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!

Posts Tagged ‘Christian hypocrisy’

George W. Bush To Attend Religious Universalism Summit. Evangelicals Who Would Trash Bill Clinton or Barack Obama For Doing The Same Where Are You?

Posted by Job on November 1, 2008

Note: this is more evidence still that the “Christian values” movement is simply a universalist works religion. You have the Orthodox Jews, Roman Catholics, and evangelicals basically making up the religious right and you have the liberal pluralists and universalists (as well as those who basically deny a literal afterlife) making up the religious left, and all are united by a common ethical and cultural worldview, not a religious one. In other words, it is the social gospel left against the social gospel right, but it is still the social gospel. And at its root it is – you guessed it – freemasonry which has always A) denied the divinity and work of Jesus Christ and B) while not denying a supreme being or creator always nonetheless promoted an ethical system that will unite humanity (of course with certain humans, mainly freemason leaders, ultimately being in benevolent control). Of course, freemasonry is not nearly the only group that believes this, and they are also not the first. But again, it is mighty revealing that the same religious right leaders that sounded the alarm when Bill Clinton used to attend and promote religious pluralism at events like these won’t raise a peep about the first president to pray in a Muslim mosque George W. Bush. But let Barack HUSSEIN Obama win the White House and these same people will insist that Obama “is trying to destroy our Biblical Christian heritage” by attending meetings like these. And again, that is why a great part of me is convinced that John McCain will ultimately win. It will be far easier for the former Episcopalian who actually asked a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention if being rebaptized as a Southern Baptist would help him win the GOP primary (he was told no by the fellow who incidentally was also advising Mormon Mitt Romney!) to bring evangelical Christians closer to this than Barack Obama. Seriously, hearing religious right talk radio give unqualified endorsement to John and Sidney McCain’s background and character … well again it will be much easier for McCain to continue to lead the religious right further into the darkness of hypocrisy and willing blindness. If anything, an Obama win would probably mean that the job is finished already, and there is nothing left for McCain to do in that area. 

Bush to Attend U.N. Conference on Religions, Cultures

UNITED NATIONS — President Bush will join several other world leaders at a General Assembly meeting to promote a global dialogue about religions, cultures and common values, U.N. and U.S. officials said Friday.

The meeting is a follow-up to an interfaith conference in Madrid organized by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and King Juan Carlos of Spain in July which brought together Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and representatives of other religions and sparked hopes of a new relationship among religions.

General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann has sent invitations to all 192 U.N. member states to the high-level meeting on Nov. 12-13 and expects at least 20 or 30 world leaders to attend, his spokesman Enrique Yeves said. Bush will attend on Nov. 13, U.N. and U.S. officials said.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Bush “remains committed to fostering interfaith harmony among all religions, both at home and abroad.” She said Bush also plans to meet separately with Abdullah.

D’Escoto believes the initiative “should be broadened to talking not only about religions but about cultures, about all the common values we have,” Yeves said. “He would like that we talk not only about dialogue, but about joining forces in order to work together with all these common values to address the major issues that we are facing right now in the world,” Yeves said.

Abdullah, whose country bans non-Muslims from openly practicing their religion, has called for religious tolerance and said such dialogue is the duty of every human being.

Advertisements

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

If A Woman Cannot Be A Leader In The Church How Can Sarah Palin Lead The Religious Right?

Posted by Job on October 16, 2008

Now I do not entirely agree with Voddie Baucham’s position below that women should not have leadership roles in the private sphere i.e. government and business. I believe that the New Testament restriction applied only to the church. Baucham’s statement that a nation ruled by women is a sign that said nation is under judgment because of its immorality causing the lack of suitable males I believe applied to Old Testament Israel, which was God’s covenant people. (Of course, looking at what our own wicked culture has done to our men and boys, resulting in a large portion of the male population being unable to hold a job and lead a household, let alone run a government or business, well that certainly makes Baucham appear right and me wrong.)

So were it simply an issue of Sarah Palin being vice president or even president of our government (or for that matter NATO, the UN, Microsoft, ExxonMobil, etc.) I am fine with that because it is a secular position. That is consistent with by interpretation of Proverb 31 as well as with the fact that Lydia of Acts was a businesswoman and entrepreneur, and women supported the ministry of Jesus Christ with their economic activity. Even in practical terms, plenty of women, particularly those whose husbands have either died or abandoned them or become disabled, wind up needing to support themselves and their children, and the current church does not have a social services apparatus to provide food, housing, and education to such women and their children as the early church of Acts did. Therefore, such women either need to get jobs or get on the very government welfare programs that the religious right so hates. 

But that is secular temporal matters such as business and government, not spiritual matters such as Body of Christ ecclesiology. Scripture makes it clear: women cannot take on positions of ecclesiastical leadership. It is interesting that the primary arguments for suggesting otherwise is generally diminishing the spirituality of the church, making it more secular. One either claims that denying certain roles to women is just another manifestation of workplace and societal discrimination, or that the New Testament words in this matter only reflected Middle Eastern worldly cultural norms and was not the Holy Spirit inspired infallible Word of God.

A novel recent attempt has been to claim that the demand that women be silent and learn under subjection only applied to the home, which makes the home the only spiritual institution where God’s suzerain covenant with Adam applies, not the church (to understand the importance of the suzerain covenant with Adam that Paul mentioned that allowed the man to transgress where the woman was only deceived, which allowed woman to be held blameless – though in subjection – and for the church to be redeemed through her seed, please read http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhgr3tfq_197djp7zwfh).

Now as mentioned in Why The Early Church Fathers Were Millennialists And Why The Gentile Church Quickly Rejected It For Sadduceeism because of a vacuum left in the religious right due to not only the deaths of its prominent founding members but many of the people that have since come along tainting themselves with compromise and scandal, Sarah Palin is the de facto leader of the religious right. She is not A LEADER but THE LEADER.

Now she has not asked for the position of leadership in the entire religious right, but rather has been thrust into it by the hyperbole of socially conservative Christian leaders, including those that have not spoken out on such matters in the past but have allowed themselves to become so fearful of Obama (as if Bill Clinton was any better … what makes Obama so much more fearsome than the draft dodging 1960s radical Oxford elitist Clinton eh, but we are not going there!) and excitement with the potential of conservative leadership in the form of someone other than a white male (as if the very reason why there aren’t more black/Hispanic/Asian conservative leaders isn’t, well, the very same one that causes them to fear Obama far more than they did Clinton).

