Truth Not Heresy

Is This The End Times? I Suspect We Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet

2011-11-10T23:03:00.005-06:00

Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network and TruthTellers.org has the aforementioned linked article having to do with "Mystery Babylon" (that is, Israel) trying to destroy the planet, themselves included if necessary. I am not here to argue whether Israel is Mystery Babylon (or as some say, the AntiChrist) or not. But his timeline is interesting. Read the article for his timeline.

In the midst of all this is the notion that the End Times are a-comin'. But if you take Christ at His word, surely we ain't seen nothing yet. Now there is--again, for the umpteenth time!--rumors of war on Iran. Then Syria, blah, blah, blah. The rumors might actually be true this time, with some rumors almost bordering on the ridiculous (such as this very strange Gordon Duff article on Iran and Israel staging a phony war to drive up oil prices, predicated on the notion that Israel's leaders and Iran's Imams and leaders have shorted oil stocks! Interesting notion, but does anyone actually believe that once Israel invades Iran the killing will stop?)Yet, what does Christ say?

Mark 13:7--"And when ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet."

He also said, and I paraphrase:

1. Nation against nation (Gentiles, that is) and Kingdom against kingdom, earthquakes, famines, troubles (verse 8). We have a lot of this sorta thing.

2. Christians will be persecuted, beaten in synagogues, trials in front of rulers for His sake so that we can testify against them. (verse 9). We have a lot of this sorta thing, mostly in the non-western world.

3. The gospel must be "published" (did Christ really say "published"?) among all nations. But is this now the case? Are there some undiscovered tribes somewhere who have never heard the Word of God?

4. When persecuted the Holy Spirit will put words into your mouth (verse 10). I imagine this sorta thing happens a lot. Think of persecuted Israeli Messianic Christian Zvi Kalisher dealing with spitting rabbis. He amazes me, his quoting the Bible the way he can.

5. Brothers and sisters and children and parents will betray each other, to death. (verse 12) Further, believers will be hated of ALL MEN for His name's sake, BUT HE THAT ENDURES UNTIL THE END WILL BE SAVED (verse 13). It does not say he that endures until the rapture! It says until the end.

THIS is when "the end" comes! (Mark 13: 29)

6. Verse 14: "But when ye shall see the Abomination of Desolation, spoken of by Daniel the Prophet, standing where it ought not, then let them that be in Judea flee to the mountains." The verse referred to is Daniel 9:27, when (supposedly) the "AntiChrist" confirms a covenant with "many" (that is, Gentiles) for "one week" (that is, seven years), and in the midst of the week he (the AntiChrist?) shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease (in the Temple in Jerusalem?) and then "overspread" the inner sanctum where offerings to God had been offered, and, presumably, they will be again (?), that is, overspread with desolation, until "the consumation" (presumably the "second coming.")

If indeed the Temple in Jerusalem is supposed to be rebuilt since it was destroyed in 70 AD and now a Muslim mosque stands at that site, the Temple Mount (?), and since there is still no "Temple" at that site (because first Israel must ethnically cleanse every last Palestinian out of the country, and then reclaim the Temple Mount, take out the mosque and rebuild the Temple), then I would say that if Pike's (and most others) interpretation is correct, then we ain't even close to "the end."

Besides which, Christ also says in verses 19 and 20 that the "affliction" that will happen at "the end" will be unlike anything the people and the planet has ever seen (even worse than Noah's flood!), and not only that, but in order to save even a small remnant of believers, Jewish and Gentile, those "end times days" will have to be shortened, the death and destruction will be so bad!

In other words, we ain't seen nothin' yet! Unfortunately, it seems we are rushing headlong into it...

We Are To Seek The Truth In ALL Things!

2011-09-16T09:35:00.005-06:00

True Christians KNOW the Word of God is in the Bible--IT IS THE BIBLE--and this Word is the hallmark and bastion of truth. Yet while we seek the truth in the Bible the command is seek the truth in ALL things.

Seek the truth in all news events, in all things folks say, in all media coverages, in all works, period.

You have "9-11 Truthers," but want to I seek the truth in all things--hard as that may be when human beings are pretty much programmed to lie either by the institutions or by living through not taking responsibility, pretty much helped by the "father of lies," who gets permission from God to do so...read Job if you're not sure, then read Second Thessalonians Chapter 2 verses 8-11 about the "strong delusions" God sends those who "believe a lie."

I am NOT a member of any "9-11 Truth" group mostly because I do not think amny of these folks really want the truth...they just think they do! Proof of this "they think they want the truth but they really don't" is what some of these folks come up with: "Israel did 9-11;" "Bush did 9-11" (the "Inside Job" crowd); "the government (but not necessarily Bush) did 9-11" (more "Inside Job" folks); "the CIA, using the bogus group Al Qaida, did 9-11" (there is some validity to this but these folks tend to over-simplify it); "the Illumiati did 9-11" (using holograms and missles, not planes--it is these folks who give the whole 9-11 truth movement a black eye)...in other words, completely denying the truth that rogue elements from the CIA, Al Qaida, various intel services including the Mossad, and various other rogue US and foreign government officials either did 9-11 or didn't try to stop it.

My position at this point, as I do not know the whole truth about 9-11? I am a LIHOP-er: Let It Happen On Purpose.

The US government let it happen on purpose, to instigate war against various oil-producing countries, opium-producing countries (Afghanistan, the world's number one supplier of opium for heroin...a DEA friend told me several times about how the CIA with some DEA help ran drugs in and out of Vietnam, South and Central America, Asia, and right now with rule by a govt. installed by NATO, Afghanistan is the world's number one supplier of opium! How could this be, if NATO was running the country? Thus this is no coincidence.), countries that do not "do what they are told" (such as Libya and Iraq--both Saddam and Qaddafi wanted to take their oil off the dollar standard, and both Libya and Iraq have some of the biggest supplies of water in the Middle East and North Africa...there is a certain Middle-East country right now that will try to steal water by any means possible...they tried it against Lebanon's Litani River in 2006, and this country is run in part by religious fanatics whose "holy book" tells them it is OK to steal resources from "the nations" if you know what I mean.), and countries that just might side with "our enemies" unless "we" "bring them back into the fold." And let's not forget their other purpose: to end liberty here at home and to get us to like it, not to mention the fear they want to instill in us.

In terms of Americans, anyway, what the folks who did 9-11 ultimately--and God will let them do it, it is His Will--want to do is to have folks who would normally be expected to worship God, worship the State instead.

I mean, what's not to like about worshiping the State? The State provides "schools and hospitals, roads and bridges." The State provides welfare payments, Social Security payments, Medicare, Medicaid, National and State Parks, Local governments, Resource Management, Holidays, Sports and Entertainment (in the sense that no sports league or event can take place without government permission, and the same goes for entertainment...don't movie theaters need licenses to exist? You know what I mean). The State provides Public TV and FCC licenses for all radio and TV programming. The State even provides "press releases" and "press briefings" and even Q&A sessions with reporters (approved by the govt. of course, or else Helen Thomas would still be reporting) so that the media can tell Americans what and how to think! And let's not forget the media also tells Americans what drugs to take when they are sad about something. Can't have folks showing any emotion after all.

And you want to know why so few Americans think anymore! Why think when someone else can do the thinking for you?! And where's the Zoloft? Who needs liberty?

I have seen poll after poll claiming now that, after ten or more years of constant "war on terror," Americans are getting tired of war. Now that may be true, but I'm not really completely buying it: Lawrence Vance, a writer for LewRockwell.com, has made a case over the years that Americans love war, and I agree. Americans have made war since it's founding! Washington? Lets kill "the Indians." Adams? "Lets kill more Indians and make war on Canada to boot!" Jefferson? Not enough dead Indians. Madison? Not enough dead Indians, and now that we have the Louisiana Purchase, lets kill even more! Monroe and his Doctrine? Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears...you get the picture...somewhere many Americans were thrilled with the slaughter of someone, and seriously, I don't think Americans have changed much.

It is no surprise to me that many Americans hate Muslims. I did not say "don't like" Muslims. I did not say "dislike" Muslims or "don't trust" Muslims. I said HATE. While I do not think most Americans think "the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim," it likely isn't too far from that. Nor do I think that if a typical American met a Muslim-American, that typical American would simply beat that person up for no reason. Not do I think that if a typical American met a Muslim he would immediately say the "F-word" and give the guy a finger or something like that. It is just that most Americans would say "hello" and be done with it...in other words they would get as far away from that Muslim as they could and have no further contact.

I mean, how many typical Americans have even one Muslim acquaintence (let alone friend)? How many typical Americans have even met a Muslim other than perhaps at a workplace? As with Jews, Muslims tend to congregate in certain places, have their mosques, and live separately from everyone else--and everyone else likes it that way! I would take it that less than one percent of non-Muslim Americans have ever read any part of the Koran; thus they have no idea what's in it and believe whatever a Glen Beck or a Bill O'Reilly say what's in the Koran. I 'm not saying Americans should read the Koran. What I am saying is that unless it is clear that a particular Muslim wants to harm them or the country, stop hating all folks who just happen to be Muslim!

And how do you know that "Muslim-looking guy" is a Muslim? Who knows? He might be a Jew from Israel! Remember the scene from "You Don't Mess With The Zohan" when some Israeli-American shop owner told some Palestinian-American shop owner that "yes, everyone hates us too because they think we are you"?

