Saturday, May 03, 2008
This is another day I wish I had the abilility to pick up the phone, call Herb Peters, and bounce this one off of him. I know what he would have said about the possible prophetic significance of this one. Most of you know too. Read the article by clicking here.
According to this article from the EUROPEAN JEWISH VOICE, Israel is the first European Neighborhood partner as part of the 7 year European Neighborhood Policy, the reconfirmed and expanded Barcelona process.
The action plan between the European Union and Israel is also now set to be extended for an additional year. Read about it by clicking here.
I wonder how long the honeymoon will last?
policy does not replace the Barcelona Process; it reinforces it"):
can't await your next radio show,
With the falling US dollar and fallling US influence worldwide, it would not be shocking to see the EU come in a begin to play a much more important role in the process. When the Bush/Rice team fails it seems natural that EU will step in.
My assessment is this is terrible for Israel, but the, anti-Torah Israelis who do not see Israel as a theocracy, but as a democracy ( accidently wrote demon-cracy...maybe I coined a new word) will not worry about Israel's biblical mandate....to glorify God. We know that Israel can't really live out Torah until it's written on their hearts ( Jer 31:31-33, eze 37:15-28, i.e. the covenant of peace)
The most telling thing will be how the subject of Jerusalem and the temple is resolved. Will Jerusalem become an international capital for all the religions? The question of Jerusalem will have to be dealt with in any peace deal. I think this is what we need to keep our eyes on.
There's an excellent video on Europe by David Hathaway. I highly recommend it to all who are interested in Europe's role in prophecy. You can watch a trailer on the this link, which gives some spiritual background. It's worth buying, and I have no vested interest in his ministry. It's just a very interesting perspective from the Book of Daniel. He might be on to something.
Without the Prince of Peace, the problem will not be resolved. That's one thing we can all be sure of.
I accessed this blog today and reviewed the handful of comments -- most related to recent developments in European diplomacy -- all appeared to have been written by Christians.
It appears to me that seeking factual information and relating it in an internet form has become a goal that has superseded a capacity for moral outrage.
I am deeply troubled by this development, and the fact that it is so commonplace here (and in the larger world) does not make it any less troubling. All the research in the world--on Mandelson, Solana, etc- is not going to stop a tide if we do not accept individual responsibility in standing up against depravity, and standing up for truth.
Research is interesting and a focus for the lives of many here -- in some instances it is a vocation--but do not forget that you are all moral agents, and that it is up to you to make Christ present in the world.
I would hope that this post, like my others, asking you as Christians to join me in condemnation of Michael A. Hoffman's work does not go ignored.
Your research will all turn to dust and will, in the eyes of the Lord, be as of nothing if you do not love.
Open your Bibles, pray for the movement of the Holy Spirit as guide of your moral agency, and act on it.
The hour is getting late.
I stand with you in outrage at anyone who denies the Shoah. As one who lost a big percentage of my family in it and knows many survivors whose personal testimonies I have heard I can't think of anything more outrageous and shocking than denying the reality that 6 million Jews were killed for the simple crime of being Jews. I am actively engaged in Shoah awareness, and am active in standing for Israel. I work with people, who at great expense to their personal safety take a stand for Israel, in fact I am married to someone who does.
If I had been alive 60 years ago living in Europe, I would most likely be dead. I saw the graves where my relatives were buried and the places where they were so cruelly executed. I didn't know the work of Michael Hoffman, but after you brought my attention to him, I read enough to be totally disgusted. Since I haven't personally read anything that he said, but only read about him, I cannot comment any further than that.
You are absolutely right in saying if the forum doesn't move people to action, and is only a place to gather information that it's time to reflect. God certainly has not forgotten what has happened to His people!
Thanks for your input. I am 100% in agreement with you.
Shalom in Yeshua,
You can not factually deny what did doccur.
The evidence for it's occurance stands on it's own merits.
I also stand resolute against replacement theology which I do think is tied to this individuals work, at least in principal.
Here are 2 posts I found from Tues., April 29, 2008:
"Michael A. Hoffman is a researcher historian on the Cabal (sp) and Jews has a new book coming out.
New Age stuff also.
"Michael A. Hoffman has a new book coming out, that wasn't very clear.
They Live, new movie not for kids, twilight language, implants in people key words. ? That's all I know, sounds NA or dark to me.
Could either of these posts be the one to which you say are without context? When referring to a post I always try to quote from it directly to help clarify statements.
If either of these are the one you mention in your post:
"A couple of days ago one of the participants in this forum made a reference to Michael A. Hoffman, the Holocaust denier, but without any context." 6:23 a.m.
It would be helpful to know.
If indeed the quotes above are the ones to which you refer it seems to me kck was saying they were New Age material. I would agree perhaps that more could have been commented to specify more of a point, I'm not sure I see Hoffman or his ideas being promoted.
I haven't seen any anti Israel statements here on this blog, nor do I think anyone here is anti Israel. I am not and I would never support anything that is anti Israel.
"All the research in the world--on Mandelson, Solana, etc- is not going to stop a tide if we do not accept individual responsibility in standing up against depravity, and standing up for truth." 6:23 a.m.
I agree with you on this, and this blog and Constance and those who comment here, in my opinion, make a very constant and consistent stand for the truth.
Indeed the hour is getting very late.
Solana milieu and USA support for same -- Rudi called my attention to this the other day -- EVERYBODY needs to carefully read it!
Thank you for your courageous comments.
One thing became much clearer to me. Individuals such as Hoffman, like Adolf Hitler before him, are masters of manipulation. Evil as their worldview is, unless society takes a united stand opposing and exposing and speaking out against it, the future outlook based on history is predictable. To me, what is the most disturbing, is that we now (primarily in my view due to the mass humanistic indoctrination which has been incorporated at every level of mandatory public education) have a generation of “intellectual worshipping”,
“truth is relative” individuals, forming their own (unfortunately, agnostic/atheistic in origin)
worldviews. This is fertile ground for very a very dangerous thought process to take
root. Information-regardless of how blatantly anti-Semitic and untrue it is, has the potential
when the truth is no longer magnified, to take root and become accepted. It becomes an
invitation to those who believe it, opening the door for future legitimized violence and indiscriminant action
against a particular group of people. I fully oppose the work (in any form) of Michael A. Hoffman and those sharing his views.
Anyone who has not yet seen Ben Steins “Expelled” need to see it. This would be an excellent opportunity to show support and take a stand for freedom. This is not a “Creation/Evolution
Movie. The movie presents facts showing the connection between the current “expelling” of any belief system not 100% behind the theory of evolution as taught by Darwinists and it's relationship
to the core beliefs of Nazism.
guy from AoC"..small world.
Bob Roberts Jr. His church is Northwood. the link for the blog is:
He has written books about "Going Glocal".
To get others to see how it works in the real world, I give you this quote from the blog:
"We wound up sitting with one of the leaders at the Brookings Institute, the head of the Alliance for World Civilizations at the U.N., Ron Sider, Chris Seiple, myself, and Joel Hunter. The Brookings guy and the UN guy both began to ask us what we got from the conference and, as evangelicals, how was it that we came to our various positions. We explained to him that not all evangelicals are on TV or even agree on the same views. They began to ask how they could partner more with "evangelicals" who were more open on things like the environment, the Arab-Isreali crisis, etc."
The name “Michael Hoffman” didn’t mean anything to me before I read the anon 6:23 post. Call me clueless, I profess ignorance, but there’s just too much info presented on this blog to follow up on everything. Rudi alone posts enough info to keep us all busy well into the next millennium. So if the man and his work were mentioned in a previous blog, sorry, I skipped right past it. But, since he’s apparently a neighbor of mine…and receiving more than a passing mention here, I decided I should probably take the time to see for myself what all the fuss was about.
To start with, I visited our universal knowledge base (Wikipedia). Then off to Hoffman’s own website, revisionisthistory.org, where I looked at just a few titles of his materials and watched the video, “Judiac Connection to Black Slavery” (with Dr. Toni Martin). Next I read a couple of Hoffman’s shorter articles. (I have to say, I actually appreciated his article concerning the Don Imus fiasco.) I’m still looking for samples of his work on Freemasonry, which I would, for obvious reasons, be intrigued to read.
I have not (yet) found where Hoffman claims that the halls of Hadamar and the ovens at Auschwitz, and all that took place therein, as well as the atrocities committed at various other Nazi “institutions”, are figments of an overactive Zionist mind. On his own website Hoffman admits that Hitler intended to exterminate the Jews and put methodologies in place to attain that goal. Regarding the holocaust, Hoffman seems to be questioning the numbers and marginalizing the “efficiency” employed in the process while positing a heavy critique of the political conspiracies he says were spawned in the aftermath. I have discerned a thread of anti-semitism running through the few pieces I have read. Again, I’m just beginning to look into this man’s work, and while not defending the man’s conspiratorial view of history, I’m not convinced the label “holocaust denier” is accurate either.
In one segment of Ben Stein’s film, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, Stein takes us on a walk through the halls of Hadamar. Unlike Stein, I was not surprised by the comments of the tour guide, who claimed that Hadamar’s euthanizers, with over 14,000 documented kills on their hands, were not evil or insane, but were merely people acting upon an utterly rational scientific world view. The point being that it is really no different today. Our own “rational” scientific establishment, (and we must take ownership for their actions), promotes genetic engineering, gene splicing between human and animal, abortion on demand, and euthanasia of the sick and disabled, all totally based on Darwinian science in a Malthusian remake of the very same Nazi nightmare that took place in the halls of Hadamar. When the Nazi’s did it, they were bad. What’s changed?
I’m well aware that revising history, meaning to discern the “truth” of a matter by careful examination of historical fact, can be a slippery slope when done to promote a specific agenda. Hoffman’s research is obviously colored by his own world view and contains no small amount of bias and angst. However, he denies being an anti-semite, leveling his harshest criticisms at the Talmud and Mishna as having a profoundly corrupting influence on Judaism. He makes a distinction between modern Judaism, which he obviously views as corrupt, and that found in Biblical Judaism as is documented in the OT.
Well, those are my first impressions. I'm sure I'm missing much. But if those are my first impressions, think about what somebody with absolutely no NA discernment is going to see. Scary, isn't it? I respect the opinion of the researchers here, but please post links to expose this man, not just opinion. I will look a lot more closely at this man when I have time. I like to know what my neighbors are up to
I hadn't heard of Michael Hoffman until you posted twice. I checked out his work on RevisionistHistory.com. You're right. Without reading the full texts, his work appears to be repugnant. I don't know anyone on this post who would subscribe to his ideas. I can't speak for her, but I suspect KCK's link to it was in the vein of Constance pointing out some researchers who pretend to be us but are in reality them, meaning people who pretend to be opposed to the NAM but in reality are part of it.
I do not know of any anti Semitic people on this post. Despite the occasional and intense theological flare ups, every single Biblical Christian on this site understands and deeply appreciates the Jewish roots of our faith. Everyone of us knows that Jesus and all of the disciples were Jewish. We do not subscribe to replacement theology nor would we dishonor our Lord and Savior by denying His heritage.
Jewspeak: A Critical Analysis of the Language of Mind Control by Michael A. Hoffman II. Also: Rigging the Hate Crime Statistics. And: Why the Silence on Black Atrocities?
These are just two of the "articles" by Hoffman. I don't want to waste the $13.00 to read them. By the synopsis of this and the one about Abraham Lincoln being a homosexual dictator leads me to believe I might not agree with his work. I don't feel like supporting this "scholarship".
Old Man -- perhaps a better word for describing Hoffman is "Holocaust revisionist." (Rose rolls her eyes).
As regards Hoffman's website, res ipsa loquitor--I, too, have had a cursory read through and like Rudi and Deannie, my response is a visceral one.
I am not suggesting everyone go around labelling folks as Antisemitic if they utter one criticism of Israel. But keep in mind, it's very easy to skip over Antisemism, minimize it, rationalize it, and sweep it under the rug--history has shown that this is one topic where extreme vigilance is called for.
When I read the last paragraph:
"Mr Mitchell stressed how favourably Europe's current means of unification contrasted with the less peaceful approach of the Nazi era: "We're doind ig without Panzer divisions and gas chambers."
What came to mind is a pedophile in court claiming innocence because he lured a child into his car with a candy bar instead of a shotgun in order to violate the child.
Mr. Mitchell could copyright the phrase "Rationalization Gone Wild" and produce videos of his wicked foolishness, N/A'gers would eat them up by the truckload.
Strong delusion is the appropriate term for what Europe is falling for if they vote for this stuff.
Thank you for the heads up Rose.
Edwin Black Sunday,
November 9, 2003
I had forgotten I had this article until the reminder above regarding the lateness of the hour. Also, today I came across a site which looks like an excellent resource fo tracking antisemitism around the world. CFCA "The Coordination
Forum for Countering Antisemitism"
I am finding it to be very educational. -Rudi
But DOUBT and SKEPTICISM are clearly Hoffman’s gods, and that’s not good. History is not a function of faith, and therefore it cannot be undone because of unbelief or because one dissents from the popular view. True, our accepted versions of history are “revised” often enough, usually after a major calamity by those who are fortunate enough to survive. Hoffman makes his own dissent moot by declaring that what we accept today as fact, could disappear from the history books tomorrow. It's happened before, and it will certainly happen again. But there is something to learn from the man's insatiable skepticism, which should not be lost on the bloggers here. Of what impact is our research? Are we doing anything good? Is documenting the end of days a worthwhile endeavor? Will our fact finding do anything to prevent the coming "tipping point"? Is history not already written and the seals about to be broken and the bowls about to be poured out upon a deserving world?
I agree with Rose, Deannie, Rudi, Constance and the others. The man has a clear agenda, which is to deny that Jews have any special place in history, except for playing a hugely negative role, which Hoffman alludes to on numerous occasions in this FAQ and in some of the other works I have read. The bottom line for me is that the Abrahamic covenant is still good in my book. God is not mocked. He knows the end from the beginning. He is the Alpha and the Omega. I believe any nation that blesses the nation of Israel will in turn, be blessed. That said, while America kisses Israel on the cheek, we are putting guns in the hands of it’s enemies. With friends like us….who needs Michael Hoffman?
I'll include the link to the "WW II FAQ" here, with a warning that it could be a pandora's box for the ill equipped.
A few threads back we were discussing the possibility of UN parliament moving to Iraq (ancient babylon).
Well I got in my news today that the US is building a
$700 million dollar embassy in Bagdad called "The Zone of Influence". It is a 5 Billion dollar plan.
You must read this:
US military demolition? On innocent people?
BAGHDAD - The U.S. military fired guided missiles into the heart of Baghdad's teeming Sadr City slum on Saturday, leveling a building 55 yards away from a hospital and wounding nearly two dozen people.
Now that you've spent some time reading Hoffman's website, spend some quality time doing research on how propaganda works.
The devil does not come to us spouting blatant, obvious, hateful, illogical, and non-credible untruths so that we can immediately see what we are dealing with. He is much more intelligent than that. He comes as an angel of light.
Michael Hoffman is obviously an erudite and intelligent man. He is capable of reasoning well, and he writes well. He brings forward some important facts that have been buried or obscured by history, and makes some excellent and sensible proposals. He has dazzled you, an intelligent and analytical man, with these techniques to such a degree that you cannot see the ugly agenda he advances whilst he dazzles you.
This is exactly how Hitler was able to come to power.
No one here has said Hoffman should be jailed, censored, or silenced. I think the word used was "condemned" -- which means, as I read it, speaking out clearly against his obviously hate-filled agenda, however eloquently and cleverly he attempts to advance it. Deannie and Rudi have done exactly that, and I have seconded them (although in a less impassioned way).
Don't take this post as a personal attack--I, too, read the Don Imus piece and thought it was pretty good--any of us can get caught off guard. I am trying to take this as an opportunity to get you to "wake up."
I repeat, spend some time learning how propanda and disinformation work. We are all susceptible to its charms, and your response to Hoffman is a clear illustration of the fact that we need to proactively arm ourselves.
What came to mind is a pedophile in court claiming innocence because he lured a child into his car with a candy bar instead of a shotgun in order to violate the child.
Just a few thoughts:
Several posts ago you mentioned kck's original reference to Hoffman. You raise an important point, and I'd like to respond with my take on the situation.
I cannot speak for Anon 6:23 but it does appear to me that kck's posts were the motivation for drawing attention to Hoffman's work.
I cannot speak for kck either. Although I would like to give her the benefit of the doubt in good faith, I find her references to Hoffman that you quoted above somewhat oblique and ambiguous (at best)--the sentence structure she uses is itself ungrammatical and thus difficult to parse.
Did kck assume that the readers here already knew Hoffman, and knew his game, and that therefore he needed no introduction? It simply is not clear from her posts.
I suspect that this very ambiguity is why anon 6:23 felt compelled to raise the issue.
It's useful to keep in mind that under the law, ambiguity is always construed against the source of the statement, not the one reading and interpreting it. The Hoffman discussion underscores the importance of being as specific as possible when linking to or refering material on other websites or from other sources, and asking for clarification from our colleagues when their words are not clear.
Hopefully kck will come back to this website and clarify her views, which would end the speculation about her motives.
If this horrible news is true, perhaps the Rev. Jeremiah Wright was speaking prophetically about America.
May the Lord help us all!
You guys are amazing. You know what assume means?
I am flattered I got so much attention.
Being dyslexic takes care of any writing errors, now for the rest.
Having fought the good fight like Connie for years both inside and outside the church I can only say think what you like, being attacked is what one doing the right thing should expect.
Anything I post is for your information only and perhaps will give some insight into who's doing what where.
Adieu (Old French, I commend you to God)
According to the latest study bee's are dying due to pollution.
They can't smell well enough to find the flowers, but just in certain locations are the hives suddenly collapsing.
Bee's also live in the city so it doesn't make sense air pollution is truly the only problem.
Bee's are dying all over the world, and chemtrails have also been reported worldwide and could be a likely contributor to their deaths.
I saw a brand new chemtrail just over the Queen of England's head during an interview from one of her Castles, I wouldn't think that would be permitted, would you?
Afraid my life has been so confusing last week that I have missed part of the discussion, although I know what we used to discuss MEANING OF 'ASSUME' and it went something like this, which is what I suspect you are saying:
NEVER assume anything
because to "assume" makes and a** of you and of me!
Thanks for your contributions -- now I'll have to go back and make up for lost reading!
You are correct -- I am not the be all and end all regarding discernment, nor have I ever claimed to be. I warned that any of us can be taken in. This is not a contest about who is smartest.
I was hoping my words would get you to question, and to look more deeply at how easily it is be manipulated by a Holocaust revisionst. These folks are masters at manipulation and the six million dead are the proof. I would have hoped we all had something to learn from this not just you. I'm repeating myself though.
I sense you are aching to get the last word here so I will sign off this dialogue with you since I've made my points.
kck -- this is not about you. Read the discussion again. No one has said anything about you, questioned your church affiliation, or your work record. It's about the ambiguity in your posts about Hoffman in which two of the writers have given you the benefit of the doubt.
My friend Marnie is dyslexic and far less able to write an English sentence than you are (sentences riddled with spelling errors and wrong words--almost indecipherable), but she takes enormous pains to communicate clearly especially in matters of moral importance. You've yet to clarify your views on Hoffman who you described as a "researcher historian."
For purposes of this discussion, how you have spent the last twenty years is irrelevant as is where you go to church, whether you see yourself as being attacked as one who does the right thing, etc. How did you learn about Hoffman, and why were you drawing attention to his book? You've seen references here to the disgusting nature of this man's work yet clarifying this appears to be low on your agenda since you haven't done it yet.
At least two participants, HK and Deannie, have already voiced strong support in favor of good faith in your motives. Time and thought went into both their posts. I notice you didn't take even a moment to take the focus off yourself and thank either of them. You could have used a courteous acknowledgement of their kind support as a springboard for clarifying exactly what you meant, I suspect to the good of all here.
While there are many Protestants who are good people, the idea that only faith is Jesus is needed seems to be a matter of self-idolatry, "Look at me. I've got it." What good does that do for the development of one's soul or the moral development of the community?
The whole business about believing in Jesus as the only criteria seems to me to put the emphasis on human believers and how important and wise they are.
In the Catholic church, the emphasis is on the greatness of God, not only on Jesus as God. Catholics aren't emotionally hyped about Jesus as God. A picture of Jesus often used shows Jesus surrounded by children which is to teach how vulnerable children are and how God says they should be protected. The emphasis is on what Jesus did and what he said, not constantly his divinity. Mary is presented as a role model for women, not a god, but as someone who lives after death and who can be used as an intermediary with Jesus because she was his mother. The emphasis is on living a moral life and being ready to be holy enough to be near God through communion after confession. The lives of the saints, the children of Fatima, Bernadette, are all given as examples of how to live and how to treat one's fellow man. We are taught sexual purity is necessary. The mass, the Gregorian chant, the kyrie are all used as symbols to refer to the greatness of God and how we are to respect His attributes. There is dignity and solomnness connected to practicing this religion.
Some may consider this a simplistic view of the Protestant community, and that it is. Other younger people might only know the Catholic church as it appears after Vatican II which changed it considerably. I've attempted to give a description of the church that has stood for 2,000 years.
No church, Protestant or Catholic, is able to twist the hearts of all who learn there to instant total goodness. Not being broken down into factions, all of the negatives revert to the single body of the Catholic church. Protestant are able to escape their history by blaming the negatives on some other faction as in "Episcopaleans are, Baptists are, Lutherans don't have it right, Evangelicals are, Rick Warren is."
Since the Catholic church has been presented in such a negative light here, I thought it was time to show how Catholics who follow its lessons see it.
I've chosen to be gentle about presenting what I see is a negative side of a Protestant belief. Unlike some who write here, I don't think it is necessary to pile it on.
"The emphasis is on what Jesus did and what he said, not constantly his divinity."
I used to be a Catholic and most of my family still is, so I am sympathetic to them. However...
As Taught in the Bible
I don't mind admitting to being emotionally hyped about Jesus being God, especially over His work on the cross. I think there's cause to clebrate and shout it from the roof tops.
I agree with you on certain points. I don't agree that we can just accept Yeshua and then do anything we want. That makes a mockery of what Yeshua did for us through His death and resurrection. If we are "born again" we become the temple of the Holy Spirit. If we look at the Temple in Tanach, we can see it was the very place where God manifest His presence to the people of Israel.
Only once a year the high priest, descendants of Aaron, could go in and make atonement for B'nei Israel. When Yeshua came, this changed. The veil in the holy of holies was ripped in two so we HAVE NO NEED OF A PRIEST TO INTERVENE. We can enter freely into the presence of God, because Yeshua's blood cleansed the throne in Heaven. I'm not making this up. Everything I said is written in the Bible. Does this mean that we going around sinning now. As Paul would say, heavens no! God is still holy and if Yeshua had to die to pay for our sins, then out of love for God we should try to live holy and blameless lives, by the power of His indwelling Spirit..not in our own strength. Do we all fall short, absolutely...
If you took offense at what I said in my posts, I'm very sorry, but I am not sorry for my criticism of the Catholic Church. All the Gregorian chants and prayers to Mary give some impression of being religious, but unfortunately they don't conform with the Scriptures. I do agree with you when you say that in many Protestant Churches holiness has been left out. That is true in some cases.
I would not say that solution to this is to add Gregorian chants and rosary beads, or statues of Mary, because much of what the Catholic church has done to promote a "religious" environment, unfortunately violates Scripture. I do not believe we should be "antinomian" lawless...I do believe that God gave His loving instructions, called Torah to His children to teach us how to live and to convict us as sin. The Torah says we should not make images of God, so we cannot reconcile this with the many Catholic Cathedrals throughout the world with statues of Mary, Jesus and other biblical figures. This is a direct violation of the Bible, just as not treating God as holy is also a violation of Scripture.
I don't think there is a perfect assembly out there. We all need to examine what has been passed down through history and see if it lines up with Scriptures. I apologize if you are hurt by my comments, but you cannot and should not worship
Mary, who is a blessed woman chosen by God to bear Yeshua, but is NOT to be worshipped. All I can say is read the Scriptures and see if the Bible tells us to do that.
The Mother of Heaven was worshipped in pagan societies, who looks an awful lot like the images that are made of Mary, but in the Bible it says we are to "Worship God Alone!" This is another case where the Catholic Church took something that was done in pagan culture and assimilated it into their practices. Miriam, the mother of Yeshua replaced "the mother of heaven" of pagan cultures.
In the assemblies that I've been a part of, we teach sexual purity too, not celibacy, but sex within the confines of God-ordained marriage. If you read Torah, in Leviticus 20, it is very clear which are considered correct and sinful sexual relations. We only need to know the Scriptures. There are many churches today saying homosexual relations are fine. Scripture is really clear that this, adultery, incest, etc, etc. are sin before God...It doesn't say anything about being celibate however...even the Levitical priests could and did marry.
My problem is not with people like you are as Mac stated, I also have had family members or friends who are Catholic. Some of them are no longer. I just wish for your sake you would open the Bible at Genesis and begin to read it, until you get to the book of Revelations. I am not saying all Protestants have it together or anyone for that matter, but the Reformation happened for a reason. Some people who read the Bible ( one, a former priest Luther) and realized that the doctrines didn't match Scripture and they "protested". I don't consider myself a Protestant per say, but I am still protesting. I am protesting how centuries of ignoring bit sections of Scripture have lead to false doctrines.
The apostles themselves warned about this. Just please do me a favor, before you condemn me for what I said, please read the Scriptures yourself and see if what I'm saying has merit.
Someone that we know was a nun. For years she had to read the Bible under her bed until finally she decided it was true and left the convent and became a born again beilever. She was NOT ALLOWED to read the Bible....Maybe this has changed in the last couple of decades, but for centuries it was like this. The Protestants that were killed, were killed for owning Bibles, no more no less. What do you suppose the RCC was afraid of? People may read and think for themselves. Why do you suppose the RCC is such a huge holder of real estate has incredible wealth and political power. Yeshua didn't build an earthly empire and He said to "follow Him".
I have a copy of an original indulgence sold by the Catholic Church "for the forgiveness of sin". I wouldn't have believed it if I didn't see it with my own eyes. Do you really think gold or silver can buy what Yeshua paid for in full with His precious blood...? I don't. The Catholic church made lots of money by selling these to poor unsuspecting people who didn't know that the Bible would forbid that. Just like Yeshua threw over the moneychangers tables in the Temple courts and chased them saying "My Father's house is a house of prayer and you have made it a den of thieves " I sincerely believe He would do the same thing with those who sold indulgences in the Catholic Church, had He been walking on the earth. I believe those false shepherds will be judged.
Having said all of this, our Father is sovereign over all things and I believe that He has permitted the Catholic church to survive, but He is calling those who are really His own out. It may take you some time, but if you think carefully about what I am saying and read the Scriptures, instead of being mad at me, you might thank me. My mother did before she died and I am so thankful that she knew with assurance that her sins were forgiven, paid for in full by the precious blood of the Savior.
When anyone would ask her if she was a Catholic, she would say very happily, "no I am born again!".
My pointing out the contradictions to her and holding things up to the light of Scripture was what made her see. I am not trying to criticize you for being a Catholic. I was one too...don't forget. I am just trying to shine the light of the Scriptures and see if what the RCC stands for will hold up.
If you put all the comments I wrote together and see all of the points I made, you will find that they are true. I did not invent anything that I said. It's not from my own imaginations. I haven't said anything mean or nasty about anyone on this forum, nor would I. Believe it or not, I do have the love of Yeshua in me for all of you and desire to see you have the same freedom that I received. I don't think it's because I am smarter or better than you. I think it's a work of God's grace and mercy that He revealed Himself to me in His Word and I do honestly wish the same for you.
May Abba bless you through His Son, the Word who became flesh, Yeshua the Messiah,
I've said before and will say again, if we make a golden calf and call it YHVH, is it YHVH? I think not. We cannot make a false image of God...He tells us in His Commandments.. Making a false image of someone is presenting them in a way they did not present themselves...This is what the false messiah will do. Many proclaim the name of Yeshua or Jesus, but to many who come saying, " didn't I do this or that in your name?" He will say "get away from Me, I never knew you". Scary words, that we all need to reflect on. We need to KNOW HIM. He revealed Himself through His Word. He is the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us. He spoke the world into existence ( contrary to those who teach evolution ) He was there at the foundation of the world. If you see Him, you have seen the Father. They are one.
It's a pity so much paper was wasted over 2,000 years attempting to understand what is in Torah. Everyone could have waited until you came on the scene with your explanations. You reference no one's understandings but your own. No Talmud with its analysis for you. No St. Augustine. No various translations. No historical context outside of what you see in the Bible. Why are schools wasting so much valuable space for religious studies departments when they can just call on you.
Or is it that each person can claim to be the final authority for everyone else and somehow, miracle of miracles, there will be no confusion.
I am not fully sold on the "oral Torah". I know Judaism considers it equally with the written Torah, but it was written hundreds and hundreds of years after Moses so it would be tough to prove that.. The Talmud was put together after the Book of Revelations...which says we shouldn't add to God's Word. Now if I don't read it as Scripture then it's okay. You and I are not coming from the same place on that one, but I think you already figured it out.
I'm not against religious studies at all. I do a lot of studying myself and learn lots from other people, but I never put what a person says over the Scriptures...That is a principle I won't violate. I don't care if it's a rabbi, the Catholic Church, a Protestant Pastor, a Messianic Jew. If someone says something and they can't prove it in Scripture....I reject it because I do believe the Scripture is God breathed. If it's Dorothy, you've probably studied Talmud, more than Torah....just guessing. You probably never read the Newer Covenant....but that's my guess..Always willing to be wrong.. You may or may not have read all the Prophets and Writings either. You will hear them in Synagogue and you probably pray out of the Siddur. Nothing wrong with that. Most of it is from the Psalms...I rather like it too.
If you notice, I've been pointing people to the Bible. In the circles I travel, that's considered a good thing, not a bad thing. I haven't been quoting from Augustine because he was a man and didn't write Scripture. I quoted from the source... Do you have a problem with that too?
By the way, understanding is not only by intellect. It's by revelation. The Apostle Paul, a Pharisee of Pharisees trained by Gamiel was killing followers of Yeshua until he was struck on the road to Damascus by the light. By the way, Paul didn't put any confidence in the flesh and I don't either. I am very open to other people's point of view. By the way, I have quoted from a lot of Scripture, but I don't necessary hold to the Talmudic view of Scripture. I will pray that you have a Damascus road experience...just in case it's Dorothy. Anyway, it doesn't matter. God knows who you are and He is capable of touching you....By the way, I have heard many rabbis comment upon reading the Newer Covenant.....that it's the best commentary on Torah, they've ever read. Maybe you should read it.
I don't have the monopoly on this conversation. If you want to jump in with some quotes from the Talmud or Augustine , by all means feel free. That sounds very,very Jewish! At least the person who talked about the Gregorian chants offered another point of view....although they didn't sign their post either.. at least they explained where they are coming from...
Many Jews and Muslims are coming to Yeshua. It's not by intellect. It's by revelation. He's touching them at this moment in history, along with Buddhists, Hindus and others. I've met hundreds of people if not more, whose lives have been changed by the power of His Spirit to bring life to those who are spiritually dead. You may not have had this experience yet, or met people that have, so there is no way intellectually I will ever convince you so I will just continue to bless you, whether it's Dorothy or someone else.
Shalom in Yeshua,
Only faith in Jesus is needed for salvation from sins. To add any more requirements to that would be salvation by works. Nothing you DO will save you except by believing in your heart that Jesus is Lord, that he died and rose according to the scriptures.
The process of changing one's life to conform with Jesus's example after you believe is called sanctification. The process of becoming holy. It doesn't happen overnight, in fact, this one we all struggle with till we die. Can we ever be holy enough?
Many people confuse the acts of salvation and sanctification, or think that to be saved you must first be holy. I don't believe that is what the scriptures teach us.
This is a good encapsulation the Protestant view. It is important to keep in mind that there are other readings of scripture.
There is an anecdotal way of illustrating the idea of "salvation through faith alone." One might say that as the Gestapo hauls away your neighbors and their small children to murder them in a gas chamber and you sit and watch while shouting from the rooftops "Jesus Saves, Hallelujah" along with your own wife and children (who play regularly with the children en route to their deaths)and sincerely believe that He saves, you and your own family will be assured a place in heaven along with other "believers".
I don't have any authority except what I have in Yeshua. Again, I'm quoting Him, not me:
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Matt 28:18-20
If I sound authoritarian to you, it's because you don't really know me. If I sound confident, it's not in myself. I know that I was a sinner that was called out by grace, and my faith is in Yeshua and His finished work at the cross, not in my flesh or anything, I myself can do to save me or anyone else. I also know that I cannot "convert" anyone. When the Holy Spirit comes, He will convict the world of sin, righteousness and judgement.....that's a Bible quote again.
To paraphrase Rav Shaul. I know that nothing good lives in me but my sinful nature, I have the desire to do good but cannot carry it out. Wretched man ( woman) that I am, who will set me free from this body of death? Thanks be to God, Yeshua the Messiah..
See if you knew me, you would know this is what I really believe. If you really read my comments instead of just judging me, you would see my heart is for the Scriptures, which I define as ( Torah, Prophets, Writings & Newer Covenant or Apostolic Scriptures). You don't know me, and you don't my heart. I haven't judged you or your heart...so why do you judge me. Is not God my judge. He knows what's in my heart and where I'm coming from.
If you can respond in an intellectual way to discuss your views on Talmud, Torah, Newer Covenant, the Prophets, etc...go ahead and say something...otherwise what's coming out is just a person insulting me for loving my Messiah and His Word...
I agree with you totally. There is salvation and sanctification. When the children of Israel came out of Egypt, God delivered them, then He took them into the wilderness and spoke His loving words of instruction which we call the Law, but Torah is so much more than just the Law. His Torah was a marriage contract, but we know that Israel committed spiritual adultery with the baals, asheroths etc. God in His infinite mercy, one more time sent the Passover Lamb to deliver Israel from the slavery of sin, the Lamb was Yeshua.. When we accept Him as our Messiah the Holy Spirit comes and dwells with us and leads us in truth i.e. God puts Torah on our hearts ( Jer 31:31-33). That is the Newer Covenant that God made with Israel. All are welcome to join into that covenant as it says in Ephesians.
Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called “Uncircumcision” by the so-called “Circumcision,” which is performed in the flesh by human hands— remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. Ephesians 2:11-13
The nations have been brought into the covenants that God gave to Israel, through Yeshua the Messiah. He didn't make a new entity. He wants them to be "grafted in" to the Olive tree that we call Israel. (Romans 11).
For the Catholic who thinks Newer Covenant believers don't believe in holiness, look at Yacov, Yeshua's brother's instructions after His death and resurrection....discussing the Gentile believers:
but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. “For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath.
These instructions are directly from the Torah. In fact this weeks Torah portion and lasts discuss these very things. You see the new believers, according to Yacov were supposed to learn Torah little by little as they went to the synagogue and heard Moses. These are the dietary and purity laws that Yacov was referring to. This was sanctification, which comes after salvation. It's not the means of salvation. Salvation comes by grace as Leanna accurately said. Sanctification is our daily walk with God.
That becomes clear when you read about the land divisions in the Millennial kingdom in Ezekiel 48. God does not have a real estate problem and their will be enough territory to go around for all who love Him and are called to His purpose. If people really understood His plan, we would not have a Mideast problem today. Thankfully, when Yeshua puts His feet on the Mt. of Olives and sets up His reign from Jerusalem all these disputes will be resolved.
Listen to the anonymous critic
whose never cracked open a Bible
to read it with humility.
Joyce has a comprehensive view
of the Scriptures and all you can
fire back with is vague pot shots
which miss the mark.
If my Rabbi, or my "priest" told me
that I don't need to read the Bible for
myself and that it's much too deep
for mortal men and women, he'd
soon be my former rabbi or priest.
The Bible was written for humble
people to easily understand. It's
not like your talmud with all sorts
of mystery and mystical ( magical )
intonements to bring a person
"good fortune", kind of like
the I Ching.
Jesus said to the Pharrassees:" Why
do you follow the traditions of men
( The Mishna ), and not the
commandments of God?" (The Torah)
Why every holiday except Passover
Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits
and The Feast of Weeks and
Trumpets and Atonement and
Tabernacles ? Why, when these
are the only HOLY days according to
YHVH, Sacred Tetragrammaton,
Triunity, Jehovah Raffa, Jehovah
Nissah, Jehovah Jira, Eternal One
of Jacob ? God hasn't changed.
God is Eternal and Holy. He is not
a man that he should change his
mind. The Bible is his book to
mankind. If you can read, READ IT.
Why read anything and everything
BUT the Bible?
A true believer who professes to know Jesus as Lord and Messiah will ALWAYS be among those who will come to the aid of believers and unbelievers alike, in good times and bad. We would never turn someone away or fail to provide food, clothing, shelter or if needed a hiding place for the persecuted in times of trouble. To do otherwise would be a denial of our faith. There were many, many unrecognized (by awards, movies and books) Christians and others who did all they could to help the persecuted during the Holocaust. One person with God’s
help has saved hundreds. Here are several publically recognized examples of what genuine Christian faith can accomplish.
Corrie ten Boom, and her family were arrested for hiding the Jews in their home. Corrie’s sister Bessie died at Ravensbrouck where they were taken following arrest. They were a part of a network of people who risked their lives to help and we won’t know on this earth how many lives were saved.
Simon Galley, a Catholic priest, helped Dr. Mordecai Padiel and his family plus many other Jews cross from France into Switzerland during the Nazi occupation.
The Anti-Defamation League regularly honors rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust. Some individuals
Helped as a matter of conscience, others because their faith would let them do no less. I wonder…would you do the same for me? -Rudi
“For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.“
Matthew 25: 35-40
“Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
For a mere mortal you seem to have an awful lot of insider information about the reading habits of others. Have you considered the possibility that people have read the Bible and come way from it with some interpretations that are different from your own?
Your indignation about anonymous posters appears to be nothing more than a pretext. It is discredited by the fact that there are numerous anonymous contributions here, but the only ones that offend you are the ones you disagree with, in particular, ones that show the Catholic Church in a positive light.
There are few things more frustrating to me than to witness an individual who has heard the word, but who does not grow.
Your impoverished command to "read the Bible only" is very sad. Over the years I have often recommended the work of philosophers, theologians and critics to people on their Christian walk. The writings of Edmund Burke, Augustine of Hippo, Jonathan Edwards, Karl Barth, and Soren Kierkegaard are particularly illuminating for contemporary Christians.
2Co 3:4 And such confidence have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Co 3:5 not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to account anything as from ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God;
2Co 3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Please people, stop killing each other with the letter.
I was talking about the last word on the "I like a lot of Michael Hoffman's writing--hé's a really smart guy" discussion, not on "life" or the eternal destination of anyone's soul.
I thought this was clear, but I probably should have been more specific. Apologies for the confusion!
"Just the ones we want to set the guidelines, OIC, EU and UN...Hegel could not have planned this better himself. We have the Clash of Civilizations, the Alliance of Civilzations and then we become one and do away with all these "extremists" i.e. anyone who has a strong conviction about their faith, even if that faith is from the Scriptures."
While we should share our faith in love, we should NOT back down. Let's make sure we do not include ad hominem attacks but be fearless to remain steadfast. The NWO seeks to break you down. Again, bravo! The spirit of ecumenism, tolerance and diversity seeks to create a false peace through our wishy washy faith. You are the resistance. Yeah. As a born again Christian, I will search the Bible as my source for God's truth. The Truths found there will put me at odds with many, so be it. The NWO wants me, in the spirit of tolerance, to pretend these Truths do not exist. If I find them in the Scriptures, I am pressured to "reinterpret" them. See Canada's hate speech restrictions to see this in action. It was Dorothy who posted the story about Dobson's forced change in order to broadcast into Canada. Can't we see where, calling each other names and assuming hateful motives on the part of those with whom we disagree shows the degree to which we have already been influenced by the NWO. Shame on us if we back down from our beliefs in order to achieve a false "peace." Can't we as adults, kindly and rationally discuss doctrinal differences with impugning motives?
Just my 10 cents (since it's so long).
With love and much cheer in our "rebellion" against the NWO,
Thank you for your post about Corrie Ten Boom. As I read the response to my previous post, I left the computer to reflect for awhile, and that was what I was thinking about exactly.
I agree, and hopefully you did not find me in that category. Thanks for the reminder. It does seem that we are being stirred up and hopefully our responses can further bring glory to God rather than condemnation upon ourselves.
I realize I have hit a nerve. Yes, my view is a common protestant view of the scriptures. Which makes sense as I am protestant. I am just fully assured that what God has promised, He is also able to perform.
I am saddened that you would think I would be flippantly shouting "He Saves" as others are brought to their demise. I know not the condition of their heart, and I would with every fiber help, take action and pray. I don't forget that the salvation is not for this life but to the next. But for myself, if I was being hauled off, and my husband and my children, I will guarantee we will be Praising the Lord we are counted worthy to suffer for His name.
Blessings to you,
I must disagree with you. Listen to Rav Shaul with all his education, which undoubtedly included understanding the Greek philosophy of his day said:
And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory;
Paul who had much education but he understood what was most important.
I am very surprised at the way that you attacked someone on the forum for reading the Bible. First of all it would be better to be a peacemaker. Don you think? You elevated men's writings, although some of them may be very good.....above the Bible.
Maybe you have not tasted the Living Water, but if you do, you will never go thirsty. There is no commentary in the world that can fill me, as the Word itself does. It is life. I will have to side with Paul on this one...It's sad to me as a Pastor that you don't stand for God's Word in an unambiguous way.
Constance has been reluctant to take a stand for the Bible too, even though she quotes from it, but I understand. She is a lawyer, not a Pastor.
Please read what the Psalmist has to say. He finds his wisdom in the Word of God. I'm sure you know it well...
How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked,
Nor stand in the path of sinners,
Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!
But his delight is in the Torah of the LORD,
And in His Torah he meditates day and night.
He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water,
Which yields its fruit in its season
And its leaf does not wither;
And in whatever he does, he prospers.
The wicked are not so,
But they are like chaff which the wind drives away.
Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
Nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
For the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
But the way of the wicked will perish.
There might be some wonderful commentators on the Bible and some not-so wonderful commentators on the Bible. The Bible calls our wisdom, apart from God, vain human wisdom. I will take God's wisdom any day over that of men.
Blessings to you in Yeshua,
Thanks for your comments. I think what you said is really true and we should keep that in mind.
Blessings to you in Yeshua.
My comment was not for any individual, but in general.
Deannie, when your brother or sister is in error, it is right to show them the error according to Scripture. This blog is for showing the error of New Age teaching. But it must be done in love. The problems with comments is that we can read the wrong info into it. There is a lot of posters who states that if they were known in person, the readers would understand. The written word can sometimes be misinterpreted and can lead to arguments.
I am just as anti New Age as you are. I hate what is happening to the Body of Christ A.K.A the Church. But by misunderstanding God fearing posters on my blog, I have made enemies. And my intentions were good. So before starting to fire with the Word, lets just all pray for insight and wisdom. Then we will edify and not kill with the Word.
Thanks for your references to those who rescued Jews during the Holocaust and the links. I posted on this topic a couple of weeks ago but no one picked up on it.
The number of people who took action in this way was numerically speaking extremely small. From the little I've read on the topic, they could probably all have fit into a corner at Willow Creek Church. Most ordinary people watched it happen, went about their daily lives, and did not intervene.
What conclusions can we draw from this about who actually knew Jesus as Lord and Messiah in Europe during the early 1940's, and who knows Him now?
Absolutely. I agree, we as Christians, should correct error when we see it. However, we above all, should not impugn motives. We should also expect that people will disagree with us, and vigorously. This is especially so because they do not perceive it to be error. They, in turn, will correct us. I think that is healthy discussion. "My chief objection to a quarrel," G.K. Chesterton wrote, "is that it ends a good argument." We can not force a change in beliefs. We can provide Scriptural references for our beliefs and others can counter. We can state why we hold to sola scriptura. This can all be done with civility and love. What I was trying, ineptly, to show was that the NWO and NAM both attempt to pull ALL dogmatic people from their pillars of faith. In this sense, I think Dorothy and Paul actually have a lot in commmon. Neither one is ready to compromise their beliefs to accomodate another. In the NWO and in the NAM this uncompromising, dogmatic position is the new evil. It seems to me that neither, Dorothy or Paul, is ready for the "shift" and both are equally distateful to those in NAM. (As I hope all of us are.) I cringe when I hear people try to guilt others into compromise or silence by appealing to tolerance. I would rather civility in disagreement. My Lord didn't compromise and neither did his adversaries. If the NAM and NWO continue unabated, we may be in a similar situation. (It seems the NAM and NWO want to force tolerance at the point of a gun. How many posts regarding the AoC and Council on World Religions do we need to read to be convinced of this?) We can see what Jesus thinks of compromise in the Revelation church of Laodicea - He wants to vomit them out. If not worth fighting for, of what value are our beliefs? I would rather see us unfraid of discussing doctrinal differences but drop personal attacks and impugning motives. BTW, I have not seen you do this. I think Rose's last post was brilliant. She recommended a book to Joyce without a snide comment. It seems this is the type of give and take that honors God.
Sorry for the long posts. I hope my previous post didn't sound too flippant. I take God's Word and my Christian walk seriously. But I am weary of "tolerance."
For what it's worth.
I doubt that Joyce, Mac, Doug, Paul, Oldman, or anyone else has said they don’t read anything but The Bible. Rather the most important book ever written is their authority and their emphasis. Digressing to the philosophers or other peripheral reading is a red-herring.
The NA movement is NA because it is different than BC and AD, but as we all understand, its genesis can be found in: “Hath God said?” So, to get at an ugly root we need to dig it up, expose it for what it is: “whatsoever makes manifest is light. . .wherefore he says: awake thou that sleeps and arise from the dead and Christ shall give thee light. . . Jesus is the LIGHT of the world. . .sanctify them by THY Word, THY Word is truth. . .” Emphasis is mine. My philosophy is beauty; “behold the beauty of the LORD.” The highest beauty is love, and Christ is the greatest expression of love. What God the Father, who is love, sees in His Son is beautiful, is robed in Holy royalty, and is safe; outside of Christ Jesus is nothing safe. “The worst Christian is better in the eyes of God than the best non Christian.” That’s a tough quote for those who are working their way to heaven, maybe taking it by violence.
We are commanded to earnestly contend for the faith. I thank Rudi, Deannie, and all who are doing that in the flood of contention which has manifested another gospel and who “love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.”
And in the stars the glory of his eyes,
His body gleams amid eternal snows,
His tears fall from the skies.
I see his face in every flower;
The thunder and the singing of the birds
Are but his voice—and carven by his power
Rocks are his written words.
All pathways by his feet are worn,
His strong heart stirs the ever-beating sea,
His crown of thorns is twined with every thorn,
His cross is every tree.
Hmmm, yes, well... why bother to read or spend time thinking about books other than the Bible or pay attention to art for that matter? After all, wasting your time in such a way is just such a digression from and detraction from the Biblical Truth.
To readers who are moved by the above--try "Good Friday Riding Westward" by John Donne--it is like nothing else.
You don't seem to understand. Perhaps if many strong willed believers in Islam started posting here, refusing to stop posting their beliefs, challenging others to arguments, forcing others to continuously read their version of how religion must be practiced and arguing that only their belief system can fight the New Age movement, you might begin to see the blog as someone who is not a Christian sees it. You might see how the comments section has deteriorated from a united fight against the dangers of the New Age movement to one having a focus on European politics and Christianity, to the almost complete exclusion of anything else connected to the New Age movement. It's as if Germans only talked about Christianity and Russian politics as the Nazi movement was growing.
Is the practice of Christianity the only way to fight the New Age movement? The New Age movement has infiltrated all religious groups. The difficulty is in isolating those aspects of the movement that are now found in religious groups that are similar to those that can be found under the label New Age "spirituality."
Fighting each other to the point of destruction is as much of a danger as the blending of religions would be. In both cases monotheistic core belief systems would be marginalized or destroyed. Do not fool yourself; Judaism and Christianity are both to be eliminated. Christians who would like to see Judaism eliminated are just helping the New Age movement. Protestants who would like to see Catholicism eliminated are just helping the New Age movement do what they see is their job.
Is every school board meeting, every church service, every kindergarten class, every adult education program, every television show supposed to be place for a showdown between monotheistic groups?
Joyce included, Christians know very little about Judaism and Jews know very little about Christianity. All of the arguments here seem to be based on limited superficial knowledge. That's why for the first 18 years or so I refused to get involved in Protestant squabbles or judged what each group and its leaders said they knew about the movement. I refused to publicly comment on Christianity in spite of all of the negative things I had learned. Even now I try to avoid the discussion though I will comment on obvious New Age infiltration by the New Age leadership.
Christians continously attempt to put Jews on the defensive where religion is concerned. While it doesn't happen publicly, privately it seems continuous. I don't think Jews ever attempt to put Christians on the religious defensive or push their religious beliefs on them. I have never seen it happen.
To go back to the beginning point Deannie, do you think I should aggressively push Judaism here. I don't mean debate. I mean sell like one sells a used car. Do I need to do this to show I am not a follower of the New Age movement? Do I need to do this to show my beliefs are firm and not subject to change? Do I need to point out where Christianity is not an acceptable religion for me to follow? Do I need to continuously say I love Christians but that I believe Christianity has many weaknesses in the larger scheme of things? Do I need to say I appreciate Christians seeing value in Jewish documents, but that Judaism does not need or appreciate evaluation by Christians?
Or can I just post information about the dangers of the New Age movement!
What have I been doing since 1981? Making chop suey?
Judge not, lest ye be judged and please let's all remember that it was the sin of self-righteousness that was responsible for crucify ing our Saviour Jesus Christ!
You have defended Rose again, who actually seems quite capable of defending herself with lots of stinging remarks she sends out. I forgive her, but her remarks actually seem kind of silly to me to be honest. Affirming her okay, but not defending Scripture is another story.
I am deeply concerned unwillingness to name the Bible as the sole authority for our faith. I just would like to be sure where you stand on this. No offense, but you are dealing in areas of eschatology, talking about the anti-messiah who you have hinted is Javier Solana. Whether I agree with that or not isn't relevant but, I'd like to know what caused you to come to these conclusions. I'm assuming it's the Bible, but would like to verify that.
The blog centers around news that relates to the study of "last things" but what is our reference point, no? If Scripture is not the sole reference point for the NA and I do mean Genesis to Revelations, then I am wondering HOW we will know to recognize the counterfeit when he appears. How did you decide that Javier Solana meets the description of antimessiah?
I have some very specific criteria that I use when trying to understand eschatology , which is not always so easy to understand, from books like Daniel,Matthew, Revelations,Corinthians, Thessalonians, Deutoronomy, Exodus, Genesis, Joel, Amos, Ezekiel, Zachariah, just to name a few. i.e books of both the Tanach and the Newer Covenant. Ecclesiology factors in too. Exodus parallels much of Revelations, in fact rabbis call it a "stolen book". Pharaoh is type of antimessiah. Do you see how much we could learn from Scripture by looking at what Pharoah did? What a relief to know that God will help us "cross over" bring us through the wilderness into the Promised Land or this time, His everlasting kingdom. What a blessing to know He will restore Gan Eden, the "place of delight" where we dwell with Him face to face.
There are some very specific things that the anti-messiah will do. I know people who believe that Islam will produce the anti-messiah and they will quote a bunch of verses to explain why based on current events and the Bible.
My opinion has always been that we can't know for sure who he is until the sacrificial system is reestablished and he halts it, according to both the prophet Daniel in Chap 9 and Yeshua in Matthew 24 Then and only then can we really be sure. There are people that say those prophecies have already been fulfilled when Rome destroyed the temple in 70 a.d. There are those who say when Israel signs a peace agreement they will be fulfilled. There are those that say it was Oslo, which clearly can't be.
There are some who think the 10 kings are EU, others think it's 10 regions of the world, still others who think its' 10 kings from the Arab world.
Some think the antimessiah is Prince Charles, some Tony Blair, others believe it will be an "Assyrian" based on a passage of the Bible, others like you Javier Solana. There is the antimessiah and the false prophet. Some think the false prophet will be the Pope, in fact that was a common interpretation of Scripture for centuries. There are still some who think he has a big role to play.
I believe there are other prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled like the joining of the two sticks, outlined in Eze 37:15-28. There are also prohecies that talk about the role of Jews in the last days like Zech 8:23, which has a very spefic meaning. It's about the nations taking hold of the tzizit of a Jew, symbolizing obedience to the commandments. There are still other prophets who say God is going to shake Israel out of the nations like Amos.
My point is, no matter what we think is going to happen, we base our opinions on the Scriptures, first and foremost. Shimon Kefa ( Peter) said that there would be lots of deception in the Last Days and we should grow in truth and knowledge of Him, so that we are not deceived. Listen to what he says:
But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Pe 1:20-2:1.
We are warned about false prophets, and false teachers and we are also told that prophecy is NOT a matter of personal interpretation. How can we recognize a fake dollar bill? Only by knowing what the REAL ONE looks like in great detail.
I would like to be able to put your comments into context. There are people on the blog, that don't believe in Yeshua at all or those who follow the Pope. That's fine, but I take this into account so if and when and if I read their comments, I know where they're coming from.
I've been open about what I believe, even if others disagree, which is their right. As I said, maybe you've done this somewhere before, and if so, please forgive me for asking. I'm not asking for a long doctrinal statement, but just a few words about what you base your beliefs on..
I firmly believe that if people want to learn about who is the antimessiah and what deception will look like in the last days, they need to read it from the Bible. Then and only then will they know what God says will happen, not someone else's opinion about it. When we know the Scriptures, we can go to the news and see how current events might fit into the Biblical scenario, not the reverse.
Again, just want to emphasize there is no offense intended and I am not saying that you haven't looked at Scripture, but I think that it would be important to clarify this so that people understand why you believe what you do.
While I do read the news and stay informed about major events of our day, if I didn't read the Scriptures I would be without hope. In Daniel 2, it says that the Last Kingdom, Yeshua's kingdom will crush the kingdom of iron and clay ( the antimessiah's kingdom). That is the most important thing I can know. If I don't know the end of the story, then I would be afraid. Praise be to God, who gave us the hope of His Word so that we can know with certainty that in Him, and in Yeshua our future is secure.
Thanks sincerely and blessings,
I would agree the NAM would like to have the various religions destroy one another. I don't see how my encouraging civil and loving debate, devoid of ad hominem attacks and impugning motives, qualifies for trying to destroy another religion. Perhaps if I were strapping on suicide belts or encouraging others to do so you would have a valid point. To equate civil, reasoned debate with attempts to destroy another's belief is one method the PC crowd uses to silence opponents. I'm quite happy to hear from Muslims, Jews and atheists. Doesn't bother me bit. I don't see how their input on Javier Solana being anti Christ is relevant though. I would be happy to hear their thoughts on how he may be a king pin in the NAM though. I would also be happy to hear their thoughts on how to fight the NAM, just not on whether JS qualifies as anti Christ. (Which is what attracted me to this blog in the first place. Perhaps I misread the intent and genesis of this blog.)
I assume adults can debate and amicably disagree. Perhaps I assume too much.
I just saw your comment before mine was posted. I haven't been reading you since 1981 sorry, I'm new to your writings. With all the defense of Catholicism, it clouded the issue for me. My original thought was your a Bible believer so if my original thoughts were right, great I can't reconcile the RCC with Scripture, so that's where I get a little stuck reading your comments. There might be some others here that feel the way I do too?
I am sorry that you feel persecuted on the blog. I personally as a Jew who lost my identity for most of my adult life would never want to persecute you. I love my people, the Jewish people and I don't know you, but my heart goes out if you feel that way. I have made it a point to understand Jews and why they were persecuted and what Judaism is all about. I'm not expert and I learn every day. I have a dear, dear friend raised in Orthodox Judaism in Israel and we discuss many things. If anything, it pains me what has been done to MY people for centuries. I know God told us He would disperse us for our disobedience but I believe today He is gathering us and bringing them back to the Land. This is a MIRACLE and proves He is still the God of Israel! I don't believe the church will be raptured like some, and then Jacob's trouble will come, so my interest in seeing the Jews back in the Land is not self serving...I just happen to believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob does not change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He will accomplish what He said He will. Israel is His chosen, His treasured possession and He has a plan for Israel ( the physical descendants of Jacob) , so I personally am not against you at all. My view of Mashiach is that Yeshua came once as Mashiach ben Joseph and the second time He'll come as Mashiach ben David. My beliefs about the two sticks of Judah and Ephraim coming together is actually shared by many Orthodox Jews. My belief is the Torah is still valid and God's appointments are still His appointments. He hasn't cancelled them. I follow the Biblical dietary laws, not always the rabbinic ones, like using separate sets of dishes, and not having a cheeseburger. I separate between Torah and some of the fences built around it after the Babylonian exile, but I understand why they were put there, to protect the Jews from disobeying God again. I do not think Yeshua came to abolish Torah, or Paul for that matter. Maybe I'll change my mind on cheeseburgers. I've had to change my mind on things like Christmas, Easter, etc. I am always listening to Abba to see what He wants to show me. I am not set in my ways. We can always learn. Maybe I can learn some things from you? I learn from my Orthodox Jewish friend even though we often have differences. She considers our family dear friends to her, more so than some of her Jewish friends from her synagogue.
It is helpful for others to know how you see these things and I don't mean that in an insulting way. The only way to undo 2000 years of antisemitism is for people to understand the Jewish way of looking at things, and even if they don't agree...that's okay.
I believe the roots of what Christians believe needs to be reexamined through Hebraic lens. The Dead Sea Scrolls and much scholarly work has helped us to do this in the last 60 years. Many of the Jews, raised in Judaism, who come to faith in Yeshua have helped too. I think this is not accidental. Since the Yom Kippur war, many, many Jews have put their faith in Yeshua.. Probably more than any other time since the book of Acts.
The only reason I care at all about the New Age Movement is because I'm concerned how people will be turned away from the true and only God, the God of Israel, so my only interest in being on a forum like this or reading Constance's comments is to see what's going on in the world today that looks like Bible prophecy. Without the Bible, Tanach and for me the Newer Covenant, I would have absolutely no idea if Constance is on to something or not....so it's evident that our belief systems will come into play here. That doesn't give us the right to insult one another or put one another down. That should be understood by all. Sometimes in expressing our strong opinions it might seem like we are insulting others, but I can speak for myself in saying I don't want to insult you.
My heart does go out to you as the only Judiasm practicing Jew on the forum. Hannah Newman wrote an excellent online book as to how she sees the New Age from an Orthodox perspective. It's called the Rainbow Swastika and she quotes from Constance. I could resonate with much of what she said, and yet still not agree with her totally. Jews are misunderstood, no doubt. I think the Messianics have tried to bring some understanding to the Christian community but sometimes among themselves they don't agree, but we are dealing with 2000 years of misunderstandings and even the Jews don't agree among themselves and Christians among themselves,etc....When Mashiach comes we will all be on the same page...probably not until!
Shalom & blessings to you,
Well stated and thank you for the wake up call. When I referred to religious bigotry yesterday, I was referring not only to Anticatholicism but also to Antisemitism, both of which are two underlying assumptions for many who participate here.
Certain individuals have outed themselves explicitly over the last few months in regard to both, under the pretext of claiming to possess unshakeable "Biblical" faith.
Note to everyone: Catholics and Jews are also "people of the book." Dorothy and I are as "biblical" as you are --- we just give a different interpretation to the scriptures--and I use more scriptures than Dorothy.
Usually I try to ignore it or skirt around the issue but some days I am less successful than others. Joyce's posts lately are particularly repugnant in their bigotry. In a certain sense I feel sorry for these people, because it is apparently the only means of talking abstract concepts (in contrast to the mundane, as in "What would you like for dinner") that these people seem to know. Does Setterman or Paul or Joyce even know how to have an intelligent normal converstaion about a topic where they are not continually referencing their Biblical interpretations as supreme?
I suspect they have these weird, me-centric (as in "look at me, I have the right beliefs!") converstions that they post here so much in their own houses, or with their church members, that they have forgotten how to have a normal human conversation where their own "personal faith in Jesus Christ" is not the centre of attention.
I believe the dialogue on this blog would be far more ugly if you, Dorothy, were not a personal friend of Constance (For example, see Old Man's stomach-churning posts above about the merits of Michael Hoffman--hard to believe, isn't it, that he has the nerve to come and post that here publicly, without embarassment or shame?). Yet I am the only person here who dared take him to task. (Apparently, you don't take Old Man to task because he has the right "Biblical belief system.")
This place is like a clique where everything's okay--anything you believe, anything you say, any manner of ill-mannered behavior, is overlooked--so long as the one engaging in the behavior is "saved" and has a "Biblical" world view. In other words, so long as you hold the right belief system (aka Evangelical Christianity) behavior of the most unbiblical kind will be continously tolerated and overlooked.
Deannie comparing you to Paul is, in my view, Deannie's attempt to not alienate (assauge, in other words) Paul because she feels a theological affinity with him because of his belief system. Deannie knows you are nothing like Paul in either your methodology or your beliefs, but for Deannie, to face the reality of Paul's ugly behavior and confront him about it would be to force her to question who someone who is also "born again" could behave in such an ugly way. (His belief system is "Biblical" and correct, I have heard his witness--why isn't his behavior "Biblical"? He's one of us) Deannie--this is my interpretation of your behavior, I am not claiming to read your mind, conscious or otherwise--feel free to speculate about my own motives as well.
Some of the nicer and better mannered people here share the Evangelical belief system of the rude people, but they are afraid to speak up in disapproval. It's like a highly dysfunctional family who make excuses for the bad behavior of others because they are family.
I would love for people like Leana or Deannie for example to take a strong stand againsst the religious bigotry that permeates this blog by confronting people when the issue arises, but I don't think it will happen unfortunately. Like yourself, I don't come here to talk about my religion. On a weekly basis, however, I see such vicious attacks on it that I feel compelled to try to redress the problem with the individuals at hand. I also am trying to set a role model for Protestants here who may also be uncomfortable with what they are hearing but be afraid to knock it on its head so to speak.
I can only imagine what this blog would look like vis a vis Jews if Dorothy were, like me, someone who surfed in off the street instead of a colleague of Constance. I have a pretty good idea though, based on things that have been said, and it is not pretty.
I don't think you are going to get much of a debate about the New Age movement from anyone in the Muslim community. I've looked. There is a publication titled New Age. There are parallels between the Sufi community and NA. A number of years ago I went and talked with the librarian at a major mosque in the Chicago area, and he and his wife confirmed that the topic hasn't been explored. The Muslim community is extremely large, and perhaps there is someone warning about NA but in a language I don't understand.
If the Muslim community is to become controlled by NA leadership, I think it will be through the political end which controls trade and finances. I believe that there are large numbers of Muslims who practice the religion for practical reasons, much like members of any other religious community. It's done to share solidarity with other members of the family and community. When those around them become lax and liberal, they will go that route also. If their leadership leads them into NA practices, just as Christian leaders have done to their flocks, they aren't going to take a stand against the changes. If anyone can add to this, I would appreciate hearing it.
Deannie, I don't know who you think is discussing religion in a civil manner. That takes two people. What we have in the comments section are affirmations between people who think alike and lectures to those like Rose, RL and myself who say NO to the offer of "civil discussions." What can be said of people who refuse to take NO for an answer!
You are an extremely intelligent, articulate person who not only sees through the "word soup" but whose bluntness is delightfully softened at the edges, making readers more charmed than angry with your attacks on opponents. I look forward to seeing you pick apart what passes for "intellectual" promotion of New Age planning. You could easily be a columnist writing to expose NA. I don't think there is such a writer about the NA movement at this time.
Go to it girl!!!
Maybe you didn't read my comment about Jews. I'll repost it so you can refrain from misquoting me:
" I love my people, the Jewish people and I don't know you, but my heart goes out if you feel that way. " Hardly sounds like an antisemitic comment to me.....
I don't hate Catholics either. I don't love or hate people based on their beliefs. I just don't agree with all of them...Sorry about that.
As for Constance "nipping me in the bud" that's quite an expression. You face a little opposition on your beliefs and this is how you react. Well what is the difference between that approach and Nazi Germany where they "nipped people in the bud" who didn't agree with them?
You obviously can't tolerate the fact that someone has a faith that they can back up with Scriptures..Instead of taking the time to search the Scriptures you attack me and others without ceasing. As of yet, I have not attacked you because I have no interest.
As for "nipping me in the bud" all I can say is if that will give you a sense of power and control have a field day. My suggestion would be to look at the example of Yeshua, and see how often He quoted from the Scriptures. He even quoted the Scriptures to chase Satan. I also love what He said to Peter:
But turning around and seeing His disciples, He rebuked Peter and *said, “Get behind Me, Satan; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s.” Mark 8:33..
Peter didn't understand Yeshua's mission on earth was to die. Sometimes we just don't understand what's the most important thing to God...
We need to make sure we are keeping our eyes on what interests God, not man.. I will continue to do as my Father leads me to....
As for you, continue to attack those who quote from Scripture....and what can I say "nip us all in the bud" ...Get rid of those darn believers in the Bible!! What a nuisance they will be when the antimessiah establishes his kingdom...They'll really be in the way. Sounds like you are lining up with his agenda not Yeshua's..
Think about it,
Since it is evident there is no shortage of opinion here, perhaps some here might help me with this question.
Would anyone care to share if they think the Cubs will win the World Series this year???
Opps... the clock is killing me, I have to go to work...
Some of you know that I’m no fan of the Bushes, and this is not intended to defend them, however I thought you might like to see Expelled in action. Roger Ebert gives this M. Moore piece a three and one half star rating, almost a perfect score, but Expelled, not a mention. Hum, what did I predict? Too bad the "Berlin" wall is alive and well in the minds of "men." When the modern tower of Siloam falls upon us (Luke 13:4) the world will be inclined to blame, and yes to curse God.
I was talking to a Michael Moore fan the other day, and he offered me this: Bush ordered the destruction of the World Trade Center and we should have done nothing in Afghanistan or Iraq. Like the Boston Globe columnist, we should just surrender. Wow, all those who died for liberty, what would they say?
through the years:
-the "Founder of Existentialism"
Albert Camus, Carl Jung, Wilhelm
Reich, Gore Vidal, Hermann Hesse,
James Joyce, James Michener,
Martin Buber, C.S. Lewis, Immanuel
Kant, S. Freud, Joyce Cary, K.
Vonnegut, M. Garcia Marquez,
I. Velikovski, G. Grass, C. Baudelaire,
J. Ruskin, W. Durant, etc
I have never said or implied that
we should read nothing else but
the Bible. That didn't keep people
from misquoting me and implying
that I did.
There's a time and a place for
everything. I just don't see these
days as the time or place to get
filled up with the things of this
world, most of which are essentially
a-theistic, such as Kierkegaard et al.
If Pastor Ted's Unitarian Universalist
"Church" wants to give equal time
to them that's their business.
Vanity of vanities.
"I like a lot of Michael Hoffman's writing--hé's a really smart guy".
Obviously he is a smart guy, but the word “like” means to have an “affinity for”, or “affection towards”. If you had the kind of discernment you claim I lack, you would not have made such an erroneous assumption.
You put your own spin on what I wrote. I figured I’d give you the benefit of the doubt and ignore it, but then you go and bear false witness against me again by deliberately distorting my views in your 2:54 post...
“For example, see Old Man's stomach-churning posts above about the merits of Michael Hoffman--hard to believe, isn't it, that he has the nerve to come and post that here publicly, without embarrassment or shame?”
I think if you were to reread all of my posts on Hoffman you would see that I came to certain conclusions regarding the man that are not much different than those of the others who post here, including your own. I did say that I agreed with “half” of what Hoffman writes. I suspect I’d agree with about “half” of what the devil himself had to say.
Unlike you, I hesitate to condem people who are sharing their insights and beliefs while adding to this discussion in ways that are not comfortable for particular individuals.
I'm impressed that you visited a mosque to research NA in roads into Islam. Good on ya.
I know the evangelical discussions are wearisome to you. I think, however, they will continue. I say this because Constance uses a distinquely Christian framework on which to peg the news of the world. When she uses terms like the anti Christ, the Black of horse of the Apocolypse and the 7 year covenant between the anti Christ and Israel, it draws us Christians like flies. Unfortunately for you, most of us can not easily untangle our eschatology (study of end times) from our soteriology (study of salvation) and theology. They are so interwoven that discussions about the first inevitably lead to those of the second and third. I suspect, so long as Constance uses this framework and its unique terminology, you will subject to our "discussions." I do hope we can do this with love firstly and secondly with civility.
Just fyi, I don't think it's a great idea to go to mosques. Without going into all the details why, mosques are not neutral spiritually. I'm concerned with the recent trend of believers going to mosques and trying to "understand Islam". Obviously not referring to Dorothy in this case, I'm talking about believers in Yeshua.
It's alarming to me to see this trend, which is happening under the guise of "trying to reach Muslims" Christians are allowing Imams to speak in their congregations, going into mosques, etc. Women go in an put on a veil, which means they're submitting to Islam. Some take their shoes off.
I'm just telling you and I can tell you more in a private email if you like. We know a lot of people who have come out of the darkness of Islam and they wouldn't recommend this either. I guess you could make an analogy to going into a Masonic lodge or the Mormon temple. Like Scripture says, "what place has light with darkness".
If you look at Abraham's Path on Harvard's website they are trying to get people to do this in the name of building "understanding". Abraham's Path has some New Agers associated with it if you follow the links. This is an AoC initiative. If you remember, Harvard was funded by the famous, rich Saudi Prince, who also funds Georgetown's Islamic study program. When you connect some of the dots it gets very interesting. Here's the link for Abraham's Path:
one of the financial contributors is:
You'll see the cast of NA characters is the usual Barbara Marx Hubbard, Micheal Beckwith, etc.
Here's the complete list of financial supporters:
I think in this sense the New Age will intrude in segments of Islam. True Muslims won't buy into because they will not "submit" ( Islam means submission) to the NA agenda. They are the "extremists" like the Amedinajads, Nasserellahs etc. They won't buy in because they want the whole world under Islam. That is the goal of Islam. Jihad is how they accomplish it, but many think jihad is only violence. That's not true. Inviting people into their mosques and "evangelizing" them with the dawha etc. Through economic means....Look at the price of oil..who's benefitting? Look at the weak $. Who has been investing in our banks, media, unversities...Muslims. Prince Al Waleed bin Talal is proud of having a "moderate Islam" but make no mistake, he is a Muslim and being a Muslim means spreading Islam. He owns a piece of Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp...voting shares. He owns over 5% of Citicorp. He has invested 20$million each in Harvard and Georgetown, both AoC universities..and now Cornell as well. His holdings are immense. He would love to have Christians and Jews come into mosques and learn about Islam, the "religion of peace".
As I said, there's much more I could tell you if you're interested.
Thanks for your other comments...well said.
Since you asked, I haven't taken any of my fellow evangelicals to task because I assume their motives to be like mine. When I said in my previous post that I am weary of "tolerance", I meant weary of tolerance that is false and imposed by political correctness. Yet genuine tolerance I love. Tolerance does not mean agreement with another's views. The dictionary defines it as: to allow the existence, presence, practice, or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permit. When the others say that apart from Jesus Christ, one can not know God the Father. That only shows to me they know their Bible. See the Gospel of John. It does not reveal to me anything about whether they are anti Jewish, anti Catholic, or anti anything (in other words: motive). I have always understood anti Semitism and anti Catholicism to be distate or outright hate for those people based simply upon their ethnicity (Jewish) or beliefs (Catholics). Stating that a person has no salvation apart from the God of the Bible and specifically through Jesus Christ does not qualify for anti anything. It might lead to interesting discussions of hermeneutics (the interpretation of something, in this case the Bible) but it doesn't follow that one hates another. I lived for years in Malaysia, a country with Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists. I knew their beliefs about me as a Christian, yet I never understood that to mean they hated or had a distaste for me because of them. (They might have had a distaste for me for other reasons.) To the contrary, I had many friends from each of these religions and we all cordially encouraged each other in our respective celebrations. All this to say, we can each have a different set of beliefs and not hate one another. The trouble is when we use those sets of beliefs as a pretext to harm another. Unfortunately, there is plenty of evidence that Christians have done just this throughout history. They have taken the idea that those who do not know God through Jesus have no salvation to mean they can cause harm to those outside God's salvation. Those Christians clearly did not study the whole counsel of God or they would have known better. Similarly, we see Muslims today who take from the Koran that all non Muslims are outside God's salvation and use that as a pretext to kill. Does that mean all Muslims hate all non Muslims? Certainly not. I had wonderful Muslims colleagues in Malaysia. Does it mean it is hateful for Muslims to say and believe that I am an "infidel?" No. I'm fine with their assessment because I am secure in my faith. Believing one's faith does not require one to hate another. However, a hatred of another, as exhibited by the Nazis, can be partnered with a set of beliefs to devasting consequences. So I don't criticize my fellow evangelicals for being well versed in Scripture. I would say that we could be more loving in our choice of words. But I don't recall seeing evidence that anyone here hates another. Just as I observe that you, Dorothy and RL have very strong opinions about the evangelicals' beliefs on this post. I have not understood that to mean that any of you hate or are anti evangelical, simply that you vigorously disagree with us.
This is a long post to say that I don't think disagreement about beliefs presupposes hate. This is the mistake in logic that underlies hate crime legislation. As adults, we should be able to disagree vigorously, yet without becoming defensive, accusatory and personal. I think we've seen enough of that by all sides on this blog. There is plenty of blame to go around.
I hope you will receive this in the spirit with which it is intended.
Although I lived amongst Muslims for years and had a number as colleagues and neighbors, I understand and agree with your assesment of the spiritual dangers. It is a point well taken.
Thank you for your response to my question. This is a big issue, and am important one, so I will keep this discussion focused specifically on Anticatholicism (and not bigotry in general).
You've raised an important point by zeroing in on the question of defining one's terms when speaking about "Anticatholicism"--something I should have done earlier, but did not (this wasn't intentional). Without a clear definition of the word, it's impossible to say whether a particular word or action falls within its scope.
If I read you correctly, you are defining Anticatholicism ("AC") as follows: Distate or outright hate for a person based simply upon their Catholic beliefs.
That's not my definition of AC at all. It is a somewhat oblique and amorphous term, I grant you. Generally speaking, though, I don't think most AC bigotry is rooted in hate at all--certainly not in hatred for particular individuals as persons (for instance, Joyce has repeatedly stated that she loves Catholics as individuals and has no problem with them, the problem is the Roman Catholic Church, etc. I hope I'm paraphrasing correctly--if in doubt, Joyce's posts are available in the archive--I have never doubted this statement to be true). Rather, I think it's rooted in a view of the Catholic Church as inferior to the various Protestant denominations. It rarely manifests itself in outright hostility to an individual person, because it is not about hatred of the person -- it is about a view held about the Roman Catholic Church.
I've done quick internet digging and found a link which pretty much sums up my own view of what AC is, and what it isn't. The author, Professor Cruzuribe, breaks AC into four main categories:
Anti-Catholic themes may be loosely categorized as follows:
1. attacking Catholicism as being un-Christian or a cult (in the pejorative and not the sociological sense);
2. ridiculing or misinterpreting Catholic doctrine or practice;
3. ascribing to the Catholic Church a sinister role in an anti-Christian or anti-American conspiracy;
4. distorting or taking out of context illegal or scandalous behavior (especially sexual misconduct) by Catholic clergy or laity.
Unfortunately, all four have cropped up, some repeatedly, since I've been reading this forum. 1,2, and 4 have been especially problematic.
It is very difficult to draw a line between what is genuine debate about doctrinal differences, and where the line is crossed into bigotry. "Tolerance" is a very tricky concept. Political correctness can have a very bad chilling effect which in effect shuts down any genuine good-faith debate.
I thought about cutting and pasting some quotations I've seen on this blog over the last few months about the Catholic Church (not about individual Catholics--about the RCC itself), and then asking you, "Do you really think this is appropriate, acceptable, and simply the result of someone being well versed in scripture?--are these people whom you are proud to call Evangelical Christians?" but I don't think it would really accomplish anything. I guess, at the core, I already know the answer. You've read the stuff, same as I have.
I wonder how you would react if I took some of these phrases and reversed them to be anti-Protestant statements instead of AC ones--would it touch you then? I may try that some time Deannie. Sometimes it's difficult to experience things from another's point of view--especially when the "other" is, in this instance, a minority of one (me) surrounded by a plethora of likeminded individuals (the numerous Evangelicals who contribute to this blog).
If a Catholic came onto this board with the kind of Anti-Protestant rhetoric of Joyce, Bob Mitchell, Paul, etc. (and such Catholics do exist, I'm sad to say--although they are numerically speaking quite rare) I wouldn't, even if I agreed with the underlying doctrinal arguments, impute good faith to them, or be able to let it go. I'd take that individual to task immediately, and vigorously. I would give it no quarter here at this particular board--I'd send them over to another blog to hash out their views with other likeminded folks at a sectarian board, and I wouldn't feel I was making doctrinal compromises by doing this.
Here's the link on the definition of AC I have been using:
2. I don't want to discuss theology, but blasphemies against Our Lady are particularly offensive to Catholics. You may not be in tune to how this sounds to a Catholic ear. Believe me, though, it's offensive in the extreme, and meant to rile the listener.
Sorry too for the length here, and thanking you sincerely for your response,
When you were in Malaysia it appears you didn't continously confront others about their need to convert to Christianity. Why, if this is what you truly believe?
You write: "As adults, we should be able to disagree vigorously, yet without becoming defensive, accusatory and personal." Do you feel it is required that all of us must be pressured to engage in religious discussion if we choose to post here on the New Age movement? When does NO mean NO!
There are a whole lot of stops on the continuum between total acceptance of another's views and hatred of those views and the person holding them. I may not agree with you on where to draw the line which finds acceptable on one side and unacceptable on the other.
It seems that there was an informal and unspoken agreement in Malaysia between you and others who lived there on how you were going to share the space in which you interacted. Perhaps you can elaborate on that.
I don't respect people who use word games. Catholicism and Judaism are not Sabbath only belief systems. Those beliefs lead to how we act toward others seven days a week. To pretend to like Jews and Catholics while saying one does not like Judaism and Catholicism is plain nonsense. Joyce is saying in effect, "I like you as long as you don't act like what I think a Catholic acts like " or "I like you as long as I see you ignoring the importance of Judaism in your life."
The bigger danger here is that those coming to this blog will marginalize any fighters against the New Age movement as religious cranks who use sloppy, dogmatic thinking to come to conclusions. Yes, there are times when tolerance of the views of some is a dangerous thing.
one is from TimesOnline about "New wi-fi devices could warn doctors of heart attacks". I recommend the article. I'd tag on the url, but this library computer for some reason doesn't let you copy and paste like that.
Another article is about the clerics getting annoyed with Ahmadinejad because now he says the Mahdi is helping direct Iran. They suggest he concentrate on more down-to-earth topics, like the 20% inflation rate over there. I don't think the imams were impressed that the Mahdi is helping to run things and so driving up the inflation rate.
I have no desire to make enemies with either one of you, so if you interpreted what I said in that light, please accept my apologies and lets leave it there.
I think this has become a big waste of time. I have nothing against either one of you. End of story.
I have strong opinions which I expressed on the blog...by the way, I'm not exactly what you call evangelical either. I consider myself a Jew who knows her Messiah, but I'm not even going to go there right now.
May Abba bless both of you & I hope we can practice some forgiveness here now... Hope this can be the end of the story. You won't change my ideas and I won't change yours...
Blessings to you both in Yeshua,
Thanks for the compliment on my analysis, as well as for your compliments earlier today.
I find it very hard to participate here, for the reasons I articulated in post to Deannie, and for the subtle issues you have pinpointed and teased out so well in your post earlier today.
I repeat, once again (sounding like a broken record at this point) this is not a sectarian forum. Nonetheless, it is not strictly speaking a public forum either--rather it is Constance's forum.
If Connie wants it be (or default to) a sectarian forum, I hope she will say so explicitly. If she wants Catholics like myself to engage in discussion here, I hope she will seriously take on board the issues I have raised, and make a statement about conduct and behavior, since I am getting no support whatsoever from the other Evangelicals on the board.
In Catholicism, with its incarnational view, this consensus I have described above would be viewed if seen through the eyes of faith as a "sign."
Thanking you again for your all the fine work you do here,
If you sincerely desire to see a change in this forun maybe as a sign of good faith you could start by trying to limit your posts to say, 3-4 per day, and to limit the word count to say, 250 words. This would show considereation for all readers here.
I'm not being smart with you here--I am dead serious.
This might go a long way to changing the tone of what has been happening here.
Kathleen Keating has been talking about this for years now.
I'm biting my tongue on Hoffman--I prefer to pack it in at this point.
I would however, like to ask you if you could at some point elaborate for all of us about your experiences living amongst New Agers (shamans, etc) after you yourself had a conversion experience. You referred to this in an earlier thread in a post to me.
I think this would be an interesting topic for all to hear--how you were treated, whether you had any internal struggled and if so, how you coped with them.
The problem isn't with my interpretation or Dorothy's interpretation--the problem is with your words.
You have attempted in the above post to use a subtle and often disarming psychological trick. It is a technique misused by many in order to distance one's self from the foreseeable effect of one's actions on others. The phrase most often used is, "I'm sorry you feel that way." This is no true apology at all -- it shows no remorse, and no desire to make amends. Rather, it takes the focus away from the speaker's action (where the focus belongs) and shifts the entire "problem" onto the hearer.
I've been wise to this trick for many many years now. It's very popular in NA circles.
I've been away from this blog for a few days . . . so am just now catching up with the latest.
Just want you all to know that I am in complete agreement and support regarding the most recent comments from all 3 of you.
Thank you for trying to keep this blog relatively sane . . . and free from "toxic" buildup.
Love you all,
Divide and conquer.
Friends, this is the last days tactic of the enemy. He wants us all to chew and devour one another.
Your enemy the devil roams around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.
Let us not be guilty of doing his work for him.
I could only skim over some of the posts and it seems our focus on revealing the signs of the times has been shifted to a religious debate.
Just remember the thief on the cross who was saved and never spent a day in church, but he believed with all his heart.
AND WE MUST ALSO REMEMBER, THERE WILL BE
IM POSTERS WHO WILL GET US ALL IN A TITHER AND DISTRACTED, STAY TO THE COURSE SET BEFORE YOU AND DO NOT, I REPEAT, DO NOT LET THEM IN.
Now what were we saying about the first European Neighborhood?
The Race for President of the United State of Europe: Blair Out
EU Invokes Bible and Koran
You and I are both lawyers -- I believe in freedom of speech -- which doesn't mean I necessarily concur with the content of the speech -- There are points where I agree and disagree with Joyce and the others -- I will beg upon all the rules expected of lawyers (and too often violated there as well)
Sarkozy made a big impression on the Queen as did his wife during his official visit and they/elite no doubt are working together more so than in the past.
Could be Blair is needed else where perhaps spending more time on the NWO and the Peace Agreement.
Blair had some very lucrative job offers but he chose his present course instead.
Have you seen the list of US citizens participating in Israel's 60th? Very impressive.
If you get a chance to email me about the matter (civility in speech), I'd apprecate it.
This one from the Brussels journal that you sent is interesting too:
interesting comments on the article underneath from European Christians...
We need to keep our eyes on these developments.
Brussels has lots of EU ministers who are Muslim and a big mosque right in front of the EU headquarters. It's in a park that was at one time dedicated to the mother of heaven. Belgium is probably one of the countries furthest along in giving Muslims political power. The Muslim schools are payed for by the taxpayers..
Food for thought!
Here's part II
Thanks for putting me in my place. I will certainly try to limit my conversation with you to discussing the lure of shamanism. First, we must define the term as it has been used in various ways throughout history.
According to one definition dated 1913: The Shaman, or wizard priest, deals with good as well as with evil spirits, especially the good spirits of ancestors.
And according to another more current definition, shamanism refers to
1. the animistic religion of northern Asia, embracing a belief in powerful spirits that can be influenced only by shamans.
2. any similar religion
A shaman is defined as a person who acts as intermediary between the natural and supernatural worlds, using magic to cure illness, foretell the future, control spiritual forces, etc.
The lure of shamanism is based on the tendency of human beings to view the world around them as a hostile environment with danger present not only from their fellow human beings, but from the supernatural realm as well. Those who get caught up in it are looking for help to get them through the day, the winter, an illness, some type of calamity or just to make sense of a confusing world.
Some see it as an opportunity to gain personal power (authority over others) or as a pathway to a successful life. Many famous people have had their own shaman(s). Makes them feel special. The Grateful Dead rock band hung out with a native American shaman by the name of Rolling Thunder, that is until Jerry Garcia found a more powerful spiritual mentor in Peru.
Healings and so-called miracles are not uncommon in the world of shamanism. Crystals, feathers, incantations, special ceremonies to ward off evil…..your basic smoke and mirrors, these are the tools of their trade. But don’t laugh, such tools, invested with real faith, do have an effect. Think of holy water, statues that cry real tears, shadows of the virgin appearing on stone walls, rosary beads, and prayers to St. Germaine.
Rose have nearly succeeded in
driving Joyce out of here with
their incessant mealy-mouthed,
whiney, defense of indefensable
false doctrine, pedophile priests,
and idolotry, by using the time-
tested methods of misquotes,
misrepresentation, false accusation,
and underhanded outright lies.
All this while accusing Bible
believers of all the very things of
which they themselves are guilty.
This technique, if it can be called
a technique, is what's known as
Primitive Behavior. Like when a
little boy punches his younger
brother and then goes screaming
to mom saying "He hit me !"
Dorothy and Rose, you are the
bigots. No one has attacked you
but you claim, with a list that I'm
proud to be on, that these people
have been mean to you, which
they've taken great pains to explain
that they do not have animosity in
their heart towards you or any other
Catholics,only strong disagreement
with Roman Catholic DOCTRINE.
Could Joyce have spelled it out any
more? Every other paragraph of her
posts is a reminder that she does
NOT hate you or any Roman Catholic.
Dorothy, you are not a victim of
hate in this blog. Why do you keep
implying that you are?
Rose your point #4 of your 1:43 post
is disgusting. How does one "take out
of context" the rampant priest pedo-
philia ? How does one take out of
context the destroyed lives of children
and the ruined families and the sick
behavior that has resulted from this
culture within the RC clergy. Was it
just a few bad eggs ? No. Hundreds,
perhaps thousands of criminals of
the worst sort found a comfy home
in the very heart of the RC church.
It went on and on and on and the
reponse from the Pontiff is
transparent and completly lacking
to this day.
Wrong doctrine always leads to
Jacqui Smith says police forces should give persistent offenders 'a taste of their own medicine'.
Police should be harassing badly behaved youths by openly filming them and hounding them at home to make their lives as uncomfortable as possible, the home secretary will say today.
Believe what you want it's your eternity.
Let's get back to the business of watchmen on the wall and trying to see the signs of the times.
The objection, with a certain few who regularly post comments here, is against the relentlessly aggressive, condescending, self-righteous and judgmental behavior toward others day after day after day.
Jesus lived on this earth for 33 years. As an adult, He taught and ministered to all who would gather and listen, but it was His quiet, gentle example that He set that was even more powerful than His words.
Many Christians today also quietly lead others to faith by setting a beautiful example of how a person should live. This "quiet example" speaks volumes - more than an entire blog of "words" could ever convey.
According to John 10:16, Jesus promised that we "will all become one flock and one shepherd" some day. And, nearly 2,000 years ago, no one would ever dare to interpret the words of Jesus as "ecumenical" equals New Age "propaganda."
All we have to do is turn on the TV to gain a very clear and sober perspective. Yesterday, it was reported that the death toll in Myanmar (formerly Burma) has now reached 100,000 from that devastating cyclone.
Shouldn't we all be on our knees in prayer instead of "dissecting" each other's beliefs?
I admit you leave me baffled--how is it that the presence of one little Catholic Christian (me) and one little Jew (Dorothy) can cause you so much consternation?
Perhaps you could kindly do everyone here a favor and suggest to Mrs. Cumbey the names of an alternate token Catholic and alternate token Jew who have both been thoroughly vetted by you and deemed to meet your personal standards of approval?
Alternatively, you could just get a petition drive going asking her to ban Catholic Christians and Jews outright from this forum.
Be of good cheer--I am willing to discuss nearly anything with you, including Michael Hoffman--provided you genuinely wish to revisit that topic. (I am however going out of town tomorrow, so if you do post something for me, there will be a delay before I can respond).
I am confident when I state that it would be far more interesting--and edifying--not only to me, but also to many of our colleagues at this forum to hear in detail about your experiences as a convert interacting with Shamanistic culture than it is to watch you lob pebbles at the windows of Notre Dame.
parpcofriends say :If the world is to be a cashless,barbaric,tasered society.Could it then be that due to one world one currency and already we got credit cards that scane products of barcode selling system we already have.No need for cash in hand just credit and the mark of the beast then beeing a micro chip which is scanned,and if the poeple are going to kill the poeple who dont want to believe in one world new religion ,and thought ,then the poeple of the world will have become barbaric.There are already chips that are inserted into children to located them if they are lost,what else is in the microchip ,can it be used to scan for a value of credit that indivdual has ??
louis vuitton purses
ed hardy outlet
louis vuitton outlet stores
uggs for women
louis vuitton purses
uggs boots for women
ugg boots outlet
abercrombie and fitch
michael kors outlet
ray ban outlet
michael kors handbags
fake oakley sunglasses
tory burch outlet
the north face jackets
michael kors handbags
giuseppe zanotti outlet
cheap oakley sunglasses
christian louboutin outlet
michael kors handbags
abercrombie & fitch
jordan retro 11
christian louboutin shoes
oakley sunglasses wholesale
nike sb shoes
tory burch outlet
louis vuitton bags
nike outlet store
coach outlet online
coach factory outlet
christian louboutin shoes
louis vuitton outlet
kate spade outlet
louis vuitton handbags
ray ban outlet
louis vuitton bags
nike air max 90
polo ralph lauren outlet
jordans for sale
louis vuitton outlet
jordan 3 infrared
michael kors outlet
nike huarache shoes
ray ban sunglasses outlet
tory burch outlet
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]