Why Did Napoleon Lose Waterloo?

Above: The Anglo-Allied Army defending the gates of Hougoumont against a French offensive during the Battle of Waterloo. The Duke of Wellington called this the decisive moment of the battle.

Scholars, history buffs, and Bonapartists have debated for over 200 years why Napoleon lost the Battle of Waterloo on June 18, 1815. The Duke of Wellington called it the “nearest run thing you ever saw,” indicating that the battle could have gone either way. Hindsight is 20/20, and it is human nature to examine what went wrong and imagine counterfactuals. In reality, there are many reasons why Napoleon lost the battle. This brief article will examine a few of them.

First, Napoleon was overconfident and underestimated Wellington. Napoleon told Soult and his generals that Wellington was a “bad general” and that the English were “bad troops.” He went on to say that the battle would be “a lunchtime affair.”

In fact, Wellington and Blucher outperformed and outsmarted Napoleon. Wellington was wise in his choice of ground. He placed his men behind a small ridge which helped to protect them from artillery fire. Wellington’s right flank was protected by the farmhouse at Hougoumont, his center by La Haie Sainte, and his left flank by the farm at Papelotte.

Napoleon also underestimated the Prussians. He thought Blucher’s troops were in worse shape than they actually were after the Battle of Ligny on June 16. And Napoleon ignored intelligence by his brother Jerome that Blucher and Wellington would link up. Napoleon expected Blucher to head east, not west.

While the Allied leaders performed well, two of Napoleon’s marshals, Ney and Grouchy, underperformed. Napoleon should have picked Davout, his best marshal, to help him at Waterloo. Instead he was guarding Paris as Minister of War. Ney was an excellent marshal, but his loyalty was in question in light of his support of the Bourbons after Leipzig. He switched sides to support Napoleon in the Waterloo Campaign, but he made some key errors during the battle. Other valuable personnel who could have supported Napoleon at Waterloo were not available–Berthier, Massena, and Murat (Berthier was disillusioned and eventually fell from a window; Massena remained neutral; and Murat had betrayed Napoleon after Leipzig to save his throne).

Napoleon himself made several errors as well. In the days before the battle at Quatre Bras and Ligny, communication problems plagued Napoleon’s forces. D’Erlon’s reserve corp spent July 16 going back and forth between the left wing and right wing, which ensured that his forces didn’t arrive at either battle in time. Napoleon also lost the initiative due to inaction between 9 p.m. on the 16th and 9 a.m. on the 17th. Thus, Napoleon was unable to capitalize on the last battlefield victory of his career at Ligny. On the day before the battle, Napoleon split his forces, which went against his own maxims of warfare. He also delayed ordering Grouchy, who was effectively neutralized by fighting the Prussian rearguard in a sideshow at Wavre, to join the battle.

Napoleon was also relying upon a faulty map of the battlefield. A printing error was responsible for the confusion. As a result, Napoleon did not have a good sense of the lay of the land.

In addition, Napoleon was sleep-deprived and fatigued. The night before he had not gotten much sleep due to constant interruptions of his men bringing him reports. It is also likely that he was suffering from a painful case of hemorrhoids during the battle. Physically, he was not at the top of his game to say the least.

Perhaps one of the most crucial mistakes committed by Napoleon was to delay action on the morning of the battle. The late start (11p.m.) dearly cost the French valuable time that they could not afford to lose. It had rained the day before, and Drouot had suggested waiting to let the ground dry for the artillery. These lost hours allowed the Prussians to join the battle later in the afternoon. Once the Prussians arrived, the battle was essentially over.

The battle itself was filled with missteps by the French. The various branches did not coordinate with each other. Ney sent a cavalry charge at Wellington’s center around 4 p.m., but he did not support it with artillery or infantry. Wellington’s forces formed impregnable squares, and the cavalry charge had to be called off. Then when Ney captured La Haie Sante around 6:30 p.m., Napoleon waited too long to send in the Old Guard, and the momentum was lost. For someone who was known for his speed and taking quick, decisive actions to gain the upper hand against the enemy, Napoleon seemed lethargic and reactionary during the Waterloo Campaign. In all fairness, Napoleon was almost 46 years old, and it had been 10 years since Austerlitz. There had been a lot of water under the bridge.

Perhaps the best explanation for his loss at Waterloo is from Napoleon himself:

“I sensed that Fortune was abandoning me. I no longer had in me the feeling of ultimate success, and if one is not prepared to take risks when the time is ripe, one ends up doing nothing.”

Throughout his career, Napoleon referenced “destiny.” As a wedding gift, Napoleon even gave Josephine a gold enameled medallion engraved with the words, “To Destiny.” After he divorced Josephine and the losses began to mount (especially in Russia), Napoleon started to suspect that Fate had turned against him. Whereas earlier in his career, Napoleon was a bold, decisive, risk-taker, by the time of Waterloo he had become indecisive, tired, and less induced to take those risks “when the time was ripe.”

Napoleon once said:

“There is a moment in combat when the slightest maneuver is decisive and gives superiority; it is the drop of water that starts the overflow.”

It’s clear that at Waterloo, Napoleon let that moment slip by.

Sources

Roberts, Andrew. Napoleon: A Life. New York: Penguin Books, 2014.

Markham, Felix. Napoleon. New York: Mentor, 1963.

Herold, J. Christopher. The Age of Napoleon. New York: American Heritage Publishing Company, 1963.

Chazan, David. “Map Error Hastened Napoleon’s Waterloo Defeat,The Telegraph, October 6, 2014.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11144216/Map-error-hastened-Napoleons-Waterloo-defeat.html (accessed April 19, 2020).

http://www.epichistory.tv/watch, Battle of Waterloo

Easter Sunday: Evidence and Implications of the Resurrection

The empty tomb

As Christians, we can rejoice that we serve a living Savior. When the women and the disciples arrived at the tomb on the first day of the week, they found an empty tomb! The angels said, “Why seek ye the living among the dead. He is not here, but is risen…” (Luke 24:5-6)

On this Easter Sunday, let us briefly reflect on both the evidence for the Resurrection and the implications of this great event for us as Christians.

Evidence

1. The empty tomb (Matt 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20)

2. The Apostles and over 500 witnesses saw the risen Christ (1 Corinthians 15:3-8)

3. Worship moved from the Sabbath to the first day of the week because the Resurrection took place on Sunday (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2)

4. The explosive growth and mission of the early church. The Apostles went on missionary journeys to spread the Gospel. Most of the disciples died martyrs’ deaths. Why would they do all this unless they had in fact seen the risen Christ? (2 Peter 1:16)

5. The Word of God and fulfilled prophecy (Matthew 12:40, Luke 18:31-33, 24:6-7)

Implications

1. Jesus Christ is who He said He was. He claimed to be God. He predicted that He would be crucified at the hands of sinful men and be raised again. His Resurrection proves that Jesus truly is the Son of God. (John 20:29)

2. Believers have the hope of being resurrected and given glorified bodies when Christ returns. (1 Corinthians 15)

3. Christ has power over sin, death, and the grave. (1 Corinthians 15)

Palm Sunday

Jesus’ Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem

“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King is coming to you; He is just and having salvation, Lowly and riding on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.”
‭‭Zechariah‬ ‭9:9‬ ‭NKJV‬‬


We see the Old Testament prophecy above fulfilled in Jesus’ Triumphal Entry in Matthew 21:1-11, Mark 11:1-11, Luke 19:28-40, and John 12:12-15. Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, less than a week before his death on the cross.

Tree branches were strewn in the road before Jesus. This would be similar to rolling out the red carpet for a dignitary or ruler today. Christians often celebrate Palm Sunday by waving palm branches in a procession. In ancient Greece and Rome, palm branches symbolized victory, joy, peace, and triumph. They were used to celebrate champions of the games or military victories. Palm branches were also used for celebration in Israel’s Feast of Tabernacles, or The Feast of Booths (see Leviticus 23:40). We read about palm branches in Revelation 7:9 as well. 

The people who welcomed Jesus also shouted, Hosanna, which literally means means, please save, or save, we pray. It is also used as a shout of praise. It seems that many of the Jews of Jesus’ day wanted him to save them from Roman occupation. However, Jesus came for an even higher purpose—to save his people from their sins.

The Hebrew term which is transliterated, Hosanna, is used in 2 Samuel 14:4 and Psalm 118:25. In the triumphal entry account, the people quoted the first part of the next verse, Psalm 118:26: Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

The symbolism of the donkey was one of kingship and peace. Horses often depicted war, but Jesus identified with the lowly and was a man of peace. He was riding into Jerusalem as a declaration that he was the King of Israel. Sadly, most of the Jews ended up rejecting Him. Before the week was over, they had handed him over to the Romans, who crucified him. In Luke 19:41, Jesus wept over the city because he knew that the Romans would come against Jerusalem and destroy the city in 70 A.D. due to their rejection of Jesus. But we know from Romans 11:26 that God is not done with Israel yet. Jesus will return one day again, sit on the throne of David, and set up his Millennial Kingdom in Jerusalem and rule over all the Earth.

So as we celebrate Palm Sunday, let us remember why Jesus came. Jesus came the first time to die on a cross to pay for the sins of the whole world. Then he rose again. One day he will come back for those who have put their faith in him. We all have to decide whether we will worship him as our King. The Bible makes clear “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:10-11)

Imagine a World….

Are we in the Twilight Zone?

Imagine a world where you have a socialist running for President of the United States who is openly calling for political revolution while other Democratic candidates are endorsing infanticide.

Imagine a world where a gay mayor who recently dropped out of the Democratic primary race for President openly kisses his “husband” on stage and encourages a 9-year-old boy to come out as gay.

Imagine a world where drag queens are not only allowed but encouraged to read to children in public libraries and schools.

Imagine a world where young kids are given puberty blockers and hormone treatments to change their gender and schools encourage this.

Imagine a world where there’s a Republican President who fights for Christians, speaks out against abortion at the March for Life in Washington D.C., and has overseen a vast improvement in the United States economy.

Now imagine for a moment if you will leaders of the largest Protestant denomination in the United States telling people that it doesn’t matter who you vote for and that we shouldn’t be aligned with any political party.

Imagine those same religious leaders attacking the current Republican President, calling him a racist, and saying that we hurt our witness if we support him.

Imagine those same religious leaders being silent about the drag queen story hour at the libraries and schools, the gay mayor, and the transgender indoctrination of children, but instead they regularly try to diminish America and paint it as a racist country.

Now imagine a group of people within that Protestant denomination who are concerned about the strange behavior of their religious leaders, and imagine that group forms a conservative network to combat the liberalism within the denomination.

Finally, imagine the leaders of that Protestant denomination attacking and attempting to silence that conservative network within their denomination.

Sadly, you don’t have to imagine this world because this is the world that you are currently living in.

An Open Letter to Southern Baptists

Dear Southern Baptists,

I want to ask a favor of you. Please get off the fence and decide whose side you are on. Our denomination has been flirting with such ideas as the promotion of women preachers, the acceptance of homosexuality, Critical Race Theory (CRT), and Intersectionality. Many SBC leaders prefer to remain silent on these critical issues. When I talk to Southern Baptists, most of them seem unaware of the problems within the denomination because pastors are not talking about it. They know what is going on in the local church, but not much beyond that.

Joshua told the Israelites:

“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”
‭‭Joshua‬ ‭24:15‬ ‭KJV‬‬

We cannot allow people into the denomination that are teaching unbiblical doctrines. If you support homosexuality and women preachers, you have departed from sound doctrine. We must always ask, “What does the Word of God say?”

When you give to the Cooperative Program, you are supporting some of the false teaching that is being promulgated in our seminaries and in entities like the ERLC. There must be more transparency about where the money is going and for what it is being used. As good stewards, we should not be supporting unbiblical practices.

I won’t outline here everything that has been going on within the SBC, but I will name some of the top concerns of mine: the leftward drift of the ERLC (Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission), the association of the SBC with ecumenical groups like The Gospel Coalition, the woke theology of the Kingdom Diversity initiative at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, the softening stance on homosexuality by SBC leaders, the push for women to be able to preach within the denomination, and of course Resolution 9, CRT, and Intersectionality.

For the last several years, I have watched the SBC drift in a more liberal, unbiblical direction. The leaders usually deny it or try to say that it’s not that bad. Yet it keeps getting worse. To the SBC leaders, I would say, “Are you asleep? Why are you not listening to our concerns? Why do you side with liberals who hate Christians over the conservatives within your own denomination?”

Something is seriously wrong in the SBC, and I urge all Southern Baptists to wake up and speak up. The time for equivocation is over. Like the Israelites, we need to choose whose side we are on. No more ignoring the problem. No more denial. Let’s deal with the problem. And let us make sure that we are on the Lord’s side.

Sincerely,

A concerned Southern Baptist

True Shepherds vs. Hirelings

The present-day church seems to have bought into the lie that being loving means that you are never stern or tough with anyone. But the Bible says in Romans 12:9b that we ought to “Abhor that which is evil.” Ephesians 5:11 says, “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” And in 2 John 9-11, the Bible says not to bid anyone Godspeed or receive him into your house if he does not bring the doctrine of Christ.

In John 10:11-14, Jesus said:

“I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep. I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.”

‭‭

Jesus is called the Chief Shepherd in 1 Peter 5:4. Christ is the example to all the under-Shepherds. Christ does several things which show that He is the Good Shepherd: lays down his life for the sheep, cares for and tends to the sheep, and feeds the sheep.

Christ also protects the sheep. Notice in the passage above from John 10 that Christ does not leave the sheep when the wolves or false teachers come. That is contrasted with the fleeing hireling, who cares for his wages and not the sheep.

Sadly, there are many national religious and denominational leaders in our country who have left the door wide open to the wolves. In fact these same leaders seem to cozy up to the wolves while at the same time criticizing the sheep for raising concerns about the danger that the wolves pose. A true shepherd will side with his sheep over the wolves. If a shepherd defends the wolves, you know that he is a hireling. That person is not serving the sheep, but himself.

We as Christians need to be able to discern between true shepherds and hirelings. We also need to be willing to confront evil and oppose it instead of tolerating it. A true shepherd may seem harsh to some when he carries out this function, but he is really carrying out his Biblical role. Remember, a true shepherd will protect the sheep.

In Defense of the Unborn

It’s raining today, which seems appropriate since it is the 47th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. That tragic Supreme Court ruling has led to the deaths of over 60 million innocent babies. It has also inflicted untold psychological, physical, and spiritual harm upon millions of women. Abortion is much more than a political issue. Primarily, it is a moral and theological issue. It is also a family issue.

The Bible makes it clear that we as human beings are made in the image of God. Human life is sacred, and we are not to shed innocent blood. Some verses to consider along these lines are: Genesis 1:27, Genesis 9:6-7, Exodus 20:13, Psalm 139:13-14, and Luke 1:39-45.

Sadly, our conscience as a nation has been seared. It seems that we can no longer weep over our sins. I think about those babies inside the womb fighting for their lives, trying to get away from the instruments of the abortionist. Do we ever stop to consider what goes on within the walls of an abortion clinic? Do we ever think about the suffering of those innocent babies and what horrible pain they endure? Do we realize the depth of emotional damage caused to women who’ve had an abortion? What about the impact upon our society of the absence of millions of people–who should be here, but aren’t? Have we aborted a person who would have cured a disease, been President, or become the next Billy Graham? And obviously a person doesn’t need to be famous to have worth. These innocent babies could have grown up to be someone’s mother, father, brother, sister, son, or daughter. That is why abortion is a family issue. That is why it is a societal issue. It doesn’t just affect the woman. It affects everyone.

When I hear phrases like the woman’s right to choose or it’s the woman’s body, that all sounds very selfish to me. No thought at all seems to be given to the innocent unborn life. They are sacrificed on the altar of convenience.

We cannot ignore this horrific problem. It is being carried out on an industrial scale. It is a huge stain upon our nation’s conscience. Let us repent, seek God’s mercy, and take action. There are many pro-life charities and organizations with which people can get involved. Adoption is also a great solution for the woman who feels that she is unable to raise her baby. Many would-be parents are on waiting lists and would gladly raise that child.

If you have had an abortion, there is hope and forgiveness to be found in Jesus Christ. Thank God for his mercy. And perhaps the best way to find healing is to help other women avoid making the same tragic mistake.

So on this very sad anniversary, let us pray, let us renew our commitment to oppose this great moral evil. Let us lend a helping hand of mercy to those who have been affected by it. Let us vote for leaders who will stand up for the unborn and protect them. And let us do all that we can to prevent more babies from being killed. Let us choose life.

Why I Love the King James Bible

As someone who loves the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, also known as the Authorized Version (AV), I feel a little out of place these days. Let me first say that I don’t subscribe to the “KJV Only” argument because it seems to be an intellectually untenable position. I believe there are other good English translations out there, but there are a lot of weak translations as well. I would not recommend the New Living Translation, for example, although I have one at home.

There is a lot of misunderstanding out there about the KJV. Many people just seem to write it off as archaic and too hard to understand. Those who do use the KJV as their main devotional study Bible are often portrayed, quite unfairly, as legalistic, uneducated, or as a fundamentalist.

In this article, I would like to give some reasons why I enjoy reading and studying the KJV, as well as refute some of the myths and misunderstandings about the sacred text.

I’ll start with my personal history of the KJV. My very first Bible given to me by my mother was a KJV. It was just the New Testament, Psalms, and Proverbs. I still have it, and it can fit in my pocket. The cover has an illustration of a boy handing Jesus the five loaves and two fish in the miracle of the feeding the 5,000. In all honesty, I looked more at the pictures than I read from that Bible; I was only four after all.

My next Bible given to me was by the church that I grew up in when I got saved, or became a Christian. It was a New American Standard Bible with a blue cover, and it had pictures in it, such as the Garden Tomb. I remember reading Psalm 1 in that Bible. I would always turn to the Psalms because it was in the middle of the Bible. I rarely got beyond the first one.

When I went off to college, I wanted to really begin reading the Bible in earnest. So I went to The Living Word, the local Christian bookstore in the mall. I picked out a black leather Thomas Nelson KJV Study Bible. I don’t remember exactly why I chose the KJV at that time, but I’m glad I did. That Bible became my main study Bible, and I use it to this day, some 25 years later. The cover is coming off and part of Genesis falls out when I open it if I’m not careful. It’s the Bible that I first read all the way through. I’ve highlighted large portions of it, and I’ve memorized the location on the page of many passages. If I remember correctly, it is the Bible from which I preached my first sermon. I cherish that Bible, and I’m not sure what I’d do without it. I do have other Bibles, and sometimes I use other translations as I study for my Sunday School lessons. But I always seem to come back to that one.

Before I discuss the benefits of the KJV, let me first address a common objection to the translation–that it’s too difficult to understand. We live in an age where things are often dumbed down. Many people feel that they need to have a modern-English translation that is easier to read. I’m not trying to be elitist or snobby in saying this, but sometimes we as humans would do well to tackle something that is challenging so we can grow and learn from it. People often live up to the expectations placed upon them. It’s not that people are incapable of understanding the KJV, it’s that we sometimes rob them of their confidence and scare them away.

This is where the notes and tools in my study Bible really come in handy. In the center column between the texts are translations for difficult or archaic words. For example, in 2 Thess 2:7, the KJV uses the word letteth, which could be confusing because the contemporary usage of the word let is the opposite from what it used to be in the early 17th-century. There is a superscript number after the word, however, and if you look in the center column you will see the word restrains. The word let previously meant to hinder or prevent. At the time the translation was a good one, but over time the meaning of the word changed. The alternate translation note informs you of the actual meaning of the Greek word in the manuscript. And you actually learn more about the text and the history of words than you would have known just using a modern translation. There is also commentary below the text, especially for difficult passages. The KJV Study Bible also has doctrinal and archeological footnotes as well as personality profiles on major Bible characters. All of these tools solved any problems I encountered with difficulty understanding the text. In fact, it helped me to learn more than I would have otherwise. If you own a separate concordance, it also allows you to look up any word in the Bible and find which Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek words were in the original manuscripts. So, the bottom line is that the KJV is not too hard to understand, especially if you have the proper study tools to help you.

I should also say that my favorite preacher, Adrian Rogers, preached from the KJV. And to this day, his sermons are some of the most powerful from any preacher I’ve heard. I can’t help but think the translation he used played a part in that. Personally, I believe God’s blessing is on the translation.

Having given you a personal history of my experience with the KJV, let me now endeavor to outline some more objective reasons as to why I love it.

First, the KJV is a formal equivalence translation, or word-for-word translation. This makes it more faithful to the original text. Some prefer dynamic equivalence translations, or thought-for-thought, but in my opinion, these translations often take too many liberties with the text. Proverbs 30:5a reminds us that, “Every word of God is pure.” If a translation does not translate each word, it seems to me that we are losing some of the Word of God. The italicized words in the KJV let the reader know that those words were added by the translators for help with understanding and that they were not part of the original text.

Second, the KJV has had a huge impact on the English language and literature. Quotations and allusions to the KJV repeatedly appear throughout English and American novels, stories, and historical speeches. Try to read a few of Abraham Lincoln’s speeches without coming across a quotation from the King James Bible. Also, there are poetic passages in the King James Bible, such as Psalm 23, Ecclesiastes 3, and 1 Corinthians 13, which do not sound as majestic when coming from other translations. We dare not lose the wonderful heritage and history of the interweaving nature of the King James Bible and the English language. But when we forsake the KJV in favor of more modern translations, it seems we do exactly that.

Interestingly, many seem to criticize the KJV’s use of the outdated second-person pronouns such as thee and thou. However, these too actually help the reader better understand the original text. The Hebrew and Greek languages make a distinction between second-person singular (thou, thee, thy, thine) and second-person plural pronouns (ye, you, your, yours). So by paying attention to which pronoun is used, you can glean key information that is not always evident in English. Galatians 6:1-2 is a good example of this.

Third, there are key words and phrases entirely left out or relegated as a footnote in many other translations but included in the KJV. The New Testament of the KJV is based upon the Texus Receptus, a Byzantine text-type (the Majority Text). It was compiled by Erasmus in the 16th-century. Modern translations do not use the Textus Receptus. You may have seen charts that juxtapose the KJV and the modern translations like the NIV and show the differences between the two. The modern translations leave out key words and even entire verses found in the KJV, such as Acts 8:37. James R. White addresses this in his book, The King James Only Controversy. I’ve read this book, which takes the side of the modern translations. White did bring up some interesting points in the book, and he provides plenty of material to think about. But he didn’t convince me that the Alexandrian manuscripts are superior to the Byzantine, nor did he convince me that the modern translations use superior manuscripts. Like I said before, I’m not KJV only, but I do prefer the KJV. Something just bothers me when translators start removing verses and words from a Bible which has been used for the last 400 years.

That brings me to the fourth reason I love the KJV. It has stood the test of time while modern translations have not. The KJV, completed in 1611, just celebrated its 400th anniversary. How many countless millions of people have been transformed by the King James Bible? One notable fact about the modern-day translations is that a new one seems to come along and replace the previous one every few years. For sake of honesty, it should be stated that there have been several editions of the KJV. The one that we read today is based upon the 1769 edition, which is easier to understand. Spelling was updated, use of italics was increased, and printing errors were corrected.

The fifth and final reason I love the KJV is that it has no copyright. Well, technically the British Crown owns the rights to it, but you can quote the KJV freely without getting permission. If you pick up Christian books using modern-day translations, you will probably notice that somewhere in the front, usually on the back of the title page, there are notes saying that the author or publisher got permission to use the translation. Another translation, the American Standard Version (ASV), had a copyright, but it has expired. So, it also is in the public domain.

The King James Bible is rich with tradition and history. Its beautiful, poetic language has become a part of the rich tapestry of our culture’s religious life, literature, and even our political rhetoric. It is also a faithful and reliable translation of the Bible. Choosing a Bible translation for one’s personal use should be done after much prayer and study. And if you decide upon the KJV, you will have made a wonderful choice and reap many benefits.

Clear Choice in 2020

On Columbus Day, President Trump and Senator Elizabeth Warren’s statements on the holiday gave a clear indication of their parties’ vastly different visions for the United States of America.

Warren tweeted support for Indigenous Peoples’ Day and lamented America’s “long and painful” mistreatment of Native Americans. Trump, on the other hand, issued a Presidential Proclamation commemorating Christopher Columbus, calling him a “great explorer” and noting his courage and skill on his “daring voyage.” President Trump displayed appreciation for our country’s heritage while Senator Warren exhibited contempt for our history.

Warren isn’t the only Democratic candidate who wants to remake America. In CNN’s “Equality in America” town hall event last Thursday, Beto O’Rourke said he wanted to revoke the tax-exempt status of religious institutions that opposed same-sex marriage. This sent a clear signal that O’Rourke and the Democrats would come after churches and people of faith for their sincerely held beliefs. In contrast, President Trump and Vice President Mine Pence have been friends of evangelical Christians, not just in theory but also in practice.

Democrats offer a radical vision on the issue of abortion as well. In the CNN Democratic Presidential Debate on Tuesday night, Senator Kamala Harris attacked states with strict abortion bans and said that people need to keep their hands off women’s bodies and let women make their own decisions. Among the Democrat candidates, Harris is not alone in her radical pro-abortion views. The Democrat Party has stooped so low that it now seems to celebrate the murder of babies. President Trump, however, has been one of the most pro-life presidents in recent memory. Vice President Pence has publicly declared he would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned.

So we have a starkly clear choice in the 2020 election. The Republican Party stands for America, faith, and life, while the Democrats are hostile to all of the above. If we want to preserve America, religious freedom, and promote the sanctity of life must vote Republican. The choice could not be clearer.