Sunday, September 23, 2007

Romans 13...Again!

When I had my old "Render Unto Christ" site up here on Blogger I had written a post expressing what I had believed Romans 13 actually said. I will boil it down to this: you must obey the law and the authorities but you don't have to like it, you can work to change it, and if it violated the laws of God you most certainly did not have to obey it!

Well, I didn't go far enough and, further, I was wrong about who or what I thought Paul was meaning when he used the word "authority." "Magistrate" was another word. However, I did not have to wait for God to give me discernment on this directly. In this case, God used Chuck Baldwin (see his website at Chuck Baldwin Live. The Florida Panhandle preacher wrote a very informative piece on why most Christians and preachers get Romans 13 wrong. I am not going to site the exact words Paul wrote from any Bible. Suffice it to say Paul wrote that since all authority (power) is derived from God, and all "rulers" (powers) are appointed by God, all SOULS must obey this authority and these powers. As for taxes, they are to be rendered unto authority is given. Baldwin explained that where Christians get it wrong is in their belief that all people we elect to be our leaders or rulers or what have you must be obeyed, even if we don't like their laws or even if we believe their laws take our freedom away or even if we believe they might violate "The Ten Commandments." Even I believed that this was true until, as Baldwin pointed out, it was precisely our rulers who were emphasized as to be "subject unto the higher powers." Naturally, we all are. But Paul and of course God knew who exactly would need to be reminded constantly who must remember that they are subject to there "higher powers": the "rulers" themselves! It is the people at large, being constantly reminded every minute of every day by the cops, the media, the clergy, the courts, the governor, the president, who KNOW they are subject to the law. That is why most people wear seat belts whether they want to or not--they don't want to be ticketed (and of course some wear then to feel safe). That is why most people register their vehicles and buy car insurance...the law says they have to. That is why 18-year-old males register for Selective Service: the law says they have to (besides, the penalties for not doing so, such as not getting a job or a college degree, make not registering a bit prohibitive). That is why people pay taxes. Not because they want to but because they don't want the IRS on their backs!

No, Romans 13 applies most specifically to the "rulers" themselves. Why? Because God knows it is the rulers who are most likely to break their own laws! Throughout history--including the history of the Kings of Israel and Judah--it was most likely that the rulers would break their own laws. David, "the man after God's own heart", murdered Urias to grab his wife Bathsheeba. Solomon had God knows how many wives though the law was one wife only. Many of the Kings, listed in Kings and Chronicles, constantly violated God's laws and man's laws ("...and he did evil in the sight of the Lord..."). It is the rulers, who to a man or woman constantly break the laws of God and the laws of their nations, that Romans 13 was specifically written for. Not just because these rulers tend to break their own laws because they can rig the system to let them get away with it. Also, because when the people see their rulers flouting the law as they always do, the people themselves start to think that they, too, should be allowed to flout the law. It is rare indeed when a member of the public at large violates a law that the rulers hadn't already violated themselves. It is not for nothing that most famous (or infamous) quote of the late Leona Helmsley, "Only the little people pay taxes," rings true. Well, we can know what uttering that quote got her...several years in jail!

If you think that President Bush and Vice-President Cheney really, really are going to get away with their various crimes (do I really need to list them here? If you don't know what they are you have been physically or mentally asleep since 9-11-01), then you are being sorely pessimistic. They may not get impeached (and, if any president and vice president deserves to be impeached it is Bush and Cheney!), but somehow, somewher, at some time, they will answer for for bearing false witness, violating, continually, the US Constitution, overseeing the murder of millions either through unjust war or financial chicanery or torture, worshipping false gods (through Skull and Bones and the other so-called "secret societies"), taking the Lords' name in vain ("God told me to invade Iraq..."), committing adultery (in the sense that Bush is "in bed" with leaders of the so-called Religious Right who practice "Churchianity", that is, Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots), stealing (by invading countries to steal their resources, in the case of Iraq, oil, and lusting to steal the oil or Iran), lusting after more wealth and power (that is, coveting), and lying, lying and lying some more! When the Constitution, "the supreme law of the land," (in other words, the "authority" of which Paul speaks!), says that the Federal Government must raise a standing army it means in order to defend the US--not go into 140 or whatever countries putting up bases of Empire! Not go destroying Iraq and perhaps Iran and Syria and thinking that what Alexander the Great, the Mongols, the Huns, the the Brits, the Soviets, and who knows what others couldn't do in Afghanistan, the "almighty United States" can do!

And, for all you "Mark of the Beast" eschatology believers: now that you so wholeheartedly believe that you must obey the government of man no matter what they force you to do, on what basis will you be able to resist it when they "put this mark" or "microchip of the 'mark of the beast'" into you?

And you though you deserved to be "raptured"!

Deborah Lagarde

Saturday, September 01, 2007

"Zeitgeist" on my mind

The Zeitgeist movie, the first part of which is primarily based on writings from the late 19th and early 20th century Egyptologist Gerald Massey (which, while claiming Christ's divinity denounce the fact that he actually existed as a human: see this article
and read it carefully
) and "Archarya S", who is the author of "The Christ Conspiracy: the Greatest Story Ever Sold" and whose real name is "D. M. Murdock", supposedly proves that religion has been invented to keep the masses down (hey, I agree with that! which is why while I call myself a member of the Body of Christ rather than "Christian", which to me translates nowadays as "Chruchian"...that is, while the Bible is true, religion, with all of its quasi-Biblical dogma, is not, and is part of the anti-Christ Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots) by making Archarya's claim (naturally, she uses Massey as a source) that Christ is actually an amalgm of the various gods of the various historic religions, beginning with Horus, the Egyptian "Sun God." Archarya, who claims to be an archeologist as well as language expert in ancient languages (folks, there is a big difference between ancient Greek and modern Greek!), claims on her website (see above) that NO historians at the time Jesus was "supposed to have lived" ever mention Christ, or any of Christ's names used at the time. When Josephus is brought up, his writings (see here) are
ridiculed as hoaxes. Well, naturally! They must be hoaxes because these self-styled
"intellectual giants" say they are! At least Massey (again I say read the whole article before you diss the guy) had the sense and honesty to at least claim Christ is God. While Archarya, who has seen so many evidences of so many gods she's got pagan gods on the brain, is not being intellectually honest and is hiding behind her credentials. I agree with her that religion was invented by the power elites of history to enslave the masses (Marx had this right when he said "religion" was "the opiate of the masses"), but to make that leap to "Christ never existed" sounds to me as if some idiot "Christian" some time in her life really did a number on her and she has made it her mission in life to try to prove beyond all the historic evidence
from the first century AD up until now being discovered that just because she would rather He not exist she is bound and determined to prove it! Truly another example of junk "science" (as with "Creationism" now being pushed as something "scientific" by calling it "intelligent design"---folks, Creationism is NOT science!) by someone who just happens to have "credentials".

Well, that said, I must say that after watching the first part of Zeitgeist, they haven't proven anything regarding the "non-existence" of Christ, for the following reasons. First, Zeitgeist rehashes all the phony "indicators" of the "existence" of Christ-as-religious-tool, such as Christ was born on December 25 (as was Horus, Tamuz, Mithras, Buddha, and other pagan gods...all of them in fact!), such as Christ was born of a virgin, such as Christ taught in the temple at age 12, such as His miracles, death on the cross and resurrection, etc., etc., etc., and His coming again. Well, I answer that with what the Bible says: in Luke 2, Mary (who as in Matthew really was a virgin, I am not disputing that) gave birth at a time when the Romans called everyone to go to the place of their ancestors to be taxed, as well as the shepherds were in the fields. This would place the birth around the time of harvest (when folks were taxed, because this is the time when they had available money); and shepherds being out in fields watching sheep (they harvested animals at the same time they harvested crops) also indicated that, since the sheep were still there, it had to be around time of harvest--not after, as it would have to be if the birth was on December 25, because the sheep simply would not be there, they'd already be slaughtered! Further, if you look at the old Roman calendar with December as the 10th and not the 12th month, even this indicator would be wrong, because this would place December at the beginning of winter in any case. The beginning of winter
implies there was no harvest, the sheep will have already been slaughtered, and hence taxing would already have taken place. Therefore, while all these other pagan gods were born on December 25, CHRIST WAS NOT! The "Christ was born on December 25" nonsense was invented by "the Church" in or just after Constantine made "Christianity" palpable for all the pagan Horus/Tamuz/Mithras/etc. worshippers who were forcibly being "converted" (take a clue here: only Christ through the Holy Spirit can convert!). Secondly, the notion of Christ was born on December 25, while false, is given credence in the movie because that was the time of the "rising star in the East" when the 3 Maji were to visit Christ and offer gifts, by way of visiting Herod first in order to find out where the Christ child was. Now, as the Bible says
(Matthew 2), when, after seeing Herod, they found the house (NOT THE MANGER! He
had already been born, and in fact was probably several months old by then!) and offered gifts to the "young child" (not infant!). Further, if Christ was just an "infant" by the time the wise men were supposed to return, why would Herod have ordered the deaths of ALL BOYS 2 and UNDER OF BETHLEHEM (Matthew 2:16)? Thirdly, the claim that Christ "taught" in the Temple in Jerusalem when he was 12 is NOT in the Bible! Luke 2:46-47 says that Christ "listened and asked questions" which, if Christ was following in Jewish traditions (you've heard of the bar-mitzfah, Archarya?) would have been a natural thing for Him to do! NOWHERE does it mention he "taught" in the temple at age 12! Fourthly, though Christ did perform miracles, did die on the cross and was resurrected, this does not prove he is an amalgamation of pagan gods such as Horus or Mithras! Heck, the disciples performed miracles! (see Luke 10 when He sent out the 70 disciples, and they came back saying in verse 10:17, "Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name"!) What is the big freaking deal about miracles! So, Christ arose from the dead? So what! So did Lazarus! So did the daughter of Jairus! So did the slave of the Centurion! Whoop-tee-doo! So does
anyone who, having his or her heart stopped, gets defibrillated back to life! No doubt my own paramedic husband has raised people from "the dead" when he defibrillates them!

Finally, Zeitgeist makes the claim that the "coming of Christ" is no more and no less than the return every morning of the sun. Because Christ is really Horus, the Sun God! Right! And I'm the Easter Bunny! They make this claim by saying the Bible is nothing more than the Zodiac. Further, by using the Bible-as-Zodiac, the makers of the film can claim when the end of the world will be...in 4300 something, because that is when we enter the Age of Aquarius (Sorry, cast of "Hair", you're wrong about that too), the water bearer, and, coming as it does on January 21 to February 20 or thereabouts), and, prior to Aquarius, we have the Age of Pisces, the Fish, or the Church Age with Christ represented by a fish (the fish, BTW, does not indicate Pisces, but the harvest of mankind...you know, Christ telling the disciples they
will be "fishers of men." But why let Bible truth get in the way of "facts"?). So, despite everything in prophecy, in Revelation (I guess they don't think the apostle John existed either!), and in Paul's (non-existent?) letters to the various Christian groups, "Christ" comes again every morning with the sun, not once again to judge and save the world and mankind for good. All mankind, even their sorry asses!

I guess what really compelled me to debunk this movie is not just that the makers, and their sources, are wrong, not just that this is just another example of anti-Christ among so many anti-Christs who and which have existed since the resurrection of Christ (warned about in 1 and 2 Thessalonians), not that these liars are taking their cues from phony "Christianity" as if it is true Christianity, but most of all because by doing so they are saying THERE IS NO SALVATION, PERIOD! They are really saying that the "God" of all the Churchianities of this world, the wrathful, hateful, torturing "God" of the "hell for eternity" crowd is THE BEST WE CAN HOPE FOR! Heck, might as well pray to Sauron or Galadriel of "Lord of the
Rings"!

But I will defend my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and I don't give a crap what these phony "intellectuals" say!

Deborah Lagarde