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 ‘perversion’

The Logical Conclusion Of The Civil Rights Movement: Homosexual Activists Attack Mount Hope Church of Lansing Michigan

Posted by Job on November 11, 2008

It has been commonly asserted that the election of Barack Hussein Obama is the fulfillment of the civil rights movement. If that is so, Christians, this is what the future holds. Make no mistake, though the civil rights movement exploited the church and cloaked itself in religious rhetoric, it was not Christian. The movement’s ultimate originator was W.E.B Du Bois, a communist atheist. Those who followed in his path were cut from the same cloth, including Martin Luther King, Jr., who rejected the sound doctrines of his Baptist father to go after a liberal (liberation theology) abomination that denied the divinity, virgin birth, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and turned the message of scripture into a political tract. Make no mistake, despite the attempts to domesticate the image of the civil rights movement by making it look like something high minded and genteel, it was a subversive radical movement whose aims and tactics were rooted in Marxism. The civil rights movement made revolting tactics like these acceptable to mainstream society, and now we have a huge subset of the population who believes that the way to affect “change” is not through using the gospel of Jesus Christ to build people but radicalism that destroys them. Keep in mind: the civil rights movement is not only a rejection of special grace, but also common grace by declaring legitimate institutions to be oppressive and invalid.

What does this have to do with Obama? Well first this fellow in his various speeches has all but declared himself to be the fulfillment and successor to King and his movement. Second, please do not forget about Obama’s radical background. William Ayers, Saul Alinksy, Jeremiah Wright, his Marxist Ivy League intellectual circles: these are Obama’s people. Obama is so good at these tactics that he, a professional, left the amateur agitators, the Clintons and the Republicans, in the dust. I marveled at how Obama’s community organizing background gave him the tactics needed to beat Hillary Clinton before she even knew that she was in trouble, and how his techniques of media and personal manipulation allowed him to basically coast from there.

Now of course, the people at Mount Hope Church would oppose my using the events that happened at their church in this type of rhetoric. The best evidence is that these people were doing as the Bible commands them to and praying for Obama on the very Sunday that they were attacked! And the behavior of the church people was a clear contradiction to and judgment upon their vile protesters. (Right now, I happen to be playing a “Bibleman” episode for my child where the demon villain is called “the wacky protester” and his primary tactics are to sow subversion and rebellion among kids. At first, my response to the character was “what is so wrong with protesting?” because like everyone else public schools and the media had conditioned me to regard protest and radical activity, “civil disobedience”, which is more disobedient than civil” as honorable. Now I see Bibleman’s point.) The evil men and women in this instance brought cameras, and then acted as vile as they could in order to bait the church people into a violent and profane response. Why? So they could plaster it all over the mainstream media, on YouTube, used it to do teach – ins at college campuses, etc.

Now, of course, there are some Biblical justifications for getting up and casting the people causing the confusion out. But these people did not go that route. They remained calm in the face of attempts to bait them with blasphemous behavior, disruption and vandalism and waited for church security and later the police to remove the protesters, denying them their precious footage. In other words, the actions of real church people who were obeying what Jesus Christ taught on the sermon on the mount can be contrasted not so much with the homosexual radicals in this instance, but the so – called civil rights preachers like Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc. who trained a generation of people in the black church to sin, to reject being conformed into the image of Jesus Christ and instead conform themselves to the image of Satan and how he has worked through radicals, subversives, and anarchists from the fall of mankind in the garden of Eden thanks to Adam. Satan was a murderer from the beginning, as what Cain demonstrated when he slew righteous Abel, and his tactics were on display in the civil rights and other radical movements in the 1960s, which were then normalized and sanitized by the educational system and media (with the clergy largely compliant, now most evangelical Christians speak lovingly of King and his “accomplishments”), is evidenced by attacks like this. And what was amazing is not only how the mainstream media has not covered this incident (although had these people achieved their desired melee it would have just as much as every spurious “racial controversy” around Obama has been), but how the police did not arrest the protesters, not even for vandalism or disturbing the peace. Will more attacks like this happen, especially in light of the fury of the homosexuals over Proposition 8 passing in California?

By the way, Obama is not the first “radical son” in the White House. That was Bill Clinton. It was disgusting how so many “conservatives”, including evangelical Christians, were trying to paint Bill and Hillary Clinton as middle class moderates with no ties to subversive or radical politics and tactics as part of a desperate attempt to get suburban and rural Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida Democrats to vote for John McCain. It was a lie and they knew it, but that is what happens when you pick sides and decide that an “ends justifies the means” approach to get “your team” in. But again, the fellow who dodged the draft, ran off to Oxford, and took part in antiwar rallies and whatever else was and is an amateur, just as is his wife with her genteel suburban high income feminist activism. (Hillary Clinton for her part had the obligatory ties to the Black Panthers and other radical groups that her chosen profession required but was never one of them.) Obama is a professional. Remember that for the next four years. Or perhaps the next eight. Just as George W. Bush was far worse than George H. W. Bush who for his part who managed to outdo Reagan who similarly surpassed Nixon, Bill Clinton was more damaging than Jimmy Carter, and Obama will outdo Bill Clinton. But in the course of these events remember one thing: they all serve the same master, and we can tell this by their works. After all, it was Ronald Reagan who honored the subversive radical King with a federal holiday.

That is why we must not compromise. We must hold fast to Jesus Christ, the Bible and the Holy Spirit that reveals Him to us, and the faith that was once delivered to the saints.

Gay Activists disrupt Church in Michigan

A sign of things to come?

Advertisements

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

I Kissed A Girl. I Liked It. Then I Went To Hell!

Posted by Job on September 9, 2008

Saying It Like It Is?

Here’s a church sign put up by a congregation in Blacklick, Ohio in response to the hit single I Kissed A Girl (And Liked It) by Katy Perry(WARNING: site opens in a new window and plays songs from her album automatically).

ABC reports:

KATY PERRY’S SONG USED AS CHURCH WARNING TO TEENS

BLACKLICK, Ohio (AP) — A church near Columbus, Ohio, is using Katy Perry as a bad example. A sign outside Havens Corners Church in Blacklick has the lyrics from her song, “I kissed a girl and I liked it” — but it adds, “Then I went to hell.” Church pastor Reverend Dave Allison says the Bible is clear that homosexuality is a sin, so the sign is intended as a loving warning to teens. He says it’s confused some people who either don’t know the song or don’t understand the message. Lynne Bowman of the gay rights group Equality Ohio says the sign indicates the church isn’t very accepting. Perry has not responded to calls for comment.

Obviously, those who come across the sign would have to have some inkling of the song and what its lyrics glorify to understand why kissing a girl would send someone to hell. It’s no wonder, too, that the world, and I presume, (perhaps) a section of Christians who are liberal in their outlook, is up in arms over this “offensive” message. 

What do you think? Good or bad call on the part of the pastor? Is this a case of “tell it like it is” or can the message about homosexuality as a sin be better put forward?

The Three Step Salvation Plan

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , | 57 Comments »

British Broadcasting Says Sex With Animals OK For Airwaves

Posted by Job on October 30, 2007

guardian.co.uk/media/2005/may/25/broadcasting.radio

Clean-up TV campaigners seeking succour in Ofcom’s new broadcasting rules suffered an immediate blow today when the regulator gave the all-clear to programmes about “sex with animals”.The comments by Richard Hooper, the Ofcom deputy chairman, came at the unveiling of its long-awaited new broadcasting code and will have had the regulator’s spin doctors holding their heads in their hands.

Although Mr Hooper was at pains to point out that the new regulations will not give carte blanche to broadcasters, he said certain offensive material would be OK as long as it was shown at the right time and with suitable warnings.” [What about] a programme about sex with animals? Yes, it’s potentially possible. It all comes down to context,” he said.

The new code, which will apply across all TV and radio networks, allows broadcasters to “transmit challenging material, even that which may be considered offensive by some, provided it is editorially justified and the audience given appropriate information”.

Mr Hooper’s comments recalled Channel 4 bestiality documentary, Animal Passions, which featured a man who admitted have sex with his pony and a woman who had sex with her dog. Although it was cleared by Ofcom last year, it generated 75 complaints from viewers who said it “normalised bestiality” and could encourage copycat behaviour.

The broadcasting code is intended to give broadcasters more “creative freedom” and allow audiences more responsibility in deciding what they watch.”Freedom of expression does not necessarily mean swearing and offensive language,” said Mr Hooper.

“A lot of things have to be taken into account if something is to be seen as generally acceptable. In certain circumstances the c-word is acceptable, and in certain circumstances it is not. What we have done is codify that. That is nothing new.”

Ofcom has drawn up a 117-word definition of “context” that broadcasters can use to justify the depiction of sex or violence and the use of bad language, including the time the programme was shown, the channel on which it was broadcast, the size of the audience and whether viewers were warned about the content.

“It’s about telling the punter what they are going to get before they get it,” said Mr Hooper. He said The Thick of It, Armando Ianucci’s acclaimed political satire which began on BBC4, last week “had a quite clear statement before it about the sort of language viewers were going to hear. We are very keen that broadcasters do that.”

Tim Suter, the senior partner for content and standards at Ofcom, said previous broadcast regulation had been “about stopping things. The new regime is about what [broadcasters] need in place in order to allow material to be broadcast.” “We are moving into a world which recognises the different responsibilities of the different players. Broadcasters are responsible for what they broadcast, and audiences are responsible for what they consume.”

Mr Suter said the new rules leaned towards the “lighter touch” regulation previously seen in the radio industry. “Freedom of expression with editorial justification – that is the central idea.” The new code will also allow companies to sponsor an entire channel, although the proposals still need to go to consultation.To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 7239 9857

Posted in abomination, media conspiracy, sex demon, sexual exploitation | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: