Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Would You Die for Your Faith? ‘Martyr’s Oath’ Author Talks Tough Questions

November 16, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Around the world, Christians are being persecuted and murdered in record numbers.

Author Johnnie Moore didn’t realize how dangerous it could be to profess faith until he witnessed the oath that is part of a graduation ceremony for theology students in India. Graduates vow to be willing to die for their faith if needed.

For his new book, “The Martyr’s Oath: Living for the Jesus They’re Willing to Die For,” Moore traveled the world to collect eyewitness accounts from people who had been persecuted for their Christian faith as well as stories about people who sacrificed their lives as martyrs.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Johnnie Moore, good friend of the program, and the author of the book The Martyr's Oath, joins us now.

He is -- he is the guy who provided the inspiration to start the Nazarene Fund, and we welcome him to the program. Hi, Johnnie, how are you?

JOHNNIE: Hey, Glenn, I'm good. Good to hear your voice.

GLENN: So I don't know if you saw this on CNN yesterday, but CNN is starting a series now. They've been doing an investigation for a year, and they found out that slaves are still being sold in the Middle East. They didn't -- they didn't touch on the Christian slaves. They just touched on the -- the slaves in Libya. But I'm hoping that they will find the -- the -- the enormity of the problem soon, that it's not just happening in Libya.

JOHNNIE: Yeah. No. The situation has changed. But it hasn't improved. You know, ISIS taught these terrorists all around the world, in different places, new brutality. New techniques. And it persists. It's not what we were seeing. You know, the beheading of Christians on live television. Now it's back in the shadows.

But in Nigeria alone, Boko Haram, which pledges its allegiance to ISIS -- I mean, they killed more Christians last year than ISIS did in Syria. I mean, this is still a very, very intense, intense situation. Not to mention, you know, these communities still need to be rebuilt.

And, Glenn, I got to tell you, I was thinking really, really small, until I got on your radio program, and, you know, because of the Nazarene fund and your vision and your voice, I mean, a lot of people were helped. But we can't let up now. There's a lot of work that needs to be done.

GLENN: So Johnnie, you went over -- and this is kind of what your book is about, you went over with kind of a comfortable, Christian attitude -- an American, Christian attitude. And you met these people who are living -- we are seeing first century kind of persecution of Christians. They are now the most persecuted people on earth. And nobody is -- nobody is even talking about it.

And you saw it firsthand. And it kind of shook you to your core. Did it not?

JOHNNIE: No, it changed me. I totally changed my lifestyle. I changed my job. I changed how I was investing my time. I could not not have a good answer to this question, you know, what was I doing when this was happening in history?

And, you know, with this latest book, The Martyr's Oath, you know, we went around to 30 different countries, sent research teams everywhere to document the firsthand accounts of persecution. And I was even surprised at what was happening in countries I barely even knew anything about.

And, you know, then, Glenn, we have allies like Turkey. You know, Turkey is a country where last year the director of religious affairs, appointed an imam to the Hagia Sophia.

The Hagia Sophia was for a thousand years, the most important church in Christianity. And it has been a museum since the fall of the Ottoman Empire. But last year, Turkey, you know, under the nose of the whole world, appointed an imam to supervise one of history's most famous Christian churches.

They also confiscated 50 Christian holy sites. And so it's not just the imprisonment and beheading and the torture and all these things, you know, the thousands of people that are affected by that -- countries like North Korea where 70,000 Christians are imprisoned. But it's also this subtle discrimination and prioritization and supremacy of Islam that's erupting, you know, all around the world. And we have to keep pressure on people. And we have to keep telling these stories. And we got to help them too.

GLENN: Tell me these stories that you found in your research.

JOHNNIE: Well, one that I can't get out of my head, I met a family that had fled Syria. You know, I was in a neighboring country. You know, they were sitting across the table from me. They had converted to Christianity. And because of it, their jihadist relatives in Syria were threatening their lives. They sent them a letter. And the letter literally said, we know where you are. We're going to come find you, and we're going to crucify you, like your Jesus.

And, you know, my saw was on the floor already. But then they told me what they did. They said, we wrote him back. They wrote the jihadist relative back.

And the letter said, please, please, come find us. You know, we're ready to die for -- for our Jesus. But please don't crucify us. We're not worthy to die the same death.

And I just couldn't -- I just didn't know a faith like that. I mean, I see in it in the Bible, right? But I don't see it in our real world. And, you know, I found that as much as we've helped these people. And you know this more than anyone, Glenn. This audience saved the lives of thousands of thousands of Christians. But as much as we try to help these people, I find that they help us. They show us what's really important.

GLENN: All the time.

JOHNNIE: You know, they show us how to live because of their willingness to die.

GLENN: So what causes that? What have we lost, Johnnie, to where -- because I can't imagine -- I don't know a single Christian that I think would sit down with the family and say, let's write them back and say, please, just don't crucify us like our Lord. You can crucify us upside down. But we're willing to do that.

But just don't -- don't put us in his category. I don't know a single person here in the United States that could sit down with the family and really say that.

What happened -- what happened to us? Where is the disconnect?

JOHNNIE: You know, and I don't know that I could say it. And it causes me to look inside of my own heart. You know, in my -- in my reading of the Bible. You see a lot of this, right? The New Testament is all about persecuted people. They're either being persecuted. Or they're helping people who are being persecuted. And I'm just convinced that we cannot have a real faith life, unless we're close to people whose faith costs them something. And this is the most subtle thing, because it gets at our character. And we don't even know it's getting at us. You know, but it changes us. And it changes us in profound ways.

We don't care about truth anymore because truth doesn't cost us anything. We don't forgive our enemies. We don't forgive our political opponents, much less our enemies, because we don't have to.

And yet the Coptic church, you know, which has endured terrible persecution in the last six months, multiple suicide bombings, a bus of children massacred, and yet the Coptic pastors all across Egypt publicly said that they forgive the terrorists that killed them. It's like, crazy. Until you read the Bible, and then it's like ever present. You know, there's a role of government. You know, it's to keep nations secure. And there's a role for the church and for people of faith. And that is, by our compassion, by our service, by our testimony. We -- we cause less problems in the world for governments to solve. You know, we work on hearts. They work on security. And our persecuted brothers and sisters, they have a faith we need to learn from.

You know, Boko Haram went after this mom that we interviewed, and they were trying to behead her after they beheaded her husband and her children. And they were demanding that she say Allahu Akbar. They were trying to convert her on the spot, probably to make her one of their wives. And you know what she did, Glenn, she said to us, with a raspy voice, because she nearly died -- she said, every time they demanded that I say, Allahu Akbar, I looked back over my shoulder at them, and I screamed Jesus. She was fearless. You know, she has a real faith. And I think a lot of us sort of -- you know, we have -- we have a fake faith sometimes.

STU: Wow. I will say though, my i Phone 10 has not been delivered yet. It's been delayed. I'm very upset about it.

GLENN: He's been talking about it all day.

So, Johnnie, you know, I can't even get to the beheading part and see that kind of faith.

I am -- I'm struggling now with -- with faith. Not my faith. But with -- with religion and religionists, that we don't believe in Jesus enough to turn the other cheek. We don't believe in the message of the gospel, which is -- which is what Gandhi and Bonhoeffer and Martin Luther King lived.

We are escalating the -- the trouble by not being messengers of peace. And it strikes me that we don't really believe it. We don't really believe that it works. When push comes to shove, no, it's the sword. It's not the knee.

JOHNNIE: Yeah. And it says something about us in a deep and profound place. And the only way I know how to change is to meet those people who don't have what we have, they don't have our religious freedom. They don't have our wealth and our prosperity. They don't have our security. They don't have any of these other things. But what they do have is their faith. And their faith is all that they need. And, you know, this is why for 2,000 years, we've told these stories. You know, in early America, every American home had a Bible, a copy of Pilgrim's Progress, and they had Foxe's Book of Martyrs.

GLENN: Of martyrs.

JOHNNIE: You know, it's no surprise, that there was something unique about the Judeo-Christian foundation of this country, because it was -- you know, we were close to people whose faith meant something to them.

They expected they would have to sacrifice their lives, their money, their reputation. Something. They would lose something if they were faithful.

GLENN: And that is what this book is, The Martyr's Oath. It is a new version of Foxe's Book of Martyrs. And Johnnie Moore is its author.

Thank you, Johnnie, God bless you.

JOHNNIE: Thank you, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet.

Trump v. Slaughter: The Deep State on trial

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The administrative state has long operated as an unelected super-government. Trump v. Slaughter may be the moment voters reclaim authority over their own institutions.

Washington is watching and worrying about a U.S. Supreme Court case that could very well define the future of American self-government. And I don’t say that lightly. At the center of Trump v. Slaughter is a deceptively simple question: Can the president — the one official chosen by the entire nation — remove the administrators and “experts” who wield enormous, unaccountable power inside the executive branch?

This isn’t a technical fight. It’s not a paperwork dispute. It’s a turning point. Because if the answer is no, then the American people no longer control their own government. Elections become ceremonial. The bureaucracy becomes permanent. And the Constitution becomes a suggestion rather than the law of the land.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

That simply cannot be. Justice Neil Gorsuch summed it up perfectly during oral arguments on Monday: “There is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.”

Yet for more than a century, the administrative state has grown like kudzu — quietly, relentlessly, and always in one direction. Today we have a fourth branch of government: unelected, unaccountable, insulated from consequence. Congress hands off lawmaking to agencies. Presidents arrive with agendas, but the bureaucrats remain, and they decide what actually gets done.

If the Supreme Court decides that presidents cannot fire the very people who execute federal power, they are not just rearranging an org chart. The justices are rewriting the structure of the republic. They are confirming what we’ve long feared: Here, the experts rule, not the voters.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

The founders warned us

The men who wrote the Constitution saw this temptation coming. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers hammered home the same principle again and again: Power must remain traceable to the people. They understood human nature far too well. They knew that once administrators are protected from accountability, they will accumulate power endlessly. It is what humans do.

That’s why the Constitution vests the executive power in a single president — someone the entire nation elects and can unelect. They did not want a managerial council. They did not want a permanent priesthood of experts. They wanted responsibility and authority to live in one place so the people could reward or replace it.

So this case will answer a simple question: Do the people still govern this country, or does a protected class of bureaucrats now run the show?

Not-so-expert advice

Look around. The experts insisted they could manage the economy — and produced historic debt and inflation.

The experts insisted they could run public health — and left millions of Americans sick, injured, and dead while avoiding accountability.

The experts insisted they could steer foreign policy — and delivered endless conflict with no measurable benefit to our citizens.

And through it all, they stayed. Untouched, unelected, and utterly unapologetic.

If a president cannot fire these people, then you — the voter — have no ability to change the direction of your own government. You can vote for reform, but you will get the same insiders making the same decisions in the same agencies.

That is not self-government. That is inertia disguised as expertise.

A republic no more?

A monarchy can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A dictatorship can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A constitutional republic cannot. Not for long anyway.

We are supposed to live in a system where the people set the course, Congress writes the laws, and the president carries them out. When agencies write their own rules, judges shield them from oversight, and presidents are forbidden from removing them, we no longer live in that system. We live in something else — something the founders warned us about.

And the people become spectators of their own government.

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The path forward

Restoring the separation of powers does not mean rejecting expertise. It means returning expertise to its proper role: advisory, not sovereign.

No expert should hold power that voters cannot revoke. No agency should drift beyond the reach of the executive. No bureaucracy should be allowed to grow branches the Constitution never gave it.

The Supreme Court now faces a choice that will shape American life for a generation. It can reinforce the Constitution, or it can allow the administrative state to wander even farther from democratic control.

This case isn’t about President Trump. It isn’t about Rebecca Slaughter, the former Federal Trade Commission official suing to get her job back. It’s about whether elections still mean anything — whether the American people still hold the reins of their own government.

That is what is at stake: not procedure, not technicalities, but the survival of a system built on the revolutionary idea that the citizens — not the experts — are the ones who rule.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

1 in 20 Canadians die by MAID—Is this 'compassion'?

Vaughn Ridley / Stringer | Getty Images

Medical assistance in dying isn’t health care. It’s the moment a Western democracy decided some lives aren’t worth saving, and it’s a warning sign we can’t ignore.

Canada loves to lecture America about compassion. Every time a shooting makes the headlines, Canadian commentators cannot wait to discuss how the United States has a “culture of death” because we refuse to regulate guns the way enlightened nations supposedly do.

But north of our border, a very different crisis is unfolding — one that is harder to moralize because it exposes a deeper cultural failure.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order.

The Canadian government is not only permitting death, but it’s also administering, expanding, and redefining it as “medical care.” Medical assistance in dying is no longer a rare, tragic exception. It has become one of the country’s leading causes of death, offered to people whose problems are treatable, whose conditions are survivable, and whose value should never have been in question.

In Canada, MAID is now responsible for nearly 5% of all deaths — 1 out of every 20 citizens. And this is happening in a country that claims the moral high ground over American gun violence. Canada now records more deaths per capita from doctors administering lethal drugs than America records from firearms. Their number is 37.9 deaths per 100,000 people. Ours is 13.7. Yet we are the country supposedly drowning in a “culture of death.”

No lecture from abroad can paper over this fact: Canada has built a system where eliminating suffering increasingly means eliminating the sufferer.

Choosing death over care

One example of what Canada now calls “compassion” is the case of Jolene Bond, a woman suffering from a painful but treatable thyroid condition that causes dangerously high calcium levels, bone deterioration, soft-tissue damage, nausea, and unrelenting pain. Her condition is severe, but it is not terminal. Surgery could help her. And in a functioning medical system, she would have it.

But Jolene lives under socialized medicine. The specialists she needs are either unavailable, overrun with patients, or blocked behind bureaucratic requirements she cannot meet. She cannot get a referral. She cannot get an appointment. She cannot reach the doctor in another province who is qualified to perform the operation. Every pathway to treatment is jammed by paperwork, shortages, and waitlists that stretch into the horizon and beyond.

Yet the Canadian government had something else ready for her — something immediate.

They offered her MAID.

Not help, not relief, not a doctor willing to drive across a provincial line and simply examine her. Instead, Canada offered Jolene a state-approved death. A lethal injection is easier to obtain than a medical referral. Killing her would be easier than treating her. And the system calls that compassion.

Bureaucracy replaces medicine

Jolene’s story is not an outlier. It is the logical outcome of a system that cannot keep its promises. When the machinery of socialized medicine breaks down, the state simply replaces care with a final, irreversible “solution.” A bureaucratic checkbox becomes the last decision of a person’s life.

Canada insists its process is rigorous, humane, and safeguarded. Yet the bureaucracy now reviewing Jolene’s case is not asking how she can receive treatment; it is asking whether she has enough signatures to qualify for a lethal injection. And the debate among Canadian officials is not how to preserve life, but whether she has met the paperwork threshold to end it.

This is the dark inversion that always emerges when the state claims the power to decide when life is no longer worth living. Bureaucracy replaces conscience. Eligibility criteria replace compassion. A panel of physicians replaces the family gathered at a bedside. And eventually, the “right” to die becomes an expectation — especially for those who are poor, elderly, or alone.

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

The logical end of a broken system

We ignore this lesson at our own peril. Canada’s health care system is collapsing under demographic pressure, uncontrolled migration, and the unavoidable math of government-run medicine.

When the system breaks, someone must bear the cost. MAID has become the release valve.

The ideology behind this system is already drifting south. In American medical journals and bioethics conferences, you will hear this same rhetoric. The argument is always dressed in compassion. But underneath, it reduces the value of human life to a calculation: Are you useful? Are you affordable? Are you too much of a burden?

The West was built on a conviction that every human life has inherent value. That truth gave us hospitals before it gave us universities. It gave us charity before it gave us science. It is written into the Declaration of Independence.

Canada’s MAID program reveals what happens when a country lets that foundation erode. Life becomes negotiable, and suffering becomes a justification for elimination.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order. If compassion becomes indistinguishable from convenience, and if medicine becomes indistinguishable from euthanasia, the West will have abandoned the very principles that built it. That is the lesson from our northern neighbor — a warning, not a blueprint.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.