This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program originally aired on April 15, 2021. To listen to the audio file, please click HERE.

Joe Green:                          Greetings. My name is Joseph Green, and I will be your host for today’s Stand in the Gap Today radio program. Hosting along with me, the honorable Sam Rohrer, President of the American Pastors Network. On today’s program, we will talk about how much the liberal left has infiltrated the American education system on all levels. Not only have they infiltrated the system, but they are also creating a hostile environment against those that do not hold the same liberal Marxist ideology.

                                             We will also be joined with a very special guest who is fighting back against the liberal lefts subversion of the American educational system. As we always do on the program is define the terms and bring awareness to some of the ideologies behind what we’re discussing today. There’s a term, the Prussian educational system, which many people may or may not be familiar with, but the Prussian education system refers to the system of education established in Prussia as a result of educational reforms in the late 18th and 19th century, which has had widespread influence ever since that time. The Prussian education system was introduced as a basic concept in the late 18th century and was significantly enhanced after Prussia’s defeat in the early stages of the Napoleonic wars. The Prussian educational reform inspired other countries and remains important as a bio power in the Foucauldian sense of nation building.

                                             American educators were fascinated by German educational trends.

                                             Calvanese Stow, Henry Bernard, Horace Mann, George Bancroft, and Joseph Cogswell all had a vigorous interest in German education. And for those of you who may not know, Prussia is the name that was given to the country before it was called Germany. In 1843, Mann traveled to Germany to investigate how the educational process worked. Upon his return to the United States, he lobbied heavily to have the Prussian model adopted. Mann convince his fellow modernizers, especially those in the Whig party to legislate tax supported elementary public education in their states.

                                             Indeed, most Northern states opted one version or another of the system he established in Massachusetts, especially the program for normal schools to train professional teachers. In 1852, Mann was instrumental in the decision to adopt the Prussian education system in Massachusetts soon, New York state set up the same method in 12 different schools on a trial basis. The system was characterized by compulsory attendance, teacher colleges, standardized national tests, national age graded curriculum, compulsory kindergarten, the fragmenting of concepts into separate subjects with fixed periods of study, and the state ultimately asserting a superior claim to the child over the rights of the parents.

                                             This was a radical departure in methodology and content from the successful traditional forms of education in America. Educator, John Taylor Gatto, and the underground history of American education describes Prussian thinking at the time, “The Prussian mind which carried the day, held a clear idea of what centralized schooling should deliver, obedient soldiers to the army, obedient workers for mines, factories, and farms. Well subordinated civil servants trained in their function. Well subordinated clerks for industry, citizens who thought alike on most issues, and national uniformity in thought, word, and deed. The area of individual volition for commoners was severely foreclosed by Prussian psychological training procedures drawn from the experience of animal husbandry and equestrian training, and also taken from past military experience.”

                                             Sam, the Bible makes provision for the family to educate the children. And I know you’ve talked about this much in the past, yet in America, our children gain most of their education from the school system. Can you talk about how much the public school system influences our children and how that has affected the body of Christ?

Sam Rohrer:                      Joe, I can. And I think what you just laid out historically is probably news for most people who are listening to the program today. But the best thing that I can do right now is to support what you are saying. What you laid out is what people are listening to it, they say, “Well, yeah, that’s what we have in the public educational system now. Federal control, standardized curriculum, set hours of different subject matter in the school,” the whole approach, everything you laid out is exactly what we’re doing. The contrast I want to draw though, is that that was not the standard and the form of education in the earlier days of our education. What you described was a usurpation of what was in place. Now, what was in place? Well, what was in place was the approach of education that accompanied the pilgrims and the Puritans.

                                             And that was a family-based, parental based, direct involvement in the education of the children. And then it extended there to church involvement, and it was the early days, government never got involved. Now all the way back in Pennsylvania, we’re sitting here Joe. William Penn was our founder and people would understand his name, he laid out what he called a frame of government. It became a model for the early colonies at that point.

                                             In that he laid out what they needed to know and for a Republic, a self-governing Republic to be able to function. And what he was saying was a self-government functioning without a heavy handed, centralized government, king, dictator, or something else, but where individuals discipline themselves and allow for a self-governing Republic. And it was founded on, basically what he describes as a biblical worldview. You had to understand the nature of the role of God, understand the nature of the role of man, the reality of sin and the fall. He talked about the nature of man going into government unrestrained by God’s law would become tyrants.

                                             And he went into, and said, “Once established what had to happen to keep it was, you had to have a virtuous and godly education of the youth directed by the parents.” And out of that came, the new England Primer, was the document used all the way up into the 1800s to teach kids how to read, but it all started with teaching them the ABCs built off of each verse, A was a verse that went to Romans as an example, “All have sinned.” And then B, every letter was begun with a verse from the Bible. Their purpose was, unlike what you laid out, “To teach a compliant worker and able soldier or whatever,” their goal was the biblical model of teaching a child to fear God, to keep his commands and to understand and be grateful to the God of heaven, who was the giver of all good things for the purpose of glorifying Jesus Christ as king.

                                             And matter of fact, when that first group Joe, set up, they actually began Harvard University in 1630 for the purpose of teaching young men, how to preach. The purpose of education is on a plaque on the wall right now in Harvard University, and it speaks specifically that, “The purpose of education was so that a person would bring glory to our creator, the God of heaven.”

                                             So it starts with a worldview, that’s where we started within this country, and when we began to move away from God that opened up the door for both public education, which was only intended originally for those who could not be schooled by their parents at home or would not. And then it shifted to what you described as a very, very secular worldview that now dominates our educational system.

Joe Green:                          Yeah. And those are great points, Sam. And I found out that when they first started the Prussian model, it was because they had lost the war and they realized that they didn’t have enough compliance from the people. And so that was the basis for that particular educational system. But we’re going to go to break now. And when we come back, we’re going to have our very special guests. We’ll talk a little bit about how this ideology has infiltrated the higher institutions of learning. We’ll be back here on, Stand in the Gap Today.


Joe Green                           And we’re back. Today, we’re talking about how much Marxism and liberalism has infiltrated and subverted the U.S. educational system. And our first segment, we talked about the Prussian model of education. And for those of you who aren’t familiar with that you might want to take some time and really look into that and how our educational system has been framed around that in modern times. Much of the American public is finally coming to the realization that the basic institutions of our Western heritage, both economic and cultural are under assault.

                                             Capitalism, our Judeo-Christian foundation’s, marriage, the family, our legal system, our Constitution, our representative democracy, and our basic civility, all of the institutions that have given us so much security and prosperity for 250 years, the biggest engine driving this train has been the steady transformation of the majority of our colleges and universities from institutions that foster open debate and the exchange of ideas into incubators of left leaning, socialism. Cultural Marxism, and political activism, shaping generations of young people.

                                             Merzamie Clark is an educational leader, passionate about advancing Christian excellence in academia. A Philippine born American, Clark graduated from the University of Washington with a BA in English language and literature and comparative history of ideas. She was awarded the university’s college of arts and sciences Dean’s medal in the humanities in 2013. And subsequently served two grant years as an English teacher and U.S. Cultural ambassador in South Korea through the Fulbright program. In 2015, she returned to her Alma mater to pursue a MA/PhD in English as a top scholar fellow.

                                             She founded TRINICY in 2018 as an effort to create a worldwide coalition of Bible-believing Christian scholars and supporters standing up for the unfettered pursuit of truth and academia through free inquiry and the open exchange of ideas. TRINICY is a non-partisan non-denominational, non-profit association of conservative Christians on and off campuses in the United States and abroad. Their vision is for all Christians to have the conviction, courage, and competence to advance the cause of Christ in education, regardless of any and all opposition. Welcome to the program today Merzamie.

Merzamie Clark:               Dr. Green, thank you for having me.

Joe Green:                          It’s quite a pleasure. It really is. You shared a story with me as we talked about how simply being identified as a conservative Christian triggered your classmates emotionally, can you share that story with us?

Merzamie Clark:               Absolutely. This is a sobering topic, and I’m excited to share a bit about my experience that led to the birth of TRINICY. So I was in my second year of graduate school at a research one institution when the topic of identity and diversity came to the fore. And before this, as a context, I had spent my undergraduate years as an incognito Christian and a closeted Christian. And a closeted Christian conservative, those are the two worst things to be in academia.

