Saturday, March 22, 2014

From my archives: An important struggle for truth -- you now deserve to know

To my readers:

I've been computer archiving materials in my library and found this letter I sent to Huntington House on May 1, 1991 about a book based on untruths that was sensationalizing those in the Christian community needing honest information.  I think the letter is basic to understanding many of the struggles I and others went through to get honest information on the New Age Movement out.  It also shows the disinformation and profiteering attempts by others.  Huntington House published Darrick Evenson's book NEW AGE MESSIAH IDENTIFIED under his pseudonym (false name) of "Troy Lawrence."  Ministries such as Southwest Radio Church, Jack Van Impe, and many others sold the book in ignorance of Darrick Evenson's agenda.  As this piece of correspondence tells much of the story, I thought I would publish the letter here in its entirety.    I note that Darrick Evenson has since tried telling his own version of the events.  Sandra Tanner wrote an important article about what transpired from her perspective.  Even CRI (Christian Research Institute) did some reporting on Evenson's fraud.

Evenson [aka Troy Lawrence] is still at it as shown by this link.

This is an important part of the history of the struggle to properly expose the agenda of the New Age Movement and its accompanying religious apostasy.  You deserve to know and for that reason, I am republishing it here.  The letterhead is an old business address, one that I occupied in 1991.

I look forward to your comments.


1533 North Woodward Avenue
Suite 140
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304
(313) 645-0790 ofc (313)645-0797 FAX
(313) 599-5434 Beeper
May 1,1991

Mr. Richard Trosclair
Mr. Mark Trosclair
Mrs. Teresa Trosclair
Huntington House Publishers, Inc.
FAX No. 318-237-7060

                                                                                               Re: Darrick Evenson Fiasco

Dear Richard, Mark, and Teresa:

After my conversation with Mark Trosclair this morning and in view of all that has transpired within the past week, I find it necessary to send this letter via FAX. My facsimile machine generates records of what was sent and confirms whether or not it was received, so in that sense, from a legal perspective, it is as good as a certified letter.

I find it personally disappointing after you have abundantly reaped the rewards of my own sacrificing work on the New Age Movement, that I would receive a sneering statement from Mark such as I did this morning telling me that my book is doing "almost nothing." If indeed that is the case, I demand my rights back immediately. I used great forbearance with you over the years on my royalty rights. I have had people from Bill Keith through Petti Wagner and the Bowens tell me that you were under-reporting sales of my book to me. Local bookstores ranging from Barnes & Nobles (a major chain), Waldenbooks, and Christian bookstores tell me they still -- after 8 years have trouble keeping the book in stock. The profits you have reaped on other books about the New Age Movement can clearly be traced to my ground breaking work where I took the persecution and you took the profits. I find it therefore most disappointing to receive sneers of this type. You had almost a free ride with me over the years. Up until I went back to my law practice full time, your publicist scheduled no interviews for me, even though my book by and large was paying her salary. In the meantime, your other authors were being busily scheduled. I was busy, nonetheless, with the media but it was absolutely no thanks to Huntington House. Many times I did interviews with those the publicist did schedule and they had absolutely no idea that my book had been out for several years and that it was the first book exposing the New Age Movement or that I had pioneered this book [topic] in the Christian community.

After I brought you incontrovertible evidence that Pat Robertson was celebrating the International Week of Forgiveness (a Lucis Trust Holiday); denying Scriptural inerrancy (also documented by Dr. Kurt Koch). and claiming that when "every eye shall behold him" it means on television (certainly does not match scripture, but it does match pages 575-576 of The Externalisation of the Hierarchy by Alice Bailey as well as The Armageddon Script by Peter LeMesurier), I learned from several sources that Teresa Trosclair said that despite this, she "worshipped the ground that Pat Robertson walked on."  Maybe that is why you have not been able to see through such obvious phonies as Darrick T. Evenson -- your plumb line is that of men claiming to have "words of knowledge" and slick television "ministries" rather than being the Bible.

You at Huntington House, of all people, know that we got the word out against the New Age Movement absolutely no thanks to Pat Robertson and the 700 Club, absolutely no thanks to Walter Martin, and no thanks to Bob Larson. You very well remember those days when I stood alone on this issue. That's all right, I never expected to win a popularity contest on this, but on the other hand I do expect some loyalty from my publisher -- especially one that I helped place on the map so to speak. That loyalty does not include sending Darrick Evenson a/k/a Troy (site of the Trojan Horse) Lawrence to make the statements over the air he has purported to make on behalf of Huntington House over at least the past week. It also does not include statements by Mark of the nature made to me today. You know the only reason you have a first crack at most anti-New Age manuscripts is because of my book. I figure God knows who did what, so I don't too much worry about this, but I still find your behavior puzzling and disappointing, and I am sure God will not reward it.

Now as regards Darrick T. Evenson, let's recap the events. I was contacted by Teresa Trosclair (or maybe she mentioned it to me in a conversation I initiated with her) last summer about a manuscript you were thinking of publishing. Teresa told me excitedly that this man had been converted out of the New Age and believing in Benjamin Creme's Maitreya the Christ and had since his conversion gone back into Tara Center, gained access to their computer "working long feverish hours" and learned the identity of the New Age "messiah."

My immediate counsel to Teresa Trosclair was one of caution. I told her that this type of tactic was often used by New Agers to have Christians scurrying after something that was just not so. Teresa seemed disappointed at my response but asked if I would be willing to talk with the "young man" and review his manuscript. I told her I would be willing to do both, but I was extremely skeptical about the entire business. The manuscript and a tape from Darrick Evenson were sent. I played the tape while I was working in my office. I was starting a prolonged jury trial so did not have time to read the manuscript which I intended to do after the jury trial.

I had no sooner finished the jury trial before Darrick Evenson called. He had called several times while the trial was in progress and had left phone numbers for various motels about the country and told me he was at libraries "doing research." He continually left messages pressing me for a decision on his manuscript. At the conclusion of the jury trial, which also ended in me contracting pneumonia, I was home one evening when I received a phone call from Darrick T. Evenson. Darrick said to me, "I know you can't endorse my manuscript and I know why. After much prayer, I have decided to withdraw the manuscript and abandon that project. Since I came to the Lord reading your book, I want to help you in anyway I can. Walter Martin unfairly attacked you and I have talked with Huntington House and they agree with me that it would be good to do a book about it."

I too am human with all the incumbent weaknesses. Walter Martin did unfairly attack me and his last book [The New Age Cult] prior to his death openly plagiarized parts of The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow and falsely claimed that he, Walter Martin, was the first to bring out the New Age connections of Jim Jones, when Walter Martin had publicly attacked me in the past for my documented statements that Jim Jones was an active part of the New Age Movement -- in fact, People's Temple was a recognized, official New Age Center. I thought the new project had splendid possibilities and I did encourage Darrick. He called again asking me to bundle up all my documentation on Walter Martin and send it to him. I don't know if it was the Lord or the Holy Spirit, or my own disorganization that saved me, but I never got around to sending it.

Darrick called me again -- I believe the last time was last September or October, 1990 and said that since it was my work that had brought him out of the New Age Movement (today I learned that he told Pat Matrisciana that it was reading Caryl's book that brought him out!) that he just wanted to help me in any way possible. I told him it was too bad he was not in Detroit as I had trouble getting up the steam to continue to do my newsletters. Darrick suggested he could work with me on this via Fax machines and computer modems. We vaguely agreed to talk more about it in the future. A few weeks later I received a faxed message from Darrick Evenson demanding my mailing list to get out an issue of something he called "World Crusade Journal." I faxed a return message to him reading "let me see your copy." He faxed back a message saying "I must have your mailing list today, otherwise there will be no World Crusade Journal." I faxed back a message saying "I send my mailing list to nobody, particularly without copy." I then immediately called Teresa Trosclair at your offices and told her I considered this bizarre behavior. She apologized and said she would contact him and tell him not to bother me any further.

Throughout all of this, I had no idea that you were publishing the book that Darrick told me he had abandoned! Further, although Teresa now insists I told her I saw nothing unscriptural about Darrick's book, that is not the case. We never got to a discussion about the scripturality or lack thereof of the manuscript because Darrick manipulated the situation by his prior contacting of me to say that he had dropped that project and was instead working with you on a book about how Walter Martin had unfairly attacked my work.

Thereafter I thought nothing more of Darrick Evenson until I was throwing out back issues of The Inner Circle, an anti-Mormon paper that has never been kind to me. As you know, I found a 1989 article entitled "The facts on Evenson". When I spotted the article and read it I was not even sure that it was the same one. I did a search on my computer and came up with my phone register log for 1990 with "Darrick Evenson." I immediately called Teresa Trosclair to share this with her and rejoice in the fact that the Lord had spared us this particular snare. I heard Teresa groan and I said, "Teresa, you didn't publish him, did you?" Teresa replied "15,000 copies." I said, "Teresa, I warned you." She said, "I know." She asked if I could fax the article to your new fax number.  After a few transmission problems, you did receive it. Teresa immediately called me and asked me to show the article to nobody until they had a chance to research this. I told her the article was in the public domain and since the young man was crediting his conversion to me, it was very important to maintaining the integrity and credibility of my work which has been under attack since day one in the Christian community, that I protect myself.

The next day Mark called and vigorously and almost affectionately defended "Troy" (Troy Lawrence) who had always been known to me as Darrick T. Evenson.  Mark said they had Darrick traveling and doing assignments and speaking engagements for them and defended his thesis on the grounds that Southwest Radio Church, J . R. Church, and numerous others had accepted the story. (Personally, I have tried to maintain the Bible as my plumbline, not someone else's uncritical acceptance. I demanded and received a conference call between "Troy" and Mark Trosclair (I would have vastly preferred Richard as he is less emotional) the next day.

As Mark is witness to on that conference call, "Troy" denied that he in THE GAINSAYERS claimed to have been a former part of Ex-Mormons for Jesus or indeed that he had ever been a Mormon. Mark accepted these lying denials at face value and indeed implied I was acting in an unchristian and uncharitable manner for believing otherwise. I attempted to cross examine Darrick/Troy about his knowledge of the Theosophical Society since he claimed to be a "Theosophical initiate." Darrick/Troy could not even answer basic questions about the history of the organization he claimed to know so intimately.  Again, he didn't have to submit to much scrutiny because Mark Trosclair stepped in to defend him by saying how surprised and disappointed he was at me for asking such petty questions. "I was born a Catholic and I don't know who the popes were," said Mark. "But you aren't out presenting yourself as an expert on the Catholic Church as Darrick is on the New Age Movement," was my retort.

You promised to Federal Express me forthwith Darrick's book which I had seen only cursorily in manuscript form and Darrick promised to federal express a copy of The Gainsayers.  Thereafter I left to speak in California. I was receiving questions on New Age Messiah: Identified in California and had still not seen the book. I called Teresa who apologized and one was Federal Expressed to me the next day along with William Still's book (for which I also have reservations, although not nearly as serious as those with Darrick cum Troy Lawrence).  I started reading the book and called Teresa immediately, from California, to say that I was incredulous that he was using G.R.S. Mead, Madam Blavatsky's original secretary, initial editor of Lucifer, and the funeral orator at Madame Blavatsky's funeral as an unbiased "historian."

I returned home and had to hit the floor running because of a busy trial docket. A week ago Tuesday, 4/23/91, I had a jury trial that did not go (adjourned to August 22).  I went home to catch some rest because of severe exhaustion and a sleepless night very typical of the nights that precede jury trials. I had no sooner closed my eyes than AI Kresta of WMUZ radio called. AI said he was going to be interviewing Troy Lawrence and saw that he had a flattering reference to me in his book. He wanted my opinion about the book. I told AI I was probably cutting off my nose to spite my face since Huntington House, my publisher was its publisher, and since the book praised me, but I had to be honest, "I had severe reservations about the book." I told AI that I had not completely decided as yet, but I told him about Darrick contacting me to say he had dropped the project thus intercepting my critical report to Huntington House, his telling me of a substitute project about how Walter Martin had unfairly attacked me, his offer to work on my newsletter, and his sudden demands for my mailing list. I told AI about the article in The Inner Circle and Darrick's explanations that these were actually "Trojan Horse" ministries to lead people to the gospel who would never otherwise listen. I suggested he might want to speak with Ed Decker as the article implied that it was Ed Decker who had the most personal contact with this man.

AI Krista told me that he knew Ed Decker, had interviewed him in the past on his show, and that he would do that. I asked Al if he needed a copy of The Inner Circle article. I said it would be a sacrifice as I needed the rest, but I would get up and go to my office and fax it to him prior to air time. AI said, "please!" I went to the office. AI called me just prior to air time, gave me Ed Decker's number and said Ed wanted to talk to me and said that Ed had told him some amazing things about Darrick Evenson.

I decided to turn on the program and pop a tape in my office "boom box." A friend called me from Seattle to discuss Malachi Martin's escapades (like Darrick, he has also Faxed Letter to Huntington House, Page 4 of 6 May 1, 1991 caused much mischief writing under pseudonyms -- his latest claim is that the Pope is to be the New World Leader in the New World Order!). I was intently listening to her when all at once I heard from the radio a voice -- Darrick -- saying "Constance Cumbey says that Moody Bible Institute is a Mormon front, I think you should be aware of that."  Then he said "Constance Cumbey says Gerald and Sandra Tanner are Mormon double agents, I think you should be aware of that." I said, "What!," hastily hung up from talking with my Seattle friend and tried feverishly to find WMUZ's number. I called them while they were simultaneously trying to reach me on the other line for a response to Darrick/Troy's allegations. I told them, as I told you, that I had not made up my mind about him until then, but now "my mind is made up -- the man is an unmitigated liar."

Sandra Tanner told me today that Darrick Evenson was in her Utah bookstore on April 22, 1991, the day before this interview. He told her that he was converting to the Bahai faith, but still considered himself to be a Mormon. He had evidently, according to Sandra Tanner, reconciled Bahai teachings with Joseph Smith's teachings about a "great prophet to come." Sandra told me he was making sexual allegations at women visitors to her store whom he had never met in the past. He accused them of being lesbians and "playing with themselves." She said she ordered him out of her store. Sandra says that Darrick specializes in trying to stir up trouble between ministries. While I understand from Ed Decker whom I spoke with after our conversation this morning that there has been friction between himself and the Tanners in the past, that nevertheless, they are in complete agreement on the subject of Darrick Evenson/Troy Lawrence.

Sandra told me that every anti-Mormon ministry "out there" has "horror stories" about Darrick Evenson. She further told me that she keeps a daily journal and that she had made detailed entries on April 22, 1991 about the Darrick Evenson incident. Ironically, his traveling expenses to go into that Christian business and cause havoc were probably paid by Huntington House! I ask you, where was the Trojan horse really positioned -- at Troy! It was Huntington House who published him under the pseudonym of "Troy" not the Mormon and Masonic publishing houses who published him under his actual name!

Ed Decker says he received threats of blackmail for false allegations by Darrick/Troy four weeks ago. This would have exactly coincided with the time I discovered the article that quoted Ed Decker. Blackmail is a felony and its threat is a felonious act!

Admitting that one has been wrong is never pleasant -- but is sometimes necessary. I understand that Darrick pressured you into making a quick publication of his book, after he contacted me to say he had dropped the project. I have sometimes been taken in by people I have had to recant on later -- Gary North as one prominent example. I have not hesitated to admit I made a mistake and for the sake of the integrity of your work, I urge you to do likewise.I further understand that you have made statements to various people that I urged you to publish Darrick/Troy's book. This is absolutely untrue. If you make any statement to that effect, I will put you on immediate notice that I repudiate it and will take legal steps, if necessary, to protect the record.

I hope that we can put this behind us. I understand that New Age Nightmare is doing well. As you know, I have done much personally to step into the void after Randall Baer's death and help promote that book. I think your best potential story is Trojan Horse Ministries, Inc. Ed Decker and I are interested in writing it. Are you interested in publishing it? If not, I suspect many others might be!


                                                                        CONSTANCE E. CUMBEY



1 – 200 of 221   Newer›   Newest»
Constance Cumbey said...

Here's a link to an article by Darrick Evenson aka "Troy Lawrence" trying to explain away his escapades and inconsistencies:

Constance Cumbey said...

I discovered this young man had fallen on hard times. I just found this on a search. He was homeless in Portland in 2012. I would not wish that on my worst enemy. This is sad -- even for a purveyor of fraud such as he was!


We are to pray for our enemies and those who despitefully use us. I am definitely praying that Darrick will find peace -- AND GOD!


Anonymous said...

Internet of things, chipping, and Freescale employees lost on MH370

Anonymous said...


Until your book "The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow" was published in 1983 (can't believe it's been 31 years ago!), no one had ever heard of the New Age Movement.

It was a huge best seller then, but now you can't find it in the book stores (even in the so called 'Christian' book stores). Therefore, there is a whole new generation who are completely clueless and unaware....unless they are motivated to take it upon themselves to search alternative web this blog.

Anonymous said...

To Anon 5:25 AM

BINGO! I think you've got it.

I agree with your theory that
"Maybe MH370 is being used by Freescale to push The Internet of Things and RFID chipping of people in the future."

Anonymous said...

Christine look at the previous page to see a message I left for you.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon 11:45 I saw it, check for answer.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

the website the video speaks of.
interesting, some "event" to happen involving bank shutdown and martial law soon, using public concern about financial corruption as an excuse. total bank and currency shutdown banking system to go offline 3 to 5 or more days, assuming this isn't New Age pie in the sky from their perspective.

paul said...

Mrs Cumby,
Mr's Evanson and Lawrence are (both) of the Ba'hai
persuasion according to them.
And the very notion of a Trojan Horse ministry that is Christian is absurd.
As if God needs to sneak up on people and trick them into becoming Christian, which isn't even what Mr Evanson is trying to do, though he bald-facedly claims that.
It's funny; I'm durn near homeless myself right now, but this Portland is the original, Portland, Maine, and we've got a whole passel of knuckle headed philosophers too, but down here on Preble Street in Portland at the homeless shelter
( where it's probably three times colder than any of those silly Oregon west coast shelters ), there aren't many people around that are so blind with conceit that they carry on like this guy.
Let's face it, this man is ENTITLED... Yet, somehow
destitute. Hmmm...
It reminds me of some people.

But blessed are the poor in spirit.
This must be the downside to being in the public eye, particularly when you're there because of what a person might use as a plumb line so to speak;
morals and such, smooth stones out of the old riverbed of time, the Bible.
Thank you for your testimony about how God sets a table for us in the presence of our enemies.
I see what He was doing there.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

regarding the old issue of whether the priest represents Christ or the cherubim, this article shows the latter, though this is not its focus.

It is important to remember that the liturgical symbolism and iconographic symbolism predates the Roman schism from Orthodoxy.

Anonymous said...

"regarding the old issue of whether the priest represents Christ or the cherubim"

I can't speak about cherubim but I don't need a (ordained) priest to represent me to God or to represent God to me, because I AM a priest if I believe in Christ according to the New Testament. No waffle about "interpretation" - 1 Peter 2:9 and Revelation 1:6 are crystal clear, and they are not addressed only to congregation leaders. I need only a High Priest, and thankfully and mercifully I have one, Jesus Christ of Nazareth who died for the sins of myself and others.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

TheEO view as I was taught, was that yes we are all priests, the laity are the level that offer the sacrifice of praise and prayer, the next level up do the sacraments and sacramentals, and whether this ability could reside in the laity with the epiklesis to The Holy Spirit or not, there is the issue of doing all things in order, "God is a God of order and not of chaos."

Jesus is The High Priest Who is in the Holy of Holies in Heaven, which is why the regular level priest can enter the Holy Place inside the iconostasis, while we laity stand in the nave instead of HP in Holy of Holies in The Temple, lesser priests in nave, everyone else in outer courtyard as in OT system, everyone ratcheted up a notch.

Anonymous said...

You cannot have it both ways 6:23 a.m.

Choose you this or God.

A double-minded man is unstable in all---all---his ways. James 1:8

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

those are not two ways. If the presence of another human distracts you from God, then perhaps you should do without such.

But you don't understand the proper role of clergy, it is not either them or God.

Now read the New Testament Epistles, and notice the terms elder (presbyter, presbyteros where the word priest comes from) BISHOP (episkopos, overseer like a shepherd) and deacon.

Anonymous said...

Christine@6.23pm, what do you mean by "laity" if we are all priests? We who do not believe in ordination (ie it is an invention of man unauthorised by God) have been accused of wanting to abolish the priesthood. Nothing could be further from the truth. We want to abolish the laity! The effects of an officer class in God's people are grievous.

How unhappy for the early church that there was no iconostasis and that instead of having many congregations under one episkopos as today they they had many episkopoi in each congregation (episkopos = presbyteros according to Acts 20:17 & 20:28; Titus 1:5 & 1:7; 1 Peter 5:1 & 5:2, and many per congregation according to James 5:14 and Acts 14:23 & 20:17). O what an impoverished spiritual life the early church must have led!

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

1:32, episkopos is not same as presbyteros exactly, it is the head presbyteros, St. Paul appointed Titus and Timothy episkopoi over two different cities, the population increase of believers caused some changes.

Remember in the OT there were priests and laity? Yet somewhere in the Torah it is written that the whole nation are priests? The laity is a minimal priesthood of sorts. Laos means the people.

Clearly then, even with the ratcheting up of everyone one notch, you still have precedent for a kind of hierarchy, but it is not just about hierarchy. Pride and ambition should not motivate the shepherds....or the sheep.

Anonymous said...

"1:32, episkopos is not same as presbyteros exactly, it is the head presbyteros"

That's eisegesis aka guesswork - you can't prove it from scripture. At 1.32pm it was shown that these two words apply to exactly the same set of people in a congregation. Why two words? Because one denotes their function and the other their seniority. This explanation is consistent with scripture. Yours isn't.

Anonymous said...

"But you don't understand the proper role of clergy, it is not either them or God."

Don't you get Christine? We have no need of a priest because we go straight to the top because Jesus Himself is our Advocate.

My pastor fulfills a role lined out in 1 Corinthians 12. All the parts of the body fulfill their role by exercising their gifts from the Holy Spirit but do you notice the word priest is missing from the list? Think about w h y .

Jesus has replaced the old system with His New Covenant and the priesthood of the believer is *me going straight to Jesus as my High priest--nobody--meaning no body--but His body (presenting His scars in my behalf) comes between me and the Father. By His blood in His Name. Quit trying to tell us how to pronounce the LORD'S name for goodness sake. We know how to say J E S U S ok?

You make this difficult because you are doing what Paul said was going on in the Galatian church. "O foolish Galatians" trying to go back under a law that Jesus Christ fulfilled. Done. Fini. You make it hoops to jump through and that is wrong. Religion is all about that! Like resewing the temple curtain of the Holy of Holies that Jesus tore in two at His death! Stop it!

Religion saves no one.

Jesus does.

(Isn't that good enough for you?) Nope, because you will just keep explaining and setting a stumbling stone in front others who are wanting to simply come to Jesus. I pray they do not listen to your old pagan morphed into new age works salvation.

Christine cannot allow simple. (Do you have control issues per chance?) Not in your playbook it seems. To leave things to Him. You must tamper with it and work it torture it and explain it to death. The contortions of your brand of theology is draining and paining to hear and watch. All simple needs is faith. *Jesus said---note that! *Jesus the Authority* of All things (not you honey) said--come to ME like a little child. You cannot put a child through these rigors to come to God so you see what you are doing? You must "see" (do) to believe. Jesus teaches the opposite. Believe and you will see ( then do). The path Jesus talks about is the straight and narrow path (straight to Him with no priest ok?) and your version looks like a doubally doubled pretzel. You make my butt tired.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

priest is a word morphed out of presbyter, in the Greek Churches the priests are still called presbyter. Yes we go to the top, but we also have some order which is partly to make sure no heresy is taught and services get done right and on time, and there is spiritual counselling in confession and so forth.

And to remind us as we go into Great Lent (which is now) or lesser fasts that we should be examining ourselves repenting of sin and getting more Christlike.

Constance Cumbey said...

Looking at the discussion which seems a little off topic, I have to say that the discussion centering about "episkopos is not same as presbyteros exactly, it is the head presbyteros" is somewhat out of my pay grade.

It seems to me that God made the Gospel simple. Why complicate it here?


Anonymous said...

"priest is a word morphed out of presbyter, in the Greek Churches the priests are still called presbyter"

You still don't get it, ALL Christians are priests (1 Peter 2:9, Rev 1:6), kindly conform to scriptural usage of words. How meanings changed after the canon is irrelevant to anything except church traditions. The Greek word for 'priest' at the time the NT was written is HIEREUS and all Christians are that according to the verses stated.

A response is not a reply.

Anonymous said...

Priests are the old testament concept religiously. Presbyter is much more the new testament model for the church (bishops etc and separate from actual priests which some sects wanted to continue-in error). Paul the apostle spoke of these as seeking preeminence an even named them in some instances as those seeking "higher offices" (leadership roles) when the model is one of onedownsmanship not the priest style of leading in oneupmansship. There are roles for the church not classes. Jesus Himself came that way. The Lord of all took the lowliest place. part of why the priest class of His day hated Him. HE is our true model for all things. Church or outside of church.

Christine's model is too "high" for me.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

7:34 and 8:05


But I didn't depend on Calvinist derived doctrine and interpretation I let The Bible and information from the first two centuries of The Church speak for itself.

One of the first things I figured out, was that ALL the listed denominations, Protestant and RC in a chart showing doctrines and practices comparing them,


I was not going to start my own denomination. I just worshipped Jesus where He was taught about and the other issues not a big subject usually.

yes all Christians are priests, as I already said, but there is also the principle of God is not a God of chaos but of order and all things in order. Find those using a search in The Bible and though they have a different context, the principle applies.

in OT ALL THE PEOPLE WERE ALSO PRIESTS What Paul says about a nation of priests is quoted from Torah, but there were gradations like in a family there is a top person or pair and older children and younger children, the base level priesthood gives the sacrament or sacrifice of prayer and praise to God along the with rest, and also the ministry of invitation to outsiders to join.

YES PRESBYTEROS NOT HIEROS is used, but "priest" etymologically morphed off presbyter not hieros, which indeed shows that it is a shall we say lower dominance gradient than with hieros and not a sharp caste like division but gradation.

Nonetheless those with the ministry of care and direction of the flock are called bishops, the head elder, episkopos or overseer, or shepherd, and elders who would be presidents of the meeting like Justin Martyr speaks of, and therefore in absence of the episkopos the one to give the Eucharistic prayers, and the deacons. (the latter acquired a liturgical role later they didn't originally have they were supposed to handle the day to day paperwork, charity collection and distribution, care for sacred objects and so forth).

See, things are not a digital on/off yes/no, more like analog, gradations of amount of flow if you use an electrical comparison. you are thinking digital, while the reality is more nuanced liked the analog.

Anonymous said...


If your trajectory has given you deep knowledge and if I am wrong then you should be able to knock me down without difficulty by using reasoned arguments based on scripture, rather than trying to assert authority. Instead your writing is full of frustration and circumlocutions. (I never mentioned any denomination, just quoted Bible verses which you are declining to engage with.) Don't blame me if you can't answer my arguments.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I have given you Scripture but didn't give the chapter and verse. you are invited to do your own research. Since you don't know your Bible well enough to recognize them, and apparently are lazy I will supply them now.

Exodus 9:16 I Peter 2:9 Rev. 5:10 priesthood of all believers rooted in Exodus phrase, which is clearly in a liturgical oriented context, but there are gradations among the priestly caste and different roles as you can see if you read The Book of Leviticus. so there are gradations among us.

I Timothy 5:17, Acts 14:23 Titus 1:5, Heb. 5:6 Acts 20:17, 28 I Timothy 3:17 Titus 1:7-9 acts 1:20 "office" can be translated "bishopric" I Timothy 5:17-22 and Titus 1:5 show the bishop was a somewhat different order than that of elder, though in the general category of elders.

"Early records show James was bishop of Jerusalem by AD 49 and functioned accordingly at the first council there (cts 15:13-22)."

AD 67-107 Ignatius was bishop of Antioch and wrote letters as such, himself a disciple of an Apostle and of a time frame to have known the Apostles. Ditto Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, these are writers NOT considered Scripture because the canon of Scripture was closed, limited to what was accepted from OT (mostly Septuagint) and what The Apostles wrote and that was that, but these show what was going on in the immediate post Apostolic times. Christ "the Shepherd and Overseer [episkopos, bishop] of your souls" I Peter 2:25 is head over the whole Church, which operates as a symphony with all playing their parts.

Constance Cumbey said...

Big favor, Christine and relevant "anonymous". Let's try to stay reasonably on target -- either on the article I posted and/or current developments in political, geophysical, and/or New Age issues.


Anonymous said...

Chapter and verse Christine. Just quote it and stick to it to make your point. (if you truly have one it will bear up in that Authority). Leave it at that and let the Scriptures teach (not you).

You seek preeminence here and are exactly what we know not to become (and what the Apostle Paul warns of). The flesh of your mind and usurping spirit drives.......but......The Holy Spirit leads.

Clang, clang, clang.............


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

10:38, I just gave Scripture chapter and verse, a lot of it. Go read it. you are trul pathetic with your bald faced lie.

and if you want the "proof texts" and that absent context read to you spoon fed you instead of reading it for yourself, then Luther's and others' efforts to make The Bible available to all are in your case for nought.

you want someone to play pope for you, not to be a Bible student yourself. How sad.

I don't attempt preeminence, that is not my goal, it is to share useful information and analysis and fight lies and misconceptions. Some of which I used to believe myself.

If you see me as preeminent and are jealous, that means YOU were seeking preeminence, doesn't it? Look to your own soul for a change.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

In deference to Constance, the last post I just made will be my last post on this topic, it is going in circles anyway.

New Age relevant stuff now: there is an increasing trend I see, to drag supposedly benevolent aliens into the mix. A fake alien invasion or a fake friendly alien arrival could be done, with more credibility than a Second Coming of Christ, by the Blue Beam method.

Also, given the reports leaking out of outrageous genetic experiments by rogue elements of the govt. underground (literally) it is also possible for a fake alien arrival involving the results of these, the individuals brainwashed to play a role. Weird technology has been being worked on never mind where it came from also.

Given also, that the benevolent aliens are usually the "Nordic" type this all could be done without reliance on genetically reengineered humans or anything like that. Also plays to the Aryanist notion.

Since the proposed solutions would be in line with the New Age and NWO which our elites and others are already into, it would be a perhaps somewhat less nuclear war potential version of what is going on now, only worse with full out persecution of Christians and Orthodox Jews, and the moslem sects would split unpredictably and be on each other like ugly on ape as the saying goes.

I do not think this is an immediate prelude to the antichrist, and pre trib or post trib, do not expect to be airlifted out just study the history of horrific persecutions of the Church from its earliest days to right now in many lands (mostly moslem but some hindu persecution of Christians and some other pagans sometimes).

So be prepared.

And do not accept thoughts and feelings that crop up in your mind or emotions as necessarily from God or even from yourself, telepathy (incl. the ability of some frequencies of microwaves to transmit sound modulated as words resonating in your skull bones) being in play reportedly anyway.

And a bad idea or feeling that does come from yourself, is still a bad idea or feeling, we should not treat ourselves as the measure of all things.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

regarding the antichrist, he arises out of the empire of the fourth beast of Daniel 7 which is not even here yet. Traditional interpretations among Protestant writers which label these as ancient empires, originate with writers who were copied by others to this day, who were themselves before the 20th century.

Daniel 7 visiion of the four beasts leads into the Second Coming and Last Judgement, so points to much more recent times.

We are in the latter days or years of the first beast, the second and third are rising the fourth isn't here yet.



that doesn't RFID might not play a very dangerous role in all this, and eventually have a demonic component or at least artificial telepathy aiding hence corrupting or misdirecting or confusing your mind angle on it once it is developed enough.

Those who are developing it, may indeed have mark of the beast intentions and hope regarding it.

Anonymous said...

For all her legal insights, Constance has no knowledge how the world of trolls operates. There is a investigated science to that world. It's a pity that given all the information about New Age that is important one troll can shut it down.

Anonymous said...

Christine, I recognised that you were trying to draw an analogy with the priesthood of the Old Testament people of God, but neither you nor I can say how accurate an analogy it is. Thank you for the NT verses. I am at a loss why you are so grumpy about giving them; generally only people who don't care about being taken seriously fail to give their sources in their expository writing.

In Acts 20:17 Paul calls for the presbyteroi of the congregation at Ephesus. When they come, he addresses them collectively as episkopoi (20:28). Other verses are ambiguous between my view that presbyteroi = episkopoi in each congregation and your view that each congregation has one episkopos who is the head presbyteros. But Acts 20 settles it: presbyteroi = episkopoi in each congregation.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

reading the link Constance proveded to Darrick's excuses, I see the claim that the Tanner's knew there was a revival in Manchester in a Baptist church in 1820 but kept the story there was none, because they allegedly said the point is that Joseph Smith was a false prophet implicitly saying that this info was irrelevant.

Now, here is a link that refutes this argument

Showing that the Smiths had NOT moved to Manchester until AD 1822, and WERE in Palmyra before that, not in Manchester, according to tax records.

Also that the church records for 1820 do not show a great revival if it happened resulted in any increase in various church memberships, so this revival must have been limited to this one church, and some visitors who went elsewhere, or who were already members of other churches (so they did not show as new members) but were lacking in actual faith being nominals, and maybe or maybe not attending church that much.

I will probably deal with more of his stuff later. I notice he said he only quit the Mormon church when Bahai said he could not be a member of any other organization, but didn't say that at that point he repudiated Joseph Smith, so its not a total conflict with a later statement that he wouldn't formally repudiate them for the publisher. Still it looks a bit contradictory.

What I cannot understand, having studied Bahai in my teens and briefly believed it sort of though never joined, is how a Mormon who still clings to the mormon church and Joseph Smith get into Bahai? There is no real compatibility I can see.

This guy strikes me as a serious nut case if he isn't just a stone liar, and the two are hardly incompatible conditions to be in.

While using dishonest measures to get information is not inherently wrong, often lies can shake loose the truth, it seems he is addicted to lying and loves the covert ops sort of style and uses a religious crusade as an excuse.

A writer Dennis Wheatley in the early 20th century, did several occult novels where he opposes "the dark side" but his hero first name I forget "de Richelieu," played by Christopher Lee in Hammer Films version of the devil rides out, uses Golden Dawn rituals to counter black magic. Wheatley's hero, a different person, is described in an abstract of one of his books as joining a satanic cult in order to infiltrate it and doing its rituals for this purpose. This kind of thing is unbelievable as an option for any Christian and Wheatley of course pretended to be in favor of Christian specifically British civilization against communism and whatever. I haven't read the book, so I don't know if the infiltrator starts out as an alleged Christian or becomes one later, but it seems to me that this love of intrigue and lies and infiltration can deceive one into serious sin when there seems to be no limits.

I recall some guy on TV years ago talking about dealing with life under the antichrist's rule, that could include forging beast mark cards or documents or something like that to operate with, which is EXACTLY the kind of thing that got you thrown out of church along with other apostates under the emperors, those who had not actually worshipped the emperor but got forged documents saying they had or paid bribes for such, being admitted after a time of penance less than those who had done so under duress (which was still several years of public penance).

Darrick is not the issue, but rather I am addressing the mentality, I think it may crop up a bit in some Left Behind novel or something of the nature.

The British Intelligence thing was created by magician John Dee's buddy I forget his name, and the whole style is problematic. Quite a cult of clandestinity has developed over the centuries going whole hog public with spy novels and movies for decades inspiring I don't know how many people.

We can probably blame this clandestinity and covert ops culture for Darrick.

Anonymous said...

After looking at another of Christine's long diatribes, I feel it is important to make another possibility known. I am making it after reading numerous books on how the Nazis took over.

There is a large antisemitic network operating behind the scenes in this country. Such a network will also affect Christians. Not every part of that network operates by openly telling the truth about what they believe. They are not stupid people. They are intelligent but with their own moral system, similar what is openly seen in the Muslim community where they talk about the religion of peace while they end the lives of opponents in the most ugly ways.

I believe such a network exists that keeps information about the New Age movement away from the general population. Ask yourself, when is the last time you got straight information about New Age. I do believe there are moles who work to destroy any information that can come to the general public about New Age. I believe Christine is such a mole.

To pretend these individuals operate on their own is stupid. Christine is the troll here. Some of us have researched her network and learned some of her connections. She is not a well meaning disrupter of information coming in on New Age.

The questions is why Constance lets Christine operate here. Either Constance believes information about New Age is serious or she doesn't. If she thought it was serious, she would not allow a troll to disrupt information coming out about the New Age movement.

Is it possible that Constance found a bandwagon to ride in the past and now that the parade is over, it doesn't matter what happens.

Those of us who care about the political and cultural changes taking place need to find another place to share information. If you have suggestions, please share them as you can. I am working on another place. The information may not be as in depth as found here in the past, but that's life. If there are those who understand and are worried about the future, we should find a place to talk. If you want to just stay here and pick up tidbits now and then, that's your choice.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"Some of us have researched her network and learned some of her connections"

please post them all here. Now. I reserve the right to comment.

Anonymous said...

I've said what I want to say. I have nothing to post that you are unfamiliar with. There is no dialogue between those who are concerned about the New Age movement and you Christine. Absolutely nothing you post will in any way warn people about the New Age movement. You are a blog consuming hog and a major danger to the freedom of the US.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"I've said what I want to say. I have nothing to post that you are unfamiliar with. "

you've said nothing worth a damn, just an innuendo you won't back up.

Which means no one else gets to see anything incl. my answer.

warn people about the New Age? I have posted links to some current stuff going on, Nazi related stuff also, and plenty of analysis and methods to address some of this, weapons to use


I also got flack for saying New Age is both spiritual and political when that is what it is, and Constance says so also, and so does wikipedia.

When you are taking fire you are over the target.


or, EVERYONE TAKE NOTE, you are a liar.

LinkedIn connections on some one shared issue like ham radio for instance hardly count. youtube and google circles ditto. you can find my email turn up in a search on google groups in alt.satanism which looks real bad if you don't take the trouble to actually read the posts I made there.

I can dig up disgusting acquaintances from the 1980s and a couple of relatives now long dead probably involved in demonism and witchcraft.

I am not going to do that.

or too cowardly? POST YOUR STUFF not innuendos.

And no, frankly, I have no idea what you got. I have had contact with too many people almost all online over the years to know what you know and what you don't know.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

note the first two clauses, the first assumes a die off leaving only one half million humans in the world, and then maintaining the population at that level, the second would of necessity involve planned marriages and culling - killing - the "unfit." Bear in mind that Nazism was very ecologically minded when you read the rest. Then read the rest of the article.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

8:28 its been over 2 1/2 hours since I challenged you the second time. No answer?

I am not surprised.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

8:28, this is not a private conversation between you and me. Everyone here got to see your smear effort. (Which is what you intended obviously, and don't anyone dare tell me you can't know someone's heart, Jesus said "out of the treasure of his heart a man speaketh.")

And everyone can see what a fraud and pretentious coward you are that you don't post what you think you got, and act like it is some private conversation where you can say that I know what you are talking about and leave it at that, which would still be bad enough, especially since i have no way of knowing what exactly you are talking about, so that I can answer it.

But you have posted this PUBLICALLY, and frankly it comes very near to a legal definition of libel. Now, post your crap publically so I can take it apart at the seams, publically.

Constance Cumbey said...


I'm going to ration you to one post per day. Please be concise in your writing and consider using a spell checker, i.e. "Publically" should be spelled "publicly".


Anonymous said...

I agree with Christine that Daniel 7 portrays the four empires that lead up to Jesus Christ's second coming, just as Daniel 2 portrayed the four empires that led up to his first. The parallels are extensive and that has led some commentators to suppose that Daniel 7 is a recapitulation of Daniel 7 using the language of beasts rather than parts of a statue to provide further allegorical details, but Daniel was told that the four beasts were in the future whereas the head of the statue represented Babylon, which had already conquered the Jews.

So who are the lion, the bear, the leopard and the sort-of-dragon? The lion is the emblem of Great Britain, which had an extensive empire. The bear is the emblem of Russia, which had an extensive empire. The 'dragon' is the Antichrist's final world empire. The leopard is obviously going to be either China or an Islamic bloc, led perhaps by Persia/Iran which has had great empires in the past. Time will tell, and fairly soon.

Constance Cumbey said...

Blogger Constance Cumbey said...
I also agree that Daniel 7 portrays the 4 empires leading up to the Second Coming. I took a shot at it in HIDDEN DANGERS. My personal thinking (and your guess could be as good as mine) is that the bear represented Russia, The lion England, and the beast with 4 heads was most likely the USA with 4 heads: The Executive Branch, Congress - 2 heads (Senate, House of Representatives), Supreme Court. The Dragon is the final world government, "global governance," whatever --. It is absurd, IMHO, to think that the USA is out of this equation, especially given the President's speech in Europe yesterday!


Anonymous said...

"Those of us who care about the political and cultural changes taking place need to find another place to share information. If you have suggestions, please share them as you can.

I am working on another place. The information may not be as in depth as found here in the past, but that's life. If there are those who understand and are worried about the future, we should find a place to talk. If you want to just stay here and pick up tidbits now and then, that's your choice."

I agree to a point even though I don't come here very often anymore the "tidbits" are important to me.

Collapsing the comments is great!

I have trouble with my eyes so this feature is useful to read only the comments I want to instead of wading through them all.

Constance I appreciate all your work on the New Age. I read your book "The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow" in the 80's and couldn't put it down. When I found your blog I would check in frequently to read what you had posted on your blog.

Thanks again for all you do and for your research.

Anonymous said...

"From my archives: An important struggle for truth -- you now deserve to know"

WOW! That letter was an eye opener. You are right Constance, the truth is always costly.

Jayne Warner

Anonymous said...

Has anyone come across the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) in their research?

Might there be any NA links with this organisation?

I ask because I am a retailer. Some of the wood and paper products we sell are manufactured by companies that have FSC certification and state that their products are 'FSC wooden whatever'.

We purchase and are invoiced these products as, 'FSC wooden whatever' and have subsequently described these as such to our customers. We purchase these products because they are well made, basic products not because they are necessarily FSC certified.

We have now been informed directly by the FSC that by describing these products as 'FSC wooden whatever' we are misusing their written "FSC" trademark and are required to purchase a license each year to be able to describe the products as such.

I am in awe at this and shall in all likelihood remove all reference to FSC from our product descriptions rather than purchase the annual licenses.

The only other places I have come across such daft 'trademark' ideas are on products that I have seen on NA sites whilst researching - hence my opening question.

Thanks for any help,

~ K ~

Anonymous said...

OK, come clean Christine. Give us all of the blogs that are under your name and all of those that you post to regularly. Everything connected with you in the last eight years. You have taken over this Cumbey blog and destroyed it. Don't do the
Rumpelstiltskin act and stamp your feet. Be honest.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

10:19 asked about
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
maybe this can help as a start.

11:18 " Give us all of the blogs that are under your name and all of those that you post to regularly."

THAT'S your idea of reprehensible connections?

from 1993


maybe you should try reading what the posts are and what the blogs say.

and get off your ain't-it-awful-we-gotta-warn-each-other-about-the-New-Age butts and get out there in the marketplace of ideas or however you view the Internet or in person, and do some arguing against whatever turns up as a bad idea or share what is good.

warning: develop a thick skin.

That first blog netted me a bunch of strange cyber attacks and a physical attack (which I put on the run, God must have had a hand in the situation because I don't recall a headache or pain at all from several punches to the side of the head, just enough mild stunning I couldn't close my hand around the screwdriver he'd tried to use on me and lost control of we were almost to the ground and it was next to my hand, and he grabbed it and ran. I was surprised it was only a screwdriver, I thought it was a knife when he first threatened me and I attacked him.)

I haven't the vaguest idea of all the places I have posted to in the past ten years, I roam around drop comments and unless ask for notification of answers (rarely done) don't remember where I've been or what I've said to who. When I stumble on the posts now and then I am surprised years later, but rarely do I think I said the wrong thing.

Anonymous said...

Oh pleassssse !! cannot believe Christine is stillllll blowing her own knowledge trumpet. I enjoyed reading a variety comments on Constance`s posts-but ever since Christine is wielding the know-all sceptre I decided to abandon this blog- came back for a peek... and o dear she is stll looming large! Will move on again. Pity

Anonymous said...

Could 4 heads on Leopard represent Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama? USA was global hegemon from 1991-2014?. Four heads representing each branch of government might not make sense as since WWII executive branch has unquestioned supremely in foreign policy. Four wings could represent global nature of USA hegemony. Unclear why animal would be Leopard.

So - Lion with Eagle wings GReat Britian -controls large part of world "pax britanica" until 1914, loses Eagle wings or far reaching control. Becomes man when playing role of defeating Hitler.

Soviet Union is Bear and hegemon starting in 1930s until 1991 - eats it's fill of Nazis during WWII. Brutalizes Ukrainians and other ethnic groups in 1920s and 1930s, maybe three ribs in mouth.

Leopard, starting bush one and "New World Order" in 1991. We are about to see humiliation of USA power vis a vis Russia situation.


Then final dragon beast

Ten kings, three uprooted


Constance Cumbey said...

Just as I asked Christine to be concise and limit her posts, I am asking the Christine-bashers to be a little more godly and do likewise when being critical of her!!!!


Constance Cumbey said...

Just as I asked Christine to be concise and limit her posts, I am asking the Christine-bashers to be a little more godly and do likewise when being critical of her!!!!


Constance Cumbey said...

Los Angeles area (Orange County epicentered) suffered another fairly significant earthquake this morning - 5.1.

I'm just about to go on air at You can listen live from there or from the chatroom which is


Anonymous said...

Yes Constance, her advice I presume goes to you also. So why don't you just shut off this useless blog.

From Christine:
and get off your ain't-it-awful-we-gotta-warn-each-other-about-the-New-Age butts

So much for your books, archives, your radio show and this blog. If all of those weren't meant to be taken seriously, then why did you bother.

Why don't you do a long post telling us why you and the rest of us have to put up with Christine in order to get information out about New Age. And do skip the story about when you were a little kid and someone picked on you. Your childhood feelings just don't measure up to warnings about the New Age movement. You made yourself queen of the hill where information about the movement was concerned, but that was over 30 years ago.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon. 2:31

"From Christine:
and get off your ain't-it-awful-we-gotta-warn-each-other-about-the-New-Age butts

So much for your books, archives, your radio show and this blog. If all of those weren't meant to be taken seriously, then why did you bother. "

Interesting misapplication. My point pretty obviously was
to put this information into action and figure out
how to us it in the battle field of the world.

I notice that every time I give tools to use in that
battle I draw fire.

That shows me that the last thing people like you want,
is seriously dangerous stabs into the New Age
homeland so to speak, into its infrastructure
which is its foot soldiers and pop propaganda.

Constance's information is not out of date. There is new material that appears and she is onto it, like some points in such of the show I caught today.

Now, I am sure if I point out that the very condition of feeling infinite and without boundaries, not being in the "illusion" of being a finite creature, has the effect of making you paraphysically and spiritually more permeable therefore more influencable by demons and psychics and this is analogous to some poisons that kill you while making you feel good or at least without stress or pain,

you would scream "NEW AGER!" at me.

A similar scene has erupted here more than once.

Anything that really endangers the New Age "spirituality" that could raise doubts in the minds of its practitioners, while using the language they speak, is verboten.

So why don't YOU give us your specifications and let us do some research on YOU,

The Bible warns not to mistreat others when you know what it is like
to be mistreated, so Constance's mention of her childhood experiences is PERFECTLY BIBLICALLY CORRECT.

If you pretend to know your Bible so well, you should be able to recognize that concept, it is in one of the Books of The Pentateuch, not those exact words, speaks of slaves and strangers and having been in Egypt. Jesus' Golden Rule will do nicely also.

Anonymous said...

Christine. Please. Shut. up.

Let others come to this discussion for once. I don't agree with 2:31 p.m. but at least quit defending yourself constantly and Constance can hold her own without you. We all can. You really need to check out why you are such a bully yourself in these instances. Your stuff brings fire down upon you but not for the reasons you are believing. Learn quietness of soul and find some physical activity so you can come up for air once in a while (out of cyberworld) and get some fresh thoughts (and attitudes) about all of the rest of us. Be a human being ok?

Anonymous said...

James Lovelock: Environmentalism has become a religion

Scientist behind the Gaia hypothesis says environment movement does not pay enough attention to facts and he was too certain in the past about rising temperatures

Environmentalism has "become a religion" and does not pay enough attention to facts, according to James Lovelock.

The 94 year-old scientist, famous for his Gaia hypothesis that Earth is a self-regulating, single organism, also said that he had been too certain about the rate of global warming in his past book, that "it’s just as silly to be a [climate] denier as it is to be a believer” and that fracking and nuclear power should power the UK, not renewable sources such as windfarms.

Speaking to the Guardian for an interview ahead of a landmark UN climate science report on Monday on the impacts of climate change, Lovelock said of the warnings of climate catastrophe in his 2006 book, Revenge of Gaia: "I was a little too certain in that book. You just can’t tell what’s going to happen."

“It [the impact from climate change] could be terrible within a few years, though that’s very unlikely, or it could be hundreds of years before the climate becomes unbearable," he said.
Lovelock's comments appear to be at odds with dire forecasts from a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on Monday, which leaked versions show will warn that even small temperature rises will bring "abrupt and irreversible changes" to natural systems, including Arctic sea ice and coral reefs.

Asked if his remarks would give ammunition to climate change sceptics, he said: "It’s just as silly to be a denier as it is to be a believer. You can’t be certain."

Talking about the environmental movement, Lovelock says: "It’s become a religion, and religions don’t worry too much about facts." The retired scientist, who worked at the Medical Research Council, describes himself as an "old-fashioned green."

Lovelock reiterated his support for fracking for shale gas, which has been strongly backed by David Cameron and the government but vigorously opposed by anti-fracking activists and local people at sites from Salford to Balcombe in West Sussex.
“The government is too frightened to use nuclear, renewables won’t work –because we don’t have enough sun – and we can’t go on burning coal because it produces so much CO2, so that leaves fracking. It produces only a fraction of the amount of CO2 that coal does, and will make Britain secure in energy for quite a few years. We don’t have much choice," he said.
Craig Bennett, director of policy and campaigns at Friends of the Earth, said: "I think every year it becomes harder to generalise about environmentalism. These days it ranges from people like green activists of the 1970s who Lovelock perhaps has in mind through to chief executives who say this is one of the most pressing concerns we have to address."

"The environmental community is no longer a minority but a majority of people who are concerned about the planet. That makes it much harder than ever to pigeonhole who the environmental community is."

Anonymous said...

Indeed i's a religion; here's Ezra Levant saying the same thing, from

As every parent knows, schools don’t teach the old 3 R’s anymore – reading, writing and arithmetic. But they sure teach the new 3 R’s – reduce, reuse and recycle.

First, religion was drummed out of our schools a generation ago. Now the discipline of spelling tests and times tables is being abolished. But nature abhors a vacuum. The dogma filling the void is the political philosophy of environmentalism. That’s what children are being drilled in, now.

A century ago Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem called “The Gods of the Copybook Headings.” Of course, schools abandoned copybooks years ago.

They were sheets of lined paper, with a sentence written at the top. School children, learning how to write, would copy the sentence again and again, underneath the original, to practice their penmanship and spelling. It was learning by repetition. Which is how humans learn.

In Kipling’s classic poem, he listed some of the proverbs that were commonly used in copybooks Tough proverbs like “the wages of sin are death” and “stick to the devil you know.”

You can imagine a student would turn those phrases around in his mind a hundred times as he copied them. And later – maybe years later – he’d have a moment when the wisdom in those age-old sayings would seem natural to him, because it was indeed in his nature.

Those old sayings have been thrown out, replaced not with another religion, but with the secular superstition of environmentalism, promoted with a missionary zeal.

Like many religions, environmentalism has its Eden time, before the fall of Man. In environmentalism, that was life before industrialization.

Environmentalists talk about sinning – using carbon, having a carbon footprint. It’s immoral, they say. That’s not science, that’s religion.

But, like the medieval Catholic Church, you can buy an indulgence for your sins, if you’re rich and important. So sinners like David Suzuki, who have enormous carbon footprints, can buy “carbon offsets,” to get themselves off the hook for their hypocrisy.


Anonymous said...

Ezra Levant cont'd...

Like the Bible, environmentalists believe in Armageddon, too. They say it’s going to be a climate disaster that we humans cause.

Reduce, reuse, recycle is a religious mantra. It’s not a scientific observation. It’s a moral code. But it’s contrary to thousands of years of western cultural teachings.

To reduce, to shrink, to have smaller numbers – that’s not how mankind, or nature, is wired. All plants, all animals, all people, are built to increase, not decrease. It’s called reproduction.

There are more people alive now than ever before – and they live longer, and suffer less, and are happier than ever before. Life before industrialization was nasty, brutish, short, diseased, hungry and cold. It’s better now.

It is contrary to nature to live a life of reduction and minimization. It is natural to want to have children, to live longer and happier. And over the centuries, we figured out how – through human achievement. We took what God or nature gave us, applied our human ingenuity and freedom, and we improved the world.

The secular Christmas of the new eco-religion is Earth Hour. It is an hour when we are told to sit in the cold and dark, and reject what freedom and ingenuity gave us – to reject civilization, to reject our very nature. It is an hour to live as they do in miserable North Korea. It is an hour to live without civilization. To live no different than animals.

Environmentalists want people to spend time in the gutters, not in the stars. They want us to sort our garbage into five piles, and touch it, and poke at it, and have rotting compost piles in our yards – instead of throwing it out. They want us to reduce the use of water in our toilets, sometimes not even to flush. That’s their new sacrament.

If we truly lived the instruction of Earth Hour, we’d freeze – it’s the coldest winter in a generation in Canada.

But at least Earth Hour’s name is honest. It’s not about people. It’s about a world without people.

Anonymous said...

Environmentalists want people to spend time in the gutters, not in the stars. They want us to sort our garbage into five piles, and touch it, and poke at it, and have rotting compost piles in our yards – instead of throwing it out. They want us to reduce the use of water in our toilets, sometimes not even to flush. That’s their new sacrament.

Welcome to age of "enlightenment".

I'd rather be forgiven than enlightened.

We have all made a mess of God's world and of the human family but the New Age beliefs will not and simply cannot truly address what makes all the wrong happen nor can they make it stop. That is God's job. (Glad He is still in the forgiving business and has a massive cleanup coming soon. For mankind and the planet)

Anonymous said...


The blog posts have dryed up.
Were are you???

Anonymous said...

Christine leaves and so does everyone else??? Everyone bitches like crazy when she posts, but when she is reined in everyone disappears??????

Anonymous said...


You mentioned your nearly homeless. Hope your alright? Will keep you in prayer. It may not be long before we are all homeless as things are waxing worse and worse day by day. The time of the revealing the lawless one is close.

Anonymous said...

Christine has to eat off the feeds of others, putting her own spin on everything. No Christine, I don't want your feedback on this. I'd post much more, but I don't want what I post denigrated in value by Christine's New Age spin.

Here's something for others to read.

It appears that Obama's mother and the woman killed who said she had information about Obama's birth certificate were into the occult Subud cult.

I'll be sharing the information in many other places.

Anonymous said...

7:49 P.M.

Amazing resemblance this Barry Sotero
has with Mohammed Subuh!!!! I had never considered it before this but now that I think of it Barry really looks nothing like his supposed father! Amazing how Ms Fuddy was the only casualty in this plane crash a half mile off Molokai. She was seen to have gotten out of the plane ok. How convenient.

Anonymous said...

Paul @ 11:19 PM:
Re: "I'm durn near homeless myself right now"

Paul, I will be keeping you in my prayers that your financial situation improves. May God bless you.

Anonymous said...

6 I will send fire on Magog and on those who dwell securely in the coastlands, and they shall know that I am the Lord.

I re-read Ezekiel 38-39 tonight and verse 6 stood out to me.

Isn't Magog modern day Ukraine? The only Coastlands of Gog/Magog Russia/Ukraine would be on the Black Sea, way to the North in the Baltic Sea or out in the Pacific.

Verse 6 makes sense if Russia uses the Sevesterapol Naval Base and other bases in Crimea to launch attacks on Israel ~x number of years in the future and then Israel retaliates by nuking "Crimea Coastlands" or the Coastlands of Magog that get the fire sent upon them.

A scenario:

Pax Americana ends in 2014 with Putin reabsorbing all of Ukraine into the New Russian Empire by 2015. Israel fights regional wars in 2017 that result in massive victories and newfound hydrocarbon riches.

Israel gains controlling interest in vast oil and gas fields, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean underwater giant gas fields. Israel becomes richer per capita than Qatar and makes a deal with Europe to supply all their gas needs.

Russia sees its leverage vis-a-vis Europe imploding and Putin decides to "rebalance" the regional order.

He loads up an armada onto transport ship launched out of Crimea. A massive air wing also launched out of Crimea heads south to attack Israel.

Yada yada yada, Crimean Russian bases are nuked from Israeli Dolphin submarines.

Moscow is preserved and Russia retreats back to base. Russia is afraid of future nuclear attacks and chooses not to send nuclear missiles to Israel. Furthermore, Russia does not want to obliterate the million Russian ethnic Jews in Israel.

Constance Cumbey said...

Going on air in about 10 minutes -- will give details of Oregon trip coming up in a week. I have much to share with you this week, join us at or

Call in live at 888-747-1968.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

though 4:24's scenario would put Israel in a situation of dwelling securely in peace, perhaps, he makes a good point that it doesn't look like this can happen in these days, because Israel does not dwell in peace like the prophecies say would be the case when this happens.

As he says, it might happen twice, a lesser one now and THE Gog Magog war later in the revolt after the first thousand years of Jesus' rule on earth after He comes back.

Anonymous said...

Keep up with the New Age movement by knowing who is involved. The World Future Society is one of the overview operation. Here is a list of names connected with their coming conference in Florida in July.

Anonymous said...

OK Constance. You are in Michigan. You know what is going on under the label New Age movement. "Jesus Saves" works in churches, but it doesn't in courtrooms where your expertise is valuable.

"MICHIGAN — Hundreds of thousands of parents have been flagged as “child abusers” in a huge database maintained in secret by Michigan’s Child Protective Services (CPS) agency. The names are entered into the database without due process, without a judicial hearing, without an opportunity for defense, without a conviction, and without even letting the individuals know they have been targeted.

"The list is called the Michigan Child Abuse and Neglect Central Registry. It reportedly contains the names of 275,000 “abusive” parents currently in that state alone, as WXYZ reported....."

Yes, I know you are very busy. I also know there is a good saying that reads, "Grow where you are planted."

Keeping up with what is going on with New Age, I'm sure you know that parents are fighting Common Core around the country. A goal of New Age is to take parental concern about children and turn it into the state's concern, as if the state brought children into the world, and every child is to be part of the marching troops to further the New Age goals.

Every one of us has our own list of personal time-consuming concerns. If you can't concern yourself with this in any way, perhaps one of the people you have reached with your information can find a bit of time to look into it if you call it to their attention. It's in your own backyard.

Anonymous said...

New Age in the culture and workplace:

(1) Jay-Z Embraces Five-Percent Nation, Addresses Illuminati and Questions Other Religions -

Jay-Z appears to have embraced the beliefs of the Five-Percent Nation, which is an American organization that holds to the thought that 5 percent of the Earth has the ability to enlighten the rest.

Rumors and imagery in some of his music videos have tied Jay-Z to the occult and Satan worship in the past few years.

"I confess, God in the flesh, live among the serpents turn arenas into churches." Five-Percent members frequently refer to themselves as God according to their doctrine.

(2) The mainstreaming of mindfulness meditation -

It's a meditation practice central to the Buddha's teachings, which has now been adapted by Western teachers into a secular self-help technique.

The most basic mindfulness practice is sitting meditation: You sit in a comfortable position, close your eyes, and focus your awareness on your breath and other bodily sensations.

Google now has an in-house mindfulness program called "Search Inside Yourself," and the company has even installed a labyrinth at its Mountain View complex so employees can practice walking meditation.

Dave's Note: Mindfulness (Eastern Mystical) meditation is the same contemplative practice found in Evangelical churches pushing the "new spirituality."

Dave in CA

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

""I confess, God in the flesh, live among the serpents turn arenas into churches." Five-Percent members frequently refer to themselves as God according to their doctrine."

That reminds me of the Deagle line of talk we were debating
with his acolyte here several blog segments back. Wasn't he claiming we are all The Father in the flesh
and Jesus was The Father in the flesh?

The "mindfulness" meditation described by these people is not mindfulness. Mindfulness is more of a hyper alertness to your environment,
and yourself in relationship to it. This state of mind is compatible with the idea of objective reality existing and ourselves as finite
limited beings in it, though this is taken as a start that you move away from, not a good idea.

There are several kinds of meditation, in far eastern terminology, "contemplation" considered a lower state, where you mull over specific
subjects and writings, is what is unfortunately translated in The Bible as "meditation," which is different.

This translation of course lends itself to abuse by New Agers to mislead people that meditation in their sense of the word is okay.

Interesting how they are now warping the term "mindfulness"
so you maybe get some good recommendation on it,
and think this is the same thing and get into it, but
it isn't the same thing.

However, if applied while walking it will of necessity morph into real mindfulness to some extent.

Or into a kind of dual mindedness part in a trance (the opposite of real mindfulness) and part in
a state that can function with people.

Anonymous said...

An excellent source for research on Eastern Mystical Meditation and its expression "contemplative spirituality" in the Christian Church

Dave in CA

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Ray Stevens on Global Warming

Constance Cumbey said...

Interestingly, I'm speaking in Oregon next week. I don't know where I've been, but I'm just now hearing about the "blood moon" excitement. I would advise caution as it is being used by the date-setters, but it is very interesting.


Constance Cumbey said...

A British press article on the coming 4 Blood Moons:


Constance Cumbey said...

Quoting from that article, APOCALYPSE NOW:

Mars, Earth, and the Sun will all align tonight, a rare 'opposition of the planets' that only happens once every 778 days.

But what makes this so remarkable is that it comes precisely a week before everyone on earth will see the first of FOUR dark red 'blood moons', an extraordinary event some Christians believe represents the End of Days and the second coming of Christ.

The King James Bible predicts: "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD comes," [Joel 2:31].

And, according to NASA, a highly unusual 'Tetrad' - four successive total 'blood-red' lunar eclipses each followed by six full moons - will, indeed, start a week today and finish on September 28 next year.

Constance Cumbey said...

To Anonymous 10:59

Thanks for the long and very well written post regarding the James Lovelock, Earth Worship "Gaia" religion.

Interestingly just two nights ago, I was just reviewing two books in my library by Lovelock. One, THE AGES OF GAIA is part of the Bantam New Age series. It was originally published in 1988 by W.W. Norton. The other book, GAIA, was published by Oxford.

The Gaia theory and its proponents are frightening indeed. Lovelock saw himself as a type of "shop steward" for lesser forms of life on earth. We humans don't have much right to be here, per his way of thinking which he summarizes in his preface as follows:

Gaia theory forces a planetary perspective. It is the health
of the planet that matters, not that of some individual species
of organisms. This is where Gaia and the environmental movements,
which are concerned first with the health of people,
part company.

Lovelock's collaborators in the 1980's were the usual gang of New Age suspects:

The first Gaia
book also stirred an interest in the religious aspects of Gaia, so
in another chapter I have tried to answer some of the difficult
questions that were raised. In this unfamiliar territory I have
benefited from the strong moral support of the Lindisfame Fellowship
and especially from its founders, William Irwin Thompson
and James Morton, and from the friendship of its other
members, like Mary Catherine Bateson, John and Nancy Todd,
and Stewart Brand, who was for many years the editor of CoEvolution


Constance Cumbey said...

to 1:17 p.m.

Your post was insulting. I am one person in the Michigan legal system. I unfortunately know about the Central Registry. Most of my professional colleagues, as do I, believe it to be an abomination. The steps one has to take to get off of it entail major legal battles in and of themselves.


Constance Cumbey said...

People are notified by letters that they have been placed on "The Registry" after accusations of abuse occur. I have often been retained as an attorney to take steps to have their names removed from same.

There is notice, but the DUE PROCESS is definitely lacking. I don't have money and resources to fight it in the courts -- the ACLU should be interested in that, but it appears they have so far done little or nothing, perhaps because their New Age friends might find keeping it to their ultimate advantage.


Constance Cumbey said...

Being personally acquainted over the past 30 years with Christine as I am with the Anonymous complaining about her, I will say this.

If Christine is a "mole," she is a very poorly paid one. She has her faults, like the rest of us, but I believe her to be sincere. I wish she would be concise and avoid the James Joyce literary style of "Stream of Consciousness," but she obviously has difficulty with that. However, she sincerely is against the New Age Movement as are most of us.


Anonymous said...

OK, so you can't fight the legal system in Michigan on a large scale. At the very least you can warn readers what is CURRENTLY going on so that they can protect themselves and their families.

There are many people who see what is going on at this blog. I am not the only one concerned about the influence Christine has over you. At this point readers should know that you put your friendship with Christine over the importance of the fight against the New Age movement. She distracts from the seriousness of the fight in the public eye because she makes the fight against New Age look like a battle of the weird against logical rebuttal. If you can't see that, it's obvious nothing will change and the battle against New Age can go down the drain where it pretty much is right now.

So, you are offended. I'm one of those who puts the battle against New Age over your feelings.

Constance Cumbey said...

Christine has no particular influence over me except that I try to take the wheat and leave the chaff from her as from you. I don't panhandle for money and I'm still struggling along trying to practice law which is time consuming and money short as collections are not my FORTE. If you want to write about it, I'll cheerfully publish you or interview you on the radio.


Constance Cumbey said...

For the record, sometimes nastiness and mean-spiritedness takes more out of one than even ramblings.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

book review, hilarious.

Anonymous said...

Say whatever you want to say Christine, particularly if you have more to share along this line. In this last post you introduced us to Mr. Common Sense who I listened to through many videos. No pretense, no rationalizing, no arguing, no junk intellectualizing, no concern about hurting feelings, just straight out no worry about what people will think honesty. Something incredibly rare these days. Again, thanks.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

New World Order Bible Versions (Full Movie)

Very very serious issues with the NIV and some others, some of it like a time bomb waiting for a cultist to exploit.

When he gets to the New King James Version he can't find that much to complain about, species specific terms for some trees.

The triskelion design on NKJV, though often used by occultists now because of its Celtic connection, is an old Christian symbol in use from Irish Christianity in the days before they were dragged into the Latin fold and were Orthodox, referring to the Trinity, and their interrelationship (perichoresis, where one of Them is, there are all of Them, because all the Persons of The Holy Trinity are infinite).

Sounds like the trees etc. are rendered more precisely and satrap was the Persian title. Not corruptions there. Leaving out "Lord" is not too cool, but the context or name may provide this, since it is clear elsewhere.

Are saved vs. being saved the latter must be more accurate to the Greek, because the view of salvation as a process, that begins with translation from the kingdom of darkness into The Kingdom of God, and proceeds to the salvation of our bodies as well as our souls, Romans 8:23, at our resurrection as believers, is typical of Eastern Orthodoxy, whose Greek speaking core segment were reading NT without need of translation.

Mere assention to Jesus without following through in growth and bearing fruit is like the seeds sown on rocky ground or among thorns, and Jesus warns in John's Gospel at The Last Supper that those who bear no fruit are dead branches that are cut out and cast off. 

The change from quicksand to Syrtis Sands which is probably correct, is understandable when you read

chances are the KJV translators thought quicksand would be more understandable as a risk issue. A dangerous kind of sand bar.

KJV translators decided to use "church" which has institutional connotations they liked better than "assembly" the proper meaning of ekklesia. So they had a bias or two there also.

Anonymous said...

Re NIV and other Bibles, Christianity spread clockwise and anticlockwise round the Mediterranean from Jerusalem. This has led, given copyist's minor changes and errors, to two families of manuscripts, the Alexandrine and Byzantine. From bits of copies and from quotes in letters in the Byzantine tradition, a version of the original was put together centuries later, known as the Textus Receptus (TR). Some fairly early complete Bibles have been found that are in the Alexandrine tradition.

Which to prefer? Unfortunately we do not have enough information to reliably reconstruct a family tree even in the two sub-branches. So age is one factor to take into account. And although the TR has been assembled from bits, those bits are considerably earlier than the Alexandrine complete NTs.

It has also been asked why those complete NTs survived in an era when the written word was precious and copies were worked until they fell to bits. Some say they were kept hidden by faithful families who were suddenly wiped out in persecution. Others say that they were deemed heretical and locked away. Nobody knows.

Since the TR was complied, many more early bits have been found. It is obvious that we need an updated TR. THEN it is time to translate from the Greek, raising its own issues of word-for-word or thought-for-thought, two differing approaches which can clash.

King James' NT was translated from the TR, apart from some of the Book of Revelation which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

Not everybody here wants to watch a 100-minute Alex Jones documentary. Could those criticising the NIV here give the most telling examples of 'issues' from its text?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

1. the nearly complete copies found are two or three, which are far outweighed by the Byzantine type text. As was pointed out by one writer, this hails from the vicinity of the location of the originals, so it would take longer to go astray. Originals would be available longer to compare to in copying.

2. NIV refers to Joseph as Jesus' father. NIV (this is another's research not this video) in I John 1:1-4 gives sloppy rendition of how to test the spirits making it easier to be deceived by a fake angel, I discussed this already.

3. It isn't an alex jones documentary it was aired on his show and copied from there. It is available as a DVD from the publisher a separate company.

you can always fast forward through youtube videos. use the bar that travels below the picture on the video as the video progresses.

4. some specifics I Tim 3:16 "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, etc." NIV weakens this by taking out Theos and putting in a word meaning "he"

Heb. 1:8 "but unto The Son He saith, Thy throne O God, is for ever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom," NIV changes this to "about the Son he says, etc."

Micah 5:2, "whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting," which shows Jesus is eternal from eternity, no beginning. NIV changes this to "whose origins are from of old, from ancient times," which makes Jesus out to be merely a very ancient early creature, not God but with an origin, as the heretic Arius would say, that "there was a time when He was not."

What is interesting is that while all the core doctrines CAN be defended from the NIV if you choose less often used verses, and go through the whole thing, the average person doesn't do this. Precisely the verses most often used to defend the divinity of Christ are the ones made subtly or overtly different and wrong.

That these readings are not correct, is shown by their use in early Church writings in the normal form.

going through all of them the preacher lists (Alex Jones is not in any of this) would take too long.

A good book is The Identity of The New Testament Text by Wilbur N. Pickering. shows a long list of deviations in NIV which often have doctrinal implications.

shows some same some others.

Craig said...


You really ought to study the discipline of NT Greek textual criticism before spreading disinformation. I'm not going to take the time to educate you on this forum, but try reading these:

Craig said...

This whole idea of “New World Order Bible versions” began with Gail Riplinger, and her sensationalistic nonsense has been refuted time and time again. Try James White’s The King James Only Controversy for starters. Here’s a link which does a good job of explaining some of the differences in Greek manuscripts, which leads to some of the differences in translation.

Ironically, for the KJO advocate who claims the new versions that rely on some Alexandrian manuscripts which are purportedly ‘corrupted’, some of the Alexandrian texts are actually more Christ-exalting than the Textus Receptus. But such as these will not allow actual facts to get in the way of the hysteria.

No translation is perfect, as there as a number of differences in Koine Greek syntax, verb forms, etc. While some translations are certainly better than others, the one I’d most definitely NOT recommend is Eugene Peterson’s The Message (which is a paraphrase and not a translation anyway). The latter most definitely brings in overt New Age / occult themes, such as translation on earth as it is in heaven as as above, so below.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Craig, I studied this years ago and this is not disinformation, the comparison of verses speak for themselves.

Gail Riplinger is almost a satanic parody of legitimate issues that makes the subject look silly, as the main preacher in the video says, we are King James users but not King James onlyers.

Exactly how are the Alexandrian texts more Christ exalting than the Majority or Byzantine text? Sure, you can defend all the core doctrines out of these translations if you wade through them and find them but most people don't do this. The verses most easily and clearly and frequently used to defend core doctrine are precisely the verses that are altered.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

and other pdfs at their resources page

Craig said...


I'd have to question what is exactly you studied. Did you read any of the books I referenced above? If not just what scholarly material did you read?

Anyway, I don't wish to waste my time trying to instruct you (as it's been shown time and time again, the efforts are typically fruitless).

However, briefly, the earliest Byzantine manuscripts are from the 4th century (the earliest Alexandrian is ca. 225-275, with others in the 3rd century, as well) . A well-known characteristic of this text type is the harmonizing of texts. That is, the copyist will take the lengthiest of a given passage in the Synoptic Gospels (especially quotes of Jesus) and insert the ‘missing’ text into the others. Another characteristic is the smoothing out of the language, to make it easier to read.

You wrote, What is interesting is that while all the core doctrines CAN be defended from the NIV if you choose less often used verses, and go through the whole thing, the average person doesn't do this. Precisely the verses most often used to defend the divinity of Christ are the ones made subtly or overtly different and wrong.

OK, let’s compare John 1:18, first the NKJV:

18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

Now, the NIV, first the 1984 version, and then the most current version:

18 No one has ever seen God, but God the one and only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.

18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

First of all, “only begotten” is now recognized as better translated as “one, unique” or something to that effect. But, more important is the difference between “Son” in the KJV and “God” in the NIV. This is a case in which the Alexandrian text is more Christ exalting than the Textus Receptus and the entire Byzantine text type.

The NIV 1984 rendering is more literal, but rather clumsy in English; so, the newer version combines both the TR reading and the Alexandrian – not a good solution in my book, but I understand the intent. I prefer the 1984 version, as it more closely approximates the Alexandrian manuscript.

That’s not to say I prefer the Alexandrian reading in other places in which the newer versions use it.

Craig said...


You wrote, Precisely the verses most often used to defend the divinity of Christ are the ones made subtly or overtly different and wrong

And you referenced 1 John 4:1-4 (you mistakenly wrote 1 John 1:1-4 instead, but I understood). Could this be an instance of the Byzantine ‘smoothing out’ the text? I think so.

Here’s the NKJV, stopping at the verse 3, which is adequate for our purposes. It’s the first portion of verse 3 which is in question:

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

And here’s the NIV:

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

The portion in italics in the N/KJV is what is in question. This can be seen as redundant, as it’s already in verse 2. All one needs to do is read the Scripture in its proper context, beginning with verse 1. To “acknowledge/confess Jesus” (verses 2 and 3) is to acknowledge/confess that He has come in the flesh (verse 2).

I concede that it is clearer to add the text “Christ has come in the flesh” in verse 3, but it is not necessary to figure out the author’s intent. In fact, John had already stated that one who denied that Jesus is the Christ is antichrist (2:22); so, once again, the larger context – 1 John is a letter, and one should understand it as a complete, whole document – adds to the comprehension of the document.

The question comes down to what is likely in the original manuscript. The overwhelming scholarly consensus is the portion in question (Christ has come in the flesh ) is not.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Craig 10:42 "However, briefly, the earliest Byzantine manuscripts are from the 4th century (the earliest Alexandrian is ca. 225-275, with others in the 3rd century, as well) ."

Not exactly. Fragments exist earlier than that. And you can get a good idea of what text the pre Nicene Fathers were reading by reading Irenaeus and so forth.

Scholarly studies - I read the materials that refuted them point by point so I amnot going to waste my time with it.

Scholars of that sort have a cute way of making assumptions.

H. Hoskier's critique of Vaticanus (B) and Aleph Vol 1 and Vol 2 pdf

and several other valuable answers to this fad.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Craig 11:10 you totally miss the point.

While general intent may be obvious, weasle room exists when challenging a supernatural being that appears, or speaks to someone else, THAT IS THE ISSUE.

Christ HAS come in the flesh, okay, that confesses Christ (define your terms) but leaves room for no Resurrection, or for a spiritual resurrection only, or for a physical Resurrection followed eventually by a natural death.

Christ IS come in the flesh says He STILL IS IN THE FLESH. I.e., Resurrected physically, and will live physically forever. (The Resurrection body is physical even if immortal and indestructible.)

The even sloppier phrasing, "confesses Christ" or "does not confess Christ" in some other versions, is even worse, because someTHING can "confess Christ" meaning anything by "confess" that He was just a nice guy, etc. etc. and if it is a spirit that confesses Christ IS come in the flesh is of God, but a spirit that does not confess Christ is not of God is the format used, then someTHING can con you by answering it confesses Christ if you ask if it confesses Christ IS come in the flesh.

Meric Casaubon's book on John Dee and Edward Kelly (don't bother me with talk of fraud) describes from Dee's records conversations with the so called angels. In these conversations, statements are made by them about Jesus Christ which by your way of thought would have an obvious intent of meaning, but the exact words are in fact weasle words, and when possible they do not name Him at all. And these instances are rare as hen's teeth. Jesus Christ is not a subject they wanted to get onto and apparently neither did Dee.

In some charismatic church was reported some angel who was seen by some others who was essentially a familiar to the preacher. No indication anyone quizzed the entity on this, and it was handing out cubic zirconia as diamonds. As the critic discussing this noted, it is unlikely God is going to hand out cheap substitutes. If someone finds cubic zirconia has some unusual superior uses to diamond, that doesn't change this, because they were not given with any such instruction or purpose, only as valuable gems from heaven.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Irenaeus writing c. AD 180 in Against Heresies, has a slightly different version of the statement, which as you point out in context of the entire passage is okay,
if you recall the entire passage. (bumper sticker short phrase memory mentality is not limited to modern times that have cars with bumpers to put stickers on.)

"the Lord has cautioned us beforehand; and His disciple, in his Epistle already mentioned, commands us to avoid them, when he says:
"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Take heed to them, that ye lose not what ye have wrought." And again does he say in the Epistle: "Many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God; and every spirit which separates Jesus Christ is not of God, but is of antichrist." These words agree with what was said in the Gospel, that "the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." Wherefore he again exclaims in his Epistle, "Every one that believeth that Jesus is the Christ, has been born of God; " knowing Jesus Christ to be one and the same, to whom the gates of heaven were opened, because of His taking upon Him flesh: who shall also come in the same flesh in which He suffered, revealing the glory of the Father." Book 3 ch. XVII verse 8.

whether he is quoting exactly or paraphrasing at the end is
I will concede that your point about the context clarifying things IF one retains the larger context,
i.e., "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." then you can phrase it right. But will the entity phrase it right? This is a test of course not only of supernatural entities but of preachers and supposed prophets.

However, the phrasing about separating Christ would still be effective, because if one denies separating Christ from flesh one is acknowledging His Incarnation and physical Resurrection and current and forever existence in the flesh.

Anonymous said...

"The even sloppier phrasing,.."

Good grief.......if ever there was sloppy phrasing it is yours Christine. Enough of the hair-splitting please. Craig made his point and we get yours so quit beating us over the head with this. Christine, you obviously come here to argue and are usually arguing the finer points of next to nothing. This is why your posts draw fire. You are not noble in this as you suppose.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

NIV "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God."

closer look. Not only does it put Jesus Christ coming in the flesh in the PAST tense, which leaves room for no Resurrection or a Resurrection followed by death later, but it leaves "Christ" out in the second part, all a spirit would have to do, to pass this test would be to acknowledge Jesus. Meaning what? Why is Christ dropped off of Jesus Christ here? It is almost an implicit separation of Jesus from Christ.

Now as for "one and only Son" that is INADEQUATE because it could be hybrid son (1/2 God 1/2 human instead of 100% God and 100% human), or adopted son, instead of consubstantial Son from eternity Who became human.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon 1:01 there is a saying "the devil is in the details." Hair splitting is essential to catch games being played.

And if you don't learn hair splitting you won't spot anything but the most blatant New Age stuff (i.e., Christ as ascended master and trance states are good for you and we are all gods or extensions of God's essence sort of thinking). Anything more subtle, let alone New Age use of Christian terms is going to go right over your heard.

Anonymous said...

This is 6.48am, the first responder to Christine. In that response I was setting out my own view rather than disagreeing with Christine, as I too prefer the TR to the later (and complete) Alexandrine texts. I just think that the TR needs updating, as we have many more fragments than when it was first compiled. Moreover Christine recommends - so has presumably read - Pickering's book on the NT text which is scholarly and outstanding.

(I am in fact Physicist of earlier threads.)

Anonymous said...

We get that Christine. We just don't want l'il ole you to take it upon yourself to do all that hair-splitting (if needed) for us. Your info ends up useless for that very reason (if it was actually good to begin with that is). State your point, show us your links, and let us investigate without all of your intrusion (arguing). We can think for ourselves but you are quite sure that we cannot. Who died and made you sheriff/keeper/babysitter of the blog? You end up insulting to others not to mention exasperating for your hyper approach to dialogue here. (And you will not relent or repent for the intrusions).

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon 1:47 I gave links. and my conversation was with the person I was conversing with, not you. Things are not simple, bumper sticker mentality quick slogans. Very very few things can be handled that way, and most of what this blog is about and textual criticism, is not one of them.

Anonymous said...

True, it is a 'conversation' between you and whomever, but this is a public place too. You forget/or disrespect that. Take your finer points direct(or direct them to your own blog for the expanse of your thoughts) to whomever requires them of you, not to us all in general. Try that for maintaining blog etiquette. Would be a relief to the average person who comes here for something other than your near constant barage of "info".

Anonymous said...

Wasn't Christine rationed to one post per day?

Anonymous said...

Other Anonymice, it appears Christine thinks she is the only person who will tell everyone what is important about New Age. She has done it over and over again. She tells us if Christine says it is unimportant, it must be so.

Dr. Common Sense, who Christine recently told us about, might disagree with her way. In this video he talks about the Homosexual Mafia. (See the comments around 7:28.) In another, he talks about the Muslim Mafia and how they tell everyone what they can or can't say about the Muslim community.

Anyone who has tried to spread information about New Age knows there has to be a New Age Mafia. They will tell you what is New Age and what isn't. Usually they will tell you that it is a disappearing way of thinking. They will tell you what you can and what you can't say about New Age. Now Christine said in an earlier post, " won't spot anything but the most blatant New Age stuff (i.e., Christ as ascended master and trance states are good for you and we are all gods or extensions of God's essence sort of thinking). Anything more subtle, let alone New Age use of Christian terms is going to go right over your heard (sp)." I think she was trying to say skip the blatant "stuff" and learn to indulge in hair-splitting when telling others about New Age. Now it may appear that Christine is part of the New Age Mafia when she tells us what is important about New Age and what isn't. If she was though, would she call Dr. Common Sense to our attention, a person who says don't listen to the Mafia people? Think for yourself!

While Christine's messages might appear to be cognitive dissonance, we who have been reading what she posts for a VERY LONG TIME, or at least what seems that way, know that she is JUST a well-meaning kind of intellectual who is not part of a New Age Mafia but just someone who keeps trying to teach us how to think for our own good.

To my mind every once in a blue moon she brings us a gem like Dr. Common Sense and that makes up for the rest. With a couple of blue moons coming up, that means we can look forward to several gems. Right on Christine. Keep doing your own thing. With gems like Dr. Common Sense you are doing better than those who read but post nothing at all.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"They will tell you what you can and what you can't say about New Age. Now Christine said in an earlier post, " won't spot anything but the most blatant New Age stuff (i.e., Christ as ascended master and trance states are good for you and we are all gods or extensions of God's essence sort of thinking). Anything more subtle, let alone New Age use of Christian terms is going to go right over your heard (sp)." I think she was trying to say skip the blatant "stuff" and learn to indulge in hair-splitting when telling others about New Age."

That hair splitting and looking at subtle rather than the obvious stuff, is how you will spot the New Age infiltration into the Churches themselves. And its there. Just go study linked on Constance's front page.

hardly any preacher will pull the blatant stuff, but such New Age infiltrators will operate subtly, twist Scripture and bring in conveyorbelt stuff. A good example is Kenneth Copeland and his "I AM too" line of self deification crap. Serious heresies aside from pre trib are circulating increasingly in the charismatic scene.

Dominionism is bad eschatology at best heresy at worst. Constance has discussed things wrong with Pat Robertson for instance a long time ago and I think more recently.

No, you don't ignore the obvious stuff. Its not either/or.

Keep an eye on the Joel's Army scene. sooner or later, it may get around to playing out its idea that this army will punish the Christians who are disobedient brides and don't go along with their ideas, i.e., persecution of the church may come from this quasi Christian element (gnosticized) as much as from an obvious atheist element or from Moslems.

Anonymous said...

"No, you don't ignore the obvious stuff. Its not either/or."

Thank you so much for your advice Christine. Another gem and it's not even a blue moon. I guess we are lucky.

Until we get your latest advice, I would suggest everyone ignore all of the things between blatant and hair-splitting. Can't be too careful.

Anonymous said...

So once in a while she posts a good one! Hey, a broken clock is right twice a day!

Come on...we can think for ourselves... and we don't have to be coerced/manipulated.........or preached at by do it. Use some restraint, Christine, and you'll get that message out a whole lot better than currently doing "since you are so all about the message"...

Craig said...


I was unaware of Pickering’s work, so I had a brief look-see. More on that in a bit. I’m much more familiar with Maurice Robinson, a staunch advocate for Byzantine priority. However, first I’d like to see that we are on the same page regarding terminology.

The Textus Receptus (TR) is not the same as the Majority Text. The TR, which is the Greek text undergirding the N/KJV is based on a relative handful of Byzantine manuscripts. The MT consists of the majority of the Byzantine mss in agreement with each other. In other words, such passages as the so-called Johannine Comma (a portion of 1 John 5:7-8), which is found only in a very few Byzantine mss yet missing in the large majority, is not included in the MT. Most who are advocates of Byzantine priority refer to the MT and not the TR as the base text for the New Testament.

Admittedly, the following article was posted 10 years ago and appears to be a reposting of an even earlier article, so it may not reflect the most current views of Pickering; but, in this article Daniel Wallace (director of the Center for Study of New Testament Manuscripts) illustrates how Pickering conflates the TR with the MT. Wallace notes other serious problems as well:

Also, I skimmed an online pdf of Pickering’s work, and it seems his claim is that modern textual critics adhere to the Westcott-Hort position that the Alexandrian is the “neutral” text, and hence the one to be preferred in all cases. The WH position has fallen out of favor in the past decades; so, this is no longer true.

For a balanced position on Byzantine priority, I highly recommend the work of Maurice Robinson – even though I disagree with some of his assertions. Robinson is, though, most definitely in the minority.

Having said the above, despite some who claim not to adhere to Alexandrian “neutrality,” some seem to, in fact, place this text type over all others. My personal position is that one should do a careful study of each passage of Scripture using all extant mss (external evidence) and then compare the text most likely to be original with the particular NT author’s style (vocabulary, syntax, etc. – the internal evidence).

The Alexandrian are earlier, but earlier is not necessarily better, as we don’t know what occurred between the original transmission and the Alexandrian ms in question. The Byzantine are more numerous, but this does not equate to being more likely an original any more than asserting that an earlier ms would likely be original. The more numerous readings could well come from all subsequent copyists more faithfully replicating their exemplars – errors and all.

Craig said...


You wrote, [Byzantine] [f]ragments exist earlier than that [4th century].

First of all, I was wrong; the earliest Byzantine mss – fragment or otherwise – are from the 5th century. Would you care to provide specific manuscript numbers and concurring citation to support your claim that there are extant Greek NT manuscript fragments before the 4th century? Don’t bother trying, because you cannot, as there are no Byz. mss earlier than the 5th century.

I’m not going to spend the time to re-address what I’ve already written. Your post @ 1:03pm is well-addressed in my 11:10am post in the 2nd and 3rd to last paragraphs.

I will address one thing, though – your comments re: “has come” vs. “is come”. The verb here is in the Greek perfect tense-form, more specifically it’s a perfect active (mood) participle. Most grammars claim that the perfect conveys a past action with continuing significance/consequences (though there are a few modern scholars who challenge the past action portion as always part of the perfect). This makes the Greek perfect difficult to translate (note that the KJV contains “is” while the NKJV contains “has”).

But, here’s the long and the short of it: The statement that Jesus Christ HAS come in the flesh is a concern for you because you feel this does not convey continuing significance as would IS come. OK; but, why would anyone assume that Jesus somehow lost the flesh He initially came in? Aren’t there enough other Scriptures that confirm that Jesus is still enfleshed and will return in the flesh (Matthew 24:30; Acts 1:10-11)?

Anonymous said...

"But, here’s the long and the short of it: The statement that Jesus Christ HAS come in the flesh is a concern for you because you feel this does not convey continuing significance as would IS come. OK; but, why would anyone assume that Jesus somehow lost the flesh He initially came in? Aren’t there enough other Scriptures that confirm that Jesus is still enfleshed and will return in the flesh (Matthew 24:30; Acts 1:10-11)"

Thanks Craig. There is yet another example of the hair splitting I was talking about for which Christine is famous.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

1-:54 you guys don't get it. I SPECIFIED that the issue is WHEN DEALING WITH A SUPERNATURAL MANIFESTATION,

a supposed angel appears. A voice.

remember the issue of being sneaky.

that is what you have to worry about.

IS is a word that does not allow heresies like

DID come in the flesh but didn't rise from the dead

DID come in the flesh but only rose spiritually or by an illusion, or half ass barely and died later.


the issue is testing paranormal stuff someone is claiming to have or that appears to you.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

9:23 you apparently know nothing of how either spirits weasle when challenged, or how humans twist the Scriptures to promote all kinds of heresies,

and heresies were then and still are current which

deny actual physical Incarnation of Christ acknowledged as divine,

deny physical Resurrection

deny actual death on the Cross (but died later)

etc. etc.

and which were and are "backed up" by fake visions and revelations on the
one hand and fake scriptures on the other and redefining terms in Scripture. Not to mention claiming the Scriptures we have are fakes produced by people trying to control us or whatever.

Go wade through that garbage for a while, past and present, and you will see the point.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Maybe you should spend less time looking for the false Gospel and just simply focus on the True One, Christine. Would do you a world of good.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"The earliest Church Father to witness to a Byzantine text-type in substantial New Testament quotations is John Chrysostom (c. 349 — 407); although the fragmentary surviving works of Asterius the Sophist († 341) have also been considered to conform to the Byzantine text,[2] and the incomplete surviving translation of Wulfila (d. 383) into Gothic is often thought to derive from the Byzantine text type or an intermediary between the Byzantine and Western text types.[3] Chrysostom and Asterius used text only in 75% agreed with the standard Byzantine text. The second earliest translation to witness to a Greek base conforming generally to the Byzantine text in the Gospels is the Syriac Peshitta (though it has many Alexandrian and Western readings);[4] usually dated to the beginning of the 5th century;[5] although in respect of several much contested readings, such as Mark 1:2 and John 1:18, the Peshitta rather supports the Alexandrian witnesses. Dating from the fourth century, and hence possibly earlier than the Peshitta, is the Ethiopic version of the Gospels; best represented by the surviving fifth and sixth century manuscripts of the Garima Gospels and classified by Rochus Zuurmond as "early Byzantine"."

the materials dated to the beginning of the 5th century attest to their existence immediately prior at least.

Granted the fragments themselves don't go before 5th century, but
the existence of this is indicated by Byzantine influence in the Egytian, Western and Eclectic types.

Bear in mind most of these variants aren't really important, very rarely do you get to something that challenges doctrine or how to deal with stuff.

scroll around and click on links for details. Irenaeus seems to have used the Western type

Constance Cumbey said...

I'm getting ready for the Oregon trip. Sylvia Beadleston McKelvey who has researched the New Age Movement as long as I have and appeared in THE NEW AGE: PATHWAY TO PARADISE along with me will be my radio guest Saturday morning. It should be a TERRIFIC SHOW.


Anonymous said...

Then there is always the possibility that Constance looks informed with her New Age information as compared with Christine who focuses on smaller and more focused areas of information.

We will never know until Christine appears as a guest on the Microeffect show how that one on one comes out.

I look forward to the time when Constance has Christine on as a guest, maybe even several times as Christine has so much information to share. If Christine is important enough to take over the blog, then she is important enough to share Constance's time with that larger audience.

Constance, do let us know when Christine will appear as a guest. She is large scale in the chat room regularly and I'm sure she would be available to share what she knows about the New Age movement.

Anonymous said...

What a wasted opportunity. Christine could have taken over the show while you were gone Constance. She is such a friend of yours. Well, maybe in the future.

Constance Cumbey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Constance Cumbey said...

To the "anonymous" who is specializing these days in sarcasm:

Meanspiritedness is as bad as rambling -- maybe worse.

Both are aggravations to me.

This is still my blog and my radio program. Thanks to modern communications, I can do it just fine from the road!


Constance Cumbey said...

Blogger Constance Cumbey said...

I do not agree with all that Gail Riplinger has put forth; HOWEVER, I do not question her motives and I would NEVER call her a "Satanic parody" of ANYTHING.

Remember, some have made similar accusations against you here, so be very careful on others.

Gail Ripilnger's book was NEW AGE BIBLE VERSIONS.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

perhaps satanic parody was wrong as it might be implying she was doing this on purpose.

But while the overall picture - something is severely wrong with a lot of modern translations - is correct, the details and the idea that the KJV is itself inspired, so that God made any corrections needed because of corruptions in the Greek and you can forget learning Greek, etc., this is King James Onlyism and often say KJBO King James Bible Only and prefer KJB King James Bible meaning it is the ONLY Bible and these are the exact words of God which He spoke in English, I kid you not,

THIS makes the issue look ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

Dear Constance,

It's your blog but many of us find it has been ruined by one contributor. You said that you would ration her to one post per day, but you aren't doing. I took those words to mean forcibly if necessary, as you have asked her before to do that without effect. Will you take this action, please?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I want to say now, that I can't overstate how important Constance's work has been, and still is, in my
life and I am sure elsewhere.

Those of you who see me as aiming to replace her, haven't a clue. Or worse, some of you may have an agenda. Perhaps some of you are also the anonymice who have posted subtly and overt New Age stuff here. Perhaps not. But I notice patterns, and what
I post that draws fire is often attacking what can easily fly under the radar so to speak.

In bomber talk, "when you are taking fire, you are over the target."

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Constance appears beginning 1:16:50
time point use white ball move on red line under picture to move about in a youtube video. Other critics at various points.

Anonymous said...

Mean-spiritedness? Suggesting you let Christine take over as hostess of some of your programs is sarcasm? Of course not. She is your friend and I am sure you mean nothing negative.

Anonymous said...

Craig, this is Physicist. You wrote to Christine: "The statement that Jesus Christ HAS come in the flesh is a concern for you because you feel this does not convey continuing significance as would IS come. OK; but, why would anyone assume that Jesus somehow lost the flesh He initially came in? Aren’t there enough other Scriptures that confirm that Jesus is still enfleshed and will return in the flesh (Matthew 24:30; Acts 1:10-11)?

He DID lose the flesh that He initially came in. Then, unfleshed, He preached in Hades as Peter's letters recount; then he was reclothed in new flesh with some resemblance to the old.

I do think that Christine makes a valid exegetical point about "is come" vs "has come". On the other hand nobody uses "is come" nowadays; it was a good translation in King James' day but English has changed. How about "has reached us in the flesh"?

Anonymous said...

Now Christine, it was you that said it was time to start fighting the New Age movement. It's up there on your blog. Obviously you felt not enough was being done to fight the New Age movement. Well, here's your chance to become a leader.

Constance, take the wheat and leave the chaff.

Anonymous said...

King James Only is indeed a nonsense. The autograph texts in Hebrew and Greek are forever, but translations change because language changes. "Woman taken in adultery" - nowadays people would take this to mean taken sexually, but the intended meaning is "caught in adultery". And "Suffer little children" when in today's English it means "let little children..."? It is just plain silly to demand that people relearn Elizabethan English in order to study the word of God. King James was a great translation but it's out of date today.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Physicist, Jesus was reclothed in the SAME flesh which was then transformed into the resurrection body, empty tomb, remember?

has reached us in the flesh is still past tense, and can be warped by a false teacher remember most listeners are not theologians or Bible habituated even if they think they are, and redefinition of terms and explaining "this is what it really means" is a game of heretics from day one and the New Age now.

and "has reached us in the flesh" sounds like He has reached us who are in the flesh, again, vague, and open to all kinds of gnostic stuff.

the key to self defense physically begins with seeing the potential for trouble and avoiding it.

For instance, I was once walking up a street in a dubious neighborhood in San Francisco. I saw out of the corner of my eye a character who went onto a slant tangent across the street, that would intersect my path just as I would reach an alleyway opening.

I changed course, we never met.

Same deal in the non physical, where could something go? how can this particular thing be misapplied or twisted? If it can be, it has been or will be.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon 4:06, I think we need to take this information and make pamphlets addressing specific and general issues and distribute them outside churches. Especially megachurches. And then cut and run before being challenged to a debate if you are not able to handle that.

Use as a resource.

Do you think all whatever million count Internet accessing people land on this blog and read everything ever posted here?

Spiritual Counterfeits for all its failure in dealing with the New Age, its sellout in hopes of showing love (that and forgiveness and not resisting evil but turn the other cheek which is about a slap not serious blow or you wouldn't be in shape to turn the other cheek, and not judging are among the most misapplied out of context Scriptures for supporting evil or supporting what it takes to keep it unstopped)

and some of its leaders opposition to Constance,

did an excellent job long ago in its early days, when it was involved in a lawsuit to stop Transcendental Meditation in the workplace as mandatory on the basis that it is Hinduism (analysis of English translation of the puja or worship ceremony that is part of the initiation, puja means worship in sanskrit or Hindi whatever) and as such should not be demanded by employers or the state.

A similar move needs to be made today.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

the former is "Errors of The Emergent Church" this one is "The Death of Discernment - How The Shack Became the #1 Bestseller in Christianity"

Craig said...


Re your post at 12:07AM: your quote from wiki on Chrysostom, etc. is NOT indicative of Byzantine fragmentary evidence. You are misreading the intent. What that article is stating is that there is evidence of a Byzantine reading in a church ‘father’s’ text. This is not the same thing as an actual Byzantine manuscript. In the article referenced above about Pickering, Daniel Wallace makes that point well:

Early patristic writers are especially valuable in textual criticism because it can be determined when and where they lived. Many of them lived much earlier than the date of any Greek manuscripts now extant for a particular book. Some lived in the first or early second century. If it could be determined what kind of text they used when they quoted from the New Testament, such information would naturally be highly valuable. But textual critics do not usually give much weight to the church fathers. There are several reasons for this, some of which are as follows. First, when a church father quotes from the New Testament, it is not always possible to tell if he is quoting from memory or if he has a manuscript in front of him. Second, he rarely tells which book he is quoting from. He might say, “as it is written,” or “just as Paul says,” or “our Lord said.” Third, none of the original documents of any church fathers remains. Almost all the copies of these early patristic writers come from the Middle Ages. In other words textual criticism must be done on the church fathers in order to see how they attest to the New Testament text.

This last problem is significant because the Byzantine text was the majority text after the ninth century. And virtually all the copies of the fathers come from the ninth century or later. When a scribe was copying the New Testament text quoted by a church father, he would naturally conform that text to the one with which he was familiar.41 This fact has been recognized for the past 80 years. In 1912, Frederic G. Kenyon, a British textual critic, wrote, “Without any prejudice against the received text [i.e., the Byzantine text], it must be recognized that, where two alternatives are open, the one which diverges from the received text is more likely to be the one originally used by the Father in question.”42

You can continue reading for more reasons to be wary of a given reading in patristic evidence. Essentially, the only way to give it more credibility is to apply the principles of textual criticism upon all the patristic writings. That is, we’ve got to get closer to the original writings, and there are no extant writings contemporary with any father.

Craig said...

Physicist, re: your post at 4:06am:

You wrote, He DID lose the flesh that He initially came in. Then, unfleshed, He preached in Hades as Peter's letters recount; then he was reclothed in new flesh with some resemblance to the old.

Perhaps I’m splitting hairs, here; but, theologically, I’m not comfortable with your phraseology here. It sounds Nestorian. The way I understand Scripture, Jesus Christ never ‘lost’ His flesh per se, as the divine and human natures were in hypostatic union. The empty tomb signifies that Jesus left the tomb in a body with the ability to go through walls, etc.; however, nowhere do we have evidence – at least that I’m aware of at the moment – that Jesus actually ‘lost’ His earthly body in acquiring His new one. First Corinthians (15:50-52) says that we’ll be “changed” from the “perishable” to the “imperishable”. The resurrection of the saints is described as “sown a natural body” but “raised a spiritual body” (1 Cor 15:44), “for the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable” (1 Cor. 15:53; cf. 15:54). This does not seem to indicate an ‘unfleshing’ and ‘re-fleshing’; and I’d think Jesus was modeling our own resurrection – not fully, of course, for we aren’t hypostatically united to a divine nature!. (All quotes from NIV 1984.)

I’d say Jesus’ ‘preaching in Hades’ was done with His already changed body; that is, there was no interval between Him enfleshed in His earthly body and reclothed in His ‘new flesh’.

You wrote, I do think that Christine makes a valid exegetical point about "is come" vs "has come". On the other hand nobody uses "is come" nowadays; it was a good translation in King James' day but English has changed. How about "has reached us in the flesh"?

I’m not denying that; in fact I’m in agreement (I’m just not so sure Christine understood why she was trying to make her point, i.e., I’m not sure she knows Greek well enough to make this assessment). The Greek perfect tense-form is difficult to translate without resorting to clumsiness in the receptor language (assuming English or other modern, say, European languages: Spanish, French, etc.). I’d say your suggestion is a good one – better than any translation I’ve seen – but there are scholars today who may say, though better, your suggestion is still a bit shy of the meaning of the perfect tense-form. That is, it needs some further qualification about the continuing state of ‘having come’.

In an article I wrote a while back referencing this Scripture, I quoted two works re: the perfect tense of erchomai, “come”. The first was Colin Kruse (The Letters of John: The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000):

When in 4:2 the author refers to the confession ‘that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh’, he uses a perfect form of the verb ‘to come’, indicating that it is Christ’s status as one come in the flesh, rather than simply the historic act of his coming that he had in mind… (p 114).

Then I wrote the following, which is followed by a quote from Judith Lieu (I, II & III John: A Commentary. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2008):

Judith Lieu notes also the Greek perfect tense and explains the phraseology “in the flesh”. It is not merely making reference to the Virgin Birth/miraculous conception…but the entire manner with which His being is made known to us during the Incarnation:

Yet to acknowledge Jesus Christ as having come in flesh is not merely another way of saying that he has come into the world. “In flesh” signals not destination but mode and location: the means by which and wherein his presence is known… (p 167).

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Craig, "evidence of a Byzantine reading in a church ‘father’s’ text. This is not the same thing as an actual Byzantine manuscript."

On the contrary. you can't have a Byzantine reading in a Church Father's text, or in a heretical writer's twisting of Scripture type text either, if there are some like that,

without a Byzantine text type to be quoting from.

The lack of fragments testifies to the popularity of this text type, got used too much and fell apart. Also, it is likely that at such an early time Jewish practices like burning a damaged to uselessness Torah Scroll instead of throwing it out, was in use regarding The Gospels, since the processing in Church with The Gospels elevated and kissing the Gospels, is straight out of the synagogue service done even today.

As Pickering I think it was pointed out, survival intact is an indicator of nonuse ergo distrust of a MS, and nonsurvival except in bits here and there is a testimony to its heavy use.

I recall he also pointed out, that the fact the majority of surviving texts are Byzantine or similar, means it had a head start as well as a greater popularity, in being what was copied from in the first place.

Anonymous said...


If it's transformed then it's different from before it was transformed, although yes it is still flesh - that doesn't change so is the same. We surely agree.

"Has reached us" has implications that the event has continuing consequences, which is why I suggested it as a translation of the Greek. Translation is an art rather than a science and this was merely a suggestion. What would you suggest, given that "is come" now makes no sense and that "has come" suggests a one-off event that might be of little continuing consequence? (I share your concern over "h

I know that you boast about your ability to defend yourself physically. Pride is unwise as we never know when God will deflate it. There's always someone better than you out there.

Craig said...


Re: your post @ 7:34am:

You are missing the point that we must first apply the principles of textual criticism (TC) to any of the patristic evidence before we can determine if the text is valid to use in TC on Scripture. Just because a father has readings that align with the Byzantine does not mean the father’s original mss was actually writing with a Byz exemplar in mind. Is it not possible, in fact probable, that the copyist used his own Byzantine-influenced text/thought and imposed them on Chrysostom? That is the point that Wallace made. Unless and until you find an actual 3rd or 4th century mss – that is, one DATED specifically from that area either palaeographically and/or through carbon dating – you cannot make any strong assertion either way.

Pickering appears to be using his own internal bias for the TR (conflated with the MT) in his analysis. We must be diligent to let the evidence speak for itself, rather than imposing our own prejudices.

You wrote, I recall he [Pickering] also pointed out, that the fact the majority of surviving texts are Byzantine or similar, means it had a head start as well as a greater popularity, in being what was copied from in the first place.

If this is the case, then Pickering is ill-informed and/or imposing his own viewpoint upon the (lack of) evidence. Could it not be that once the texts were conformed in a certain way (adding errors and well-meaning “corrections”) that subsequent copyists were more careful with their scribal habits? Evidence points in that direction, as the Byzantine era mss are known to be more uniform.

But, the larger problem is that this is a hypothesis springing from thin air, as there are no Byz mss earlier than the 5th century to bolster this view. However, there ARE some Alexandrian and Western (and Caesarean) texts which paint a different picture.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"Translation is an art rather than a science"

That reminds me of the Monty Python skin about a bad Hungarian to English phrase book that landed in court.

"What would you suggest, given that "is come" now makes no sense and that "has come" suggests a one-off event that might be of little continuing consequence?"

IS COME is fine. it is a continuing reality implication. I fail to see why it makes no sense. English is fluid enough. Or you could run it into a sentence, Did indeed come and remain and remains forever in the flesh having died once and come back to life never to die again - er, isn't "is come" easier?

I don't boast, there was an example of avoiding the problem in the first place. Too many women cave at the thought of a smack across the chops.

Attitude is more important than skill and strength, since without that, the former will mean nothing, and with it you can sometimes prevail without much skill or strength. Sheer surprise of your reaction.

An interesting video, a field mouse kept attacking a coyote or fox, drove it back a few times, eventually it did get eaten, but if the size difference were better the results might have been different.

Anonymous said...


So you think translation is an exact science rather than an art?

"IS COME" won't be understood today. If it doesn't worry you that you use a phrase which people won't understand when you try to evangelise them, that's up to you.

Boasting again about your self-defence skills. AND denying it.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Translation is an exact art. "is come" is perfectly understandable. Might be taken as bad grammar, but that never prevented understanding. could try "is come and still is" if that makes you feel better.

That however would be tacking in more words than the text would allow, but might give better understanding. However, others could critique it for adding words not there. Is this what they call "dynamic equivalence?" In a few places, usually italicized, KJV had to add words not in the text to make the translation understandable because the implication of idiom and tense weren't present in one or two words in English.

My self defence skills are not as good as I would like them to be.

But as I said, all the skill in the world in a safe environment you can "tap out of" is not going to do much good if you are not willing to face pain and damage rather than get kidnapped, killed or raped. Otherwise you will not even try or will cave in first time you take a punch or other pain infliction.

Now, using that "is come" phrase is not about evangelizing, and was not used in that context. St. John addressed believers, not potential converts.

It is about testing the spirits.

or can't you wrap your mind around the fact you are talking to a 21st century woman who believes such things as literal demons, etc. exist?

that said, I am not sure this would work if the testee were an externalized bilocating human gone semi solid enough to talk and be visible, pretending to be a spirit, and still as able to lie as any human in a normal condition.

This is also a way of testing the overall doctrine of a prophet or a teacher.

But the idea that that is ONLY that is ridiculous, as is John MacArthur saying we don't have power or authority to bind satan. While his critique of charismatics is mostly sound, it may be that their blurry brained spiritual passivity is in dire need of the exercize of this power.

Also, casting out demons in Jesus' Name seems to be something that can be done with minimal relationship to Him. Notice the crew He rejects at The Last Judgement "didn't we cast out demons and do miracles in Your Name?" "begone from Me, I never knew you workers of iniquity."

Anonymous said...

Christine, I (9.02am) also believe that demons exist. That has nothing to do with what we were discussing; why bring it up?

"Translation is an exact art." To see that this is nonsense, observe that if it were so then there would be only one right way to translate every word and phrase from one language, at one point in time, to another; and that every purported alternative is not inferior but outright WRONG. That is is patently untrue. You can find a "best match" for many words, but words have overtones, and those overtones differ between the original and the target language. Obviously the Bible *should* be translated, but the Muslims have it right when they call translations (of the quran) "interpretations".

Anonymous said...

I read this somewhere above:

"Christine, I'm going to ration you to one post per day. Please be concise in your writing..."

Go ahead - make my day!

Anonymous said...

"it may be that their blurry brained spiritual passivity is in dire need of the exercize of this power."

Yeah thanks Christine, for the advice, you wonderful spiritual armchair captain of the blog.

You should test your own spirit by God's Word and leave us to do the same. ye a doer of the Word and not a hearer only. How many times are you going to mentally (oh so intellectually lol) dissect this 'frog'?

Knowledge? Perhaps some. Discernment? Next to none.

Christine you make yourself the leaven in the lump.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

" Anonymous said...
Christine, I (9.02am) also believe that demons exist. That has nothing to do with what we were discussing; why bring it up?"

Because that and that only is the issue about that passage in John's Epistle and issues of translating it, how a bad version could leave you vulnerable to deception if you are not sharp and if you don't read more than a few sentences at once or just memorize a little here and there.

""Translation is an exact art." To see that this is nonsense, observe that if it were so then there would be only one right way to translate every word and phrase from one language, at one point in time, to another; and that every purported alternative is not inferior but outright WRONG."

That's why I said exact art. Its not an exact science, its not a freewheeling art.

It needs as much exactitude as possible, and no except maybe for some stuff in some languages more than one word can be chosen in some cases two or three need to be used.

But the exact original meaning must be conveyed.

Some translations are WRONG others are just dicey without being totally wrong.

Anonymous said...


This is Physicist. (I sign myself as such only at the bottom of posts discussing physics.) Thank you for your compliment about my suggested translation "has reached us in the flesh".

Yes the Majority Text is a sort of updated Textus Receptus; what I should have said when I asserted that we need an updated TR is that we need CONSENSUS on an updated TR. Zane Hodges and Maurice Robinson have both offered up-to-date majority texts.

I had thought that the fragments from which the majority text has been reconstructed (including quotes from letters among the Church Fathers) were earlier than the Alexandrine complete documents. One would expect fragments from earlier than complete texts. I had forgotten as it is a while since I read Pickering that this is not the case. The argument against Alexandrine seems then to be: "Safer not to put all of your eggs in one basket". But what if your eggs all came from the same hen?

I have seen one scholar successfully reconstruct a family tree of a subset of extant manuscripts, tracing successive changes through its descendants like genetic mutations. But it is not always possible to proceed like that as a copyist might have two manuscripts in front of him, and there simply is not enough information to permit a unique reconstruction of the tree and then take its trunk as the autograph version.

I prefer Byzantine, but I rely on the summaries of scholars; I do not have the expertise to compare manuscripts for myself.

I see why you say what you do about resurrection bodies; there are things we cannot be certain of. But - changing the subject - you said I sounded a bit Nestorian. The Nestorians were Trinitarian and they believed that Jesus was fully human and fully divine. They simply took a different view of HOW he was both. For that, Cyril of Alexandria, using sophistry, got them excommunicated over something that the NT is silent about. Shameful! Their church lasted 1000 years but does not appear in our church histories.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

sounded Nestorian - I didn't say that, someone else weighing in did, frankly I don't think it sounded Nestorian which proposes something like two persons and two natures.

all the eggs from the same hen - the originals of the NT were not written in Egypt, with the possible exception of the Gospel of Mark but probably not that either.

(Mark was first bishop of Alexandria.)

So Alexandrian must have derived from Byzantine or something like it.

Craig said...


You wrote, I prefer Byzantine, but I rely on the summaries of scholars; I do not have the expertise to compare manuscripts for myself.

I once read something to the effect that the version of eschatology one is currently reading seems the most convincing until the next view is read, which supplants the former. I’ve encountered this to some degree with NT textual criticism. I was initially persuaded (without much research, I might add) by the conspiracy theory that all the Alexandrian mss were corrupted by gnostic thought, and therefore not to be trusted and thus avoided at all costs. Then I went to other extreme of viewing the Alexandrian as mostly superior to the later Byzantine mss, mainly because the former are earlier. I think the truth of the matter lies in the middle.

As to the latter part of your statement above, I lack the requisite expertise myself; but I think the layperson can come to a fairly reasonable conclusion with the right references (to include scouring the ‘net for additional resources – I’ve found quite a few scholarly articles this way). This would include Metzger’s A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, which records a good number of the known variants and explains why the committee chose one over another. However, the variants themselves are all in the Greek with no translation (or transliteration); yet the commentary itself is in English, so an English reader could get the gist. Roger Omanson has adapted Metzger, translating all the Greek, making it more comprehensible to the non-specialist (I reviewed his work here).

However, a caveat is in order. I initially picked up the first edition of the Metzger locally (not knowing there was a 2nd ed, at the time) when I happened upon it, and later bought the second. In comparing, I noticed that some of the variants in the first are not in the second (Omanson follows the second); but, more importantly, I noticed that both the rating system for variants had changed – essentially upgraded – with some of the ratings themselves actually upgraded to the next letter. Thus some ratings were doubly upgraded with absolutely no change in the commentary. In other words, there is no reason supplied for these double upgrades. The committee had changed a bit (I think it was because one or more members of the initial committee was/were deceased in the interim); but, that was all the changes I could find. As far as I know, though there were some mss discovered in the meantime, these weren’t of such import as to change the results. However, it could be that the committee, through further research, had good reason to account for the additional confidence in the findings. But, again, this is not mentioned.

Also, there appears to be a preference towards the Alexandrian mss, and this preference is more pronounced in the 2nd Metzger, through the double upgrades. I plan to explain in a bit more detail in a portion of an article I’m currently working on, so I’ll conclude this line of thought here.

Constance Cumbey said...

I've been on the air now for the past half hour and Sylvia Beadleston McKelvey will now be joining me on the air.

Please join us 888-747-1974



Anonymous said...

Here is a good post on what is really going on in Nevada.
the conservative

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

seems the feds have pulled out, or claim to be doing so, want others to leave so they can safely leave and supposedly give back cattle, I dunno, they might come back later with the support people gone.

interesting hypocrisy about the tortoises, killing them then claiming to be protecting them, some people used screen capture to keep papers on the BLM or other site mentioning plans to build a solar power site there a Chinese company, which papers were pulled from the Internet. That was the real motive for targetting him it seems.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I think it is possible, that serious physical persecution on Christians could come from the aberrant neo pentecostals/neo charismatics of the IHOP MSOG Joel's Army crew, or they would be with the NWO element doing this, seeing the NWO as a step towards the global rule of their supposed holy spirit, first clearing out the "disobedient brides" and other substandard (in their sight) Christians and (by their standards) heretics because opposing their "move of the spirit."

BTW, some pagans refer to their earth soul universal pantheistic whatnot as "the spirit," perhaps a deliberate deception, to disguise themselves when talking with Christians, or to ingratiate themselves with charismatics.

First, read this.

notice the issue of purging the church, as well as unbelievers,

now read

and parts 1-4 before that. you can skim a lot of it, you will recognize
much anyway. But the issue of there being second class Christians who\
are not so devoted is repeatedly raised.

Now, putting all this together, bearing in mind that in one of these articles
we see that a preacher of this category claimed to have seen The Holy
Spirit dancing around glad that finally he is going to be free to do all he
wants to with the christians, having been severely limited before,

and noticing that Joel's Army is part of this same scene,

and that the mountains of dominionism which incl. the military (and
this as you and herescope have noted is pretty amoral in its prayer
breakfast of military and political important people scene) are

it looks to me at least, tell me if you think so also, that somewhere
down the road a lot of "perfectly obedient brides" will be so used
to taking orders and taking authority, first praying in the wrath of
God that second they may start personally executing said "wrath,"

i.e., running around massacring the rest of us.

Does this sound like a reasonable deduction as to a possible

No way was that The Holy Spirit that guy saw, presumably in a
humanoid form, dancing around, especially with all these heresies
and ego enhancing ones at that.

Craig said...


Yes, I do believe the hyper-charismatics will eventually, through what they see as 'obedience', start killing off Christians. I argue that here, based on a somewhat recent topic at a conference hosted by Chuck Pierce, older words of Bill Hamon, and a recent 'word of the Lord' from the late Bob Jones:

And, of course, Constance herself has written about this very thing in her second book A Planned Deception.

paul said...

Here's something that a former Muslim Bro'hood
turned Christian says:

I believe it.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Craig 7:48 while one could dismiss this warrior talk as merely prayer warrior, the focus on the very physical warfare of the army in Joel's prophecy and the sheer potential of any mass movement to go physical, is disturbing.

Also, just when i got to the part about "maturing into one man," I thought of some horror flick type scene adding up to mass possession.

I think Constance suggested this also in regard to overly New Age non Christian type stuff.

I can't remember if the MSOG etc. crew is pre trib rapture or just dismisses the whole issue (and the antichrist) or what, but the potential for them accepting the antichrist as the individual manifestation of the spirit running them and head of this new "body" is kinda obvious.

It is also an example of how people who think they read The Bible in fact only read along with the preacher the part he is quoting, and don't go beyond that, either before and/or after.

Joel's Army is not described as an army of believers, and generally when God disciplined Israel He did not use believers of any sort to do so.

Farther along, it says that when the people repent, God will DESTROY THIS ARMY that is "Joel's army."

I doubt any of these people read that far.

Also,you don't need anything supernatural to do like that army, just have clawed soles to the feet of shoes and grappling hooks, and good armor, maybe hyped up on uppers as well.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:31 - thank you for that link. I've shared it as it goes further in the explanation of what is going on there than other pieces I've seen.

Some other links of interest Lucis Trust series of videos -
From University of the Seven Rays

Constitutional convention
Did the 34th state call for it?

Coming blue moons

Craig said...

The following was sent to me the other day by "oldmanoftheski":

Wayne Hage was Cliven Bundy's neighbor. The BLM ran him out of business. He has passed away, but shared what's really going on re the destruction of private property rights.

"Much of the water in the United States is owned by United Water, which is in turn owned by the Suez Company located in France but owned by the United Arab Emirates, whose mission is to be the largest water company in the world. "

Craig said...


Most hyper-charismatics are postmillennial, and hence, not pre-trib. With the explicit teaching that "Christ" will return IN and/or THROUGH His people, we have a New Age parallel. So, yes, they are ripe to accept the antichrist.

Here's another quote from the late Bob Jones (the "prophet," not the one of Bob Jones University):

As you begin to grow into the likeness of Christ you’re gonna begin to partake of the divine nature. And, once you begin to grow up in that-a-way you’ll continue to mature until you look like Christ all over the world. Jesus was one person. Now get ready for Jesuses [sic; plural of “Jesus”] all over the world.

Once they think that they themselves are the fully incarnated Christ, I do believe they will be demonically influenced to the point that they'll carry out their distorted version of "Joel's Army".

And here's Bill Johnson from Bethel Church in Redding, CA, in a recent podcast taken from a 'sermon':

So what is He looking for? He is looking for a people that will cooperate with the FULLNESS of God’s presence, operating and manifesting THROUGH them so that this world actually gets a FULL and ACCURATE taste of who Jesus is. It’s not us; it’s Him. But He dwells IN us in FULLNESS in bodily form…

And here's more of this "One New Man" from the same source:

until we all come to unity of faith and the KNOWLEDGE of the SON of God. Too many people think they know that don’t know. So the knowledge of the Son of God, to A perfect man. Look at the description. Millions and millions of body members come to A – singular – perfect man…a full-on revelation of the Person of Jesus, what He is like, how He is. To A perfect man, to the measure and stature – equal measure to the fullness of Christ...

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Craig, I think it would be a good idea for someone to make a list of ALL the churches into this stuff, and keep an eye on them and their members, incl. if possible a secondary list of members and locations, so that if a clutch of them exists in a given city or neighborhood, the real Christians there can be on guard ahead of time.

These people should not be trusted at all.

A friend of mine used to watch IHOP on TV, but then started asking me if demons could get in through the base of the spine, I said short answer yes, and forwarded him the kundalini - charismatic experience comparison chart from somewhere, and I don't think he is into this any more.

So a list of individuals interested or attending is not edifying, but those who are intensely into it, and are located in geographic bunches, represent a potential hazard.


but Christians who have guns or training in the kind of self defense that can take out multiple attackers should know who to be on the lookout for, especially if things get really hairy with the gummint.

five or six people coming to your door with a peaceful look like on the faces of the attacker in The Purge (watch that movie!)

should not be let in under any circumstances.

an attack from an unexpected direction is as dangerous as a full out surprise attack from no expected direction.

There are probably house churches and rural compounds that will fly under the radar on all this.

But any offer of refuge from any such people if there is persecution is probably a trap.

for self defense videos, look on youtube, you can download videos often from Internet Explorer but not Google on youtube without Internet Download Manager (a paid thing), "fightfast" and "tim larkin" and just "self defense" are good search terms, and explore videos that are on the right hand side.

if unarmed when attacked, consider disarming tactics so that the weapons they bring become your weapons for use on them!

This will be denounced either here or in some minds as alarmist and overreaction.

I don't anticipate this problem developing immediately, but when it does, IF it does, you should be prepared.

Also, those who are highly resistant to suggestion, might consider attending some of these events in twos or threes, and praying to bind Satan in Jesus' Name when these groups are doing their thing. Also praying over the shows broadcast.

printing out and distributing the simplest refutations, easiest reading, you can find online and do this at such churches would be a good idea also. Or leave on cars in parking lots during the services.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Anonymous said...

The weapons or our warfare are not carnal

Anonymous said...

Good post @ parablesblog.blogspot
Friday April 11 post 'Catching Fire'

Anonymous said...

Flight 370

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"The weapons or our warfare are not carnal"

most of the time they are not. at what point do you draw the line as to carnal or physical?

no distribution of tracts?

no running and hiding?

no physical resistance at some point maybe? Bear in mind that to turn the other cheek, you need to be conscious and more or less on your feet to do so. This turn the other cheek teaching by Jesus must have been about a slap not a spinning kick to the head or a brick upside your head. It was addressed to people to whom small to medium insult was reason to kill or at least to do far more damage than was done, and then bear grudges ever after.

faced with attack anti Christian hate groups raiding in the night, do we refrain from calling the police who are armed with clubs and guns?

faced with invasion by moslems or a hypothetical pagan militarily competent country, do we refuse to use the army or denounce its use?

faced with the communist menace, did we denounce military options or demand unilateral disarmament down to the rifles and pistols?

Anonymous said...

We live in a first world so called "christian" body here in the west. We demand protection from persecution. We strongly desire "peace and safety". At ALL costs! See the christians of North Korea,or of Africa, who are being butchered by the demon possessed Muslims,or the christians of Afghanistan etc.for the flip side of our faith.

Anonymous said...

I published a post just prior to this 11:34 A.M. post and it did show up on this thread, then it quickly disappeared??? I'm not an internet expert so don't know how or why this happens? When it showed up at the bottom of this thread I re-proof read it. So indeed it was there.

Rich Peterson - Medford said...


Please check your gmail account.


Anonymous said...

More on rancher Bundy

paul said...

I re post this since no one apparently noticed it before though it may just be a little more relevant some of the current chatter.
cut and paste:

I sadly agree with 11:34 above.
Hey folks, Catholics may have some problems. Protestants may have some problems, but they are both a very long way from murdering, gassing,
hijacking, beheading and torturing people because they believe in the One whom God called his "beloved son in whom he was well pleased".
They HATE Jews and Christians.
The ones that are slicing people's throats
every day, in Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Egypt, North Korea, and other places (all Muslim), DON'T ASK ask if you're Catholic or Protestant.

Please read the history of this war that's been going on already for centuries, at the above link.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Turkey 'Aided Islamist Fighters' in Attack on Syrian Christian Town

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

note on panentheism - as noted by wikipedia there are several forms of this. the PERMEATION by God of everything, so that if you are hugging a tree you are hugging God in it, so to speak, as explained by a speaker against contemplative spirituality, is NOT the implication of God's presence everywhere maintaining everything that is also categorizable as panentheistic.

presence is not identity. God is not tree sap which permeates the tree. The idea of God being in all as the speaker points out logically leads to the automatic salvation of all or universalism, condemned a long time ago at an ecumenical council, I think it was Ephesus, one of the condemned notions of Origen (often wrongly called a Church Father but he isn't, however he had some unfortunate influence on some who were such as the idea of pre fall human bodies being less densely material like ours are now, even speculations that something other than sex would have been used to reproduce if no fall had occurred).

God is only in and/or united to the believer in Christ. the speaker points out that contemplative prayer or contemplative worship proposes to commune with the soul of God without mediation by Christ or The Holy Spirit. impossible.

Eastern Orthodox theosis is identical to the Protestant idea of progressive sanctification. union with God is by grace not by nature, along the lines of 2 Peter 1:4 "Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust."

union like the union of individuals with each other in an organization, a close fellowship, agreement, an activity, not union like some amoeba engulfing and digesting a paramecium or two bottles of gas opened and the contents merging.

It is unfortunate that terminology is so similar among dissimilar notions.

monastic tradition in EO has many warnings against spiritual deception, pretty nearly absent from the contemplative stuff in liberal protestantism or whatever it is, there are also some warnings against deception in RC contemplative tradition, but it is much more soulish or sensual in its nature than the Orthodox, a brief look at the kind of experiences will show you that.

Anonymous said...

Beth H shared this:
Topic 72 The Externalization of the Hierarchy:
They are no longer hiding it. This is an Alice Bailey channel, the uploads are recent from Feb. 2014. This video openly admits that with the new age comes the mysteries religions. So here we listen Bailey herself connect in her own words, Masonry is Theosophy.

Many occult videos are shown on the right of the page.

Anonymous said...

Another from Beth:

The Age Of Evil - Theosophy:
This is one of the best New World Order movies on you tube and has Constance in it.

Constance Cumbey said...

I'm in Oregon since Monday -- Internet speed where I am is not what I'm used to at home, but will try to do a significant post soon.

I'm speaking in Canyonville, but staying in Roseburg, OR.


Constance Cumbey said...

I'm in Oregon since Monday -- Internet speed where I am is not what I'm used to at home, but will try to do a significant post soon.

I'm speaking in Canyonville, but staying in Roseburg, OR.


Constance Cumbey said...

I'nm in Oregon since Monday -- Internet speeds are not what I'm used to at home.


Anonymous said...

Good teaching on the three harvest 'raptures'

the open
Wednesday April 16, 2014

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

this is just another way of bringing in apre trib rapture for some of us. II Thes. 4:16-17 and the previous verses saying Jesus won't come back until AFTER the antichrist is revealed rule all this stuff out. One Second Coming, living saints caught up to Him in the clouds, stay with Him there while God's wrath pours out on the antichrist and his followers, and we stay with Jesus Who after that continues descent to rule on earth.

real simple. All this complicated stuff tries to separate things that are obviously one event.

No pre trib of any kind interpretations exist prior to a couple of RC speculations after the Reformation started, then Scofield and Darby got it rolling Ephraim the Syrian makes it clear that the tribulation coming on the earth because of sins is not the tribulation by the antichrist but against the antichrist, elsewhere is clearly post trib.

I thought you were anti pre trib?

It is impossible to get pre trib or even mid trib without doing the same esoteric backflips with Scripture that the cultists and heretics always did and still do, and all the date setters, so obviously this is not how to handle Scripture.

It sounds convincing but only with Scriptures taken out of context, suppressing others and chopping things up.

Matthew chapter 24 "immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days The Sign of The Son of Man will appear...."

hey, how hard its it to get beheaded, especially with a gillotine? no big deal.

Anonymous said...

Hey Christine, months ago you were VERY critical of US policy towards Iran - a country with an ideology which says kill the infidel thaty is developing nukes - and said that the US was risking WW3. But when good ol' Vladimir the Orthodox actually INVADES part of another sovereign State, ie Crimea, an action that diplomatically is at least as risky, what do we hear from you?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

First off, my reason for criticism about Iran is that it is rattling the tiger cage. As I made it clear then, and subsequent mainstream news has probably shown by now, Russia and China both back Iran. China has already stated that an attack on Pakistan is an attack on China, and while it has not drawn that line in the sand re Iran, it would probably act accordingly.

US action anywhere with or without NATO is in the service of satanic elites. There are no good guys to speak of.

It is the US backed rebels who are persecuting Christians and Jews, not Hezbollah (unless a moslem converts to Christianity or a Christian converts a moslem in which case both might die, but off the bat just for being there, no, there isn't this kind of action being reported out of Iran, and was not going on under Assad.)

You want regional war that go could go into WW 3 (and we would probably be occupied as a result)? just attack Iran.

Putin's activities do not have such risk, if we mind our own business and stay out of it.

But that version that he invaded Crimea is a lie.

Crimea was tacked artificially onto Ukraine by Kruschev, and was not happy there. Crimea is also essential to Russia regional security, and to their continued functionality in Syria, which being in support of Assad also effectively supports Christians whether that is the intent or not.

Crimea got fed up with the illegal takeover in Kiev and went independent then applied to be taken back into Russia.

Russian actions a bit over the border into Ukraine I think it was were to protect pipelines about to be blown up.

Frankly, the issues you raise show you are not thinking clearly. First off, Crimea is none of our business except that of course bottling up Russia would minimize its ability to protect Assad.

China has already got warships in the Mediterranean to back Syria, BTW.

If you give a hoot about Christians in Syria, then you will back Russia in whatever moves it takes to secure its ability to project force into the Middle East, which is Assad's only hope aside from China, which is less closely tied to Syria than to Iran, a major supplier of oil to China.

you are talking about issues like invading sovereign states (which didn't happen outside the spin of the lamestream media which is run by a handful of owners and embedded CIA agents who serve military industrial complex interests that want more war to make more money, and some want to destroy Christianity).

The REAL issue is, what is the end result of the action taken? Right now, the end result is that Russia is still able to project force by sea into the Middle East in support of Syria.

The EU and American covert ops created Kiev takeover was partly to undermine this ability.

Russia did nothing USA hasn't been doing here and there, did nothing against international law especially with the Kosovo precedent.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Are the Blood Moons a legitimate end times sign?

(short answer: no.)

Anonymous said...

Christine I mentioned Iran, not Syria, so don't divert. I never said that USA = good and Russia = bad, my own opinions don't matter, I was just pointing out your INCONSISTENCY. What a lot of hot air to try to cover it over!
And ask the Crimean Tatars who should own the place.

Anonymous said...

I'd reply to Walid Shoebat that those medieval guys had no right to fight physically against the attacking Muslims in defence of the church, but every right to fight them in defence of their lands and homes and families.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

To be fully consistent, we got no business messing around in Syria, and by definition nothing outside of Europe is NATO's business, and its terms require a member to be attacked to start hostilities on NATO's part, but all the brawls they've been in (mostly as USA puppets) have been without any member being attacked.

We got no business in Syria, and we got no business in Crimea and Ukraine, especially since Ukraine is not a NATO member or an EU member.

is that consistent enough?

Ah but you are really with your head up your posterior if you think I am diverting.

Syria is not a diversion. Russian security interests (which to be consistent we gotta acknowledge as well as our own, golden rule remember?) are not a diversion.


Crimea, Ukraine, Syria, etc. are all blips on the same radar screen.

anon 8:11 I could not DISAGREE with you more.

however, the standard operating procedure is to recruit citizens for The Kingdom of God rather than physically conquer ground, all you get then is nominal citizens. The actual rule physically with military type action to consolidate it will be at The Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The confusion of these issues leads to nothing but trouble.

effectively however, you cannot distinguish all that easily between defending lands and families and defending the church, because IF your families and you are Christian you ARE the church pretty much.

Also, while military action to expand the church is not a good idea, military action to protect land it is either tolerated or normative in, is a good service of Christianity, since maintaining this status quo keeps more people getting converted or catechized in Christianity, and provides a safe place for Christian refugees from persecution to run to.

Anonymous said...

"you are really with your head up your posterior if you think I am diverting."

When I mentioned USA, Russia, Ukraine and Crimea and you started going on about Syria? Furthermore your imagery says more about you than me.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Crimea is ALL ABOUT SYRIA. both our effort to turn Ukraine into an EU country, and gain control over Russia's Black Sea naval base already in Crimea by treaty, to keep them from access to Syria.

Crimea is also essential to Russian security and strategic interests.

It is impossible to discuss Crimea and Ukraine, especially since the latter is part of the flat plain no natural boundaries not defensible perimeter to the Russian core, without talking geopolitics.

I could say head up your ass, or I could say you are not seeing the big picture.

Both say the same about you. Both only say something about whether I am right or not. choice of words is not important.

But you keep thinking in tiny strips of world at a time, and someday someone will hand you your head if you are on or in stray ordinance range of the front lines.

your kind of thinking will make it possible for those who don't care to get us into WW 3 to their advantage without effective opposition.

your kind of thinking will also mean, that you will not see this mess coming, and be able to hide or escape, in time, to avoid being caught up in it.

Not understanding the issues that Crimea is only the iceberg tip of, not understanding the larger context, incl. NATO encroachment over the decades (in violation of an agreement this wouldn't happen), you will not see why Russia will fight to the death - ours in actuality - to defend interests you do not understand the criticality of which.

not understanding this, the response will be unexpected.

Now if you are talking about issues these are the issues. Geopolitics. Not Crimea or sovereign states or anything like that.

But if all you are trying to do is to expose me as inconsistent, well, you just show you don't understand what is going on or you wouldn't target me with this subject.

And that in itself if you are only trying to find something to attack about me, and not sincerely discussing issues, tells more about you than anything I could say. Can you spell petty and irrelevant and diversionary?

Geopolitics. remember that word always. Very few things are what they appear to be on the surface.

Anonymous said...

"anon 8:11 I could not DISAGREE with you more."

But what you then say basically agrees with what I said. Please check again as I think you might have misread me 180 degrees.

Certainly it would look to attackers like Christian defenders were making a holy war, but for those defenders themselves their motivation before God is important - especially on the Day of Judgement.

Anon 8:11am

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon 10:48 you said "those medieval guys had no right to fight physically against the attacking Muslims in defence of the church, but every right to fight them in defence of their lands and homes and families."

I am arguing you do have a right and duty to defend the church if it is physically attacked, to defend Christianity if it is under physical attack.

the Crusades were not about defence actually, and there was a definite political game going on as well.

Spain and so forth was about defence about driving back out what had come in. Europe was RC and Middle Eastern Christians were mostly EO and the Crusades took time out to attack the Orthodox and do atrocities in Constantinople.

Anonymous said...

"Both say the same about you. Both only say something about whether I am right or not. choice of words is not important."

O really? So YOU don't mind at all if instead of somebody saying to you "respectfully I disagree" they say that you are talking unmitigated cr*p and should shut the **** up?

Jesus didn't tell the pharisees that they had their heads up their asses. He had too much respect for them for that.

On matters of fact, you ducked the question about the Crimean tatars and you are ignoring the fact that the Dardanelles Strait through which Russian warships must sail to Syria is already in a NATO country. Moreover Russia has its own Black Sea coastline without needing access via Crimea. Also, here is a quote from a news blog:

"There is a common misperception that eastern Ukraine is populated largely by native Russian-speakers. In fact, Crimea is the one and only Ukrainian region with a Russian-speaking majority. In the three eastern regions of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk, Russian-speakers are minorities of 26 per cent, 38 per cent and 39 per cent respectively. Incidentally, when Ukraine held a referendum on whether to leave the Soviet Union in December 1991, more than 80 per cent of voters in these three regions supported Ukrainian independence."


(NB I am quoting only the paragraph above from this article.)

Anonymous said...

"you do have a right and duty to defend the church if it is physically attacked, to defend Christianity if it is under physical attack."

Absolutely not. Then you get into a worldly tit for tat with others. Read the sermon on the mount. Read the armor in Ephesians 6.

Anonymous said...

"the standard operating procedure is to recruit citizens for The Kingdom of God rather than physically conquer ground, all you get then is nominal citizens"

Like Valdimir the Great decreeing the baptism of his subjects 1000 years ago, you mean?

Anonymous said...

Christine the amazon 'christian'. Got her 'Rambo' on again today. She loves to rambo this blog.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Crimean tatars - not the only people there aside from Russians. Russian empire was always multi ethnic and mostly managed to keep intact despite that. Ducking isn't what happened, it is just irrelevant unless you want everything a patchwork of tiny states.

Yes, conversion by decree makes a mess.

Jesus called the Pharisees a generation of vipers and compared them to rotting corpses inside apparently nice looking tombs.

that is a bit rougher than what I said, which did not add up to the comparison you made.

Constantine's approach was wiser, he made Christianity legal and protected, it was two emperors later who made it the official religion and you probably had to be Christian to get ahead.

The destruction of the false gods was good, because these were a standing paranormal and spiritual danger to the land, and the king having ranged himself under the True God just as any pagan king under a false god would do, demanded his subjects - or conquered peoples - worship his god.

However, it would have been better to have them all enrolled as catechumens and have a massive reeducation campaign instead of mass baptism and that's it.

Anonymous said...

"it would have been better to have them all enrolled as catechumens and have a massive reeducation campaign instead of mass baptism"

I agree with that Christine. Question is, what about the ones who after taking the course still say that they don't believe? Do you leave them to their consciences or do you persecute them because they might lead the faithful astray, and even execute them as traitors to the church/State conglomeration?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

church state conglomeration was normative for most lands and cultures, still effectively is in most primitve societies and Japan though it may not be called that, a serious treason to the tribal nation is indicated by not worshipping its gods. Ancient Rome was a case in point.

leave them to their conscience you don't want phonies in church and worse yet getting into the priesthood. We got enough of that anyway in all denominations' clergy.

But prohibition of certain practices and of public or state supported paganism would be a good idea.

remember, St. Paul said demons hide behind the idols, and you don't want to feed the demons.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 221   Newer› Newest»