But that is not to say that Palin has not been courting the religious right. After all, she is not the only pro – life religious conservative. Ron Paul has the same views – including the same ability to dissemble on homosexuality as Palin by the way -and what is more has the actual scientific background to speak form it as a medical doctor and the religious right loathes him. Tom Coburn also has the views and medical background, but the next religious right leader to talk up the fellow that actually wants to end abortion and reduce government will be the first. But yes, we know that Palin has not only courted the religious right in her state, but did so using government resources. See State paid for trip when Palin told students to pray for pipeline and As governor, Palin at times bonds church and state. So even though Palin didn’t ask to lead the national religious right, it is certainly a role that she was certainly willing to use to her political advantage in Alaska and as such has experience in. 

But again, Palin is a woman. A woman is not supposed to have such authority in the church, right? I agree that being a leader of the amorphous ill defined religious right is not the same as being leader of the Southern Baptist Convention or pastor of Coral Ridge Ministries. As someone who feels that a woman has the right to, say, initiate and run missionary organizations (a fact made more so because the vast majority of missionaries today are in fact women and said women are putting men to shame in this vital area of the Great Commission) then my challenge is less than perfect because leading the religious right is not direct ecclesiastical authority per se but rather leadership of a parachurch activity. 

Still, it is interesting to note that my very liberal views on women in leadership is not shared by many of Palin’s advocates, including the leaders of denominations that forced women out of the leadership positions of the missionary boards that they themselves started, financed, and ran with very little help (and usually only opposition) from the male leadership of those denominations. Also, there is a difference between being a leader of a parachurch organization like, say, a Christian charity (which I assert is a position akin to a deacon, and the Bible does suffer women to be deacons) and leading the religious right. Simply put: leaders of Christian charities have very little influence on church doctrine and practice other than perhaps being more effective at getting more Christians to participate and give. 

But it is past time to acknowledge that leadership of the religious right is the closest thing that we have in America to a Protestant pope, or as it were the leader of a state church. The best example is how so many evangelicals have become very accommodating to Roman Catholicism and dual covenant theologies surrounding Judaism and Israel thanks to the need to maintain religious right alliances. One truly cannot be a leader in the religious right while unambiguously stating that Roman Catholic doctrines regarding Mary, angels, and icons are grievous blasphemies and apostasies, or that Jews must accept Jesus Christ or face eternal flame. That is why religious right leaders would much rather simply bash gay rights activists and the ACLU, or for that matter are much more comfortable denouncing their political opponents as a group because of their political, cultural, ideological etc. views than denouncing individual sinners for their sin. Further still, being a religious right leader requires being in good company with people like Rush Limbaugh. Stating that an unrepentant thrice divorced former drug addict should not be accepted as a leader or authoritative voice (and the same for, say, George W. Bush, Newt Gingrich, et al) would be appropriate Christian speech, but it would put one very much at odds with conservatism, correct? And as a result, evangelicalism simply follows suit in refusing to oppose Roman Catholicism, tell the truth about Judaism and Israel, and putting up with Council on Foreign Relations new world order globalist occultists. The next religious right leader that asks why we send an ambassador to the Vatican or challenges Bush on putting on Muslim garb and praying in a mosque (no, they only get mad when Obama does it!) or stating that all religions worship the same God (again, imagine were Obama to say the same!) will be the first. 

So yes, Sarah Palin will be very influential in the doctrine and practice of politically active evangelicals, especially in areas regarding how they relate to the world. As a matter of fact, it has happened already. Did you note how so many religious right leaders took a far more accepting tone towards teen pregnancy because of Bristol Palin? The next religious right leader to go after Sarah Palin, Briston Palin, or Levi Johnston will be the first. And of course, if the religious right EVER tries to make illegitimacy an issue again, they will be reminded of it. And as I have alluded to, their having to give up on the issue politically will basically mean that they have to give up on it THEOLOGICALLY.

As a matter of fact, they already have. Please recall Dobson’s response: “teen pregnancy is part of the cultural landscape now, and the church has to acknowledge it and adapt to it by praying for and offering support to teen mothers.” Excuse me, but any one that read “A Nation At Risk” knows that teen pregnancy has been part of the cultural landscape since the 1950s, and further that the religious right were the last ones to suggest that the church pray for and support them, but instead demanded that such people be excoriated and marginalized in order to get them to change their behavior. 

Now again, if the religious right is a secular movement promoting culture, values, and a particular vision of government and economics, then it is fine for Sarah Palin to wield so much influence over it. But if it is a religious movement, a church movement, then I would like to see how it can be justified. But hey, then again, I was saying precisely the same thing back when many religious right leaders were wanting Mormon Mitt Romney to be their standard bearer. This includes, incidentally, prominent Southern Baptist leaders that were advising him. (Romney did not take their advice, because they wanted him to acknowledge to evangelicals that Mormonism was a totally separate faith from and completely irreconcilable with Christianity, and Romney was determined to force evangelicals to accept his faith as another denomination or branch of Christianity as part of his candidacy, but when you realize that these same evangelicals have done the same with Roman Catholicism and increasingly Judaism, then you cannot blame Romney and his Mormon backers for calling evangelicals big time hypocrites on this issue.) I recall how Romney took the house down at some C-PAC meeting after conceding the nomination to McCain. Make no mistake, based on the buzz emanating from C-PAC, Romney most definitely was going to be the standard bearer for social conservatives going forward. That is, until Sarah Palin, who by virtue of her being female and actually being a Christian has completely usurped and deposed him. (Although ironically if the financial crisis causes a McCain loss, Romney stands to be the biggest beneficiary politically.) 

So how about it political evangelicalism? How does having a woman be your de facto pope or state church leader square with what the Bible says about ecclesiastical roles for women? Will you accept Palin being your teacher just as you have been accepting humanistic pyschology and political/cultural values masquerading as (crossless) Christianity from the likes of James Dobson and Bill Bennett for the past 20 years? (Say what you want about Beth Moore, but her teaching ministry apparently does seem to be aimed at women.) So maybe, then, the Voddie Baucham video below should be considered, if only in the context of the religious right. That is assuming, of course, that such an entity based on compromise and commingling between the church and the world as the religious right should have ever existed in the first place.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 19 Comments »

False Preachers: Todd Bentley, Stephen and Karl Strader, Joe Perez!

Posted by Job on April 11, 2008

contributed by Walter Kambulow

  1. Talking about idiots or fools who are false preachers, Canadian Revivalist Todd Bentley is holding this week special revival meetings see http://www.freshfire.ca/ at Pastor Stephen Strader’s Ignited church http://www.ignitedchurch.com which was bought with money that Pastor Karl Strader with the help of Joe Perez stole from Carpenter’s Home Church which he stole from First Assembly of God of Lakeland Florida see “Not Innocent”
    http://crooksag.tripod.com/crooks.pdf
    http://crooksag.tripod.com
  2. Todd Bentley is bragging about all the miracles, signs and wonders that are occurring during the meeting and is ignoring what Jesus said about signs and wonders:
  3. Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 7:22 “Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 7:23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
  4. Todd Bentley should check what lying Pastor Karl Strader stated on his website http://www.karlstrader.com/main/mainstory.aspx about his lying thieving son Dan Strader and compare it with what the Ledger reported
  5. In 1993 we experienced a glorious move of God with Rodney-Howard Browne. It was a revival that reached around the world in influence. It looked like we were going to regain some of our losses. Then, in 1995, our church took another gigantic hurricane-like hit. My son, Daniel, went to prison for 45 years. More than 200 newspaper articles blitzed the area plus TV coverage. He had come on economic hard times, and his investment business was said to have violated securities laws involving about 65 people and three million dollars. Because his father was a prominent pastor in this comparatively small town of 70,000 people, the media and the devil had a hay-day.
  6. But the reality as reported by the Ledger and posted on http://cnt10d.tripod.com/strader.htm
  7. Daniel Strader To Stay In Prison
    Son of religious leader is serving a 45-year sentence for stealing $3 million from investors.
    Published Friday, June 16, 2006
    By Jason Geary
    The Ledger
  8. BARTOW — A bid for clemency by Daniel Strader, a former insurance agent and son of a prominent Lakeland religious leader who is in prison for stealing more than $3 million from investors, has been denied.
  9. Strader, 48, has been searching for mercy since his 1995 conviction on 238 criminal charges.
  10. He is serving a 45-year prison sentence with a scheduled release date in 2033.
  11. In December, Karl Strader, the founder of the Carpenter’s Home Church in Lakeland and father of Daniel Strader, and other supporters made their plea to aides to the state Clemency Board. They suggested Daniel Strader should be released from prison to begin repaying his victims.
  12. But the State Attorney’s Office in Bartow received a letter Tuesday from the Office of Executive Clemency in Tallahassee with news that Strader’s request to waive the clemency rules to allow his case to proceed had been denied.
  13. Gov. Jeb Bush and the Cabinet members, who serve as the Clemency Board, denied Strader’s request on Feb. 6.
  14. “It has been the position of this office all along that his case wasn’t appropriate for clemency,” said Chip Thullbery, administrative assistant state attorney. “We believe the board made the correct decision.”
  15. Calls to the Governor’s Office did not glean any further detail about why the board came up with its decision.
  16. “There is not an in-depth explanation for decisions written in the files for the clemency hearings,” said Russell Schweiss, a spokesman with the Governor’s Office.
  17. “The individual cases are decided by the board based upon the recommendations of the clemency office in addition to testimony and also records that are provided to the governor and Cabinet members.”
  18. Strader may not apply for another waiver for at least three years from the date the waiver was denied, according to the rules of executive clemency.
  19. Jason Geary can be reached at 863-533-9079.
  20. It’s to be noted while Rodney Howard Browne in 1993 was holding his revival meetings at Carpenter’s Home Church Pastor Jack Collins reported that Karl and Joe were skimming money from the offerings collected for Rodney – see http://cnt10d.tripod.com/rodney.htm and http://cnt10d.tripod.com/strader.htm
  21. </ol

Posted in abomination, church hypocrisy, false doctrine, false preacher, false preachers, false prophet, false religion, false teachers, false teaching | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 87 Comments »

What If Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, Paula White, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, And T.D. Jakes Were RACIST?

Posted by Job on April 10, 2008

And Pat Robertson, Robert Schuller, Oral Roberts, the Crouch family, Juanita Bynum, Creflo Dollar, Eddie Long, and whoever else you wanted to name? Take Paula White in particular, who has (or until very recently HAD) a predominantly black church in Tampa, Florida and has the #1 rated show on Black Entertainment Television. Suppose this women were to start preaching that I.Q. tests have proven blacks to be genetically less intelligent than whites (after a manner of “The Bell Curve”) and that black culture is inferior (after Dinesh D’Souza’s “The End of Racism). Suppose that she were to say that she supports the Confederate flag, that her ancestors were slaveowners and that she was proud of that fact, and that the nation was better off from segregation because it protected whites – especially women like her – from black crime, the inevitable product of lowered black IQ and of inferior black culture. And that our low IQs and inferior cultures are due to our being the cursed descendants of Ham/Canaan, and that America had tried to remove the effects of the curse with slavery, generous welfare and social spending, affirmative action, etc. but it is just impossible for man to undo what God has declared. And so on. Would her black parishioners leave (not to mention a good percentage of the white ones)? Would she remain on TBN and the other Christian broadcasting networks, to speak nothing of BET?

Of course not. So then, why are these same people so forgiving when it comes to pastors that commit adultery (and this includes GETTING DIVORCED AND REMARRYING, READ Matthew 19:9), who steal, cheat, lie, preach false doctrines, and violate so many other things that the Bible plainly says (including that women cannot preach!) on a regular basis? It is simple: worldliness. The world has declared racism to be one of the greatest and most unforgivable evils of human history. So the person that commits racism is not to be tolerated in any context. But disobey the Bible? Who cares! That person is still called by God and has a powerful ministry and anointing! Consider their fruits, all the people that they have gotten saved and their works of charity! Instead of tearing them down, causing division, and making the church look bad, pray and ask that God restore them! Touch not mine anointed and do my prophet no harm! And pull the beam out of your own eye before you pluck the mote out of Brother (or Sister) Pulpit Pimp, thus saith the sheeple! (I hate both terms, but that is what they are.)

Are you aware that one of the books in the Bible is named after a slave owner? Philemon is the name. Yet if a pastor owned slaves in this day and time, virtually no one would sit in his church. Yet at any given time you can find any number of convicted felons, sex perverts, and blaspheming heretics running their synagogues of Satan any which way they choose, and instead of saying “hey, this wickedness is just what the Bible warns against in Revelation 2 and 3 and in other places”, folks are much faster to “prophesy” against the people that actually care about what the Bible says. Well, if the followers of these preachers don’t care if their pastors obey the Bible, how on earth can they criticize the unsaved for not doing so? On what basis will the unsaved be condemned? You say “Well, the Bible says that believing in Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven.” You mean, the same Bible that you IGNORE when it says that Christianity is not for getting rich, and that we are to prefer the poor over the rich instead of the other way around? The same Bible that you IGNORE when it reveals the reality of Trinity? The same Bible that you IGNORE when it says that not everyone will speak in tongues, that “sign gifts” are not to be used as evidence of salvation, and that “slain in the spirit” is confusion to be banned from the church? Or that we are not to follow or fellowship with those who reject sound doctrine? And so on? If you are not going to judge YOURSELF by what the Bible says regarding those things, how can you use that same Bible to hold someone’s not accepting Jesus Christ over their heads?

For instance, Carlton Pearson’s congregation up and left when the fellow started advocating universalism. But what about all of the other false doctrines that this fellow from the Oral Roberts school of Word of Faith/prosperity/confusion was espousing? I suppose that is where such Christians draw the line. The notion that you can get to heaven without believing in Jesus Christ offends them, because they still want to be better than everybody else. They still want to be special. They want to be able to claim to be a peculiar people, blessed and highly favored, anointed, a royal priesthood, and all of those things for themselves, but not give them away to anybody else. But this is the issue: THEY DO NOT WANT TO OBEY THE BIBLE IN ORDER TO BE AND RECEIVE THOSE THINGS. So, these same people who beg for tolerance and forgiveness on behalf of their pastors and themselves for claiming to believe in Jesus Christ while not obeying Him are denying that same tolerance and forgiveness to everyone else. Ones such as those, people, are the real hypocrites, and the Bible itself says that people like that will be judged most harshly of all.

So if hearing that Eddie Long, Creflo Dollar, John Hagee, and Jamal – Harrison Bryant are no better than Ku Klux Klansmen offends you, well I am sorry, but it is still true. The folks who followed the Ku Klux Klan will get the same reward as the people who follow these false preachers on judgment day, and unless you turn aside from these wicked men and women and start seeking after God’s righteousness, all of you spiritual Klansmen will spend an eternity in the lake of fire together! Do not let the standards of the world determine what is acceptable for your pastor, for your church, or for you. Instead, allow the Bible to determine it. Rest assured, there is no excuse for not doing your level best to submit yourself to the standard of the Bible, or for following pastors and fellowshipping with others that refuse to.

Those who hear the shepherd (Jesus Christ) and follow His voice (the Bible) will be saved. All else are not His sheep will perish. But for a lot of you, it would be so much better were some tape of your favorite Pulpit Pimp railing against blacks (or whites), Jews, Asians, etc. were to be found to prove that these people were never called by God and are not following Him, since hearing these people all but come out and deny Jesus Christ with their very lips is not sufficient. Oh but that it were that simple, but it appears that for a lot of you it is precisely that sort of thing that it will take, because for you the Bible itself is just not good enough. The Three Step Salvation Plan

Posted in false doctrine, false preacher, false preachers, false prophet, false religion, false teachers, false teaching, Kenneth Copeland, modalism, warning given to churches in Revelation 2 and 3 | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

My Main Concern With Barack HUSSEIN Obama: His Victory Would Make Liberation Theology Seem Rick Warren Purpose Driven!

Posted by Job on April 9, 2008

I have heard about the nightmare scenarios about a Barack Obama presidency: the anti – Christ thing, the Muslim thing, the inexperience thing, the far – left thing, etc. and to tell the truth none of them concern me terribly much. Allowing them to do so would require my dismissing from consideration the things that some of our past presidents – and our current one! – have done, or pretending that I find John McCain or Hillary Clinton in any way more to my liking. On the last point in particular, let me tell you that in their own way, each of them is immensely dangerous to the interests of Christianity!

But speaking of Christianity, do not mistake this as a statement that Barack HUSSEIN Obama is the one most worthy of opposition, for I legitimately feel that such is the case. Still, in Christian terms, there is one aspect of an Obama presidency that I find extremely worrisome: the potential that his presidency would lead to a mainstream acceptance of liberation theology. Perhaps not the radical and separatist version espoused by Jeremiah Wright and James Cone, but definitely a more commercialized, homogenized, domesticated, works – centered (PURPOSE DRIVEN?) version of it.

Now as you may know, liberation theology was given to the world by the Roman Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council. For a time there was a chance of it becoming very influential to mainstream Catholic and Protestant Christianity, but the doctrine suffered a major setback when the very Roman Catholic Church that birthed it began opposing it in a major way in the 1980s. But were Barack Obama to win the White House, there is the potential that this system could again assert itself.

You see, many may underestimate what electing a black President would mean to America’s black citizens. It is not that blacks feel that Barack Obama would enact a raft of laws and policies favoring blacks. Rather, it would be a major symbolic victory, a sign that America is turning its back on its racist past and ready to accept a fairer future. It would signal that at long last, blacks are fully recognized and accepted as equals – as Americans – by a nation that in every way imaginable denied conceding such. You think this to be foolish? Well consider this: we are less than 25 years removed from blacks being regularly featured on television commercials. That occurrence coincided right about the time of the celebrity of Michael Jordan and the success of “The Cosby Show.” Many companies feared that featuring blacks in their commercials would result in white consumers shunning their products! And yes, it has been less than 15 years since blacks began to regularly play quarterback in the NFL. When asked about the controversy in the early 1990s, NFL head coach Jimmy Johnson stated on Fox Sports that a lot of coaches regarded blacks as not being smart enough to read NFL defenses. This trivia may seem to be just that, but it is evidence of how racism so deeply permeated and tainted everything in American life, even the trivial, and it explains why people that are black like me are capable of getting so worked up over things that appear to be so small! But to so many blacks, the election of Obama would signal that the long nightmare of being second – class citizens is about to end.

This is not to say, of course, that all or even most of these people are obsessed with racial victimization. Quite the contrary, conservative views on race such as those espoused by Bill Cosby are much more popular in the black community than is let on. Many blacks are very much concerned about the cultural problems in the black community: crime, illegitimacy, educational failure, etc. It is just that we are unwilling to discuss them in response to the baiting of conservative racists (who can be of any race) that wield these issues not intending to contribute towards solving them, but rather to use them to justify racism (including but certainly not limited to their own). But in Barack and Michelle Obama, such blacks see hope in that respect as well: Harvard Law School graduates, married, and parents of two daughters. Even Barack Obama’s drug use makes him only a more practical role model in the eyes of those who found the aforementioned Cosby Show “too perfect” and “evading the real problems of the black community”, sort of the ideal anti – hero for our cynical postmodern times. So yes, blacks would look to the Obamas as role models for themselves and the black community, and Barack Obama in particular to serve this role for the very troubled black male.

So were Obama to fulfill these dreams for black America, everything that took Obama to the mountaintop, that got him to that brass ring, that he used to bring to fruition the wildest fantasies of the descendants of slaves, would become absorbed into the shared collective black experience. And a great part of Obama’s everything is, of course, none other than Jeremiah Wright. Jeremiah Wright’s theology, doctrines, sermons, mentoring, etc. (the media is not shy about calling Wright Obama’s “father figure”) will all become a major part of the narrative of how a confused biracial young man went on to become the first black President. And of course, scores of black people will want to apply what worked so well for Barack Obama into their own communities, their own churches, and their own lives.

Let me say two things about this. First, it is the American way! All Americans of all races have been assimilating the traits of successful people, of leaders, into their own being since this country was founded. And yes, the cult of personality has always been very much a factor in American religious life. Second, with respect to the black community in general, there is already precedent. Who is unaware of the huge impact on black religious life that one Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had? Well, as important as Dr. King is to black America, King never became president (a fact that Hillary Clinton, for reasons that made no sense unless she was TRYING to lose the race, taunted supporters of Obama and King with back in January during the very week of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday … let me point out by the way that if Hillary Clinton and the Republicans in nominating McCain – a fellow that most Republicans don’t even LIKE – are giving Obama every possible shot at victory). So then, the effect of Obama on the black religious landscape might even exceed that of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s!

But that is just American blacks, right? Wrong. There has been a provincial, chauvinistic even, tendency among blacks to overstate this, but American blacks are quite often trendsetters. American blacks set trends for blacks in other regions: Africa, Latin America, etc. Now liberation theology is already more of a factor in those regions than in America, so Obama’s election would give the advocates of that belief system in those areas precisely what they need (and that speaks nothing of the Hispanic, Asian, and white adherents of it). And yes, blacks do set trends for whites in America. American whites, in turn, set trends for white people elsewhere in the world. So world, liberation theology brought to you by Barack Hussein Obama. What, Obama is a Muslim? Well, what better belief system for the secular moderate Muslims to buy into? And the secular moderate Hindus? Buddhists? People that are just, well, secular and moderate? And so on …

Again, a key component to remember is that it will NOT be the same liberation theology as advocated by David Cone and Jeremiah Wright. As a matter of fact, not even the black nationalism or Afrocentrism portion of the messages of Cone and Wright will be overly offensive in time. After all, the current image of Martin Luther King, Jr. is nothing like the man with exceptionally radical views and confrontational methods that actually lived. Does anyone remember that Muhammad Ali was once a member of the Nation of Islam? Nope. And even Malcolm X had his black history month commemorative soda cups sold by McDonald’s! The same will be done with liberation theology. It will be packaged and sold like a commercial product just like everything else in America, and when that happens, it may just find a nation – a globe! – of willing consumers in our churches just waiting to devour it. And why not? In their determined zeal to run away from the true Jesus Christ of the Bible, the cross, and the empty tomb, has not Christianity shown itself more than willing to devour everything else? This, people, is no different, and when you consider a great many of the other falsities ingested into popular Christianity over the ages, liberation theology, black or otherwise, is not so radical after all. Is it?

The Three Step Salvation Plan

Posted in abomination, abortion, abortion rights, black history month, false doctrine, false preacher, false preachers, false prophet, false religion, false teachers, false teaching, hate speech, Hinduism, homophobia, homosexuality, identity politics, idolatry, Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments »

Jeremiah Wright’s $1.6 Million Dollar Home In The White Suburbs

Posted by Job on April 7, 2008

The fellow is just another false preacher fleecing the flock, no different from the TBN minstrels. See link below:

This is the home that Trinity built

Trinity United Church of Christ is building a million-dollar home along a Tinley Park golf course on land that was owned by its longtime pastor, Rev. A. Jeremiah Wright Jr., records show. The 10,340-square-foot home, apparently planned for Wright’s retirement, sits on land purchased by the pastor in 2004 for $345,000. In September 2006, the church applied for a building permit, and in December 2006 he sold the land to his church, which took out a $1.6 million mortgage on the property.

The church received a permit in April 2007 for the brick-and-stone structure, set on Odyssey Country Club.
Trinity officials declined to comment. The church’s national office said it is “customary and appropriate in many Christian denominations, including the United Church of Christ . . . to offer housing provisions for retiring clergy” after years of service.

Rev. J. Bennett Guess, a spokesman in Cleveland, said: “Each local UCC congregation is free to honor a retiring pastor in ways it feels most appropriate.” Rev. Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School, said African-American congregations often purchase a parsonage for clergy. In some traditions, ministers own the home. In others, the church retains ownership.

In recent weeks, Wright has been a central figure in the Democratic presidential race as U.S. Sen. Barack Obama—who has described Wright as a spiritual mentor and confidant—has sought to distance himself from racial and political statements made by the pastor.

Tribune reporter Manya A. Brachear contributed to this report.

mwalberg@tribune.com

So … is this the “black value system” and “rejection of middle – classedness” that Jeremiah Wright espouses from the pulpit? Again, I don’t use the Melvin Jones terminology here, but if I did, Wright would get it. The Three Step Salvation Plan

Posted in Christianity, false doctrine, false preacher, false preachers, false prophet, false religion, false teachers, false teaching, religion, religious left | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 53 Comments »

Pat Robertson’s China Bans Visitors To Olympics From Bringing Bibles!

Posted by Job on November 9, 2007

First, see the post

Pat Robertson Promoting The Chinese Government

to see why Pat Robertson endorsing pro – abortion pro – gay rights cross – dressing fascist Rudolph Giuliani is really no surprise. After that, see the video below to see why Pat Robertson’s claims that the persecution that China is placing on its citizens is overstated and misunderstood, and that the gospel is really spreading in STATE APPROVED CHURCHES THAT PREACH A NEW AGE PROSPERITY SELF ESTEEM PURPOSE DRIVEN FALSE GOSPEL THAT DOES NOT EMPHASIZE OR CENTER AROUND JESUS CHRIST!

Posted in abortion, Bible, China, Christian Persecution, fascism, Mitt Romney, Pat Robertson, Rudy Giuliani | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

AMERICANS’ TRUE RELIGION: SECULAR HUMANISM

Posted by Job on November 6, 2007

newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis114.htm

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
November 5, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

(Note: On October 23, 2007, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1955, titled “The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.” Section 899A of the bill defines “violent radicalization” as “the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.” Nowhere in the legislation is “extremist” or “violence” defined, so you can imagine how the government could even use this bill to imprison people like the founders of this nation! Also, overnight between this past Saturday and Sunday, Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf declared what amounts to martial law. Look at my previous articles regarding the importance of Pakistan.)

You hear many people today saying what a mess this country is in. That’s because while surveys show most Americans claim to believe in Biblical religion, in practice, a growing number of younger people are really secular humanists. Why?

While young people’s values are shaped by the media, music, etc., the only thing they are required to do is go to school. And most of them attend public schools, where secular humanism exclusively has been “preached” for decades. How did this come about?

For the last two centuries, there has been in the U.S. a battle between the Biblically-based values of the American Revolution and the secular humanists’ values of the French Revolution, which emphasized Adam Weishaupt’s Illuminati philosophy of “do what thou wilt.” One of the leading proponents of the French Revolution was the Marquis de Lafayette, who brought Madame Francoise d’Arusmont (Fannie) Wright to the U.S. in the early 1800s. Here, she joined with Socialists Robert Dale Owen and Orestes Brownson secretly to take over America. According to Brownson, who later converted to Christianity, they wanted to establish a “national, rational, republican education, free for all at the expense of all, conducted under the guardianship of the State” with the purpose of separating children from what they considered the “negative influence” of parents. In terms of values instruction, they wanted to impart to the students values different from those of their parents, and this would come to be known as secular (not God-centered) humanistic education which emphasizes naturalistic evolution as well as moral relativism and situation ethics via values clarification techniques.

A few years after the plan of Owen, Wright and Brownson was begun, Karl Marx in 1844 authored ECONOMIC AND PHILOSOPHIC MANUSCRIPTS, which stated: “Communism begins from the outset with atheism. . . . Communism, as fully developed naturalism, equals humanism” (see Naturalism chart). The next decade, Auguste Comte in 1851 began to author a series of volumes on his SYSTEM OF POSITIVE POLITY, with a “positivist” philosophy in which man, not God, would decide for himself what’s right or wrong.

During the last half of the 19th century and into the 20th century, this philosophy became dominant among American intellectuals, including educators and jurists. As these individuals in the 20th century gained control of American higher education and the federal courts, the philosophy began to spread, even to public elementary and secondary schools.

In 1930, Charles Francis Potter authored HUMANISM, A NEW RELIGION, in which he boasted: “Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism and every American public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools meeting for an hour once a week and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?”

Three years later, Potter signed the first HUMANIST MANIFESTO (1933) as did John Dewey, the “Father of Progressive Education.” The MANIFESTO’s first affirmation stated: “Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.” Secondly, it affirmed that man is a product of naturalistic evolution. Humanist Sir Julian Huxley, UNESCO’s first director-general, would later explain that humanism’s “keynote, the central concept to which all its details are related, is evolution.”

In 1954, former president of the American Humanist Association Lloyd Morain, and his wife Mary (a director of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, which has 4 million members), authored HUMANISM AS THE NEXT STEP, which declared that “Humanism is the most rapidly growing religious movement in America today.” With all of these references to humanism as a “religion,” it was no surprise when the U.S. Supreme Court in Torcaso v. Watkins (June 19, 1961) listed “secular humanism” as a non-theistic religion.

One would think that with the Supreme Court’s “separation of church and state” rulings in the early 1960s banning school prayer and Bible reading, secular humanism would also be banned from public schools. This, though, was not the case. When a case eventually was brought before federal district Judge Brevard Hand, he sided with parents in their desire to ban this “religion” from public schools (see “Judge Bans Humanist Textbooks,” THE WASHINGTON POST, March 5, 1987). However, his decision was reversed at the federal Appeals Court level, which was dominated by a Positivist philosophy. This was despite the fact that even liberal WASHINGTON POST columnist Colman McCarthy in “Textbook Case Look Again” (April 5, 1987) wrote of Judge Hand’s decision about the school texts being challenged, saying “this highly relativistic and individualistic approach constitutes the promotion of a fundamental faith claim opposed to other religious faiths.” So much for “government neutrality” !

As the decade of the 1960s closed, leading educator Ted Sizer wrote in FIVE LECTURES…ON MORAL EDUCATION (1970) that “Christian sermonizing denies individual autonomy….Moral autonomy…is the ‘new morality’ toward which we are to guide ourselves and other people….Clearly the strict adherence to a (moral) ‘code’ is out of date.” Three years later (1973), HUMANIST MANIFESTO II was published and declared: “Ethics is autonomous and situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction.”

Three years after that, THE HUMANIST (January-February 1976) published an article by Sheila Schwartz expressing her thankfulness “the crazies (fundamentalists) don’t do all that much reading. If they did, they’d find out that they have already been defeated.” Then, the very next issue of THE HUMANIST (March-April 1976) contained an article by Paul Blanshard, in which he remarked : “I think the most important factor leading us to a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all other myths of alleged history.” Textbooks followed this same philosophy, as in the early 1970s, PERSPECTIVES IN UNITED STATES HISTORY informed students that “the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition was a god worshipped by desert folk…clearly man-created.”

The year after Blanshard’s article appeared, THE HUMANIST (January-February 1977) published an article by Sidney Hook, in which he explained that “human beings can be influenced to examine critically their religious beliefs only by indirection, (by which) I mean the development of a critical attitude in all our educational institutions that will aim to make students less credulous to claims that transcend their reflective experience.” And 3 years after that, Morris Storer (director of the American Humanist Association 1975-1980) declared in his book HUMANIST ETHICS (1980) that “a large majority of the educators of American colleges and universities are predominantly humanists, and a majority of the teachers who go out from their studies in colleges to responsibilities in primary and secondary schools are basically humanists, no matter that many maintain a nominal attachment to church or synagogue for good personal, social or practical reasons.”

The point in using all these quotes is to show that humanists’ control of American education and the values our children are taught in public schools is not an accident. If you need any more proof of this, the following quote by H. J. Blackham, a founder of the 4-million-member International Humanist and Ethical Union, should suffice. In THE HUMANIST (September-October 1981), he proclaimed that if schools teach dependence (in a moral sense) on one’s self, “they are more revolutionary than any conspiracy to overthrow the government.” Blackham was absolutely right, and this is exactly what the religion of secular humanism has done. It has become most Americans’ new religion, and that is reflected both in government (e.g., Supreme Court legalizing abortion) and in most Americans’ personal lives.

Humanists have not hidden their agenda, as John Dunphy’s prize-winning essay was published in THE HUMANIST (January-February 1983), and proclaimed that “the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom…between the rotting corpse of Christianity…and the new faith of humanism…(and) humanism will emerge triumphant.”

Unfortunately, humanism has “emerged triumphant” in the U.S. today. Not too long ago, the Josephson Institute of Ethics polled more than 20,000 middle and high school students and found that an amazing 47% acknowledged that they had stolen something from a store in the past 12 months. Do public school teachers and secular humanists tell students to steal? No, but they do say the student is an autonomous moral decisionmaker who should make up her or his own mind about what is right or wrong based on the situation. This could lead some students to say, “Most of the time I don’t steal, but that store owner ripped me off on the price of a sweater, so in this situation I didn’t see anything wrong with shoplifting something from him.”

Yes, secular humanism has become the new religion of most Americans today whether or not they realize. You think not? Ask yourself how many Americans cheat on their taxes! Public school textbooks actually have promoted this philosophy, as HEALTH COMMUNICATING SERIES asked first-graders: “Do you think there is ever a time when (cheating) might be right? Tell when it is. Tell why you think it’s right.”

The consequence of abandoning Biblical principles will be our “destruction.” Remember that in Philippians 3, Paul is talking about “the enemies of the cross of Christ,” and verse 19 reads: “Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.”

There is a famous quote about men and women becoming accomplices to the evils they fail to oppose. This is something of a paraphrase of the last part of Romans 1:32, and it applies to Americans and their new religion of secular humanism today. Shortly after the Iraq war began, a poll showed two-thirds of Americans supported torturing prisoners in wartime. Subsequently, the horrors of Abu Ghraib were made public. The American people basically invited this evil, and since God holds nations accountable for their actions and nations cannot be punished after this life, can’t we expect God to punish the U.S. and its people here in this life?

All of the so-called Christians who humanistically rationalize torture based on situation ethics should ask themselves what Jesus would say about this. You say you’re not one of those supporting torture, so you’re all right. Well, do you check to see from where the TV, radio, shirts, jeans, etc., which you buy come, so you’re sure they are not from Communist China, which tortures and kills Christians? If you buy products from China, you are supporting a torturing and murdering dictatorship, and what would Jesus say about that?

 

If I were a reporter at one of the current presidential debates, I would ask the candidates (and the millions of viewers watching) the following: “If Hitler and the Nazis controlled Germany, Austria, Poland, etc., today, and acknowledged murdering millions of Christians and Jews, would you have a trading relationship with them, supporting their economy and military?” After the gasps of unbelief from the candidates and viewers subsided, I would then ask: “Well, if you wouldn’t trade with Hitler, when are you going to end our trade with Communist China, which we all know has murdered tens of millions of innocent people, including many Christians whose body parts have been harvested to sell to Americans and others for implants?”

Remember Thomas Jefferson’s warning: “Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

© 2007 Dennis Cuddy – All Rights Reserved

 

Posted in secular humanism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

So The War Between Church And State Begins With Fred Phelps

Posted by Job on November 1, 2007

I will forgo the usual routine of prefacing my comments with a discussion as to whether the behavior of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church was wrong; there are plenty of places where you can go find that. Instead, I will deal with this fact: since Westboro Baptist Church almost certainly does not have $10.9 million they will have to close. As such, this is the first time to my knowledge that the state is causing the doors of a church that has not been found to be in violation of any laws down. Rather, they received a $2.9 million judgment against them for invasion of privacy (despite the fact that the funeral was a public event in a public place) and an $8 million dollar judgment for causing emotional distress.

It is quite difficult to say what is worse. The $2.9 million invasion of privacy judgment that was a clear rejection of the actual facts of the case, the $8 million judgment for emotional distress caused by free speech in a public forum, or the stated aim of the plaintiffs “But Albert Snyder’s lawyer urged the jury to ensure the damages were high enough to stop the church campaigning” was granted. Keep in mind: the defendants were not found guilty of libel, slander, defamation, or trespassing. They incurred this verdict by making legal speech in a legal manner, and the sole purpose of this verdict was to prevent them from making legal speech in a legal manner again. Whatever you may think of Fred Phelps and his congregation, they are not the criminals here. The criminals are the jury that brought this verdict and the judge that failed to vacate it. If the state enforces this judgment, it will effectively nullify the First Amendment protections of free speech and freedom of religion and set a powerful precedent. As such, it is Fred Phelps’ church today but your church tomorrow.

Any church that preaches that homosexuality is a sin can be found guilty of causing emotional distress to homosexuals, and even facilitating the spread of AIDS. Any church that preaches against the genocide of abortion can be found guilty of inciting violence against the abortion mills and its employees, or even the mental anguish caused by the theoretical threat of increased violence. And any church that preaches against unjust government action can be labeled subversive.

Make no mistake, it is a perfect test case, so perfect that one would think that Phelps was some sort of a plant, though I sincerely doubt it to be the case. Phelps chose the funerals of the untimely dead, the most emotionally charged environment imaginable, as his forum. He went after homosexuality to enrage the left. He went after soldiers killed in combat to enrage the right. As a result, a law restricting such conduct was speedily passed without any opposition. The ACLU did not want to come down on the side of a homosexuality opponent, the ACLJ (owned by Pat Robertson) did not want to come down on the side of one who would grieve the families of dead soldiers. For both sides, protecting their own bases, their own constituencies, took priority over taking up an unpopular cause to defend rights from a government that hates righteousness. Such is almost certainly the reason why no prominent pastor, preacher, or theologian was able to muster a defense. When such people feel the heavy hand of the state pressing against their necks for the crime of offending Islam or Judaism by insisting that salvation is only through Jesus Christ, they will wish that they had not chosen the path of silent forbearance.

Finally, I wish to deal with part of Fred Phelp’s theology. He states that we are losing on the battlefield in Iraq because this nation promotes and celebrates homosexuality. Why not? First off, I realize that we are not Old Testament Israel. But the entire religious right movement is based on the fiction that we are, that we are a Christian nation founded by God to be the light among nations, the shining city on the hill. So let us adhere to their false theology in order to further convict the religious right sorts that were silent on this issue. Did not God punish Old Testament Israel, the elect nation that He founded, for their sins by not only allowing casualties and lost battles, but actually fighting for the enemy? Why should America be any different? Christian right, you cannot employ your false theology when it helps your fundraising campaigns and voter registration drives and then discard it when it is inconvenient because it offends the white evangelical Christian families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. You have to be consistent! The fact that you are not being consistent proves that you yourselves know that your theology is false, and that you are not serving Jesus Christ. Instead, you give people a theology that allows them to point the finger at someone else while basking in their own self – righteousness. No wonder it has been such a popular theology that translates to easily and effectively to political action for so long! But no, the true gospel of Jesus Christ that requires people to examine themselves first to see whether they be in the faith and then make tough stands and sacrifices for that faith, to suffer rejection and persecution as Jesus Christ did, has never been popular and it has never translated into anything that can be used for political power, financial gain, or anything else that is of this world.

Further, I wish to take issue with this notion that God for some reason has stopped judging people and their nation for wickedness. A lot of preachers, some that I respect highly and others that are vigorous apostates, make this claim. We heard a lot of this during Hurricane Katrina in response to the common claim – believed by many Katrina refugees themselves – that God destroyed that city for its wickedness. Oh so many theologians manifested with the notion “it cannot be true, for why would God destroy New Orleans and not San Francisco or Las Vegas?” This is not to say that Hurricane Katrina was an act of God. Instead, it is to say that you could hardly pick a worse possible argument for saying that it wasn’t! Who is man to question the ways of God, to suggest that He is arbitrary, unfair, and unrighteous unless He behaves according to man’s logic and values? Was that not the error of Job, who had to be reminded of God’s sovereignty and rebuked? If God chooses to judge one and spare another, is that not His prerogative? Is that not His grace? But far too many churches claim that we have earned grace by our own virtue, and as a result we have the right to sit and judge God. They have forgotten that we are all sinners, that we all deserve the lake of fire for our sins, but despite of that fact God will spare some that deserve destruction and give others the destruction that they deserve.

The clear evidence of this was Sodom and Gomorrah. Do you honestly believe that Sodom and Gomorrah was the only place that had homosexuality going on? Not to attach some level of significance to this one specific sin when the Bible says that all are equal, what about the idolatry, violence, greed, and oppression of the poor that was going on elsewhere? And let us not forget the – gasp! – gossiping and false judging! The truth is that the whole world deserved the very same punishment that Sodom and Gomorrah received because the whole world was as guilty of sin as Sodom and Gomorrah! The whole world deserved to be destroyed then because of sin, and the whole world deserves to be destroyed today. Instead of viewing the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as punishment of the sin of homosexuality, we should look at it in terms of God’s GRACE because He spared everyone else! But oh no, we do not go there, because we are so convinced of our own virtue.

That is why all of those preachers said “Why not Las Vegas or San Francisco” instead of “WHY NOT MY CHURCH AND MY OWN HOUSE!” By using that argument, they are pretending in their self – righteousness that there is some sin in San Francisco or Las Vegas or in Sodom and Gomorrah that they are not guilty of in their person. But that is not what the Bible says. The Bible says that the man who says that he is without sin is a LIAR! So even if God theoretically did destroy New Orleans or cause the tsunami, He had just as much right to do that as He just as He has the right to destroy YOU!

Nay, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah to demonstrate a theological point. The same was true of His destruction of Egypt. Egypt was not the only proud oppressive nation on the face of the earth at the time, far from it! But God destroyed Egypt in order to demonstrate His power and to show them as a parable against wickedness and defying His Will, and openly said as much in scripture. But do not be deceived: the whole world deserved what Egypt received and far worse then, and deserves the same still now.

Almost as deadly is what I call “neo – deism.” Some preachers claim that God only worked such spectacular interventions in history to judge the wicked and raise up the righteous in the previous dispensation before Jesus Christ, but now that Christ has come and overcome the world, God is allowing history to play out until Christ returns. Pardon me, but where does it say that in the Bible? Where does it say that the Father is sitting on His Throne with Jesus Christ on His Right Hand doing nothing? That is speaking as if God has fallen asleep and has forsaken doing righteousness! Claiming that “history is just playing out” or “this world is dying and disintegrating due to sin” seems to me to be either a religion of naturalism or claiming that these events are mere chance: evolution perhaps? Excuse me … “intelligent design” to use the lingua franca of evangelical politics.

Or worse … maybe you are giving SATAN credit and the glory for these events? Take God out of it, and it is either naturalism, random chance, or Satan. As for me, I say that a sovereign God is still ruling on the throne and intimately involved in world events just as He always has been, for He is a God that never changes. I have confidence in trusting an unchanging God or my salvation. What about you?

So whatever doctrinal errors Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church exhibit with their actions, it appears that mainstream respectable Christianity has problems of its own! At least it can be said about Phelps and his congregation that they are willing to put themselves on the line for something. As if “submit to Babylon” was a popular message during Jeremiah’s day. You know what Jeremiah was accused of? Harming the morale of our troops and the country, and helping the enemy. Sounds familiar to the same charges made by the Bush administration and the religious right to certain folks, right? Again, I am not endorsing their doctrines or their actions. I am merely saying that their doctrines and actions are not as wayward as many Christians choose to believe.

Update: a reader has left an excellent comment doing what I specifically refrained from doing for my own purposes, which was to make the plain Biblical case that Westboro Baptist Church was incontrovertibly wrong. As a matter of fact, he did a better job than I could have! So please read his comment, which God provided through him in order to make the treatment of this matter complete. Also, another reader made a related point that Westboro Baptist fell for a government trap, which complements the other comment.

Posted in Christian Persecution, Christian persecution America, christian right, Christianity, church state, Theodicy | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 30 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: