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 ‘the beast’

Did Jesus Christ Appear To Hagar? If So, Why?

Posted by Job on June 18, 2009

Reading Genesis 16:7-14 makes me certain of it. “And the angel of the LORD found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur. And he said, Hagar, Sarai’s maid, whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai. And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands. And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; F77 because the LORD hath heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren. And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said, Have I also here looked after him that seeth me? Wherefore the well was called Beerlahairoi; F78 behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered.”

Now “the angel of the Lord” is a common term for the preincarnate Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. However, there are incidents in the Old Testament where references to angels – and other appearances of supernatural beings – are just that … angels (whether fallen or not). So, I came up with a system where if the supernatural being is worshiped i.e. Moses and the burning bush or Joshua on the plain of Jericho, then it is a theophany, an appearance of God in the Old Testament. However, if the supernatural being is not worshiped, then it is an angel. However, this is not foolproof, as Jacob apparently did not worship Jesus Christ, but wrestled with Him and demanded (?) to be blessed by Him, and we only know that it was God whom Jacob wrestled with because A) Jacob said so, B) God warned Jacob that day was breaking and that it was not meant for Jacob to clearly see His face and C) God refused to tell Jacob His Name upon Jacob’s request.

This appears to be a similar incident. In Genesis 16:10, the angel of the Lord states “I will multiply thy seed exceedingly …”.  The angel speaks in first person of an action that he will personally take, not in second person regarding an act of God, or of knowing the intentions of God (in contrast with, say, how Gabriel spoke of God’s actions to Mary in second person i.e. “and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David” in Luke 1:32). As obviously no angel has the power or authority to perform this deed, it had to have been God speaking to Hagar.

More evidence still? Genesis 16:13. “And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me.” So this verse makes it plain: Hagar knew that she was speaking to God, and called God by Name. The Hebrew makes it more explicit: “qara shem Yĕhovah dabar ‘el ro’iy.”  Qara shem means “[She] called the Name.” Yĕhovah is Jehovah, Yahweh, YHWH, or the Name of the Holy Trinity. “Dabar” means “word.” “Dabar” is what the apostle John translated directly into “Logos” in the prologue of the Gospel of John … “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” In that verse and elsewhere in reference to God, “the Word” = “Logos” = “Dabar” = “Jesus Christ” are  interchangeable. So not only was it the God of Abraham that Hagar was speaking to, but Hagar knew that she was speaking to the God of Abraham, and – whether knowingly or not – by including “dabar” in her speech, actually addressed the Person of the Trinity that she was speaking to!

Still more evidence: “Wherefore the well was called Beerlahairoi” of Genesis 16:15. In Hebrew Beerlahairoi is  “Bĕ’er la-Chay Ro’iy”, which basically means “well of the Living One seeing me.” Or in other words, the well where God saw me.

Now the Geneva Study Bible notes on http://bible.cc seems to dance around the issue. Which is strange, because the idea that the Old Testament people knew of the Person and office of Jesus Christ is a major part of Calvinism. However, the Matthew Henry and John Wesley notes that appear on that same site arrived at the same conclusion as did I.

But neither of them deal with the obvious question: what was so special about Hagar (or more truthfully Ishmael) that there was an intervention on Ishmael’s behalf by way of a Christophany? And why was Ishmael the father of 12 tribes, just as Jacob (Israel) was? It is still more curious when you consider the type-antitype regarding Ishmael and Isaac. Isaac was the son of the free Hebrew woman, which generally means salvation and the people of God in scripture. Ishmael was the son of the slave Egyptian woman, with slavery representing bondage and Egypt representing sin in scripture. Also, Isaac represents the church because he was resurrected from the dead (meaning born to a barren womb). Meanwhile, Ishmael was conceived naturally. Isaac = son of God, the supernatural order where Ishmael = son of man, the earthly sinful order?

In a way, it recalls Adam and Eve, with the Godly line originating with Seth (type) and the evil line originating with Cain (antitype). And yes, just as Adam and Eve were the direct father and mother of both Seth and Cain (this isn’t an “obviously” sort of thing, because it would have been very possible for the ungodly line to have originated a generation or three from Adam and Eve), Abraham and Sarah were the father and mother of Isaac and Ishmael. So … Abraham was not just the progenitor, the ancestor of Israel and ultimately the church. He was quite literally the father of “many nations”, including the ungodly Ishmael line! (Incidentally, Israel was not the only Godly line that Abraham started … he also started the Midianite line, who apparently were Godly at least for a time, as Jethro, the father – in – law of Moses, was the Jehovah worshiping priest of Midian, and thus it was acceptable for Moses to marry Jethro’s daughter, and Miriam was punished for speaking against the marriage.)

Yet, just as God directly intervened to preserve the Ishmael line, He marked Cain to prevent him from being killed! So, Seth = Isaac = Jesus Christ = church. Cain = Ishmael = _______ = ______. Now precisely who or what is the opposite of Christ who persecutes – or will persecute – the church? (See Galatians 4 for more of this type/antitype involving Sarah/Isaac and Hagar/Ishmael, and for the direct statement that Ishmael and his seed persecutes the church.) Anyone want to fill in the blanks? It seems clear – to me anyway – that Ishmael and his line were intended for a prominent role in salvation history, and his being the father of a nation/people of 12 tribes plus the contents of Galatians 4 verifies this fact. So, the only mystery is A) who the descendants of Ishmael are (my guess … it isn’t the Roman Catholic Church or some new Roman Empire, nor is it the Jews, although nothing precludes Ishmael’s seed from using one or both) and B) what that role in salvation history will be.

Advertisements

Posted in Bible, Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Amillennalism 10: The Beast

Posted by Job on April 15, 2009

Posted in Bible, Christianity, Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Want To Work For The Anti – Christ Globalist Money System? Here Is The Company To Apply For!

Posted by Job on November 13, 2008

This is an actual advertisement targeted to college students forwarded to me by a ministry supporter. I regret that the graphics that were in the email do not show up correctly. I have used “@” to replace some information that would reveal the college that the sender attends, I bolded a section that shows that our government is behind this scheme, everything else is as I received it. By the way, the name of this company, Denarii, is a plural form of denarius, which was the currency of the Roman Empire in the time of Jesus Christ. (To you King James Version bigots like myself, it is commonly translated as “penny” in the New Testament.) Oh yes, and this “be a part of true change” business? Hope! Change! Obama! Classic. 

Sizzle Money

 

Be a Part of True Change!

 

Socially responsible & community-focused Denarii Payments, Inc.

searches for young, disciplined, & proactive individuals……

 

Candidates must:

 

  • Be critical thinkers
  • Be fluent in Spanish & English
  • Have an understanding of Hispanic customs
  • Attend a free SizzleMoneytm   Training Seminar
  • Pass the SizzleMoneytm Exam

 

Benefits:

 

  • Be part of an organization launching ground-breaking technology
  • Be part of a socially responsible company that puts people first
  • Work at your own pace
  • Attractive earning potential

 

VISIT US AT:

@@@@@ @@@, @@@ @@@@

11 a.m. – 3 p.m.

Information Session Every Hour

Conducting Interviews

 

About Denarii Payments, Inc.

Denarii developed SizzleMoneytm to respond to the demands of working families who need an easy-to-use safe and secure method of electronic commerce and money sharing.  SizzleMoneytm is a community-centric mobile financial serice that enables anyone to exchange funds and make retail purchases through our secure text messaging service.  SizzleMoneytm  works on any cell phone and on any cellular network in the U.S. Accounts are FDIC insured and have no minimum balance requirements and, more importantly, have no hidden fees.  Our modest transaction fees are “pay-as-you-go” charging only for what is used.  Our neighborhood iSizzle Representatives or local participating merchants are available to assist in opening new accounts and making additions for active SizzleMoneytm customers.

Visit www.sizzlemoney.com for more information.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

CNN’s Creepy Hologram: The Image Of The Beast That All Will Worship?

Posted by Job on November 8, 2008

CNN states that they have big plans for this technology.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 9 Comments »

Another Reason To Question Whether The Roman Catholic Church Is The Anti – Christ

Posted by Job on October 20, 2008

The fact that the reformers (and those who rejected Catholicism in times prior) frequently called the Roman Catholic Church the anti-Christ is often used to give theological and historical weight to people holding onto that view. While you will not find a bigger opponent of those that have cast aside the Bible for manmade tradition in order to facilitate their idolatry of images, the host of heaven, and humans (including “saints”, the pope, and “Virgin” Mary), I still have found the idea to be quite suspect. My prior reason for believing so is because the anti – Christ will deceive and lead the whole world. While thanks in large part to the new world order forces doing their best to promote religious pluralism, mysticism, syncretism and secular systems masquerading as religion (including liberation theologies of Barack Hussein Obama and Martin Luther King, Jr.) there is nowhere near the opposition to Roman Catholicism as there once was, chiefly among Protestants but also among other religions, we are nowhere near the day when the whole world will be deceived by and follow the so – called bishop of Rome, who has the same title, pontifus maximus, that Roman emperors such as Constantine held in their pagan state religion. (Constantine merely moved from being pontifus maximus in the prior pagan state religion to being pontifus maximus when the empire adopted “Christianity”, a fact which people who defend the decision of the church to acquiesce to Constantinism rarely mention. My suspicion is that Protestants tiptoe around this fact because Constantine called the Nicea ecumenical council that defended the truth of the divinity if Jesus Christ from Arianism. In doing so, they ignore the fact that even if any human had the spiritual standing to convene an ecumenical council Constantine certainly was not that human, a fact later borne out when Constantine called ANOTHER ecumenical council to adopt Arianism and immediately began persecuting people who believed in Jesus Christ’s deity. Constantine’s motives were political and military,  not religious. Even if Constantine did actually see a cross in the sky with the famous “in this conquer” slogan, it was a demonic deception in a pagan society that was utterly demonized. Protestants should be truthful enough to declare that nothing good came out of Constantinism and have enough faith to state that the true apostolic faith over issues like the deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity would have won out without needing a pagan state to call ecumenical councils whose edicts were imposed with the sword.)

Yet how far are we from the day that the whole world will follow the so – called bishop of Rome? It would require 1) a major theological move on the part of the Roman Catholic Church and 2) for the nations of the world who have suffered at the hands of Rome or who themselves have major religious objections to forget or abandon them. While both (or either) are certainly possible when God sends the spirit of strong delusion, the truth is that said delusion can cause the whole world to follow any institution or leader. So while that does not preclude the Roman Catholic Church, there is no reason to definitely say that it will be them when it could just as easily be some secular political leader or entity, or the leader of some now obscure eastern religious movement such as the Tibetan ones that are oh so popular among the left (keep in mind that jainism was equally obscure until first Ghandi and then Martin Luther King, Jr. popularized its tenets). 

So what of the position of the reformers and those similar? Well keep in mind that the reformers were adherents to amillennialism, whose first major exponent was Origen and which was cemented in the Constantine church (and ultimately a great many churches that splintered out of her, including not only the Roman and Orthodox Catholic churches but also many Protestant churches, especially the state and liberal churches) thanks to the work of Augustine. Though its modern adherents deny the extent to which it is true, amillennialism relies on allegorical interpretations of the covenant, prophetic, eschatological and apocalyptic passages of the Bible. (Otherwise, Origen’s theories that everyone, including possibly Satan and demons, would be saved and that there could be an endless number of falls of mankind and creation into sin requiring an endless number of redemptions throughout eternity; in other words there was no permanency to Jesus Christ’s work because as Origen was working from a naturalist pagan structure as opposed to a Jewish spiritual one – please read Why The Early Church Fathers Were Millennialists And Why The Gentile Church Quickly Rejected It For Sadduceeism and he Early Church Fathers: Amillennialism and Universalism, would have been impossible.)

Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that the amillennial reformers, who to one degree or another accepted an allegorical or nonliteral interpretation of not only the millennium but a great many other prophetic and eschatological concepts to give them a temporal meaning and fulfillment, believed in a literal beast, man of sin, anti-Christ, etc.

When you consider the dominionism aspect of amillennialism, this becomes even more so the case. Dominionist amillennials (and this incontrovertibly included Roman Catholics but Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, the Church of England, and all others who basically rejected a separation between church and state, advocated the right of the state to use violence and other measures to enforce church doctrines and accepted infant baptism as a method of initiation into the church – state system) believe that we are in an allegorized nonliteral millennium now where Jesus Christ is ruling the earth from heaven through the church, which happens through the transforming moral and cultural effect that the church has on societies as well as any influence that the church exerts on civil magistrates. 

With that view in place, “anti – Christ”, then, becomes anything that opposes the church’s dominion over the earth. In particular, it results in a false Christianity or a false church that takes dominion of the earth over the true church instead. Thus, when the reformers and like minded amillennialists spoke of Roman Catholicism being the anti – Christ, it was only in a nonliteral allegorical sense. Further, it was based on the Roman Church having the same position that the reformers wanted for their own churches. Make no mistake, the churches set up by the reformers were not merely spiritual and religious competitors, but also political, military, and economic rivals. The result was not only well over one hundred years of warfare between Roman Catholic church – states and Protestant church – states both calling each other anti – Christ for opposing each other’s desires for amillennial dominion of state and culture that was allegedly in the Name and to the glory of Jesus Christ in heaven but in reality was a violation of James 4:4 and a host of related scriptures that say that there is no marriage between sacred and secular, Christian and worldly. Now recall, this was something that God used the hard line of demarcation between holy and defiled in the Jewish law to teach the church … if the Jews could not even use tools to cut stones to build an altar for sacrifices because the tools were unholy and their touching the holy altar would defile it and make it unholy, what made them think that the church could come into such intimate contact with pagan cultures and adulterous rulers?!

And as a direct result of this worldview, both Roman Catholic AND reformation church – states persecuted Anabaptists and others who rejected infant baptism and the lack of separation between church and state. Consider this: the amillennial dominionists in the Roman Catholic and early reformation churches grotesquely misinterpreted such Bible events as Hagar’s being subjected to Sarah, the lord of the estate compelling people in the hedges and highways to come to the wedding feast, and Peter picking up two swords to coerce people into membership of “Christendom”, or the church – state in which membership was usually initiated by infant baptism. (Which is why it was called “Christendom”, or kingdom of the christened or infant baptized, as opposed to Christiandom, or kingdom of confessing Christians.) These abominations were institutionalized by Augustine at the very latest but almost certainly existed before then. The worst was the “two swords” when Peter (as always until his indwelling by the Holy Spirit) misunderstood the teachings of Jesus Christ and responded “here are two swords” in response to the words of Jesus Christ to which Christ, frustrated by their inability to understand and having His mind occupied with other things at the time (His very soon trip to the cross) replied resignedly “it is enough.” The dominionist allegorists claimed that Peter’s erroneous notion of believing that Jesus Christ was somehow speaking of a violent overthrow of the Roman Empire (and likely also the Pharisees and Saduccees if they resisted!) was correct in the sense that one sword of Peter referred to the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the second sword of Peter referred to the power of the state to compel people to (externally of course) submit to the former!

So, you had Catholics and reformers calling each other anti-Christ because they were both claiming that the other were wielding a false gospel sword and a false state compulsion sword. But please realize that both Catholic and Reformed states persecuted certain Anabaptists and other groups who A) rejected the notion of church states, B) rejected the coerced initiation into said states including but certainly limited to infants baptized by their parents and C) especially rejected the church’s getting the state to heavily fine, imprison, or even execute those who rejected their religious AND civil authority. This was why Reformers often persecuted and killed Anabaptists who agreed with them on every doctrinal point save those regarding the church using the coercive power of the state (or possessing such power and authority itself by having its own police and army), and particularly why many Reformed states followed the policy of Roman Catholics by making the rejection of infant baptism by getting rebaptized as adults (which is the origin of the term Anabaptist) which in addition to being an act of sincere religious dedication to the gospel was also public rejection of state church authority or dominionism a capital crime

This is, after all, why some scholars claim that Michael Servetus was burned (the Roman Catholic AND Reformed church states twisted yet another set of scriptures to justify the practice of burning heretics, and furthermore the typical method was to use green wood so that the victim would die very slowly, often over the course of hours!) was primarily initiated by the civil magistrates of Geneva for his opposition to infant baptism (making him a subversive to civil authority) rather than by Calvin over his rejection of Trinity. But make no mistake, Calvin fully believed in the right of the state to execute Servetus based on Calvin’s dominionist convictions (even if Calvin’s true motives were Trinity he nonetheless testified against Servetus in a proceeding where a city state considered him a political subversive based on his opposition to infant baptism, the primary method which people were initiated into Genevan citizenship, please realize that Calvin himself was never a Genevan citizen as he was never born or baptized there) and therefore fully participated. And keep in mind: where Servetus was the only heretic killed during Calvin’s tenure, many dominionism rejecters were imprisoned, expelled, or executed by other Reformed states. 

