Lawlessness Is In The Eye Of The Beholder…: Kevin H

You may also like...

37 Responses

  1. bob1 says:

    Garvey fathered two children out of wedlock?

    Doesn’t matter a whit yo these cretins

    Can’t blame it all on Der Donald..

    But on the other hand, he’s opened the floodgates to this moral sewage in the church.

    It’s a blatant power grab.

  2. Ex Calvary says:

    Garvey wasn’t the best teammate when he played for the Dodgers.

    Once again, we see that character doesn’t count. As long as you proclaim both your anti-abortion stance and proclaim you’re to the “man”, that’s all the radical left needs to hear.

    Oh, one more thing, rigged and weaponized need to be part of your vocabulary.

    For 56 out of my 78 years, I considered myself a conservative Republican. Now I feel I have been invalidated from the party that has been taken over by the radical right.

    Is was no fan of Jack Hibbs long before he endorsed Garvey. He was on the board of a church where I served on staff, his lack of discernment then was disturbing.

  3. LInn says:

    Lots of pastors/church leaders do this and very little comes of it. However, it has driven me away from a couple of churches, where politics was so front and center I didn’t dare invite any of my more leftist family members to attend. The claims of the gospel should be the only reason for offense, not political candidates.

  4. Rob Murphy says:

    interestingly, the oppo marketing and ads I’ve received from the Dems ( I live in SoCal and rec’d *at least* 10 mail pieces in the last 2 weeks) all saying “Steve Garvey: Too Conservative for California”.
    He’s not even as conservative as Bill Clinton of ’92 campaign, with very similar baggage.

    You want to talk about an absence of character? Look at California politics. Our other choices? Schiff and Lee from the Dems. Worry not, those two will get the most votes in the primary and there won’t even be an R choice.

    There isn’t any remotely ethical candidate available. Write in is the only way to not violate the conscience.

    I’m reminded of PJ O’Rourke’s book title “Parliament of Whores”.
    It is an absolutely corrupt system. Think long and hard before you vote, sign your name, and therefore endorse any candidate and the process of voting itself. Question even the paper or computer screen the ballot appears on.
    It’s bad.

  5. Kevin H says:


    You’re right, lots of pastors do, do this, and little if anything ever comes of it. The government so often has just chosen to look the other way.

    That is why it was such a crock when Trump claimed to have made a great stand for Christianity and religious liberty by repealing the Johnson Amendment (the amendment in the tax code which prohibited 501(c)(3) organizations from endorsing or campaigning for political candidates). First of all, Trump never repealed the law as only Congress could do that, he only signed an executive order directing the IRS not to target churches for violating the Johnson amendment. Second, he tried to get Congress to repeal it, but failed in his efforts to get them to do so. And third and most of all, the government and IRS rarely enforced the Johnson amendment in the first place, so Trump’s order in the end made little difference.

    Pastors have long endorsed candidates from the pulpit and other platforms, both on the Left and Right. From a standpoint of the law, it has always been wrong, even if the government rarely chooses to take action on it, but from a standpoint principle and righteousness, it is often even worse as pastors have allowed partisan politics to take priority over and corrupt the pursuit and teaching of God’s Kingdom and God’s ways.

  6. Kevin H says:


    Yup, lack of character and lack of honesty all around. That’s why Christians have a difficult job to rise above it while at the same time not abandoning their call to care for and about others.

  7. Kevin H says:

    The Steve Garvey campaign in many ways is Herschel Walker 2.0, Garvey just isn’t as crazy as Walker and more competent at polishing his reputation.

  8. Bob Sweat says:

    I agree with you. Lack of character is not confined to the Republican Party. That is the reason I cannot support either party at present. My concern is not every believer is willing to open their eyes, as you have, to recognize that it’s on both sides. I understand your position on abortion, and I agree with most of what you wrote yesterday; however, I see many politicians who are pro-life as a vote-getter.

    Kevin, I believe you called it correct, Garvey is Walker 2.0.

  9. Bob Sweat says:

    “There isn’t any remotely ethical candidate available. Write in is the only way to not violate the conscience.”


  10. Kevin H says:

    If Christians, both right and left, truly wanted to have political power, they ought to collectively start demanding candidates that have demonstrated significant character and ethicalness. They ought to collectively pledge to vote for only such candidates. Talk about a game changer. Suddenly the political powers would be scrambling to find politicians and candidates who have carried themselves with integrity, because it would be otherwise quite difficult for anybody else to win if the entire Christian bloc refused to vote for them.

  11. Rob Murphy says:

    Bob – yup, I voted for 38 years for the Pro Life candidate and finally have decided that I can’t say “I’ve been snookered” anymore. I figured out that I was the source of my own exasperation. I kept voting and they kept lying about their beliefs.

    I am praying and thinking (for me, this only my personal conviction) that it’s time to be done with voting. I can’t endorse the process or the product of voting.

    Like the old Steve Martin record, I’m thinking for me and mine, “Let’s Get Small”.

    So I’ve increased my support and involvement with our local pro life pregnancy resource center and am establishing our church to be a “House of Refuge” with the organization Love Life.
    Here’s what they/we do:

    This approach to serving and thinking within my own sphere of influence has brought peace to my heart and a shortening of my Christmas Card list – both sending and receiving, haha.

    ps if the link to Love Life/House of Refuge isn’t something that serves the discussion, please edit it out for me.

  12. Reuben says:


    I dig the idea, but that is as much a utopian pipe dream as my Communist utopia happening in America.

  13. Kevin H says:

    Oh, I know, Reuben. With all the division within Christianity, there’s no way such a thing could be nearly organized, nor would people cooperate. But I’m just saying, if Christians are going to try to make a political power play, like they already do so often especially these last several years, this is what they should do – something that would actually make a positive difference, unlike the results of so many of their other attempts.

  14. Muff Potter says:

    @ Rob Murphy,
    House of Refuge sounds like a good pro-life organization.
    They could d be even better if they’d also advocate for safe and effective contraception.

  15. Michael says:


    It aids the conversation because it demonstrates how a person with deep convictions can actually manifest the Gospel in his sphere of influence.

    I would say there are echoes of how the early church dealt with the issue in your efforts.

    It is not politically partisan, it isn’t dependent on a particular theology….it’s incarnating Jesus in the church through us.

    May it all produce an abundance of fruit…

  16. Rob Murphy says:

    @ Muff Potter, ‘safe and effective’ contraception is a raging debate even within the pro-life movement.
    I can only speak to my personal convictions, actions, and experience.

    My wife and I resolved that the only acceptable means of contraception for us would be that I get my plumbing adjusted after our fourth kid, and in looking back, I believe that was a mistake.
    My wife wasn’t keen on me going under the knife, but I pressed on, and I was wrong.
    Children are a reward, a gift from God and I made it so God couldn’t bless us with more kids in the traditional reproductive manner. I wish I had not done that.

    Our personal history with “The Pill” is that (for us) it caused/ causes actions/reactions that risks future fertility and is, in my understanding, provably causing the end of life in the first stages of pregnancy. Additionally, the synthetic hormones were not good for us.

    I believe that pregnancy outside of marriage can be redeemed in a multitude of ways. The long term risks associated with modern methods of contraception make it impossible for me (just me, just my conviction) to ever advocate for external intervention of contraception.
    So for me, it is a net positive that they do not endorse contraception.

  17. Jean says:

    Up above Adam Schiff’s integrity was impugned. What is your evidence? It has to be more than that he investigated Trump.

  18. Everstudy says:

    Jean, you would never accept any evidence that Schiff is a known and proven liar. He’s on your side, and that’s all that matters to you. Don’t try to act all indignant about his “integrity” being impugned.

  19. Kevin H says:


    Rather than making assumptions and accusations, why don’t you bring evidence that you believe implicates Schiff as a substantial liar for Jean (and the rest of us) to consider? That’s much more conducive to the possibility of having a constructive conversation.

  20. Jean says:

    Serve it up Everstudy. That’s how adults converse.

    One of the things that characterizes our society is that truth is determined by human influencers. People have surrendered their responsibility to investigate truth claims to essentially blind faith in what someone else says. It’s how we get the image of a sheep.

  21. Rob Murphy says:

    I’m going to offer only one citation, not because there isn’t more, but because it’s fruitless.
    Please be aware that doing evil to conquer evil is not Biblical.
    I picked National Review because I’ve seen/read Michael utilize or share it, so I take that as a means of judging that it is seen by the community here as a ‘fair’ or objective source.
    After this provision of personally satisfactory proof / summary, I will not further engage out of respect to the positive discourse.

    Confirmation Bias is real. I promise that we’re both thinking that about each other.

  22. Jean says:

    There is an assumption by some (promoted by Trump) that because the Mueller report did not recommend charges against Trump that that conclusion was a conclusion that the allegations in the Steele report and other evidence was false. That is not the case. It was a judgment that the standard of proof likely could not be met. However, the Mueller investigation was also not able to pursue certain evidence because some witnesses refused to cooperate.

    Schiff was entitled to draw his own conclusions from the evidence. In retrospect he was closer to the truth than Trump supporters.

    What do people think about Jim Jordan’s impeachment inquiry built on the testimony of a witness who has now been indicted foe lying under oath about Biden? Is Jordan held to the same standard as Schiff is?

  23. Rob Murphy says:

    Jean – You asked about Jordan while I have already answered (while offering no defense of *any* politician).
    I will reiterate me, from above: “Please be aware that doing evil to conquer evil is not Biblical”.
    Also, please rethink asserting “closer to the truth” is anywhere near being the full truth or absent of untruth. Schiff is indefensible; I pray you won’t hitch your reputation to his.

  24. Wendi says:

    It’s the grandstanding by Jack Hibbs that I can’t stomach.

  25. Michael says:


    A quick Google search shows times when Schiff has not been completely honest.

    His opponents would consider him to be a liar and there’s not much defense available for that charge.

    This is getting beyond the scope of this discussion…

  26. Dread says:

    LOL … Schiff and Steele … definitely go together.

  27. Captain Kevin says:

    As someone who spent over 30 years in Calvary Chapels, with mostly positive experiences, Jack Hibbs just flat out pisses me off.

  28. Kevin H says:

    Wendi & CK,

    I hear ya, stuff like this just gets under my skin, too. Standing in the pulpit, while supposedly representing God, and operating in such an arrogant and deceitful manner while simultaneously charming the people, is altogether disgusting.

  29. The New Victor says:

    This even made the conservative-libertarian AM show Armstrong and Getty this morning.

  30. Alan says:

    Stop watching Hibbs. Watch great preaching that exalts the Savior. Hibbs should be paying rent the way he vexes your mind and ruins your good pen.

    I never listen to any of the vexing noisy political preachers. I can get way better politics and transcendently better preaching elsewhere.

    Listen to great theologians they abound online. Put their glorious ideas out there with your influence.

    We need the revelation of Jesus — Calvary Chapel has been doing newspaper preaching since the beginning.

    Besides the chance of a Republican winning the Senate in CA is about the same as the rapture preceding the vote.

  31. Kevin H says:


    “Stop watching Hibbs.” – Yes!!!

    Even greater so, for those who attend his church – Stop going!

    For those of us who get agitated by this crap, we’re NOT watching Hibbs or others like him, or are hardly doing so. But when stuff like this is brought to our attention, we get upset about it not only because it is a bastardization of the pulpit and the gospel of Jesus Christ, but also because we know that many people are being deceived by it. Some of us feel compelled to speak out at times about it, as that has been thoroughly documented many times by our references to Scripture that tells us to be far more concerned with sin in our own house and to expose the evils of such. And this type of specific evil is having a great detrimental effect on the church in our country.

    Many who read here, and certainly the large majority who comment here do not fall much for the false teachings and actions of charlatans like this. However, there very well may be some who read here, or end up getting referenced here by other concerned brothers and sisters, who may be vulnerable to such deception. The exposure of false teachers like Hibbs is certainly not happening within their own churches, thus for the welfare of the people of the Church, it needs to be done somewhere where the message can be seen and heard. (If it the exposure and proper handling of such would happen in the local churches in the first place, then there wouldn’t be any need for anybody else to do or say anything.)

  32. bob1 says:

    Well articulated, Kevin H. Speaks for me, too!

  33. JimmieT says:

    Praise the Lord! Wife and I are really looking forward to watching Pastor Hibbs this morning.

  34. Michael says:


    What are you looking forward to seeing?

  35. JimmieT says:


    His excellent exegesis of Scripture.

  36. Captain Kevin says:

    Please tell me that was a joke. Eisegesis is more like it.

  37. Wendi says:

    Jimmie T, except he doesn’t really do exegesis. Putting together a string of scriptures sometimes out of context, to support a preconceived idea or opinion isn’t really exegesis.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Phoenix Preacher

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading