Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Archive for the ‘humanism’ Category

How The Penn State University Child Molestation Case Demonstrates The Existence Of God

Posted by Job on November 11, 2011

Make no mistake friends, God exists. God is real. Should you countenance thoughts otherwise, this case involving Jerry Sandusky and his committing unspeakable crimes of violation against a number of young boys proves it. This case demonstrates the existence of God by demonstrating the existence of evil. Now of course, evil is not some deity that is the opposite of God who contests God, as dualistic religions and philosophies propose. Neither is evil some force (whether personal or impersonal) as again some religions or philosophies claim, i.e. the “karma” of eastern religions and the New Age ideas that influence them. Instead, Gotquestions.org (a Christian ministry) provides a very suitable Bible-based definition:

A dictionary definition of evil is “morally reprehensible, sinful, wicked.” The definition of evil in the Bible falls into two categories: evil against one another (murder, theft, adultery) and evil against God (unbelief, idolatry, blasphemy). From the prohibition against eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9), to the destruction of Babylon the Great, the embodiment of evil to come (Revelation 18:2), the Bible speaks of evil.

So allow it to be said, from a reverse-logic standpoint, that because evil exists – as the Bible clearly bears witness of – then God must necessarily exist also. Moreover, God must exist as the answer to evil, the one who defeats evil, which the Bible also bears witness of. Great, unspeakable, incomprehensible craven crimes against the innocent is evidence of the existence of evil, evidence of a great problem with our existence that must be overcome lest we be destroyed by it, and evidence of a solution to this pressing existential problem and threat that only God can provide. If there is nothing more powerful than evil save God, then God must exist. It is said that love is more powerful than evil. This is so, and the Bible bears witness that God is love and that God is loving.
‘Tis tempting to deny that the actions of Jerry Sandusky were in fact attributable to evil, which one might accuse of being some abstract idea. Instead, one can propose a more rational, reasonable scientific root cause: that Sandusky is simply disturbed, one possessing an abnormal brain biology or chemistry that causes him to both have abnormal urges and be unable to restrain himself from acting on them; that indeed he might have an inability to discern or respond to reality. Legitimate medical science has proven that such is the case with a number of people, indeed those that have committed monstrous crimes against individuals and humanity. And yes, the problem of evil must be explained in such a way that deals with cases as these, just as explanations are needed for such things as natural disasters, epidemics, and stillborn children that lack an identifiable human villain, antagonist or cause.

But in this case, one not need to consider (solely) Jerry Sandusky when it comes to evil. Instead, we have other figures with regards to this case such as Mike McQueary, Joe Paterno, and many other figures at Penn State University and the surrounding community who had knowledge of the crimes of Sandusky for many years and failed to act in a manner that would have punished the guilty and protected the innocent. These figures chose not to act because of the wealth, power and prestige associated with college athletics, in particular Pennsylvania State University football. 1 Titus 6:10 says “For the love of money is the root of all evil!” At other points in the Bible, the contrast between mammon – the desire for money, power and privilege – and the things of God are given, as are the people who seek the former verses the latter. Thus, even if we deny that Sandusky is evil, then the actions of those who chose not to act in the interests of those that Sandusky victimized and to protect him from committing further harm most certainly was! So the monstrous behavior associated with this case was clearly evil, and evil on this scale demonstrates the need for one with the power and desire to defeat it, and this need can be met only by God.

If God hates and can overcome evil, why does He suffer its existence in the first place? The reason is that the existence of evil was the cost of accomplishing creation. Only God is perfect, containing perfect power, knowledge and righteousness. Thus, anything and everything that is not God will inevitably come to a state of imperfection, and this imperfection is either evil itself, or allows for evil events to occur. So, though creation was not evil at the time that God finished it, creation did what was inevitable, which was lapse into an imperfect, evil state.

The Bible describes this occurring both with Satan in Ezekiel 28:13-19 and Isaiah 14:12-17, and with Adam in Genesis 2-3. The Bible states that both Adam and Satan were created perfect (see Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 1:31 concerning Adam and Ezekiel 28:15 concerning Satan) but that they both abandoned that perfect state of their own accord, through no fault or action of God and without being attributable to any flaw or defect in their making or original condition. God did not create evil, but instead evil was the inevitable result of creation. As God did not cause or force the actions of Adam or Satan, being responsible for creation does not make God responsible for the evil in creation.

That creates the question: if God knows all things, then He knew that His creation would lapse into imperfection and that evil would result. This means that God was willing to allow the existence of evil. Why, then, did God allow the existence of evil, even if He is not to be blamed for evil? The answer is this: God allowed the existence of evil in order to accomplish a greater good: for the glory of His Son. 1 Colossians 1:16 states that all creation was done according to the will of God the Father for God the Son. For God the Father to glorify, honor and please God the Son was the greater good that was accomplished by suffering the existence of evil. This can be put into better perspective when one realizes that though evil will only exist for a time, the exaltation of God’s Son that came as a result of creation will last forever!

It is easy to doubt and mock and say “God was willing to allow the existence of evil because it cost Him and His Son nothing; that His creation that He claims to love – including sentient human beings – had to bear all the negative costs and effects.” Now be not deceived: even were this so, it would be perfectly appropriate and within God’s rights, being that He is the sole Owner and Master of whatever He chooses to create for whatever purposes He chooses to create it. However, it should be said that this is not so! Again, it is not so that creation alone must bear the negative effects of evil; that God kept Himself unaffected and unscathed by such horrible events as what Mike McQueary saw being done to a juvenile boy by Jerry Sandusky yet refused to intervene to save the juvenile, though being a 27 year old former football player he certainly had the ability to. Instead, though He was by no means obligated or required to, God demonstrated the legitimacy and the extent of His love for creation by giving up the very Son for whose glory creation was accomplished in the first place to die on a cross!

You see, the existence of evil in creation was no mere set of bad facts. Instead, it was a situation that required a remedy. It created a debt that had to be paid. It was a crime for which something had to be punished. God could have remedied the situation by simply destroying creation, all of it, forever. But instead, God chose to have His Son, totally innocent and blameless of all imperfection and evil, provide the remedy by paying the debt, by taking on all the punishment upon Himself. God’s Son, Jesus Christ, did this by dying on a cross in place of creation. By paying this debt, this allowed creation – or some part of it anyway – to remain forever for the joy and happiness of God’s Son – who was resurrected from the dead – and as this same Son of God is forever the joy and happiness of His Father, this state of affairs is certainly appropriate. Thus, the logic of the greater good of allowing evil to exist for a time for the joy of God the Son and God the Father for an eternity becomes explicit, apparent and utterly reasonable. Suffering the existence of evil was a great price, but one that God was willing to pay with the blood of His own Son. Far from being the “cosmic child abuse” that some doubters propose, the truth is that God’s Son – also divine and one with His Father and with His Father’s Spirit – is a willing participant, is manifestly pleased with the arrangement, and benefit to Him (and His Father) far outlasts and exceeds (in value and duration) the very real and significant loss.

So whenever you learn of – or experience – any great evil, though you may and should mourn it, always remember: the occurrence of this evil does manage to powerfully demonstrate that God exists. So, remember that the God who does exists has already paid the price of evil – through His own Son on a cross – and will one day put an end to all evil forever. God’s creation will endure, but the evil will not. This does leave one final pressing issue: your fate. Will you be part of the creation that endures forever, providing joy and delight to God’s Son while receiving great benefits from this existence (and absent any and all negative effects or considerations) yourself? Or will you be included in the portion of creation that is destroyed when all evil is destroyed? The answer to this is simple: if you renounce and turn away from all of the evil that you have done and thereby represent and believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died to pay the debt incurred by your evil and was resurrected from the dead, then you will be among the portion of creation that remains. Otherwise, you will be among the portion of creation that is destroyed. (As time will no longer exists – for time is part of creation – the process of your destruction will take place in eternity and last for an eternity.)

For make no mistake, even if you had no part in this incident, we have all committed evil, if not according to our own standards, according to God’s standards. Though the debt incurred by your evil actions has already been paid for by Jesus Christ, the Bible makes it clear that only those who renounce their evil actions and ways and believe in Jesus Christ will have their paid debt applied. It is the same as having won a contest, but having to go present yourself and your ticket to those running the contest to claim your prize. Though your debt has been paid, one has to renounce his evil actions and tendencies and believe in the Sonship, Lordship, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to have that paid debt “applied to their accounts.” In order to further explain and assist you in this process, please click on “The Three Step Salvation Plan” link below, which contains information presented in both written and video form. I entreat and implore you to do so – to heed and believe – immediately. Thank you.

The Three Step Salvation Plan

Posted in abomination, Apologetics, atheism, Bible, child abuse, child molestation, Christianity, education, homosexuality, humanism, idolatry, mammon, religion, sex crime, sex demon, sexual exploitation, sexual violence, skepticism, societal decline, sodomy, sports, Theodicy, Y'shua Hamashiach, Y'shua Hamashiach Moshiach, Yeshua Hamashiach | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Are We All Christian Scientists Now?

Posted by Job on June 17, 2011

Sorry to feature homosexuality in back-to-back posts, but they are in response to a post Is It A New Day For Baptists And Homosexuality? that dealt with the changing approach that many evangelical and fundamental Christians are taking towards the homosexuality issue. Allow me to propose that the “need” to deal with this issue differently is not because of some new or better way to read the Bible that didn’t exist 30 – let alone 300 – years ago, but rather because mainstream society has chosen to view the sin of homosexuality in a different way. And make no mistake: a major reason why mainstream society has moved toward embracing homosexuality is that so many scientists have declared homosexuality to be a natural, in-born “orientation” as opposed to a lifestyle choice. So, the scientists lead, and Christians – along with everyone else – follows.

This, incidentally, includes Christians who take the seemingly orthodox position that being born a homosexual is no excuse, for we are all born in sin, which makes the “born this way” homosexuals as obligated to resist evil as anybody else. I say “seemingly orthodox” because where is the Biblical evidence that anyone is born a homosexual? Are people also born adulterers, thieves and murderers? Is there a “blasphemy gene” or an “idolatry orientation”? While the Bible does tell us that we are all born sinners due to the federal headship of Adam, and that fallen mankind has a sin nature making us predisposed to sin, and that sound Biblical theology lets us know that our lacking God’s perfect attributes means that all who are not God will fall short of God’s standards and thereby sin, where does the Bible say that anyone is born to a specific type of sin?

There is more evidence against it than for it. For instance, though Jesus Christ did call Judas Iscariot, the one who betrayed Him, the “son of perdition”, Iscariot did not betray Jesus Christ because he was “born that way.” Instead, the Bible stated that Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus Christ after Satan entered and possessed him! And on the issue of homosexuality, rather than calling this sin a product of nature, the Apostle Paul in Romans 1:26-27 stated that homosexuality is “that which is against nature” and “leaving the natural use of” the body! So, how can one be born a homosexual on one hand, and against nature/leaving the natural use of your body on the other? We only countenance such notions because the scientists say so!

Now if anyone would have an agenda to stand up for science and a need for Christianity and science to be reconciled and integrated, it would be me, an engineer by education who works in technology by trade. Indeed, were science given the highest level of esteem, one that exceeds all reproach, I would benefit in terms of pay and reputation! But despite any personal benefits that I might derive from taking an alternate position, I must endorse the view of John MacArthur when he says that science is not a valid hermeneutic for interpreting the Bible! And as legitimate Christians are Bible-believing and Bible-based, we must choose the Bible over science.

Some say that no such choice has to be made. Why is this belief so common, it must be asked? Why is choosing the Bible over science so much harder than, say, choosing the Republican Party over the Democratic Party (over issues like abortion, homosexuality, school prayer and opposition to communism)? The reason is that in our culture, we have made science into an idol. We look to science, and not to God, for our daily bread! We attribute our wealth and power to our many scientific breakthroughs, which create everything from medicines to keep us alive and healthy to consumer products to drive our economy to weapons that allow us to win wars. And yes, even for many, a religious context is placed on this. How often do we attribute the superiority of our culture to its reliance on science, and then belittle other cultures for being backwards? It is not a far a leap to then state that our culture is superior because of its being shaped by Christianity, while, for example, Middle Eastern culture is backwards because of Islam, or native cultures are undesirable because of animism. It is similar to another idol of our culture, democracy, and yet another – capitalism – and indeed,  the exaltation of science, democracy and capitalism by American Christians is central to the “Americanity” or “Ameritianity” syncretism.

Because of this, few Christians are willing to simply stand up and say “I choose the Bible over science.” Instead, most of us meekly follow behind and adapt to whatever framework the scientists erect, and we strive to find ways where “legitimate science proves the Bible right!” (a major emphasis of apologetics). Case in point: how many Christians are much more comfortable with using psychology to explain moral and social problems as opposed to sin or – gasp! – demon spirits? Thanks to psychology, Christians get to appear “scientific” and therefore “educated” and “respectable” by talking about sin less and less, and about evil spirits practically never.

One should point out that it was not always this way. Science has not always been such a prominent measure of the worth of a society or individual. Indeed, this is a recent phenomenon, a direct result of the absolutely breathtaking scientific innovations that were unimaginable even a few decades ago, plus the similarly unconscionable growth and concentration of wealth and power that resulted. In prior times, people and nations were not judged by their scientific prowess, but by high culture: art, literature and religion. It was the lack of those things, and not of scientific prowess, that caused many people and cultures to be considered “savage”, “barbarian”, “brutish”, “Philistines” etc. That things have changed so dramatically and rapidly is evidence that man’s heart is indeed after mammon, because the way to wealth and power is to build the better mousetrap, not compose the better symphony! We have gone from making it a state priority to sponsor a large, vibrant community of artists capable of making beautiful, Christian-themed music, artwork, architecture and literature because of how those things reflect and communicate God’s attributes to trying to weave evolution into the Genesis narrative because the scientists say so, and done so in an incredibly short time.

Of course, I am not calling for replacing science idolatry with high culture idolatry, but rather to see what both, and in our context particularly the former, for what they are, which is idolatry. Again, go back to the common conceit “science proves the Bible right.” Pardon me, but why should it? For science is every bit the product of fallen man’s depraved nature and all the lusts thereof as is Hollywood. That is a good comparison, because evolution, stem cell research/cloning, weapons of mass destruction, and Stephen Hawking’s insistence that the universe created itself ex nihilo are evidence of the downward spiral of science in our culture just as Hollywood is a reflection of what happened to literature, music and theater. So, there should be no more need to reconcile science with the Bible than an Oscar-winning movie or a Grammy-winning record. (Then again, you have no shortage of preachers seeking Christian inspiration from Hollywood!)

The most that it can be said of science is that it is a product of common grace; that God has providentially used it to show His love for us by giving us things to make our lives better (i.e. medical breakthroughs) and also to fulfill His will (i.e. facilitate the spread of the gospel using everything from roads in the Roman Empire to the Internet today). But just as Satan has perverted other gifts of God through common grace for his own wicked purposes (see culture, religion and government being corrupted almost from the beginning in the Bible) there is no reason for science to be any different. Science is not holy. Science is not under any special protection from God, nor is it afforded any special privileges by God, nor does it have a divine or blessed use by God. The only things that have that special status – the things which Christians should respect and adhere to and center our lives and thoughts around unconditionally – are the supernatural things born of or given by God’s Spirit (John 4:23-24) which include God’s church and God’s word. So then, how amazing that the church is willing to just meekly accept the all out assault on the Bible because of “the science of textual criticism“?

That is why we have to abandon the notion of “all legitimate science confirms the Bible.” It takes the idea that scientists have come together to make this predetermined pact to rebel against the Bible because of a wish to reject God and His authority over their lives. While this is no doubt true in some cases, and while such things as ideological agendas and other biases do indeed exist, the idea that these people are propagating falsehoods and rejecting facts on purpose is untenable. Indeed, such things are unnecessary in the first place. Consider, for example, the text 2 Thessalonians 2:11. I am using it a bit of context, granted, but still “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” Combine that with Romans 1:21-22 (which I am employing in slightly better context) which reads “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

As science is the product of fallen mankind’s imaginations, those texts reveal that they do not have to deny the truth in favor of lies on purpose, after the manner of some conspiracy or overt rebellion against Christianity for instance, but rather that they are going to take lies to be the truth. We have no problem applying this to the politicians, activists, educators, economists etc. (especially if they are liberal), so why claim that the scientists are any different? The scientific method is not scripture. Instead, it is totally reliant on the ability of man to perceive the natural world and interpret its results. The scientific method provides absolutely no insight on the supernatural – save to reveal basic things concerning God’s existence and nature, see Romans 1:20 – which is God’s realm and from which God called the natural world into existence in the first place! Also, all of creation isn’t even “natural” per se … what of angelic spirits, and the spirits of men? So, the scientific method cannot even comprehend the supernatural portion of creation, let alone I AM THAT I AM, the uncreated, self-existing Creator! And even with regards to the natural world, the scientific method has real constraints. (For a somewhat whimsical example, see if you can reliably measure how much rain fell in a town in France 1500 years ago. You can’t … there’s this little problem called TIME.)

But the main limitation is man himself. The fact is that even if the scientific method were capable of perfectly measuring the natural and the supernatural, it still wouldn’t be enough! Why? Because man would have to be able to perfectly interpret the results! Not only does man lack the perfect knowledge – omniscience – required to do so, but the limited knowledge that man does have is compromised by the fall of humanity into sin. Now these things are either clearly revealed in the Bible, or can easily be deduced from them. Yet, why do we still go to great lengths to justify science, to try to evaluate the Bible through the prism of science, and to be respected by the world as “scientific”? (While I do intend to visit the “Creation Museum” at some point, one must consider the underlying rationale for pursuing such a venture in the first place!)

The only answer is idolatry. We make the work of man’s hands into idols, and we do this because of our desire to make man into an idol. We put so much faith in science because deep down, we wish to believe that man has more knowledge, more power, more control than he actually does. That – plus the fact that it makes us rich and powerful and causes us to wonder after such things as great telescopes and micro robots – taps into our desire to worship ourselves. Indeed, the increasingly vain quest to validate the imaginations of scientists using the Bible rather than casting them down like 2 Corinthians 10:5 tells us to (oh had Paul warned of being led astray by philosophers AND scientists in Colossians 2:8, though I should point out that science is very much the traditions of men!) shows our deep-rooted desire to have a religion that allows us to worship ourselves. Interpreting the Bible in light of science allows us to worship God and ourselves at the same time, and it gives the veneer of respectability to our human idolatry! Indeed, it appears to sanctify it, to make it holy and acceptable!

But instead, the opposite is true, for the first commandment, Thou shalt have no other gods besides me”, is still very much in effect, including when the “other gods” is man. The search to try God, to test God, to worship God inasmuch as His revelation will be subject to science is merely humanism. So, though the homosexuality issue provoked my thoughts on the issue, the truth is that the real issue is in fact the exaltation of humanity through idolatry. It is the pride of life, the same which Satan tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden when he told her that the fruit would make her “as god.” Science gives us a way to be “like God” in our own minds, so just like Eve, we eat of the forbidden fruit, and share it with others! From this evil we Christians must turn away.

Science has its many uses, but one thing that it cannot be used for is to deal with human sin. Because God is holy and righteous, human sin must indeed be dealt with by God, the only one capable of acting as a judge in this matter (for unlike God, all humans are sinners and therefore are incapable of justly judging each other). At the appointed time, God will deal with sin by either forgiving it or punishing it. The punishment for sin is everlasting torment in a lake of fire, and this will happen to all whose sins are not forgiven. The only way to avoid this punishment is for one’s sins to be forgiven, and this occurs only for those who have faith in Jesus Christ. So please, stop putting faith in science or any other false idols, gods or religions today, and instead put your faith in Jesus Christ, the One who became fully man while remaining fully God as He had been for eternity, lived a perfect sinless life, died on the cross to pay for sins of others though He himself never sinned, and rose again from the dead. For more explicit information:

Follow The Three Step Salvation Plan!

Posted in Apologetics, Bible, capitalism, Christianity, humanism, Jesus Christ, mammon, rationalism, religion | Tagged: , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

Why Does The Media Focus Only On Harold Camping?

Posted by Job on May 26, 2011

Yes, Harold Camping has been exposed as a false prophet, deceiving many as concerning the timing of the second coming of Jesus Christ. Again. Yes, his deception has caused lots of problems and unnecessary harm, especially for his followers. Again. The question is this: what is the big deal? Why has Camping been the subject of such media attention for months when there are so many pressing stories to cover i.e. wars, famines, diseases, natural disasters, economic failures, political intrigues etc. on a global scale? Clearly the media has an agenda, but what is it?

First off, for the sake of sound doctrine, let it be known that the return of Jesus Christ will not occur until A) the gospel has been taken to all nations and B) a great apostasy, a great falling away from the true faith, occurs. As the great commission is a primary duty of the church, it logical to conclude that the falling away will occur shortly after the great commission is fulfilled, or when the great commission’s fulfillment and with it the time of the Gentiles draws to a close. Anyone who extricates themselves from rapture watching and religious right (or religious left) politics long enough to pay attention to the global missions movements knows that barring a fantastic miracle we are at least 100 years from fulfilling the great commission (the 10/40 window alone is an amazing challenge) and – despite the claims of Camping otherwise – far from there being a great falling away, there are more Christians – or definitely appreciable numbers of Christians in more places – today than at any time in history. So, if we can learn anything from this Camping episode, it is that we should heed the words given by angels and recorded by the physician Luke at the direction of God the Holy Spirit “why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” That was an exhortation to cease waiting for eternity and to get on with the business of living for eternity by loving Jesus Christ and walking in His ways.

With that out of the way, let it further be said that the error of Camping does not undermine the authority of the Bible, Jesus Christ or His church but rather confirms it. How? Because the Bible repeatedly warns against false teachers, including those who would lead people into error concerning His second coming. Jesus Christ said that “false prophets shall deceive many” in Matthew 24:5, and that many will be offended by the true faith in Matthew 24:10. Such false teachings were present even while the New Testament was being written, as the apostle Peter referenced them in 2 Peter 3:4, the apostle John did the same in 1 John 2:18, and the apostle Paul did the same in 2 Thessalonians 2.  Further, Jesus Christ predicted such specifically in Matthew 24:4-5! The New Testament makes it clear that we identify false teachers when they teach things that are in contradiction to the Bible. This truth is what drove William Tyndale to martyrdom, when he stated “I defy the Pope and all his laws. If God spare my life ere many years, I will cause the boy that drives the plow to know more of the scriptures than you!” in response to being told that common people didn’t need to be knowledgeable concerning the Bible’s contents, because it was better to obey the pope than the Bible anyway. So, in rejecting Jesus Christ when He stated that none knows the timing of His return save God the Father (Matthew 24:36), and in rejecting Jesus Christ when He stated that the great commission will be fulfilled before He returns (Matthew 24:14) and in rejecting the Holy Spirit’s inspiration of Paul concerning the falling away first in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, this Camping teaches against things concerning God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, and by his doing so and attracting so many followers he verifies the pages of the New Testament when it said that such a thing would happen. So, Camping did not harm the authenticity or integrity of the Bible by being wrong, but rather verified the Bible’s truth! Instead, Camping’s being RIGHT would have been an occasion to challenge the veracity of the Bible, for were Jesus Christ to return before we reach the many tribes in the 10/40 window or while there are tens of millions of believers risking persecution to worship in Africa and Asia, what would be said of those Bible texts?

So, make no mistake, there is nothing special about Camping. Was not just over ten years ago when there were tons of false prophets claiming based on Bible codes and numerology that Jesus Christ was going to return in 2000? (Never mind that the Bible doesn’t follow our modern calendars, and that Bede almost certainly incorrectly calculated the date of the birth of Jesus Christ that we use for “B.C.” and “A.D.” anyway). Or about 25 years ago Jesus Christ was going to return because it was 40 years after of the establishment of the modern state of Israel? (Never mind that Jesus Christ spoke “this generation” to the Jews of His own time concerning the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D., and if the Bible actually does speak of the restoration of the political nation of Israel, it does not link this event to any timetable concerning Christ’s return.) So why all the fuss and the furor? It has to serve some sort of media agenda.

Consider this: how come when the subject in view is Usama bin Laden or some other Muslim terrorist, the media is quick to say “he isn’t a real Muslim” or “he doesn’t represent mainstream Islam that is practiced by hundreds of millions of peaceful followers”, but the media is quick to depict Camping as being in or near the mainstream of evangelical and fundamental Christians? In truth, as Camping rejects the Holy Trinity, he shouldn’t be classified as Christian at all. Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muslims and Jews all reject the Holy Trinity, a core foundational doctrine of Christianity that sets it apart from other religions that are either polytheistic or present a false teaching on God’s Unity. But while the media does its best to present Islam and increasingly Mormonism as moderate and mainstream, it uses Camping to create a wild eyed, dangerous fanatical face for Bible-believing Christianity.

Another thing: it isn’t as if Camping is the only false prophet or source of wrong information. Far from it. It is just that when so many others get things wrong and are exposed for their false, anti-Biblical thinking, nothing is ever said about it. Instead, the media, the academy, the elites simply move on. (Or they carry on as if the error was never made.) Consider liberal Christianity, such as the critical “scholars.” Barely a year goes by when an archaeological find of a Biblical site or a scientific breakthrough that confirms Biblical truth or discovery of early manuscripts verifying the existence of historical persons, places and the integrity of Biblical texts that the critical scholars challenged, yet the critical scholars are still accepted as scholars, and their methods – which would never be used in any other field because of their ascientific nature – accepted as reliable.

But that is just the Bible, right? Wrong. Take psychology. The theories of giants in that field like Sigmund Freud and Alfred Kinsey have long been discredited. Yet they are still revered as having made great contributions to science, modern thought and human progress, and furthermore their discredited theories are still being taught as fact in our schools and universities. But psychology, save when it is based on experimentation and observation and does not deal with brain’s biology and chemistry, is a “soft science”, right? Sure, except that the theories in the hard sciences like physics and biology turn up erroneous also. Our schools still teach the long-discredited false leads in evolution theory, i.e. the “evolutionary timeline tree chart” that has long been abandoned as unworkable, and fossils allegedly showing primates evolving into humans that were actually either diseased humans or other animals as fact. You would be surprised to know how many of the things that were taught in science class has been quietly abandoned, how much more needs to be pushed from the classroom, and would be if the media held that community to the same scrutiny that it does evangelical and fundamental Christianity.

But that is just arcane science that has little relevance to our daily lives, so what harm does it do? Fine, except that the realm of false prophets also exists in government and policy. Many fantastic, dire predictions have been made and influenced the direction of governments and leaders to who knows what ends. Example? Global warming. Except that they couldn’t call it “global warming” anymore when many places in the world started experiencing prolonged unseasonably cold weather! So, the cause of the cold weather was attributed to greenhouse gas emissions also and “global warming” became “climate change.” I remember a specific prediction from the global warming prophets that had a lot of people frightened: after Hurricane Katrina and other large, powerful destructive hurricanes in 2005, the global warming community (the “climate change” moniker had not yet been instituted) claimed that the increase in the power and severity of the storms were caused by global warming, and that we could expect worse storms – and more of them – thereafter. They predicted that the hurricane season of 2006 was going to be one of the worst in history! All their models said so! What happened? We haven’t had anything approaching Katrina since.

Another example: peak oil. The experts a few decades back claimed that we had maxed out our oil production, that we had exploited the main reserves, that oil production was heading for an inevitable decline, and that we needed to alter our lifestyles and change our way of life to conserve what oil was left or face a global energy crisis. A few years after those dire predictions, some of the largest oil reserves in history were discovered, as well as technological breakthroughs for accessing oil, and possible new sources of oil, such as from shale and sand. (Do not mistake me for an oil company and fossil fuels advocate, quite the contrary I am fully supportive of alternative energy, and believe that a lot of great technology in that area is not being exploited.) And there was also the “overpopulation crisis.” It was promoted by folks who believed that if the world’s population reached 4 billion, it would become unsustainable, and the result would be mass famines and starvation, diseases, wars and environmental degradation. The only solution was immediate global population control programs! Well, now the world population is 6.75 billion and counting.

There is more. Remember when mad cow disease was going to ravage our food supply? Oprah Winfrey said “I’ll never eat a hamburger again!” (Of course, these folks OPPOSE abstinence from fornication as a defense against sexually transmitted disease as the Bible commands, but constantly promotes abstinence from eating the animals that God gave us dominion over and called lawful to eat.) Remember when bird flu was going to kill thousands, or tens of thousands? What about swine flu? Brought to you by the same false prophets who told you to run out and buy cellophane and masking tape to protect yourself from a nuclear terrorist attack after September 11th.

The prophets told us in the 1980s that AIDS was going to wipe out a significant portion of the U.S. population with little or no regard for lifestyle, and needless to say they were wrong, as AIDS rates only increased among homosexuals, the promiscuous and drug users while declining for everyone else. The lead false prophet was surgeon general C. Everett Koop, who used this false information to promote sex education and condom giveaways in schools starting in 3rd grade. Speaking of sex education, the false prophets told us that it would drastically reduce the venereal disease and teen/out of wedlock pregnancy rates, and it did neither. Instead, both shot through the roof, and further there are now new venereal diseases that even condom manufacturers acknowledge their products are useless against (not that you will ever hear that in any public school sex education program).

But wait, there’s more. The prophets told us that abandoning classical education for new education reforms (often based on Freudian or Marxist theories) would lead to markedly improved results and a transformation of society. They were totally wrong, American academic achievement has fallen off the map, and no one talks about it. The prophets told us that divorce and illegitimacy were GOOD for women, children and even most men, but education, poverty, drug use and incarceration rates say otherwise. The prophets claimed that we could eliminate racism through education. How is that working out? They claimed that we could eliminate poverty through government action, and now not only is poverty still a reality (as Jesus Christ said it would in Mark 14:7, not a favorite text among liberal theologians!) but unprecedented numbers of people in America and worldwide are reliant on government assistance of some kind. The false prophets also claimed that the triumph of Soviet communism was inevitable, and the best course of action was resignation, acceptance and learning from and becoming more like them, only to have the Soviet Union collapse and many remaining Marxist regimes like China and Viet Nam adopt more capitalistic economies. Those who predicted that the war on drugs and the war on terror (especially Afghanistan and Iraq) could be effectively and quickly won? Whatever happened to them?

The sociologists who said that eliminating censorship laws and allowing the free trafficking of pornography would make us more progressive and improve relations between the sexes? They have been nowhere to be found as rapists, child molesters and other sex criminals have proliferated, multiplying like rats. The social theorists who claimed that putting criminals in jail wouldn’t lower crime rates because the root causes were economic? Wrong, and verified when crime rates still remained lower despite two severe recessions and deep cuts in social services. (Well, street crime is lower anyway. White collar crime, the rich in their vain attempt to sate their lust for greed, remains through the roof. But the Bible said that this would happen concerning the wealthy also … see the book of James, which is not a favorite among political conservatives or those who teach the false prosperity gospel.) And another example: remember Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s claim that we had to immediately adopt a stimulus package to keep unemployment from hitting 8%? Unemployment has been at or near 10% for over two years! Anti-Christ? Probably not. False prophet? Definitely.

So, on one hand you have ONE Harold Camping, who again due to his rejection of the Holy Trinity and of many Bible texts (he forbids his followers from fellowshipping in local churches in violation of Hebrews 10:25) should not be considered a Christian is a false prophet. On the other hand, you have MANY worldly prophets who due to their embrace of ungodly, anti-Biblical ideas, doctrines, philosophies and imaginations that exalt themselves against God (2 Corinthians 10:5) that are utterly, totally and completely wrong all the time. Now both groups of false prophets are wrong for the same reason: their rejection of Biblical revelation as true, infallible, inerrant, and the final authority in all matters, and not merely things necessary for salvation. But the media and the elites shine the light on Camping to defame and discredit Christians who actually do adhere to the Bible while doing their best to cover up the fact that they so wrong so often on so many issues to the great harm of so many is appalling. It is hypocrisy at best, and a conspiratorial cover-up at worst. If anything, talking about Camping gives them an excuse to keep from having to address the huge mess that these folks have made of the economies, governments and societies of the world. Further, it allows them to transfer the blame from their failed policies – and the rejection of Jesus Christ and the Bible which reveals Him ideology that motivate them – to Christians, as if Christians are undermining their efforts.

Christians, for instance, are blamed for illegitimacy by opposing sex education. Christians are blamed for AIDS by opposing homosexuality. Christians are blamed for poor educational performance for opposing evolution. Christians are blamed for global warming for opposing climate change legislation. Christians are blamed for the wars and tension in the Middle East for supporting Israel and not a Palestinian state (by the way, I reject Zionism, and “Christian” Zionism is especially repugnant to what the Bible actually says, and John Hagee and not a few other false prophets follow this flawed school of interpretation). Christians are called misogynist for adhering to what the Bible says about the roles concerning men and women in the church, in marriages and homes and in society, and for opposing the murder of abortion. Christians are blamed for “Islamophobia” and “anti-Semitism” and “anti-Mormonism” for refusing to deny that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven, and accused of undermining cultures with our missionary work. And the list goes on and on.

And it is only going to increase. As more and more ideas based on a rejection of the Bible and even of general revelation (see Romans 1:18-32) causes still more decline and failure, anger will increase against Christians. As the world continues to reap the fruit of the sin and wickedness that it sows, it will increasingly see Christians as scapegoats. Instead of repenting of their sins and acknowledging those as the true source of the misery and calamity, the blame will be on Christians for failing to get with the program.

This will climax in first sporadic but then general and organized attempts to silence Christians and remove us from their midst, in the hopes of keeping us from hindering their “progress.” This is far-fetched, you say? Not in the least, because it has already happened. An example is not merely the brutal repression and murder of Christians on a massive scale in the Soviet Union, China, Germany, Sudan and other totalitarian (whether Marxist, Muslim or fascist) regimes in the last century, but the experience of the church in the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire’s wealth, power and culture were declining due to the decadence and incompetence of its ruling classes, and from Nero to Decius, they saw Christians as a scapegoat.

The legitimate Christians refused to join in their state religion (an odd mix of paganism and patriotism not dissimilar from what goes on in our country today, including in not a few churches) so the Roman “gods” were angry. The Christians refused to join in their public activities (regrettably this is not a mark of contemporary Christianity!) so they were called “divisive” and were accused of undermining the common culture (in addition to not being patriotic!) that was allegedly needed to have a cohesive, strong empire. And Christians preached and taught against the immorality, wickedness and depravity of the people, the rulers and the times. They preached against the rampant adultery, homosexuality, violence and child molestation. They preached against the wanton excesses of the upper classes (again, not a mark of contemporary evangelical Christianity, unless the upper classes in view are Hollywood, government bureaucrats and other liberal elites). And they preached against paganism, not only by the people but the official state religion (again, the evangelical Christian preacher who even speaks of the freemasonry and occult that was vital to this nation’s founding and has been influential in it ever since is rare).

