the test of time, but not the theologians. The gospel of Jesus rests upon the resurrection, Jesus referred to his death and resurrection point- edly at least three times. Nevertheless, 19th century theologians began to "demyth- ify" the gospel and reduced Je- sus to a sage, a wise teacher, who was caught up in Messianic fervor. Much of what passes as preaching today is little more than self-actu- alization, which is worship of self. Unfortunately, some will gath- er in churches that have discard- ed the resurrection of Jesus. The code words are always the same: "There are many faith traditions concerning the res- urrection, or "I know Jesus is living in my heart," or "This is what the resurrection means to me." The apostle Peter made the resurrec- tion the central point of his message on the Day of Pente- cost "…you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, hav- ing loosed the pains of death, be- cause it was not possible that He [Jesus] should be held by it." The apostles boldly stated that God is not removed from his cre- ation, and the prophets of the Old Testament attested to His guiding hand in man's affairs. Modernists tell the faithful that faith in God's miracles is a "cop- out." But Paul told the church that "our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full con- viction." Popular religion in America presents a gentle, human Jesus who is light, and to know Him is to be like Him, to become illuminat- ed, for Jesus showed a better way. This sounds good, but what is missing is Jesus of the Gospels is the Creator of all things and sus- tains all things; He is God in the flesh; humanity is called to re- pentance for a day of judgement has been set for Him to judge the world. To know Jesus is an intel- lectual exercise; to follow Jesus as Savior, is an act of faith! The authenticity of Jesus is His resurrection from the dead! To deconstruct Jesus and remove the miracles removes the claim that God in- tervenes in human af- fairs. Luke remarks in the book of Acts "And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all." It is ridiculous to accept the apostles had a enlighten expe- rience and Jesus arose in their hearts, but was still dead. This is nonsense. The apostles accepted persecu- tion and death because they saw the risen Savior! Paul gives a stir- ring testimony to the historical resurrection: "…that Christ died for our sins according to the Scrip- tures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day ac- cording to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Peter, then by the twelve. A fter that He was seen by more than 500 brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fall- en asleep. A fter that He was seen by James [His half-brother], then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. This is the testimony of the res- urrection that we celebrate Sun- day! The facts present themselves and to move beyond knowing is a step of faith, for Jesus told "doubt- ing Thomas" – "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have be- lieved. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." Dare to Believe! Think about it! Points to Ponder by Rev. Ford Bond The resurrection is assured Continued on page 6 Minority View by Walter E. Williams Millennials for socialism Continued on page 6 Continued on page 6 If one needed evidence of the gross ignorance of millennials, and their teachers and college pro- fessors, it's their solid support for socialism and socialist presiden- tial candidate Sen. Bernie Sand- ers. Socialism has produced trag- edy wherever it has been imple- mented. Last year marked the 40th anniversary of nearly 1,000 Americans perishing in a mass suicide/murder in the jungles of Guyana. Just as Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez see so- cialism as mankind's salvation, so, too, did Rev. Jim Jones, who told his followers, "God is Socialism, and I am Principle Socialism, and that's what makes me God." Perhaps the most disastrous failing of our educational system and the news media is that people are neither required nor encour- aged to test ideas against facts. The promises of socialism sound wonderful and caring, but in reali- ty, wherever it has been tried it has been a true disaster. Let's examine the history of socialism. During the first three decades of the 20th century, Argentina was one of the world's top-10 rich- est nations. It was ahead of Cana- da and Australia in total and per capita income. A fter Juan Peron's ideas, captured in his economic creed that he called "national so- cialism," became a part of Argen- tina's life, the country fell into eco- nomic chaos. Today it has fallen to 25th in terms of GDP. Nicolas Maduro, an avowed so- cialist, has turned oil-rich Ven- ezuela into a place where there are shortages of everything from toilet paper to beer, where elec- tricity keeps shutting down, and where there are long lines of peo- ple hoping to get food. Some peo- ple are eating their pets and feeding their children from garbage bins. Socialism has crippled Venezuela's once-thriving econo- my. Today, Venezuela is among the world's most tragically poor countries. Socialism can be tested by doing a few side-by-side country comparisons. A fter Germany's defeat in W WII, it was divided into socialist East Germany and capitalist West Germany. West Germans had far greater income, wealth and human rights protections. In large num- bers, East Germans tried to flee to West Germany, so much so that the East German government set up deadly mines and other traps to prevent escape. Few, if any, West Germans tried to flee to East Ger- many, and the West German gov- ernment spent no resources pre- venting its citizens from leaving. Then there's North Korea and South Korea. North Korea's nom- inal per capita GDP is only 3.6 per- cent of South Korea's nominal per capita GDP of $23,838. There are few human rights protections for North Koreans. North Korea, like East Germany, has set up deadly mines and other traps to prevent its citizens from escaping. The key features of a free mar- ket system are private property rights and private ownership of the means of production. By contrast, socialist systems feature severely limited private property rights and government ownership or control of the means of production. There has never been a pure- ly free market eco- nomic system, just as there has never been a purely socialist/com- munist system. Let's do an experiment. First, rank countries according to whether they are closer to the free market or the communist end of the economic spectrum. Then, rank countries according to per capita gross domestic prod- uct. Finally, rank countries accord- ing to Freedom House's "Freedom in the World" report. Here's our finding: People who live in countries closer to the free market end of the economic spec- trum not only have far greater income and wealth than people who live in countries toward the communist end; they also enjoy far greater human rights protec- tions. Moreover, it's the socialist nations that have murdered tens of millions of their own citizens such as the case with the former USSR and China. Sanders and other socialists hold Denmark as their dream, but Prime Minister Lars Lekke Ras- mussen said: "I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of so- cialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned econ- omy. Denmark is a market econo- my." Scandinavian socialism is a myth. Walter E. Williams is a profes- sor of economics at George Mason University. Pursuit of the Cure by Star Parker Three cheers for Betsy DeVos Heritage Viewpoint By Edwin J. Feulner Trump cuts education spending Logging on to the website of the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union, the first flashing headline that meets the eye attacks Education Secretary Bet- sy DeVos: "Betsy DeVos and Her No Good, Very Bad Record on Public Ed- ucation." What perturbs the NEA is that De- Vos sees her mission as education, which is not necessarily only "pub- lic education." Surely, Secretary DeVos' new initiative, the Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunity Act, which has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Ted Cruz and in the House by Rep. Bradley Byrne, has the teachers unions on edge. Education Freedom Scholarships provides dollar-for-dollar federal tax credits to those who voluntari- ly contribute to state-controlled and administered "Scholarship Granting Organizations" to whom parents can turn for funds to send their child to any school of their choice. No, this does not expand federal control over education. It just pro- vides a new source of federal funds to support state-administered pro- grams that will help enable parental choice in education. The proposed $5 billion in financ- ing doesn't even amount to one per- cent of the $ 654 billion now being spent annually on K-12 education. Educational freedom is still a rel- atively new idea. Twenty years ago, platforms enabling parents to choose where to send their child to school were nonexistent. Today, 482,000 children are par- ticipating in some kind of education choice program — either through vouchers, tax credit scholarships or education savings accounts. Which is still miniscule given that we have 56.6 million children attend- ing K-12 schools and 50.7 million in Here's a perspective check for you: When I first came to Wash- ington, D.C., more than 50 years ago, the big question when it came to schools was "Should the feder- al government have any role in fi- nancing education? " How times have changed. Fast forward to 2019, and the question now is "How large a role should the federal government have in financ- ing education? " And the default an- swer is apparently "bigger." Suggest that maybe we should reconsider that role — or at least trim the budgetary fat when it comes to schools and the fed- eral government — and the re- ply is a predictable bit of political demagoguery: What do you have against education? Don't you want our children to have good schools? And so on. So you can imagine how Pres- ident Trump's opponents reacted when the budget he proposed last month called for a $7.1 billion cut for the Department of Education. If that sounds like a lot, consider the fact that it's a 10 percent reduc- tion from 2018 levels. We've spent $2 trillion (that's "trillion" with a "t") on education programs since 1965. And if you combine federal, state and local K-12 spending, that jaw-dropping number is just a frac- tion of what's been spent. It would be one thing if this enormous infusion of money made some measurable differenc- es when it comes to student perfor- mance. But as education experts Lindsey Burke and Mary Clare Amselem note in a recent article, the gaps between upper-income and lower-income students is as wide as ever. This is backed up by new re- search by Paul Peterson of Har- vard University, Ludger Woess- mann of the University of Mu- nich, and Eric Hanushek and Lau- ra Talpey of Stanford University. "Toward the beginning of the War on Poverty," Ms. Burke and Ms. Amselem write, "14-year-old students from the poorest fami- lies were three to four years be- hind those from more affluent fam- ilies. But unfortunately, research- ers concluded that current efforts rooted in federal programs and spending have not reduced this socioeconomic gap in education achievement." If these efforts were more re- cent, it might be reasonable to wait and give them time to work. But when good money has been thrown after bad for years, if not decades, you have to ask yourself whether the programs you're fund- ing even work. Take the 21st Century Commu- nity Learning Centers Program. Mr. Trump's budget would elimi- nate it — and its $1.1 billion price tag. As well it should: There's no evidence that this 25 -year-old pro- gram even works. Mr. Trump's budget would also cut $2.1 billion from teacher devel- opment programs. Again, though, there's no evidence that the money spent so far has made any positive difference for students. And besides, teacher develop- ment is a state and local responsi- bility, not a federal one. Let's not forget the incentives at work here. Many things that ought to be fund- ed at a lower level of government wind up on the federal govern- ment's tab — mostly because it's the feds who are the ones waving the big checkbook around. Mr. Trump's budget also propos- es other sensible cuts. Take the in- terest subsidy on student loans, which delays interest accruing on a student's loan until after gradu- ation. According to the Congres- sional Budget Office, eliminating it would save taxpayers $23.4 bil- lion over the next decade. Even better, it "will help end dis- torted lending policies that have led to rampant college tuition in- flation," Ms. Burke and Ms. Am- selem write. The burden of proof, though, shouldn't be on the White House to defend these cuts. Proponents should explain why spending lev- els should stay the same. Of course, to do that, they'd