I am still struggling both with my eyes and painful arthritis. My physician has now prescribed a once a day fairly inexpensive pill that I have now taken for the first two days with significant relief. I'm hoping that continues. But there are encouraging fronts, nonetheless.
A Polish publisher contacted me via telephone directly from Poland. He had been trying to reach me for some time. He said he wanted to have HIDDEN DANGERS OF THE RAINBOW translated into the Polish language for circulation there and in Polish speaking regions. I happily gave my consent. He is sending the proposed contract that I will review and sign. Additionally, I have volunteered to him that I would add an updating foreword as well as an end chapter with updates. I could use that supplemental material to update Hidden Dangers' other editions (English, Dutch, Norwegian, and German). He tells me it will take approximately six months to translate and produce.
Well, I suspect this will not make Isobel Blackthorn (author of THE UNLIKELY OCCULTIST - ALICE ANN BAILEY) happy. It probably will not delight the Fetzer Institute either. Their strategy is to publish the worst of the New Age and then label it as good, right, and true. The New Age Movement is very much out there and in public view as "Meditation", "Mindfulness", and a host of new leaders and shamans. A daughter of the King of Norway is living in the United States and is dating a New Age shaman leader. The New Age Movement is far from dead. The Fetzer Institute claims that they will now succeed whereas they failed in 1982 because now a majority are SBNR (Spiritual but not religious).
I have heard recently from New Agers exiting the New Age Movement and now seeking information to help their still involved friends. I've had some wonderful telephone conversations with some. Steve Bancarz is doing an excellent job of reaching out to New Agers with his own conversion account. I'm greatly encouraged by his work and by the work of another very prominent former New Ager, Doreen Virtue. There is a great deal of discussion about Kanye West and his very public profession of his belief and faith in Jesus. Steve Bancarz believes this is a tremendous victory for God's Kingdom. I am inclined to believe in Steve's analysis. Some watchers feel and have stated otherwise; however, it is my belief that those exiting the New Age Movement and other similar circles have had their heads played with for a long time and there is often far from theological perfection while the Holy Spirit is doing His work. There is a song sung by children, "God's still working on me." Me, too!
I hope to post more frequently from now on. Please pray that God strengthens me.
Sincerely,
CONSTANCE
632 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 632 Newer› Newest»On The Jews And Their Lies
"On the Jews and Their Lies" is a 65,000-word anti-Judaic treatise written in 1543 by the German Reformation leader Martin Luther (1483-1546).
Luther's attitude toward the Jews took different forms during his lifetime. In his earlier period, until 1537 or not much earlier, he wanted to convert Jews to Lutheranism...but failed.
In his LATER period when he wrote this particular treatise, he DENOUNCED them and URGED their PERSECUTION.[1]
In the treatise, he argues that Jewish synagogues and schools be SET ON FIRE, their prayer books DESTROYED, rabbis FORBIDDEN to preach, homes BURNED, and property and money CONFISCATED. They should be shown NO mercy or kindness,[2] afforded NO legal protection,[3] and "these poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into FORCED LABOR or EXPELLED FOR ALL TIME.[4] He also seems to advocate their MURDER, writing "[W]e are at fault in NOT slaying them".[5]
The book may have had an impact on creating antisemitic Germanic thought through the Middle Ages.[6] During World War II, copies of the book were held up by NAZIS at rallies, and the prevailing scholarly CONSENSUS is that it had a SIGNIFICANT impact on the HOLOCAUST.[7]
...
In the treatise, Martin Luther describes Jews (in the sense of followers of Judaism) as a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth".[9] Luther wrote that they are "full of the devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine",[10] and the synagogue is an "incorrigible whore and an evil slut".[11]
...
The prevailing scholarly view since the Second World War is that the treatise exercised a major and persistent influence on Germany's attitude toward its Jewish citizens in the centuries between the Reformation and the Holocaust.[6][31][32] Four hundred years after it was written, the Nazis displayed 'On the Jews and Their Lies' during Nuremberg rallies, and the city of Nuremberg presented a first edition to Julius Streicher, editor of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer, the newspaper describing it, on Streicher's first encounter with the treatise in 1937, as the most radically antisemitic tract EVER published.[7]
...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies
RayB,
My comment on this is simply to state that I believe numerous Scriptures in the Bible point to God's will to use physical Israel as a witness to God's existence and power in the physical earth, throughout history, until the End Times.
I am not yet going to attempt to disprove or prove this thesis, but I would simply like to ask you now, whether you also believe that -- or not.
Reflect how incredible it is that a whole people could survive for 2,000 years with a distinct identity after having been scattered throughout the earth and persecuted for centuries. Ask yourself why it seems like Satan has been out to get the Jews throughout history. Ask yourself why Islam is out to get the Jews even more than the Christians. Ask yourself why pagans like Hitler were out to the get the Jews. Why have so many people inspired by the devil himself been out to get Jews and Christians both, but Jews even more so? Hitler would have turned his attention to Christians next, after having used some of them and martyring many of them. The useful idiots would have been purged next. But he was out to get the Jews first!
Think about this. It was normal for people throughout the ancient world, both in the civilized empires and in the barbarian tribes, not to have any identity left, after they lost their land! Losing your land meant losing your family name! Losing both meant losing your very identity! Enslavement inevitably followed from losing family land and family name.
Think about how incredible it is that the Jews regathered in Israel after all that time. Think about how incredible it was that the Jews stuck in the Muslim lands made it safely into Israel after the regathering! Nearly 1,000,000 of them in three years' time!
I believe that God wants the world to see His hand, physically, with his original physical Israel. And I believe He wants the Jews of Israel to return to Him by believing in Him again as proved by His protection of them.
Tiny Israel is surrounded by the same peoples who historically swept across the Byzantine Empire and created the Ottoman Empire like a flood or a locust plague! These are the same people who historically occupied Spain. In our time the Middle East has always been chaos and confusion, fighting against each other, not united, and mainly known for terrorism and not conquest. It was not always so. They will try again to conquer Israel with land armies and not only terrorist attacks. God predicts it. It's in His Word. It is in His Word that it is God's will for Jesus at His Second Coming to defend literal, physical Israel as a witness to the whole world Who He is, how He works and that He is real and He means business.
As for what exactly is meant by "remnant", it is a mystery of God.
Dear 9:26 AM,
That was an excellent post.
Thank you.
Craig,
Re: your 12:25 AM post:
I'm not sure what you are attempting to imply by stating "Calvin sounds like RayB here—or RayB sounds like Calvin.
If it walks like a duck…"
Craig,
That I would be in agreement with what Calvin says on this subject means exactly what to you? Your "if it walks like a duck ..." is somewhat demeaning, IMO. Why do you always have to make everything so personal, Craig?
That begs the question "Is RayB all that he's quacked up to be?"
How Romanism Ruined America
https://nopeacewithrome.com/how-romanism-ruined-america-by-john-robbins/
...
In 1917, the Roman Church-State hierarchy in the United States formed the National Catholic War Council (later to be named the National Conference of Catholic Bishops[VI]). In 1919 its administrative committee issued a plan written by John Ryan, the Bishops’ Program of Social Reconstruction. The plan advocated government unemployment, sickness, invalidity, and old age insurance; a federal child labor law; legal enforcement of labor’s right to organize; public housing; graduated taxation on inheritances, incomes, and excess profits; regulation of public utility rates; worker participation in management, and so on.[13] It is not surprising, then, that when Franklin Roosevelt was elected President in 1932, he invited Professor Ryan to join his administration. Ryan had been a proponent of the New Deal for decades, long before Franklin Roosevelt was elected to office. Abell pointed out that “During the Great Depression of the 1930s the Catholic social movement seemingly flourished. All the immediate measures set forth in the Bishops’ Program of 1919 were adopted in whole or in part.” [14]
...
I wonder what happened to the very recent "accelerationism (etc)" topic blog that disappeared after just taking a handful of comments the other day.
Everything okay, Constance?
I was wondering that too???? We're did it go, and why?
https://blockonomi.com/federal-reserve-digital-currency/
Rich in Oregon: Any input on this matter?
That is the 9:57 & 10:15 matter.
Constance Cumbey Twitter
https://mobile.twitter.com/cumbey?lang=en
Constance Cumbey Papers
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/b/bhlead/umich-bhl-04101?byte=149567646;focusrgn=bioghist;subview=standard;view=reslist
Rick Wiles of TruNews interviews Steve and Jana Ben-Nun of Israeli News Live on the subject "Christianity Vs. Evangelical Zionism." Numerous important subjects are covered in detail, many of which most Christians have never even heard before.
The interview begins at the 10 minute mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3T3n4ShefU
RayB,
I have revisited Romanism and the Reformation, and now I'm on the last chapter again. The last chapter is about Israel of the Old Testament foreshadowing the spiritual Israel of the New Testament. Ezra and Nehemiah are compared to the Reformers. Babylonian captivity is compared to the Roman Catholic Church's Dark Ages. The author of Romanism and the Reformation believes that the Old Testament foreshadowing was pre-ordained by God. It would be consistent with this belief that, at His Second Coming, Jesus will return to the spiritual Pharisees and the spiritual Sadducees of spiritual Israel. That means the Protestant Church. Although the author does not extend his thinking to this conclusion, it seems like an obvious deduction to make, given his logic.
One characteristic of the Pharisees and Sadducees was that they thought they were better than the Samaritans -- and even better than the Galileeans, who were the people Jesus grew up among. Should we, as Christians, assume we are always necessarily better than the Orthodox Jews? Could we be in danger of coming full circle, in a very ironic way?
"The restoration from Babylon inaugurated a blessed era of civil and religious liberty. The restored remnant were not without severe trials; it was by no means easy for them to accomplish their task in face of the persistent and successful opposition of Sanballat the Horonite and his confederates and companions. Again and again the work had to cease, and the people would have given up in despair but for the encouraging and stimulating words of Haggai, Zechariah, and other prophets. The joint ministry of Ezra and Nehemiah seems to have lasted about half a century, and they were permitted to see the work accomplished, the Jewish people liberated from their long exile, and, better still, from all tendency to heathenism and idolatry. They never fell back into that sin after the return from Babylon. The long suspended worship of God was restored; magistrates, judges, and teachers of the law were appointed over the land. The people entered into a solemn covenant to separate themselves from all idolaters, and even, painful as it was, from the heathen wives some of them had taken; and before Ezra and Nehemiah passed to their rest the people, the worship, the temple, and the city were all restored, and the canon of Old Testament Scripture was arranged and closed.
Many political and military troubles arose afterwards, but no such overthrow and restoration. It was to that second temple that Christ came, thus making the glory of the latter house greater than that of the former."
New Age Movement Exposé Videos
How Did Hollywood Get So ‘Woke’?
By Michael L. Brown
Life Site News
02/09/20
...
How, then, did their message become so slanted? Why [during the Academy awards broadcast] a quotation from Karl Marx? Why the concern about inseminating a cow?
This, in my view, is the result of taking up causes from a me-centered perspective. (I would say “man-centered,” but that uses the dreaded “m” word. To say “human-centered” doesn’t seem to cut it as well.) In other words, rather than seeing things from God’s perspective, they see things from an earthly perspective.
So, rather than see the meaning of marriage as God intended it for human flourishing and the wellbeing of society, they see the “injustice” of two women not being allowed to “marry.”
That also means that they see animals as equal to humans (since humans are not uniquely created in the image of God). They even see trees as equal to humans (and even better than humans, since trees are noble creatures that never hurt anyone).
As to how these views became so dominant in Hollywood, this would seem to reflect a process similar to that in our universities. Specifically, after the counterculture shift of the 1960s, an increasing number of leftist intellectuals and artists and cultural influencers rose to the top. And they now hold positions of dominance, effectively silencing and suppressing those who dissent.
Interestingly, though, many “common people” – the proletariat, if you will – are not having it. As the Mail also reported, “while the well-heeled crowd at the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles applauded their speeches, their ‘lectures’ nauseated the audience at home.
...
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/how-did-hollywood-get-so-woke
J,
Having read your post, just a few thoughts and comments. I'll try to be brief.
First, I think in general, the book Romanism and the Reformation is a worthwhile read. Primarily, because it is a good source that illustrates that Historicism was the predominant eschatology of the orthodox (small "o") church for over 1800 years. It has unfortunately been replaced as the orthodox view with the "modern" system of John Nelson Darby's invention known as Dispensationalism, which was made extremely popular by the Scofield Reference Bible, along with Bible colleges such as the Dallas Theological Seminary and the Moody Bible Institute. Having said that, I don't necessarily agree with ALL of the conclusions that are enumerated in the R & R book.
As to your question: "Should we, as Christians, assume we are always necessarily better than the Orthodox Jews?" I don't think that it is a matter at all as to being "better" than "Orthodox Jews," it is rather, a matter of truth. Orthodox Jews, in spite of the overwhelming preponderance of Scriptural evidence, continue to reject Jesus Christ as their Messiah, without which, there is no solid foundation for obtaining justification with God. Also, IF a person professes to be a "Christian" and thinks that he/she is "better" than anyone else, I doubt sincerely that they have experienced God's grace. A person may tenaciously cling to the truth, but that should never make that person sense a feeling of superiority over another. If you are truly saved, you are a SINNER that is saved by the grace of God alone ... a GIFT that YOU have not earned.
Regarding the last section of your post: I personally do not agree with the author's summation as to the spiritual state of the Jews after their Babylonian captivity. The Jewish hierarchy were very much influenced by the pagan culture of Babylon, as reflected in the Babylonian Talmud, the writings of the Rabbis during the captivity. These writings (the Talmud) forms the foundation for the occultish, Babylonian beliefs of Kabbalah. While Orthodox Jews may claim that they follow the Torah and that it has precedence over the Talmud, in reality, that is not true. It is the Talmud, not Torah, that represents the basis for their belief in "tradition." The Talmud is also the foundation upon which the "teaching of commandments of men, rather than the Commandments of God" that Christ was referring to, and condemned. The Pharisees were (and are) followers of the Talmud, as evidenced by their 600+ "Laws" that are enumerated by the numerous Rabbis in the Talmud. These "Laws" are NOT found in the Torah, yet they are strictly followed, even today, by Orthodox Jews. In a very real sense, Orthodox Jews are modern day Pharisees that follow the very same Talmud that Christ condemned.
It can't be emphasized enough that when the Jews departed Babylon, they took with them the basis for the occultism beliefs of Kabbalhaism, the Talmud. How the author in your post could clam that "the Jewish people liberated from their long exile, and, better still, from all tendency to heathenism and idolatry. They never fell back into that sin after the return from Babylon" is beyond me, because it simply isn't true. Rather than Christianity declaring that "they are better," is is the Talmud, and not the Bible, that declares that Jews are far superior to the Goyim, which they consider to be on a par with lowly animals, such as dogs! In a VERY real sense, the Talmud makes the Jewish people themselves an idol, because it elevates the Jewish people far above every other people in the world.
J, take the time to watch the video I posted at 11:01 PM. Warning: some of it may be shocking. AGAIN, I don't agree with everything in this video, but it is definitely worth watching because it scratches the surface on some of these points that I've tried to make.
God has the last WORD, RayB, not you.
God does the sorting, RayB, not you.
You "preach" grace...but not often that we see that from you here.
Practice what you preach, RayB...to Jews too.
That is what Apostle Paul did...
unless you want to change what the Holy Spirit wrote in Scripture through him..
Does the B of your name stand for bias, RayB?
You are well known here, in fact, you make sure we all know your name..
But it's not about you, RAYB.
RayB,
I will watch the video. I have read about the Talmud before.
It seems to me, just in my own opinion, that it could be a Jewish tendency to have both an inferiority complex and a superiority complex. It may be something almost like the narcissistic individual who feels shame about who he or she is because of childhood neglect or abandonment -- or because of being an oddball and not a popular kid -- or whatever childhood reason. This narcissist learns as an adult to overcompensate for the shame, and partly it is a coping mechanism. The adult narcissist needs to feel special -- and better -- to compensate for having felt outcast, overlooked, bullied, abused, abandoned or neglected.
A whole people has felt abandoned by their God, has been bullied by the world through the ages, and has been oddballs within their host cultures and nations.
I don't think any kind of Jewish narcissism about their own identity is theologically justified per se; just that it may be an emotionally understandable way of compensating for their history.
One can see it in the Jewish celebrity stories, like Howard Stern's Ugly Duckling type success story. Jews also created such comic book heroes as Superman, who goes around most of the time as Clark Kent, but who is really super heroic compared to everybody who surrounds him. This theme of being underappreciated and picked on -- but later turning out to be very special -- seems to repeat a lot with Jewish celebrities, artists, writers, and others.
I'm not justifying it morally; just explaining it psychologically, but not suggesting it needs to be enabled if and when it causes actual harm.
I think it is fair for the Jews to be in Israel, because they paid for the land. A lot of people think they just went in and conquered the Palestinians. I'm not saying that's what you believe. I used to believe it.
My ideas are fluid and could change with new information. I intend still to watch the video.
Are Christians justified by the works of the law, or by the imputed righteousness of Christ thru God's sovereign grace?
Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.
Hebrews 4:16
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved). Ephesians 2:4-5
Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. 2 Timothy 1:9
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Romans 6:14
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Romans 3:23-24
What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Romans 6:15
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9
But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. Romans 5:15
That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 5:21
If justification can be achieved by obedience to the law, or by obeying ANY set of religious rules, then Christ's sacrifice on the cross was completely unnecessary. Those that attempt to enter into the Kingdom by establishing their own "righteousness" are "thieves and robbers," because they deny the ONLY door by which men must enter. John 10: 1-16
Why are you so against the idea that God has the very same opportunity for grace, the same great salvation, for the Jews of today too, RayB? Do you wish them not to be saved? Their blindness is not permanent, some will come to Jesus, like you and I did. God knows those that are His..and He knows it all beforehand, you don't.
Have you forgotten how marvelous God's grace is?
“Have you no wish for others to be saved? Then you're not saved yourself, be sure of that!”
― Charles Spurgeon
Anonymous said @ 8:13 PM ...
"Why are you so against the idea that God has the very same opportunity for grace, the same great salvation, for the Jews of today too, RayB?"
Anonymous:
At no time, in any way, have I ever stated that "the Jews of today" are excluded from God's sovereign grace. I have NEVER believed such a ridiculous thing and have never even remotely proclaimed it. I rejoice whenever ANYONE comes to a saving faith in Christ. But, I suppose that won't stop you from spreading such a filthy lie, will it? When you make such unfounded claims, you are what the Bible declares to be a FALSE ACCUSER, which is listed among the abominations found in II Timothy 3:3.
God's Sovereign Grace's end result:
“After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;” Revelation 7:9
Anonymous @ 8:28 PM ....
Thank you for quoting Charles Spurgeon. I own a 10 volume set entitled "Spurgeon's Sermons" which I have been reading for 30+ years. I am VERY familiar with Spurgeon.
Did you know that Charles Spurgeon taught the doctrine of Sovereign Election and that he proclaimed his complete agreement in the doctrinal system known as "Five Point Calvinism?" In each volume of his "Sermons,' Spurgeon devoted at least one message to the doctrine of Election. He also wrote a book entitled "All of Grace" which details in depth that it is God that calls, chooses and justifies according to His sovereign will.
How is it that you come across so anti-semitic then?
And why your broad brush write off of the Jewish people if you are not at all anti-semitic, against their salvation?
You post here as one who is quite done with the Jewish people.
That doesn't jive.
In case you doubt that Charles Spurgeon was a "Calvinist," check this out:
In his work, “A Defence of Calvinism,” Spurgeon states unequivocally: [T]here is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation.
Anonymous @ 9:13 PM ...
I have NEVER in my entire life EVER been "against the salvation" of ANYONE, whether Jew or Gentile. I have never even remotely stated any such thing.
WHERE ON EARTH DO YOU GET SUCH GARBAGE ?
YOU may imagine somehow that I "come across so anti-semetic," but it is entirely in your imagination. I am NOT AGAINST ANY PEOPLE, because God CALLS people from every nation, kindred, people, and tongues."
I am certainly not in any way, shape or form "anti-Semitic."
https://christianindex.org/fordham-spurgeon-calvinism-arminianism-sbc/
Concerning 1 Timothy 2:3-6, especially “God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” and “Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all,” Spurgeon said something dramatically different than the hyper-Calvinists:
What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I think not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. ‘All men,’ say they that is, ‘some men’: as if the Holy Ghost could not have said ‘some men’ If he had meant some men. ‘All men,’ say they; ‘that is, some of all sorts of men’: as if the Lord could not have said ‘All sorts of men’ if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written ‘all men,’ and unquestionably he means all men. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. ... My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God.(Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 26: 49-52)
Spurgeon didn’t try to reconcile every paradox or apparent contradiction in the Bible. He said:
The Calvinist has said, and said right bravely, that salvation is of grace alone; and the Arminian has said, and said most truthfully, that damnation is of man’s will alone, and as the result of man’s sin, and of that only. Then they have fallen out with one another. The fact is, they had each one laid hold of a truth, and if they could have put their heads together, and accepted both truths, it might have been greatly for the advantage of the Church of Christ. These two doctrines are like tram lines that you can travel on with safety and comfort, these parallel lines—ruin, of man; restoration, of God: sin, of man’s will; salvation, of God’s will: reprobation, of man’s demerit; election, of God’s free and sovereign grace: the sinner lost in hell through himself alone, the saint lifted up to heaven wholly and alone by the power and grace of God. Get those two truths thoroughly engraven upon your heart, and you will then hold comprehensively the great truths of Scripture. You will not need to crowd them into one narrow system of theology, but you will have a sort of duplicate system. (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit,41:500.)
May we read Scripture and believe it, not explaining away what doesn’t fit our theology, but stretching our theology to embrace the full breadth of God’s revealed truth.
If you are not anti-semitic as you say RayB, then perhaps you might consider the immediate above.
You say you are about saving grace, RayB, but it is God's grace, not yours (nor mine).
You can make things confusing in that you quote the Bible right, but can at times misapply it. (we can all do that sometimes)
Is good to take the clang, clang out of our approach..."...once you stop trying to know everything and be like God, it does kinda become easier."...so take it easy on everybody, RayB.
Pray and care and reach beyond yourself to others not like yourself, to love them to the Gospel, even the Jews...in that you will become gracious..like Jesus.
Law and Grace: What Does the Bible Really Say?
By Mike Bennett
Throughout the Bible, God’s law and His grace are interwoven. They are not at odds, as some think. What does the Bible really say about law and grace?
The Bible reveals how God thinks. It contains laws that God gave “for your good” (Deuteronomy 10:13; Romans 7:12). They are beneficial family rules that show us how to love God the way He wants to be loved and how to love fellow human beings in the way that promotes the greatest peace and happiness.
God’s laws are NOT a burden but a BLESSING (1 John 5:3).
However, the truth is that no human being, except Jesus Christ, has perfectly obeyed God’s laws. Going against God’s perfect and holy laws creates a rift between us and our holy Creator. His perfect righteousness can’t coexist with the vile corruption of sin. The horrible stain of sin must be removed if we are ever to have the close family relationship that God so greatly desires. While the law defines sin, clearly showing us what actions are right and wrong, keeping the law—even keeping it perfectly—cannot remove the penalties for our previous sins and reconcile us to God. We are saved “FOR” good works, NOT “BY” good works (Ephesians 2:10).
God’s grace—His love and mercy and all of His generous gifts—makes reconciliation possible. Grace does not remove the beneficial laws but, through Christ’s sacrifice, pays the penalty of sin.
It is not a case of law VERSUS grace. God’s revelation is that law and grace work TOGETHER!
So why do so many today believe grace abolishes God’s law or that they are at odds? In this section, we carefully examine the teachings of the Bible on law and grace to see what God really intended.
Topics On Law and Grace
Jesus vs. Paul
Some people today believe that the apostle Paul’s teaching on law and grace changed what Christ taught. Is it Jesus vs. Paul? What does the Bible say?
Acts 15
What did gentiles need to do to become Christians? This major controversy was settled by the Jerusalem conference of Acts 15. How was the law changed?
Galatians Law and Grace
Understanding the apostle Paul's teaching about law and grace in Galatians requires understanding the background—the heresies Paul was combating.
Curse of the Law
Many have been confused by Paul’s use of the phrase “the curse of the law” in Galatians 3:13. What did he mean?
Nailed to the Cross
The apostle Paul said that SOMETHING was taken away by being nailed to Jesus Christ’s cross. WHAT EXACTLY was he referring to and how does it apply to us today?
Colossians 2:16-17
Colossians 2:16-17 has been translated and explained various ways. What does the context and background tell us about what Paul was trying to convey?
Galatians 5
Paul uses the word “bondage” many times in Galatians, including Galatians 5. Many claim that this refers to keeping the commandments. Is this true?
Christ Is the End of the Law?
Many believe Jesus came to do away with the law, based in part on what Paul wrote in Romans 10:4. Is this true? What the BIBLE says might surprise you!
What Are Good Works?
Good works are by definition good, yet some people disparage those who believe good works are necessary.
WHY?
Because of divergent understandings of what works are for and how we should do them. What does the BIBLE really tell us about good works?
Law and Grace (Home Page)
Was the Law of GOD "Nailed to the Cross"?
DOES The New Covenant Abolish God's Law?
In summary:
Worry about what the >BIBLE< (not a man) says about what defines the NEW Testament Body Of Believers:
Revelation 14:12
"THE SAINTS...ARE THOSE THAT >KEEP< THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD"
Clear as a bell!
KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS
Anonymous 11:47 PM,
I'm not disagreeing with the theology per se, but it leaves out the context of history. Specifically I personally used to be naive about the teachings of the Roman Catholic church regarding works. The RCC did teach that people have to earn their salvation through "works". The "works" did not necessarily equate to obeying the commandments. The "works" meant some members of the church literally being tortured and calling it "penance". The "works" could also mean "alms", which does include charity, but they literally thought that -- not God, but the Pope -- keeps an accounting book to give people blessings and curses, merits and demerits, and let them share their merits with others to get them out of purgatory. This was also the concept behind selling "indulgences". Some families believed and were told by RCC priests that one family member could be sacrificed to a life of "penance" to save the whole family. People also thought their "works" could include going for a time without eating meat and this would somehow cause them to become more meriting of salvation.
It's not really fair to leave out history, and the Bible was never presented to us as nothing but a system of theology, void of history. The Bible is thoroughly historical. It was written by and for Middle Easterners, who were not Greek systematizers. For them everything had a context, and that context usually took the form of a story or a history. There is absolutely no reason at all for us to be ahistorical in our theology, either.
Not to understand what a historical revolution it was to share the gospel of grace with millions of people around the world -- who used to be forbidden to read the Bible without obtaining written permission from a priest -- is not being fair to the Reformers.
The fact that we can now use the Bible to argue against Calvinism is a credit to all Reformers and all Protestant martyrs.
It's possible some of the original Reformers over-reacted to the RCC and everything associated with it. Or it's possible it is only their modern day followers who are systematizing too much and not being historical enough -- along with their modern day critics. I haven't made up my mind, since I haven't studied them enough in their own original words along with the history of their time.
J @ 9:51 AM
It is certainly GREAT that certain Protestants helped spread the previously/contemporaneously-'banned' Holy Bible to the general public, no question!
This TREMENDOUS contribution to society should not be forgotten.
11:47 PM
Black Student Tells White Students to Leave Multicultural Center Because They Make Her "Uncomfortable"
https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/02/13/black-student-tells-white-students-to-leave-multicultural-center-because-they-make-her-uncomfortable/
Once again, our Armstrongism Anonymous friend continues to abuse this site with more and more and more Armstrongism propaganda.
Posts from "Anonymous" @ 11:44 PM, along with all of the links from both posts @ 11:47 PM are all from a site that is run by the followers of Armstongism.
"Life, Hope & Truth" is a newer site designed to hook people into this cult. DON'T BE FOOLED ! This is a very dangerous cult.
Here is a site that can be used as a source of information regarding this cult that is designed to make YOU subservient to them.
http://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2012/04/cogwa-can-it-realy-deliver-life-hope.html
The hypocrisy is knee deep. Massa Craig continually attacks RayB, a Christian brother, but he has nothing to say to disruptive and nasty 'Cult Boy'! Constance's comments section is nothing more that a place for egotistical religionists to fatten up their already hyper inflated egos!
Once again, our 'buddy' RayB continues to AVOID directly addressing the DOCTRINAL matters discussed therein themselves and, as per his usual, attacks the MESSENGER so that you (like him) reject the information OUT-OF-HAND.
He is THREATENED by Christian theology ideas different than HIS own.
This automatic knee-jerk reaction by him serves to illustrate the DANGER of having a mind based on WHAT to think rather than HOW to think: It is TERRIFIED of encountering what it doesn't happen to believe and REFUSES TO CONSIDER it! A mind that knows HOW to think, on the other hand, is NOT threatened by an unfamiliar idea and after due consideration of it lets it stand or fall on its OWN merits!
THINK FOR YOURSELF
NOT FOR RAYB
BTW: WHATEVER could it BE that gets RayB SO upset that you might thoughtfully consider and then perhaps no longer believe the same as HIM?
Hmmm, let's think...
Oh! How about this for starters:
The UNFINISHED Revolution
Martin Luther exposed the avarice, ritualistic enslavement of the common person, and some of the unbiblical dogmas of Catholicism. He stood up to a religious system that had misinterpreted and misused Scripture. It was an awakening that unleashed the Protestant Reformation.
But is the movement he inadvertently spawned that much better? Five centuries after Luther presented the Ninety-five Theses, it’s time for Protestants to examine if their teachings have degenerated into a watered-down and corrupted version of what the Bible actually teaches. Has the idea that belief is all that’s needed for salvation led many to use God’s grace as a license to sin?
How many times do Christians excuse...disregarding one of the Ten Commandments, or living a lifestyle like unbelievers with the simple argument, “I’m justified without works; I’m saved by grace; God loves me just the way I am”?
This way of thinking is nothing more than using God’s grace as a license to sin. It has serious consequences. Jesus gives this warning in the Sermon on the Mount:
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’” (Matthew 7:21-23).
...
The UNFINISHED Revolution
VIDEO: The UNFINISHED Revolution
RayB,
I have watched the video. We were told there would be many antichrists. In one sense it doesn't much matter who is "the" vs. "an" antichrist. Regardless our practical response can be the same. We can just hold fast to the true gospel and the true Jesus and not accept any other one.
The complexities and threats in the world are certainly immense and seem at times to gather around from every side, but I'm thankful my faith can still remain simple and that nothing in the world is as powerful as God.
It seems that, as a pop song used to go, "Everybody Wants to Rule the World." As one of the interviewers (not Rick Wiles) on Tru News noted during Constance's interview, there seem to be competing NWOs.
I am reminded sometimes of my former workplace where the chairman and CEO held out the expectation for years that he was just about to retire. He had three of his vice presidents expecting to take his place. All three competed with each other for many years. When the old chairman and CEO finally did retire, a totally different replacement for him was brought in from the outside.
Only God knows what will happen in the end, but it certainly is a weird world we live in.
How long is Constance going to allow her site to be taken over by a Cult?
The highly respected Cult expert, the late Dr. Walter Martin wrote extensively about Armstrongism in his classic: "The Kingdom of the Cults."
Don't be fooled for one single moment; this is a VERY DECEPTIVE and DANGEROUS CULT.
J,
You are very astute and correct; there are MANY antichrists along with a number of factions that want to "rule the world."
I find it interesting that Islam, Judaism, Roman Catholicism, Communism all make the claim to one day ruling the world. Not to be left off this list either is Armstrongism's British Israelism, which believes that THEY will rule via the British Monarchy which was ascended to by a lost tribe of Israel ! In their "plan," America will reunite with Britain and become subservient to the British Throne.
Glad to see you watched the video. I couldn't agree more with your statement: "Only God knows what will happen in the end, but it certainly is a weird world we live in."
Dear me!
Seems that we touched quite a nerve and were right on target about our 'buddy' RayB!
LOL!
HEY, 2:01 PM
GO AWAY! NO ONE WANTS TO JOIN YOUR CULT ANY MORE THAN THEY WANT TO JOIN THE DULLHOMIE CULT!
THANKS ANYWAY! BYE BYE!
RayB's distortions get funnier and funnier!
"Not to be left off this list either is Armstrongism's British Israelism, which believes that THEY will rule via the British Monarchy which was ascended to by a lost tribe of Israel ! In their 'plan,' America will reunite with Britain and become subservient to the British Throne." ROFL!
(This BTW is what happens when you get someone who is too intellectually cowardly &/or dishonest &/or lazy to get/put the CORRECT information!)
The ACTUAL point of the matter is that (guess what?) ONLY the United States Of America + Great Britain fulfill the Bible prophecies about Ephraim & Manasseh!
Kinda good to be aware of don'cha think?
You have a choice:
#1) Be an unquestioning lockstep follower of 'The Boogeyman Will Get You If You Don't Watch Out!'
Or...
#2) Act like who the Holy Bible PRAISES as NOBLE:
The BEREANS!
"Now the Bereans were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and EXAMINED the Scriptures every day TO SEE if these teachings were true."
https://biblehub.com/bsb/acts/17.htm
So therefore to (once again) set the story straight from RayB's distortions:
The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy
The amazing story of the rise to greatness of the United States and Britain begins 4,000 years ago with the biblical patriarch Abraham. God's promises would bring an astounding future for his descendants!
VIDEO: Are The United States and Britain in the Bible?
America and Great America and Great Britain – Our IDENTITY Revealed!
(Correction)
America and Great Britain – Our IDENTITY Revealed!
More propaganda from the Armstrong Cult.
This time, he posts an entire book by the PROVEN false prophet William F. Dankenbring, who in the past, made numerous false prophesies that of course never came to pass.
Herbert W. Armstrong PROMISED his followers that Christ would absolutely return in his lifetime. Why? Because Armstrong proclaimed that he was the end times prophet Elijah that would usher in the Lord's return. Armstrong proclaimed that if that didn't happen, "the Bible was false." Well, Armstrong is now dead and the Bible is still true !
British Israelism has been proven completely false. Armstrongism believes that their cult members are decedents of two lost tribes Israel, that are now residing in Great Britain and America. THAT is why they are so adamant about OBEYING THE OLD TESTAMENT Laws and celebrating the OT Feast days and festivals, along with the strict 7th. Day Sabbath obedience.
WATCH THIS VIDEO where a number of FORMER Armstrong Cult members and leaders describe their experiences in Armstrongism, and how they came to believe the truth about this Cult.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb76qyaC824
Observe yet AGAIN, RayB (like a broken record) DOESN'T directly show error in the materials THEMSELVES (he apparently CAN'T) so he merely resorts to blanket condemning them INSTEAD!
That tells the HONEST intellect MUCH.
(These materials BTW are chiefly concerned with proving FULFILLED Bible prophecy rather than MAKING prophecies, a distinction apparently lost on him.)
And as far as disgruntled ex-members: ANY longtime church of size has them, it's HARDLY unique to the COG. (And regardless, the Standard Christian Church Attendance Operating Procedure SHOULD be for ANYONE, ANYWHERE: If there's an irreconcilable problem: KEEP holding to whatever Biblical doctrines ANY given group one was with had, just find a better group to fellowship with!)
But RayB's evidently far more worried about finding what mud he can sling to discourage YOU from being like a Berean and reading these Biblically-based doctrinal articles for yourself and coming to your OWN conclusions than being like a Berean HIMSELF.
Sad. Very sad.
In closing...
To paraphrase (and in so doing to correct) Charles Spurgeon:
"It is a nickname to call it Armstrongism; (aside from some self-made prophecies) Armstrongism is (closer than the vast majority of professing Christianity is to) the gospel, and nothing else."
And BTW if people don't like Armstrong they should lament that he didn't have SOUNDER character when he evangelized the Bible's ACTUAL doctrines.
But at least HE did it, imperfectly though he did do it.
And that, at least, was enough to start with.
What Is the True Gospel?
VIDEO: The Gospel Of The Kingdom!
(Correction)
But at least he DID it, imperfectly though he did do it.
And that, at least, was enough to start with.
Wanting global governance means worshipping the image of the beast? If a beast is an empire, and the last beast was the Roman Empire, then dreaming and scheming over a mental model of a future version of this same beast could mean worshipping it, since it's literally a form of idolatry and a substitute religion of humanism and a New Age? I don't know. I'm still trying to reconcile historicism with our place in history for all those who are alive right now. I'm just thinking about it. This is a blog linked to the historicism.com web site. The author is a Canadian Baptist.
Worshipping the Image of the Beast
http://035e9af.netsolhost.com/prophecy/2009/11/23/worshipping-the-image-of-the-beast/
In Revelation 13 and 17 and in Daniel 7, the Empire of Rome is called “the beast”. When socialist elites today fantasize and scheme to recreate Rome’s glory through the establishment of the European Union, the G-20, the Copenhagen Conference, etc., etc., they are literally worshipping the picture, the form and shape and image of the Beast:
Revelation 13:14-15 by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.
It’s an old cult, this worship of the image of the beast, the idolatry of Roman forms of government. Not new at all. And Christ has already conquered the beast, its worshippers, the Hell they will endure forever and the death their sins (and ours) have earned. So don’t fear the Antichrist, his government, or Obama. Fear God, worship His Son, Jesus, and put your trust in His death and resurrection as the Substitute for sinners.
J,
Very interesting post.
When I read your first paragraph, I was reminded of this prophesy concerning Christ and His coming eternal government:
Isaiah chapter 9:
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
There are many antichrists that proclaim themselves to be the future rulers of the world. They are counterfeits to Christ's coming rule, both spiritually and physically.
RayB there are 613 laws in the Torah. Did you read it?
the unexamined false premise of protestant eschatology is that the church is european. THIS IS FROM ROMANISM, wrongly thinking it is the one true original church (it is a splinter from it) and full replacement (not semi replacement/inclusion) theology re Israel. This combination transferred any prophey not already come to pass to the church, meaning Roman Catholic. Protestants took this but applied the prophecies about the antichrist to the pope, though there is almost no match whatsoever.
Malachi 1:11 KJV "For from the rising of the sun, even to its going down, My name shall be great among the Gentiles; IN EVERY PLACE INCENSE SHALL BE OFFERED IN MY NAME, AND A PURE OFFERING;..."
read that again. INCENSE SHALL BE OFFERED. who does this? the Roman Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, the Syriac the monophysite/miaphysite Oriental (non chalcedonian) Orthodox, the Anglican and some Lutheran. All these also recognize the Holy Eucharist as the Body and Blood of Christ.
Obviously it is these that constitute the actual Ekklesia, and the rest of you are slap happy confused catechumens with your own organizations. better some form of Christianity than none.
All eschatology that focusses on Europe or USA as other than peripheral is WRONG. Prophecy centers on Israel and the Middle East period. Only the winged lion of Daniel 7 could be Brit-Euro-NATO-USA.
"Some people like to say the annual Holy Days were a shadow of Christ, and once Christ came, the shadow disappeared. That’s NOT what the scripture says. They are a shadow of things YET to come in God’s plan. This was stated many years AFTER Christ was crucified."
THAT IS WHAT SCRIPTURE SAYS what was said after Christ came was to get them to stop listening to people like you!
"So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,
"WHICH ARE A SHADOW OF THINGS TO COME, BUT THE SUBSTANCE IS OF CHRIST" Col. 2:16, 17 preceded by what Christ accomplished, and pagan ceremonies do not point to Christ so much for that argument.
I understand Chinese government now pays for treating ncov - what kind of commie country makes you pay for medical care? they seem to have the worst not best of both systems! (I think they figured history HAS to go through phases China missed the capitalist phase so they were going to provide it and then go full commie later.)
Constance's missing article - I called her, she hadn't finished and accidentally published it, I felt sorry for you all that I couldn't explain to you, but you all complain about me and got me put on limited posting so you can just sweat it.
Concern about cows - yeah there's a wrong agenda sometimes but you don't have to esteem animals equal to us to be decent to them. PRoverbs says caring for animal well being is a feature of a righteous man.
https://nowhere.news/index.php/2018/12/11/ecological-society-sustainable-national-anarchist-communities/ the tribalism they propose is a tyranny of its own small pond for a big fish to dominate. This is part of the larger network "the group" Mike told me about is part of. Troy Southgate main author of nowhere.news is National Anarchist/National Bolshevist
one of the group's accepted philosophies and with satanist connections in Russia and San francisco where it was started by a few satanist infuenced nuts in the 1980s.
And of course this article advocates veganism, ignoring (or not knowing) that taurine and b12 which are essential can't be got from such a diet. Lysine can grains and legumes mixed. The analysis of poop problem from agricultural animals ignores that it can be collected and used as fertilizer for the veggies. This would put those who can stand this or sneak eat meat in charge, the others weakened and influenceable.
The violent accelerationism promoted as to be by individuals radicalized online, is the old leaderless resistnce renamed.
Christine 9:59 AM,
The papacy perfectly fits the little horn of Daniel. It doesn't much matter whether the "little horn" is also "The Antichrist" -- that's just a label. There are many antichrists. The popes have certainly been among them.
Who persecuted the saints in the Holy Roman Empire? Who killed 50 million Protestants and proto-Protestants? If that was not the persecution of the saints, what was? They weren't killed for being heretics. Heretics who venerated the pope would have been absorbed, just as we see syncretism being allowed in the RCC today -- just so long as the pope is venerated. They were killed because they would not worship the pope!
That was in the West. In the East, the Mohammedans and the Caliphates persecuted the saints, who were members of the Eastern Orthodox church. These Eastern Christians were persecuted by both RCC Crusaders (remember?) and by Mohammedans. Constantinople was weakened by RCC Crusaders before falling to the Ottoman Empire, remember? Your Eastern Orthodox ancestoral brethren said that the tiara (the pope) was worse than the turban (the caliph). And also this other form of beast religion (Islam) did not honor women and still does not honor women.
Europe is close to Israel. It's right across the Mediterranean Sea from Israel. The pagan Roman empire encompassed portions of Europe, as well as portions of the Middle East. It is not at all a stretch to include Europe in prophecy.
Doctrinal, biblical truth is more important than incense. My friend raised by a "white witch" mother had incense sticks burning in her house all the time. The incense burning churches used to have that truth but allowed idolatry to creep in, with superstition and veneration of relics and icons, veneration of and prayer to statues of and icons of Mary and saints.
Like the Pharisees, the popes and priests and magisterium of the RCC made the Word of God of no effect through the traditions of men!
I agree with two things you said, at least partially; I'm not sure it's full agreement. I believe that there are unfulfilled Old Testament prophecies about literal, physical Israel that started to become fulfilled when the Jews regathered in Israel. I also believe that Armageddon is still unfulfilled and most of the peoples who are mentioned as fighting against Jerusalem during "Armageddon" or the battle of "Gog and Magog" are peoples who are today Islamic.
But remember the Vatican covets Jerusalem, and remember that Pope Francis is pushing for Chrislam.
I have a great deal of respect for the Eastern Orthodox church, and I considered joining it, but I just can't abide the superstition about relics and icons or the prayer to saints and Mary. Those things constitute idolatry. Even if people rationalize this veneration cognitively, it is still worship subliminally even for sophisticated people. For the unsophisticated it is just pure superstition and idolatry. It is a stumbling block for the brothers and sisters. But doctrinally, the Orthododox church has far more purity than the RCC, in my opinion.
Protestants have problems, too, but at least all believers can correct it on their own if they are being led by the blind! They don't need to follow the blind into a ditch.
Also, by the way, replacing the Pope didn't mean every husband is a mini pope inside his own little Vatican at home. Baptists teach the priesthood of all believers, and without the idolatry called "headship doctrine", women need not have a man standing in between her and the light of the Holy Spirit and casting a shadow. Nor do women need to follow blind men if they are married to somebody who is in a cult or who is carnal and does not have indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Where do women stand in the Eastern Orthodox church? Don't they still need to cover their heads because otherwise they might tempt the angels to come down and make Nephilim with them?
The aftermath of Christines' post is like crumbs of popcorn, crackers, pet food, dust, hair etc, on the carpet. Your post @ 11:00 AM is like after the vacuuming!
Thanks
Senate Democrats Insist Babies Born Alive After Abortions Should Be Left To Die
https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/14/senate-democrats-insist-babies-born-alive-after-abortions-should-be-left-to-die/
https://summit.news/2020/02/13/twitter-thread-of-white-people-getting-their-ass-beat-for-black-history-month-receives-over-335000-likes
NYT Reports Japanese Man Diagnosed With Virus Visited Resort, Mingled With Hawaiians During Recent Visit
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/nyt-reports-japanese-man-diagnosed-virus-visited-resort-mingled-hawaiians-during
Bloomberg Considers Hillary For Running Mate
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bloomberg-considers-hillary-running-mate
Why isn't Hillary in prison yet? Oh, that's right, I forgot, she is a close personal friend of Satan!
She always comes back, like Dracula!
Well, well, well, what have we HERE!
Cashless Agenda? China Is Scrubbing Cash Notes To Stop Virus Spreading So Its Paper Money Won't Kill You...
https://www.activistpost.com/2020/02/china-is-scrubbing-cash-notes-to-stop-virus-spreading-so-its-government-paper-money-wont-kill-you.html
EXCLUSIVE: Michael Bloomberg Is Hillary Clinton’s Deep State Bitch
https://www.infowars.com/exclusive-michael-bloomberg-is-hillary-clintons-deep-state-bitch/
Democrat Senate Candidate Unveils GUILLOTINE As New Campaign Logo
Yes, really.
Bre Kidman, the Senate candidate of Maine challenging Susan Collins in November, and a self-described “non-binary” socialist, said the execution apparatus was the perfect symbol to represent her party’s upcoming war with the Republicans and the wealthy.
Kidman also explained that the guillotine, used for the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, was chosen as a reminder that a “violent uprising” would be inevitable if Democrats failed to push their socialist agenda through.
https://www.infowars.com/democrat-senate-candidate-unveils-guillotine-as-new-campaign-logo/
Lunatic Stripping 'Non-Binary' Socialist Challenging Sen. Susan Collins Gives Away Guillotine T-Shirts
BY MEGAN FOX
FEBRUARY 10, 2020
Maine's "1st non-binary" candidate for Senate, Bre Kidman, who says her pronouns are "they, them," is giving away "guillo-tees" to promote her campaign to replace Republican Sen. Susan Collins. The t-shirts have a graphic of a guillotine on them. Known for their love of political violence, Democratic socialists like Kidman (and all the Bernie bros ever caught on camera) enjoy violent imagery and fantasizing about killing the rest of us or putting us in camps.
Kidman has no idea why her t-shirts are causing such an uproar. "I was gonna wait until tomorrow to show off these beauties, but Trump got acquitted and I feel like folks could use something to look forward to," she wrote.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/stripping-non-binary-socialist-challenging-sen-susan-collins-gives-away-guillotine-t-shirts/
The Demoncrats are just pure filth!
Baby murdering, sphincter loving Lucifarians!
And more!
Yes, they are, but we are to love our enemies -- which doesn't mean voting for them or having a coke and a smile with them. It means trying to convert them and praying for their conversion.
https://youtu.be/S1TLU9fG5mY
Tim Mackie is fortyish Bible professor who used to be a skater dude, and he speaks to Christians and seekers in Portland, OR in the above video on YouTube.
He has a web site called the Bible Project. He is needed for the Millennial generation.
He is an example of the type of Christian who can reach liberal Millennials -- the kind who call themselves spiritual but not religious.
Put a pretty ribbon on it
China Stocks Surge, S&P Futs Hit All Time High On Latest Chinese Monetary Stimulus
The worse things get, the higher stocks rise because the more liquidity Central Banks have to inject... liquidity that almost instantly ends up in risk assets
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/china-stocks-surge-sp-futs-hit-all-time-high-latest-chinese-monetary-stimulus
The Death Of Free Speech: Zuckerberg Asks Governments For Instructions On "What Discourse Should Be Allowed"
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/death-free-speech-zuckerberg-asks-governments--instructions-what-discourse-should-be
Mike Bloomberg 2/12/20
"Reproductive freedom is under siege in Washington, and President Trump is leading the assault" said Mike Bloomberg. "For many years, I have been one of the strongest champions of Planned Parenthood, and as mayor of New York City I removed barriers so more women could access birth control. As president, I will fiercely protect a woman's right to choose, and I will appoint judges who will defend that right. On my first day in office, I will reverse the damage President Trump has done to women's rights and ensure that every woman has access to reproductive health care"
I really get the feeling lately that Bloomberg, and Clinton may be the Deep States selection for this election. If so, we will quickly defend even further into the abyss.
OK, so, according to the WHO, the American-Chinese and Chinese residents of Buffalo, NY are affected by Covid-19 Coronavirus via not going to celebrate Chinese New Year this year and by their concern for extended family members in China...
China coronavirus outbreak affects those in Western New York
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIIvcZtpQTI
...but, what about those testing positive at at least one local hospital?
Coronavirus CDC coverup in NYS (6 cases) by Dr. Paul Cottrell
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejULhB69zLs
It's best to listen to the above at 1.25 or 1.5 speed.
Massa Craig, we don't really give a damn about WHAT they say about that!!!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Who
Anon 3:00 PM,
That’s MISTER Master Craig to you.
In any case, I’m obviously referring to the World Health Organization, for if I wanted to refer to The Who, I’d have shown something like the following, which captures Townsend with a fantastic guitar tone, and features Keith Moon in one of his best performances:
The Who - Young Man Blues - 7/7/1970 - Tanglewood (Official)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1CJuzpuca4
It’s too bad the videographer(s) gave short shrift to bassist John Entwistle, who was on the other side of the stage, playing excellently, though subdued, as always.
The Who? Really?
So the fact that Townsend was caught with hundreds of photos of naked children doesn't deter your fan adulation of him?
Evil Uncle Earnie indeed. The sheer loudness of their performances, which left Townsend stone deaf to this day, ought to have been your first clue that they were just another semi literate semi accomplished "musicians" and British marketing success stories; modern day idols.
Amazing the crap that we hang on to even after we've been saved and delivered. They and The Stones and the Beatles and Clapton and Zepplin, and Bowie and the whole lot of them were wildly overrated amateurs. Clever innovators riding a technological wave maybe but hardly the accompished musicians that rock fans think they were.
Oh, I'm guilty of it too, but as time goes on I find it easier and easier to let go.
Your 9:14 AM post ROCKS!!!
A great guitar performance is a great guitar performance whether done by
Jimi Hendrix, Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, David Gilmour, Eric Clapton, Stevie Ray Vaughan or Adolph Hitler.
Acknowledging that doesn't mean we are automatically 'fans' of them, especially fans of them PERSONALLY as opposed to MUSICALLY.
Every one of those guitarists you mention played, for the most part, electric guitars with high watt SCREAMING amplifiers. Sure they also played some memorable acoustic bits, but they were all famous for their 100+ decibel electric music. They also ALL advocated, either actively or by example, drug and alcohol abuse. Oh, and none of them could read music, so, they would only play rock/blues etc, and then only their own inventions. Sheer volume is it's own accompaniment. I figured that out in 1971 when I plugged into a Vox amp and a distortion pedal, and voila! I sounded exactly like Tony Iommie! And who can't play power chords?
Try Joe Pass, or Charlie Christian, or Pepe Romero, or Paco Delucia or Chet Atkins, or Tommy Immanuel, or if you dare, Carlos Montoya, who never plugged into any devices, and who could play without his right hand!
Rock music is 90% illusion plus hype. I've lost all respect for it.
This is a true story ... a personal account regarding "rock music."
First, I had a job that required me to spend a lot of time traveling in my car. The first thing after starting my car was to turn on FM radio to a rock station, light a cigarette and proceed to the next stop. Now, I did quit smoking prior to being miraculously saved, but continued to listen to rock music. Then a very strange thing happened; the very music that I "enjoyed" prior to being saved suddenly had a depressing effect on me. It was actually my "new nature" that was "born of the Spirit of God" that was communicating to me about the hidden "nature" of this music, along with its inherent message, which of course is, "sex, drugs and rock n roll." When you look at the fruits that rock brings forth, it is truly just that. The destruction that it has contributed to is rampant and obvious.
It is truly the "Devil's music," and it has, for decades, invaded the "church" by repackaging it under a "christian" label. I remember a saying that was very popular back when I was much younger, and it was this: why should the Devil have all the good music?" Look at the sad state of the churches. Do you think that "modern" "christian rock" hasn't played a part in contributing to all of this?
Not that I have many "friends" on this site, but this post sure won't make me more popular. I really don't care about that, because I am speaking the truth.
Are Noahide Laws something to be concerned with?
Check this video out ... you might be in for a shock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUvQSM_fjk4&list=PLg8_Df7lKXNRl8pbLcPLNUNHKGGnZCCJH&index=2&t=0s
https://www.duckduckgo.com/dangers-of-rock-music
One short story account to my post above that I just recalled:
Many years ago, after no longer listening to ANY type of rock music, I read a book called "Satan's Music Exposed" that was written by a man that was in charge of the music department at the Prairie Bible Institute in Canada. The book exposed not only the secular rock industry, but also, the so called "christian" rock movement. After reading this book, I felt compelled to write this man a letter in order to express some thoughts along with thanking him for his sacrificial efforts in writing the book.
I didn't expect a response, but I did receive a rather lengthy, handwritten letter back from him, in which he described some of what he had gone through since the publication of his book. This man literally poured his heart out to me regarding his experiences in writing the book:
1. Prairie Bible Institute forbade the sale of his book in their book store, removing it from the store's shelves.
2. He was told that as long as he was a member of the staff, he would not be allowed to teach on the contents of the book, nor criticize any "modern day" music, etc.
3. He was told, in no uncertain terms, that as long as he was a member of their staff, he would not be allowed to make public appearances that were designed to promote the sale of his book. He was basically "put on probation," all because of this book.
4. He received a number of vicious letters, many of which contained threats, many too that were laced with vulgarity. A number of these were from people identifying themselves as "Christians."
5. His car, while parked on the school's campus, was vandalized (a bag of sugar was poured into his car's gas tank).
6. His teenage son experienced harrassment by rock music proponents and "ran away from home." At the time of the letter, his son was "still on the run."
Although the above is all from the memory of a letter written to me from a long time ago, I NEVER forgot the impact it had on me. It illustrates further the "fruit" of this "music."
One more that I just remembered:
7. He also received numerous, late night threatening phone calls. (This was back in the day when no one had Caller ID).
"Satan's Music Exposed"
By Lowell Hart
(Read the reviews.)
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1576267.Satan_s_Music_Exposed
https://www.amazon.com/Satans-Music-Exposed-Lowell-Hart/dp/0912582359
https://www.amazon.com/Satans-Music-Exposed-Salem-Kirban/dp/0899576192
https://www.tributearchive.com/obituaries/7357618/Lowell-Hart
"Contemporary Christian Music Exposed"
By Lowell D. Hart
Publication date:
April 21, 2016
https://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Christian-Music-Exposed-Lowell/dp/1936857154
DDG: Dangers of Rock Music
Sometimes I've wondered if our entertainment is our spiritual equivalent of eating meat that has been sacrificed to idols. The Apostle Paul seemed to me to say about things like this, "It depends". He brought attention to what is happening in the depths of the human heart, with human intentions and human experiences. He had an inner focus. I think that is why he did not give us a black and white answer, because it's not as if there is actually some sort of intrinsic magic to things -- it's more about how something impacts the hidden depths of our hearts.
Anon @ 7:22 AM ...
Very interesting post. A couple of verses came to mind when I read it:
Romans 12:2
"And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."
1 John 2:15
"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him."
Well, I sure didn’t intend to derail the comments in my response to the Anon. Let’s not forget my original post about the WHO—World Health Organization—and the, IMO, inadequate response to what is best called a pandemic.
----
paul,
First, I concur with Anon 10:07 AM’s response to your initial post in this vein. Second, in your list @ 10:53 AM you could have listed the great Django Reinhardt, who has influenced countless guitarists (and other musicians) since his time—including Iommi (since Reinhardt had lost use of two of his fret fingers as a result of a fire, while Iommi lost the tips of two of his fret fingers in a machining accident). But, then again, Reinhardt didn’t read music. But I’d be surprised if Charlie Christian ever learned to read music either.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but I don’t see how the use of effects negates talent. You say you sounded just like Iommi, but the point is not to sound like someone else, but to have your own unique sound.
Ultimately, the appreciation of any art is subjective, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I happen to like all sorts of music (most of my collection is jazz), except opera and hip hop/rap—though I think Public Enemy’s It Takes A Nation of Millions has some excellent material.
Oh, and I—and Townsend himself—don’t think Pete Townsend is one of the greatest guitarists. Now, John Entwistle is one of the greatest bassists to ever pick up the instrument. But to compare him to, say, Dave Holland, one of my favorite jazz acoustic bassists, is to miss the point. Both are immensely talented, but Holland can’t come close to playing the electric bass at the level of Entwistle any more than Entwistle could approach Holland’s acoustic bass playing. Different kinds of music; different instruments. Stanley Clarke could play both very well, but he had a completely different sound on the one compared to the other—and since he focused primarily on the electric, he was more proficient with it.
Noahide Laws Prophesied
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Q_QB5GTFc
This one is supplemental to the other video about Noahide Laws, claiming to find support in the Bible, in response to a pastor who said there is nothing about Noahide Laws in prophecy.
I don't know what to make of this. It's possible to see it as having already been fulfilled in the first few centuries after Christ's death -- except for the last part. I'm not aware of fulfillment of that last part, but I'm not a scholar of early church history. Maybe somebody else can speak to that.
It's important to realize that most Jews don't think in this way, and hardly any Reformed or secular Jews do at all. This is a tiny percentage of elite Chabad rabbis, and this is according to Steven Ben-DeNoon who is a Jew himself and who has many Israeli friends -- including many rabbis -- and who was a Chabad member for over twenty years.
Matthew 10:16-21 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
16 “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves.
17 But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues,
18 and ye shall be brought before governors and kings for My sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.
19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak, for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaketh in you.
21 And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child; and the children shall rise up against their parents and cause them to be put to death.
Verse 21 is interesting, because Noahide laws allow gentile relatives to be used as a witness against the gentiles but not the Jews to put them to death -- according to Jana Ben-DeNoon in the video already linked above by RayB:
The Dangerous Truth About the Noahide Laws | KMN LIVE feat. Jana Ben-DeNoon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUvQSM_fjk4&list=PLg8_Df7lKXNRl8pbLcPLNUNHKGGnZCCJH&index=2&t=0s
Still seems a little alarmist to overly worry about it. After all many liberals think most American conservative Christians want to turn America into a theocracy, and we do have actual Dominionists among us.
RayB,
Before my conversion I had interactions with a Christian woman, the first Christian I found genuine. She told me that prior to her conversion she was an addict and had been involved with gang activity. I caught up with her years later, and, though I don’t recall the context, she mentioned how (paraphrased) ‘the Bible considers drinking alcohol a sin’. I wanted to correct her, letting her know that it’s drunkenness that is a sin, but immediately the Spirit stopped me, as I recalled her past.
My point in relaying that story is that some folks have a conviction about something—for whatever the reason. This same conviction may or may not apply to another. You seem to miss the point in Anon 7:22 AM’s post regarding “it depends”.
Years ago there was discussion on my blog regarding music generally. In fact, I’d been thinking about writing a short blog post in this vein (I have the germinations for it, begun late last year, spurred by a YouTube video I saw then). My conclusion back then (and yet still) was that music—any arrangements of notes, played this way or that way—is not inherently spiritual. It’s neutral. The lyrics, of course, are a whole different thing. A vocalist can sing the vilest lyrics over the most lighthearted music, or vice versa.
One of the comparisons I made then, I’ll make here. The somewhat simple keyboards (though deceptively so, as the time signature is a bit tricky) in Mike Oldfield’s “Tubular Bells” is rather peaceful sounding as it begins. The tune, though, is associated with the movie The Exorcist, and so some have this idea that it’s somehow inherently ‘evil’. But, I contend that had it not been used in the soundtrack to this movie, the association to ‘evil’ never would have been made.
Tubular Bells (The Original Remastered)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXvtDm820zI
Another example is the theme music to the movie Jaws. When we hear the music that precedes the shark sighting scenes, we think of those scenes. Yet, I contend that if an individual had never seen the movie and heard this music, it would still sound a bit unnerving! But it’s hardly inherently evil. It was composed in a manner to evoke a certain emotion, like other music is designed to do, say, romanticism.
Jaws - Theme song
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3bN5YeiQs
----
To anyone: So, whose voice is sampled here?
Devil's Music [The Three Johns]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZIqTz_XQgA&t=5m11s
Although medical professionals and the media generally portray abortion as a safe, virtually painless and emotionally freeing decision, the reality is very different. Abortion carries serious risks of side effects and complications, and can leave a woman emotionally devastated for years.
Here’s what happens when you get an abortion
Anon 9:56 AM,
As regards 10:18, I question the KJV translation here, for it is at odds with every other one here:
biblehub.com/multi/matthew/10-18.htm
This is not due to any textual variants (see Greek in middle column—it’s identical among the various sources). Though, in isolation, the KJV translation is possible (dative of disadvantage, as opposed to the other dative of advantage translations), we must discern whom the “them” refers in this verse. In other words, by the immediate context, those persecuted by the kings and governors will be a testimony to or against whom? This will determine, then, how one interprets the passage. Note also that “Gentiles” can be rendered “nations” as well.
The verses you posted RayB are right on target, but that being said, it is still a Holy Spirit call in the heart of someone about how they go about living out their liberty in Christ.
And the Lord's Spirit knows how to plumb and target within the depths of souls to root out issues, so though in some instances show obvious open detriment to the heart and walk of a believer, actually the motivation of how we walk in the light is still not ours to judge. We can only speak for ourselves in that case.
If the Gospel is at stake a believer should stand with the Gospel that saved him or her, but other things aside is territory for the Spirit's discernment. We have to individually arrive at the agreement with the Spirit for true change--good change--to come. Clinging hard and fast to the Scriptures, tenderness in the heart to hear the still small voice of the Lord, will illumine all issues, circumstances, and motives for anyone who desires to live by the Spirit's leading, resulting in upholding the Gospel and walk in sanctifying grace to accompany it.
The process, of working out what God has worked in, takes time..even a lifetime.
Let him who has ears hear is an important word from Jesus.
Totally agree agree about Django Reinhardt. Awesome.
Charlie Christian not able to read music?
O contrere. He played in big jazz bands. He must have been able to read. No?
But guitar is the one instrument that most of it's players don't read music for.
As far as lists go, mine is endless; without repeating the ones already mentioned:
Pat Methany, Al DiMeola, Leo Kottke, Larry Coryell, Larry Carlton, Earl Klugh, Junior Brown, Robert Johnson, Charley Patton,
Jeff Beck, Michael Landeau, Albert King, Johnny Winter, Albert Collins, _and on and on, are just some of the ones that I like.
https://www.infowars.com/video-white-liberals-apologize-for-slavery-by-kissing-boots-of-black-power-group-members
Singing this under their breath?
"These boots are made for walking, and that's just what they'll do, one of these days these boots are gonna walk all over you!"
OVERLOOKED PREPPING SKILL: CRITICAL THINKING
Mac Slavo
SHTFplan.com
February 18th, 2020
So many preppers have stockpiles of food and water, generators, and even extra ammunition. While these preps are great, they must accompany the overlooked (and not taught in public schools) skill of critical thinking.
We’ve all heard the phrase “children are not taught how to think, but what to think” when it comes to public school education/indoctrination. Making the mistake of not learning how to think critically outside of your personal beliefs could be a problem in a survival situation. It is vital that preppers understand the concept of critical thinking.
Critical thinking is the ability to think in an organized and rational manner in order to understand connections between ideas and/or facts. It helps you decide what to believe in. In other words, it’s “thinking about thinking”—identifying, analyzing, and then fixing flaws in the way we think. For example, instead of being told you must say the Pledge of Allegiance and immediately follow the order, you contemplate why you were given that command.
A set of morals often arises once critical thinking is applied. But that’s not the only added benefit. Knowing what to do, and how to go about it in a survival situation is another. You could have all the preps in the world, but not knowing how to use them or the reason why it’s in your stash, to begin with, could be a huge pitfall.
Thinking for yourself outside of what you’ve been told is CRITICAL in survival!
But how do you teach yourself this POWERFUL and overlooked skill?
Start by questioning EVERYTHING.
Don’t just believe something because it’s being said by [for example] an athlete, politician, or celebrity. These people are known to only promote things that add to their own power and wealth. No politician will advance freedom because that would mean they’ve got to give up some power. This and other skills are VITAL to understand especially if we ever face a massive societal collapse.
The book titled "Think for Yourself: A Critical Thinking Workbook for Beginners" [by Dyreka Klaus > Link at this article] expertly lays out ways to improve the skill that’s vital to survival.
We all hear that old line that children are only taught what to think, not how to think. Today’s chaotic and reactionary society is a case study for why this is a tragedy. Childhood education is lacking the most fundamental building block for the development of rational adults; deliberate instruction in critical thinking. Critical thinking is one of the most important skills we can develop. It is highly prized by employers and it is how we can take proactive control of our own lives, but it isn’t taught in a cohesive fashion to young people. After searching for an unbiased/apolitical homeschool lesson plan on the subject and coming up empty-handed, the author developed her own lesson plan and is now sharing it with anyone who may find it useful. This workbook aims to expose beginners to some of the most foundational concepts underpinning this crucial skill in a few concise chapters, including: deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning, logical fallacies, first principles, and more. A basic format for critical thinking is laid out in steps, followed by practice pages and room for the reader to record research resources. Students are encouraged to use this no-frills workbook as a starting point then research the topic independently in order to foster the development of their own critical thinking skills. This title is a solid first step on a life-long journey of discovery and capability. Give yourself or your children the gift of clarity and empowerment. It is indispensable in today’s world. Intended for independent learners.
Public Schools Are Preparing America’s Children For Life In A Police State
“Governments don’t want a population capable of critical thinking, they want obedient workers, people just smart enough to run the machines and just dumb enough to passively accept their situation.” –George Carlin
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out… without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” –H.L. Mencken
To Craig @ 10:27 AM & Anon @ 12:05 PM ...
Just for the record, I agree with both of your posts. By posting those verses, I didn't intend to make it appear that one should, in the "flesh" (i.e., legalistically), obey those verses WITHOUT the Holy Spirit being the One that does the teaching & convicting and in His timing, not ours. Only God knows the heart ... but ... we can, nevertheless, observe the fruits of an activity and make reasonable judgments as to whether or not it is "expedient," or "fruitful," even though it may be something that we have "liberty" in.
Just a few considerations: Does this "activity" bring glory to God ... does it please Him? What is the "fruit" that this activity is known for? Is it presenting a blameless testimony, or, does it bring your testimony into question or cause confusion? Is it an activity that might cause another Christian brother to stumble? Could this activity, in its infant stage, grow into a much bigger problem if it is allowed to mature? etc, etc.
RayB @ 7:52 PM,
In one breath you express that you ‘get it’ and you agree, yet in the very next breath you illustrate that you don’t. If listening to any music short of European classical music is verboten in your conviction (I’m going by the reviews the anon posted above, assuming you agree with the author’s position in the book you said you agreed with), then fine. But you fail to see that you are imposing YOUR conviction on others.
In your second paragraph, your tone is accusatory. An example: Could this activity, in its infant stage, grow into a much bigger problem if it is allowed to mature? Such a question presumes that its “infant stage” is a ‘little problem’.
According to the author of the work you reference—that is, according to more than one reviewer who stated such—even rock/pop type music with Christian-themed lyrics are out of bounds. Tell that to John MacArthur. About 1 hour ago, in a sermon regarding sin that I heard on local Christian radio, he mentioned how “everybody likes music”, then went on to advocate for contemporary Christian music.
Your comments as regards this subject are just as dogmatic and accusatory as this quote from a while ago that I challenged you on (with no response from you):
Satan cannot destroy God’s word, because God has promised to protect it. However, Satan can, and does provide counterfeits. This is exactly what the modern translations are.
According to you all modern translations are Satanic counterfeits. Also according to you (assuming you agree with the author of the book you recommended in total, as per the reviews of said book), any music other than (white) European classical music—except any with a hint of atonality or dissonance—are “Satan’s Music”.
Global Warming and the New World Order (a Chabad.org video)
https://www.chabad.org/multimedia/video_cdo/aid/3771422/jewish/Global-Warming-and-the-New-World-Order.htm
Hard to follow sometimes, although other times charming. Very convoluted to me the more I try to follow it. Quotes Isaiah some, gets into some Hebrew words, interesting and congenial, seems sometimes to talk like a college professor who is teaching the material and knows Hebrew. But then this stood out around the 10:50 mark:
"Maybe we have a little bit of a sheet of demerits. (unclear) dealt with. (Unclear) outstanding bills to pay. (Unclear) engendered negativity. The negativity's gotta go somewhere. It doesn't just dissipate. You've created these monsters. So (unclear) the monsters will instead inflict the nations. The negativity engendered by the inappropriateness that we may have done will express itself elsewhere. (Unclear) turn into a disease for our enemies."
Anon 9:42 AM,
Might I suggest listening to this speaker @ .75x? [Click on “1x” at bottom of video to get options for playback speed.] He talks very fast.
Off and on the past few years I contributed to a blog consisting of individuals with a Jewish perspective on the Scriptures—OT and NT. During this time I learned a few Hebrew words. In the beginning he references the Scriptures as the “Tanakh” (0:11), which is the Hebrew “OT”. Also, “Tehillim” (1:06) means Psalms. “HaShem” (10:29) means “the Name”, which refers to the Tetragrammaton (YHWH). “Meshiach” (10:40) means, “Messiah”, of course. “Yidden” (10:42) means “Jews”—this is important, for this is his preface to the portion quoted below. Throughout he references a number of Rabbis/commentators and commentaries.
To add to the difficulty, the Tanakh numbers the Psalms differently than the Christian Bible—and the LXX translation is numbered different from both (most times)! He is exegeting Psalm 47:4, which is our 47:3 (LXX 46:4). The root word here [he assumes his students understand it to be] is dabar (or davar), which usually means “speak” as a verb or “word” as a noun. However, OT Hebrew was all consonants, with no vowels, which means one must fill in the vowels to complete the word. If you complete one way, you get one word/nuance, another way is another word/nuance.
The LXX translates this word to a Greek verb which means “He subjects/submits”. The Greek is most literally: “He subdues people for us, and nations/Gentiles under our foot.” OR “He subdues people for us, even nations/Gentiles, under our foot.” The speaker here renders it “nations”.
I cannot speak to whether or not the translation he cites is valid, since I don’t know Hebrew.
Here’s my rendering of the portion in question:
Maybe we have like, uh, a, a little bit of a sheet of demerits. Like we have list of things which are—you(?) have to be dealt with. Like we have some outstanding bills to pay. And, that has engendered negativity. And the negativity's gotta go somewhere. It doesn't just dissipate. You created these monsters. So what will happen? So [cites Hebrew]: the monsters will instead, uh, inflict the nations instead of us. The negativity engendered through the inappropriateness that we may have done will express itself elsewhere. It will turn into a disease for our enemies.
The enemies here are “Yidden”, Jews—fellow Jews who have “a sheet of demerits” that “have to be dealt with”.
God owns harmony. He invented it. But God owns dissonance too. It all belongs to God and He will get all the glory, eventually. He will get all the glory for J.S. Bach, who knew and would have admitted that it is God who created the conditions that make it possible to write down a Brandenburgh Concerto, or a Chromatic Fantasy. But God will also get the all the glory bestowed on a W.A. Mozart, who in his lifetime didn't have much to say about the Lord. He wasn't particularly satanic, like a modern Ozzie Osbourne, but he wasn't particularly reverent either.
God owns number. He owns the Pi sequence and the Fibbonacci sequence and the ways in which sound waves interact; sometimes bouncing off other frequencies, (which are just numbers after all), and sometimes aligning with other frequencies and sometimes partially aligning, and sometimes even cancelling other frequencies out by being an inverse or a same-as frequency. God created the tambour of different resonances of different materials. God owns frequency and wavelength, and amplitude. God came up with the ideas of rhythm, and rhyme, and rhythmic poetry, and woodwinds and strings and brass and percussion and the bow and the reed and the flute and cymbals, and it's all God's work even though the majority of the people to whom he has given musical talent, have failed to acknowledge Gods grace and mercy and bounty through his son, Jesus.
His mercy endures forever.
So true @ 11:30 AM, Paul.
Craig @ 8:45 AM ...
What a surprise ! You've taken me to task again (seemingly, your favorite activity).
You've also completely misunderstood what I was attempting to say, another consistent habit of yours.
Underlying all this is that I've apparently struck a nerve and that nerve is your love for secular Rock n Roll "music." I stand by my conviction that Rock n Roll is a tool of Satan ... just look at the fruits that it has abundantly produced. Perhaps you agree with its mantra? Sex, Drugs and Rock n Roll?
Craig, I get it. I sense a very deep hatred that you harbor towards me and I'm fine with that. Your constant need to nit pick on every little nat that you can find is indicative of your true feelings.
I'd like to ask you this, a point that was made by an "Anonymous" in a post on this thread: WHY is it Craig, that you will not utter ONE SINGLE WORD against the voluminous propaganda posted by a Cult member on this site, but find all kinds of "evil" in whatever I post?
I recall a silly back and forth you had with this individual when discussing the Trinity. Instead of correcting this person's heretical views, you offered your take on what you termed to be the "Binity," as in a TWO person Godhead. Strange, as in REALLY strange.
PS: it was "Paul" and not me that took you to task on your "fan adulation" (idolatry?) of Peter Townsend of the Who:
Paul stated to Craig:
"The Who? Really?
So the fact that Townsend was caught with hundreds of photos of naked children doesn't deter your fan adulation of him?
Evil Uncle Earnie indeed."
Wow! Very poetic!
Bears repeating:
"God owns number. He owns the Pi sequence and the Fibbonacci sequence and the ways in which sound waves interact; sometimes bouncing off other frequencies, (which are just numbers after all), and sometimes aligning with other frequencies and sometimes partially aligning, and sometimes even cancelling other frequencies out by being an inverse or a same-as frequency. God created the tambour of different resonances of different materials. God owns frequency and wavelength, and amplitude. God came up with the ideas of rhythm, and rhyme, and rhythmic poetry, and woodwinds and strings and brass and percussion and the bow and the reed and the flute and cymbals, and it's all God's work"
RayB @ 11:51 AM,
I ‘took you to task’ because of how you framed your response to me and Anon.
There’s no ‘deep hatred’ toward you, but I certainly do not like your stances on a number of things, and I will address this sort of thing when I have the urge to do so. And I’m not going to entertain any of the straw men you’ve introduced in your comment. But, I will address this:
WHY is it Craig, that you will not utter ONE SINGLE WORD against the voluminous propaganda posted by a Cult member on this site, but find all kinds of "evil" in whatever I post?
Besides the fact this is a red herring, I DID respond to the WCG member. You can find it in the last thread, my very last comment on that thread (# 421). I’ve already explained, at least in part, my reference to a “Binity”. Understanding what another believes—as opposed to what someone else says they believe—is the only way to properly critique. Otherwise, you’re just erecting straw men. Kinda like what you do quite often.
As regards your PS, I have not mentioned Townsend in any of my responses to you, so I don’t know what you’re on about here.
RayB @ 11:51 AM took Craig to task for being open-minded and reasonably discuss matters like a BEREAN while he, himself, tries to FIGHT AGAINST consideration of differing ideas JUST LIKE CULTS DO. That he says that he is fighting AGAINST cultishness MASKS the fact that HE is doing EXACTLY THAT HIMSELF.
TRUST RayB!
LOL
paul @ 11:30 AM,
Very nicely written!
As regards C. Christian being able to read music, I’m not so sure that his playing in big bands necessitated this.
I could go on and on on the subject of music, to the point of ad nauseum, so I won’t do so here.
Craig,
Let's get this straight: you strain at nats with me on every conceivable point, yet, our Armstrong friend posts numerous links to entire books that are used to propagandize their cult and your response is what?
Can you point to a single post where you have exposed ANY of this cult's numerous false teachings?
Have you ever pointed out the numerous false prophecies of its leaders? Enlighten me Craig. I can't seem to find anything that you have ever said in response.
Why the silence Craig?
RayB,
It’s quite simple. You present yourself as a professing Christian. I deem myself the same. Yet we have widely divergent stances on some things, which is OK in and of itself on debatable issues. The problem is your extreme dogmatic stances in which you simultaneously implicitly judge anyone who doesn’t agree with your stance.
As regards the WCG member(s), I don’t have your conviction that we must rail against everything that doesn’t agree with our stance(s). Have at it. Go ahead. I challenged the person on the Trinity. You didn’t like the way I did it. Whatever…
WHATEVER could it BE that gets RayB SO upset that you Blogspot readers might thoughtfully consider and then perhaps no longer believe the same as HIM?
Hmmm, let's think...
Oh! Must be THIS:
The UNFINISHED Revolution
Martin Luther exposed the avarice, ritualistic enslavement of the common person, and some of the unbiblical dogmas of Catholicism. He stood up to a religious system that had misinterpreted and misused Scripture. It was an awakening that unleashed the Protestant Reformation.
But is the movement he inadvertently spawned that much better? Five centuries after Luther presented the Ninety-five Theses, it’s time for Protestants to examine if their teachings have degenerated into a watered-down and corrupted version of what the Bible actually teaches. Has the idea that belief is all that’s needed for salvation led many to use God’s grace as a license to sin?
How many times do Christians excuse...disregarding one of the Ten Commandments, or living a lifestyle like unbelievers with the simple argument, “I’m justified without works; I’m saved by grace; God loves me just the way I am”?
This way of thinking is nothing more than using God’s grace as a license to sin. It has serious consequences. Jesus gives this warning in the Sermon on the Mount:
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’” (Matthew 7:21-23).
...
The UNFINISHED Revolution
VIDEO: The UNFINISHED Revolution
Worry about what the >BIBLE<
(not RayB) says about what defines the NEW Testament Body Of Believers:
Revelation 14:12
"THE SAINTS...ARE THOSE THAT >KEEP< THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD"
Clear as a bell!
KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS!
Is anybody here advocating breaking the commandments?
Historically popes said you need to obey them even if they are evil, because they are as God on Earth. And nuns have been told by their mother superiors they need to obey priests, even if it means breaking their vow of chastity, because the vow of obedience takes precedence if vows are in conflict. Popes said if you kill for the Catholic church (as in Crusades) you will be automatically saved in the next life (and most Catholics were afraid they would be in purgatory in the next life). And one could go on and on.
So you think Jesus made this statement about "you who practice lawlessness" because He looked into the future and foresaw that RayB would believe that he is saved by grace? And that He felt it was important to warn RayB, as if RayB now goes out and serially murders people, because he believes he is saved by grace?
Or could Jesus have foreseen the Catholic church, which is after all the little horn of Daniel in prophecy, as well as the harlot riding the beast? What do you think is more likely?
Again and again various people have stated in various words that grace does NOT mean lawlessness, it means grace leads to following the law, not the other way around! It is a matter of what is the cause and what is the effect. Is keeping the law the cause of being given grace? Or is being given grace the cause of keeping the law -- not out of fear, but out of love?
Craig said (in part) to RayB:
"As regards the WCG member(s), I don’t have your conviction that we must rail against everything that doesn’t agree with our stance(s). Have at it. Go ahead. I challenged the person on the Trinity. You didn’t like the way I did it. Whatever…"
Craig,
What a pitiful misrepresentation. You claim that I have a "conviction" that "we must rail against everything that doesn't agree with our stance(s)." Apparently, your misrepresentation is an attempt to deflect from the lack of defending the faith on your part. In your mind Craig, silence is the proper response when one if up against a cult attempting to hijack this site in order to recruit members.
I have done my DUTY by exposing the danger of this cult by exposing its heresies, along with providing documentation of the FALSE prophesies of their leadership, I did this in response to post, after post, after post ad nauseam of the lies contained in the links that are posted by this Armstrong Anonymous. I have issued WARNINGS that the books that he/she links to are written by these false prophets.
YOU call that "railing." I call it faithfully standing for "the faith that was once delivered unto the saints."
Yes, RayB that valiant defender of Martin Luther, er, the Faith that we should all look up to and follow!
Oh, wait...
On The Jews And Their Lies
"On the Jews and Their Lies" is a 65,000-word anti-Judaic treatise written in 1543 by the German Reformation leader Martin Luther (1483-1546).
Luther's attitude toward the Jews took different forms during his lifetime. In his earlier period, until 1537 or not much earlier, he wanted to convert Jews to Lutheranism...but failed.
In his LATER period when he wrote this particular treatise, he DENOUNCED them and URGED their PERSECUTION.[1]
In the treatise, he argues that Jewish synagogues and schools be SET ON FIRE, their prayer books DESTROYED, rabbis FORBIDDEN to preach, homes BURNED, and property and money CONFISCATED. They should be shown NO mercy or kindness,[2] afforded NO legal protection,[3] and "these poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into FORCED LABOR or EXPELLED FOR ALL TIME.[4] He also seems to advocate their MURDER, writing "[W]e are at fault in NOT slaying them".[5]
The book may have had an impact on creating antisemitic Germanic thought through the Middle Ages.[6] During World War II, copies of the book were held up by NAZIS at rallies, and the prevailing scholarly CONSENSUS is that it had a SIGNIFICANT impact on the HOLOCAUST.[7]
...
In the treatise, Martin Luther describes Jews (in the sense of followers of Judaism) as a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth".[9] Luther wrote that they are "full of the devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine",[10] and the synagogue is an "incorrigible whore and an evil slut".[11]
...
The prevailing scholarly view since the Second World War is that the treatise exercised a major and persistent influence on Germany's attitude toward its Jewish citizens in the centuries between the Reformation and the Holocaust.[6][31][32] Four hundred years after it was written, the Nazis displayed 'On the Jews and Their Lies' during Nuremberg rallies, and the city of Nuremberg presented a first edition to Julius Streicher, editor of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer, the newspaper describing it, on Streicher's first encounter with the treatise in 1937, as the most radically antisemitic tract EVER published.[7]
...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies
J said...
"Is anybody here advocating breaking the commandments?"
•Reply:
As a matter of fact, YES.
By default.
Example:
RayB 2:04 PM said...
"Anonymous @ 5:37 PM stated (in part):
"'... RayB, the man who promotes the SATANIC DOCTRINE OF LAWLESSNESS!:
"To Anonymous:
"Please explain what you mean by this statement,"
•Reply
Thank you for your questions.
Simply put, to (certainly presumably unwittingly here) promote a false doctrine that goes by the "Sheep's Clothing" title of "Grace" but in practice really means "Works Unnecessary".
And 'Satanic' of course merely refers to "The Father Of All Lies'" DOCTRINE not you!
*********************
RayB said...
"and while you are at it, copy & paste anything that I have ever posted that 'promotes Satanic Lawlessness.'"
Reply:
Obviously here you are making a showing of the STARK DIFFERENCE between our beliefs on this doctrine:
"If you are going to believe according to...OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW"
1John 3:4
"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth ALSO the LAW: for SIN is the TRANSGRESSION of the LAW."
"Everyone who sins breaks God's law, because sin is the SAME as breaking God's law."
https://biblehub.com/1_john/3-4.htm
Matt 7:22-23
"When the Judgment Day comes, many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord! In your name we spoke God's message, by your name we drove out many demons and performed many miracles!'"
"But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, YOU WHO BREAK GOD'S LAWS!'"
"And then I will tell them, 'I never knew you. DEPART FROM ME, you who practice LAWLESSNESS!'"
https://biblehub.com/matthew/7-22.htm
https://biblehub.com/matthew/7-23.htm
--------------------
J said...
So you think Jesus made this statement about "you who practice lawlessness" because He looked into the future and foresaw that RayB would believe that he is saved by grace? And that He felt it was important to warn RayB, as if RayB now goes out and serially murders people, because he believes he is saved by grace?
"Or could Jesus have foreseen the Catholic church, which is after all the little horn of Daniel in prophecy, as well as the harlot riding the beast? What do you think is more likely?"
•Reply:
To say "Did Jesus forsee RayB (etc)" RATHER than say "Did Jesus forsee people LIKE RayB (etc)" is a transparent attempt to mock my point, making as though Jesus singled RAYB out of ALL of humanity.
And as far as "What do you think is more likely?", it's a question based in a false assumption by making it "either-or." It's BOTH! Christ CLEARLY meant to WARN those future professing Christians who are DELUDING THEMSELVES into believing that they ARE Christians when they AREN'T >BECAUSE< THEY DON'T CONSIDER IT VITAL TO STRIVE TO KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS, THAT'S WHY HE MADE THAT PROPHETIC WARNING. They think 'LIP SERVICE' is enough -and it's NOT!
(Although it IS enough to be condemned to ETERNAL DEATH with! NOT BTW eternal TORMENT, as you indicated previously you believe is the case, you may be happy to learn! "They will receive their eternal punishMENT, but not eternal punishING. Their death, their eternal punishment, will last forever, but the punishing ends when they are burned up. There's no contradiction. God is a God of mercy and love. He mercifully puts those who will not choose what's best, out of their misery."
And I NEVER accused RayB of MURDER but (since you took it there for dramatic effect to further attempt to make my point look ridiculous) so be it:
.
"Whoever breaks ONE commandment is guilty of breaking them ALL."
(That INCLUDES breaking the 4th Commandment: KEEP the SEVENTH day Sabbath, which need for keeping RayB has repeatedly DENIGRATED!)
https://www.biblehub.com/gnt/james/2.htm
https://www.biblehub.com/james/2-10.htm
--------------------
J said...
"Again and again various people have stated in various words that grace does NOT mean lawlessness,"
•Reply:
J, it DOESN'T MATTER if they say that on one hand but also say Jesus did away with the law on the other. He came to EXEMPLIFY keeping the Law not destroy it! People try to twist things to say that He basically said "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law, I did not come to destroy the Law but to destroy the Law" LOL!
Was the LAW of God "Nailed to the Cross"? Were the Ten Commandments "nailed to the cross" when Jesus died for our sins? What is the REAL meaning of Colossians 2:14-17?
The New Covenant - Does It ABOLISH God's Law?
What Did Paul Really Say In Colossians 2:16?
Law And Grace - Colossians 2:16
Galatians 4:9-10 Are God's Laws Bondage?
In closing...
Ask yourself, really ask yourself why RayB NEVER, EVER quotes such NEW TESTAMENT Bible scriptures as this:
James 2:26
"Faith WITHOUT works is DEAD!"
Have a good day.
Anonymous 3:33 PM,
I am going to respond to you in detail at some point in the next few weeks. I am working on my reply, because I need to spend some time reading the material. I may as well confront the ghost of my childhood, anyway.
For now, let me just reply to your post about Luther's book Jews and Their Lies -- notice that nobody here is promoting it! But you are here promoting Armstrongism.
I had recalled reading before that Herbert Armstrong belonged to the KKK in the 1920s or 30s and that he admired Hitler. I went searching for what I had previously read. Instead of finding that --and I didn't look for it very long because I became more interested in this story - I found Bobby Fischer was scared there would be an American Holocaust. So I became intrigued by the bits and pieces to give a glimpse of his story. I knew a former member of the Worldwide Church of God who became an atheist and who was best friends with Bobby Fischer. I never met him, but I heard stories about him, and he fascinated me.
I will find the references I recall reading about Herbert Armstrong having belonged to the KKK and having admired Hitler and the claims that he modeled some things in his sect after the Nazis -- like encouraging members to drink so they would talk about other members! That is for later.
Back to Bobby Fischer. He is just one example of the human cost. A good tree does not bring forth bad fruit. Good for RayB for warning people away from cults. Somebody should have warned Bobby Fischer away. He had an autism spectrum disorder, making him brilliant, yet socially naive. He was preyed upon to milk him for his money. Very, very sad story.
Bobby Fischer, Chess Genius and What Actually Happened from a Former Armstrong Cult Victim Who Endured Same Post-Cult Aftermath
https://bobby-fischer-1962.blogspot.com/p/bobby-fischer-chess-genius.html
...
As an adult, I connected ONE other human who is known to have endured the same inexplicable Post-Cult Trauma fate back in 1990's: Bobby Fischer, the chess player. Three innocent people were murdered, so my journey post-Armstrong cult was documented like Bobby Fischer's. But, there are other victims out there who have not came forward. Most likely out of intimidation and fear… or total lack of understanding what happened to them.
Especially Bobby. Like myself, he is believed by most people who are knowledgeable about “ASD” (Autism Spectrum Disorders) or as it is still called by some “Asperger's Syndrome”. Bobby Fischer notably exhibited all major symptoms of ASD. One of the conditions includes a serious cognitive vulnerability in social skills. Bobby tended to be on the side of credulity off the chessboard, when interacting with people. He was often taken advantage of (as was the case between Bobby Fischer and the cult leader, Herbert W. Armstrong) which Bobby complained in 1977:
“And here I was in the sixties reading this stuff sincerely and believing it. And I should have known that it was all just a pack of lies. He was just playing with me. Lie after lie, letter after letter.”
— Bobby Fischer Interview, Ambassador Report
A rare glimpse of Bobby Fischer expressing our cult beliefs to outsiders:
“Well, I guess the world's coming to an end anyway,” he sighed. “Maybe I'll let 'em publish the book.” [1968{?}1969]
...
J @ 5:46 PM
Okay, so like your buddy RayB you (didn't address the DOCTRINAL points I made NOR simply say that you intend to address them after further reading but INSTEAD) cry 'CULT' and make undocumented Hitler claims about HWA (BTW I have NEVER heard THAT one before). IF they have some REAL substance to them you should've waited until you had good documentation to back it up.
But you didn't.
Instead you just recklessly slung mud.
RayB has a worthy sidekick!
And guess what, J?
NONE OF IT MATTERS DOCTRINALLY.
HWA COULD'VE HAD A 3-WAY WITH ADOLPH & EVA AND IT STILL WOULDN'T HAVE AFFECTED WHETHER KEEPING THE 7TH DAY SABBATH (ETC., ETC., ETC.) IS VALID, SO RESEARCH AWAY!!!
YOU TWO JUST DON'T SEEM TO GET IT. NONE OF THAT SORDID BUSINESS MATTERS DOCTRINALLY. THE DOCTRINES STAND AND FALL ON THEIR OWN MERITS, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU THINK YOU ARE ACCOMPLISHING BECAUSE:
THE DOCTRINES STAND AND FALL ON THEIR OWN MERITS!
••You said: "let me just reply to your post about Luther's book Jews and Their Lies -- notice that nobody here is promoting it! But you are here promoting Armstrongism."
•My Reply: RayB tries to dissuade people from checking into important Biblical doctrinal matters by repeatedly bringing up ad nauseum HWA's failed predictions as the reason to automatically dismiss EVERYTHING HWA had to say. My point was that if RayB is going to use THAT type of criteria that if someone is seriously wrong about something then EVERYTHING they say should be automatically dismissed as well, then HE shouldn't be promoting and praising Luther! I daresay that HWA's ill-considered failed 'prophecies' PALE IN COMPARISON to Luther's book,
"the most radically antisemitic tract EVER published"!!!
And as far as "Armstrongism" HWA had more BIBLICALLY correct doctrines than the vast majority of professing Christianity so therefore those doctrines are, you know, kind of nice to be made aware of.
••Your & RayB's DEFLECTION Response: BUT HWA made a number of false prophecies!
•My Reply: He did but that doesn't address my point. He could've made 1,000,000 more wrong predictions and that STILL isn't the issue here. The DOCTRINES (including such as keeping the BIBLICAL Sabbath 7th NOT 1st day of the week, keeping the annual BIBLICAL Holy Days NOT Pagan Holidays, ETC.) ARE STILL PROVEN, VALID DOCTRINES!
••Your Response: There have been disgruntled members Including Bobby Fischer.
•My Reply: ANY LONGTIME CHURCH OF SIZE HAS DISGRUNTLED MEMBERS. AND NO ONE SAYS HWA WAS PERFECT. IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A PERFECT CHURCH LEADER YOU'LL HAVE TO GO BACK IN TIME 2000 YEARS.
AND BOBBY FISCHER AND THE REST WOULD'VE BEEN/WOULD BE WELL-ADVISED TO NOT IMPLICITLY TRUST ANY HUMANS IRRESPECTIVE OF RELIGION (OR LACK OF SAME). SOME OTHER RELIGIONISTS (OR ATHEISTS) WOULD HAVE NOT DONE WELL BY HIM EITHER, HAD HE GONE TO THEM INSTEAD. SOME PEOPLE TRY TO AVOID HAVING TO OBEY GOD'S LAWS BY SAYING SOME OF THE LEADERS/GROUPS ARE VERY IMPERFECT. IF YOU SHOULD HAPPEN TO FIND (UPON REFLECTION) THAT THAT IS YOUR REASON: GUESS WHAT? THEN AVOID THOSE THAT ARE TOO IMPERFECT AND ABIDE BY THE DOCTRINES ON YOUR OWN, IF NECESSARY, UNTIL YOU FIND A BETTER GROUP THAT BELIEVES SIMILARLY TO FELLOWSHIP WITH!
AND ACTUALLY I QUITE AGREE WITH THE TWO OF YOU ON AVOIDING CULTS! THAT IS WHY I NEVER POST LINKS TO SOME GROUPS THAT ACTUALLY ARE CULTISH IF IN FACT NOT CULTS. AND I COULDN'T CARE LESS WHETHER YOU (OR WHOMEVER) JOIN THIS GROUP THAT GROUP OR THE OTHER GROUP JUST SO LONG AS YOU'RE TRYING YOUR BEST TO BE GODLY (ESPECIALLY LIKE A BEREAN) AND UNDERSTAND AND FOLLOW BIBLE DOCTRINES!
MORAL OF THE STORY:
We should simply worry about whether we REALLY know and accept the actual DOCTRINES of the Holy Bible and, while researching that: AVOID bad groups!
Have a good day.
Bobby Fischer Speaks Out!
https://hwarmstrong.com/ar/Fischer.html
"THE PSYCHOLOGY OF ARMSTRONGISM
Church members shouldn't let themselves be confused. They begin not trusting in their own judgment, and then they're finished. That's a terrible, terrible thing. First, they get conducted in with a nice sweet program, no money, everything free, free, free. And then they get sucked in, and suddenly a few lies get mixed in. They are told that their human nature is wicked and these nice people who gave them all these things wouldn't be lying to them, would they? And then I think once you start distrusting your own mind you're finished. From there you just get more and more confused. Once you think that your own mind is not your friend any more-your own conscience and your own mind is not your friend-then I think you are on your way to insanity. You have been stripped bare. All your defenses are gone. You must trust Armstrongism, his ministers, doctrines, and organization. Otherwise you're going in the wrong direction, and you know where that leads.
Herbert Armstrong claims to be freeing you from the world's churches, freeing you from all the trash you've heard all your life. He's freeing you, and finally you're coming to know the truth that will set you free, free, free, and the next thing you know you are really a zombie. You are completely under the power of Armstrongism. Good luck... you're going to need it.
"...once you start distrusting your own mind, you're finished."
This idea of Herbert's that you can't trust your own thoughts-that's the key doctrine that I think has to be blasted out. I would say that if there's one thing that is the whole essence of Armstrongism, that's it. That's how he screws up your mind. That's how he hangs on to people.
I have to discuss some of the things Herbert has done to me-how he screwed up my mind-just to let people know that this is for real, because if anybody tried to live by the letter of the law... it was me. I truly tried to be obedient. The more I tried, the more crazy I became. The pressure he puts on you! You can't do this, you can't do that, you can't tell your friends this, you can't see unconverted people, you can't eat this, you can't eat that, on the sabbath you have to rest, you have to listen to the radio program every day, you have to study the correspondence course... and then you're supposed to pray...."
Craig,
Maybe you should go on ad nauseum about music. You wouldn't get in so much trouble.
The thing about guitar as a part of a percussion section, which is what it is, is that a guitarist can read a "chart" which is just a reading of the changes of the chords that take place in a given piece of music, as opposed to the exact individual notes as they take place, which is classical notation. Guitarists are notoriously unpolished at reading standard notation.
But the guitar is not part of the classical orchestra anyway, so who bothers?
The guitar has this in common with the saxophone, which is also not in the classical orchestra. But the guitar and the saxophone are very much in the great American Jazz Orchestra. In that format guitarists read charts and Jazz is a more free and immediate way of processing music. It brings the musician into the realm of composer. It's a more democratic way of performing music.
Blessed are the poor in spirit.
J @ 8:23 PM
RE: "This idea of Herbert's that you can't trust your own thoughts-that's the key doctrine that I think has to be blasted out." (Etc.)
THANK YOU for sharing that!
That "idea of Herbert's that you can't trust your own thoughts" RIP-ROARINGLY INFURIATES me, and if HWA was still alive today and would've dared say "you can't trust your own thoughts" to ME (and KEPT insisting on it EVEN after being successfully rebutted as he WOULD'VE been, believe me) I would've verbally torn him a new you-know-what. Oh yes, he would remember that day. I joke around a bit to keep things light on this blog but that frankly belies just how seriously I take certain things.
Sigh. Now I feel obligated to post even MORE warning signs about cults (although I personally HAVE put a tad before).
As if I didn't have enough to do.
Thanks a LOT, J!
LOL!
Have a good night.
You done good.
8:20 PM
Mister Massa Craig,,, he got dem dry bones!
Coronavirus; Its Just the Flu!
endtimesforcaster.blogspot.com
Thursday, February 20,2020
Also:. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/cases-covid-19-south-korea-double-overnight-alarming-prison-outbreak-reported-china
Beast System
https://hackernoon.com/what-elon-musk-plans-to-do-with-our-brain-through-neuralink-ps7o36sn
US bishop ORDERS priest to DELETE blog criticizing Church's sex abuse cover-up!
https://lifesitenews.com/news/us-bishop-orders-priest-to-delete-blog-critical-of-churchs-sex-abuse-cover-up
http://wset.com/news/local/bishop-prohibits-priest-from-broadcasting-opinion-after-criticizing-sex-abuse-scandals
Francis-APPROVED communist parallel Chinese Roman Catholic ‘church’ APPROVES ABORTION
https://lifesitenews.com/news/communist-run-chinese-patriotic-catholic-association-is-pro-abortion-pro-contraception
'Epstein and I have EVERYONE on videotape' Ghislaine Maxwell alleged to have confided
Socialite with links to royal family reveals she has spoken to FBI about friendship with Jeffrey Epstein and Ms Maxwell
By Victoria Ward
The Telegraph
02/21/2020
Ghislaine Maxwell told a former acquaintance that she and Jeffrey Epstein had “EVERYTHING on videotape,” it has been claimed.
Christina Oxenberg, a socialite and distant relative of the royals, said Ms Maxwell also once told her that Epstein had purchased his own helicopter because commercial pilots were “eyes and ears” they did not need.
She revealed she had spoken to the FBI about what she had been told.
Ms Oxenberg, 57, first met Maxwell in the early 1990s and said she would never forget a conversation the pair once had in Maxwell’s home.
“We were alone,” she said. “She said many things. All creepy. Unorthodox. Strange. I could not believe whatever she was saying was real. Stuff like: 'Jeffrey and I have everyone on videotape.’”
...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/02/21/epstein-have-everyone-videotape-ghislaine-maxwell-alleged-have/
Pope Francis The Taxman
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pope-francis-taxman
Anonymous 8:20 PM,
Any doctrines taught by Herbert Armstrong are doctrines that believers should be necessarily skeptical about.
As well anything taught by the Roman Catholic church needs to be an object of skepticism and scrutiny.
It could be true that the Reformers' reforms were incomplete.
It could be true that Herbert Armstrong's teachings were not wrong about every single thing.
Even the RCC does not teach 100% complete error.
But a little bit of poison ruins the water.
A little bit of water added to the poison only dilutes the poison.
My whole life my father, even though he left the organization, continued in most of the major doctrines, and he completely alienated me from Christianity. He spent his time obsessively proving things about holy days and calendars. I found it boring and irrelevant. I didn't see him as a lamp in the world, a living example that it is real.
Now you insist these things are important for salvation. If you came at me that way when I was taking my first baby steps back to belief, I would have just shut down. The only way I could stomach it at first was to focus only on the very most simple and basic things that Jesus directly said and did. I held onto my faith by thinking again and again that if I don't understand something and it seems unfair or alienating to me, I won't let it make me lapse back into disbelief, because nothing can contradict the direct and simple things that Jesus said and did. With God there is no fine print to "getcha" and say to you in the end, "I didn't really mean it! It was all just a joke! And now the joke is on you sucker! You didn't go to church on Saturday? Well now you're going to hell! You should have listened to Anonymous on Constance Cumbey's blog, now shouldn't you have?" While meanwhile you are standing behind him with a huge halo over your head and all lit up, not because you were ever a martyr like millions of Protestants who went to church on Sunday. But only because you kept the holy days and went to church on Saturday.
The more you push me on this, you will not like who I become. I am trying to restrain myself as a sister in Christ with self-control.
I have already said I will pore over the doctrines and respond when I have had time to study them in the light of Scripture and write out my thoughts.
I think you mean well, and I don't actually want to be snotty to you, but I'm not a perfect person, and you are really pushing my buttons by pushing this in my face after my childhood.
Subcomandante Bloomberg It Is, "Another 'Obama' Won't Cut It...Folks Ain't Buying That Con Anymore"
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/subcomandante-bloomberg-it-another-obama-wont-cut-it-folks-aint-buying-con-anymore
I find it interesting that Solomon's temple was similar to the Canaanite temple that Joshua invaded. Isn't Solomon's temple the very thing that Freemasons are obsessed with rebuilding? Solomon is known to have become apostate in his faith because of the influence of his many pagan wives and concubines, right?
From the article: "The front of the compound is marked by two columns and two towers leading to a large hall."
Isn't there a verse in the Bible to effect that God is saying to the Israelites in future tense that they will no longer worship their sacred columns? I can't find it now.
Canaanite Temple Invaded by Biblical Joshua Unearthed
New find again validates the biblical narrative, and shows similarities with Solomon’s Temple
The excavation team unearthed a trove of artifacts including, bronze cauldrons, Hathor-inspired jewelry, daggers and axe-heads adorned with bird images, scarabs, cultic figurines, and the oldest known etching of Hebrew letter “Samech.”
“And the Lord delivered Lachish into the hand of Israel, which took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls therein…” (Joshua, 10:32)
The Book of Joshua tells the story of the ancient Israelites’ entry into the Promised Land after a 40-year sojourn in the desert. Now, a team of archaeologists led by Professor Yosef Garfinkel at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s Institute of Archaeology and Professor Michael Hasel at Southern Adventist University in Tennessee, have opened a window onto the Canaanite society that inhabited the land during that era.
Read more here: https://www.israeltoday.co.il/read/canaanite-temple-invaded-by-biblical-joshua-unearthed/?utm_source=wnd&utm_medium=wnd&utm_campaign=syndicated
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1714864/jewish/Is-the-Messiah-a-Descendant-of-King-Solomon.htm
Is the Messiah a Descendant of King Solomon?
By Yehuda Shurpin
Dear Rabbi,
I read that the Messiah will not only be a descendant of King David, but also of his son Solomon. What is the source for this?
Answer:
Let’s start with King David.
Various verses throughout Scripture clearly state that the Messiah, known in Hebrew as the Moshiach, will be a descendant of the house of David:
And a shoot shall spring forth from the stem of Jesse [David’s father], and a twig shall sprout from his roots. (Isaiah 11:1)
Behold, days are coming, says the L‑rd, when I will set up of David a righteous shoot, and he shall reign as king and prosper, and he shall perform judgment and righteousness in the land. In his days, Judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely, and this is his name that he shall be called, The L‑rd is our righteousness. (Jeremiah 23:5–6)
The reason that the Moshiach will be a descendant of King David is because, once David was anointed king by the prophet Samuel, he acquired the kingship for himself and his descendants forever. The verse thus states (II Samuel 7:16), “Your throne shall be established forever.” This acquisition was conditional, applying only to his righteous descendants, as the verse in Psalms states (132:12), “If your children will keep My covenant . . . their children shall also sit on your throne forever.”
Nevertheless, G‑d assured David that the monarchy would not be taken from his descendants forever:
If his children will forsake My Torah and cease walking in My statutes . . . I will punish their transgressions with the rod, and their sins with plagues. Nevertheless, I will not utterly remove My grace from him . . . His throne shall be . . . established forever. (Psalms 89:31–38)1
While this promise seems to be made about all of David’s offspring, we find that G‑d singles out King Solomon (I Chronicles 22:9–10):
Behold, a son will be born to you; he will be a man of peace, and I shall give him peace (shalom) from all his enemies around about, for Solomon (Shlomo) will be his name, and I shall give peace and quiet to Israel in his days. He shall build a house in My name, and he shall be to Me as a son, and I to him as a father, and I shall prepare the throne of his kingdom forever.
Continued below...
And later on, David states:
And of all my sons—for the L‑rd gave me many sons—He chose my son Solomon to sit on the throne of the kingdom of the L‑rd over Israel . . . (Ibid. 28:5)
When King David reaffirms that Solomon will reign after him, he is saluted with the expression, “Let my lord King David live forever” (I Kings 1:31),2 indicating that the eternal monarchy continues through Solomon.
In light of the above, the fact that Moshiach will be a descendant of both David and Solomon is part of the twelfth (of the thirteen) Jewish fundamental beliefs as outlined by Maimonides.3
However, it is interesting to note that while it is clear from all of the above sources that the Messiah will be a descendant of King Solomon, the Zohar seems to state that Moshiach will actually be a descendant of Nathan, a different son of David. Expounding on the verse (Isaiah 40:9), “Upon a lofty mountain ascend, you who brings good tidings to Zion,” the Zohar states:
“You who bring good tidings to Zion” is Hephzibah, the wife of Nathan son of David, who is the mother of Messiah, Menachem son of Amiel. She shall go out and bring the tidings . . .”4
The famed 20th-century Jewish scholar and kabbalist Rabbi Reuven Margolies explains that the Zohar is careful to describe the Moshiach as being a descendant of Nathan’s wife, rather than of Nathan himself. Nathan had passed away childless, and Solomon his brother married his widow, according to the laws of yibum, levirate marriage.5
In a levirate marriage, the firstborn son of the widow and the brother of the deceased is considered to be a continuation of the dead husband’s line. Therefore, Moshiach is referred to here as “offspring” of Nathan, even though he is a descendant of King Solomon.6
https://www.davidicdynasty.org/
"The Davidic Dynasty honors the history, lineage and heritage of the royal line of King David and identifies people of legitimate Davidic descent. It is the goal of the Dynasty to gather and reunite Davidic descendants in the Holy City of Jerusalem. Your donation can help us fulfill our mission."
When our Armstrong Anonymous friend rants on and on about "obeying commandments," this is what he/she is referring to:
Herbert W. Armstrong's Seven Criteria that Identifies the True Remnant Church:
(1) observance of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the week,
(2) retaining the Passover and other Jewish feasts (while renouncing Christmas, Easter, and other religious holidays of allegedly pagan origin),
(3) compliance with Old Testament kosher laws,
(4) rejection of the Trinity doctrine in favor of the semi-polytheistic, quasi-pantheistic, God-is-a-family concept,
(5) practice of adult baptism by immersion (valid only if administered by a “true minister of the true Church”),
(6) non-involvement in secular governments, and
(7) use of the designation “Church of God.”
IF YOU DON'T MEET EVERY SINGLE CRITERIA LISTED ABOVE, YOU ARE NOT A TRUE CHRISTIAN !
NOTE: I would add an eighth criteria to this list. Herbert W. Armstrong also taught that his members were COMMANDED to give his "church" 10% of their gross income ... AND ... it was a "work" which was required in order to EARN salvation!
If a member did not "tythe" to HIM, they forfeited any hope of salvation.
When I find the time, I plan on writing a post that explains thoroughly what the Bible is referring to when it uses the term "commandments."
Hint: when the term "commandments" is used, it is not referring EXCLUSIVELY to the "10 Commandments."
J @ 9:13 AM
Sorry you took it that way but I am not meaning to be, especially in the sense of it you mean, "pushing you" but merely responding to what you said.
Yes, I KNOW that you said you were going to research the doctrines (great!) BUT my point was that you didn't JUST "simply" say that BUT said that AND threw the mud, etc, ALSO.
You miss as well the thrust of my advocated philosophy about things in general (Including doctrines): ALL claimed-to-be-Christian Doctrines from ANYWHERE AND ANYONE should be verified Biblically!
And as far as 'Armstrongism', let's do some 'isms' for illustrating a point. Let's take 'Armstrongism', Calvinism, & Catholicism: Consider each a separate circle on a chart with a main circle marked ABD for "Actual Biblical Doctrines". Visualize that? Now each circle has some overlap with each other showing commonality of belief in certain areas. With me so far? 'Armstrongism' has the most commonality of the 3 with ABD. It's NOT the same as ABD BUT it DOES have the MOST overlap with it.
So it is terribly regrettable that HWA chose to add cultic practices to the mix and, as you say, poison the well.
'Separate the Biblicaly accurate doctrines from any bad organizational practices in your mind' is what I would advise anyone in any such situation about ANY group they have had a bad experience with.
And J, for the record: I, myself am not "insisting these things are important for salvation", I'm simply saying that this is what the BIBLE says.
If you can conclusively show otherwise, FINE!
BUT, that being said, in response to your statement...
"(Jesus talking:) 'You didn't go to church on Saturday? Well now you're going to hell! You should have listened to Anonymous on Constance Cumbey's blog, now shouldn't you have?' While meanwhile you are standing behind him with a huge halo over your head and all lit up, not because you were ever a martyr like millions of Protestants who went to church on Sunday. But only because you kept the holy days and went to church on Saturday."
...you will be glad to know that you are under a very great misapprehension indeed! And that is that I (etc.) think that God (is unfair and) will sentence all those that don't happen know any better (regarding whatever vital Biblical doctrine[s] they don't obseve) to eternal death.
NOT AT ALL.
In fact you alluded to it yourself!
God will give those who've lived their lives without truly understanding His ways (not really so much a second chance as) a first chance, giving them true understanding so that they can make a true decision whether to follow God's ways or not.
You are perhaps under the impression that because you read about, for example: the need for 7th day Sabbath-keeping on this Blogspot that that 'safety net' (if you will) no longer applies to YOU. Actually it STILL does if (as in this example) you truly believe that keeping the 7th day Sabbath is not important.
God HIMSELF must open people's minds to His truths.
It is unfortunate that HWA found so much Bible Truth that was not already what was being taught in the vast majority of mainstream professing Christianity so that when people went to HWA's church and encountered any seriously cultish things that HWA thereupon might well presumably refuse to change upon being confronted about they could then just drop attending there like a hot potato and go across the street to say, the Presbyterian Church Of God or down the block to the Southern Baptist Church Of God and be done with it because the doctrines were taught there too but WITHOUT the 'strings' attached.
But such is life.
Anyway, live YOUR life secure in the knowledge that God is most assuredly NOT unfair!
Have a wonderful day!
8:20 PM - 10:05 PM
Regarding the 12:16 PM post...
Rather than trust our buddy RayB and his usual distortions, read the ACTUAL positions (and their SCRIPTURAL BASIS BTW) from the Church itself:
(These are UCG and are reflective of COG positions in general.)
Fundamental Beliefs (An Overview)
Fundamental Beliefs (In Depth)
Correction (the 2nd link above was the Table Of Contents, here is the item itself):
•Fundamental Beliefs• (In Depth)
RayB @ 11:51 AM,
You wrote, I recall a silly back and forth you had with this individual when discussing the Trinity. Instead of correcting this person's heretical views, you offered your take on what you termed to be the "Binity," as in a TWO person Godhead. Strange, as in REALLY strange.
I’ve explained my point for using “Binity”. It was to ensure I understood the position of the UCG, as I explained earlier and again in my response to you @ 12:24 PM. My subsequent Scriptural refutation of this position in the previous thread, by the use of Matthew 28:19 (and etc.), you continue to refuse to acknowledge, as evidenced by your 12:33 PM comment (Why the silence Craig?). Frankly, that’s dishonest.
As I wrote earlier and now again more recently, you can see my final comment on the Merry Christmas! Significant 2019 events post (#421), in which I illustrate that “in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” implies one Triune Name and not one Bi-une name. So, unless the UCG has an adequate explanation for the clear grammar—the singular use of “Name” for the collective of the ‘Persons’ (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)—it fails in its denial of the Trinity with just this one verse.
This leads me to your comments @ 1:53 PM. My approach was to engage on a specific doctrinal point in order to refute said point. I’m waiting for the UCG adherent to adequately address Matthew 28:19. Your method is to rail against the UCG incessantly. Now, to your credit, you obviously know, and apparently had previously known, some things about the UCG, such as the false prophecies of Armstrong, as well as some of its aberrant doctrines—at least in some measure. This is certainly helpful. It’s more that I’d known. Making comments about them is not inappropriate. Yet, given your continued misconstruing and mischaracterizing of some of my positions and statements, I was and am not confident you are adequately presenting the UCG stance. In reading the back and forth between you two it appears you have mischaracterized some of its doctrines. As a result, the UCG adherent continues posting about the UCG’s doctrines in order to correct your mischaracterizations. And on and on we go. I don’t want to get in the middle of it.
This forum here, Constance Cumbey’s blog, is not specifically “Christian”. It’s her forum for her views, most of which center on the NAM/NWO. It’s not intended to limit or forbid contributions from non-Christians. An example is Dorothy, who had done considerable research into the NAM/NWO, and whom you VERY uncharitably spoke ill of in the “In Memoriam” thread. How disrespectful. Not just to the memory of the recently-deceased Dorothy, but to Constance. But you don’t care. In your mind, it’s all about the “truth”—as you see it.
If you have a conviction to continue the exchange with the Anon UCG adherent, feel free. Just don’t have an expectation that others (I) will follow you. And don’t expect that your dogmatic stances on debatable, secondary doctrines, especially when attended by your implicit judgment upon those who don’t align with said stances, will go unchallenged.
After now catching up to some of the recent comments before posting my comment here, I need to add: In light of your most recent comment @ 12:30 regarding “commandments”, this is helpful. Once you post your explanation on this, maybe you and the UCG adherent can have a more fruitful exchange—one in which one understands the other, as opposed to talking past each other.
"This forum here, Constance Cumbey’s blog, is not specifically “Christian”. It’s her forum for her views, most of which center on the NAM/NWO. It’s not intended to limit or forbid contributions from non-Christians. An example is Dorothy, who had done considerable research into the NAM/NWO, and whom you VERY uncharitably spoke ill of in the “In Memoriam” thread. How disrespectful. Not just to the memory of the recently-deceased Dorothy, but to Constance. But you don’t care. In your mind, it’s all about the “truth”—as you see it."
Nailed it, Craig. Sadly is not just Dorothy who has been maligned by RayB.
"And don’t expect that your dogmatic stances on debatable, secondary doctrines, especially when attended by your implicit judgment upon those who don’t align with said stances, will go unchallenged."
Copy that. That excessive and loud clang, clang, clang, from RayB deserves to be called out. He mischaracterizes, misrepresents, and misspeaks, of many a poster here. No doubt why so many no longer post here that had good contributions to the purpose of this blog in the first place. He deeply disrespects Constance Cumbey in my opinion on her own blog of which he is a mere guest. She has been very gracious with him regardless and says a whole lot about her...
In stark contrast to the blog owner, RayB does not know, or does not want to know, don't know which and for him to judge himself by, but certainly in the rebuke of what Jesus said fits a huge portion of his postings: ..ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. Luke 9:55
Craig @ 3:36 PM said to RayB (in part):
"Your method is to rail against the UCG incessantly. Now, to your credit, you obviously know, and apparently had previously known, some things about the UCG, such as the false prophecies of Armstrong, as well as some of its aberrant doctrines—at least in some measure."
and ...
"In reading the back and forth between you two it appears you have mischaracterized some of its doctrines. As a result, the UCG adherent continues posting about the UCG’s doctrines in order to correct your mischaracterizations. And on and on we go. I don’t want to get in the middle of it."
Craig,
Very interesting. First, I do NOT have "back and forth" debates with this Armstrong poster. I simply RESPOND by issuing WARNINGS, along with pertinent information that refutes these lies whenever he/she posts WWG/UCG propaganda. This person often posts to links to voluminous amounts of literature put out not only by Herbert W. Armstrong, but by subsequent UCG "prophets and apostles." In one case, a PDF downloadable free book was written by Armstrong, yet, his name appeared nowhere on the book! Rather deceitful? THAT is what I am responding to. You, Craig, have apparently had either little or no personal contact with cults, whereas I have, and I know full well the incredible spiritual (as well as *physical) damage these cults can cause upon individuals AND entire families. Cults ruin people's lives! Do you even care about that Craig? DO YOU ??? Do you REALLY care about defending Biblical truth? Do you actually LOVE the truth Craig? Do you love truth enough to defend it?
Instead of taking the time to find out what this is all about, YOU have chosen to attack me instead You have gone so far as to make numerous, false disparaging comments about my character, many of which are based solely upon your fertile imagination, and nothing else. And, even after you admit your ignorance regarding this cult, you still can't control your obvious hatred and continue to lash out at me personally.
* This cult CAN damage a person physically as well. Why? Because Herbert W. Armstrong FORBID his followers to seek medical attention by visiting a Dr. He claimed that if you contacted a Dr., you were "lacking in faith" and were "denying God."
Craig also said (in part) to RayB
"An example is Dorothy, who had done considerable research into the NAM/NWO, and whom you VERY uncharitably spoke ill of in the “In Memoriam” thread. How disrespectful. Not just to the memory of the recently-deceased Dorothy, but to Constance."
For the record, this is what I posted when Constance announced her passing:
With all due respect, what was the advantage of Dorothy's work which involved the warnings to the Jewish community regarding the New Age Movement, IF, that work did not include an uncompromising message that the Lord Jesus Christ IS the ONLY "way, the truth and the life" and that "no one cometh to the Father except by me?" John 14:6
I distinctly recall Dorothy labeling me "anti-Semitic" for posting passages directly from the Gospel of John. She was not attacking me, but Christ Himself for HIS words that were spoken.
The lesson here is that you can spend your life "fighting for a religious cause," in this case, fighting the NAM. But, if you oppose the complete, absolute, authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, you are still on the losing side.
The quint essential question for EVERY living soul, is NOT "what think ye of the New Age Movement?"
IT IS: "WHAT THINK YE OF CHRIST?"
Is He your King, your Sovereign, your Lord? Do you bow to His absolute authority? Do you love Him and His Word?
RayB @ 5:14 PM,
You sure have a penchant for mischaracterization and misrepresentation. You even self-contradict in doing so:
You, Craig, have apparently had either little or no personal contact with cults, whereas I have, and I know full well the incredible spiritual (as well as *physical) damage these cults can cause upon individuals AND entire families. Cults ruin people's lives! Do you even care about that Craig? DO YOU ??? Do you REALLY care about defending Biblical truth? Do you actually LOVE the truth Craig? Do you love truth enough to defend it?
OK, so, you state I “have apparently had either little or no personal contact with cults”, while you have. But, after assuming I have little to no experience in this regard, you ask, “Do you even care about that Craig?” Well, logically, if I had little or no “personal contact with cults”—as opposed to you—then how would I KNOW about it to either care or NOT care? This is followed by more straw men based on this self-contradiction.
You then write, Instead of taking the time to find out what this is all about, YOU have chosen to attack me instead You have gone so far as to make numerous, false disparaging comments about my character, many of which are based solely upon your fertile imagination, and nothing else.
You frame this as a choice between two, when it isn’t. First, I don’t need to know what the UCG is all about. You’ve already got that covered, right? Second, challenging you on YOUR doctrinal points is not an attack on you personally. Moreover, I don’t know what you mean by “false disparaging comments about my character”. Are you speaking of Christine’s video?
RayB @ 5:20,
You just don't get it. Do you think posting your hateful comments again absolves you?
RayB said...
"In one case, a PDF downloadable free book was written by Armstrong, yet, his name appeared nowhere on the book! Rather deceitful? THAT is what I am responding to."
•My Reply: Yes indeed! I "DECEITFULLY" HID the first link I found with a nice copy of the cover (some were not) of the book in question (which source had happened to have left out the author)...
RIGHT IN THE BODY OF A POST WITH THESE SAME COG-TYPE MATERIALS: IDENTIFIED AS SUCH, NOT OFF ON ITS OWN.
-AND SHERLOCK HOLMES HIMSELF, AKA OUR VERY OWN RAYB FIGURED OUT THAT IT WAS DIRECTLY RELATED TO EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE VERY SAME POST! WOW!
And BTW RayB didn't care in the least that the information was important to know exposing the New Age Movement & related occult, no, not a word of praise, just more denigration.
PATHETIC,!
incidentally, if you might be perchance wondering WHY RayB is repeatedly making a fuss about this ONE particular time, it's the same reason he wants to eliminate the 'Anonymous' option here: HE WANTS TO BE ABLE TO AUTOMATICALLY DISCOUNT WHAT IS SAID -RIGHT OFF THE BAT, (NO MATTER HOW CORRECT IN ACTUALITY IT MIGHT BE). And of course, whether an author's name is on something or not DOESN'T affect how accurate or inaccurate something is, EXCEPT for people like RayB who promote WHAT to think at the expense of HOW to think.
Which is ironically of course...
JUST LIKE a CULT!
Hi Craig.
You said: "I’m waiting for the UCG adherent to adequately address Matthew 28:19."
And you earlier made the assertion: "Basically, the WCG must either reject Matthew 28:19 as inauthentic* or adequately grapple with its semantic implications."
Well, for right now, I'll personally go with the former. There is a LOT of evidence of a Binity rather than a Trinity** so therefore thusly have I so decided, at least for now. (Frankly I don't care which it is as long as I am open to the truth of the matter.)
Have a good day!
*Does Matthew 28:19 Have Added Text?
There are MANY historical quotes from theologians and other writers that HEAVILY indicate that Matthew 28:19 has been altered and ACTUALLY (i.e. ORIGINALLY) says:
“With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,”
The following PDF has been complied by Grzegorz Kaszyński and has EIGHTY versions of Matthew 28:19 that do NOT say Father, Son and Holy Spirit:
*Matthew 28:18 PDF
**TRINITY?
**VIDEO: Is God A Trinity?
paul,
Your most recent comment closed with “Blessed are the poor in spirit”. What did you mean by that?
Earlier, you mentioned Pat Metheny. Here’s an excellent concert at Woodstock, NY on 9/19/81, featuring a number of jazz greats. I’ve timestamped at the one piece with Metheny (and the fantastic Jack DeJohnette on drums, Miroslav Vitous on bass, and Dewey Redman on tenor sax):
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WyeEySgwps&t=13m
After the close of the piece featuring Metheny is Anthony Braxton, who is betting a nickel than no one could guess the tune going with his verbalization. After this, he and others play Coltrane’s “Impressions”. In the very beginning of this video is footage of a female pianist—Marilyn Crispell. She joined Braxton shortly after this, and I’ve been listing to the apex of Braxton’s quartet featuring her of late, specifically Santa Cruz 1993. It’s definitely avant garde, atonal and dissonant at times:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rAvsB9xeCE
Metheny got his debut on the German ECM label. I’d tried to collect the label’s entire output on vinyl—about 425 records. I got close, but I sold off a number of them over the years. It was through ECM, though, that I expanded my musical horizons. Have you heard/seen guitarist (and pianist) Egberto Gismonti? The following is stamped at my favorite piece by him, Danca dos Escravos (though I prefer the ECM album version titled by that name):
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWU15munPms&t=36m56s
The entire video above is worth viewing, though it’s interspersed with him speaking in his native Portuguese. (Since I can read a bit of Spanish, which is similar, I can make out some of it.)
But, most days, I would say the greatest assembled band ever was Miles Davis mid-60s quintet of Miles, Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock, Ron Carter, and Tony Williams. Here’s some footage:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_T14jAkj2w
[pssst: Let’s not mention that Robert Johnson wrote “Me and the Devil”. Shhhhh…]
1 John 2:16
For all that is in the world - the desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes, and the pride of life - is not from the Father but from the world
"Blessed are the poor in spirit"
Anon 6:17 PM,
All Greek manuscripts contain the words “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. There are no textual variants in this portion of the verse.
I’d seen Kaszyński’s article before. To take just one example, he cites Eusebius as one who uses “in His name” instead of the Trinitarian formula; however, Eusebius cites it BOTH ways, with and without the longer verbiage. Thus, to not mention this fact about Eusebius is a bit deceptive. Even unitarian Anthony Buzzard admits this:
Matthew 28.19 long vs short Eusebius, "in the name of" only.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFtjOronQt0
Buzzard also mentions the Didachē (@ 0:28), written ca. 50-120 AD, which uses the longer version twice in chapter 7. See here: www.earlychristianwritings.com/didache.html
The bottom line: though some early church writers appear to write it “in His name” instead of the longer text, this in no way negates the Greek NT text, which evidences no variants in the relevant section. It was not uncommon for writers to ‘quote’ by memory, as opposed to having a manuscript in hand. Moreover, it’s possible some writers conflated Matthew 28:19 with some of the Acts verses which speak of baptizing in Jesus’ name.
And the Trinity does not rise or fall on this one verse. In an earlier thread you quoted a source stating the following regarding John 14:17-16:15, which I’ll follow with my response:
The rules of Greek grammar require that pronouns agree in gender with the nouns that are their antecedents. The antecedent of these masculine pronouns is “comforter” (Greek parakletos), which is masculine in Greek. The use of a masculine pronoun simply means it is in gender agreement with the masculine antecedent “comforter.” This fact of grammar does NOT prove that the Comforter is a person.
Everything about this statement is true, and I have read others’ try to use this to ‘prove’ the personality of the Comforter aka the Holy Spirit. Let me quote Murray J. Harris in his exegetical commentary on John (Greek transliterated): John, Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2015), p 261:
The fact that the pronouns referring to the Spirit (viz. dia…auto…auto) are neuter no more establishes the impersonality of the Spirit than the masculine pronouns ekeinos in 14:26; 15:26; 16:8, 13-14 and auton in 16:17 prove the personality of the Spirit. In each case the gender of the pronouns is grammatically conditioned…The personality of the Spirit should be established without appeal to the masculine pronouns in the passages cited above. (One can argue, for example, that since Jesus as Helper [implied by allos, “another” in 14:16] is personal, one would assume that the Spirit as “another Helper” is also personal. And the other personal roles attributed to the Spirit, such as teaching and reminding [14:26], testifying [15:26], guiding [16:13], and informing [16:14-15], would certainly be strange if the Spirit were simply an impersonal force).
Jesus is also referred to as the paraklētos in 1 John 2:1. This further implies that the Holy Spirit and Jesus are similar entities in some fashion, does it not?
RayB to all,
My attempt to post with my name as usual hit a glitch so I'm having to post this one under 'Anonymous'...
Craig @ 10:59 PM
CONGRATULATIONS, you outdid yourself (which I didn't think was possible) but your unique 'BINITY' contribution to the world of religion NOW takes a back seat to saying CHRIST OUR SAVIOR beneath the flesh is a PARAKEET!
("Jesus is also referred to as the paraklētos". )
Now although I'm no Koine Greek scholar like YOU 'Professor', it should be OBVIOUS to ALL that its being so very, very, VERY close to our own English word can ONLY mean that it means just exactly that:
PARAKEET!
What's NEXT, Craig?
Gonna lecture us on how St. Paul was actually a WOMBAT?
Anon 11:47 PM,
Your attempt at humor is a bit bizarre. But OK...
In rereading my post @ 10:59 PM above, I can see how this might be a bit confusing, especially for those native English speakers with no knowledge of foreign languages. In most other languages nouns are gendered. In Greek, each noun is masculine, feminine, or neuter. Some may seem a bit haphazard. For example, the word for “world” (kosmos) is masculine, while the word for “earth”, “land” (gē) is feminine. When a “personal” pronoun is used, grammatically it must match the gender of the noun to which it refers.
The Greek word for “spirit”/“Spirit” (pneuma) is neuter, so each “personal” pronoun referring to this word must also be neuter. This hardly indicates that the Holy Spirit is not a person, even less that the Spirit is a person that is neither masculine nor feminine, neither male nor female. Nor do we think the world, kosmos, is actually masculine, while earth/land, gē, is actually feminine.
I was initially led astray by an article I’d read that attempted to make the case that the Holy Spirit is not neuter because the Spirit is called the paraklētos, which is masculine, and subsequent “personal” pronouns referring back to the paraklētos are masculine. When I later learned that the pronoun MUST be masculine in accordance with Greek grammar rules, I was really dismayed. Faulty arguments to attempt to bolster a theological position undermine Christian apologetics.
To my disappointment, there is a video in which Walter Martin succumbs to a version of this faulty argument. In it, he claims that because a “personal” pronoun is used in John 1:3 to substitute for “Word”, logos, this indicates “the Word” is a person. Not only is this false (the pronoun is masculine to match the gender of logos, no more, no less), this is totally unnecessary, for he’d already successfully argued by context that “the Word” (logos) had to be a ‘person’.
Craig @ 12:09 AM
Bizarre?
EXACTLY!
I was 'inspired' by RayB's (#1) flipping out a bit some time back when "But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, YOU WHO BREAK GOD'S LAWS!’" (Matthew 7:23) was first posted and he said in heated response that, no, it has to say 'iniquity' to be correct (like it has in his beloved KJV) and YOU had to clue him in that in the original language it's 'lawlessness'. That attacking through arrogant ignorance on his part frankly SHOCKED me because I really had thought he would've checked Strong's Concordance (or similar) before charging in like Don Quixote. That oddly reckless behavior told me he might well be likewise similarly arrogant in his ignorance on some other issues as well, and (#2) when he attacked you under the bizarre assumption that YOU had INVENTED 'Binity' that CONFIRMED it!
Quite amazing.
Craig, you don't have to have personal contact with something to know something or care about it.
Classical music not all clean https://www.talkclassical.com/51757-classical-music-occultism.html
https://slate.com/culture/2008/12/how-the-illuminati-influenced-beethoven.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozart_and_Freemasonry
WCG suporter you do NOT establish the lawlessness or works of iniquity have to do with Mosaic limited covenant indicators like sabbath and circumcision and food laws.
J glad you see through "headship" idolatry.
Armstrongism/not trusting your mind reminds me of L Ron Hubbard once said that to enslave someone you need to offer them absolute freedom.
you identify pope as antichrist mostly by persecution Great Tribulation which hasn't happened yet so the antichrist isn't here yet, 2 Thess. chapter two.
Little horn takes over an existing world empire fourth beast of Daniel. which doesn't exist yet. Chris White on youtube cued me to this three beasts conquered by fourth and still exist and allowed to continue a while after Christ comes back and destroys the fourth beast, so these are not ancient.
Vatican is not one of Rome's seven hills.
no pope demanded worship Vicar of Christ just means appointed representative
no pope issued a mark to show you worshipped him without which you can't legally buy or sell.
Euro-Brit-USA-NATO has/is in Middle East and shaped it a lot, probably Daniel's winged lion. But it gets driven out.
yes the protestants WERE persecuted as heretics.
the Bible not forbidden just difficult to get before printing press. Translations burned were considered heretical mistranslations.
venerating relics and images is not idolatry, Paul warns that behind the idols that are nothing or in them are demons, the principle extracted is "honor given to the copy goes to the original." hence we venerate images of Christ and saints
Some people WERE falling into idolatry and a kind of magic, iconoclasm was an overreaction, and the Nicea II ecumenical Council corrected both. As a result of this icons are put up on walls, and you don't get the option to slobber and obsess over any you move along bow or kiss and get going.
3D images (statues) are disliked by us, I think more room for delusion than with flat not so lifelike images. Some icons streamed myrrh and other miracles connected to them. These are done by The Holy Spirit through them, and oil from a relic lamp often has unusual qualities but the effects vary per what God decides the person needs. some are very strong to oppose demonic forces. Holy Water cleans up a bad atmosphere. Holy Unction (misunderstood as extreme unction/last rites by RC) has often healed physically.
Jesus explains metaphors when He uses them, He doesn't in instituting the Eucharist I take him at His word, the bread and wine are His Body and Blood, somehow. Of course, it might be that His Body and Blood are not present where it is denied. The priest's power is focus of RC they don't ask The Holy Spirit to do the transformation, we focus more on The Holy Spirit as performer of this miracle, and He is invoked after the words of institution.
head cover in some churches not others. can't go into the altar space except to clean with blessing. some churches have readers who are women.
I oppose female ordination though I can make a case for it, https://politicallyunclassifiable.blogspot.com/2015/06/women-clergy-bad-idea-even-if-biblical.html https://politicallyunclassifiable.blogspot.com/2013/05/council-of-laodicea-proves-women-were.html
That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew by Martin Luther (1523)
http://johnnycirucci.com/that-jesus-christ-was-born-a-jew-by-martin-luther-1523/
“Therefore, I will cite from Scripture the reasons that move me to believe that Christ was a Jew born of a virgin, that I might perhaps also win some Jews to the Christian faith. Our fools, the popes, bishops, sophists, and monks — the crude asses’ heads — have hitherto so treated the Jews that anyone who wished to be a good Christian would almost have had to become a Jew. If I had been a Jew and had seen such dolts and blockheads govern and teach the Christian faith, I would sooner have become a hog than a Christian.”
“They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property. When they baptize them they show them nothing of Christian doctrine or life, but only subject them to popishness and monkery. When the Jews then see that Judaism has such strong support in Scripture, and that Christianity has become a mere babble without reliance on Scripture, how can they possibly compose themselves and become right good Christians? I have myself heard from pious baptized Jews that if they had not in our day heard the Gospel they would have remained Jews under the cloak of Christianity for the rest of their days. For they acknowledge that they have never yet heard anything about Christ from those who baptized and taught them.”
This begs the question of why Martin Luther started out sympathetically toward the Jews and later became angered toward them. No matter what reasons he could have had to become angry, it should go without saying that it could never justify the evil of the Holocaust.
"The Jews and Their Lies" by Martin Luther
https://www.resist.com/Instauration/OtherPubs-20120723/TheJewsAndTheirLies-Luther.pdf
"The publishers of this treatise by Dr. Martin Luther, the pioneer of Protestantism, do not necessarily present this work as an accurate expression of their opinion. The chief reason for its publication is to give the reader an accurate translation of Luther's treatment of one the most delicate and dangerous subjects for a public man to discuss -- the Jews."
Anon 11:47 PM & 1:09 PM,
I believe that, to the extent possible, we should treat others fairly. With that in mind, their own words—in proper context—are fair game, but I don’t think it right to ponder what someone might say.
In any case, here’s a piece I wrote 6 years ago on straw men and cognitive dissonance:
notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/creating-straw-men-from-cognitive-dissonance/
On page 39 of "The Jews and Their Lies" by Martin Luther (the version linked above), he writes:
"We are not permitted to take revenge. Revenge is around their neck a thousand times greater than we could wish them. I will give you my true counsel. First, that we avoid their synagogues and schools and warn people against them. And such should be done to the glory and God and Christendom, that God may see that we are Christians and have not knowingly tolerated such lying, cursing and blaspheming of His Son and His Christians. For what we so far have tolerated in ignorance (I myself did not know it), God will forgive us."
Herbert W. Armstrong: Racist
With his adoration for the past, it is no surprise that Armstrong’s views on race relations remained unchanged from his youth. Segregation, bans on interracial dating and marriage, and the inferiority of the “Negro” race were things he took for granted. As his article in the October, 1963 Plain Truth demonstrated, Armstrong cloaked the racial prejudice practiced in the Jim Crow south with Biblical garb. His attempt to make racism Biblical is truly astonishing.
Armstrong went to his grave without changing his opinions on race. In Mystery of the Ages, Armstrong lays out his racial theories in a book published just a few months before his death. Support for segregation, a distaste for interracial marriage, and a belief in black inferiority are all on display in his final book:
“The subject matter of the chapter [Genesis 6] is the generations ancestry of Noah. Exceeding wickedness had developed through those generations, by Noah’s generation reaching a climactic crisis that ended that world.
“What was this universal evil and corruption? Jesus described that universal, corrupt evil as ‘eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage’ (Matt. 24:38). Eating food and drinking is not evil. Marrying is not evil in itself. There had to be wrong use and excess in eating, drinking and marrying – the evil was in the manner, and in the extent of eating, drinking and marrying.
“It could only be eating improper food, drinking excessively of alcoholic drinks, revelings (Gal. 5:21), rioting, violence. Marrying, to be evil, had to be as in Genesis 6:2, when men ‘took them wives of all which they chose.’ There was rampant and universal interracial marriage – so exceedingly universal that Noah, only, was unblemished or perfect in his generations – his ancestry. He was of the original white strain.
“It is amply evident that by the time of Noah there were at least the three primary or major racial strains on earth, the white, yellow and black, although interracial marriage produced many racial mixtures.
“God does not reveal in the Bible the precise origin of the different races. It is evident that Adam and Eve were created white. God’s chosen nation Israel was white. Jesus was white. But it is a fair conjecture that in mother Eve were created ovaries containing the yellow and black genes, as well as white, so that some of the children of Adam and Eve gave rise to black, yellow, as well as white.
“The one man God chose to PRESERVE the human race alive after the Flood was perfect in his generations – all his ancestry back to Adam was of the one strain, and undoubtedly that happened to be white – not that white is in any sense superior.” So Armstrong says. But you’ll notice that he believes that Adam and Eve were white, and so was Noah and Jesus and the twelve apostles. Armstrong tries to convince us that the white race is not superior in his eyes, but he strongly implies that it is preferred in God’s eyes.
More here: https://thepainfultruth.org/2017/08/12/herbert-w-armstrong-racist/
Herbert W. Armstrong Incest
One can only speculate on how much Herbert’s first wife Loma knew of what had transpired for ten years between her husband and her younger daughter. but some individuals who were then close to the Armstrong family did notice that toward the end of her life Loma was not on good speaking terms with Dorothy and that during the last year or so of her life she appeared to have lost almost all will to live. She died in 1967 after an illness that many say could have been cured by medical science, had she availed herself of that help. It is interesting to note also that Herbert W. Armstrong’s great preoccupation with world touring began right around that time.
Let us briefly review the facts. In 1971 Garner Ted Armstrong paid a visit to his younger sister Dorothy. He had long been suspicious of the kind of relationship his father and sister maintained during his youth. They chatted over a few drinks and then Ted told her bluntly of his suspicions. She did more than admit the allegations. With candor she related detail after shocking detail.
For a number of years Garner Ted Armstrong kept the information to himself. But Dorothy did not She divulged the same information to many others including David Antion (Garner Ted Armstrong’s brother-in-law) and Lois Chapman (who had been married to the late Richard Armstrong, Ted’s older brother).
Dorothy’s story as related to Ted and others was that Herbert had begun fondling and heavy petting her in 1933 when she was thirteen years old, around the same time that Herbert W. Armstrong now claims God was using him to found the modern era of the only true church. But he did not begin to go “all the way” with her until three years later. One day Dorothy returned home from a date with a young bank teller to inform her father that she had just been “half-raped.” To her surprise, Herbert was actually “elated” over the news. Herbert decided it was time to show her how it was really done. From then on Herbert went “all the way.” The year was 1936; Dorothy was 16 years old. Strangely, Dorothy has claimed that Herbert later went on to become a good friend of the bank teller.
The incestuous relationship went on for years, but it was apparently not mutually enjoyable.
Dorothy has related to friends how on one occasion in a hotel room she so strongly protested Herbert’s abuse that the manager knocked on the door and asked what the reason was for all the noise. Herbert was quick to inform him that his “young bride” was a bit uncooperative due to inexperience. Satisfied with the alibi, the manager left. Dorothy has claimed that Herbert then overpowered her, and after tying her to the bed and gagging her, proceeded to rape her. It’s a pity Herbert neglected to include this incident in his book God Speaks Out on the New Morality.
More here: https://thepainfultruth.org/herbert-w-armstrong-incest/
Gerringer Letter
Before an individual becomes a member of the Worldwide Church of God, he is encouraged “to prove all things, hold fast that which is true.” The ministry tells him, “Don’t believe what we say — check it out.” “If we teach contrary to God’s Word, do not follow us.” Etc. Unfortunately, the opposite process begins once one is in the Worldwide Church of God. The member is told that “Mr. HWA is closer to God and has more of His Holy Spirit than anyone else, which is the reason
Page 4 he is the leader of the Church” or “Since Mr. HWA is the leader of God’5 Church, he must be closer to God and have more of His Holy Spirit than anyone else ” Therefore his opinions (re: scriptural or non-scriptural matters) are more godly than anyone else’s can be, so to do as he says must be the course of action which most pleases God. This type of circular reasoning is taught to the members, and is applied to a lesser degree to Mr. GTA, then the evangelists, then the pastors, then the P.E.’s, etc., etc. By the time you get to the lowly laymember, his opinion is worthless, when compared with the hundreds of those who must be closer to God since they have higher positions, or who have higher positions since they are closer to God.
More here: https://thepainfultruth.org/gerringer-letter/
Craig 8:30 AM
Yes, in a serious context in actual life that's called "putting words in someone's mouth."
But this WASN'T serious.
It was COMEDY.
Most comedy requires exaggeration, including parodies.
So eliminate parodies off the face of the Earth?
Because that's what it was.
Simply a humorous parody illustrating the pitfalls of acting in arrogant ignorance.
Smearing Bernie Sanders
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/smearing-bernie-sanders
Anon 9:26 AM - 9:35 AM - 9:43 AM
Thank you.
That will help people who may have interest from ever joining a branch that venerates him.
HWA veneration (and by extension furtherance of his cultic policies) are why, as I said, I NEVER link to some groups.
Specifically as regards your 9:43 AM post, I remember in-house critiquing of HWA was tried to be lessened or eliminated by informally coming up with the one-size-fits-all rebuttal for members to ('hopefully') say to other members, namely: "That's criticizing God's apostle!"
Here is another link covering matters you touched on:
How Are The Mighty Fallen!
BTW Let these things serve as a warning to people to NOT to ever shut their minds off but to do the OPPOSITE. And to NEVER put a human being on a pedestal be it Pope Francis, Martin Luther, Herbert W. Armstrong or ANYONE ELSE. EVER.
INSIDE religion or OUTSIDE.
EXCEPT for God incarnate:
JESUS CHRIST!
Anon 9:48 AM,
I understood your intent. And I see what you mean by your points 1 and 2. The thing is, though, online discourse is tough enough: tone is hard to read, words are miscommunicated by the writer, words are misconstrued by a reader, etc. This is especially true when dealing with more delicate topics. For this reason I think we should refrain from humor of this type, for it can be viewed as ad hominem.
It’s not that I’m humorless, of course. I saw this comment on a YT video, which I thought was hilarious:
-----
Michael Bloomberg tweeted "President Trump cheats at golf"
President Trump responds with "Michael Bloomberg cheats at...mini golf."
President Trump is #MasterTroller
----
I don’t even know if the above is true. But it’s funny.
I disagree with a lot of things Trump says, but, objectively, he can be pretty funny! And those who know me in real life know me to be one to make self-deprecating remarks and to find humor in lots of places.
MAFA: Make American Fun Again
This reminds me of this short blog post which relates a true story:
notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2019/10/01/climate-change-as-religion/
She and I have had various discussions over the years, including the topic of Christianity. She won’t admit this, but while she disavows Christianity, she’s really on the fence. At times she’ll ask her Christian sister to pray for her. She’s not a lost cause.
Christine 3:02 AM,
Thanks for explaining more of the intricacies of the Eastern Orthodox church. I prefer a simpler and cleaner faith to avoid potential pitfalls. But I do believe the Eastern Orthodox church has been a church full of the persecution of the saints through the ages, mainly from the Ottoman Empire but also from the RCC. I have respect for it and believe it to be a more virtuous church than the RCC.
List of Bible Prophecies Fulfilled
https://believersportal.com/list-bible-prophecies-fulfilled/
EXCLUSIVE: Cardinal warns Church about slipping into idolatry of ‘mother earth…Gaia’ worship
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/cardinal-warns-church-about-slipping-into-idolatry-of-mother-earth...gaia-worship
RED ALERT! ATF Sneaking in a NATIONAL REGISTRATION! Today February 24, 2020 is the Deadline to Comment and Kill This!
YouTube PERMANENTLY BANS TruNews
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61224
Whether you Agree or Disagree with TruNews:
FIGHT FOR FREE SPEECH!
https://www.brighteon.com/new-search?query=TruNews
BRIGHTEON - The ALTERNATIVE To YouTube!
I am wondering how Constance is doing. I hope well. She has so much on her plate.
Mapping out the Banking Elite’s Goal for a Cashless Monetary System – Part One
Mapping out the Banking Elite's Goal for a Cashless Monetary System - Part Two
Steven Guinness' Independent Economic and Geopolitical Analysis Website (Home Page)
Anon 6:17 PM,
You wrote:
And you [meaning me] earlier made the assertion: "Basically, the WCG must either reject Matthew 28:19 as inauthentic* or adequately grapple with its semantic implications."
Well, for right now, I'll personally go with the former. There is a LOT of evidence of a Binity rather than a Trinity** so therefore thusly have I so decided, at least for now. (Frankly I don't care which it is as long as I am open to the truth of the matter.)
I bolded your parenthetical remark—a comment I appreciate. I feel the same way about Christian theology, and this is one reason I have been studying Greek, as well as critical commentaries. I want to know the truth to the extent possible, to not rely solely on any sort of tradition. That’s not to say I set out by denying Christian theology as my premise; I merely wanted to test it out, for I’d read about others’ who challenged the Trinity doctrine (as one example). After studying this matter, I’m convinced of monotheistic Trinitarianism as being Scripturally accurate.
I responded @ 10:59 PM (& 12:13 AM) to your post. As regards Matthew 28:19, any argument against the authenticity of the longer text in favor of the shorter text must factor in the evidence of the Greek manuscripts. There are no variants here. Typically, in NT textual criticism the Greek manuscripts are considered primary while other writings are secondary. Moreover, as Daniel Wallace has stressed, we really need textual criticism of the ECFs in order to discern the reliability of these texts for use in NT textual criticism. Thus, overall I find any argument against the longer text here to be weak. (I do have one commentary that rejects the longer text, though—but, again see Buzzard’s video I referenced [www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFtjOronQt0], Buzzard being a staunch anti-Trinitarian who rejects those viewing this verse as promoting a strict sacramentalism [the RCC, e.g.], thus contradicting the practice in Acts of “in Jesus’ name” baptism.)
Assuming you are sincere in your parenthetical remark—and I’m assuming you are—would you be willing to concede that Matthew 28:19 is authentic as it appears in any (legitimate) Bible version?
Craig @ 11:04 AM
Thank you but not until such time as I have exhaustively researched it and if have found that to be the case (which I do not know when will be as in light of ALL of the OTHER evidence for a Binity rather than a Trinity it is frankly not an urgent priority right now). Certainly though that if there are no variants in the Greek manuscripts that is a plus for the case but nevertheless there are just too many issues as brought forth in the below to make a judgment based on that ALONE until they (and any others) are meticulously examined.
Have a good day.
Does Matthew 28:19 Have Added Text?
Matthew 28:19 PDF
'White Lives Don't Matter' Signs Appear in Canadian City, Media Ignores
https://summit.news/2020/02/24/white-lives-dont-matter-signs-appear-in-canadian-city-media-ignores/
Let's sum this up:
Herbert W. Armstrong, the "end times Apostle, and prophet Elijah, appointed by God committed incest with his daughter, Dorothy. AND, this unspeakable abuse went on "for years." Armstrong's son, Garner Ted, as well was Armstrong's wife (Dorothy's "Mother") knew about the abuse but kept its dirty secret "for years." It all started when Dorothy was the victim of "heavy petting" by her "Father" when she was 13. When she was 16, she came home after a date and reported to her "Father" that she had been "half-raped," to which her "Father was elated." It was then that he decided to show her what it was all about and "went all the way" with her!
Several points:
First, THIS is the "apostle" upon which the shifting sand foundation of the Worldwide Church of God (along with its off spring) is built upon. Not only was their "founder" a false prophet, heretic and proven fraud, he was a pervert on top of all that!
Second, because the evidence of this incredibly evil, deceptive false prophet is overwhelming, the UCG must, as in MUST separate themselves from him. Hence, the information that was posted by "Anonymous" @ 10:39 AM which directs you to a link called "How Are the Mighty Fallen!" This book was written by none other than William F. Dankenbring, another "church of god" FALSE PROPHET that clings to most of the heresies of Herbert W. Armstrong.
Third, our "Armstrong/Anonymous" friend, IN SPITE of all that is known about Herbert W. Armstrong, has in the past posted ENTIRE PDF BOOKS by Armstrong!
This is how cults operate. Hierarchal deception, fraud, lies, secrets, perversion, heresies, legalism, etc. And all of it is FUNDED by their blind followers ,,, as in "in order to be 'saved,' you MUST pay a tythe to the 'church."
(more)
One of the first "cracks" in the false foundation of the Worldwide Church of God came when Herbert W. Armstrong died. He had for YEARS convinced his followers that he was "appointed by God to be the end times true Apostle and Prophet, Elijah." Armstrong proclaimed that "if Jesus returned AFTER" Armstrong's death, that would prove "that the Bible was false" and could not be trusted ! When Armstrong died prior to Christ's return, many people began to ask questions.
Another major crack occurred when Armstrong surprisingly named his "Apostolic" successor (President and Pastor General), Joseph W. Tkach. Tkach was a low level member of the hierarchy and his appointment came as a shock to the others that saw themselves as Armstrong's natural successors. Tkach also came to the belief that, unlike what Armstrong had taught for years, "tithing was not necessary requirement in order to gain salvation." However, this had several unforeseen effects; one, people couldn't understand how such a foundational doctrine of their church was suddenly declared to be false, and two, donations to the church fell of dramatically, causing Tkach to back off considerably from his non-tithing stance.
The problem with the off shoots of Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God cult is that they continue to hold fast to most of his false teachings, such as British Israelism, continuing false prophesies, strict obedience to what THEY consider to be the "LAW" and the "COMMANDMENTS" i.e. man made. They insist upon keeping the Seventh Day Sabbath in a legalistic manner that, they believe, gains them merits (what they call "works") with God. Many also strictly adhere to OT dietary laws, while insisting upon observing OT feast days .... all related, incidentally, to their false belief in British Israelism (they actually think they, American and British "true believers" are the PHYSICAL decedents of the "Ten lost tribes." THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT ... inherent in this false system is a RACIST belief of the superiority of the WHITE Anglo/Saxon race. They also deny that the 3rd. person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, is God, but is rather a "force." This belief is held in spite of the numerous Bible passages and verses that teach otherwise.
NOTE: this is just scratching the surface on what this cult is all about. You might take this to be a matter of "majoring on minors," but, I KNOW personally the incredible web that cults weave. They are so damaging that it often takes a lifetime to overcome all of the negative effects upon one's soul.
Let's REALLY sum this up:
RayB said...
"Herbert W. Armstrong, the 'end times' Apostle, and prophet Elijah, appointed by God committed incest with his daughter, Dorothy. AND, this unspeakable abuse went on 'for years.'"
...
"THIS is the 'apostle' upon which the shifting sand foundation of the Worldwide Church of God (along with its off spring) is built upon."
AGAIN he fixates on attacking INDIVIDUALS & THEIR DOCTRINES WITHOUT SCRIPTURALLY REBUTTING THE DOCTRINES.
APPARENTLY HE CAN'T.
-AND HWA DIDN'T WRITE THE BOOK PRAISED BY HITLER'S HENCHMEN AND SEEN BY AUTHORITIES AS A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE MURDER OF 6,000,000 JEWS, RAYB'S HERO: MR. MARTIN LUTHER DID THAT.
SO IF THAT IS RAYB'S JUDGING CRITERIA STILL:
GLASS HOUSES!
Anon 12:57 PM,
I would expect nothing less. One doesn’t change theological views without very careful consideration.
I want to return to the video I referenced (twice) with Buzzard, who affirms Matthew 28:19 in its long form. I parenthetically noted he’s an anti-Trinitarian. To be clear, he’s what I’d call a strict monotheist, attempting to see things as would a first century monotheistic Jew. In his view, then, there is One God (the Father). Jesus (Yeshua) was/is God’s agent (akin to Moses as God’s agent, e.g.), but his agent par excellence, the Messiah—but a man. He’s not merely a man, for He’s the Messiah (HaMashiach). We agree this view is Scripturally wrong, as Jesus is clearly identified as God.
In the video Buzzard states: …you could say “into the authority of the Father, into the authority of his Son, into the authority of their combined operational presence and power—the Holy Spirit”—all of that would be to do exactly as Jesus says…
Syntactically, Buzzard is wrong. It’s ONE “name”, aka authority, for all three, as I’d noted earlier. Again, this means each carries equal weight in terms of name/authority. Even the one commentary I have that rejects the long version admits that the long form means ONE for all three: “the singular onoma, ‘name,’ points to the unity of the three”. So, while Buzzard is at least affirms the authenticity of Matthew 28:19 (the long version), he forces his paradigmatic interpretation onto the text, doing violence to the syntax.
I wanted to use Buzzard as an example, for his syntactical error is not much different than the UCG’s in this regard.
The bottom line is that one must either accept the verbiage as found in any (legitimate) Bible and properly exegete the syntax of the passage, which affirms “the unity of the three”, or one must reject the longer version text. However to reject the longer text in the manner of the two sources you refer to @ 12:57 PM is to open up dangerous territory. If we can reject passages despite no Greek manuscripts evidencing any variants—and even though non-Greek texts both don’t contain and yet contain the relevant verbiage—then what OTHER NT Greek texts can be subject to this sort of culling?
In any case, as I’d also noted, this is not the only text to wrestle with as regards the Holy Spirit. As well, I’d noted that Jesus is called the paraklētos, “advocate”, in 1 John 2:1. In John 14:16 Jesus tells His disciples that He will ask the Father to send “another paraklētos”, referring to the Holy Spirit. If Jesus is a paraklētos, and the Holy Spirit is “another paraklētos”, what does this commonality say about the two? And Jesus requests this other paraklētos because He doesn’t want to “leave them as orphans” (14:18). Moreover, the Spirit’s role includes teaching and reminding (14:26), testifying about Jesus (15:26), guiding into all truth (16:13), and informing (16:14-15). Doesn’t all this imply the personhood of the Spirit?
Anyone who has seen that there is indeed a New Testament basis for obeying God (for example in keeping His 7th Day Sabbath) has much to choose from!
Sabbath Keeping Churches - Sabbath Keeping Denominations
Below is a list of over 500 Sabbath keeping Churches of all different denominations. Many say that Sabbath keeping is legalism but legalism is something you do to earn your way to heaven. The hundreds of different Sabbath keeping Churches that know the blessings of keeping God's Sabbath do not keep the day to earn entrance into the kingdom but keep the day because they love God with all their heart, soul and might. Salvation is a free gift and so there is nothing we can do to earn our entrance into the kingdom as we are justified by faith and not by works of the law. But does this mean we do not have to obey the law? Thankfully, Paul made the answer to this question clear and informs us that we do not make void the law through faith. Romans 3:31. For even further clarity, Romans 2:13 leaves no doubt as to who is justified before God. See saved by faith for more detailed information. Select the following for Frequently Asked Questions and misunderstandings on the fourth Commandment.
Sabbath keeping Churches know that keeping the Sabbath day is a SIGN that it is God we love and worship and that we are His children. It is also a SIGN that it is God that sanctifies us and makes us Holy. These are wonderful signs and very much a blessing. What happens when we devote a full day to God because we love Him so? What is the result of spending quality time with anyone you love? This of course is not legalism by any means and applies to any of the Ten Commandments. It is something we do because we love God and our fellow man. Even though we cannot earn our way into the kingdom by keeping the Ten Commandments, we are still judged by them and will not make it into the kingdom by not trying to keep them all in love and obedience to God. Jesus said in John 14:15, “If you love me, keep my Commandments.” and in John 15:10, “If you keep my Commandments, you shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's Commandments, and abide in his love.” Jesus obeyed the Fathers Commandments and He asks us to demonstrate our love for Him by doing the same. We also find in 1 John 2:4, “He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his Commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” See also Matthew 7:21-23, Hebrews 10:26-29.
...
List Of Sabbath Keeping Churches - Sabbath Keeping Denominations
--------------------
BibleSabbath.org
--------------------
To conclude:
What does the >BIBLE< say about the NEW Testament Body Of Believers?
"THE SAINTS...ARE THOSE THAT >KEEP< THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD"
Clear as a bell!
KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS
Revelation 14:12
Hi Craig!
To be clearer than my previous statement to you: this general area is not something that I am going be pursuing right now.
However I will say here as regards to your point "the Spirit’s role includes teaching and reminding (14:26), testifying about Jesus (15:26), guiding into all truth (16:13), and informing (16:14-15). Doesn’t all this imply the personhood of the Spirit?" that I believe the Holy Spirit to be a portion of God's (The Father's / The Son's) mind(s) in semi-direct contact with His followers "teaching and reminding (14:26), testifying about Jesus (15:26), guiding into all truth (16:13), and informing (16:14-15)".
Have a good day!
"KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS"
"CLEAR AS A BELL"
Problem is; WHICH "commandments?"
Here's a list of the "COMMANDMENTS" .... "CLEAR AS A BELL" of Armstrongism:
Herbert W. Armstrong's Seven Criteria that Identifies the True Remnant Church:
(1) observance of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the week,
(2) retaining the Passover and other Jewish feasts (while renouncing Christmas, Easter, and other religious holidays of allegedly pagan origin),
(3) compliance with Old Testament kosher laws,
(4) rejection of the Trinity doctrine in favor of the semi-polytheistic, quasi-pantheistic, God-is-a-family concept,
(5) practice of adult baptism by immersion (valid only if administered by a “true minister of the true Church”),
(6) non-involvement in secular governments, and
(7) use of the designation “Church of God.”
IF YOU DON'T MEET EVERY SINGLE CRITERIA LISTED ABOVE, YOU ARE NOT A TRUE CHRISTIAN !
NOTE: I would add an eighth criteria to this list. Herbert W. Armstrong also taught that his members were COMMANDED to give his "church" 10% of their gross income ... AND ... it was a "work" which was required in order to EARN salvation!
If a member did not "tythe" to HIM, they forfeited any hope of salvation.
Just to highlight RayB's favorite (and incredibly intellectually dishonest method) of argument: DEFLECTION...
In response to a list of over FIVE HUNDRED Sabbath-keeping Churches / Denominations (the GREAT MAJORITY of which have NO RELATION WHATSOEVER to HWA)...
...WHAT is RayB's response?
"Here's a list...of ARMSTRONGISM"(!)
ROFL!
4:09 PM
What is your goal in posting here? Is it to win souls? Your very aggressive about spreading the good news. Doesn't seem to be very good news, as you don't seem to be very happy. Are you stressed out trying to make God (however you define that), happy? Frankly I'm not buying, and I don't think anyone else here is buying!? Why waste your time? There must be other places you can tell people what you want them to hear. Why bother with this blog?
Have a great day!
5:04 PM said...
"you don't seem to be very happy."
Either he/she has mixed me up with RayB or he/she doesn't know what ROFL stands for.
LMAO!
https://dailycaller.com/2018/08/31/cnn-list-bungled-reporting-fake-news/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act-our-laws-protect-animals-but-not-human-beings/
Anonymous states @ 2:02 PM (in part):
RayB said...
"Herbert W. Armstrong, the 'end times' Apostle, and prophet Elijah, appointed by God committed incest with his daughter, Dorothy. AND, this unspeakable abuse went on 'for years.'"
...
"THIS is the 'apostle' upon which the shifting sand foundation of the Worldwide Church of God (along with its off spring) is built upon."
AGAIN he fixates on attacking INDIVIDUALS ..."
NOTE: just let that sink in for a moment or two. This follower of Armstrongism actually thinks that by my posting the TRUTH about an INCEST/PEDOPHILIA relationship that Herbert W. Armstrong had with his OWN DAUGHTER ... FOR YEARS .... is an "ATTACK" on him as an "INDIVIDUAL" !!! THIS IS REALLY, REALLY SICK !
Do you people see why it is virtually impossible to have a reasonable dialogue with people like this?
It was NOT about RayB's attacking HWA about his sordid personal life, per se, it was RayB's using that personal life attack as a SUBSTITUTE for SCRIPTURALLY REBUTTING HWA'S DOCTRINES.
Difference.
(To clear things up about his 3:17 PM post where)
RayB strenuously objected to...
Herbert W. Armstrong's
Seven Criteria that Identifies the True Remnant Church:
(WHO said it, of course, is TOTALLY irrelevalent if BIBLICALLY sound.)
-------
(NOTE: I will reply to his FIRST objection at some length [as an example of the profound ERRORS he is promoting] and then each of his subsequent ones just with links to be briefer.)
••RayB coming out against:
(1) observance of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the week,
•Reply: “There remains therefore a rest for the people of God” (Hebrews 4:9).
The Greek word translated “rest” in every other verse throughout Hebrews 3 and 4 is katapausis. But the word translated “rest” in Hebrews 4:9 is sabbatismos. This is the only New Testament occurrence of this word, and its meaning is fundamental to understanding this pivotal verse, which is the conclusion of everything previously said about “rest” beginning in Hebrews 3:7.
The Anchor Bible Dictionary states regarding the meaning of sabbatismos:
“The words ‘sabbath rest’ translate the [Greek] noun sabbatismos, a unique word in the NT. This term appears also in Plutarch … for sabbath observance, and in four post-canonical Christian writings … for seventh day ‘sabbath celebration’ ” (p. 855, emphasis added).
The same resource continues with an explanation of the context:
“The author of Hebrews affirms in Heb[rews] 4:3-11, through the joining of quotations from Gen[esis] 2:2 and Ps[alm] 95:7, that the promised ‘sabbath rest’ still anticipates a complete realization ‘for the people of God’ in the … end-time which had been inaugurated with the appearance of Jesus [Hebrews] 1:1-3 …
“The experience of ‘sabbath rest’ points to a present ‘rest’
(katapausis ) reality in which those ‘who have believed are entering’ (4:3) and it points to a future ‘rest’ reality (4:11). Physical sabbath-keeping on the part of the new covenant believer as affirmed by ‘sabbath rest’ epitomizes cessation from ‘works’ (4:10) in commemoration of God’s rest at creation (4:4 = Gen[esis] 2:2) and manifests faith in the salvation provided by Christ.
“Heb[rews] 4:3-11 affirms that physical ‘sabbath rest’
(sabbatismos) is the weekly outward manifestation of the inner experience of spiritual rest (katapausis) in which the final … rest is … experienced already ‘today’ (4:7). Thus ‘sabbath rest’ combines in itself creation-commemoration, salvation-experience, and eschaton [end-time]-anticipation as the community of faith moves forward toward the final consummation of total restoration and rest” (pp. 855-856).
In summary, The Anchor Bible Dictionary decisively and correctly concludes that sabbatismos means
keeping the SEVENTH-day Sabbath. Therefore, Hebrews 4:9 stresses the need to CONTINUE TO KEEP THE SEVENTH DAY SABBATH in a NEW COVENANT context, even though the day also embodies all it meant under the Old Covenant.
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
(2) retaining the Passover and other (what he falsely calls 'Jewish') feasts
•Reply: Are Biblical Holy Days For New Testament Christians?
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
"renouncing Christmas, Easter, and other religious holidays of allegedly pagan origin"
•Reply: Christmas
Easter
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
(3) compliance with (what he falsely labels as strictly) Old Testament kosher laws
•Reply: Is All Animal Flesh (Now) Good For Food?
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
(4) rejection of the Trinity doctrine
•Reply: Trinity
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
the God-is-a-family concept
•Reply: Your Ultimate Destiny!
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
(5) practice of adult baptism by immersion (valid only if administered by a “true minister of the true Church”)
•Reply: Baptism
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
(6) non-involvement in secular governments
•Reply: (Well, I certainly understand and sympathize with the desire to, for example, not be tarnished by, say, having to vote for or against a bill that has important things in it that would really help society but also had a section that, say, furthered abortion, but for the purposes of illustration of the problem with that stance, let's imagine that 99% of a country's populace are Christian, would we be wise to automatically let the running of the country be up to the 1%? I think not.)
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
(7) use of the designation “Church of God.”
•Reply: What does The BIBLE say is the Church's Name?
--------------------
••RayB coming out against:
giving a church 10% of your income
Tithing
---------------------
Now on the OTHER hand (as the old saying goes) What's Good For The Goose Is Good For The Gander:
What about Martin Luther's 'Grace Is ALL That You Need' doctrine that RAYB has regularly promoted to the Blogspot readers here?
The UNFINISHED Revolution
VIDEO: The UNFINISHED Revolution
The Armstrong apologist posts are tiresome.
Long bully posts are not needed or wanted.
If you gotta try this hard something is wrong with your material.
Not working for you buddy..
We can think for ourselves--
--but you seem to think the mental beat downs and over explanations will sway us.
Nope.
(Nice try, 8:17 PM. LOL)
Post a Comment