Then, the persecution began as sporadic and localized, but climaxed in a brutal, sustained attempt to completely rid the Roman Empire of Christianity. And despite the estimated ten million Christians that were killed by the Roman Empire (something that you will never see mentioned in history books or depicted in movies, as they are more wont to depict Christians as murderous crusaders and the like) and the carnage of the past hundred years, that is only a shadow of the real bloodbath to come. You see, unlike Harold Camping, I do not adhere to a rapture belief. Instead, I believe the Bible when it says that when the anti-Christ comes, it will be given to him to make war against the saints, and to overcome them. I believe the Bible when it says that the time of tribulation, of great sorrows, will be of such severity that it will be cut short so that the saints, the elect, will survive it. And I believe that the saints that were mentioned in Revelation and Matthew 24 that will see that horrible time are not Jews, or those converted by Jews during the great tribulation, but Christians.

And that is what it is all about. That is why turning an obscure preacher with questionable doctrine into an international news story lasting several cycles was done. It is why Westboro Baptist Church, a cult that has existed for decades, is only now becoming international news. It is why Terry Jones, an obscure leader of a small congregation, became an international pariah for burning a Koran when not only Muslims but the United States military routinely burns Bibles!

It is why terrorists attacks committed by atheists like Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph are attributed to Christians. It is why violence against abortion clinics and doctors is an issue oft raised against Christians despite the fact that less than 5 such incidents have occurred in over 20 years, and only 1 in the past 10. The Hutaree militia drew headlines and a massive sting operation from the federal government as a Christian terrorism threat to rival that posed by Al Qaeda, and it turned out to be just a bunch of guys spinning yarns over the Internet.  Yet, the Marxist “liberation theology” types, not a few of whom were trained Soviet infiltrators, fanned the flames for any number of bloody murderous third world Marxist coups with their organizing and “preaching”, and the truth about their activities – and the level of support that they received from their ideological and religious fellow travelers in the U.S. – has never been documented by the media, Hollywood or our schools. Neither has the true history of our own “civil rights movement” – how it duped the black church and many well meaning white Americans into supporting Marxist subversive tactics, and how that movement was also organized by and rife with Soviet agents and sympathizers – been told, and nor can you expect them to spill the beans on their own false prophets.

The agitation propaganda against Christians will continue in the future just as it did in the Roman Empire. Christians should be heedful of the times, which means that we must be aware of what is going on, aware of where it is headed, and aware of whose agenda it is serving. That is why Christians should end these “battles” over “being represented in Hollywood” and the “culture wars” and “religious right politics” (and religious left politics) in favor of opening our eyes to the true state of affairs. Instead, we should study our Bibles, study about the early church during its time of persecution before Christianity was co-opted by the Roman Empire so that by learning about the church’s past, we can learn about the future – our future. Of course, the Bible tells us that Jesus Christ will win in the end and vindicate and save His church. But make no mistake: just as Jesus Christ suffered Gethsemane and His passion before His resurrection and glorification, the church, being less than its Master Jesus Christ, must also suffer many things. Christians must be prepared so that we might stand during the time to come, and endure to the end. This is a battle that will be won not by guns, money or governments but by faith in the God who is fighting on our side and prevail.

It must be asked: which side are you on? The side of God, or of the wicked? Though Camping was wrong, his error only proved the Bible to be correct. The Bible makes it clear that the wicked perish and that Jesus Christ and those who believe in Him will triumph. If you do not believe in Jesus Christ, make no mistake, you will be counted among the wicked, because no matter how good you perceive yourself to be, before a holy and perfect God you are a sinner. I urge you, repent of your sins, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

Follow The Three Step Salvation Plan!

Posted in Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Bible, Christian Persecution, Christian persecution America, Christianity, creationism, economic collapse, evangelical, evangelical christian, evangelism, evolution, false doctrine, false preacher, false prophet, false religion, false teaching, family breakdown, fascism, freemasonry, global warming, globalism, government, government dependency, great tribulation, Hal Lindsey, hate speech, heresy, higher education, homophobia, homosexuality, humanism, identity politics, idolatry, innocent blood, intelligent design, Islam, Israel, Jesus Christ, Jesus Only, John Hagee, late great planet earth, Left Behind, liberal, liberal christian, liberalism, liberation theology, mark of the beast, media conspiracy, Middle East peace process, missionary, modalism, mohammed, Mormon, mormonism, multiculturalism, Muslim, Muslim Brotherhood, New Age, new world order, occult, oneness pentecostal, oneness pentecostalism, palestine, persecution, politics, population decline, prophecy, prosperity doctrine, public education, rapture, religion, social breakdown, societal decline, sodomy | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

Abortion Rights Dr. Jorge Carpizo McGregor: Unborn Babies are Really Chimpanzees

Posted by Job on March 3, 2008

Unborn Babies are Really Chimpanzees « Sola Dei Gloria

LifeSiteNews: Legal Expert Claims that Unborn Babies are Really Chimpanzees

Unborn Babies are Really Chimpanzees
Posted on March 3, 2008 by pjmiller

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..” Genesis 1:26

It wouldn’t be Monday without at least one crazy story.

From LifeSiteNews: Legal Expert Claims that Unborn Babies are Really Chimpanzees

A former attorney general and human rights commission chairman is claiming that unborn children in the earliest stages of development are not human, and are in fact chimpanzees.

Dr. Jorge Carpizo McGregor claims that “for the topic of abortion, there are very important scientific advances that prove that the DNA of chimpanzees is 99 percent identical to that of a human being. The difference between ourselves and chimpanzees is one percent, this quantity that makes the difference is the central nervous system.”

“Before twelve weeks of gestation, there is no cerebral cortex, that is to say, there is no human being, the cortex is formed around the 25th week. This is a very important piece of information because those who attack abortion say that a human being is being killed and it isn’t true.”

“That’s ridiculous,” said Dr. John Shea, medical advisor to Canada’s Campaign Life Coalition. “This is the most ignorant remark I think the man could possibly make. He must be totally ignorant of science.” Dr. Shea was shocked to hear that a prominent attorney was claiming that the only difference between a chimpanzee and a human being was in the nervous system. “That’s so ignorant that I don’t know where to begin,” he told LifeSiteNews.

“The organism is different in every single way” he said, and added that “a person is different in a trillion different biochemical ways. It’s ludicrous, ludicrous. It’s on it’s face, ridiculous.” In reality, the nervous system begins to form well before the 25th week. During the first four weeks, the neural tube begins to form, which is the beginning of the central nervous system. During the fifth week, the brain begins to grow.

Carpizo, who is a former attorney general of Mexico and former head of Mexico’s human rights commission, has acted as a legal advisor to the government of Mexico City, which is defending its recent legalization of abortion before the nation’s Supreme Court. The current head of the National Human Rights Commission is one of the parties disputing Mexico City’s law. A decision on the matter is expected within days.

Carpizo is planning on putting forth his ideas in a new book, which he will introduce in March, called “Human Rights: Abortion and Euthanasia”.

Posted in abortion, abortion rights, Christianity, evolution, humanism, innocent blood, Jesus Christ, murder | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Annihilationism And The Christian Metaphysic

Posted by Job on February 18, 2008

Not long after I began this site, a fellow objected to my brazen emphasis on two foundational Christian doctrines: the Holy Trinity and eternal suffering in the lake of fire for sinners that die without accepting the resurrection and Lordship of Jesus Christ. The man dismissed by being “hatefully intolerant and unnecessarily divisive” on the Trinity issue, and further insisted that the doctrine of eternal suffering in the lake of fire was of pagan in origin and made God appear both overly cruel to sinners and choosing to allow evil to exist for eternity rather than causing sinners and fallen angels to simply be consumed and cease to exist, hence annihiliationism.

Now my first impulse was to simply dismiss this fellow, sincere as he was, as someone with marginal views. Now I see how wrong I am. As for modalism, while the number of those that OFFICIALLY align themselves with this heretical doctrine through membership of varied oneness pentecostal denominations is small, 17 million, they exert influence on the rest of Christianity in a manner far greater than their numbers. Apart from them is also the increasing number of liberal and emergent Christians that really see no need for particulars concerning the Godhead because their doctrines do not require Trinity or for that matter even a truly divine Jesus Christ to begin with, for they have centered their beliefs around the false god of manhood anyway.

But it has recently come to my attention that annihiliationism is also gaining traction in evangelical circles, and among its adherents is evangelical giant John Stott. And just like evangelical Christianity did absolutely nothing regarding T. D. Jakes or the many other oneness preachers, it has refused to rise up and discredit Stott and the annihilationist preachers. Why? Because modern evangelicalism hates Christian fundamentalism worse than Christian heresy. Now is it possible to hold certain heretical or blasphemous views without being a heretic on his way to the lake of fire? I myself believe that to be the case, primarily because of my notion there are degrees of seriousness of doctrinal deviation, and also the hearer is only responsible for the portion of sound doctrine that he has been exposed to. But whatever the implications that a particular doctrine might have on the eternal salvation or damnation of its holder, certain views are still quite simply deviate from scripture, and those that preach them are not to be accepted or tolerated because of their standing or of some misguided desire not to be a Pharisee or cause of disunity, and that goes for John Stott and annihilationism, Billy Graham and universalism, or R. C. Sproul and infant baptism.

Now most of the justifications for this doctrine is typical man – centered doctrine, both the notion that God has no right to treat their exalted notion of mankind in such a way (don’t Christians read the Old Testament anymore?) and that having to publicly espouse the doctrine in the presence of those that reject it make them uncomfortable. But there is one legitimate issue that they have raised that I wish to deal with according to my limited ability to do so: the idea advanced by annihiliationists that the eternal punishment cannot be because eternal existence is a gift from God that will be granted only to those that make a decision for Jesus Christ. In other words, in the view of evangelical scholars like Clark Pinnock, Edward Fudge, John Sanders, Philip Hughes eternal existence is conditional. Some, but not all, evangelicals that hold this view are open theists, those who hold a doctrine that teaches that God changes His Will in response to man’s actions in history (consider it process theology – lite).

To further make this point, Pinnock for example ultimately denies the reality of the existence of the created spirit – man as described by Numbers 27:16, Job 32:8, Job 34:14, Proverbs 18:14, Ecclesiastes 3:21 to claim for all intents and purposes that man only has a body, and that to support the hellenistic belief of eternal punishment Christian tradition rejected the biblical doctrine of the resurrection of the body in favor of a focus on man’s eternal spirit. It is not so much that Pinnock or other such people deny the existence of the spirit man, but rather they view that the physical human existence as the ultimate reality – this is humanist evangelical Christianity after all, a fact of which they are very proud! – and as a result the spirit man would obviously share the same fate as the natural body.

I suppose that in a different era, we might have had to give this notion some serious consideration. But thanks to the discoveries of one Albert Einstein, we no longer have to. Not that Einstein was much of an innovator, as he merely proved with his theory of relativity what the Bible already said: that time was part of creation along with space. Three – dimensional space and time are not separate entities, but rather creation consists of four – dimensional space – time. And my King James Version says in Revelation 10:6 that on the day of the Lord, time will cease to exist along with the rest of the cosmos, the created order of space, matter, and TIME. “And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer.” Please note what the next verse says for reference:
But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.”

Now this is very destructive to many open theists because their doctrines make God a function and servant of time in some respects. (More accurately, this theology views God as not so much dependent on time but rather in bondage to the free will decisions of man made in time.) But the truth is that God will do away with time when He ends creation, because time is part of that creation. Before creation there was no time, and after creation there will be no time. And that is the problem with the anniliationist view: they see evil spirits – which includes the spirits of men – as needing to be sustained by God for eternity, which in their view is time running forever, a view that comes from math (and physics) class of eternity consisting of infinite time, with that infinity being able to exist in three ways: from yesterday to infinity (negative infinity), from tomorrow to infinity (positive infinity), and from today to infinity in both directions (total infinity).

But math class does not describe the spiritual realm that God inhabits, only the natural realm. In truth, it does not even accurately describe the natural realm, for astrophysics does not regard negative infinity of time – space but rather it having a definite beginning (the Big Bang!) that confirms the creation of both in Genesis 1 (and John 1), and as just stated Revelation depicts the ending of space – time (as do the Old Testament prophets and Jesus Christ also).

Though spirits may appear in the time – space limitations of creation for a time as do angels in their appearances, as did God in Old Testament theophanies, and Jesus Christ in the incarnation, the true abode for spirits is the spiritual realm where time is nonexistent. That is eternity, that is forever, that is the final state. Each human has a spirit man that will have a final existence, a final status, in the spirit realm where time will not exist. Cessation of existence will not be a factor, because cessation requires TIME which is part of CREATION. Instead, spirits of men – in addition to angels whether fallen or not – will simply exist. The only question is where this existence will be. Those that rebelled against God within the time – space of creation will exist in the lake of fire. Those that obeyed God during the time – space of creation will exist with Him.

Despite the scriptures that the annihilationists use out of context (literary context, the context of the audience to whom the scriptures were first given, and the context of the totality of scripture) that they use to build their case, rest assured that their motivation in applying them is borne of a prior conviction that man is too important and precious for God to treat – and in their opinion mistreat! – in such a fashion. “God cannot do this to me because He has no right to!” is the mindset that motivates this doctrine, and that is primarily why it must be rejected.

Please note that some of the more radical exponents of this doctrine, which does not appear to include Stott, state that the reason why eternal punishment cannot exist is because of the implications of free will. God cannot compel us to serve or love Him, but can only accept our decisions to do so arising from ourselves. Now while in their estimation God can and should bestow limitless blessings on those that accept Him, by that same estimation God simply has no right to make the punishment of those that freely choose to reject Him particularly onerous. Their belief: “it is my choice out of my free will, God, and your only choice is to accept my free will, give me a punishment that I decide to be appropriate, and go on about your business and leave the matter be!” I cannot help but considering it to be the “it is my body, my choice, and my life!” humanistic philosophy of the pro – abortion movement applied to Christian theology. At the very minimum, the very same lying evil spirits are at the root of it, seducing the desperately wicked deceitful hearts of man (Jeremiah 17:9)that harbor imaginations and high things that exalt themselves against God (2 Corinthians 10:5).

The final insult is that annihilationism advocates promote their position as the solution to the problem that evangelical pastors are increasingly uncomfortable about the topic of the lake of fire and now rarely mention it, and as a result the doctrine may soon vanish from mainstream respectable Christianity. They propose their view as a way to make divine punishment acceptable enough to the world that evangelical pastors will again start preaching it, and thereby save the doctrine of divine punishment from extinction, making them the TRUE defenders of the orthodox notions of the sovereignty and holiness of God (at least with regards to how those notions relate to the inherent great value of man and his free will). Both the trends of Christian pastors refusing to tread on the topic because of their own cowardice before worldly opinion and the willingness to embrace heretical doctrines to please this same world that rejected and murdered God on the cross is evidence that the great apostasy, the great falling away, is indeed nigh upon us. Sadly, the oneness annihilationist (Laymond was his screen name) was not someone with marginal views, but rather represented one that was on the cutting edge. Instead, the biblical view is the one that is fast becoming marginal.

Posted in apostasy, Bible, blasphemy, Christianity, endtimes, eschatology, evangelical christian, heresy, humanism, prophecy, salvation | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Humanism: Without Natural Affection

Posted by Job on February 17, 2008

Coach
Dave Daubenmire February 14, 2008 NewsWithViews.com

This
know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men
shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers,
disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection,
trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those
that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more
than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power
thereof: from such turn away.
2 Timothy 3:1-5

No
matter what you think about the inerrancy of the Bible you would have
to admit that the Bible is almost eerie in warning us what the world
would look like in the future. You can’t read Romans
1
without getting the feeling that the Bible is either true or
that someone sure had a great perspective on the nature of man. Either
way, reading the Bible with an open-mind is an exercise in wonderment.
As Abe Lincoln quoted, “the
judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether
.”

I
saw the Bible validated again this past weekend.

My
perky little girlfriend (wife) and I had the opportunity to attend
some Gospel-training in Charlotte, N.C., which included a morning
at a local abortion mill. We have done this many times, but this past
weekend the Lord allowed me to see something differently. Now, I’m
not talking about “seeing” with my natural eyes, but rather the ability
to “see” things with the Spirit. Helen Keller is purported to have
said, “there is nothing as tragic as one who has sight but cannot
see.”

The
parking lot was flooded with cars on this crisp, sparkling Saturday
morning. As is usually the case at abortion mills, there are guards
(“deathscorts” is what we call them) who “protect” the women from
the gentle-Christians trying to share the truth about abortion. Their
job is to make sure no one comes on the property and that no-one speaks
with the women.

Looking
for an opportunity to get closer I made my way up on top of a stone
wall over looking the clinic. From my perch I had a panoramic view
of the parking-lot and the sidewalk counselors crying out to those
going in to kill their babies.

“Please,
come talk to us. We have doctors in town who will give you and your
child free medical care. We have families who will adopt your baby.
We have those who will help pay for your baby. We have places for
you to stay where loving women will help care for your child. Please
allow your baby to live. Come talk to us.”
(These are the
words of those whom the media loves to call “abortion protestors.”)
There is a saying that those in the abortion-hating ministry love
to use. Every time a woman walks into a clinic the results are “one
dead, one wounded.” It is love that brings these Christians to the
gates.

As
I surveyed the activities below a Scripture popped into my head, “Without
natural affection”
which I immediately recognized from 2 Timothy.
I was a bit corn-fused because I had always applied that Scripture
to homosexuality and heterosexual promiscuity. But on this morning
I saw it in a different light.

“Without
natural affection”
I repeated under my breath as the Truth of
that Scripture etched in a new way in my heart.

It
is one thing for a young girl to be caught in the trap of an unexpected
pregnancy. Like an animal with its foot caught in a trap the urge
to chew off one’s own foot seems like a viable solution. That’s where
many of the young girls find themselves. They will do anything to
get out of the “pregnancy trap.” Many different thoughts rattled under
my cross-hat
as I watched.

The
desire of a mother to defend her child is a natural thing. Watch any
animal and notice how the mother naturally does all that she can to
protect her babies. The Women’s Liberation movement in America has
taken from our young mothers their natural affection for their babies.
Those who kill their children have been stripped of their “natural
affection.” They love themselves, their bodies, and their freedom
more than they love their baby. Is this what evolution has given us?

Just
as startling is the number of grandmothers who have accompanied their
daughters to the killing center to become an accessory to the murder
of their own grandbaby. Can you imagine anything less natural than
a grandma not loving her daughter’s daughter? When I called out to
one grandmother as she walked down the sidewalk that it was her duty
to rescue her grandbaby she replied, (As God is my witness. I almost
fell off of the wall) “We don’t need another one. We already got
two.”
I
wonder where her daughter learned her selfishness. They “already got
two.” She values things more than people. Without natural affection.

A
women’s right to choose has taken men off of the hook. We exhorted
some of the boyfriends at the death mill to be a man and go rescue
their child from slaughter. To most of them, the child was a nuisance,
something that would get in their way. A woman’s right to choose has
stripped the man of “natural affection” for his offspring. He wouldn’t
allow that to be done to his favorite huntin’ dog. “Hey, it’s her
choice.”
They repeat the feminist mantra. Men no longer defend
their babies.

The
law has lost all semblance of humanity. Police officers regularly
guard the clinics and the “right of a woman” to kill the life within
her. The law protects death, not life. (Can you say Teri Schiavo?)
I always like to point that out to the policemen on duty.

“Officer!”
I bellowed from my lofty perch above the death-camp directed towards
a patrol car sitting at the entrance of the clinic. “There is a
hate-crime taking place inside that building. A white doctor is killing
black babies by the dozens. DO something to protect them.”
As
is often the case, the cops wish there was a sniper in the vicinity
to silence my appeals for the unborn. The cops defend the killers,
all in the name of choice. They defend the law, not the innocent.
It’s unnatural.

Did
I mention that nearly 90% of those going into the clinic were black?
Systematically the black race is killing off its own. Read
about the Black Genocide here
. It is one of the untold secrets
of abortion. Read
this from Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson
.

As
I pointed out the black-genocide to the two “guards” (deathscorts)
I could tell I had hit a nerve with them. Both of them were young
black men in their early thirties and I continued to allow the Holy
Spirit to prick their conscience.

“How
can you guys be part of leading so many young black babies to death?
Dr. King would be ashamed of you. You are helping to destroy the next
generation of black leaders. Look at how many of the girls going in
there are black. Real men save babies, they don’t help kill them.”

They
were starting to squirm. The Holy Spirit always provides
a way of escape
.

“How
much do they pay you to help kill black babies?
I continued. “Killing
babies ain’t much of a way to make a living. Where I come from they
call that blood-money. You guys were raised better than that. I bet
your mother is proud of you.”
This continued for about an hour.
I know it sounds harsh. Killing babies is harsh. Finally I said,

“I
tell you what. Whatever they are paying you here today I will give
you if you walk away. Just leave. I’ll give you a hundred bucks each
to get out of here and never come back. In fact, one of our buddies
will help you find a job you can be proud of. But you gotta leave
right now and promise to never come back.”

That
was all these muscular black men needed to hear. They walked over
and took the two-hundred.

“I
ain’t never coming back,”
one of them said. (It turns out they
were brothers). “You know I never noticed all of them faces was
black until you pointed it out.”

The
other brother had spent a fair amount of time talking on the phone
as I had been speaking to them earlier. He now spoke-up as he was
leaving.

“You
know, the whole time you were talking to me I had this urge to call
my mother. Money is tight at home and I have two daughters to support,
but I knew my Mama would tell me what to do. I called her and she
told me to “run from that place as fast as I could…that the Lord would
take care of my babies.”

This
grown man turned to his babies’ grandma for advice. This woman of
God told her son, “You run from that place, Donell.” Her conscience
was still functioning.

America’s
conscience has been seared. We love animals, trees, and stuff more
than babies. It’s unnatural.

Funny,
that’s what the Bible says would happen.

Do
you think like a Christian or a humanist? Did the Founders really
separate Church and State? Is Judicial tyranny ruining America? Check
out these great teachings by the Coach
.
Sign
Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

© 2008 Dave Daubenmire
– All Rights Reserved

Coach Dave Daubenmire, founder and President
of Pass The Salt Ministries www.ptsalt.com
and Minutemen United www.minutemenunited.org,
is host of the high octane Pass The Salt radio show heard in Columbus,
Ohio.

In 1999 Coach Daubenmire was sued by the ACLU
for praying with his teams while coaching high school in Ohio. He now
spends his energy fighting for Christian principles in the public domain.

E-Mail: coach@ptsalt.com

Posted in abortion, abortion rights, Christianity, gay rights, homosexuality, humanism, Jesus Christ, pro choice, pro life | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

San Jose State University Bans Blood Drives Because Homosexuals Not Allowed To Donate

Posted by Job on February 7, 2008

CitizenLink: University Bows to Homosexual Pressure, Cancels Blood Drives
San Jose State University has banned blood drives from campus because homosexuals are not allowed to donate.

Family News in Focus Local blood center worries about shortage.
San Jose State University has banned blood drives from campus because homosexuals are not allowed to donate.
The Food and Drug Administration last reviewed its ban on homosexual
donors in March 2006 and feels the policy is still appropriate.
“We’re not arguing anything about the science,” said Larry Carr,
university vice president. “We’re not in a position to argue the
science. We have a conflict with a nondiscrimination policy on our
campus.”
Dr. Jim Small of the Christian Medical Association said San Jose State is letting its zeal for gay rights cloud its judgment.
“I think that despite their denial of this, that they are clearly making a political statement,” he said.
San Jose State students and faculty donate about 300 units of blood
a year, and, according to Michele Hyndman of the Stanford Blood Center,
any further losses could put local patients in jeopardy.“Our fear would be that other organizations would ban blood drives
following San Jose State’s lead,” she said. “That would be devastating
to the blood supply.”

Powered by ScribeFire.

Posted in Bible, Christianity, education, gay rights, homophobia, homosexuality, humanism, identity politics, idolatry, multiculturalism, political correctness, speech code | Leave a Comment »

Will Smith’s Remarks On Adolph Hitler Well Represent Liberal Christianity

Posted by Job on December 26, 2007

Actual Christianity teaches the total depravity of man, that mankind is born in sin. Liberal Christianity and Scientology (in addition to Judaism, Islam, and basically every other religion, ideology, belief system, etc.) teaches that man is basically good. So Smith states what pretty much everyone who is not a Bible – believing Christian holds to be true … that Hitler was basically good and could have been saved by reprogramming (or auditing or re – education).

Now again, all Smith did was speak what every other person that rejects the total depravity of man believes. It is just that for political correctness reasons, we are not supposed to apply that belief to Adolph Hitler. The case of Hitler requires them to suspend their ideology; to be situational in their ethics. Because Smith is a bit more honest than the average bloke (remember the mini – controversy that he generated in stating that the reason why a Hispanic actress was cast as his love interest in “Hitch” rather than a black or white one was because of financial concerns) he was willing to take this “man is basically good” belief to its actual implications.

So, you have the Jewish Defense League demanding that the man’s career be ended for simply stating what every person that rejects biblical Christianity and with it the total depravity of man believes. When you really think about it, these people really do believe that the only people that are going to spend eternity in the lake of fire are going to be Adolph Hitler plus a few other notorious criminals. The reason why man is unwilling to condemn anyone other than the worst of the worst as evil is because they know that if they go beyond that they are condemning themselves. People know the truth not only of their own behavior but the imagination of their own hearts: what they would do if they thought they could get away with it. But they deny the truth because because accepting the total depravity of man means that you will have to submit yourself to the sovereignty of God as your only hope. So long as the person rejects his own depravity, he tells himself that he will never have to bow his knee to a holy righteous God.

Friends, I urge you not to give yourself over to this self – delusion that man is basically good and only needs proper education and other methods of self – improvement. Acknowledge that you need the Savior Jesus Christ to wash you clean of your sinful nature with His own Blood! Accept Jesus Christ in your heart right now by following The Three Step Salvation Plan!

Posted in atheism, christian left, christian liberalism, Christianity, humanism, liberal christian, Scientology, secular humanism | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

The Great Debaters: Never Trust Oprah Winfrey!

Posted by Job on December 25, 2007

Let me preface this by saying that I have nothing against Denzel Washington or Forest Whitaker, having no evidence that either has willfully set himself against Jesus Christ and His work. Oprah Winfrey, however, is another matter.

Did you know that Denzel Washington’s wife drops by Trinity Broadcasting Network’s “Praise The Lord” show for an appearance every now and then? Recall that when Denzel Washington said “God is great, God is good” in his Oscar acceptance speech that honored his playing an adulterous drug dealing murdering corrupt police officer so depraved that he was willing to exchange the life of his son for his own.

Remember the Denzel Washinton – Whitney Houston film of a few years back “The Preacher’s Wife”, a remake of “The Bishop’s Wife”? Over two hours long without a single mention of Jesus Christ (not surprising since it was directed by liberal Jew Penny Marsall of Laverne and Shirley) and had nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity in any fashion, unless your image of Christianity is an angel of God lusting after a married woman (who herself was more than willing to commit adultery with him if given the opportunity) and the ridiculous notion that it is perfectly fine for a minister’s wife and choir director of a church to sing in nightclubs (without bothering to evangelize anyone while there). Oh, but all was not lost … the movie DID take great pains to make a powerful brave spiritual moral stand against the great evil posed to mankind’s fallen nature by … smoking tobacco. Hollywood. You have to love it!

Anyway, I was already predisposed to oppose “The Great Debaters” because of its marketing campaign. The movie opens on Christmas Day, has a black gospel choir singing in the background, and the voice – over goes “come see a movie about the triumph of the human spirit.” Excellent way of using Christian traditions and elements to promote a movie that has nothing to do with Jesus Christ.

Still, I decided that it would be worthwhile to track the reviews of this film and see how they deal with the subject matter. That led me to Rupert Murdoch’s racist trash sheet the New York Post (speaking of Rupert Murdoch trash, Fox News had an hourlong “Christmas with Rick Warren” special on the other day), who tends to praise worthy black projects and people as some sort of superficial cover to the fact that they regularly bait the passions of the very sort of racists that kept late – term abortion supporting fascist (and leading Republican presidential contender) Rudy Giuliani in power for eight years to inflict the sort of brutal terror tactics on poor black neighborhoods that would have never been tolerated for five minutes in, say, the upscale party districts known for their wild parties where the cocaine and ecstasy flow freely.

This is what the New York Post has to say about the central character played by Denzel Washington in Oprah Winfrey’s “triumph of the human spirit“:

The vaguely roguish Melvin Tolson, who is very possibly a Communist, is also trying to organize migrant farm workers into a union. It’s this activity – which gets short shrift in an overlong movie – that’s actually more interesting than the rather dry debating sequences.

Tolson’s organizing gets him thrown into cracker sheriff John Heard’s jail at one point, and the atheist scholar is freed through a demonstration organized by soft-spoken but powerful theologian James B. Farmer Sr., played by Forest Whitaker in his best performance in many years.

So we have now reached the point where we open movies celebrating God – hating atheist communists on Christmas Day. So now you see precisely what “human spirit” the commercial of this movie was speaking of while the black gospel choir was providing the background accompaniment. Whatever this “human spirit” might be, it certainly is not the Holy Spirit, and as such those who go after it and deal with it can keep it to themselves.

As to whether one should go see this movie, which if the information that I have read about it can be trusted seems to have legitimate entertainment value and contains useful information (such as the black college debate team in 1935 Texas encountering a lynching on the way to a competition) I will leave that to people more qualified than myself (starting with those that have actually seen the movie) to judge and comment on.

Posted in atheism, Christianity, humanism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments »

Judge Not Lascivious Christianity: Professed Christian Jamie Lynn Spears (Britney’s Sister) Is Pregnant And So Is Fantasia Barrino

Posted by Job on December 20, 2007

The Fantasia Barrino information here and the Jamie Lynn Spears stuff here. No, this will not be yet another screed against how liberal amoral Hollywood is destroying the moral fiber of America. Why when the church is playing that role?

That is true: the Spears and Barrino are professing Christians, as is Barrino’s American Idol contestant Jennifer Hudson (whom I dealt with here for her refusal to oppose the homosexual agenda not out of her desire to avoid being the sort of hateful gay – basher that harms efforts to evangelize homosexuals, because doing so would have hurt her career). As a matter of fact Spears met the 19 year old father of her child, whom she has been cohabiting with, at church. So, for that matter, are Jessica and Ashlee Simpson, whose father (who can be counted on to make completely inappropriate comments about his daughters’ bodies) is a former minister.

The Destiny’s Child crew, Beyonce Knowles (whose sister Solange also had a child out of wedlock, though she did marry the father soon after) and similar, are also professed Christians. They even place gospel tracts on their albums and make references to being Christian in their secular songs (i.e. Survivor). Michelle Williams released a gospel album, showing only SLIGHTLY less skin in the videos for that album than the stripper attire that Destiny’s Child normally cavorts in. (After it did not sell, she released a secular album and bitterly denounced Christians for judging her.) And this actually is not as recent as it appears. Mary J. Blige, Patti LaBelle, Aretha Franklin, Al Green, and Sam Cooke can all be counted among those with gospel or church roots, Franklin (daughter of prominent pastor C. L. Franklin) particularly.

I will not rehash their histories, which are either well known or can be easily discovered with minimal research, and is really not the point as much as it is an indication of a larger issue. That is, how can the church claim to be under attack by the world if this is how people representing the church act? The Spears and the Simpsons are all Southern Baptists. As a matter of fact, all of them – Barrino, Blige, Knowles/Williams/Rowland, Green, Cooke, etc. – are Baptists or from a similar evangelical denomination. And yes, all of them at one time or another have traded on their Christian roots and backgrounds to A) garner the financial support of Christians and B) improve their images even as they are selling vulgarity and sexuality just like any heavy metal group that incorporates devil worship and the occult in their act.

It is generally acknowledged, for instance, that a few decades back black popular music was commercially stagnant and in danger of dying out. What did they do? Recruit black singers from the church, and also existing black talent started emulating them. Except that the styles, rhythms, and raw emotions once used to glorify Jesus Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit were now used primarily to glorify predatory and exploitative sexual behavior. White rock and roll acts i.e. the Rolling Stones, Jerry Lee Lewis (Jimmy Swaggart’s cousin), and Credence Clearwater REVIVAL began getting in on the act as well, adding drugs and violence to the mix. Again, this has been going on quite awhile. And not to pick on merely black music, we cannot forget how Johnny Cash would sing “I shot a man in Vegas just to watch him die” one night and “Just A Closer Walk With Thee” the next, let alone the life that Cash lived. Cash once reportedly asked Billy Graham about his brand of Christianity; Graham basically absolved him and allowed him to sing at his evangelistic meetings.

So when you look at what is going on not only with professing Christians in secular entertainment (and politics!) but even the actual Christian industry itself, we can no longer claim that Christianity is being corrupted by the world. Instead, we have to consider the real possibility that carnal Christianity is one of the influences that CORRUPTS the world, and a major one at that! It appears that Christians that have been all too busy fighting the culture and values wars against feminism, multiculturalism, political correctness, humanism, secularism, liberalism, etc. have been fighting the wrong battle. Such “culture critics” really do need to start working on pulling the beams out of Christendom’s eyes instead of worrying about the motes of the world. Phil Vischer, the creator of the popular Christian children’s series VeggieTales (and one of the few that actually makes references to God and the Bible), said it best in response to James Dobson’s campaign against Spongebob Squarepants (which Dobson quickly aborted in the face of public pressure because he needs a respectable mainstream public persona in order to retain his political influence and business empire): “Christians need to stop acting so shocked when the world acts like the world. Instead Christians need to shock the world by acting like Christians.”

Are you shocking the world by acting like a Christian, by loving Jesus Christ by keeping His Commandments? Or are you among those professed Christians that is perverting the world and leading it astray? You do not have to be someone with a huge presence in the public eye in order to have a negative effect. If anything, you, the individual Christian, are more important than Britney and Jamie Lynn Spears. You are even more important than the pro – abortion pro – rich pro – state universalist Skull and Bones occultist President Bush. No matter what those people choose to do and expose it for the world to see, we only know them based on how we perceive them through the media. It is not personal, only an image. But the people that are in your family, the people in your church, the people in your social or civic organizations, the people on your workplace or at your school, your neighbors, even folks you meet randomly on the street once and only briefly … it is those people who encounter the real you, and it is the real you that will have a lasting impact on them for good or for evil.

So what will that impact be? A corrupting impact or an uplifting one? Will it be the impact of someone that conforms to the world and loves its ways? Or the impact of a person that routinely studies a Bible, prays, and honestly tries to live according to your understanding of it? Will it be someone that is meek, merciful, peaceful, not self – seeking, and forgiving? Someone that loves all righteousness but hates all evil? Someone that is not partial to the wealthy or powerful but instead has his mind on the weak and voiceless? Someone that is willing to sacrifice and finish last on earth in return for your treasure in heaven?

Of course, I am of the firm belief that the body of Christ should speak out against and remove from fellowship such poseurs as these. But that is only a small part of the battle. The real battle is for each individual Christian to reject judge not lascivious carnal false Christianity within their own hearts and lives and start being what God called us to be in the Bible.

Posted in christian worldliness, Christianity, church worldliness, feminism, gay rights, homosexuality, humanism, multiculturalism, political correctness, secularism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

The Purpose Driven Campaign: Mike Huckabee Shows His True Colors By Apologizing To Mormon Mitt Romney

Posted by Job on December 13, 2007

msnbc.msn.com/id/22239946/

Make no mistake, by apologizing to Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee chose political ambition over the true gospel of Jesus Christ. People, there is nothing to apologize for here. First of all, Mormons believe that Jesus Christ is a creature, a created being. Now the Mormon religion of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and similar specifically sought to distinguish themselves from Christianity, to the point of calling us “apostates” and “Gentiles.” Their modern goal, however, is to get Mormonism to be regarded “a Christian denomination” so that people will view going from Mormonism to Christianity as being no different from going to Presbyterianism to Lutheranism or Methodism to Baptism. So they do not make it publicly known that Mormonism holds Jesus Christ to be a creature. Instead, they tell you that they regard Jesus Christ as the son of God, and leave it at that. Of course, their hope is that the person who hears that will do so according to the assumptions inherent in Christianity, and presume that Mormons believe the same thing that we do. They do not. Christians know that Jesus Christ is uncreated but rather has always existed as part of the Triune Godhead, the same as the Father and equal to the Father. Mormons claim that God created Jesus Christ just as He created bugs and rocks. Further, consider the fact that Christianity knows that God and Jesus Christ are of the same essence or substance. This cannot be according to Mormonism, for the Mormon god does not truly “create”, call things into existence out of nothing, but rather reorganizes matter that already exists. So while it is incorrect to say that the Mormon Jesus was created by nebular space dust, he cannot be of the same essence or substance as the Father, cannot be equal to the Father, and cannot in any sense be deity. And this leaves alone the fact that Mormonism holds that God the Father Himself was a man who progressed to godhood.

So is the notion that Jesus Christ and Satan are spirit brothers offensive to Mormons and should not be said? Well consider this: the notion was not first said by Christians! Rather, it was first said by Mormons themselves! This is where such comments can be found:

Bruce R. McConkie The Mortal Messiah, Vol.1, Pg.407-408
Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, on page 744
Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, Pg.218 -Pg.219
Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., In the Discourses of Brigham Young, on Pg.53-54
Joseph Fielding Smith’s Gospel Doctrine, on Page 371
Otten & Caldwell, Sacred Truths of the Doctrine & Covenants, Vol.2, Pg.28
John A. Widtsoe Evidences and Reconciliations, Pg.209
James E. Talmage in his book, “Jesus the Christ,” on Pages 132 & 133
Neal A. Maxwell, in his book Deposition of a Disciple, on Pages 11 & 12
Sterling W. Sill, writing for the Improvement Era, December 1970, Pg.79
Spencer W. Kimball, Conference Report, April 1964, Pg.95
Spencer W. Kimball, Faith Precedes the Miracle, Pg.87
Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness, Pg.216, The Savior’s Example
The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, Pg.33, 163

This is far from a comprehensive list, but rather what appears on a single web page, which also contains the relevant quotes from those passages that I did not include for space purposes. Of course, Mormons will say that they are taken apart from context, and that is not entirely unfair. But that ignores the fact that 1. the false teaching exists to be taken apart from context to begin with and 2. their attempts to place it into proper context generally consists of little more than attempting to demonstrate that their doctrine is justified in the Bible. The primary purpose of their claim that their teachings are misunderstood and taken out of context is to avoid having to admit their doctrine that Jesus Christ is a mere creature and it is further extremely unlikely that Christians would have said such a thing – for it is one thing to be a creature but quite another to be Satan’s brother – had Mormons themselves not first said so.

Mitt Romney knows this. That is why the speech of his that is being given so much praise by the religious right apostates specifically called Jesus Christ the Son of God but went no further, with Romney dishonestly claiming that saying any more violates the spirit of Article 6 of the Constitution. Well why even say that Jesus Christ is the Son of God since Jews, Muslims, and even liberal Christians in the tradition of Martin Luther King, Jr. who believe that Jesus Christ was just an ordinary man cannot say the same? Simple: Romney does not so much fear “anti – Mormon bigotry” as he is insistent upon making acceptance of Mormonism and his candidacy a package deal.

Is Romney overtly evangelizing in the sense that he is passing out Mormon tracts at campaign events? No. But by establishing terms where it is inappropriate to talk about the differences between Mormons and Christians by exploiting not so much as Article 6 but the concept of “civil public religion” that was created in the early days of this country so that there could be cooperation between Unitarians, deists, freemasons, Enlightenment agnostics, and Christians and was recreated under the banner of “the religious right” to unite Catholics, Jews, and evangelical Christians, Romney is trying to get Mormonism included within the religious political mainstream. Please realize that this religio – political mainstream was never formed to promote spiritual aims – for the groups have disparate spiritual beliefs and agendas – but rather for secular ones. In other words, the civil religion of our founding fathers and of the modern religious right is in fact no less than the very secular humanism that these people hypocritically claim to oppose, and the hypocrisy is no less than Mitt Romney taking the position that his own Article 6 views should not apply to an atheist.

What Romney and his allies are doing is using politics to advance the evil notion that a false religion is just as good as Christianity so long as “you have the right values.” Basically, it is a values based – or should I say works based – universal common religion. In that respect, it is no different from the religious left! For an example, let us turn to the center of the Roman Catholic – Jewish – evangelical neoconservative universalism, the National Review, specifically comments from their “The Corner” weblog.

Mormonism & “Weirdness” [Mike Potemra]

Thanks to all the readers who passed along their kind words in response to my post about Mormons. To the readers, on the other hand, who have written me about how I should be worried about the (in the words of one) “extremely strange” and “Scientology-level strange” beliefs of Mormons, here’s my response: In my own faith, we believe that the cause of all evil was a single mistake by human beings many millennia ago—but that the situation was set right . . . because we murdered an innocent man 2,000 years ago. Therefore: I’m not about to throw stones about beliefs that sound weird to people who don’t share them. (First of all, Christians do not oppose Mormonism because it is “weird” but because it is WRONG. And if you are unwilling to throw stones, then it is only because you believe Christianity to be a glass house. Therefore, you are not a believer.)

Michael Novak and Mormonism [Mike Potemra]

I want to second something Michael Novak said. In my decades’ worth of meeting people from many different religious backgrounds, I have found that in every faith tradition-Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, what have you-there is roughly the same proportion of nice people and jerks. To this rule there is one conspicuous exception: Mormons. I have yet to meet a single Mormon who has been a jerk-and I have met many LDS believers. As someone who grew up in Rudy Giuliani’s faith, and is now somewhere between Mike Huckabee’s and John McCain’s, I find Mitt Romney’s religious background a factor that makes me more, rather than less, likely to vote for him. (Of course, this means that Potemra is not black, so the Mormon teaching that blacks are the cursed seed of Ham means nothing to him. Potemra also has not administered a weblog which calls Mormonism a false religion that will fill you full of demons and send you to the lake of fire for an eternity, because if he did he would CERTAINLY encounter a multitude of Mormons that are not nearly so nice. Even were what he said true … so what? Where in the Bible does it say that “nice people” are going to heaven? Was Jesus Christ being “nice” when He drove the thieves from the temple and told the Pharisees that invited Him to their house as a dinner guest that they were going to the lake of fire?)

That is just a few. Basically, read the National Review and you will encounter Catholics who see little difference between Mormons, Jews, and Protestant Christians, evangelicals who see little difference between Mormons, Jews, and Catholics, and Jews who have Catholics, Protestant Christians, and Mormons all in the same boat. The same is true of the Weekly Standard, Human Events, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, etc. Why? Because it is a secular movement and not a religious one, and Romney’s agenda is to get Mormons a seat at this secularist table that exploits religious organizations to pursue their secular goals.

And why not? Mormons outnumber Jews numerically, and to be quite honest the GOP party machinery would much rather keep evangelicals within the same position as the Democrats have blacks: seen on election day and given token representation in response, but nothing in terms of actual power or setting an agenda. And that is why these people have the sharp knives out for Huckabee for being a fiscal moderate but are just fine with Rudy Giuliani for being to the left of most Democrats on social issues. The concessions that Romney and Giuliani had to make to govern with Democrats are just fine, but Huckabee is held to some mythic Barry Goldwater standard (hypocritically of course, because the Barry Goldwater in this race, Ron Paul, they hate him too!).

Why? Because rank and file evangelicals are motivated by religion, and not some vision of the way things ought to be based on their secular views, and the GOP does not want anyone representing them to gain real power. The truth is that the GOP has the same view of evangelicals as the left does: fanatics seeking to make the United States a Christian Taliban regime. They just will not admit it because they need evangelicals to retain power so that they can implement their secular ideas. In that respect, they are no different from Democrats, who in case you have noticed is in no hurry to actually be governed by blacks.

So how does getting involved with this den of liars and thieves advance Mormonism? Simple. If Mormonism is included within our “conservative secular religion”, as we well know what is considered acceptable in the secular realm will also be considered acceptable in mainstream Christianity. So just as conversions from evangelical Christianity into Roman Catholicism, once unthinkable, has become not only commonplace but even trendy thanks to the religious right (and see how one of the first prominent religious right leaders to do so, Richard Neuhaus, all but claims Mormonism to be no different from Protestant Christianity here http://www.irr.org/mit/Neuhaus.html with “The history of Christianity, notably since the sixteenth-century Reformation, is littered with prophets and seers who have reestablished “the true church,” usually in opposition to the allegedly false church of Rome, and then, later, in opposition to their own previously true churches” and many similar statements). And now you have Christianity Today, the most prominent evangelical Christian publication, taking seriously the claim that evangelicals should abandon sola scriptura – scripture alone – and accept manmade tradition in order to accommodate and facilitate the growing intermingling between evangelicals and Catholics. Of course, there is no real difference between accepting the tradition of the Roman Catholic Church and the tradition of Joseph Smith. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. See Why So Many Prominent Catholics Are Supporting Romney and Bob Novak Joins Catholic Chorus Lying For Mormon Mitt Romney for an example of what I speak.

Truthfully, it is happening already. Here are the comments of evangelical Christian John Schroeder about why Christians should not oppose the teachings that Jesus Christ and Satan are brothers: “Let’s see, we creedal Christians (the new name for Christians for Mormons as calling us apostates and Gentiles is now too strident I guess) believe Satan is a fallen angel; therefore created by God. Save for the by now widely known and completely irrelevant to politics differences in views of the Godhead – Where’s the beef?” here. He is not the only one. Some religious right leaders are actually going about claiming that Mormonism is fully compatible with the Bible, and that the differences are only interpretations, depictions, semantics, etc.

Now Huckabee Hound could expose this whole racket. But he apologizes for telling the truth even in the most timid of fashions! By doing so, Huckabee furthers the precedent that Christians cannot speak the truth outside of a church setting (and even now, the religious right sharks are digging through his old sermons to find information to embarrass him) by retreating from it. Now is this about respecting the beliefs of Mormons? Of course it is, and Christians should have no respect for a lie. Having respect for a lie is akin to either declaring agnosticism on the lie being true or pretending that all liars will have any other fate than the lake of fire. And it has nothing to do with disrespecting Mormons themselves. Disrespecting anyone, Mormons included, is a sin because we are all created in the image of God.

