Can Light Commune with Darkness?

“Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness?  And what communion has light with darkness?” 2 Corinthians 6:14

by Cathy Helms January 9, 2023

Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, famous for his great faith in standing against a vast army and seeing God slay them all, made several serious mistakes. The most grave, perhaps, was to marry his son, Jehoram, to Athaliah, daughter of Ahab, the most wicked king of Israel. [1 Kings 8, 22 Chron 22] Athaliah’s mother, Jezebel, was the embodiment of Ishtar; she ruled over her husband and provoked him to wickedness.

Like Mother, Like Daughter

Jehoshaphat died, Athaliah’s husband murdered his six brothers so that he could be king, and it is suspected this was Athaliah’s idea. Athaliah and her husband had a son, God killed Athaliah’s husband, her son rises to the throne at age 22, and God kills him after one year. 

The spirit of Ishtar is the spirit of the usurper. 

Athaliah murdered all of her grandsons and every possible heir to the throne, or at least she thought she did. We’ll come back to that.

Athaliah usurped the throne and for the next seven years she used her power to establish the worship of Baal in Judah, exactly as her mother Jezebel had done in Israel. However, God preserved an heir, Joash, who was raised by the High Priest Jehoiada. When he reached the age of eight, Jehoiada presented him to all Judah, crowned him as king, and executed Athaliah.

But the damage had been done. In only seven years the enemy had gained a stronghold of Ba’al worship in Judah that was never broken. When all was said and done, God said of Judah before He sent them into the Babylonian exile that Judah was more wicked [Jer. 3:8-10] than the northern kingdom that had previously been scattered to the four winds because of Ba’al and Ashtoreth worship including child sacrifice. 

The sad legacy of righteous King Jehoshaphat is that he yoked the line of King David with the line of apostate Jeroboam whose legacy had infected [1 Kings 12:25-33] his successors and prevailed until the nation was carried away by the King of Assyria [2 Kings 17:18-23].

“Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness?  And what communion has light with darkness?” 2 Corinthians 6:14

Psalm 85:4-9 Restore us again, O God of our salvation, and put away your indignation toward us!  Will you be angry with us forever? Will you prolong your anger to all generations?   Will you not revive us again, that your people may rejoice in you?  Show us your steadfast love, O LORD, and grant us your salvation.  Let me hear what God the LORD will speak, for he will speak peace to his people, to his saints; but let them not turn back to folly.   Surely his salvation is near to those who fear him, that glory may dwell in our land. 

A Powerful Legal Group Changes the Law While Nobody’s Looking

The American Law Institute increasingly seeks to advance a politically correct agenda. By JOHN FUND posted May 13, 2018 7:50 PM

Next week, one of the most powerful private legal groups you’ve never heard of will hold its annual meeting in Washington, D.C. For nearly 100 years, the 3,000- member American Law Institute has exercised enormous influence through what it calls “Restatements” of the common law. Many judges, lawyers, and scholars rely on it for an objective, readable description of what the law is.

As I noted at NRO in 2016:The ALI’s Restatements are an effort to clarify and codify the common law. In many areas, actual statutes do not govern us, but “case law,” or judicial precedent, does. The ALI tells courts what the case law is, and courts routinely rely on the ALI Restatements as authority for what the law is. The ALI’s work serves as something between Cliff’s Notes and an authoritative encyclopedia of law for many judges.

The Supreme Court cites the ALI every few weeks, on average, in its decisions.

But there must be a clear line between describing what the law is and seeking to establish new law and policy. More and more lawyers think that the ALI has departed from its core mission and is becoming an engine driving novel legal rules. At its annual convention two years ago, ALI leaders proposed adopting a model penal code that would make “affirmative consent,” regarding sexual relations, its official policy. The move was stymied when influential members noted that such a definition would shift the burden of proof on to the accused, something not currently part of our judicial system. As Ashe Schow wrote in the Washington Examiner in 2016:

The accused would have to prove they had received “communicated willingness.” This would mean that any time someone engages in sexual activity, they not only have to make sure they obtain this specific form of consent, but also proof of this consent.

Undaunted, the ALI has spread its legal wings to copyright law, consumer contracts, intentional torts, and insurance. At next week’s ALI annual meeting, a battle royal is expected over a draft Restatement on the law of liability insurance. A group of ALI members say the draft seeks to reshape the law in such a way that will further clog court dockets and raise costs for business and consumers.

Last month, a group of six governors — from Texas, Maine, South Carolina, Nebraska, Utah, and Iowa — sent the ALI a letter warning that the proposed draft is a usurpation of the law-making authority of their state legislatures. The Restatement could also retard economic development, they note, by “creating uncertainty and instability in the liability insurance market.” The governors urged urge ALI members to revise or rescind the draft Restatement.

Leading lawyers agree that the ALI’s draft should return to the drawing board. Victor Schwartz, the chair of the public-policy group for the Washington firm of Shook, Hardy, and Bacon, participated in a recent conference call held by the National Council of Insurance Legislators. On the call, Schwarz noted that the draft uses “weasel words” that will become “litigation fuel.” It will make an insurer liable whenever its defense counsel lacks “adequate” malpractice insurance. “Who in the heck knows it is, or if it isn’t [adequate]?” he asked. No court has ever adopted such a liability theory.

A letter from a group of corporate attorneys notes that the draft “recommends that an insurer that loses a dispute with a policyholder would have to pay that policyholder’s legal fees, but if the insurer prevailed, it would have to pay its own attorney fees.” This is in complete variance with the “American rule” that each party in a legal dispute normally pays its own attorney fees.

Such under-the-radar shifts in reinterpreting the law have bothered legal scholars for several years. “The ALI has more and more become politically correct,” Ronald Rotunda, a law professor at Chapman University and a member of the ALI since 1977, told me before he died earlier this year. “It’s now driving an agenda rather than providing clarity and objective standards to the law.”

Justice Antonin Scalia also issued his own warning about the ALI in 2015, the year before his death. In Kansas v. Nebraska, he wrote:

Modern Restatements . . . are of questionable value, and must be used with caution. . . . Over time, the Restatements’ authors have abandoned the mission of describing the law, and have chosen instead to set forth their aspirations for what the law ought to be.

Scalia argued that such novel views of the law should have “no more weight regarding what the law ought to be than the recommendations of any respected lawyer or scholar.” No longer can one assume that “a Restatement provision describes rather than revises current law.”

You’d think the general ALI membership would realize that the last thing it needs is more public skepticism about the group’s small subgroup of legal experts who draft ALI Restatements. Right now, the growing perception is that the ALI’s legal experts are increasingly ideological trial lawyers and anti-business law professors who are on a crusade and taking the rest of the ALI membership along for the ride.

Snapshot of the history and progression of abortion in the USA

1/2/2023 by Cathy Helms cathy@cathyhelms.com

From ChristianLifeResources.com as of June 2022

1959

• The American Law Institute (ALI) proposes a model penal code for state abortion laws. The code advocates legalizing abortion for reasons including the mental or physical health of the mother, pregnancy due to rape and incest, and fetal deformity. [Cathy’s note: This organization is behind the current attempt to legalize or lower penalties for pedophilia.]

1967

• Apr. 25: Colorado Gov. John A. Love signs the first “liberalized” ALI-model abortion law in the United States, allowing abortion in cases of permanent mental or physical disability of either the child or mother or in cases of rape or incest. Similar laws are passed in California, Oregon, and North Carolina.
• The Virginia Society for Human Life is founded becoming the first statewide right-to-life organization in the country.

1968

• National Right to Life is formed in the summer of 1968 and publishes its first newsletter in October 1968. The board of directors grows to include representatives with a diverse range of backgrounds including doctors, lawyers, nurses, homemakers, and educators.

 1970

• Apr. 11: New York allows abortion on demand up to the 24th week of pregnancy Similar laws are passed in Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington state.

1971

• Apr. 21: The U.S. Supreme Court rules on its first case involving abortion upholding a District of Columbia law permitting abortion only to preserve a woman’s life or “health.” However, the Court makes it clear that by “health” it means “psychological and physical well-being,” effectively allowing abortion for any reason.
• June: National Right to Life holds its first annual convention

1972

• By year’s end a total of 13 states have an ALI-type law. Four states allow abortion on demand. New York repeals its 1970 abortion law but Gov. Rockefeller vetoes the repeal.

1973

• Jan. 22: The U.S. Supreme Court issues its ruling in Roe v. Wade, finding that a “right of privacy” it had earlier discovered was “broad enough to encompass” a right to abortion… Issued on the same day, Doe v. Bolton defines “health” to mean “all factors” that affect the woman, including “physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age.

The floodgates were opened in1973 and 744,610 babies were slaughtered in the year of this ruling by SCOTUS. But even more horrific, by 1978, just five years later, that figure had nearly doubled to 1,410,000. By 1990 babies murdered by abortion in the US reached the height of nearly 1,609,000 babies and the US was exporting this legislation throughout the world as a condition of receiving other help. Thankfully, the USA dipped to under a million abortions in 2013 and have remained there ever since. abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current/

According to Wikipedia: The American Law Institute (ALI) is a research and advocacy group of judges, lawyers, and legal scholars established in 1923 to promote the clarification and simplification of United States common law and its adaptation to changing social needs.^[1] Members of ALI include law professors, practicing attorneys, judges and other professionals in the legal industry. ALI writes documents known as “treatises“, which are summaries of state common law (legal principles that come out of state court decisions). Many courts and legislatures look to ALI’s treatises as authoritative reference material concerning many legal issues. However, some legal experts and the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, along with some conservative commentators,^[2] have voiced concern about ALI rewriting the law as they want it to be instead of as it is.^[3]

The ALI drafts, approves, and publishes Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, model acts, and other proposals for law reform. The ALI is headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

At any time, ALI is engaged in up to 20 projects examining the law. Some current projects have been watched closely by the media, particularly the revision of the Model Penal Code Sexual Assault provisions.^[4][5][6]*

*Cathy’s note:  This is legislation that proposes, among other things, legalization and lower penalties for pedophilia.

For more information on ALI check out this article:

a-powerful-legal-group-changes-the-law-while-nobodys-looking