                                             So of course I thought it was understandable that I would take on this incognito identity for now to achieve academic excellence. But when I went to grad school and I faced five, possibly 10 years of up to PhD level education, I thought, “Lord, please give me the strength to come out for you, to reveal my identity and where I really actually stand on these things.”

                                             And so when you pray those prayers, he gives you the opportunity. So one of those opportunities was in this graduate class called, “Women of color in academia,” through the department of gender, women, and sexuality studies. The professor was just talking about how, you could be included, but not necessarily belong institutionally. And one of the classmates that I had opened up an opportunity for me or a window for me when she said she felt that there has been no room for conservative people in her department. And it bothered her in a way that conservative views were not welcome. And she said, “There’s just a lot of students who are conservative, but are unable to speak. It’s just too liberal, et cetera, et cetera.”

                                             And I was just sitting in my chair shivering from fear, anxiety, and excitement, because I clearly had been praying for this opportunity and it had just arrived. So I took the opportunity to ask the question, “Is a conservative person, or is a conservative Christian welcome in this academic space?” And the chilling answer was, “In theory, yes, but in practice, no.” So obviously for me, this was not theory level. This was, I was practically in that academic setting.

                                             I was sitting with seven other scholars all going for their PhD’s. I was actually going for my master’s at that time with a fully funded scholarship. So I was, I guess the newest one in that room and the professor and the students, I think had a misunderstanding of Christianity to put it best. But the reception of my coming out with that question or through that question was not received positively. And one of the students walked out of the room for 45 minutes. And when she returned, she had turned her back against me or away from me for that class and for the remainder of the quarter.

                                             She told me later when we did have an exchange in front of the whole class, that she had been triggered by me saying I was conservative. And that, that meant for me at the time, I had said that, “This is not being me anti-things. This is me being pro my beliefs, my Christian faith. This means that I stand for family, I stand for God’s design for family, God’s design for sexuality, and God’s design and value for life.” And what I think she heard me maybe say, “I am anti-gay, I do not support gay people’s existence and so forth.” And so there was this huge, traumatic experience for her on her end. And what she described it later was seeing black spots that she couldn’t even think at the moment when she heard me say the word conservative. It was a deeply triggering word for her because she associated it with conservative people in her life, or even family members who professed Christ, but did horrible things to her. And so forth.

                                             So this was just one instance where someone in the academy, where again, you would expect that in academia, you would have what you said, Dr. Green, “An open exchange of ideas, open debates and discussions.” But that was not the case, because-

Sam Rohrer:                      Merzamie, I want to follow up on this because I’m sure our listeners are listening and saying, “Wow, wow. I mean, I’ve heard stories like this before elsewhere, but boy, maybe not one directly firsthand like you’re talking about,” would you clarify something for me, because you have used two terms, “Conservative,” and have used the word, “Christian.” You’ve gone back and forth. You said, “You assumed that it was because she thought you were anti-gay and you had said nothing about that.” So my question, is your experience is the root opposition to a Christian conservative academic? We’ll put it in that setting, is it primarily driven because of the political consideration of what a conservative is versus a liberal? Or in fact, do you find that going to the fundamental aspect of truth, Bible, Christian, therefore truth and/or moral immoral, where’s the primary resistance that you were finding there?

Merzamie Clark:               Wow. Yes. The two are not synonymous, obviously. I mean, by conservative, Bible-believing. But those two terms are as well not synonymous. But things that we try to conserve are biblical. So I think the two for me are very closely tied together. And I do want to define some of my terminology because I grew up in a Roman Catholic nation, the Philippines. I was raised in a church going Baptist home and lived very much in the minority in Muslim dominated Southern Philippines before immigrating to the United States.

                                             And so the closest approximation of my religious identity in the U.S. is, I guess, Evangelical Christianity though, I would also say that I identify as such, not without critique of the Western, in particularly, American brand of Christianity implicated in historical and contemporary atrocities, enslavements, and inequities committed against many people.

                                             So those are the things that even I was careful to include in my statements in that class, because as what you said Sam, is it the political? Or is it the biblical, the spiritual aspects? And I think for sure, the spiritual warfare is at hand. For sure, without a doubt. And it is causing people to focus. I think there is a wow, a deviation from what is actually happening. We are throwing around terms atrocities, enslavements, and inequities like I just said, thinking that that is the main thing, the material and the physical, there is a spiritual that is above all of this. But the conversation shifts so that in the academy, it’s about social justice and it’s not about biblical justice, which is what we should be occupied with. There is a judge above every man and woman, and we don’t want to pay attention to that. So I think that’s at the core of what is possibly happening in the academy, especially. And what is spilling over in our culture today?

Sam Rohrer:                      That’s just excellent. Joe, I know you got to take it back here, but I didn’t know where you were going to go on that Merzamie, but what you said there, I hope every one of our listeners caught. At the end of the day, what you’re saying, at the end of the day of the controversies that exist, ultimately can be linked ladies and gentlemen, to a moral truth, which is a biblical truth. It’s because we say here on this program all the time, ultimately it’s a decision who is God? Who is not God? What is right? Is there a right? Is there truth? There’s not truth? Thank you for your clarification on that Merzamie. That was just very helpful.

Joe Green:                          Yes. Yes. And we’ll be back with Merzamie Clark and Sam Rohrer with the re-education of the American school system. And we’ll be back after the breaks here on Stand in the Gap Today, I’m your host, Joe Green.


                                             And we’re back. Many reports have shown the leftist tilt among our institutions of higher learning. One being an extensive study published by Mitchell Langbert on the National Association of Scholars website on April the 24th. Langbert found that political registration by doctorate holding professors in top tier liberal arts colleges, is overwhelmingly democratic. With 39% of the colleges in this study being Republican free. I want to reiterate that. It means that 39% of the colleges that they studied had no Republicans. Now, whether you’re Republican or not is irrelevant, but it shows a lack of diversity of ideas in my estimation.

                                             Aside from actual political party registration, the study found that, “Political affiliation skewed heavily to democratic, with more than 78% of the academic departments having no politically conservative representation. While exceptions do exist among liberal arts institutions, they are few. The skewed figures are most notable in the humanities and social science fields where the battle of ideas is most important.” Carson Holloway an Associate Professor of political science at the University of Nebraska at Omaha told the Daily Signal.

                                             In the last segment, you mentioned, one of the interactions that you had, I’m talking to Merzamie Clark, I’m sorry, the founder of TRINICY. You mentioned one of the interactions that you had in class with people that were not happy about the idea of being a conservative. Can you share any other insights or any experiences that you’ve had with us about the temperature on these college campuses?

Merzamie Clark:               Well, absolutely. So one of the things that was imprinted on my consciousness at that time was the idea of a bad subject. So there’s a scholar called, named [inaudible 00:20:37]. She says, or this person says, “There are three kinds of practitioners in academia, the competent, the innovative, and the one who violates the disciplinary truth or the bad subject.” And I would say that our students today have to be willing to be that bad subject. Not just to go to school to be competent or even be innovative, but be the one who violates the disciplinary truth. If that truth is not Christ truth, it’s just disciplinary. If it’s just from your department or from your institution, you have to be able to make the distinction, first of all, and be willing to violate that disciplinary truth. If it is contrary to God’s truth.

                                             I think students have to be willing to be subdued and expelled, which again, the scholar says, “Is the result of being a bad subject.” And there’s something wonderful about doing that. It’s not an easy thing, but that is following literally in the footsteps of the one and only Messiah, Jesus Christ, who himself was being a bad apple, not only in his time, but in all times, including our time right now. So as far as insight, I would say, “Be willing to follow Christ footsteps, bear your cross, be excellence in your leadership, your scholarship, and your fellowship, doing work as unto one audience, and understand that you carry out the great commission, advancing the cause of Christ, even in your education.”

                                             If these are formative years, then you are in training now. I would also say the parents, know what educational institutions report as their mission, their vision and their values. Education has tended to be this huge life empowering thing and it is, but education is a mess right now. And we need to recognize that. So parents who are listening, know who these institutions supposedly serve through their mission. If they say, “All people,” then hold them accountable for that, let them know that you know, and hold them accountable to their stated claims as an active member of society. And as someone who loves your daughter or your son. Hold educational institutions through rigorous questioning as well, where is funding going? What departments and new positions are being created? And for what purposes?

                                             We have a lot of departments now named solely to promote diversity, equity and inclusion. It’s becoming standard, even in our workplaces. Now again, what happens in the academy streams out into the workplaces and into the larger culture. What is the purpose of these programs? Certainly not, I mean, certainly one of the effects is to suggest to young people and impressionable minds, our society is not diverse, not equitable, and not inclusive.

                                             What kind of diversity are you including? Intellectual? Ideological and experiential diversity? You need to be asking these questions. What kind of diversity? What kind of equitable world? Is this one where people strive, work hard, labor honestly, and move forward by the sweat of their brows by the merit of their work and by the excellencies of their character? Is that the kind of equitable world that you are talking about as an educational institution? And what kind of inclusive? The kind that includes everybody, or just certain categories of folks who have deem oppressed? Why inclusion? Why not belonging? Like my professor said, “You can be included but not belong.”

                                             So these are my questions to students and my urgings for parents and for pastors, which is, I think you’re doing really great work here because you are equipping pastors to know the culture and engage the culture. Please continue to shepherd your congregants in understanding the times because the terminologies and the words are always shifting. It is crazy how you can think that you’re in conversation with somebody, but apparently have different definitions of the terms you’re using. And you could think that you’re in agreement, but you’re not, you might be serving two different kinds of Christ.

Sam Rohrer:                      Merzamie, all excellent that you’re sharing there. As there’s a number of places that I could go, I want to come back and ask you this because you’ve identified the importance again, as we started the program and we do all of these, got to define your terms. So you’re talking, defining inclusion, defining diversity, all of those things that you found in that setting. But you brought it back to the matter of truth. And that’s what we do, we call Stand in the Gap for Truth is really what our programs are called.

                                             So here is a question for you. Is it even possible in a setting, let’s put it this way, today’s secular setting where our academic institutions have a different approach to truth, we state in the program, they’re not defining truth in terms of biblical truth. Is it even possible for a person to get their instruction in an academic institution in these days and come out of that with a proper understanding of life and living, and truth and academics, if they are not starting from the place of the definition of truth, meaning Jesus Christ, who is the way, the truth and life and the word of God.

                                             So how did you handle that in that setting? And are you telling young people today go into that setting, just be aware of what you’re walking into, how do you address that?

Merzamie Clark:               Wow, these are such important questions. I have wrestled with them since stopping with my MA and continuing to think is a PhD even worth it at this point? Where do I place myself, my time, my energy, how do I help the students who are currently in the system? Because the idea of the University again, is that the open debate and the exchange of ideas, and the research, and the academic freedom would lead people to a variety of answers and have the freedom to choose which one is the best or the most beautiful, or, which one is true? Which one of all these options, so we now know is true? But there’s a preponderance of silencing and marginalization that’s happening of worldviews and ideologies in academia. Conservatism is just one of the most hated forms of ideologies in academia, but there are other things too, that are being quieted down and silenced and other opinions that are being exposed.

                                             So there is a possibility, however, with the current subduing and expelling of the people who might be speaking on these things, and the students who are being discouraged from speaking on these things, they’re being punished through grades, through social stigma. A professor with a PhD after their name has a lot of social capital and social power. So there’s a lot of things that our students are not empowered to do in those settings without the tools.

                                             So with TRINICY, I’m understanding personally that our work is not going to focus on the political, the social, the cultural, even though those are things that will be resulting from our primary focus. It’s going back to the Bible. It’s in the initial story that I shared earlier, if I had known more about what the word of God said, because remember I had just come out of the closet. I was very, very new to understanding my faith as well. I was still growing so much at the time, and even now.

                                             And that’s what we are on the, that’s true for every Christian. But if I had known a little bit more, how to defend my faith, how to defend it with grace and love and truth, things might have worked out differently for me at that point. Because, most people don’t understand Christianity accurately. What they often attack is not Christianity, but in this misrepresentation of it. It’s often a Christianity of, for example, America or of Christianity of America, American South pre-Civil war and not the Christianity of Christ. And Frederick Douglas’ narrative from slavery to freedom makes a great and helpful distinction between these two.

                                             This is why TRINICY exists. We want our students to focus and go back to the basics. Know your Bible, please read your Bible. So we pair them with a mentor who can encourage them in this walk, who can pray for them weekly, who can hold them accountable to reading the Bible and discussing the Bible. So that they are conversant in what is true, because everything else that they will hear probably in the culture is going to be 99.9% lies.

Joe Green:                          Those are great points. And I like what you said, it was so spot on, one of the things we see, unfortunately, because a University is supposed to be a diversity of ideas, but instead of diversity of ideologies, they are now focusing more on diversity of identity at the sake of diversity of ideologies. We’ll be back after the break. And we’ll talk a little bit more with Merzamie Clark, who is the founder of TRINICY, and also with the honorable Sam Rohrer and we’ll finish our conversation about the re-education of educational system in America here on Stand in the Gap Today. I’m your host, Joe Green and we’ll be back after these important messages, please stay.


                                             And we’re back talking with Merzamie Clark, founder of TRINICY, an organization that supports conservative Christian scholars in America. Merzamie, can you tell our listeners how they can support TRINICY, and how they can find out more about your organization?

Merzamie Clark:               Yes. Friends, you can support TRINICY by showing up on our doors and offering your time, talent, treasures. We have multiple opportunities for servant leadership, including serving as a member of our board, serving as an ambassador and prayer warrior, and serving as a mentor, please consider serving as a Christian mentor. We have young people from around the world who have expressed deep interest in being guided, being poured into, and being encouraged in their walk with Christ by a mature Bible-believing Christian. If this is you and you’re listening, and you wanted or needed a sign, this is your sign. You can find out more about our work, including testimonials from both mentees and mentors by visiting our website., that’s

Joe Green:                          That’s awesome. One of the things in our last segment we talked about it became very evident is, with identity politics that we talk about a lot on this show identity is a big thing here. Now, Universities are supposed to be a diversity of ideas, but instead of diversity of ideas, there’s a uniformity of ideas. And the only diversity they’re really seeking after is diverse identity. So they’re focusing more on the identity than the ideology, or the belief system of the people, which is why, what you’re doing is so vitally important.

                                             One of the things I want to talk about is this infiltration. We talk about Marxism and communism and all these other -isms often, I just want to give a little bit of background. In 1848 [inaudible 00:31:38] with enlightenment ideas, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, which most of you are familiar with probably, penned the Communist Manifesto, an idealistic, imagining of the oppressed workers of the world uniting and a bloody revolution to overthrow their oppressors, namely the oligarchies and capitalists of the world.

                                             From the rubble they would form a new and perfect society governed by benevolent dictatorship of the proletariat. After which the scourges of crime and poverty, the need for jails and armies, and indeed government itself would melt away. Marxist political thinking, moved powerfully into the idealistic European intellectual strata of writers and artists subsequently spreading its toxic message into the universities. One eager student was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the Bolshevik who went on to lead the Russian revolution. Indeed, many of the educated elite in Europe, Great Britain and the United States became enthralled with the socialist communist promises of Lenin and Stalin of a new paradise on earth.

                                             Now, it’s quite evident that from Genesis 3, the serpent came to man and said, “That they could be their own gods.” And basically he was promising some type of Utopia. If men were just able to do whatever they wanted to do in opposition to God. And that’s what this belief system is based on. Somehow or another, these elite class people in their minds, I call them elite in their minds, but that somehow or another they can figure it out without the influence of God. And that will have a Utopian society if we just allow their ideology to take over.

                                             Sam, I do not think that we can stress enough the dangers of the influx of Marxist ideology here in America, but especially in the targeting of our educational system. Can you reiterate how important it is for pastors to understand the issue and what should be our response?

Sam Rohrer:                      Joe absolutely. We started the program talking about at the beginning of our nation, our founders, the ones that really laid down the premise for where we are, the Puritans and the pilgrims, laid down the understanding that parents had the responsibility to teach children in the ways of God, to fear God and keep his commands. They took that right from the chapter of Deuteronomy chapter 6, where God told the Israelites, “I’m taking you into a land, I’m taking you out of Egypt, a place of bondage and I’m going to give you to a new land, but this is what you have to do. To keep your freedom and to keep what I’ve given you, to keep the blessings that I will promise you, you’ve got to train up your children.” And he told fathers, “You’ve got to take the lead. Teach your children and extend it to the next generation, your grandchildren.”

                                             Teach them what? Teach them the fear of God, that all truth comes from God, our creator, and the commands of God, that the obeying of that truth and walking in it is what produces civil freedom, spiritual freedom, certainly, prosperity, a security from the enemies, all of those things that are there. And where does that come from to answer your question, Joe, it comes from the pulpit. The pulpit is the place that must communicate that truth broadly, but it’s ultimately, even if the pulpit didn’t, every father is going to give an account to God himself for how he has dealt with, and instructed in that fashion. But the pulpit will really give an account because the pulpits are commanded to preach the Word.

                                             So to me, we have two choices like we always, God of heaven or the devil. Right or wrong. Fear of God, despise God. Submit ourselves to the God of heaven as the highest, or by pride we lift ourself up. That’s been the history all the way through, but when we train up children in the way they should go, biblically Joe, they will not depart from it. And it contrasts, and I’ll give a quote here from Vladimir Lenin, who you cited, who is at the heart of our system of education now. He said this, he said, “Give me just one generation of youth. And I’ll transform the whole world. Give me four years to teach the children. And the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. Destroy the family you’ll destroy the country.” That’s Lenin. And that’s the choice that God tells us, “You train up your children in a way they go, in a fear of God, blessing and prosperity will be the result.” Lenin says, “You train them up without God, I’ll control the world and tyranny is the result.” I don’t want tyranny. I want freedom.

Joe Green:                          Absolutely Sam. And that’s why I think Merzamie, what you’re doing with TRINICY and organizations like yours is so important because I would say from personal experience, a very close family member that was very staunch in their Christian belief, but then they went away to college in this liberal environment. And she struggled for several years, not only through her college years, but afterwards she struggled with her faith because of the influx in all these liberal Marxist ideologies that really eroded at her faith. And because she didn’t have a support system around her, other than her family, she didn’t have a support system to reinforce the basic Christian conservative values that she had learned at home, and so it was very difficult for her. So what we have to do is we have to create an environment of people, like-minded people that will help to reinforce the biblical values that our young people learn at their house.

                                             Because as you stated, Sam, eventually they’ll come back to it. But there is much more of a struggle when they are basically a fish thrown in the shark tank. And so we very much have to be mindful of this, you have to realize what is happening. And the last point I’ll make Sam and then we should turn it over to prayer is that, you think about they infiltrated the higher learning institutions and they taught in the teacher’s colleges and in the teacher’s unions, this Marx’s ideology. And eventually those people that learn at a young age became administrators, they become the ones who are running the colleges, they become the ones who run various school systems. And so it wasn’t enough now for the secondary education, but they are really targeting our children at a younger and younger age because they understand that whatever a child learns at a young age will be the thing that impacts them through many, many years of their life.

                                             And so Sam, if you will close us out in prayer. Again, I want to thank Merzamie Clark for being on the show with us and sharing ideas, just a phenomenal young lady who is doing some magnificent work. We’d encourage you to check out TRINICY when you get the opportunity and support any way you can, because it is a vitally important organization. But Sam, any final thoughts you have and close us out in prayer. I appreciate it.

Sam Rohrer:                      And Joe just got something I think I’ll go ahead and pray here. Heavenly father, we thank you for the opportunity to communicate broadly, nationally on such an important topic. Thank you for Merzamie and her comments here today and for the work in which she’s involved and pray, all those who are listening will take to heart the matter of truth. It is ultimately, Lord, we fear you, do we hold onto your truth or we make and define truth ourselves? Lord may we be clear on that. Put all this in your hands now. Our country is there, so are our people. In Jesus name, amen.

Joe Green:                          Amen, this has been Joe Green with Sam Rohrer and Merzamie Clark of TRINICY International. Until next time, peace and blessings to you.