Note that while the Reformers did call Anabaptists heretics and frequently sought their suppression and persecution to the pain of death, they seldom if ever called them “anti – Christ.” Why? Because Anabaptists and similar had no designs on civil power, indeed they rejected it. (Please note that I am aware that certain Anabaptists did have designs on civil power and were willing to use subversion and violence to get it; Anabaptist was a wide, poorly defined category, and it was helpful to the cause of the rulers of Reformed states to associate all of their opponents with the subversive radicals who would violently take control over an area and then forcibly redistribute wealth and property.) So because certain Anabaptists rejected any claim on the second sword of Peter, the one which Augustine and those who came after (indeed including the reformers) claimed belonged to the true church – state, they were not a competing religious – civil power system, and hence were not a false or anti – Christ system competing for power. Instead, they were merely “heretics”, a religious system competing for souls, because of their rejection of “Christendom.” If they were “anti – Christ”, it was only due to their promulgation of doctrines that opposed not only the right but the theological imperative of the Reformation to set up church states, and also because their movements were drawing the Roman Catholic expatriates that the Reformation church states badly needed in their rival system with Rome. After all, if you are competing with earthly systems, it is all about having enough citizens to A) create capital for your economies – please note that Calvinism is credited with spurring the development of modern capitalism – and B) produce soldiers to fight in your armies. 

So, the next time you encounter someone that asserts that the Roman Catholic Church is the anti – Christ, see if that person is rejecting a literal interpretation of Daniel, 2 Thessalonians, Revelation, etc. in favor of an allegorical one and merely resents the Roman Catholic Church for having the huge numbers and political, cultural, economic, etc. influence, the second sword of Peter, that he wants for his own church, and by the way you had better believe which Islam also wants and which communists and Hugo Chavez socialists want as well. (Incidentally, Hitler and Mussolini wanted it also. With Hitler in particular, please consider the rumors of his “the spear of destiny” occultism but do so with a grain of salt.) In other words, someone who wants to exchange the Roman Catholic anti – Christ system for his own. 

Or it may simply be someone who is unaware of this history. If so, that person needs to be reminded of the awful history of both Catholic and Protestant dominionism. And that person also needs to be reminded that in these last days, Catholic and Protestant dominionists are now marching hand in hand, with the American and western religious – political movements (the religious right and the religious left, and by the way these movements even include people from other religions such as Mormons in the religious right and Muslims like Keith Ellison in the religious left, and Jews in both, and we have already mentioned the incorporation of doctrines of jainism – similar to Buddhism – in the religious left) leading the way. How ironic that so many of the politically affiliated evangelicals and fundamentalists who do interpret the prophetic, eschatological, and apocalyptic passages literally (with the appropriate hermeneutics of course!) and believe in a literal anti – Christ are at present supporting movements that are setting the world stage for the coming of the man of sin just as the amillennialists are. The two sides that are supposed to represent different doctrinal systems and in many cases believe themselves to be opposing each other (especially in the case of the religious right versus the religious left) are in fact being manipulated by those behind the scenes to work together! Well, when you consider that scripture prophesies that the anti – Christ will deceive the whole world, it is not a surprise, but instead may yet be a manifestation of it.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Will John McCain Finish George W. Bush’s Job In Implementing The Financial New World Order?

Posted by Job on October 20, 2008

A financial new world order?
Bush says reforms must improve, not fetter, the free market; Europeans hint at more robust intervention.

When President Bush hosts a world financial summit in the coming weeks, one of the least multilateral American presidents in decades will set in motion what could result in a full reordering of the global financial system.

The series of summits that Mr. Bush announced over the weekend at Camp David with European leaders at his side suggests a broad understanding among them: that the current crisis requires the kind of global regulatory reforms that have eluded major powers in the past.

Europeans especially are speaking of a “Bretton Woods II” that could do for financial markets what the 1944 summit at a resort in New Hampshire did for monetary policy.

But the call for a summit also underscores the degree to which a once go-it-alone presidency has shifted to embrace not only the necessity of international cooperation, but also a role of global leadership.

“Talk of a Bretton Woods II has been around to different degrees for 30 years. But the fact it is getting started with an outgoing administration and especially one that was at the center of a significant crisis between America and Europe, between America and the rest of the world, suggests the recognition that there is urgency in the air,” says Simon Serfaty, an expert in US-Europe relations at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington. “It also adds legitimacy to the coming process.”

That process, which is expected to stretch into next year and a new American administration, will get under way with a summit that Bush will host sometime after Nov. 4, the date of US elections, according to a statement issued Saturday by Bush, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and European Union Commission President José Manuel Barroso.

The initial summit is expected to be a kind of expanded Group of Eight meeting, assembling the leaders of the most industrialized nations and those of major developing economies like China, India, Brazil, and South Korea. (Please know that inviting developing nations is a major step to a truly global system, as the following step would be to invite the third world nations.) It would aim to assess the current global crisis and to come up with a set of principles of reform.

Actual agreements on reforms could come at subsequent summits, but the initial meeting would allow Bush to place his stamp on the process before leaving office, while also facilitating a continuity of American leadership.

Saturday’s meeting offered a picture of transatlantic unity, but that hardly means the road ahead will be discord-free. Bush says future reforms and new international regulations must improve but not fetter the free market, while European leaders hint at much more robust state intervention with tighter regulations. (Bush has to keep this pretense in order to retain conservative support, especially among evangelicals, for policies that they would never accept from an overt liberal like, say, Clinton or OBAMA. A reason why McCain would be useful. Then again, Obama would be useful in bringing America in line with Europe and getting the nonwhite, er, developing nations to go along too.)

Bush recognized the need for “regulatory institutional changes” but added, “It is essential that we preserve the foundations of democratic capitalism – commitment to free markets, free enterprise, and free trade.” (Speaking with a forked tongue. In an essentially global economy, there will be no more statutory or regulatory barriers between markets, enterprise, and trade between America and Brazil than there are between Alabama and Texas. Ironically, the very ENLIGHTENMENT principles that our oh so wise freemason and deist founding fathers came up with to govern interstate commerce within this own nation, which lest we forget was originally intended as a federalist contract between loosely affiliated largely independent and sovereign states … please recall that “state” actually refers to an individual sovereign political entity and subdivisions between a state are actually called “provinces” or similar … will work quite nicely for global commerce among member nation states – and city – states like THE VATICAN. Please recall that Rome before it became an empire was a city state. For the record, John Calvin’s Geneva, which is credited with inventing modern capitalism, was a city state as well. So despite the endtimes theories of many conservative evangelicals, the economic new world order need not be socialist or communist. It can be capitalist, or merely a union between capitalist and socialist economies just as our own nation has long been a union of more laissez faire economic states and states with heavy government subsidies, wealth distribution, and regulation.)

In response, President Sarkozy said, “The president of the United States is right in saying that protectionism and closing one’s borders is a catastrophe…. But we cannot continue along the same lines,” he added, “because the same problems will trigger the same disasters.”

Mr. Barroso was more succinct: “We need a new global financial order.”

Those words could send shivers through a White House that is suspicious of the current chorus of world leaders – European, Russian, and others less friendly to the US – who are hailing the current economic crisis as a moment to usher in a multipolar world. Bush indicated he seeks to maintain some degree of American stewardship over the financial reform effort when he politely declined the offer of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon to host the expanded G-8 summit at the UN in New York. (Again, can’t tip off the religious right. Please keep in mind that neither McCain or Obama will be beholden to the opinions of this group in any way.)

Among the issues the White House has indicated it would endorse for a reform agenda are rules for the international flow of investment funds, improved oversight of increasingly global financial institutions, and means of boosting the transparency of international financial transactions and markets. 

But European leaders have called for what sound like much deeper reforms. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, for example, has proposed a reorganization of the International Monetary Fund – a Bretton Woods institution.

Behind the European proposals is a sense that the financial crisis and America’s darkening economic prospects make this an opportunity for the European Union to play a bigger international role. Last week at the close of a two-day EU summit on the financial crisis, Sarkozy predicted that an international summit would take place before the end of the year because “Europe wants it, Europe demands it. Europe will get it.”

More than a show of unity with a declaration for a series of summits will be needed if the world is truly to come together to address the crisis, some observers note. “Unity of purpose is not found in a meeting or series of meetings. It’s found in purpose,” says Danielle Pletka, vice president for foreign-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. (Ah, the Rick Warren Purpose Driven Life language. How convenient. And how disconcerting that a generation of evangelicals is being brainwashed with the New Age doctrines of the new world order globalist Council on Foreign Relations member and pastor to the world’s biggest pornographer Rupert Murdoch in Rick Warren. Also, the “unity” thing is just recreating the tower of Babel so that the second Nimrod, the man of sin or the anti – Christ, can come on the scene.) “Whether that’s something the major players in this crisis can come together on remains to be seen.”

But Mr. Serfaty points out that the Europeans chose to engage the Bush administration, when just a few years ago the deep divisions over the Iraq war were disrupting such cooperation. (A key component to spotting people who are sold out to and working for Satan is their ability to manipulate you into thinking that you are in control when they are secretly calling the shots all along, as that is precisely how Satan works. By the way, who is the better manipulator in this race … McCain or Obama? I give it to Obama, but only by a nose.)

“Rather than seeing any kind of disconnect,” he says, “I think we should emphasize the fact the Europeans are doing what [the Americans] want them to do, in that they are coming together and taking a proactive approach to this crisis.”

So you see, no matter who gets elected, the anti – Christ globalist system is going to be implemented. Do not put your trust in Obama, McCain, or any other thing or person of this world! Instead, put your trust in Jesus Christ!

Follow the three step salvation plan today!

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments »

Assemblies Of God Leader George Wood Calls Sarah Palin A True Judeo-Christian Candidate!

Posted by Job on October 14, 2008

The second example today alone of religious right false doctrines and apostasy that has happened ever since John McCain’s nomination of Sarah Palin, which I actually thought was an astute move at the time, turned into a slow moving fiasco. First off, the frenzy over Palin shows that the religious right, especially Pentecostals, are just as much on the GOP plantation, unable to act according to their own beliefs or interests, as blacks are on the Democratic one. Why? Well … REMEMBER HARRIET MIERS? This Pentecostal woman was actually much more qualified to be on the Supreme Court than Sarah Palin is to be president. (By the way, she was also more qualified than was Sandra Day O’Connor, who by virtue of her votes on abortion and homosexuality was nothing short of a disaster for the religious right. Her best move was lying to Anthony Kennedy in securing his support for voting against broad abortion restrictions in return for her promise to vote against more narrow restrictions later, and when it came time for her to live up to her part of the deal by voting along with Kennedy for the more narrow restrictions, O’Connor reneged. But hey, since Ronald Reagan nominated O’Connor, she is above criticism because criticizing her would be criticizing the guy who used his first major decision as president on nominating her.)

What happened when Bush nominated her? She was subjected to the most revolting opposition by supporters of the party that nominated her ever, and it even rose to the level of character assassination. Did the Protestant evangelicals like Al Mohler or even charismatics like George Wood and J. Lee Grady rise up to defend Miers? Of course not. Only Pat Robertson did, and even there in the mildest fashion possible. Not only were Miers’ qualifications but also her intelligence and character were shredded by the very same people who … oh never mind. So Miers was pushed aside and replaced with a Roman Catholic, and not only that the third Roman Catholic Supreme Court appointee by a GOP president in a row, and the fourth out of five.

But when John McCain made being a less than eminently qualified Pentecostal (or for that matter evangelical, for please recall how vehement the conservative opposition to Mike Huckabee was!) acceptable, then all was forgiven and the same Pentecostals and evangelicals that sat silently by reacted just the same as they did when Bill Clinton would emulate the Arkansas segregationist Democrats who trained him (NOTHING!) immediately forgot that the same set of arguments which disqualified Miers and Huckabee should have applied to Palin, and promptly began to make Palin not only their political standard bearer BUT THEIR RELIGIOUS ONE AS WELL. Seriously, religious conservatives are attaching a larger religious symbolism to Palin than they did to Reagan or George W. Bush. That is why I still think that McCain may yet pull it out. All of those “Obama is the anti – Christ” people need to consider that McCain is the guy with the wound in his head that was healed, and that would make Palin his false prophet enabler with Jezebel doctrines. I can see the comments echoing from pulpits across America and in all the Christian magazines and websites that Palin would be the strong Christian women who miraculously resurrected the John McCain campaign from the dead! 

Now to the link with the absurd, doctrinally erroneous, even heretical statements.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/13/pentecostal-church-leader-palin-true-judeo-christian-candidate/

Opposing Views: What Pentecostal values will Sarah Palin bring to the vice presidency that America needs right now?

 George O. Wood: To my knowledge Sarah Palin has not stated she is Pentecostal. I know she has attended the Assemblies of God Church. We all want a candidate who shares our values, and a candidate like Sarah Palin who appears to have such strong Judeo-Christian beliefs is certainly someone our society needs. A candidate who is sincere in their following of Jesus Christ and is sincere in their Judeo-Christian beliefs is one we would support.


OV: Do you believe that Sarah Palin is a sincere Judeo-Christian candidate?

 Wood: Her own words indicate that she is sincere in her following of Jesus Christ and she has certainly represented those values. Obviously she is very strong in her support for the unborn, and the Assemblies of God has a very strong commitment to the unborn, and other issues that Sarah Palin has indicated she sincerely follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.

People, Judeo – Christian values do no exist. First, Judaism and Christianity are two totally separate religions. The very idea of Judeo – Christianity should be just as abhorrent as is Islamo – Christianity or Hindu – Christianity or atheist – Christianity. Judeo – Christianity should be something advanced by liberal religious pluralists and universalists, not people who claim to believe that Jesus Christ is the way and the life and the only way to the Father and eternal life. This shows how dual covenant dispensationalism (and Vatican II Roman Catholic pluralism) has come to dominate the “Protestant” religious right. With all due respect to some of the online discernment ministries, the biggest threat to undo the Protestant Reformation is not emergents like Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, and Rick Warren but rather the religious right, and if anything the former is feeding off the latter, especially when you saw the spate of columns from the conservative media wishing that debate moderators Jim Lehrer, Gwen Ifill, and Tom Brokaw would make McCain look as good as Rick Warren did.

Second of all, Christianity is not a value system. It is a personal relationship with the resurrected Jesus Christ as He was revealed to creation in His incarnation and through scripture, is now sitting on the right hand of God interceding for His elect, and will be revealed to creation again at His imminent return. It is very possible to hold onto a value system without believing in the Lordship of Jesus Christ. It is equally possible to reject any and all western value systems while believing in the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The best evidence of the latter is that Christianity is not even a western religion to begin with. It is a near eastern religion, and the Bible reflects near eastern culture and values. As a matter of fact, some of the worst doctrines have come from trying to impose western ideas on a near eastern book (see the work of the Alexandrian allegorists, Thomas Aquinas and scholasticism, and the Neo – Platonic syncretists) and from using western inventions like JAMES DOBSON FULLER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY FOCUS ON THE FAMILY PSYCHOLOGY as a convenient construct to paint a happy modern face on the Bible’s dark primitive revelation on man’s total depravity.

That, after all, is what the religious right is: a reinvention of the religious left. The original religious left denied the total depravity of man, stated that man was basically good (conveniently ignoring or reinterpreting inconvenient Bible passages that stated otherwise) and could be transformed through culture and education. What was the birthplace of this thinking? Why GERMANY of course. Who manipulated these doctrines and the environment created by it into thinking that he was helping transform mankind for the better by promoting German culture? Why Adolph Hitler, of course!

You see, these people have never heard of Sarah Palin before now. She was never a member of their church. They have never been to her house at prayer meetings. They have never encountered her at a Beth Moore Christian women’s weekend retreat. They don’t even know whether the string of wild rumors about the Palin family’s behavior, virtually all of them circulating all over Alaska long before McCain thrust them into the national spotlight, made them tabloid fodder. 

Their only evidence that this woman is a Christian is her church membership and her claims to believe. Well, excuse me, but that is different from secret society “all religions worship the same God” the first president to pray in a Muslim mosque George W. Bush how? Even better: this is better than Southern Baptists Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Britney and Jamie Lynn Spears, Jessica and Ashlee Simpson how? Methodist Hillary Clinton or Congregationalist Barack HUSSEIN Obama how? You could talk to any of them, and they would all claim to agree with 80% of the Christian creeds, just as much as do neo – evangelicals whose works are cited in many of our evangelical seminaries.

So no, I take that back. Their evidence that Palin is born again is not her church affiliation or her confessions of faith. Again, many a liberal Democrat leader – and voter – shares those. No, their evidence is politics and culture. If you have the right beliefs and lifestyle, then it means that you are sanctified and justified! It isn’t about the Lordship of Jesus Christ, it is about preferring moose hunting to off Broadway plays. 

Then again, why should we expect any different from a fellow that says “A candidate who is sincere in their following of Jesus Christ and is sincere in their Judeo-Christian beliefs is one we would support.” Does the leader of the Assemblies of God denomination even know that this is a contradiction? Jesus Christ is not of this world. Judeo – Christianity is a VERY RECENT (some say that the term and concept did not exist before the Holocaust and particularly before the establishment of Israel) worldly invention to describe an ill – defined social, cultural, and political movement.

Incidentally, it is based on a lie, the idea that Jewish religion and culture significantly shaped western civilization. Not only is this idea false, but it is one that the westerners of times past that used to force Jews to live in ghettoes would have had an issue with. Case in point: our legal code is not based on the Bible, but rather British common law. Further, British common law only reflected three of the Ten Commandments – killing, stealing, and perjury – and this was so before Britain even converted to Christianity! So, if western civilization was founded on Judeo – Christianity, then so was Babylon by virue of their Code of Hammurabi. And even that is presuming that anything worldly like Judeo – Christianity can save people rather than damn them, which it cannot. 

This is why the Bible calls it “devil’s doctrines.” And if the leader of the 3 million Assemblies of God denomination is trafficking them, then that is really disappointing. It honestly is disconcerting that so many Christians reject not only the Bible and theology, but also history and culture. I am speaking of myself, incidentally, for I was a “Judeo – Christian religious right” zombie until very late in 2006. But hey, at least I can say that I was misled. (Now according to Romans 1:18-32, being misled does not make us blameless incidentally. We are all still without excuse for rejecting the the truth and righteousness of God.)

But if I am able to discover these lies merely by reading a few of the history and theology books that are commonly used in our evangelical seminaries and Bible colleges, then what explanation is there for the many pastors and other religious right leaders that have gone through these seminaries? Did they fall asleep in class that day? Were they preoccupied with personal difficulties that prevented them from reading the relevant sections in their textbooks? And did this happen to all of them? Did every single leader of the religious right and every single evangelical pastor that traffics this “Judeo – Christian values” nonsense somehow possess the very same omissions from their theological, doctrinal, and historical studies? Now if you can believe that, then you can believe that Barack Hussein Obama was asleep, inattentive, or absent every Sunday that Jeremiah Wright said something controversial.

Yes, we are supposed to believe that Jeremiah Wright’s church is apostate and get so angry at its existence because it is Marxist. Since they are Marxist, they have the wrong values, and that is what makes them apostate. Note that virtually none of the “Judeo – Christian” people who thundered against the apostasy of Obama’s church over its rejection of western culture will ever in a million years say the same against Mormons, Roman Catholics, or Jews. Because with these people, it is not rejecting the Bible that makes you a sinner, it is rejecting your values. Therefore, a person is saved by embracing these values. 

Again, how can these people have gone to Christian schools, pastored churches, and studied the Bible all these years without knowing this, and further while refusing to stand against this error? Simple: they haven’t. Which, again, makes them no different from or better than either Jeremiah Wright or Barack Hussein Obama. And that is what makes their vigorous endorsements of Sarah Palin all the more suspect.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments »

World Federalist Association?

Posted by Job on October 10, 2008

Looks like another group we have to look into.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Leading Charismatic J. Lee Grady Claiming That Sarah Palin Is A Prophet Chosen By God To Lead Christians Into Holy War!

Posted by Job on September 10, 2008

I know, I know, yet another political article. I promise to do better, but how can I ignore things like this? Brother PJ Miller tipped me off to this fromJ. Lee Gray, editor of the influential Charisma Magazine. Now similar to Christianity Today and Roman Catholics with evangelical Christians, Charisma Magazine should have been rejected by Pentecostals and charismatics once they started accepting oneness pentecostal anti – Trinitarian heretics among their midst. Here it is in black and white from J. Lee Grady’s pen:

2. Trinitarians must embrace our Oneness brothers. I know people in the Assemblies of God who were taught all their lives that the Jesus worshiped by Oneness Pentecostals is “another Jesus.” The Lord told us to love one another, but we have avoided this by declaring that our brothers aren’t really in the family.

So what excuse is there for calling Charisma Magazine anything but what it is, which is apostate? Even better:

It all sounds like pointless doctrinal hair-splitting to us younger types. After all, who can explain the mystery of God’s triune nature? Instead of fussing about terms or reducing the gospel to a baptismal formula, why can’t we rally around our common belief that the Father sent His Son to save the world?

Excuse me, but what vital Christian doctrine CANNOT that be said about? Creationism? It is too hard to understand. Baptism? It is too hard to obey. The incarnation? Can’t believe it. The resurrection? Can’t accept it. Salvation only through the cross? Can’t put up with it. Eternal damnation in the lake of fire for sinners? Can’t conceive it. Adulterers, liars, thieves, necromancers, occultists, homosexuals, and apostates in the pulpit? Judge not, touch not mine anointed and do my prophet no harm! Look, A FALSE GOSPEL CANNOT SAVE!

But enough of that digression. J. Lee Grady claims that Sarah Palin has the Deborah anointing. Now my position is that all of these various spirits that Pentecostals and charismatics speak of do not exist, as there is one Lord who has one spirit, the Holy Spirit. Also, the word “anointing” means “choosing”, when one is “anointed by God”, it means that a person was given a calling by God to a specific calling or ministry in service to the Lord and His people. So I would discourage Christians from going around saying that someone has “a David anointing” or “a Hezekiah anointing” or “Paul’s spirit”, but I will go ahead and say that it is a crude and possibly incorrect but still understandable way of saying that someone has the same office, calling, or task as another Christian.

On J. Lee Grady’s part, this is very problematic for two reasons. First, the Bible commands us to “lay hands quickly on no man.” That is 1 Timothy 5:22. Now the best context for this verse was the practice of the church laying hands on people when they choose officers for the church. Please recall that when Stephen the martyr and Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas were appointed as deacons in Acts 6:1-6. Verse 6 states that after the church selected them, the apostles laid hands on them after praying for them. Though laying hands on people was part of the ritual or process of actually choosing and placing people in the position of service, it became a shorthanded reference for the act of choosing and installing a person into Christian service itself. But please note Acts 6:1-6 and interpret it with 1 Timothy 5:16-25. In both cases, it is obvious that a person should not be laid hands upon, or chosen, or anointed, unless the person had demonstrated their worthiness for the position by their fruits: excellent reputations, spiritual maturity, strong knowledge of and adherence to the Word of God in the eyes of the local congregation.

Now unless Grady has some extensive past history with Sarah Palin that he for some reason chooses not to reveal in his column, he has NO BASIS for claiming under New Testament church standards that God has called this woman to leadership or anything else. If he has been in longtime Christian fellowship with Palin, he should have let us know this. Otherwise, we can presume that like 99.9% of America, he was so ignorant of this woman’s existence that he could not have picked her out of a lineup until now.

So claiming that Palin was appointed by God to anything is irresponsible, reckless, and dangerous because it causes Christians to presume that she is generally acting and leading according to God’s desires and even non – Christians that respect our faith to presume that she is basically honest and moral. Such claims also damage how Christians view church doctrines and practice. Talk like this hinders people from knowing that being called by God or even elected to service by the church MEANS SOMETHING. That there are STANDARDS that these people must adhere to in order to be eligible for their appointment (in the case of a deacon) and AFTER their appointment (in the case of church appointed deacons and God – called everything else). That people keep throwing around  “I have an anointing, he has an anointing, I feel a great anointing and move of the Holy Spirit in this place” with the same level of care and discernment as they would use to say “boy that was a mighty fine and tasty bowl of oatmeal” is a great reason why we allow anyone – especially if he is a Christian – do whatever they want with no accountability whatsoever. 

So what is Grady’s basis for alleging that Palin has a call on her life? Her politics. Her values. Her culture. Her family. Her actions as mayor and governor. And keep in mind: he knows NONE of these first hand! He only knows them by their reports from people who have a motive to portray Palin in the best possible light for worldly reasons, and of course Grady is ignoring all of  the people with opposing views of this woman’s performance and character. They’re just liberals who reject the Bible, right? Now if they were “Jesus Christ was born again in hell” Word of Faith teachers, “Jesus Christ was rich” prosperity doctrine teachers, or “God the Father suffered and died on the cross” United (oneness) Pentecostals, they’d be good credible people, right? 

This is replacing true Christianity, which is of the spirit, with a works – based religion of the flesh. Of the circumcision. And you know what? It is a very shallow one at that. Islam, Judaism, Hinduism … do you know what those religions require before a person is declared worthy, a lifetime process of rigorous spiritual, religious, and personal demands? Muslims according in particular to their belief system have no assurance of their salvation when they die (unless they perish in a holy war) no matter their dedication to Islam during their lives. But Grady – and those like him – are willing to say that just because we like what we KNOW of her church (its denomination is similar to mine), her culture (small town self – reliant Alaska outdoorsmen are more holy and sanctified than those inner city welfare mothers?), her lifestyle (a married mother of five is more holy than, you know, a married mother of two or a single mother of any amount?) and her political beliefs?

The last one is key. Because she shares my values, her daughter being pregnant out of wedlock is fine. It is covered by, you know, grace. But since Jamie Lynn Spears and her family does not share my values, it is horrible. No grace for you! And as for Obama, we can dismiss him by saying that if it was his daughter he would have forced her to have an abortion, convicting him in advance for something that he hasn’t even done yet and we have no idea whether he would! The opposite of grace for you! Never mind the fact that pro – abortion people who have unwanted pregnancies choose to have the baby all the time. Never mind the fact that pro – life people who have unwanted pregnancies have abortions all the time. (Studies assert that evangelicals have the same abortion rate as the national average, some claim that it is even higher.)

Now, THIS is where the 30 years of James Dobson Focus on the Family religious right mindset of conferring righteousness on people based on their lifestyles, cultures, affiliations, and political beliefs has gotten us. And we really are entering a sort of danger zone here. Where J. Lee Grady has generally not been one given to trying to influence politics, he goes and calls this woman God’s prophet. And Albert Mohler, usually a no – nonsense figure who also avoids religious right politics and is no supporter of Pentecostalism, has basically endorsed Palin, something that I can find no evidence whatsoever that he did for Mike Huckabee, a leader of his own denomination. If this is not Phariseeism as expressed in the political and cultural context, what is?

As I said of Grady, if Mohler has some pre – existing relationship with this woman that causes him to regard her as being worthy of his endorsement based largely on her being a Christian (or should I again say a Christian with the “right” cultural markers … where in the Bible does it say that shooting bears, eating mooseburgers, living in the frontier, and having 5 kids places you closer to the kingdom of heaven or is evidence of the inner workings of the fruits of the Holy Spirit?), then he should let us know. Otherwise, it is AT BEST reckless and irresponsible. At worst, it is showing much more respect than he ever would to even another professed Christian that came in different packaging. Would Grady and Mohler be as effusive over a Methodist from Chicago or Episcopal from Baltimore, especially if they were Democrats, even if they were right on the doctrinal issues and the political ones directly related to them (i.e. abortion and homosexuality)?You know the answer to that question and so do they. 

And that is just the first part. The second concern is not nearly as lengthy but even more important. Go back to the book of Judges, chapter 4 in particular for this “Deborah anointing” issue. What was the situation? The children of Israel were at war with an enemy that, oh well, could be compared to the Muslims of today without being too far off. What did God choose Deborah to be? His prophetess through whom He spoke His Word. Again, why did God raise up prophets and judges in those days? TO USE THEM TO LEAD ISRAEL IN BATTLE AGAINST THE ENEMY. And what happened? Though Barak was the judge and the leader of the army, THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF, he would not go into battle against the ancestors of today’s MUSLIMS, in particular THE PALESTINIANS, without God’s prophetess Deborah on the battlefield leading him. Why? Because though Barak had been called by God to lead the army, because of his weak character and faith he was unwilling to do so without a woman of stronger character and faith at his side.

So here we are in America in a war against terror against a Muslim ideology. And – if their electoral hopes and dreams are fulfilled as I think they will be – the commander in chief will be another Barak, a man who professes Christian faith (raised Episcopal but now Southern Baptist evangelical) but does not wear it on his sleeve in the appropriate manner or keep company with the right and proper powerbrokers in the evangelical world (as a matter of fact Palin is his third try at short circuit people like Dobson and also the more Baptist – oriented evangelicals for lesser known Pentecostal figures like John Hagee and Rod Parsley) and is not sufficiently socially conservative in his beliefs.

So where Barak fell short in his true faith, McCain similarly falls short in this new universalist pluralist ecumenical dual covenant (or truthfully many covenant!) works based religion that serves the aims of the religious right. Again, never forget that the preferred candidate of most of this crowd was Mormon Mitt Romney, who fit their “culture and views” requirements precisely and the fellow’s actual religious doctrines (as well as his basic honesty and integrity or more accurately his complete lack thereof) was of no consequence. (Extending this a bit, this also explains J. Lee Grady’s embrace of oneness pentecostal heretics, whose beliefs are totally wrong, but who nonetheless have been a part of the Pentecostal religious scene since 1916, are growing in prominence and influence especially in music and with famous preachers/televangelists and their many theologians in Pentecostal seminaries and Bible colleges, so they must be accepted.)

So the morally flawed less than faithful Barak – McCain needs the pure and faithful prophetess Deborah – Palin at his side to fight the Lord’s battle and win against the Philistines – Muslims. (Please note: correlating Philistines and Muslims is not so coincidental when you consider that the term Palestine, or PALESTINIAN, is what the Roman Empire came up with to denote the Philistines, and they named Israel Palestine after their ancient enemies to spite and mock the Jews.)

I suppose that in this imagination, their first Muslim conquest will be on election day against Barack HUSSEIN “McCain has not made in issue of my Muslim faith/I still remember the Muslim call to prayer at my madrassa, one of the most beautiful sounds in the world” Obama. That is fine. What then? Will the prophetess Deborah – Palin tell Barak – McCain to put every Muslim in Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, Somalia, Chechnya, Turkey, Kosovo, Kenya, PALESTINE, etc. to death with the sword? Or more accurately WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS? I don’t know Mr. Grady, that sounds more like McCain anti – Christ Palin false prophet to me! (So you folks thinking that Obama is the anti – Christ may have the right time but the wrong candidate!) Maybe your interpretation of scripture is different. Then again, it would have to be for you to claim that we are brothers with people who blatantly deny scripture by rejecting Trinity, not to mention those who preach the false prosperity and Word of Faith doctrines.

You might say that Grady did not have a militaristic – eschatological intent in calling Palin “Deborah”, that he was only looking for a woman in a leadership position. First of all, even if that were the case, the guy is still wrong. Do you know why? Because words mean things. Especially words from the Bible. We can’t just go around throwing Bible terms and references around because they sound nice, make us feel good, and help us advance or win arguments (or elections). God raised up Deborah to a specific office to perform a specific task. Claiming that a woman that is being appointed to run a college or a bank or even a church ministry is bad enough because of the context. But saying the same of a woman who actually would be the advisor to a commander in chief to a nation that is at war is making a direct parallel between McCain and Palin and the actual Barak and Deborah of the Bible that cannot be ignored!

Also, this paragraph by J. Lee Grady proves that he is not merely applying a Biblical female leadership analogy, even in poor context:

When McCain announced that he had chosen Palin as his running mate, I was reminded of the biblical story of Deborah, the Old Testament prophet who rallied God’s people to victory at a time when ancient Israel was being terrorized by foreign invaders. Deborah’s gender didn’t stop her from amassing an army; she inspired the people in a way no man could. She and her defense minister, Barak, headed to the front lines and watched God do a miracle on the battlefield. In her song in Judges 5:7, Deborah declares: “The peasantry ceased, they ceased in Israel, until I, Deborah, arose, until I arose, a mother in Israel” (NASB). Sometimes it takes a true mother to rally the troops.

Seriously, what else am I supposed to think when I read something like that? So in less than 30 years Christians have gone from cheering when Ronald Reagan largely endorsed the claims of Mormon founder Joseph Smith in declaring America to be New Jerusalem in his “we are the shining city on a hill” speech (which basically gave salvation to all who earned it by agreeing with Reagan culturally and politically, and condemned all dissenters to the lake of fire … hey didn’t Palin’s pastor do largely the same in alluding that Bush critics and Kerry voters are going to the lake of fire?) to claiming that God will use Palin to raise up his army? 

This is where the religious right and the false doctrines surrounding it is taking Christanity, people. (The religious left is no better, so don’t even try it.) If you wish to make your calling and election in Jesus Christ sure, you had best repent yourself of it and love the next world and not this one.

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

SEC Takes Big Step Towards Approving Global Economic System

Posted by Job on August 28, 2008

Funny how they do this during the Democratic convention and right before the kickoff of football season. The march to economic global and political governance continues, and yes both John McCain and Barack Obama fully support it. 

SEC OKs plan that could lead to global accounting rules

Posted in Christianity, government, politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s Global Poverty Plan Sounds A Lot Like Rick Warren’s Global P.E.A.C.E. Plan!

Posted by Job on July 23, 2008

Obama bill: $845 billion more for global poverty

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | February 14, 2008

Posted on Friday, February 15, 2008 6:41:30 AM by Man50D

Sen. Barack Obama, perhaps giving America a preview of priorities he would pursue if elected president, is rejoicing over the Senate committee passage of a plan that could end up costing taxpayers billions of dollars in an attempt to reduce poverty in other nations.

The bill, called the Global Poverty Act, is the type of legislation, “We can – and must – make … a priority,” said Obama, a co-sponsor.

It would demand that the president develop “and implement” a policy to “cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief” and other programs.

When word about what appears to be a massive new spending program started getting out, the reaction was immediate.

“It’s not our job to cut global poverty,” said one commenter on a Yahoo news forum. “These people need to learn how to fish themselves. If we keep throwing them fish, the fish will rot.”

Many Americans were alerted to the legislation by a report from Cliff Kincaid at Accuracy in Media. He published a critique asserting that while the Global Poverty Act sounds nice, the adoption could “result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States” and would make levels “of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.”

He said the legislation, if approved, dedicates 0.7 percent of the U.S. gross national product to foreign aid, which over 13 years he said would amount to $845 billion “over and above what the U.S. already spends.”

The plan passed the House in 2007 “because most members didn’t realize what was in it,” Kincaid reported. “Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require.”

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com

Some Christian links on Warren’s plan:

Rick Warren’s Global Peace Plan

Global Peace – Comparisons

Rick Warren’s Global P.E.A.C.E Plan is Dominionism

RICK WARREN’S GLOBAL P.E.A.C.E. PLAN vs. SCRIPTURAL TEACHINGS ON PEACE

Posted in Bible, Christianity, false doctrine, false religion, false teaching, Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Leading Corporate Diversity Firms Says Companies HAVE To Start Firing Christians!

Posted by Job on July 5, 2008

Revelation 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Incidentally, I did not go hunting for this link. It was actually an advertisement that came up while I was reading my email!

This question is in response to a heated debate stirred by Asking the White Guys: Don’t Try This at Home, a blog entry by DiversityInc Partner and Cofounder Luke Visconti.

Question:

While I want to agree with you that a company shouldn’t have to allow employees to express (or live out) any and all values, I do think it’s a problematic position.  Since it is the law that companies may not discriminate based on race (among other things), then wouldn’t this essentially mean that you should be unemployable if you hold racist views? And if it becomes illegal to discriminate against homosexuals, then, if personal beliefs are grounds for firing, wouldn’t that make many evangelical Christians unemployable as well? While I don’t personally feel that people should discriminate in hiring based on either race or sexual orientation, to then say that other employees should be fired if they hold personal beliefs that discriminate against one of these groups does seem to be less than open-minded. It’s just closed-minded in a different way. Obviously if people can’t get along in the workplace, then someone has to be fired. But if they can function appropriately at work, then I’m uncomfortable with the idea that they should be let go based on private values. I‘d prefer to live in a country where nobody was racist or homophobic, but who gets to make the list of values which someone can be fired for not holding? Who gets to decide what diverse beliefs are healthy to have in the mix and which should be banned? While on any given example I’m sympathetic (yes, it probably creates a hostile work environment for your coworker to, on personal time, post a YouTube video bashing Jews, and so perhaps a company should consider letting them go) but the ramifications as they play out are very definitely complicated if you genuinely value diversity and freedom of speech. 

Answer:

This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Tolerating bigots doesn’t just create a hostile work environment; it creates a hostile customer environment also.

When assessing workplace behavior, however, it’s important to separate normal human behavior from bigotry. We are psychologically predisposed to trust people who look like ourselves. That’s because we are tribal animals and our dominant sense is vision. (Discredited Freudianism and Darwinism strikes again! Why do people hold onto discredited theories? Because even something discredited is better for them than the Biblical worldview that they hate!)

This is why the core of successful diversity management is breaking down those walls with training, mentoring and communications. Education, however, must be backed up by accountability because good intentions or serendipity will not overcome tribalism. (This fellow supports anti – Christ brainwashing techniques, as well as using fear and economic pressure techniques.)

Treating people equitably by race/culture, gender, orientation, disability, age, religion, etc., is a value, just like adhering to accounting principles or the law. (Mistreating homosexuals is a sin according to the Bible, a failure to love your neighbor as you do yourself. But this person is not talking about mistreating homosexuals, but rather feeling that homosexuality is a sin!)

It is up to the leadership of the company to establish the values of the firm. (And they will be getting advice from guys like you precisely because they want to avoid expensive and embarrassing lawsuits.) To be clear: Not only does the employer “get to decide” (what behavior is acceptable), it is corporate leadership’s absolute responsibility to decide. This is essential; a lack of values (and/or communicated values) destroys shareholder value.

Poor values lead to poor ethical practices. The subprime fiasco we’re going through now is a direct result of sloppy ethics. At the heart of this crisis are hundreds of thousands of financially illiterate or less-literate people who were victims of predatory and unscrupulous mortgage brokers. A lack of regulation–and most importantly, a market for the resulting unethical mortgage paper–created this mess. It is important to note that Blacks and Latinos were disproportionately sold unethically inappropriate mortgages, and this was widely reported (by us and others) as it happened. (Note the ever popular linking homosexuality to being black lie.)

On the other hand, the best example of clearly stated values and behavior guidelines is Johnson & Johnson’s credo. It easily fits on one page of paper and can be used as a concise decision-making matrix. To understand how this works in action, read about how they handled the 1982 Tylenol incident, (which is easily the best example of corporate crisis handling that I know of).

Unfortunately, people often get unfocused when it comes to values in how we treat other people. This shouldn’t be the case. If a company’s leadership decides that diversity management is instrumental for their company, they must be as efficient in rooting out people who won’t adhere to this policy as they would be about dismissing people who don’t care to follow proper accounting procedure or the law. (And after companies start rooting out and firing Christians, the government will start rooting out and jailing them. It is all about having good values. Ah, a victory of a civil rights movement led by communists, Marxists, atheists, subversives, and false preachers.)

To use your example, in my opinion, a person who posts a hate video on YouTube should be fired on the spot. (So were this fellow ever to find MY Youtube account … and of course stuff like this will intimidate Christians from sharing the true gospel on the Internet or anything else. But hey, persecution always separates the true Christians from the false ones, the offenders from the pretenders. But of course, the person who puts an “I hate white people” or “I hate Christians” tape on Youtube would never be fired, and this guy would defend it!) Because we have constitutional freedom of speech, they cannot be arrested. (Not yet anyway. But you are working on that right now! Your own diversity program is based on what has become standard on most university campuses since the 1980s, the notion that “offensive speech” is not constitutionally protected; it is the equivalent of yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. And yes, Opus Dei Clarence Thomas led the Supreme Court into endorsing this notion by making cross – burning a federal crime. Of course, Thomas would LOVE to declare anyone who speaks against his Roman Catholic Church a federal criminal. I wonder if Thomas knows – or cares – that the people who put him on the bench to make that decision knowing that folks would accept from a conservative black man what they would never accept from a liberal black man or a white person of any race will be used in a much broader fashion than he desires? Incidentally, Clarence Thomas ALWAYS rules against free speech!) However, a person who obliviously expresses a stereotype (i.e. “Gay people are disproportionately wealthy”) is demonstrating that they need training. (Never mind the statistics that do in fact show that homosexuals are disproportionately wealthy and well educated.) Since we all come to the table with misconceptions, the company is obligated to train employees if they want to achieve a work environment where good people treat each other (and customers) with a sense of equity. (Will your training program go after people who believe that anyone who rejects evolution should be locked up, a position by Charles Dawkins? Or that Christianity is dangerous and should be outlawed? Of course not.)

Don’t worry about the haters who are fired; they’ll find someplace to work. (Not if everyone reads and applies your column!) Most companies have no effective diversity management and don’t recognize the damage that can be done by a cadre of bigots.

The DiversityInc Top 50 Companies for Diversity® list is a list of companies that have superior clarity on this particular value (treating human beings with equity). I think it’s important to understand that those companies will be better employers and suppliers. Clarity on values is a cornerstone of sustainable business.

More Ask the White Guy >>

This is just more evidence that religious right Christians that have been duped into putting their trust in democracy and capitalism are fattening frogs for the anti – Christ snake. It is true that while this nonsense was hatched on our liberal universities, corporations that the religious right has been telling Christians is their rock and their strength and their refuge in a time of trouble are adopting it. Why? Not because “it is good for business” – although they would do so if it was! – but because corporations are of the world and reflect the same fallen mind state as universities, liberal political groups, and anything else. This whole flag waving capitalism thumping religious right agenda is all about fooling and duping Christians into sanctifying the secular, and taking the worldly for being holy. When big business, the military, the state, and even many churches start training their eyes on Christians, it will be the religious right (and the religious left) that helped make it popular.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT TACTICS MERELY GOVERNMENT TRAINING FOR GREAT TRIBULATION TACTICS TO BE USED AGAINST CHRISTIANS?

Posted by Job on May 30, 2008

I want to make two things clear. 

1. I oppose illegal immigration. Why? Because it is illegal. Now if it weren’t illegal, I would still be no great fan of it, but I would not pay much attention to it because of more pressing matters i.e. abortion genocide and false Christian preachers, both of which by the way are perfectly legal. As it is, government and big business colluding to aid and abet wide scale criminality for their mutual benefit but to the detriment of citizens, workers, and consumers illustrates that the notion of “rule of law” does not exist in this country. Instead, this nation is being ruled by bandits, thugs, and criminals in three piece suits from Wall Street to Capitol Hill to the White House. 

2. After leaving behind the “Left Behind” Cyrus Scofield Roman Catholic Jesuit rapture cult, I was forced to acknowledge that the doctrine of the imminent return of Jesus Christ must be interpreted in an eschatological sense rather than a temporal one – and such would have to be the case or else the last few verses of Revelation would have been demonstrated to be false like 1900 years ago – and as a result the great tribulation could just as easily come 500 years from now as tomorrow. I have to tell you … knowing to interpret Revelation in an eschatological – while still fully literal! – sense would have saved me a lot of hours watching John Hagee during his “Jerusalem Countdown” period a few years back, and it would have also saved a lot of Christians from being taken in by things like “recently discovered Bible codes prove that Jesus Christ will return in the year 2000!” hysteria. Look, Christians have to be honest enough to acknowledge that according to the very same method of Bible interpretation methods used by the “Left Behind” crowd, the rapture should have occurred at or around 70 AD. 

With those two lengthy qualifying statements out of the way, the article Operation Return to Sender on the techniques used to find and deport illegal immigrants by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ought to really get Christians to thinking. First, you have ICE inflicting “detailing stomach-turning—and sometimes deadly—mistreatment in immigrant detention centers.” Second, “Operation Return to Sender” targets immigrants that the courts have already told to leave the country. Problem ? The government freely acknowledges “about half of the information in ICE’s “Deportable Alien Control System”—a database of immigrants to be deported—is incorrect or incomplete.” (It makes me wonder if Jeb Bush’s faulty list of people ineligible to vote because of felony convictions – a list compiled by a corporation – during the election 2000 recount fiasco was nothing but a trial run). 

Still more. “… enforcement teams carry out large-scale sweeps, raiding homes in neighborhoods with a lot of immigrants just after sunrise. Without an accurate list of which homes actually harbor undocumented immigrants, agents often rely on race to figure out who’s here legally and who isn’t. For example, in Fair Haven, Conn., several residents reported that during a raid last summer, ICE officers went door to door asking how many people were inside each house—and what race they were. In an ICE operation in Willmar, Minn., Latino residents were handcuffed and interrogated while white residents, some even in the same home, went unquestioned.” NEOCONSERVATIVES who support racial profiling have no problem with this? Fine. But in great tribulation year 5 when they will be going house to house looking for Christians instead of Mexicans, let us see how many of you will still be neoconservative. (Yes, my going from Bush Republican to basically libertarian did coincide with my leaving the rapture cult.) I should point out that going house to house looking for all the Christians to arrest has already happened to Christians in various nations at various times throughout history. After all, how do you think that governments in China, North Korea, and in various Muslim nations locate and break up these cells of illegal Christian house churches? Go to http://persecution.org or http://persecution.com to see what I am talking about. But so long as it is not happening IN THIS COUNTRY RIGHT NOW makes this tactic OK, right? 

It gets better. “By ICE’s own admission, the bureau has mistakenly detained, arrested, and even deported not only legal immigrants but also U.S. citizens. Those caught up in recent home raids include Adriana Aguilar, a citizen living in East Hampton, N.Y., who was sound asleep with her 4-year-old son when ICE officers stormed into her bedroom, pulled the covers off the bed, and shined flashlights into her face before interrogating her. In San Rafael, Calif., ICE detained 6-year-old Kebin Reyes, a citizen from birth, holding him in a locked office for 12 hours after immigration agents, pretending to be police, stormed into the apartment he shared with his father and forcibly removed him from his home.” I can see the government deciding that it is best to take children from Christian parents in operations like this, can’t you? First, consider the Mormon raid in Texas, which I threw up a post endorsing, now ruled illegal. Second, consider that being a “fundamentalist” Christian is now a factor in divorce proceedings used to determine who gets primary or sole custody of children. 

This is the best part. “The government’s guidelines for immigration enforcement prohibit these kinds of abuses. Why aren’t they being enforced? Theories abound. ICE attorneys have suggested that because most of the rules governing officer conduct were instituted before the Department of Homeland Security took over immigration enforcement, they don’t apply to ICE at all. Another explanation is that in the wake of Sept. 11, stepped-up immigration enforcement may have taken priority over careful procedures.” So, once Christians are declared to be clear and present dangers due to our divisive, dangerous, and extremist rhetoric on the Bible being infallible and the final authority and Jesus Christ being the only way to heaven (please note that evangelical favorite George W. Bush has openly rejected both, while Billy Graham openly denied the first decades ago by embracing Roman Catholicism and the original edition of “The Living Bible” that contained purposeful blatant alterations, and later denied the second as well) and the eternal lake of fire awaits all who reject either, the tactics that are now being used against Muslims and illegal immigrants will be used against Christians. “Waterboarding” and “Rendition” to Christians? Why not?

The big payoff! “Twenty-five years ago, in the case of INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, the Supreme Court declined to extend the Fourth Amendment’s guarantees to immigration proceedings. But Justice Sandra Day O’Connor recognized that if in the future there were “good reason to believe” that constitutional violations in immigration enforcement were “widespread,” the way judges handled these cases would have to change.” Vatican stooge (and illegal immigration supporter) Ronald Reagan put Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court, which is all you need to know. And how many of Reagan’s policies contributed to the problems that we have in the Middle East right now? Or didn’t you know that the Reagan administration considered Saddam Hussein an ally, providing his regime with training, weapons, and money? It certainly looks like with respect to the war on terror and illegal immigration, the government created these problems only to later claim to need draconian measures to solve them. 

Speaking of the aforementioned Florida 2000, the combination of illegal immigration, the war on terror,  the need to combat voter fraud, the need to track sex offenders, and the need to battle identity theft will result in calls for a system of electronic identification and monitoring in the near future. Will that mean that the great tribulation is upon us? No. The scenarios described in Revelation do not only apply to America, but to the entire world. Some have limited it somewhat by stating that such things as being unable to buy or sell will only apply to the portion of the world that matters in Bible prophecy and the Bible in general. Now I should point out that many other nations of the world are fully onto this agenda. The National Review claims that France has enacted stronger measures in the war on terror that America has … that they will deport a Muslim preacher for delivering a sermon that offends the government in a heartbeat. (And knowing France’s feelings towards Biblical Christians, Christians are supposed to support this WHY?) Many in Europe are also joining the anti – immigrant chorus as well. While I am very sympathetic to these people’s concerns, it bears asking why the governments that comprised the EU decided to A) promote policies that they KNEW would result in extremely low birthrates among the native population while B) having open immigration policies in the first place other than to create chaos that people would support repressive government policies to control. Please recognize that the only reason why the VERY NATIONALISTIC Europeans consented to economic integration – and the political integration that goes with it – was because the member nations had spent decades purposefully wrecking their economies. And of course, once the EU was formed, pretty much the same group of folks that had spent the last few decades wrecking economies all of a sudden returned to sound economic policy resulting in fast economic growth, making Frenchmen who wold have been aghast at being linked with Italians, Spaniards, Germans, and – gasp! – EASTERN EUROPEANS think that giving up their sovereignty, traditions, and cultures is a grand idea. How long before universal healthcare, jobs programs, endless wars, and global warming economic regulations, and $5 a gallon gas (thanks ANWR!) makes our own economy so bad that a North American Union with Mexico and Canada starts looking like a great idea? By the way … Mexico has a ton of oil that its government won’t allow anyone access to …

Actually, that last scenario is a contradiction in my endtimes scenario: if we adopt the North American Union and open the Mexican and Canadian borders, that would lessen the rationale for national ID cards by negating the illegal immigration issue. Then again, if the North American Union is ever formed, the government will have so much power that it will be able to autocratically mandate such IDs – and share the information from it with the EU and any similar body of African, Asian, and Latin American nations – and there won’t be anything that anyone will be able to do about it. 

Posted in Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: