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 values’

What Is The Gospel Of Jesus Christ Supposed To Transform?

Posted by Job on December 23, 2008

Well, the news breaks from Apprising Ministries that James Dobson and Focus on the Family is promoting  Mormonism. (And that they also denounce people who oppose Roman Catholicism.) Really, this is no surprise. Allow me to explain why by asking a question: what is the purpose of the gospel of Jesus Christ? Is it to transform lives by saving souls? Or is it to transform nations and cultures by spreading values and norms? Many would say that either/or is a false choice when the answer is both. What those people ignore is that so often those two goals find themselves in conflict, and when they do it is much easier and more expedient to “focus on” transforming the nation and the culture than it is getting people saved. Tending to the nation and culture is far less difficult and produces quicker, more broad based results than crawling on your belly and face over the sharp rocks on craggy cliffsides and through the thick briars and brambles trying to find that one lost sheep, and then discipling that sheep so that he doesn’t run off again. It would imagine that it pays a lot better too, even if Focus on the Family has had to resort to layoffs lately. It is easier to focus on the family than to focus on Jesus Christ and Him crucified, so any offense that results from fighting false cultural battles will be far less.

So, when the time comes that the path to salvation is not through the false gospel of Mormonism or through a Roman Catholic Church that is now teaching religious pluralism, Dobson must stand down and count such people as his allies. Why? Because Mormons and Roman Catholics have good values, and are too useful allies in the culture wars over gay marriage and abortion to turn your backs on. So instead of telling Glen Beck that he needs to repent or spend eternity in the lake of fire, Focus on the Family promotes his allegedly Christian testimony

So in times like these, the truth be told: it is not the purpose of the gospel of Jesus Christ to transform the world, which includes cultures and nations. Instead, the purpose of the gospel is to save God’s elect from the world. Evidence of this is found in the very book of Revelation that amillennialists and dominionists love to reject with a “spiritual interpretation.” Even upon His return, Jesus Christ does not transform the world. Instead, He smites it and rules it with a rod of iron. See Revelation 19:15. Why does He do this? Because the world does not submit to His rule. The world is still trying to rebel, still trying to reject the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the Sovereignty of God. That is why when Satan is released, he has no problem finding allies for his final and futile effort as recorded in Revelation 20:7-9

Even after the final rebellion of Satan is crushed and this accuser is cast into the lake of fire, Jesus Christ does not set about transforming the nations and cultures. Instead, Jesus Christ judges them, they are destroyed with fire, and there is a new heaven and a new earth. Revelation 21:1 – “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.” Now the Roman Catholics have the statement which goes to the effect “world without end amen amen.” But that is not what the Bible says. The Bible clearly states in Revelation and in the other eschatological passages that this world is coming to an end. So why bother trying to transform it? Why polish the brassware of a sinking ship? That would only divert the energies from getting as many people as you can off the ship and into lifeboats. The gospel is the lifeboat. It cannot be meant as both a lifeboat and some attempt to plug the leak in the boat. Why? Because those are two aims at cross purposes. If the gospel was meant to transform the world, there would be no need to save men from it. Also, make no mistake: it was God who put the hole in the boat to begin with. Indeed, it is God Himself that will judge the world for its wickedness. 

Also, if the role of the gospel is to transform the world, then the Bible itself would declare the gospel to be a failure. Why? Because the Bible makes it clear: the world is never transformed. It is never subdued. It remains wicked and rebellious to the very end. So if the gospel fails at the goal of transforming the world and the culture, of say, making the government respect the Ten Commandments and making the culture respect traditional family values, then why should the gospel succeed in saving any Christian from the eternity in the lake of fire? 

This is not some bold new theological innovation here. Instead, it can be found in a simple Frank Peretti novel “The Visitation.” In it, the protagonist, a burned out pastor, is confronted with his new, eager, inexperienced replacement, and the latter states “we are taking this town for Christ.” To which, the protagonist replied “how are you going to take any town for Christ when not even Christ took a town for Christ. Have you ever asked this town if it wants to be taken for Christ?” Taking towns for Christ was never Christ’s job. Thus, transforming the world and culture was never the job of the gospel or of the church. The very Bible itself declares that the world and culture will not be transformed, so if that was ever the goal of the gospel, then the Bible which declares the gospel would declare that gospel to be a failure, making the Word of God a failure, and Jesus Christ’s going to the cross to be in vain. 

The idea that it we should be trying to use the gospel to give life to things that are doomed to die instead of using the gospel so that people could be born again is a great deception. It transforms the unchangeable truth of God into a lie, and takes the all powerful all knowing God and uses His own revelation to declare Him to be weak, a failure, as if Revelation depicts God as destroying the world only after being frustrated by His many attempts to save it; that not even sacrificing His own Son on a cross and sending that Son to Personally rule the world was enough. And what could be more Satanic, more anti – Christ, than that? 

So we are left with the truth that the purpose of the gospel was to transform lives, to save souls, and to spare them the judgment that awaits the nations and their cultures. And we should reject anyone who comes promoting a different aim using a different gospel that represents a different Jesus.


Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 30 Comments »

If The Declaration of Independence Is A Deist Document Then Why Do Christians Respect It?

Posted by Job on July 4, 2008

I am not a fan of the author of this, a neo – conservative Jew who uses the time honored tactic of using legitimate issues like affirmative action, political correctness, and hip – hop culture and to cowardly hide his racist attacks on the black community behind them. Still, the information that he provides makes me wonder ever more why Christians who worship the God that commanded us “thou shalt have no other gods besides me” and commands us not to have anything to do with idols, false religions, or anything pertaining to them sit around and deny that our founding fathers were anything other than a bunch of deists, unitarians, and freemasons. It is curious that both of our new world order globalist appointed presidential candidates are doing their part to keep the deception going. John McCain claims that America was founded on Christianity, Barack Obama claims that America was once a Christian nation but is not any more. And this brings us back to Goldblatt, one of the many neocons of various religions (Jews, Roman Catholics, Mormons, evangelicals, agnostics/atheists) lobbying people to come together under the banner of politics, values, philosophy, nationalism, etc. rather than to worship the God who will save or destroy us based on our relationship with His Son Jesus Christ, and to fellowship with like – minded people. I have to say that it is convenient for people like him. During the liberal movements of the early 20th century, Jews found out that the best way to deal with the threat of mainline and liberal Christians’ evangelizing them (especially Presbyterians in Philadelphia, who actually started several Messianic Jewish congregations there) was to encourage them to get their minds off Jesus Christ and onto social action: poverty programs, civil rights, anti – war, environmentalism, regulation, feminism, socialism, etc. That left the conservative evangelicals, however, and decades of using the mainstream and liberal Christians – depicted as “better educated and more tolerant and respectable – to marginalize the proselytizing evangelicals failed. So … a better way came along, which was the creation of the notion of “Judeo – Christian American values” and a political agenda around it. Since defending American culture through politics and propaganda was the primary goal, its members could not afford to drive off any conservative Republican (even if they weren’t conservative like Rudy Giuliani or for that matter like the “Reagan Democrats”) who had their political and cultural agenda by telling them that without Jesus Christ they are going to burn in the lake of fire for an eternity. So, in order to support this movement, an alternative history of America was created, and it was conveniently able to build on the very same propaganda machine that had been put in place for World War II and the Cold War. (Please know that the left uses this very same machine; among other things the United Nations, the federal reserve, and a great many other “reforms” would never have been tolerated without it.) So here is something that you will almost certainly never hear preached at an evangelical church: the actual beliefs expressed by the Declaration of Independence given to you by a Jew who is exposing it only because he wants his conservative evangelical readers to come to the same position that liberal Christians and Roman Catholics have accepted long ago: that so long as we share the same culture and politics there is no reason for you to harass us Jews with accepting your Jesus Christ. This fellow, Mark Goldblatt, makes it explicit at the end.

The Necessary Religion by Mark Goldblatt

The most famous sentence ever set to paper by an American was not conceived in a single instant. In his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable; that all men are created equal and independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Benjamin Franklin and John Adams read this draft and suggested minor alterations, which Jefferson incorporated into the version presented to the Second Continental Congress. The sentence became: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Though no one knows who made which edit, it’s safe to assume that all three men gave that sentence a good going over — in all likelihood agonized over its final form. Each change is therefore worth noting. But I’m going to focus here on just two: 1) “sacred and undeniable” became “self-evident,” and 2) “endowed by their Creator” was added.

The second change is perhaps the more intriguing, so let’s begin there. We can rule out the idea that the mention of a “Creator” was meant as a straightforward signal of piety. Franklin and Jefferson were deists — that is, they believed in a higher power that governed the universe, but not a personal deity; indeed, Jefferson once literally cut up a New Testament, excising all the supernatural elements, in order to pare down the text to its moral core. (So Thomas Jefferson was the creator of Judeo – Christian values, and Christian values is an explicit rejection of Christianity itself!) Their Christianity, if it can be called such, was of the most attenuated kind. Adams was a more traditional believer, but his Unitarianism was among the least emotive of Christian denominations. (Goldblatt well knows that Unitarianism is not Christianity but heresy because they reject the Trinity and the deity of Jesus Christ, but naturally since Unitarian beliefs are A. closer to his own and B. do not evangelize Jews – or anyone else for that matter – he prefers it and has an agenda of promoting it as Christianity … as a matter of fact I can imagine some more genteel sorts seeing his description of Unitarianism as a plus, a preferable alternative to the Bible thumping table turning Baptists and charismatics.) So their collective decision to invoke a capital-C “Creator” as the source of men’s equality must be taken as pragmatic, not devotional. But what does invoking the Creator accomplish?

Remember that Jefferson had originally written that “all men are created equal and independent,” and “that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable.” The problem is that these words are manifestly false. (Here we have not only a Jew denying Galatians 3:28 and Colossians 3:11, but a race – baiter refusing to admit the fact that “created independent” was obviously dropped because of slavery.) Even if we grant that men are created independent — itself a dubious assertion — they are certainly not created equal in any quantifiable way. Not physically. Not intellectually. Not even if we mean their hidden potentials. No matter how much I practice, I’ll never be as good a basketball player as Michael Jordan is. (Racist conservatives are always quick to bring up Michael Jordan.) No matter how long I study, I’ll never be as good a physicist as Albert Einstein was. (Blacks are good at basketball, but Jews and whites are smart, so everyone know and stay in their place!) Hence men’s equality, if it exists, must consist of an immeasurable quality, an intangible essence, a soul.

This is the signature recognition, the sine qua non, of natural-law theory — the moral system through which Jefferson sought to make his case for American independence. (In other words, through humanistic philosophy, not Christianity, because humanism cannot co – exist with a sovereign personal deity. Either the deity has to no longer be personal – deism – or no longer be sovereign. The Declaration of Independence, then, is not a Christian document but an anti – Christian one representing the views and beliefs of a FALSE RELIGION no different from Islam, Hinduism, or for that matter Judaism. I am aware that plenty of Christians  – including some that I respect – found John Locke’s natural law theory useful in their preaching and theology, as his thoughts on natural law are derived from both Roman Catholic thought and the natural theology of many Protestant denominations. But this is why I agree with Tertullian’s “”what has Athens do to with Jerusalem? what has the academy to do with the church?” statement where he cautions against Christianity as philosophy, as philosophy was invented by PAGANS. ) On a collective level, the theory holds that the written-down laws of any government, including those of the King of England, must conform with, in Jefferson’s words, the “Laws of Nature” – which, while unwritten, flow from “Nature’s God” and are thus binding on all people and governments. (1. God’s laws are written in the same Bible that Jefferson mutilated just as did Marcion. 2. Jefferson’s deity sounds a lot like the eastern deities being worshiped through New Age and environmentalism, not to mention through POLITICS. And curious that Jefferson believes that his deity had the sovereignty to impose a covenant on every person and government on the planet.)

On an individual level, natural law holds that there is a Third Party, beyond the biological mother and father, involved in the act of human creation. Your two parents generated your material substance, the goop and soup of you; that much could be said of any mammal. But according to natural law, God expresses His interest in every human being through the act of ensoulment — the creation of an individual soul — by virtue of which the human being becomes a person. And from that quality of personhood flow the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. (Certainly sounds a lot like the false prosperity doctrine to me. No mention of carrying the cross, dying to self, warring against the flesh or against the world, sacrifice, or persecution. And why not? Because to have those elements YOU NEED THE INCARNATION, WORK, DEATH, AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST! YOU NEED THE CROSS, AND THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CROSS!)

The genesis of this concept of personhood is, well, Genesis. Specifically, Genesis 1:26-27: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” If the biblical passage makes sense, given the peculiarities to which human flesh is subject, the image of God in man must be the soul. (This shows how Thomas Jefferson, just as the modern religious right, is perfectly capable of incorporating the things from the Bible that they agree with while rejecting the things that they do not. By the way, Jewish Mark Goldblatt has yet to mention a single thing from the New Testament. Gee, I wonder why …)

But in what sense is this idea “self-evident”? If you think about it, the proposition that all men are created equal is by no means “self-evident” — at least not in the common sense of the phrase. (Again, look at Romans, Galatians, and Colossians, Goldblatt.) Neither is the idea that they are endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights, nor that those rights include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. (I agree, this concept comes from Enlightnment humanism and is found nowhere in the Old or New Testaments. Of course, religious right preachers claim that the Bible gives Christians these things SO LONG AS THEY LIVE IN AMERICA, EUROPE, OR ANY OTHER MOSTLY WHITE CAPITALIST DEMOCRATIC NATION! Everyone else … well hey my God sends me the sunshine and the black, red, brown, etc. Christians everywhere else the rain.)

Why then did Jefferson, Franklin, and Adams prefer “self-evident” to “sacred and undeniable”? Maybe because the latter starts an argument, but the former finishes one. If you say “we hold these truth to be sacred and undeniable,” you’re laying the emphasis on the word “we”: We believe these things. On the other hand, if you say “we hold these truths to be self-evident,” you’re shifting the emphasis to the reader’s response, telling him, in effect, that if he doesn’t concur, he’s suffering from a cognitive deficiency. Recall, too, that the Declaration was written at the height of the Enlightenment — when congruence with human reason had begun to eclipse congruence with scripture as the ultimate gauge of truth. What is self-evident must be self-evident to all reasonable people. Those who fail to grasp what is self-evident, therefore, are being unreasonable. (Now you would think that the religious left, people who cast out scripture in favor of alleged “science” and “reason” when it comes to things like homosexuality and abortion would be defending this document and the fallen mindset that produced both it and the Constitution. Nope, it is the religious right that puts one hand on the Bible – and gets mad when Muslims like Barack HUSSEIN Obama and Keith Ellison refuse to do it! – and another on the deist freemason pagan Constitution! It is the religious right that is trying to coerce all children in government schools to pledge allegience to the flag, recite the Declaration of Independence, and wear those stupid flag pins! Go ahead little Christian boy. Put your flag pin on your lapel right beside your Christian cross – or Star of David if you are a Jew or angel Moroni if you are Mormon or … whatever. DO IT OR ELSE!)

The proposition that all men are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights has become, quite simply, the magnetic north of the modern world’s moral compass. (Not the Bible eh? Since he stated THE WORLD and not THE CHURCH, it is appropriate.) Which is not to say that our interpretation of it has remained fixed. The direct line between Genesis 1:26-27 and Jefferson’s “all men are created equal” compels us to take into account the tail end of the biblical passage: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

Jefferson wrote “all men.” But we now read the phrase to include women, and members of all ethnicities — that is, “all people.” (Being a Jew, Goldblatt knows that the original Hebrew word in Genesis 1:26-27 included women, just as he knows that the word “Adam” means “humankind” or “all humankind.” Of course, since Goldblatt does not honor the New Testament – still no reference to it! – he rejects Ephesians where Paul told us that the covenant was made with man, and that is why the Bible uses masculine language. Goldblatt accepts the ramblings of European Jews in the Middle Ages over the words of a Middle Eastern Jew who lived and wrote before the Romans destroyed the Jewish temple and religion.) The full personhood of human beings Jefferson himself might not have had in mind is apparent to us. (What I care about is the full personhood of Jesus Christ – fully God and fully man – which both Jefferson and Goldblatt have no interest in whatsoever.)

Taken in their totality, Jefferson’s self-evident truths are not actually self-evident truths, but represent a creed. They are unprovable and nondisprovable. You make the leap of faith, or you don’t. All in, or all out. (Maybe Jewish creeds and Jeffersonian enlightenment humanist deist creeds are not self – evident truths that are unprovable and nondisprovable, but Christianity’s creeds were proven by the empty tomb, Goldblatt. Any faith in any other than Jesus Christ is false misplaced faith, and that includes faith in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the declaration of independence, and this country that the state has been working hard to whip up ever since Woodrow Wilson forced the pledge of allegiance to THE FLAG – not God but the flag – on us to drag us into World War I Of course, our entering World War I led to World War II, and the rest is historythe United Nations, the federal reserve, the religious right and left, and Zionism going from being a secular socialist political movement preferred by atheists – and deists – to being a religious movement integrated into the theology of conservative Jews AND Christians.)

If you’re an American, you’re all in. For what is the United States Constitution, and the centuries of jurisprudence derived from it, except the laws designed to ensure the natural rights mentioned in the Declaration? (That is not true. I am only into what the Bible requires of me. I refuse to bow to Baal, sacrifice to Molech, burn incense to the queen of heaven, build groves to Diana, Daphne, Ashtoreth, etc. or do anything else that shows allegiance to the natural law doctrines of the false Mother Earth nature religion of the sham deist deity of either Thomas Jefferson or his deist – unitarian – freemason brethren. Goldblatt wants you to think so in order to replace your Christian beliefs with politico – cultural ones, and therefore you will not evangelize his people out of Judaism.)

The foundation of the United States is the article of faith that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with natural rights. It is our gospel to the world, the Necessary Religion of America, the creedal core to which all Americans — Jews, Christians, and Muslims; polytheists, monotheists, and atheists — say “Amen” each Fourth of July. (If you ever needed a payoff line proving everything that I just said to you, that was it. I will say “Amen” every Fourth of July and every other day of the year not in worship of the state or to the false demonic deity in whose name and for whose purpose it was founded, but rather to the God of Heaven who in the former times revealed Himself to us through His prophets but in these last days has revealed Himself to us by way of His Son Jesus Christ. No king but Jesus Christ. Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, and all who did not believe in, serve, or live for Him will be cast into the lake of fire to burn for eternity! Please,  follow the Three Step Salvation plan so that you won’t go to the lake of fire!)

Now all of the preachers who get up on Sunday morning or who tape TV shows promoting the lie of the religious right that we can have the false gods of capitalism, nationalism, democracy, etc. beside the God of heaven, and that it somehow makes us better Christians for it … they are going to have to stand before that God of heaven one day and be held accountable for deceiving the masses. But my focus is not on them, my focus is on YOU. Why? Because YOU are going to have to stand before that same God too, and if you believe their deception and act on it you will be just as accountable as they are. It is said that the truth has to come out from a Jew who wants to use the truth to prevent you from converting Jews instead of from all of these prominent evangelical Christians who SHOULD be broadcasting the truth in order to keep you from burning from eternity in the lake of fire. This Jew who rejects Jesus Christ may actually have more love in his heart for you than do any of these apostate religious right (or religious left!) Christian preachers, pastors, scholars, and theologians that are either actively keeping the deception going, or are not speaking out against it.

Now this is not to say that Christians should be AGAINST the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, America, etc. because doing so would be a violation of Romans 13. God calls subversion a sin and hates it. We are to submit to and respect those who God has placed over us for His own reason to fulfill His own sovereign purposes. However, there is a huge difference from being respectful of this nation and its rulers and laws and getting up in a pulpit claiming that America ever was some reflection of God’s holiness and that its leaders created it to carry out God’s purposes in the world. There is a huge difference between urging people to learn the laws of the land so that they will generally understand and be able to obey them, and vote for political candidates that will also generally support and obey those same laws (by the way, which not a single president, member of the Congressional leadership, or person holding an important mayorality or governorship has done in DECADES no matter which party they represent, and not that any leading preacher ever talks about it, especially when the criminal lawbreaker elected official in question IS A MEMBER OF THEIR PREFERRED PARTY!) and claiming that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights reflect the Bible as much as any George Whitefield, Charles Spurgeon, or John Edwards sermon. At any given time you can hear any number of preachers or Christian activists extolling the alleged Christian virtues in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence. How often do these same people talk about “Method of Grace“? “Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God“? Against Baptismal Regeneration? You hear these guys talk about the founding fathers more than they talk about Calvin and Luther. Of course, because if they talked about Calvin and Luther more, they would have to repeat their saying “better to be ruled by a wise Muslim than a foolish Christian!” AND CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT THE ONLY TIME YOU HAVE EVER HEARD ANY OF THESE PEOPLE SAY THIS WAS TO TRY TO GET EVANGELICALS TO VOTE FOR CONGENITAL LIAR MITT ROMNEY?

People, this religious right (and left) nonsense is part and parcel of the strong delusion, the great apostasy, the falling away. Come out of this spiritual Babylon, and put away your idols and false gods of the syncretism of Christianity, political values, and whatever other religion that is willing to take on your values to advance its goal of winning more converts in the United States and thereby more power on the world scene. We have already seen Jews, Mormons, Roman Catholics,  New Agers, ATHEISTS, etc. do this in both parties. It is only a matter of time before Muslims get heavily involved with Republicans (as they already are with Democrats) and Hindus do the same.

The best – or worst – part of all this is how none of this is new or secret information. Mark Goldblatt did not win some award as an eminent scholar of history for uncovering the heretofore unknown secret of the deism (and unitarianism and freemasonry) of the founding fathers, and how their beliefs were reflected in the Constitution (which nowhere mentions God’s Name) or in the Declaration of Independence (which describes a deity and a relationship with his creation that ARE NOT THE SAME AS DEPICTED IN THE BIBLE!) After all, if he had, he wouldn’t be teaching at the Fashion Institute of Technology of the State University of New York. This is not meant to denigrate his academic achievements, which far exceed my own, but merely to point out that Goldblatt is not disseminating groundbreaking information here. The true beliefs of our founding fathers have long been known to history, and the leaders of the religious right and the conservative evangelical movements have been lying about it. Many of them do it directly, but most do it indirectly by remaining silent while the Chri$tian celebritie$ go on television and radio and proclaim their lies. To these people – and we all know who they are, they even include people whose sermons and devotionals I feature on this website, which is one of the reasons why I am getting away from that – 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 applies. “And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” Go ahead and read the verses that precede it as well. “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders.

Does this apply to you? If so, I urge and beseech you on this Fourth of July and to those who read it afterwards, PLEASE COME OUT OF IT MY PEOPLE BEFORE YOU SHARE IN THE PLAGUES OF BABYLON! The people who push this nonsense – or who fail to oppose it! – are working for the anti – Christ. The truth of Jesus Christ is not in them! Evidence of this is that it is THE LEFT that – for their own purposes – is TELLING THE TRUTH about how the founding fathers were deists and unitarians (strangely they never mention freemasons) and that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution do not represent Christianity in any historical, traditional, biblical, or theological sense. And when they do, the leaders of this apostate religious right movement come down upon them with daggers, swords, bullets, and razor sharp teeth calling them liars trying to deceive the good people of this “Christian nation” and lead them into spiritual darkness. Don’t these people realize that they are talking about themselves? Or is it that they realize it and do not care? These so – called preachers know that George Washington performed a freemason ritual – a libation of corn, oil, and wine – on the cornerstone of America’s capital building. They have read the notes and letters of these people where they express their true religious beliefs. They know that Benjamin Franklin, among many others – mocked not only the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus Christ but also those who believe in it. (Which makes their willingness to attach themselves to the legacy of Martin Luther King, who also rejected those things, and claim that he led a Christian movement with a libertarian philosophy knowing full well that the guy was a radical leftist subversive much more believable.) Despite knowing the truth, they demand that every Christian under their charge show reverence for our nation’s founding leaders, documents, symbols, and traditions. The lie that George Washington chopped down a cherry tree has been replaced with a bigger one: that Washington and his crew were serving the God of the Bible and that when they fought a violent rebellion against England (in violation of Romans 13!) and founded a new nation they did it to serve God (a concept supported nowhere in the New Testament.)

So now that you know who the deceivers are, the question is … WILL YOU BE DECEIVED?

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 22 Comments »

The Idolatry of America: Is Patriotism The Evangelical’s Mystery Babylon?

Posted by Job on May 7, 2008

Frightening stuff! Link To The Idolatry of America Article

Some things: pictures of Jesus Christ on the cross WITH GEORGE BUSH’S NAME ON THE NAILS! And this passage exposing Bush’s blasphemy:

Consider Bush’s speech at Ellis Island on the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks. In his remarks, the president described the United States as the “hope of all mankind” and asserted that this “hope still lights our way. And the light shines in the darkness. And the darkness will not overcome it.” Marsh bristles at this passage, which alludes to the prologue to the Gospel of John but modifies its message in a crucially important respect. Whereas the New Testament describes God as the light that will not be overcome by the darkness that surrounds it, Bush ascribed divine agency to America. For Marsh, this substitution is unforgivable–nothing less than the idolatrous “identification of the United States with Christian revelation.”

And how “Christian values” led to the Holocaust:

The most intellectually stimulating pages of Marsh’s book concern the theological antecedents of this troubling transformation. Relying heavily on Karl Barth’s classic workProtestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century, Marsh tells the story of how German Protestant theologians responded to the skepticism of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment by jettisoning much of Christian orthodoxy and refashioning a rump Christianity in which faith was based on subjective feeling instead of the objective truth of revelation and religious worship was defended in terms of its social utility. Before long, this “liberal” theology was all the rage, teaching modern men and women that they could continue to enjoy the psychological comfort of religion while embracing scientific discoveries that seemed to undermine the authority of the Bible, and that it was unnecessary for them to choose between political freedom and the political establishment of religion. In Europe the churches became, in effect, ministries for moral edification, administered and regulated by the state for the sake of inculcating virtues that contributed to the well-being of the nation. Marsh delights in the irony that, despite their boundless contempt for “liberalism” in all its forms, right-wing American evangelicals think about God in a way that marks them, in the decisive sense, as liberal Protestants. As Marsh mischievously puts it, “It strikes me as a noteworthy turn of events that our patriot preachers and court prophets remain our most zealous proponents of the liberal theological tradition.” Just as nineteenth-century German theologians tailored God to fit the psychological needs of the rising bourgeoisie and the political needs of the Rechtsstaat, so twenty-first-century American evangelicals take their theological cues not from the Bible or the Church Fathers but from Karl Rove and Michael Gerson.

Genuine Christian faith, by contrast, begins and ends with Jesus Christ, who “comes to us from a country far from our own.” In order to adopt the otherworldly standpoint of Christ, believers must lay their “values, traditions, and habits at the foot of the cross.” The Christian then begins his life anew as a citizen, first and foremost, of the city of God, with his “unholy nature … infused with God’s holiness.” From the perspective of this genuine follower of Christ, the profane faith of American evangelicals, which worships American power in the name of God, fails to confess “Christ as Lord” and ends up “incarcerating Christ in our own ideological gulags.”

Not a fan of Karl Barth, whose theology I find to be unorthodox and I regret far too influential on evangelicals, but check this out:

Which is not to say that Marsh adopts an explicitly anti-political position. Rather, he champions those who, in his judgment, bring the stringent moral teachings of Christ most fully to bear on political life. Once again Barth serves as an admirable example. Although Barth’s early formulation of neo- orthodoxy, in his various editions of the Letter to the Romans, appeared to counsel an abandonment of politics altogether, the triumph of National Socialism in Germany, and even more the collusion of the Protestant churches in Hitler’s rise to power, led him to reconsider his position. Less than a year after the Nazis seized control of the German state, Barth took a courageous stand in writing and disseminating the Barmen Declaration, which firmly rejected the Nazification of German Christianity, and in helping to organize the Confessing Church, which went on to play an important role in resisting Hitler. As punishment for his political activities–including his refusal to swear an oath of loyalty to Hitler–Barth was first forced to resign his professorship at the University of Bonn and then was expelled from Germany.

How interesting that one of the issues that George H. W. Bush used to defeat Michael Dukakis was Dukakis’ refusal to sign a bill THAT WOULD HAVE FORCED PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN TO PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE AMERICAN FLAG!

Even more dramatic is the example of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German pastor and theologian who organized and led the Confessing Church, joined the resistance movement against the Nazis, and even participated in a failed plot to assassinate Hitler–an act for which he was sent to a series of concentration camps and eventually executed by hanging in April 1945. Marsh discusses Bonhoeffer in the first paragraph of his book, and returns to him again and again in later chapters. In starkest contrast to the obsequiousness of American evangelicals, who eagerly prostrate themselves before political power, Bonhoeffer risked and ultimately gave his life rather than bow down before evil. Here, Marsh means us to conclude, is an example of authentic. Christian piety in action.”

Again, not a fan of Bonhoeffer, but still, so many evangelicals, to borrow from 1 Timothy 6, take godliness for gain, a prosperity doctrine of money and POWER. Scripture calls such people perverse rebellious reprobates. 

And how about the many millions of evangelicals who voted for Bush in 2004–are they the moral equivalent of the “German Christians” who added a swastika to the cross, incorporated Nazi racism into Christian theology, and sought to form a unified German Protestant “Reich Church” under the leadership of the Fuhrer? The author of this piece says no, the Bible says YES. Ever hear of the anti – Christ, people?

Consider Marsh’s treatment of Daniel Coats, the former American ambassador to Germany. In the months prior to the invasion of Iraq, Coats was invited by the Lutheran bishop of Berlin-Brandenburg to read the Sermon on the Mount–including its admonition to “bless those who curse you and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you”–at a commemorative service for (you guessed it) Bonhoeffer. Coats, an evangelical Protestant, turned down the invitation, according to Marsh, “out of respect for the evangelical president’s mission in Iraq.” Once again, an American Christian had placed his devotion to Bush ahead of his devotion to Christ. Or so it seems to Marsh, who tells us precisely how Coats should have responded to the invitation: “How I wish he had exclaimed, ‘Of course, I will read from the Sermon on the Mount. I have no other choice. The refusal to read would amount to a renunciation of my faith, and I can never allow my service to the nation to compromise my loyalty to Jesus Christ.'”  

Yeah, you got a problem with that? See, this article ultimately dislikes Marsh and his thesis. Which shows that even in the case of people that are too liberal for my liking such as Marsh, the world hates Jesus Christ and will always rejects someone who tries their best to forsake all and faithfully love and live for Him. In reviewing a book that criticizes conservative Christians for compromising their beliefs in the pursuit of worldly conservatism, Linker is moved to offense because Marsh leaves no room for Christians to compromise for LIBERALISM. Linker is fine with Marsh stating that evangelicals should have never made support for George W. Bush a part of their religious faith, but he opposes the notion that Jesus Christ cannot be profaned in order to make the case to support Barack Hussein Obama. Linker is fine with saying no to James Dobson and Pat Robertson and attributing it to Jesus Christ, but he wants to reserve the right for Michael Spong, Katharine Jefferts Schori, and Jeremiah Wright to co – opt him. This shows, Christians, why we cannot go aside to the left or to the right, for the way is narrow and the gate is strait!

Posted in abomination, antichrist, apostasy, Bible, Christianity, false doctrine, Jesus Christ, religious right | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Declaring A Moratorium On Moralism, Which Takes Christ Out Of Christianity!

Posted by Job on January 18, 2008

A Moratorium on Moralism, Part 1

A Moratorium on Moralism, Part 2

Posted in Christianity, grace, Jesus Christ, legalism | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Mormon Mitt Romney Saw His Father March With Martin Luther King With The Same Eye Of Faith That Joseph Smith’s Followers Saw The Plates Of Nephi

Posted by Job on December 23, 2007

In other words, Mitt Romney never saw his father march with Martin Luther King, Jr. (see link) just as Joseph Smith’s followers (see link) never saw the plates of Nephi. Why? Because just as Mitt Romney’s father never marched with Martin Luther King, Jr. for Mitt Romney to see it, freemason Joseph Smith was never given any plates of Nephi by any angel for anyone else to see. Quite simply, Mitt Romney was lying just like Joseph Smith’s cohorts were lying. And in each case, the context makes it even worse. In the original case, Joseph Smith’s followers claimed to have LITERALLY seen the plates of Nephi because no one was going to follow a movement based on unconfirmed revelation to a single individual. The men, as such, used their false witness to lend credibility to the notion that Joseph Smith had actually received revelation and was a true prophet of God. It was only after Mormonism had attracted thousands of people that had given up everything and dedicated their lives to the new religion that Joseph Smith’s guarantors acknowledged that, well, seeing doesn’t mean SEEING.

And yes, Mitt Romney’s denial has everything to do with his religion as well. In order to prevent from having to answer questions about the racist doctrines of his religion, he claimed to have seen his father marching with Martin Luther King, Jr. If Romney says that his church was wrong, then he is calling his religion a lie, because the racist teachings of Mormonism were not false doctrines coming from willful misinterpretation of scriptures done by sinful men in their rebellion against God (the case in Christianity with people claiming that the Nehemiah narrative is an example of God forbidding the races from intermarrying when the truth is that the case was over RELIGION and not race, since the people that the Israelites were forbidden from marrying were members of the same near eastern Semitic race as the Israelis, and one of the benefits of circumcision was being able to tell Jews from Gentiles among groups of people that were visually – meaning RACIALLY – indistinguishable) but revelations given by the Mormon god to Mormon prophets. Romney can only say that the racist policies were removed over time, most notably with the priesthood decision in 1978. He cannot say that the policies were wrong to begin with, because that would be claiming that the Mormon god is -and can be – wrong. And that was the reason for claiming to have personally seen his father march with Martin Luther King. Check this excerpt:

Romney has repeated the story of his father marching with King in some of his most prominent presidential campaign appearances, including the “Tonight” show with Jay Leno in May, his address on faith and politics Dec. 6 in Texas, and on NBC’s “Meet The Press” on Sunday, when he was questioned about the Mormon Church’s ban on full participation by black members. He said that he had cried in his car in 1978 when he heard the ban had ended, and added, “My father marched with Martin Luther King.”

Mitt Romney went a step further in a 1978 interview with the Boston Herald. Talking about the Mormon Church and racial discrimination, he said: “My father and I marched with Martin Luther King Jr. through the streets of Detroit.”

In our current society, personal experience trumps everything, and as such can be used to silence debate. The best part about this whole deal is that even in having to confess that he is a liar Romney still wins. Why? Because the attention is now on the fact that Romney lied, not on whether Romney believes that the racist rantings of Joseph Smith and other Mormon prophets and apostles were ever actually inspired by the Mormon god. Pretty good huh? You don’t build an elite investment capital firm, get elected to governor of Massachusetts as a social liberal, and then become a frontrunner in the GOP presidential race thanks in large part to the support of many socially conservative evangelical Christians by being bad at what George W. Bush calls strategery.

Yet the Republican Party is demanding that evangelical Christians support Mitt Romney because he is such a nice honest trustworthy person with such great Christian values. Well, hey, it may well be true! Not the nice honest trustworthy part, but the great Christian values thing. Who am I to deny that Mitt Romney has excellent Christian values? Christian values are the stuff of a universalist works religion. My religion is an exclusive sola fide one. So to all of you Roman Catholics, Mormons, high stakes gambling Bill Bennett Republicans, and Rick Warren Purpose Driven types, you can keep your Christian values, I don’t need them, because it appears that you can still have great Christian, excuse me Judeo – Christian, values while being a filthy liar and a member of what everyone knows is a cult. So long as he can keep an anti – globalist establishment candidate out of the White House, Mormon Mitt Romney could be a virgin – sacrificing druid for all they care.

Now Judeo – Roman Catholic neoconservative globalist warmonger central, the National Review, is claiming that Mormon Mitt Romney’s being exposed as a liar is actually GOOD because it shows that his father supported civil rights. (Never mind that supporting civil rights in the secular arena and thinking that your “prophets” and “scriptures” are false for claiming that blacks are the cursed seed of Ham and were given black skin because we were failures in pre – existence are two totally different things.) Of course, these folks probably feel that Martin Luther King, Jr. had great Christian values despite not believing in the virgin birth, resurrection, or deity of Jesus Christ. If they do, hey, who am I to disagree?

Now Christians, though I strongly advise against voting for Mormon Mitt Romney, I am not going to say that doing so will fill you full of demons and take you to the lake of fire for eternity. I do say, though, that following this “Christian values” movement (and keep in mind there is a right wing and a left wing Christian values movement that at their core are pretty much the same, possessing a form of godliness but denying the power thereof) might have that effect.

Posted in ecumenism, GOP, Mitt Romney, Mormon, mormonism, Republican, universalism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: