Silence isn’t peace — it’s just surrender in slow motion



Blaze Media recently published my opinion piece “Agree to disagree? More like surrender to the script.” In the days that followed, readers left thoughtful and reasonable comments.

But when the Christian Post republished the same article, the comment section there sparked a firestorm.

If God the Father had been willing to 'agree to disagree' with humanity about sin, He wouldn’t have sent His Son to die in our place.

If you don’t have time to read the article or browse the responses, here’s the short version:

The piece centers on a conversation I had with my friend Jeffrey, who strongly dislikes President Trump. Over the four years of the Biden administration, Jeffrey never once criticized Biden or his team — no matter how egregious their actions. Yet, barely two months into Trump’s return to office, Jeffrey was already taking shots at him. And he did so during what had been, until that moment, a relatively uneventful phone call.

To be clear, I didn’t bring up the topic of the president. I knew it was a sensitive subject for Jeffrey. But during a conversation about a recent movie, he found a way to insert his objection to Trump’s deportation policy, calling those deported “asylum seekers.” He also declared that Trump was “bad for democracy.”

I pushed back gently, noting that America is not a democracy but a constitutional republic. Jeffrey agreed.

When I pointed out that an open border has led to sex trafficking, fentanyl deaths, and violent criminals infiltrating small towns, he said he didn’t support any of that. But then he quickly ended the conversation with, “Let’s just agree to disagree.”

Trump broke the truce

I found that well-worn phrase — “agree to disagree” — strange in this context. It suggests any disagreement, no matter how serious, can be casually brushed aside. Sure, my wife prefers chocolate ice cream, and I prefer vanilla. On that — and countless other minor things — we can “agree to disagree.” But when the stakes are higher? When lives are at risk — even the future of the nation? People should articulate and defend their positions.

After my “agree to disagree” article appeared in the Christian Post, commenters there came after me. Apparently, I wasn’t being a good Christian because I stirred the pot by bringing up Donald Trump — “the great divider,” as some called him. Never mind that I didn’t bring up his name. My friend did. But I wasn’t about to let his cheap shots go unchallenged.

In the original piece, I asked whether my friend — a faithful Christian — also sees his allegiance to the Democratic Party as an “agree to disagree” matter. Can a Christian’s loyalty to any political party cloud his judgment on what’s clearly right or wrong?

Jeffrey said he opposes sex changes for kids and drag queen story hours. But when it comes to deportation, he sees Trump’s second-term policies as domineering and out of bounds.

Disagreeing isn’t a sin

On critical issues — like the devastating effects of open borders — silence is complicity. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer warned, “Silence in the face of evil is evil. Not to speak is to speak.” When others looked the other way — or “agreed to disagree” — during the Nazi rise in 1930s Germany, Bonhoeffer stood firm. He was one of the few pastors who refused to be silent.

Today, the American left censors, cancels, and silences anyone who disagrees. Leftists expect us to “agree to disagree” but only if we’re the ones doing the agreeing — and the disagreeing. That demand for submission is part of why the country now finds itself in such dangerous and unstable times.

In my earlier article, one line struck a nerve:

It’s hard to imagine these days that the words ‘Christian’ and ‘Democrat’ can be mentioned in the same sentence.

That line sparked outrage. One commenter at the Christian Post wrote: “Nothing ends discussions — or even friendships — faster than questioning someone’s salvation over their political party.”

But here’s the problem: That’s not what I said. That commenter assumed I questioned my friend’s salvation. I didn’t. Within the context of the article, it’s clear I questioned his wisdom — something entirely different.

Jesus didn’t flinch

A few years ago, it was trendy to wear wristbands with the initials “WWJD?” — short for “What Would Jesus Do?”

But I always thought the better question was “WDJD?” — “What Did Jesus Do?”

Without knowing the Gospels, we risk projecting our own preferences onto Christ. We imagine He would act just like us in any given situation. But if we read scripture and study His words, we begin to understand how He actually responded — and how we should, too.

Nowhere in the four Gospels does Jesus “agree to disagree.” He never split the difference. He never wavered. He always led from a position of authority.

Take His encounter in the Temple. Jesus didn’t debate the moneychangers. He didn’t issue a polite warning. He flipped their tables and drove them out (Matthew 21:12-13). He didn’t scold them and promise to check in again next Sabbath for a follow-up heart-to-heart.

Jesus didn’t agree to disagree. He made it unmistakably clear: God’s house would not be defiled.

Oswald Chambers, in his classic devotional “My Utmost for His Highest,” ends the March 24 entry with this piercing line: “You may often see Jesus Christ wreck a life before He saves it.”

He cites Matthew 10:34, where Jesus says, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”

That doesn’t sound like someone looking to “agree to disagree.”

Debate or dodge

One commenter tried to compare disagreement to a hung jury — where jurors can’t reach a unanimous verdict. But that analogy falls apart under scrutiny. Hung juries don’t arise from casual disagreement or an early vote. They happen only after jurors rigorously examine the evidence, debate the facts, and dig into every detail.

A jury doesn’t begin deliberations by taking a straw poll and calling it quits. It doesn’t return to the judge after a 7-5 split and declare, “Let’s just agree to disagree.”

A fair trial demands serious discussion — so should any conversation where truth and justice are at stake.

If God the Father had been willing to “agree to disagree” with humanity about sin, He wouldn’t have sent His Son to die in our place. We could have gone on living however we pleased — hurting others, being hurt, and suffering the consequences. Jesus might have shown up just to stand on the sidelines, shaking His head as we destroyed ourselves.

Consider the woman caught in adultery in John 8:1-11. The Pharisees reminded Jesus that the law required her to be stoned. He could have done what Pontius Pilate would do later — wash His hands of the situation. He could have said, “The law is the law,” and let the crowd do as it pleased. Agree to disagree, right?

But Jesus didn’t do that. Instead, He delivered a mic-drop moment that spared her life. Then, He told her, “Go and sin no more.”

Compare that to what happened when Jesus stood before Pilate. Pilate, faced with the mob, knew Jesus was innocent. But instead of standing up to the crowd, he caved. He agreed to disagree — and sent Christ to the cross.

When it comes to sin and judgment, “agree to disagree” is just cowardice dressed up as compromise. Jesus never did that.

You posted, didn’t you?

Some readers of my original article accused me of sounding self-righteous for taking a firm stance with Jeffrey. But I don’t believe we should compromise — or “agree to disagree” — on matters of real consequence. That’s why I laid out the facts clearly, whether Jeffrey knew them or not.

There’s more to be said, but let me end with this:

A surprising number of commenters on the Christian Post insisted that we should always “agree to disagree,” even on major issues. But every one of those comments proved my point. Not a single person “agreed to disagree” with me. Instead, they made sure their dissenting views were heard — some twisting my words, others going straight for personal attacks.

If they truly believed in “agreeing to disagree,” they wouldn’t have commented at all.

So who’s right about the value of “agree to disagree”?

Well, it appears it's debatable, after all.

Elon Musk shows us how to kill cancel culture once and for all



Elon Musk knows how to end cancel culture.

Earlier this month, a member of Musk's Department of Government Efficiency team, Marko Elez, resigned after the Wall Street Journal reported that the young DOGE staffer once posted "to a deleted social-media account that advocated racism and eugenics." The story primarily focused on the DOGE's efforts and offered little evidence to support the serious accusation, giving readers only two examples.

For liberals angry over the DOGE's mission to uncover and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars, the story proved to be confirmation that Musk is operating a rogue campaign with immature and inexperienced loyalists.

A watershed moment?

What happened after Elez's resignation may prove to be a turning point that erodes cancel culture.

It began when Vice President JD Vance spoke up.

"Here’s my view: I obviously disagree with some of Elez’s posts, but I don’t think stupid social media activity should ruin a kid’s life," Vance said. "We shouldn’t reward journalists who try to destroy people. Ever. So I say bring him back. If he’s a bad dude or a terrible member of the team, fire him for that."

That prompted Musk to promise Elez's return — for an important reason.

"He will be brought back," Musk vowed. "To err is human, to forgive divine."

— (@)

Forgiveness over punitive exile

What Musk said cannot be emphasized enough. He has, in fact, highlighted the fundamental problem with cancel culture: the absence of forgiveness and redemption.

Understanding this is key to ending cancel culture once and for all.

If our culture fails to forgive, our society will collapse under the weight of our own hypocrisy.

In the social media age, cancel culture has become a popular tactic of the easily outraged. When a small corner of the internet is angry over the words or actions of the victim, those people demand the accused be boycotted and shunned — and even fired from his job. Unfortunately, employers all too often bend the knee and comply with the aggrieved because they don't want online controversy to impact business.

But we must understand what cancel culture does: It seizes on the worst moment of a person's life and forces him to pay for his alleged sin.

This phenomenon is almost unrecognizable in real life. We intuitively know that (in most cases) one mistake, one misstep, one taken-out-of-context act of speech should not result in perpetual exile.

And yet, cancel culture exists. Why?

The power of digital 'reality'

Perhaps it is because social media exists in a disembodied reality that lures us to do and say things that we would never say or do in real life. Just one scroll through any online comments section proves this to be true.

From that perspective, it's easy to see why cancel culture advocates feel no empathy for their victims. The aggrieved forget the humanity of their victims. Even worse, the aggrieved forget their own humanity. They forget that every person — themselves included — has done or said something that some corner of the internet would demand cancellation for.

But real life isn't punitive like cancel culture.

When I make a mistake in real life, my friends don't organize a mob and demand that my employer hold me accountable. Rather, I am provided space for correction, opportunity to express remorse, and a chance to seek amends.

Most mistakes, no matter how egregious, don't define us. Rather, it is our response to error that speaks volumes.

In his book "Mere Christianity," C.S. Lewis writes about an "important paradox": the connection between mercy and justice. "Mercy, detached from justice, grows unmerciful," he warns.

If he were writing about cancel culture, Lewis might have written, "Justice, detached from mercy, grows unjust."

Mercy, in the case of cancel culture, is forgiveness. Cancel culture, therefore, is never about justice — only unmerciful punishment. But where there is forgiveness, there is accountability, grace, and redemption.

Christian foundations

The beauty of Musk's response is not only its emphasis on the connection between mistakes and forgiveness but that forgiveness is divine.

Alexander Pope, an 18th-century poet, wrote the words that Musk tweeted. Pope was a devout Christian, which means his use of "divine" is a clear reference to God — not any random divine force. The allusion to God is important because Christianity places unique emphasis on forgiveness. It is central to God's redemptive mission in and through Jesus Christ.

Forgiveness, moreover, is a central theme in Jesus' teaching. It's in the Lord's prayer and His instruction to the disciples, and He beautifully petitioned God the Father to forgive His executioners as He died a brutal death on the cross. The apostle Paul, meanwhile, exhorts Christians to forgive "just as in Christ God forgave you" (Ephesians 4:32).

The way forward

The blueprint for ending cancel culture is found in Musk's response. We don't ignore mistakes, for that dodges accountability. But we don't define people by their worst mistakes, either. Instead, we offer them something divine, something that is of God: forgiveness, grace, and redemption.

If our culture fails to forgive, our society will collapse under the weight of our own hypocrisy. Remember the words of Jesus, "For you will be judged by the same standard with which you judge others, and you will be measured by the same measure you use" (Matthew 7:2).

The path forward — one that ends with cancel culture's demise — requires us to deny the bloodthirsty digital mob. It requires acknowledging that everyone makes mistakes, that we all have flaws, and that, indeed, we are all sinners. God, in and through the person of Jesus Christ, has shown us the way forward.

Cancel culture is destructive. But forgiveness — and following God's path to life — builds something better. God, with His unfathomable grace, forgives repentant sinners and offers them redemption. We should go and do likewise.

This is how we end cancel culture once and for all.

Baby Jesus stolen from nativity scene, but thief returns it just in time for Christmas with remorseful apology



A baby Jesus Christ figurine was stolen from a nativity scene in Colorado. However, the alleged thief felt supreme guilt over his improper actions and returned baby Jesus just before Christmas with a touching apology for his sins.

On Dec. 17, the Fort Collins Police Department notified the public that a baby Jesus figurine had been stolen from the Old Town Square in Colorado, located approximately 60 miles north of Denver.

"I am really sorry. I made a dumb mistake in the moment. It won’t happen again."

"This Grinch tried to ruin Christmas by stealing the baby Jesus from the Old Town Square nativity scene," the Fort Collins Police Department stated.

Police included a photo of the suspect in question in hopes of the public identifying the alleged "Grinch." The suspect in the police screenshot was a teen white male.

On Dec. 19, the Fort Collins Police Department noted that the baby Jesus statuette had been turned in — just in time for Christmas Day.

"The baby Jesus figurine reported stolen from the Old Town Square Nativity scene four days ago was today anonymously dropped off at Poudre Fire Authority Station #1 in Fort Collins, along with an apology note," the Fort Collins Police Department declared in a statement.

The alleged thief begged for forgiveness for his crime, "I am really sorry. I made a dumb mistake in the moment. It won’t happen again."

The Fort Collins Police Department added, "No further information has been obtained about the person who swiped the statuette."

Local firefighters could be seen posing with the baby Jesus Christ figurine.

The statuette does not appear to be damaged based on photos released by local authorities.

The business that maintains the nativity scene proclaimed that it didn't want to pursue charges against the suspect, according to the Associated Press.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biblical truth outshines feminist fiction in Lily Phillips’ OnlyFans stunt



The reaction to the OnlyFans model who recently slept with 100 men in a single day is a needed reminder that feminist propaganda is no match for biblical truth. Lily Phillips is the 23-year-old British woman who recently filmed herself having sex with dozens of strangers and posted it to her OnlyFans page. But the YouTube documentary about her stunt sparked intense reaction online when it was released in early December.

Despite decades of feminists trying to convince the public that women should — and can — have sex just like men, I didn’t see a single think piece claiming Phillips as an exemplar of sex positivity. In fact, several female commentators wanted to shift attention to the men who participated in Lily’s experiment.

Lily Phillips decided to play with fire and is feeling the burn right now. Let’s hope she will come to her senses before she is completely consumed.

This didn’t surprise me one bit. Many women want every “privilege” they associate with being a man — except being responsible for their actions. Yes, Phillips was visibly shaken after having sex with 100 men in a day, but she was no victim. She came up with the idea, recruited the men, and posted her activity on her OnlyFans page.

If Andrew Tate said he wanted to sleep with 100 women in a day, no one would have a problem criticizing him for being a sex-crazed degenerate. To make things worse, Lily Phillips is now planning to have sex with 1,000 men in early 2025 in an attempt to break a world record.

The women whose first impulse was to criticize the men who participated in Phillips’ self-degradation were tacitly acknowledging that attempts to reclaim the word “slut” and declarations that “sex work is work” are lies. Despite decades of social conditioning meant to convince us that men and women are identical sexual beings, deep down they believe those men should have protected Lily from herself.

They are right. I would be ashamed of my sons if they walked into a room with condoms strewn on the floor to participate in something so degrading, but the men who participated didn’t show their faces or allow their real voices to be broadcast.

Lily is the person trying to become famous for selling sex, and the physical consequences of her actions are likely the least of her worries. She already admitted feeling a sense of shame over her chosen “career” path. She will likely find it hard to find a decent man willing to marry her. Many people will hear her confessions and think they are a sign that society needs to become more tolerant and accepting. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The revulsion people feel when reading Lily’s story — and the conflicted emotions she expressed in the documentary — are signs of a conscience that has not been completely destroyed.

On a personal level, the news really is bad for Lily Phillips. She sounded like a woman whose soul died in that room.

Thankfully, Christians are made spiritually alive through Jesus. As it says in John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” This is the good news that she needs to hear.

Some people claim to believe in God but think Christ’s atonement for sin only covers the minor, private sins. When it comes to strippers, prostitutes, fornicators, adulterers, or homosexuals, they assume some people are too far gone for God to save.

The apostle Paul certainly wasn’t one of these people. After rattling off a list of sins that keep people in spiritual bondage, he utters six of the most important words in the Bible: “And such were some of you.” Lily Phillips hasn’t done anything in front of a camera for money that disqualifies her from receiving the forgiveness God promises to every person who turns from sin to follow Jesus Christ.

The responses to Lily Phillips were not just a repudiation of second-wave feminism. They were also a useful reminder that atheism can attempt to explain the origins of human life but has no answer for the source of human worth. If humans are simply evolved creatures who make their own choices and define their own reality, nothing would justify the reactions provoked by a woman having sex with 100 men in a day.

People who truly believe Lily Phillips and the men who subscribe to her content are no more than apes with agency wouldn’t assign any moral value to what they are doing. They would nod in agreement when she refers to herself as a feminist and explains her decision to profit from the men sexualizing her.

But Christians who believe men and women are made in the image of God know that dignity and worth come from our creator — not our bank accounts or subscriber counts. They know that sex creates a powerful connection between a man and a woman, which is why it’s meant for a husband and wife within a marriage covenant.

A flame can warm a home when it’s contained in a fireplace but will destroy a house if it escapes its proper place. In the same way, sex creates a sense of security and closeness when enjoyed within marriage but leads to a very different set of emotions outside that context. Lily Phillips decided to play with fire and is feeling the burn right now. Let’s hope she will come to her senses before she is completely consumed.

'People are going to try and kill him': Catholic priest who gave rally benediction recalls assassination attempt on Trump



The man entrusted with giving the invocation at former President Donald Trump's rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, recalled his experience that fateful day both before and after Trump was nearly assassinated.

A few days before the event, members of Trump's team contacted Fr. Jason Charron — a Ukrainian Catholic pastor in charge of churches in Carnegie, Pennsylvania, and Wheeling, West Virginia — to see whether he would be willing to lead rally attendees in prayer. Charron agreed.

'We are called to a bloody faith,' Charron claimed. 'Christ calls us to get dirty and to have a nail go through the hand sometimes and a crown of thorns through the temple.'

So on Saturday evening, Charron stood before the podium on the rally stage and asked God to send His Holy Spirit to help make America and the world "great again in God's sight."

"Through Christ, Our Lord, amen," his prayer closed to thunderous applause from the crowd, which Trump estimated to be some 55,000 people.

Charron had to leave the rally shortly thereafter, but before departing the main area, he instructed a small group of a couple dozen people to pray for God's protection over President Trump. "The reason I said that is because people are going to try and kill him," he said. "They're going to try and shoot him."

His words were remarkably prescient.

By the time Charron reached his car just a few minutes after the benediction, he heard reports of gunshots and then witnessed an eruption of chaos. "That's how the devil works," the good father explained. "He loves chaos."

Charron then left the rally and soon after sat down for an interview with popular Catholic YouTube channel "Pints with Aquinas." In fact, the interview began so soon afterward that Charron learned from the host about the death of beloved father, husband, and former fire chief Corey Comperatore and the injuries to two other individuals.

When asked about a priest's role during such horrific tragedies, Charron resolutely insisted that suffering is a necessary part of the Christian experience, pointing to Christ's suffering on the cross as the example all Christians must follow.

"We are called to a bloody faith," Charron claimed. "Christ calls us to get dirty and to have a nail go through the hand sometimes and a crown of thorns through the temple."

Regardless of circumstances, Charron continued, all Catholics — and Catholic priests in particular — must stand firm in their faith "without apology."

"It's important that we Catholics and particularly me, as a priest, that I be present to advocate for the gospel of Christ in the public square without apology," he said.

When some raised objections to Charron appearing at a Trump rally despite Trump's quibbling about abortion — an act that the Catholic Church calls a "moral evil" — Charron claimed that far too many people fall for "the fallacy of perfection," which convinces them not to vote for any candidate who is not "absolutely perfect."

Even though Charron unequivocally opposes abortion and "the anti-life culture in general," he expressed admiration for Trump — whom Charron believes to be a "baptized Christian" — and his work appointing pro-life justices who overturned Roe v. Wade.

Though grateful for the ending of Roe, Charron takes issue with some of Trump's beliefs regarding abortion. In fact, Charron views abortion as the source of almost all the violence plaguing America today.

"We have raised generations of of children with the understanding that it is okay to butcher and dispose of precious human life in the most sacred place, the womb of a mother," Charron explained with conviction. "And if that sacred gift is disposable in that sacred place, then we are all up for extinction."

But abortion, Charron insisted, is not the only pro-life issue. As a man of Ukrainian descent, he also sees the war in Ukraine as an important component of it, and he admires Trump for sending "defensive weapons" to Ukraine while in office in contravention to policies established under Barack Obama.

During a brief meeting with Trump just before the rally, Charron had the opportunity to thank the former president for his work on behalf of the Ukrainian people. "I said, 'Thank you,' and he was very grateful and he said, 'You know, it's heartbreaking to see what's happening in Ukraine with all these young men dying, and it's because weakness was projected,'" Charron recalled of their conversation.

In addition to his pitch for grace for Trump, Charron also encouraged Americans to offer forgiveness to the shooter, whom Charron characterized as "a madman."

"There are only two responses in the face of such evil like this. ... One is you become the evil, and the other is you forgive it," Charron claimed. "And the sooner we can go through that valley and come out on the other side, the better it is for us and for the lost souls in this world."

Charron suggested on "Pints with Aquinas" that Trump forgive the shooter and share this forgiveness with the public, citing Christ's forgiveness of his executioners and Pope John Paul II's forgiveness of his would-be assailant as models of Christian forgiveness properly understood.

"I think if President Trump is going to win over his enemies, then the greatest opportunity to win over the undecided and the hostile will be found the day when he can forgive his would-be assassin."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Holy Week Provides A Time To Offer Forgiveness — And Seek It Out

We forgive someone not necessarily because they deserve it, but because we want to bring out the best in them and in ourselves.

The gift of turning 60



I celebrated my 60th birthday last week. I want to thank all of the lovely people for their kind birthday wishes. I am the luckiest man in the world. I have a wonderful partner in life in my beautiful wife, Patricia, and three lovely daughters, Elle, Miranda, and Madeline.

Turning 60 reminded me of something Dr. M. Scott Peck told me over 30 years ago: At 40, you feel like you can conquer the world, and there is a sense that nothing can stop you. But at 60, you realize the very real fragility of life and the temporariness of it all. It’s humbling to know there is indeed a time limit for all things and that God’s design, though perfect, is precious far beyond its brevity.

I am also reminded of the Hindu story that my friend Bill from Lowell, Arkansas, shared with me about a man at his funeral. “Would this man lying here ask for more riches and gold from the world? Would this man ask to be more famous and well regarded by others? Would he ask to be taller or look more handsome?”

“No. The only thing this man lying here today would ask for was much simpler: more time.”

If you are reading this now, then you, too, have time! Use it wisely. Use it unwisely, too! But use it. Be in it. Be aware that you are part of all of it and that the separateness you sometimes feel is an illusion. Just as your heart beats without being told, you are as integral to the sun that fires and the planets that circle it as your heart is to you.

For the atheists, God loves you, too. The mistake you make is to think the universe is a stupid thing that just bumps into things and expands ignorantly and without reason or intelligence. And that somehow, we human beings, with our intelligence, emerged as just some kind of freak universal accident. To you, I say: If kindness, empathy, compassion, and love exist, those things exist because you found them in other people.

As my dear friend Norm Macdonald once said, “We are part of this universe, indeed a mere fraction of it, so if we have kindness and love, how much more the universe itself.” For if we are capable of love, it is because it is endemic to the universe itself. To quote Alan Watts, “For we didn’t come 'in' to the world, we came 'out' of it. We are the universe evolving to the point of consciousness, so that the universe, us, can experience existence and life in all its wonder and beauty and glorious exuberance.”

Lastly, as I am a new convert to Catholicism, I offer my apology for my lack of Christ’s forgiveness to my fellow man. I was so angry at the people who shut down schools — who shut down the world! — and who coerced others to do things against their will, which hurt many people deeply. I offer my unconditional forgiveness and amnesty.

How can I stay mad at the famous singer who would not let others into his Broadway show unless they had an experiential jab? I will never forget how kind he was to me and my friends when he was the musical guest on “Saturday Night Live.”

How can I continue to hold a grudge against the actor who shamed people like me but who has been such a great example for other actors never to give up and keep fighting for their dreams?

How can I remain angry at the lovely actress who said she could no longer be friends with people like me who didn’t “get it,” knowing how incredibly kind she is with every child she meets?

I am humbled by the example of my mother, Pilar, and how she was able to forgive the occupiers of her Philippines in World War II who killed both of her brothers. At last, it is forgiveness itself that is the gift that we give ourselves because it frees us as Jesus Christ intends for all of us to be free. For His gift of ultimate and unlimited forgiveness is indeed the gift for all humanity. May God bless you and your families now and forever.

Living 'Unconquered' After Trauma | Adam Davis | Rick & Bubba University | Ep 175
play icon

Living 'Unconquered' After Trauma | Adam Davis | Rick & Bubba University | Ep 175

A Professor Abandoning A Spouse And Kids For A College Student Isn’t Brave, But Wicked

Society used to agree that someone like Agnes Callard, who divorced her husband to marry her student, should be shamed, not exalted.

Boyfriend allegedly stabbed 21-year-old soldier and set car on fire with her inside, family wants justice but willing to forgive



A 21-year-old soldier was found dead in a burning car in Honolulu, Hawaii. The boyfriend of the victim has been charged with murder. Police say he stabbed Spc. Laau Jordan Laulusa, a member of the Hawaii National Guard, in the neck before lighting a car on fire with her inside the vehicle.

Witnesses called police to report a car fire near Mililani High School in Honolulu at around 6:40 a.m. on Monday, according to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Witnesses informed police that they saw a man "opening and closing doors" of the car during the fire. They said he "then fled on foot" from the crime scene. Witnesses followed the man, who they say was brandishing a "blade" or weapon.

Officers arrested 25-year-old Samuel Jones in connection with the death of his girlfriend, Laau Jordan Laulusa. He was charged with second-degree murder and first-degree arson. His bail was set at $1 million.

Laulusa's body was found in the torched car.

KHON reported, "The family said the suspect in custody was the girl’s boyfriend."

Laulusa joined the Hawaii National Guard in 2019. She was a supply specialist for the 227th Brigade Engineer Battalion, 29th Infantry Brigade Combat Team.

Brig. Gen. Stephen F. Logan, commanding general of the Hawaii Army National Guard, said in a statement, "Our Aloha and prayers are with her 'ohana and those who knew this soldier personally and professionally. This is a tragic loss for the entire Hawai‘i Army National Guard. We are cooperating with authorities during the ongoing investigation."

Laulusa's family wants justice for the tragic death of the 21-year-old soldier.

Her uncle, Sasoa Feagai, told KHON, "It's too bad because she's still young, a beautiful girl, real kind, and she didn’t deserve this."

Feagai told KITV, "Where's the love? What happened? It's so hard to think about something like this happening to anybody. But it does happen. Without the aloha and love that we should give people."

He added, "We're just dealing with the tragedy of it and try to make sense of what had happened."

Feagai said Laulusa's mother is willing to forgive the killer.

"My sister said she's willing to forgive," Feagai said. "I guess it's about all we can do now."

The family said, "Whatever the outcome is, is justice for Jordan."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Murder suspect to appear in court www.youtube.com