Take the person that claims that 1 + 1 = 3. Should we respect that man? Of course, for he is made in the image of God. Should we respect that man’s belief that 1 + 1 = 3? Of course not, for we know that it is a lie! And do not think that believing that 1 + 1 = 3 (and all of the negative assumptions and deductions that would follow from it) is a trivial matter. Would you hire such a person as an engineer to design dams and bridges? As a pharmacist to fill prescriptions? Of course not! Suffering such a person in that matter will result in the natural deaths of innocent people. So how much less should we have respect for a false religion that will result in people being cast into the lake of fire for eternity?

Now it does turn out that Mormons do not believe the same about Christians, believing that Christians who do good works will receive positive accommodations by God in the afterlife (by the way, this was not the original teaching of Joseph Smith, a fact which many Mormons are unaware of) and get highly offended when they hear of Christians consigning them to the lake of fire. But why should we have any more respect to the offense given to Mormons on this matter than anyone else? And if we are not willing to offend with the gospel, then we have no gospel.

Again, Huckabee knows this. Huckabee did not apologize on the account of Mormons, from whom he knows he will receive precious few votes. Huckabee apologized to curry favor with those who believe “if this is what Huckabee believes about Mormons, then he believes the same about me … that I am going to the lake of fire too, and I am offended by that!” Huckabee’s apology was not for the benefits of Mormons that reject Jesus Christ, but non – Mormons who do, and that includes not a few professed Christians that are politically conservative but practice a modern humanistic faith that either does not condemn anyone with “good values” to the lake of fire or does not force them to be confronted with the reality of the horror that actual living, breathing people that they see every day are going to receive this most horrible fate. And yes, he also apologized for the benefit of legitimate evangelical Christians that are hesitant to vote for anyone “divisive” and “controversial” and were attracted to Huckabee precisely because of his populist positive campaign (a formula that he learned from Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven apostate movement: Why The Media Likes Mike Huckabee So Much: He Is A Rick Warren Worker!). If Huckabee used the Warren method to grow a tiny Arkansas church to a 10,000 person megachurch, then getting Christian voters to choose him over Rudy Giuliani is no small accomplishment. The problem is that he is getting evangelicals to vote for him for the same theologically thin, suspect, and compromised reasons that he, Warren, and other Purpose Driven/emergent types get people to join their churches in the first place.

And the Rick Warren piece is key here. While Huckabee is using electoral politics to recruit conservative evangelicals through presidential process, Rick Warren is going after liberals and those in other religions. First of all, note his relationship with – gasp! – MORMONS!

Rick Warren ‘Works With’ and ‘Strengthens’ Mormon Churches and Other Non-Christian Sects

Second, see how Warren is going after Muslims: ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY: THE DEITY OF CHRIST and also Rick Warren Universalist Apostasy Meeting Details Here!

The “Islam and Christianity” link above reminds me of how TBN is using Jeremiah Cummings as well as the oneness preachers like T. D. Jakes, Noel Jones, Juanita Bynum, and Tommy Tenney to court Islam: TBN: REPAINTING ISLAM and
Trinity Broadcasting Network Tries To Merge Islam And Christianity!. And yes, TBN has made overtures to Mormons before: Mormons, Muslims, Oneness Pentecostals, And TBN, OH MY!

These all cannot be coincidences people. There is too much going on here with groups like the Center For National Policy (a Sun Myung Moon shadow group, see Want A List Of Pastors Who Took Sun Myung Moon’s Money?) and the Council on Foreign Relations (who counts Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush, Newt Gingrich, Oprah Winfrey, T. D. Jakes, and RICK WARREN among is members and the Center for National Policy as one of its umbrella groups in the United States) for it to be. It is called the great apostasy people, the falling away of 2 Thessalonians 2:3!

By apologizing to a man whose beliefs that he knows are false for the “crime” of doing the world a favor and letting them know that they are false, Mike Huckabee shows that he is part of it. For Huckabee is after power, influence, and the things and cares of this world. James 4:4 says this about people like Huckabee Hound: “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” I suppose that Huckabee and those like him would have been highly offended at James for calling him a spiritual adulterer and an enemy of God, but I can guarantee you that James would never have apologized for it.

Posted in Center for National Policy, Christianity, Council on Foreign Relations, emergent church, GOP, humanism, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Mormon, mormonism, multiculturalism, political correctness, Republican, Rick Warren, secular humanism, secularism, tolerance, universalism | Tagged: , , , , , , | 183 Comments »

Reformed Christianity: The Meaning of Free Will And Man’s Radical Fallenness

Posted by Job on November 27, 2007

R.C. Sproul series 2 http://ligonier.org

Posted in Calvinism, Christianity, humanism, predestination | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

More Proof That Evolution Is Inherently Racist: Nobel Prize Winner James Watson

Posted by Job on October 17, 2007

Original link here. Will the liberal anti – Christ media cover this, especially from this angle? Probably not.

Now here is what the Bible says: Genesis 1:26-27And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Colossians 3:11Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.” Galatians 3:28 – “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Philemon 10,15-17 – “I beseech thee for [runaway slave from his master] my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds: For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; Not now as [your slave] a servant, but above [your slave] a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord? If thou count me therefore a partner, receive [your slave] him as myself.”

Now as you see, Christianity and the Bible are clearly racist. They are incontrovertibly the source of African slavery, the subjugation of the Native Americans, discrimination, segregation, and all racial evil. It is incumbent upon us that we discard the evil of the Bible and the Christianity that arises from it so that we can rid ourselves of racial conflict and enter a new area of peace, tolerance, cooperation, mutual respect, and toleration between the races. Here is a clear example of what the secular humanist and naturalist mindset that comes from rejecting the Bible and embracing reason and rationalism in its place leads to, and how it can result in our racism – free tomorrow.

One of the world’s most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that “equal powers of reason” were shared across racial groups was a delusion.

James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America’s leading scientific research institutions … reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies … were wrongly based on an assumption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when “testing” suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.”

Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was “inherently gloomy … because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really“. He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true.”

His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: “There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so.””

The furore echoes the controversy created in the 1990s by The Bell Curve, a book co-authored by the American political scientist Charles Murray, which suggested differences in IQ were genetic and discussed the implications of a racial divide in intelligence. The work was heavily criticised across the world, in particular by leading scientists who described it as a work of ” scientific racism”. ” (What the furor left out by the media was that Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein, who wrote The Bell Curve, were atheist/agnostic. They also do not like to point out that “scientific racism” was practiced by the Nazis. It was their defense at the Nuremberg trials. Instead, they contrive that the Nazis, whose swastika was a pre – Christian European pagan symbol representing the sun god and their leader specifically rejecting the deity, resurrection, and virgin birth of Jesus Christ in his writings, as a Christian movement.).

Critics of Dr Watson said there should be a robust response to his views across the spheres of politics and science.” But not religion oddly, because they hate Jesus Christ more than they hate racism. “These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exists at the highest professional levels.” Yes, they do prove that attitudes in rebellion against Jesus Christ and the Bible exist at the highest professional levels.

He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.” Al Gore won a Nobel Prize. So did Yasir Arafat. Hmmm …

He has also suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, positing the theory that black people have higher libidos, and argued in favour of genetic screening and engineering on the basis that ” stupidity” could one day be cured.” Wasn’t that precisely what the Nazis were doing in creating their race?

This is the best part.

Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University and a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said: ” This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain. If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically.”

Anti-racism campaigners called for Dr Watson’s remarks to be looked at in the context of racial hatred laws. A spokesman for the 1990 Trust, a black human rights group, said: “It is astonishing that a man of such distinction should make comments that seem to perpetuate racism in this way.”” It is astonishing to YOU because you have been taught that racism is a product of Christianity. In your fanatical zeal to oppose Christianity, you have systematically suppressed and ignored all of the things that prove that evolution is inherently racist, including the title of Charles Darwin’s book “On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life“.

Want some more? “The human race has evolved to its present state of intelligence and power because of “the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life.”* “Race”* is the central mechanism of evolution that has created all living things. “The preservation of favored races”* is a simple process to understand, but its effects over time are awesome. If we examine the process, we find that at some stage in evolution we can observe a group of individuals of a single species which exists in an area segregated from other members of that same species. As a result of chance mutation, there occur genetic variations in some members of that segregated group. As the generations continue to reproduce, these genetic variations accumulate in the progeny of that segregate group. At first, the accumulated genetic variations do not make the segregate group different enough from the original species to justify calling the segregated group a new species or even a new “favored race”* of the original species. However, after many generations, the segregated group or tribe which had accumulated sufficient genetic differences would be called a new “race”* of the original species. Over time, these newly developed segregated races continue to accumulate genetic differences through chance mutation, variation, etc. The “favored”* variations increase the survivability of the “race”* which carries them. Once this new “favored race”* has become different enough from the original species, it is called a new species. Hence the subtitle, “On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life.”*There is really no probability that the “races”* would be equal. In fact, the whole notion runs counter to all evolutionary theory and to the whole science of biology.

Given the laws of biology, it would be a great surprise if the average strength or intelligence of one “race”* was found to be exactly equal to the average strength or intelligence of a different “race”*. Despite the controversy surrounding “race”*, it is not particularly useful to know which “race”* happens, as a result of an accident of evolutionary development, to have greater average strength or greater average intelligence because one could not predict from this average that any particular individual member of one “race”* was going to be superior or inferior to any particular individual member of a different “race”*. There are superior and inferior, strong and weak, intelligent and intelligent individuals in all “races”*. Regardless of “racial”* averages, one would still have to judge each individual on the basis of individual merit without reference to the average of the group to which he happened to belong. Only by judging people as individuals, could we avoid injustice and enable all people to make the maximum contribution to society. There is not such thing as a superior “race”* per se, in the sense that every member of one “race”* is superior to every member of another “race”*. Neither is there such a thing as “racial”* equality in the sense that the average strength or intelligence of one “race”* is equal to the average strength or intelligence of every other “race”*. By judging people as individuals, one could perhaps identify a (superior) socio-biological class which might be a cross section of all “races”* although probably not in equal proportion. The only way you could have a (superior race) would be if a “favored race”* evolved into and became the next more highly evolved species above Homo-Sapiens, in which case it would become a superior species. Eugenics is a moral commitment not a racial affiliation and any “race” that adopted a eugenic program could, given sufficient time, evolve into and become the next more highly evolved species above Homo-Sapiens. It is our hope that all “races” will accept that moral responsibility and accomplish that objective, but it can not be accomplished within the political, philosophical and religious milieu of the 20th century.”

Somehow, they left that out in school didn’t they? By the way, has anyone ever asked Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and similar what they think of black people? Of course not.

Right now, I am offering you the opportunity to reject the racism of evolution and everything else that rejects and exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and to accept Yeshua HaMashiach, also known as Jesus Christ, as your personal Savior. Please realize that had Jesus Christ been alive in Germany in the 1940s, evolutionist Adolph Hitler would have put him in his gas chambers. And since the genealogy of Jesus Christ included some people that might have been of African extraction, evolutionist Margaret Sanger, founder of federally Planned Parenthood thanks to the rejecter of God and the Bible in favor of universalism George W. Bush, would have lobbied for Yeshua HaMashiach to be aborted, or for Miriam (Mary) to have been her uterus disabled to prevent her conception. Please reject the evil of racism and choose the love of Jesus Christ today. Follow The Three Step Salvation Plan!

Posted in atheism, Christianity, evolution, George Bush, humanism, identity politics, multiculturalism, political correctness, racism, rationalism, secular humanism, secularism, skepticism, tolerance | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: