Dr. Robert Sumner passed away in December 2016. The Biblical Evangelist newspaper is no longer being published and the ministry of Biblical Evangelism has ceased operation.

The remaining inventory of his books and gospel tracts was transferred to The Baptist Tabernacle of Los Angeles and may be ordered here.

Incidents and Illustrations
Dr. Robert L. Sumner, Editor

A FORTY-FOUR TIMES GREATER CHANCE! Than what? We’ll tell you in a moment, but whatever it is, it is obviously not worth the gamble. The “44 times” is what The Centers for Disease Control recently said Sodomites have of receiving HIV compared with normal men.

What if the CDC said certain people had a 44 times greater chance of contracting polio if they did certain things? Or prostate cancer? Or breast cancer? Every news media in the country – make that the world – would be screaming bloody murder about the danger. But since it has to do with sodomy, the powerful Sodomite lobby – with its silly talk of political correctness – mutes and muffles any outcry against its pet iniquity.

Would schools be warning kids 24/7? You know they would! But what happens when it relates to Sodomites? The teacher rushes out to the fruit market and buys a big bunch of bananas – and starts instructing the kiddoes how to put “protection” on a banana. How inane!

The truth of the matter, however, is that a condom on a Sodomite doesn’t offer much more protection than sitting in a wheelchair when an 18-wheeler is roaring down the lane in which a victim is sitting. And the makers of condoms will tell you that, if pressed. And if condoms are effective, why are HIV cases among Sodomites 11% higher on the last report than a mere four years earlier? The answer: while condoms are very imperfect for their intended use, they are really useless when used by Sodomites!

Dr. Miriam Grossman, author of You're Teaching My Child What? says the Sodomite use of condoms is twenty percent riskier than normal use. And she notes, "The truth of biology – [Sodomite] sex is too dangerous – is squelched, because it contradicts the ideology of 'anything goes – no judgments allowed' ... Kids are encouraged to explore their sexuality, and told precisely how; with the experts' blessings, they go out and play in traffic ... And then we wonder why, after 25 years, HIV is still going strong."

Columnist Marcia Segelstein, who alerted me to this story, concluded her column: “No one wants to hear it. No one wants to say it. But the cold, hard truth is that homosexual sex is risky at best, life-threatening at worst.”

What a pity! The key to this sad tale is that sin is always a hard, cruel taskmaster. It just doesn’t pay.

A PERSONAL JOURNEY … TO APOSTASY! We have mentioned Brian McLaren several times in these pages, always negatively. He might be called “a founding father” of the emergent church movement and he has recently published a book that removes all doubt regarding his unbelief in historic Christianity, A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith. Baptist Press reported a panel discussion at the Southern Baptist Seminary by four of its professors, moderated by the president, R. Albert Mohler, Jr.

They concluded it wasn’t so much “new” as it was “a wholesale rejection of historic Christianity.” One panelist, Bruce Ware (other panelists were James Hamilton, Stephen Wellum and Greg Wills), suggested that the title would more accurately be “An Old Kind of Apostasy.” Why? Because it rejects the God of the Bible.

As Ware put it, "There is an audacity and arrogance in this book that is breathtaking … To look God in the face, as McLaren does, and say, 'You are not God,' is just stunning. Here is a man who sees the God of the Bible and despises that God. So what he does is create God in a whole different image, an image that fits his postmodern 'evangelicalism.' This will appeal to a person who knows little or nothing about the Bible, but who is steeped in the culture."

How can readers find McLaren’s book compelling? Only, as Mohler pointed out, by avoiding the Word of God, as the author does in what he calls a “personal journey.” The seminary president said, “If you actually read the Bible, you are going to end up having to say that this is a dishonest attempt to make the Bible say what it is does not say. His narrative subversion just does not work."

BP noted: “Panelists pointed out that McLaren attributes the traditional, orthodox reading of Scripture and the doctrines that arise from it to an outdated, Greco-Roman methodology of reading the text. In this way, they said, McLaren makes himself the ultimate authority for properly interpreting Scripture. As Wellum put it: "McLaren sets himself up as the one authority who at last understands the Bible accurately,” but "when you actually let the Bible speak for itself, there is no way that you could come to the conclusions that he reaches. Clearly, McLaren has an evolutionary worldview that is a process view of God. There is an evolutionary view of the Old Testament that comes from outside the text and is planted on the text. He is giving you the impression that he stands at the end of the line, though he wants to say that he is on a quest."

We suggest, as the old gospel chorus put it, “Get the new look, from the old book.” Nothing else will do.

THIRD GRADE BOYS at the Maude Wilkins Elementary School in Maple Shade (NJ) were told by their teacher, Tonya Uibel, to come to school on a recent day dressed up like girls for a fashion show – and warned the assignment would be graded. You see, it was “Women’s History Month.” By pure coincidence [snicker] it was also the Homosexuals’ “Day of Silence.”

As you can imagine, the fat hit the fan and screams came from all over the place.

One scream was from Janine Giandomenico – whose son, she said, was horrified at the thought – and pleaded with her not to make him do it. She said his exact words were, “Mommy, please don't make me do this.'"

Mommy added, "It wasn't so much about whether it was appropriate, it's what regard this had to his education and what it was going to teach him … My husband and I are very open-minded, but ... [t]he school system is trying to introduce alternative lifestyles in a sneaky way. At nine years old, I'm not ready to have the conversation with my son about homosexuals, lesbians, and cross-dressing."

The firestorm got so intense that the school principal, Beth Norcia, called the whole thing off, using the excuse every principal does when a teacher plays the fool and gets in hot water, saying poor Tonya was “misunderstood.” How could something like that be misunderstood?

Come to think of it, what’s with this “Women’s History Month” anyway? Do we have a corresponding “Men’s History Month”? Or is this like “Black History Month” without a “White History Month” counterpart?

We live in dire days when every kook tries to sneak in his own brand of propaganda.

NO TRUST, NO FEAR, NO RESPECT! So said Jack Kelley, an ex-Marine/Green Beret and former deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force in the Reagan administration, who now writes for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: “For the first time in a long time, the President of the United States is not trusted by our allies or feared by our adversaries, and is respected by neither ...”

Alex Singleton, editor of the London Daily Telegraph, wrote on March 11: "Let me be clear: I'm not normally in favour of boycotts, and I love the American people. I holiday in their country regularly, and hate the tedious snobby sneers against the United States. But the American people chose to elect an idiot who seems … bent on insulting their allies, and something must be done to stop Obama's reckless foreign policy, before he does the dirty on his allies on every issue."

In speaking about how heads of other states neither trust, fear or respect Obama, Kelly wrote: “One official named French President Nicolas Sarkozy, but his contempt for Mr. Obama is an open secret. Another named German Chancellor Angela Merkel. But, said Mr. Diehl, ‘Merkel too has been conspicuously cool toward Obama.’

“Mr. Obama certainly doesn't care about the Poles and Czechs, whom he has betrayed on missile defense. Honduras and Israel also can attest that he's been an unreliable ally and an unfaithful friend. Ironically, our relations with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have never been worse.”

First the Canadians and now the British – two of our best and longest allies – speak out against our President and we cannot, with a clear conscience, defend him. Alas, they are speaking the truth.

HE KILLED THE WRONG BABY (The parents intended for him to murder the other one!) Dr. Matthew Kuchinas, a baby killer in Sarasota (FL), was trying to please his customers (who were paying him to kill their child in the womb; names not given to protect the guilty) by killing their infant they suspected had Downs syndrome and perhaps a defective heart. The parents, being the equal opportunity killers they are, had the surviving baby murdered later.

This kind of killing takes place when a doctor who has taken the Hippocratic Oath (in cases like this, the Hypocrite Oath) to protect life, sticks a needle in the intended victim and causes abortion. It is a practice becoming more and more common as wannabe mothers take fertility treatments that result in multiple babies – then they pick out the one or two they wish to keep and destroy the others – you know, like a litter of cats or dogs.

Kuchinas has the kind of “rap sheet” to go with this business. Back in 2002 he attempted to smuggle the drug Propofol, an anesthesia, into his office by taping vials to his legs (under his pants). Two years later, in 2004, he was charged with falsifying records to appear an aborted baby died of natural causes.

The Florida Board of Medicine decided in Kuchinas case, “enough already.” It revoked his medical license. Whether that little detail will stop him, only time will tell.

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE JOHN PAUL STEVENS, comments by Baptist Press on his retiring:

– He voted twice to overturn partial-birth abortion bans – once in 2000 when he was on the winning end and a second time in 2007 when he was on the short end of a 5-4 decision.

– He consistently sided with laws favored by homosexual activists. In 2000 when the court said the Boy Scouts could bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders, Stevens voted in the minority. Stevens also voted to overturn anti-sodomy laws twice – in 1986, when he was in the minority, and in 2003, when he helped form a 6-3 landmark majority.

– In 2005 he voted against the public display of the Ten Commandments in a pair of cases that saw the court issue a split decision.

– In 2004 he sided with a 5-4 majority that overturned a federal law aimed at protecting children from Internet pornography.

– In 2008 he wrote in a concurring opinion that he believed the death penalty was unconstitutional.

Do you see why we aren’t losing sleep over his retirement? We can only imagine who will be appointed to succeed him – and then we may not sleep for a week!

HEY, MOM, I HAD TO STAY AFTER SCHOOL TODAY! Not so unusual, you say? But what if you were a mother who later discovered it was because the school was providing an abortion for your daughter without your knowledge or consent?

The Teen Health Center at Ballard High School in Seattle did this for a 15-year-old girl during school hours without notifying the mother, and even paid for a taxi to the abortion clinic and provided the bloody deed “for free” on the girl’s promise not to tell.

Mom said she had no idea when she signed a consent form for the campus clinic that this would happen, noting, "Nowhere in this paperwork does it mention abortion or facilitating abortion. We had no idea this was being facilitated on campus … [It] makes me feel like my rights were completely stripped away.” Indeed!

What Washington State needs is a law requiring parental notification or consent prior to an abortion on a minor. Wake up, legislators!

WASHINGTON’S NEROS FIDDLE WHILE BANKS BURN! Goldman Sacs has been named as a major problem in our financial messes. True, but maybe not for the reason argued.

ABC News reported – and the Associated Press publicized it – that while our financial institutions were going down the drain, the nation’s watchdog (SEC) was sinking in the slime pit of pornography. No kidding. Senior staffers at the Securities and Exchange Commission were surfing Internet pornography on the job instead of doing what they were paid to do (17 senior officials, up to $222,418 each). One senior lawyer at the Washington office, according to the AP, “…spent up to eight hours a day looking at and downloading pornography. When he ran out of hard drive space, he burned the files to CDs or DVDs, which he kept in boxes around his office.” He no longer works in the government henhouse now that the chickens are gone.

Another employee, according to the same source, “… was blocked more than 16,000 times in a month from visiting websites classified as ‘Sex’ or ‘Pornography’ … he managed to amass a collection of ‘very graphic’ material on his hard drive by using Google images to bypass the SEC's internal filter.” The SEC believes in ‘tough love’ (sic) and suspended him for two weeks!

According to one SEC memo, 33 employees have been investigated for looking at porn in the past five years, including 31 who were doing so when the financial system was tanking. Other government agencies have reported similar difficulties.

One self-described “recovering porn addict” who has written two books about internet porn addiction, commented about the above (calling it probably only “the tip of the iceberg”) and insisting porn is an addiction – you know, like alcoholism. Michael Leahy knows whereof he speaks (his 8-hour-per-day habit cost him his marriage and several jobs). He founded and is the current CEO of BraveHearts, a group concerned with fighting pornography, prostitution and the sex traffic.

The Witherspoon Institute released a 53-page report earlier this year written by over 50 scholars on "The Social Costs of Pornography." It also described pornography as an addiction and saying it is "one of the great social diseases" of our day. Unfortunately, but honestly and bluntly, it may be more of a problem in our churches than a Ted Haggard or a Jim Bakker hiding here or there.

Why doesn’t our Congress do something about problems like this instead of spending its time arguing about whose taxes to increase and how much?

HOW MEXICO TREATS ILLEGALS! Since Arizona passed its new law, “Rev.” (sic) Al Sharpton, the Roman Catholic bishops, “sanctuary cities” and other advocates of law breaking (at least on this issue) have been having kittens, screaming to high heaven. For a long time we’ve known the truth about how Mexico treats its illegals and we’ve wanted to repeat it, but it is lengthy and we wanted to quote someone we trust.

Columnist Michelle Malkin fits the trust and she is not more verbose than others. Responding to Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s charge that Arizona had opened the door "to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement," here are the charges as she listed them:

-- The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics." How's that for racial and ethnic profiling?

-- If outsiders do not enhance the country's "economic or national interests" or are "not found to be physically or mentally healthy," they are not welcome. Neither are those who show "contempt against national sovereignty or security." They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

-- Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years' imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years' imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama's illegal alien aunt -- a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).

-- Law enforcement officials at all levels -- by national mandate -- must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens' arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.

-- Ready to show your papers? Mexico's National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens' identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

Malkin noted all of the above can be found in Mexico's Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. It is against the law to criticize or oppose those laws, however. As she pointed out, “Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators ‘Smash the State,’ and holding signs that proclaimed ‘No human is illegal’ and ‘We have rights’."

If Americans – or Mexicans – tried that south of our border … well, see above the penalties! At the same time, as Malkin points out, “… the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico's southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn't respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtail illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.”

She concluded, “Here's the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands: Hypocrites.”

Katie Couric, CBS anchor, sobbed, "Hundreds of thousands of [illegal immigrants] now live in Arizona but ... many no longer feel welcome." Let’s hope so, Katie, let’s hope so. Then there is Harry Smith of the same network’s “Early Show” pontificating, “Some people would contend that this law in Arizona is racist in nature. Some have equated it even with Jews having to carry identification during Nazi Germany." Really, Harry? Really? An equation between law-abiding Jews and illegal lawbreaking Mexicans?

FORMER V-P BUYS NEW “PAD!” Al Gore left office worth $1 or $2 million. He is now worth approximately $100,000,000. Yet, under oath before legislators, he told Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (KY) “… every penny that I have made, I have put right into a non-profit deal, Alliance For Climate Protection.” So where is his money coming from? Bootlegging? Deals with con men? Laundering money for the Mafia? I jest, but he does owe the American people an explanation.

As noted above, he recently purchased his second mansion in the “luxurious” hills of Montecito (CA) on 1.5 acres, giving him a great view of the Pacific. It is a $9 million Italian-style pad with six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms. To be honest, $9 million is a “round figure”; it really only cost $8,875,000. But what is $125,000 or so among friends?

Now, let’s be realistic. If George W. Bush had purchased this mansion it would have been on every liberal network several times a day for weeks and on the front page of every newspaper in America. I say that without fear of contradiction. Yet a ‘local’ paper (the Los Angeles Times) and Fox News were the only ones reporting it. Why?

Yet when Mr. Gore testified before Congress and Blackburn queried, “Is the legislation that we are discussing here today – is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?” He angrily retorted, “If you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you do not know me. I have been willing to put my money where my mouth is. Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country?”

Which reminds us of another item: President Obama telling folks he believes in free enterprise, but there comes a time when someone has “enough.”

When will Gore have enough?

[Later: since writing this we read of Al and Tipper’s marital problems. We are always sad when sin breaks up a home. God never intended it to be.]

WHY OBAMA’S WORRIED! That little old oil spill in the Gulf is more than a minor problem to the president. For one thing, BP was exempted from obtaining an environmental drill study before drilling started.

For another thing, it turns out that Obama and his buddies were the #1 recipients of BP monies designated to buy off (oops, I should say “given” to be pc) politicians. It seems records show Obama got the lion’s share of the $3.5 million BP has given federal candidates over the past two decades, according to CRP (Center for Responsive Politics). The same source broke it down as $2.89 million from BP’s PACs and roughly $638,000 from individuals.

Nor does this count the nearly $16 million BP has spent lobbying its interests, just last year alone. Obama has been the #1 recipient of BP monies (PAC and individual), as noted above. Did that account for Obama’s delayed response to the mess? And why, during the early and vital days of the spill, was the Interior Department’s chief of staff white-water rafting in the Grand Canyon instead of “on the scene” overseeing the problem? Ah, politics. It’s such a nuisance trying to understand it.

WAVING THE FLAG! You probably heard about the kids (five of them) who showed up for classes at the Live Oak High in Morgan Hill (CA) in the San Francisco Bay area (where Pelosi is from) wearing T-shirts with the American flag on them. During brunch break the vice principal asked two to take off their American flag bandanas and the others to turn their T-shirts inside out.

They refused!

They were sent to the principal’s office where they were told that they could wear the American flag symbols on any other day of the year, but that day was Cinco de Mayo day, one special to Mexicans. Wearing an American flag would ‘offend’ them. So? So what! Why is the American flag offensive to Mexicans living in this country? Are they here illegally? Is their first loyalty to Mexico? If the answer to either is in the affirmative, let them go back to Mexico where they belong.

Which brings up something you might not know. At Montebello High School (CA) the Latino students went to the flagpole, lowered the American flag, put the Mexican flag in its place, and then positioned the American flag upside down under it. Solution? See previous paragraph, last sentence, last clause.

IF YOU GIVE YOUR CHILD A CHICKENPOX VACCINATION will it decrease his/her chances for that disease, but increase his/her chances of developing autism? According to a new study by the Environmental Protection Agency, that could well be. Not only so, but the problem began in 1995 when use of cells from aborted babies was approved in the vaccination.

Actually, the rise of AD (Autism Disorder) began in earnest in 1988 when, as Jill Stanek points out, “the Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) indicates that's when the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices added a second dose of the MMR vaccine, containing fetal cells from aborted babies, to its recommendations.”

Jim Sedlak, vice-president of American Life League, said, “For years the evidence has pointed toward the link between vaccines using DNA from aborted babies and the rise of Autism Disorder rates … Parents need and deserve to know the risks associated with vaccinations made from lines derived from the bodies of aborted children.” His solution? A “fair Labeling and Informed Consent Act” to let parents know of the problem.

Stanek added, "That virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible." The SCPI presented its studies at the International Society for Autism Research last May.

YOU BETTER WATCH OUT! You know those crazy preachers who are always telling you, “Don’t do this!” “Don’t do that!” “Stay away from this!” They just might – just might – have your best interest at heart and you might – just might – be wise to listen to them.

If not, would you listen to Britain’s Archives of Internal Medicine? It took researchers twenty years to get all the data so you can be assured it was truly a scientific study. In fact, the researchers tracked nearly 5,000 British adults for two decades and the conclusion was obvious: it pays to live a healthy lifestyle!

Some of the Brits studied had four common bad habits: smoking, drinking too much, inactivity and poor diet (any drinking is too much, but that is how the researchers evaluated it). In their eyes “too much” drinking was over three alcoholic drinks daily for men and more than two such drinks daily for women – which ought to tell the women’s libbers the constitution of the girls is weaker than the boys and “equality” in these matters is dangerous. Inactivity was considered less than two hours weekly of physical activity. Poor diet was called consuming fruits and vegetables less than three times a day. Since smoking wasn’t defined, we assume it was “any smoking.”

Overall, only 314 of the people studied had all of the bad traits. Nearly a hundred of them (91, 29%) didn’t live long enough to finish the study. There were 387 without any of the four vices and only 32 died before the study was completed (roughly 8%).

The Associated Press, in reporting the story and quoting lead researcher Elisabeth Kvaavik of the University of Oslo, said about the four bad habits: “These habits combined substantially increased the risk of death and made people who engaged in them seem 12 years older than people in the healthiest group.”

The healthiest group included both ‘never smokers’ and those who ‘smoked but quit.’ All in this group were within all the other guidelines. To illustrate the guidelines for the healthy group, a single carrot, apple and glass of orange juice was sufficient to qualify for fruits and veggies. In fact, overall the guidelines for this study were lower than most others. Even our government’s guidelines only call for 2.5 hours of exercise per week and at least four cups of fruit/vegetables per day.

If you won’t listen to the preachers, listen to the researchers!