For one thing, your hate obfuscates the truth that most of the time Muslims just want to be left alone and that every so often the doers of dirty deeds in and out of the government get some patsy--usually now a Muslim, one who has some bad feelings about this country because some jackass "patriot" beat him up once just because he looked Muslim!--to do some "terrorist" act (which is in fact a false flag op that is not designed to work or is just a set-up).

Then, of course, some Christians want to kill more Muslims even more! Why do you think I write here about Christians stopping the hating? When you hate you are too blinded to seek the truth and when you seek revenge you ignore what Christ said: love your enemies.

But back to 9-11. Who do I think did it (so far)? Rogues. Rogue CIA. Rogue FBI. Rogue Mossad. Rogue Al Qaida. Rogue government agents. Rogue government officials. Rogue airport security folks (who allowed the 19 "Arabs with box cutters" onto the planes). Rogue Wall Street types (put options on AA and United). Various others who wanted a "new Pearl Harbor" to instigate war (yes, PNAC, I am calling you out!) and destroy liberty here at home. All these rogues worked together in concert doing their part. Criminals and Psychopaths in and out of the US and foreign governments, militaries, intel services, and industries. Still, even though this covers a multitude of possibilities, I still want the truth about who, how and why they did it.

Yet, I forgive those of you who did it...that way, I can't hate you guys anymore and it'll help me seek the truth in this. That is what I did this past September 11: forgive the perpetrators, even if I still don't know who these perpetrators were.

True Christians Should NOT Favor Dominionism

2011-08-27T13:51:00.002-06:00

It is Presidential Politics Season once again. And, once again, various (usually left wing) pundits are claiming that candidates Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry and maybe others in the Republican Party side are "Dominionists." That is, they want to turn the USA into a Christians Theocracy.

Bachmann? Sure about that? Isn't she Jewish? Of course I could be wrong.

Perry? Is Texas a theocracy?

But anyway...

The left crying "Dominionist!" in a crowded political theatre is throwing various Democrat-leaning folks into a frenzy. Honestly, if Dominionism is what you are worried about, only Sarah Palin should worry you--she really is a Dominionist.

Rick Perry surely isn't, but he's doing what Republican politicos always do when they need votes: sucker the Evangelical Right into thinking that he is "God's Candidate." And, of course--it looks for now, anyway--the "suckers" are falling for it again. Perry supposedly leads all other Republican candidates. But Perry just entered the race...when even Evangelicals find out that he tried to force Texas teen girls to take Gardasil, told TSA it's okay to grope Texans, and loves illegal aliens coming across the border (or through his sponsored Trans-Texas Corridor), then maybe even his so-called anti-abortion and anti-gay positions won't help him! Not even the MSM's ignoring Ron Paul will help him if enough of these Evangelicals lose their jobs, homes, and savings.

So, likelihood is we won't actually see Dominionism in the USA any time soon. But should we want it?

Dominionism means we get some sort of theocracy under men and it means girls must wear dresses and skirts and men must wear belts on their pants and no tats, right? Let's bring back Prohibition while we're at it. If we ever got such a thing, it'll last four years, minus. Won't work. Sorry, Sarah--not even if you get some kinda morality police out after us. And these are the same folks worried about Sharia Law?

And another thing. The Talmudic Jews won't stand for it. According to their Noahide Laws, Number Two to be exact, worship of Christ as God is verboten, as in "you will be put to death." All of which means that (if many are correct and a certain Jewish-majority country in the Middle East really does run our govt.) since Israel would never allow it, it ain't happening.

But anyway...

Do you, Christian, actually want men--not Christ, but men--telling you how to dress, forcing you to go to church, forcing you to tithe, telling you how to wear your hair, forcing your kid into some kinda "Jesus Camp" (where kids "pray" to, say, whoever is president like the Jesus Camp movie kids prayed to George W. Bush), what to drink (no alcohol--and no smoking either), and forcing (a la Inquisition) "conversions"? Do you hate Muslims so much that you would support the end of freedom of religion? The same could go for any other religion, or no religion.

And another thing: read Romans and both Corinthians...we have freedom in Christ, and do not need some political leader throwing Romans 13 at us trying to get us to cover our knees with a skirt or wear button-down shirts instead of T-shirts. Or worse: bully some girl because she wears an abiyah or man because he wears a "rag" on his head. Or worse: nuke some "Arab" country in the name of Christ.

Okay, okay...Enough of the Christian Zionist Bashing!

2011-07-05T12:41:00.003-06:00

There. I've said it. I will no longer bash Christian Zionists.

Remember when I said, and I'll paraphrase, Christian Zionism is the main enemy of Christianity today? Not Islam, not the Talmud, but Christian Zionism. I said it, and it is easy enough to say that I said it because I made a post about the main enemy of Christianity today and I mentioned all the enemies of Christianity today (such as Islam and the Talmud) but in the end I said it was Christian Zionism. That is because it just seemed to me at the time, what with all the Israel-worship of a few Christian-Zionist/politcal leaders like John Hagee, with their refusal to denounce Israel's poor treatment of Palestinian Christians and the churches in Gaza and the West Bank, that the leadership of Christian Zionism was doing a very evil thing in the name of Christians everywhere and of course in the name of Jesus Christ--and that I wanted to completely denounce Christian Zionism because of this.

The thing is, by way of association I was also denouncing Christian Zionists. I mean, really...who wouldn't conclude that in denouncing Christian Zionism I wasn't also denouncing Christian Zionists?

That is why from here on in I will NOT BE DENOUNCING CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS!

Now, as for denouncing Christian ZiomISM--instead of denouncing Christian ZionISM, I can still denounce enmity toward our Palestinian brothers and sisters in Christ. I can also denounce bad treatment of not only Palestinian Christians but also Palestinian Muslims. I am supposed to admire the willful starvation of Palestinians just because 90 percent or more are Muslim?? Oh really?? Is that what Christ taught us? Now let Hagee or anyone else who believes in starving Palestinian Muslims find anywhere in the Old or New Testaments where Christ said hate your enemies. I can still denounce putting another nation--Israel, or even the United States or any other country--ahead of Christ or on the same level as Christ. I can still denounce the agenda behind promoting false beliefs, and I still believe "the rapture" and "dispensationalism" are false beliefs, but even moreso is the agenda of death and destruction that goes along with these beliefs, particularly when it comes to two-thirds of world Jewry that some folks want to see happen as "proof" that Christ is coming back. I will still denounce the notion of some Christians of loving Israel but hating Jews. I will still denounce what some believe as "Biblical prophecy being fulfilled with the 1948 creation" of Israel, because yes, the creation of Israel in 1948 DOES fulfill Biblical prophecy! (Gee, does that statement make me a Christian Zionist? Some would say it does!)--but it does NOT fulfill the prophecies some say it does! It fulfills other prophecies, but not, say, Daniel 9:27, for instance.

So that since "bashing" Christian Zionists is divisive and does nothing to serve the cause of promoting the Word of God (let alone evangelism), and in fact could cause some to leave the Body of Christ, I will no longer say anything negative about Christian Zionists, but will instead let the Holy Spirit guide me into helping them to put Christ first, second, and third, and more. For as long as they love Christ and profess love of Christ more than Israel or anything else, then there isn't a whole lot that I can do to "save" them since they clearly are already saved.

God Owns the Earth, Not the Banksters, Not the Oligarchs, Not the Power Elites (Though They Think they Do)

2011-07-05T11:14:00.003-06:00

I saw a very interesting post on IntelHub today, Tuesday, July 5, 2011, titled "How Bankers Own the Earth and Then Some."

Well, I'll concede they own "and then some."

But God owns the Earth, period, end of story. Here is why.

1. God created the Earth. If you buy into the "Big Bang Theory," then , pray tell, what got the Big Bang going? Thomas Aquinas, in 11-something or 12-something, called it the "Theory of First Causes," and God is the First Cause. Some call this guy a Saint but was he really a believer?

2. In patent law, when you create something you own it, unless you die and the patent revert to something else or it become free public domain. Which means that since God ain't dead (despite what Madeline Murray O'Hare claims), God still owns the Earth.

3. If the banksters (or oligarchs or power elites) really owned the Earth, then when they did die, they'd be able to take it with them. The best they can do is to "pass it on" to their descendants. Well whoooop-tee-dooo! I can see the first Baron Rothschild, Amschel I think his name was--or was it Nathan?--or was it something else? (Shoot, if I can't even remember his name, then just how powerful was he anyway?)--telling his confederates or servants or whoever, "Now I will control the world! Bwahahahahahahahahaha! And after me, my descendants will control the world! Because I will no longer control it! Bwahahahahahaha!" Gee, what is Evelyn gonna do on his deathbed? Give control to his wife, Lynn Forrester? Bwahahahahahahaha!

4. If the banksters really owned the Earth, you'd think they would have had complete control of it by now after trying for several thousand years. But alas, though the world is tied money-wise to fiat debt currency--and don't tell me Iceland declared independence from it, their currency is still debt based!--the banksters still do not own the Earth. They just think they do, and they count on the peoples of the Earth to believe that they do!

5. Some Christians believe Satan controls the Earth. Yet, who controls Satan? If you don't know, read Job Chapter Two.

6. Control of the Earth implies control of everything on it or in it. So the banksters control worthless fiat debt-based currency. Now some will argue this (especially David Icke fans), but while they control "money" they don't control the weather. Some will say the CIA and it's "HAARP" project do...but rather, the weather is controlled--and this is scientifically proven, so that even you evolutionists can understand--by ocean currents, happenings in the atmosphere, and oh yeah! the sun, moon, and other natural phenomena. I would like to see HAARP, which supposedly created the earthquake-tsunami that hit Japan this past year, control the Jet Stream! Not to mention sun spots. Now that would be interesting!

7. If the banksters controlled the world, they would also be able to control all life on Earth. Heck, Monsanto--the "most evil corporation in the world," can't even control its own GMO plant constructs, including its Roundup and Roundup Ready products, which do not quite give the food yields that they advertise, or else farmers in India wouldn't be committing suicide over lack of crop yields! ConAgra is of course trying to produce factory farm animals that can put up with the most unsanitary and cruel living conditions on the planet through some sort of cloning or DNA alteration program. Well, that is probably going about as well as the CIA's pet projects like combining houseflies with pigs. Next they can create the man who stared at unicorns!

8. If the banksters controlled the world, then why in the blue blazes are they destroying it? Look at what they are sponsoring for profit: wars and more wars everywhere which not only kills people but ruins environments, national assets (think of the destruction of archeological sites at Babylon and Ur in Iraq after the "coalition of the willing" invasion in 2003), wildlife, sealife, plantlife, water supplies, etc., not to mention willful destruction of life for a profit to the point now where rainforests are a fraction of what they were and seas (think BPs destruction of parts of the Gulf of Mexico) are dying in places. One would think that the banksters, if they really owned the world, would take care of it because if profit was all they cared about you'd think they'd want to take care of the Earth to ensure more profits for them.

9. So, the banksters control the world...but who controls the banksters? Or, are the banksters like rings and there is "one ring to rule them all"? (Ever wonder why Tolkien's Sauron of Mordor is an "all seeing eye?" And is Rothschild--Evelyn, that is--that "one bankster that rules them all", and if so, who rules him? Or do you honestly think the first bankster Rothschild just made all this up by himself? (Or do you think the Talmud made him do it?) More likely, he was guided by "ol' scratch" himself. After all, it is said Rothschild was a "devil worshiper," and the "Illuminati" he inspired also are devil worshipers. But again if this is true then ask yourself who controls the devil?

10. If the banksters REALLY controlled the Earth they'd have found a way to remain immortal so that they really could control the Earth and not have to pass their wealth onto their descendants. But no. Evelyn de Rothschild is now an old man and so is his closest rival, bank-ownership-wise, David Rockefeller. In fact, ol' David, as rich as he is, still hasn't managed to find a way to make himself look even a little bit younger. He's in his 80s or 90s, and he looks it. The best these folks are gonna be able to do is clone themselves. Should be interesting. But God doesn't need cloning.

But then again, I don't expect non-believers--and surely the guy who wrote the above-cited article is a non-believer or else he would have known better--to get what I wrote above. They neither have eyes to see nor ears to hear. Further, they are not "in the world but not of the world." They are preparing for their earthly salvation, and that is it.

Another Way to Look at Romans 13: We Get the Government We Deserve

2011-06-08T08:22:00.002-06:00

Obey the "authorities" Romans 13 says. Whereas the "authorities" back in Paul's day were the Roman emperors, now in the US it is those authorities authorized in the US Constitution, such that what gives these "authorities" authorization IS the Constitution--which mean (as the Supreme Law of the Land) the US Constitution IS the Authority, and the authority it gives to the "authorities."

Now, did God give the Constitution, its framers, and those who enforced it back in the 1790's and 1800's, this authority KNOWING that later "authorities" would completely destroy the Constitution's authority? I have no doubt that He did, just like I have no doubt that He KNEW Americans would lose vigilance over demanding the rule of law be kept and He also KNEW that in roughly 150 years or so Americans would give up their responsibility to maintain a free society.

So that as time went on, hastened by events in 1913 that no Americans were aware of (the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment [Income Taxes] which was NOT properly ratified...the two events go hand-in-hand because the IRS IS the enforcement arm of the PRIVATELY OWNED Federal Reserve Bank), Americans refused to stand for the Constitution and liberty, allowing themselves and thus allowing our leaders to become corrupted to the point they are now that they are wantonly and deliberately destroying the USA.

How did ordinary Americans let themselves become corrupted? Spending what they didn't have on items they didn't need and doing so because everyone else was, relying on men not on God, politicizing the Bible, lusting for death to bring about the "rapture," lusting for whatever those who are in the world AND are of the world lust after, thinking that partial birth abortion is okay because the Republicans approved of it, NOT loving and forgiving enemies as Christ demanded and NOT turning the other cheek, worshiping false idols including money--even the worthless fiat currency we have now, and more, much more. It is as if ordinary Americans emulated the elites, and in turn the elites emulated as well as set examples of corruption for Americans to follow. And some of this corruption is done in God's name.

And now that Americans are all mad about the economy and all, they are pointing fingers at bankers, oligarchs, Obama, Congress, and, according to one poll--God--but still refuse to point fingers at the person in the mirror.

Some--nay, many--are blaming God for this???

OKay, okay, God is the creator of evil (Isaiah 45:7), using Satan for various purposes to bring about evil deeds and to test our faith (see Job Chapter Two), but when a majority of poll takers blame God for what they themselves have let happen, it assures me that the corrupt and evil government, oligarch-run or not, owned by bankers or not, IS THE GOVERNMENT AMERICANS DESERVE. Period, end of story.

And when most Americans start blaming God for their ills, then how long will it be before they start blaming, then persecuting, then killing true Christians...and how many of these Christians will repudiate their Savior? In other words, saving their lives to lose their (eternal) lives?

We May Soon Find Out Definitively If Dispensationalism and the Rapture Really Are Biblically Sound or Not

2011-06-04T23:20:00.004-06:00

The link I will now provide leads to one of the most interesting articles anywhere that I have read in the past month or so: Israelis Prepare to Emmigrate and Palestinians to Return?

Now, if one is a dispensationalist and ESPECIALLY if one is a Christian Zionist, this is very very bad news! Here is why.

If this article is on to something, that means that many Israeli Jews are leaving Israel. In fact the article makes it clear that there are more Jews leaving Israel than are moving in as "settlers" (regardless of whether they are neo-Nazis or not, Talmud believers or not). Which means that for every Jew that John Hagee and his followers financially support to move to Israel so that eventually they (Hagee's followers, that is) will all be "raptured" outta here before God slaughters two-thirds of the world's Jews (see Zechariah 13:8), two Jews are leaving Israel! Well, that's about what the article says...in fact it stresses that most Israeli Jews are getting second passports, mostly from the nation that they came out of in order to go to Israel. Some are getting American passports; that way they can have dual nationality. But anyway...

Regardless of why Jews are now leaving Israel, they are leaving or are preparing to leave, hence the second passports.

Now, if Israel is starting to lose its Jews, what does that say about the whole dispensationalist-rapture scenario that Christian Zionists cling to on the backs of the notion that God will wipe out two-thirds of the Jews in Israel? After all, these folks believe that the "count-down to the end times" occurred when the 1948 State of Israel was founded. That's what Hal Lindsey ("Late Great Planet Earth") and the authors of "Left Behind" and other megachurch pastors say, right? And even if they do not actually want the Jews to be killed, they still think the Bible says that the Jews must return to Israel in order for the end times scenario to take place. some say that if you add 70 years to 1948 (Daniel's 70 weeks) then around 2018 the end times will arrive, but some only include 69 years and others say 62 years, accounting for 7 years tribulation and then the "cut off" one year..I don't get this one, but anyway...

So that, if the Jews are leaving Israel WHEN IT IS "PROPHESIED" THAT THEY MUST RETURN TO ISRAEL in order for the end times to occur (and the "rapture"), then maybe the timeline is wrong--not the Bible's, but theirs! Maybe the Jews leaving Isreal is proof that dispensationalism is bogus.

OR

Check this out. If the Jews are leaving Israel, then guess what? It becomes (as the Zionists claimed in order to usurp the land from its rightful owners) "a land without people for a people without land" and the Palestinians move back in!

A contradiction? Not necessarily, when you consider that most of the Jews that have come to Israel since 1948 are Ashkenazim, which some claim are not really Jews descended from Israel (the 12 tribes)...none other than Israeli historian Schlomo Sand has claimed that...but are converts originally from the Khazar empire (Arthur Koestler, who is Jewish I believe, made that claim first in his book "The Thirteenth Tribe"). Now if the Ashkenazim are NOT descended from the 12 tribes, and if the Palestinians owned the land prior to 1948 (or at least lived on it...the Turks owned much of it, at least according to Leon Uris in "The Haj") along with Sephardic Jews, then the only difference between "the Sephardic Jews" and "the Palestinians" was one of religion, with the Palestinians having converted either to Christianity or to Islam. Which would mean that the Palestinians just might have been Jews at one point before they converted, which might mean that THEY are the descendants of "God's Chosen," not Jewish converts, and that WHEN THE PALESTINIANS RETURN TO ISRAEL is when the "end times scenario" begins!

Or not. But we might find out real quick.

A Resurrection Day Message for Christian Zionists

2011-04-24T13:50:00.002-06:00

Look, Christians who love Israel at least as much as Christ, I will be very brief. I have already said about as much as I can about the fallacy of Christian Zionism, "the rapture," dispensationalism, "Left Behind," and the true meaning of Genesis 12:3. So I guess what I will do is present to you two videos you can watch wherein I prove my point that your "blessing Israel" is falling on waaaayyy toooo deaf ears and they are laughing at you as hard as they possibly could in Jewish Israel as they think of you this way: "What a schlemiel!"

I'll let you look that Yiddish word up...I doubt if you will find it in a Hebrew dictionary (oh, and, can you read Hebrew?)

so, without any further ado...

value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JA6vRC1xW_c?version=3">

This is a popular Israeli comedy show shown recently in that country that explains how many if not most Israeli Jews feel about Christ.

value="http://www.youtube.com/v/a-Hi2saK8iU?version=3">

This is a video including short vignettes from what various Israeli Jews say about Christ and Christians.

A Resurrection Day Message for Sabbath-Day Worshipers

2011-04-24T12:45:00.000-06:00

To the webmaster of Who Is The Antichrist and the 100 or so other sites that promotes the idea that the Papacy is the Antichrist AND Mystery Babylon besides based on some very compelling arguments--and perhaps even actual fact (since I think the Bible makes it clear that the Antichrist is a bastardization of Christianity: "they came from us but never were of us"--and not Talmudic Judaism as some claim)--you make a good argument, but like so many believers--and I'm not exempting myself from this--you are looking for the speck in the eyes of Sunday churchgoers while ignoring the log in your own eye.

Thus, this message is for those who worship God on the Sabbath, most of whom belong to one Seventh-Day Adventist church or another.

I agree with you: Saturday, at least in this calendar we use, is the seventh day, no ifs, ands, or buts. Thus you all are perfectly right to worship God on Saturday, or, more perfectly, sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. You are indeed following the Fourth Commandment; meanwhile, the rest of us, Sunday churchgoers, are not. We are indeed breaking the Fourth Commandment.

You, the author of the articles on the above site and your affiliates listed in your blogroll on the left or right side of your site, are correct in saying we must obey God as well as believe in Christ. For Jesus Himself said in His "two great Commandments" (which, of course, say the exact same things as the Ten Commandments): "Love God with your whole soul, mind, heart and strength and love your neighbor as yourself." This is not an exact quote but is close enough for the purpose of this message.

So that, you as a Saturday worshiper already have a head-start to Heaven over me, who goes to church on Sundays. But if you think that you are going straight to Heaven just because you worship on Saturdays while I am going straight to Hell because I do so on Sundays, I have news for you and all of your fellow Seventh-Day Adventists and like worshipers: Every one of the Ten Commandments is equal, period, end of story.

Now I have just admitted that I have broken the 4th Commandment by going to church on Sundays. But--and you all know this because you all seem to have as much or more spiritual discernment as I have--do you spend EVERY SINGLE WAKING MOMENT ON YOUR SATURDAYS worshiping God? You do not do one single ounce of work on Saturdays? Other than your church service, you spend the rest of your waking sundown-to-sundown reading and contemplating the Bible? Because, if not, YOU TOO ARE VIOLATING THE SABBATH! We are supposed to "rest in HIM," remember?

Further, do not tell me you never violate the other nine Commandments! You never take God's name in vain??? NEVER? You NEVER say "Goddammit" or " Lordy" or "Lord love a duck" or "Jesus wept" or "Chrissakes" or "Good Gosh Almighty" or even "Dangnabbit"?

You never violate the second Commandment. You never root for a sports team and you never wear the logo of the Dallas Cowboys, for example. Or the New York Yankees. Or Manchester United or Real Madrid or whatever. You do not have a favorite actor or singer or movie or book or author or philosopher and you do not ever ever ever want more money.

You never disobeyed your parents or thought they were screwy.

You never stole a pencil or pen from the office, and you never saw a penny or dime in the street and kept it.

You never saw a beautiful woman and reacted in even a little bit of a lustful way. Remember Christ said to even LOOK at another woman than your spouse in that way is a sin.

You never committed murder in your heart with hatred, let alone actually killed someone. If you were in the military that must have been hard to do.

You never wanted what your neighbor had, ever. You never said, Gee I wish I had that fill-in-the-blank.

Oh, and you never lied about someone else, or gossiped, or said anything about your neighbor that just might not be true.

But, at least with your Saturday worship, you've only broken nine of the Ten Commandments, whereas us Sunday worshipers have broken all ten. Good for you.

But just as Carl Sagan once said the number "googleplex" (a number so huge, he said, you couldn't fit it into the known universe, and is the number ten to the power of a google, which is ten to the power of 100) is no closer to infinity than the number one, then you are in fact no closer to Heaven than I am.

In fact proper discernment of the LAW of the Old Testament PROVES that NO MAN can obey all ten commandments--God even says so!--except for Christ. Our Savoir IS the only living being who has ever fulfilled all Ten Commandments at all times. Now, since that is true, Christ could have condemned every single Jew and every single Roman living in Galilee, Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and all over that area to the kind of condemnation you are assigning to everyone who attends church on Sundays unless they go to church on Saturdays. But He didn't. He only condemned the Pharisees, Priests, Scribes, Saducees and the rest of the religious authorities--He even said of the Roman soldiers and authorities to God, "Forgive them, they know not what they do." But He never would forgive the Pharisees, for the simple reason that since they followed (in their own minds, at least) the Mosaic Law, they could only be judged by God (guess where? the White Throne Judgment!) because God judges under the Law.

I think I would much rather be judged by Christ as my Advocate when Satan throws around the "she violated the Sabbath by worshiping on Sundays" (or, for so much of my walk toward Christ, not even on Sundays! Heck, we even tried the Saturday Sabbath thing at home several years ago but came to the realization that we were just going through the motions--kids have to eat and so I, as a woman, had to prepare something for them to eat and thus I "worked" on the Sabbath, and other things would happen like having to water the garden or fix a pipe that just broke, and other things that sound a lot like rescuing a donkey in the ditch even on the Sabbath (which Jesus chided the Pharisees for mocking the Sabbath by leaving a donkey in ditch because it was the Sabbath!) accusation. I guarantee it, when the Bema Seat judgment rolls around and God judges a believer's works, that "violating the Sabbath" bit WILL affect God's judgment, as will all the times I said "lordy" or "good gosh almighty" and the like, as will the fact that as a teen I was a bit of a rebel, as will various other violations of the Ten Commandments.

But where do you come off saying that unless I obey God's Commandments--in fact you are saying unless I go to church on Saturdays (because you know as well as I do that is the only thing that separates me from you)--I will not see Heaven? (I do agree with you about Hell, by the way...) do not forget--we are in the world but not of the world...but we are STILL in the world and we have to deal with it the best we can under the grace of Jesus Christ.

If you have never or do not now ever violate one of God's Ten Commandments and can prove it, let me know and I will apologize for this message.

So Maybe the Papacy IS the Anti-Christ: A Compelling Argument

2011-03-31T21:33:00.004-06:00

For years I thought the Papacy was "Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots" (which Ted Pike believes is actually Talmudic Judaism) because of the scarlet and purple robes and whatnot worn by the Pope, Cardinals, and priests at large, and because sometime in the second century AD and beyond the organized Christian churches began to go astray, highlighted by Contantine's turning Christianity into the state religion of the Roman Empire, and, untimately, turning Reformation protestant denominations into similar whores that put someone or something else ahead of Christ.

And while a lot of what Pike says about Talmudic Judaism is true and it is easy to think present-day Israel could be the whore of Babylon, an equally and maybe even better case can be made for the Catholic Church holding that title.

And, in fact, the author of the article here, entitled "Who is the Anti-Christ makes an even better claim that the Papacy is indeed the Anti-Christ. His (or her) argument is strengthened by the fact that he or she actually identifies not only the four "beast" kingdoms in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 (Babylon, Mede-Persia, Greece, Rome), but also the "10 toes of iron and clay" or the ten kingdoms that come out of the Roman Empire, and, most importantly, the 3 that get uprooted by the "little horn," that is, the entity that would later be identified as "the Anti-Christ," or, as with Second Thessalonians, the "Son of Perdition" or "Man of sin" that would exalt himself as the same as the Most High God. To further back up this claim many original Catholic church writings are sited, including quotes by various Popes as to their "Divine Nature" as "God's Representatives on Earth," and includes the so-called Sacrament of Confession whereby a priest forgives sins (only God or Christ can forgive sins!If a priest could forgive sins then why the heck would God have asked His only Son to be the final sin offering???) And there is more here that could convince someone that the Pope is that Man of sin.

However, the hard part is that the author does NOT take the typical futurist (or atypical preterist) position on the end-times, but the rather rare "historicist" position in that the "1260 days" or "42 months" spoken of by Daniel and in Revelation is in fact 1260 years, beginning in 538 AD when the Papacy established Roman Catholicism as the state religion of the reconstituted Roman Empire and later Holy Roman Empire along with the rest of western Europe), and ending when Napoleon's brother captured the Pope in Rome in 1798--exactly 1260 years in time span.

The final kicker is that, as stated in Revelation, while the "Beast" (that is, the "anti-Christ") is "wounded" it comes back to life after a time (see Rev. 13:3-8).

Yet, "another beast" in Revelation 13:11-17 comes to the fore which causes "the earth and those that swell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed" and causes the followers to make an image to the first beast, or be killed, and causes all those who worship the beast to have a mark in the right hand or forehead.

So that, now we have TWO beasts, and if one is the Papacy, then the other is...

The second beast has "two horns like a lamb" and speaks like a dragon, as well as makes fire come down from heaven in the sight of men. Hmmmm.

And, by the way...those who have God's name written on their foreheads instead of the mark of the beast are those who KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD and the faith of Jesus. That is, the Ten Commandments INCLUDING KEEPING THE SEVENTH DAY HOLY (Sunday is NOT the seventh day!) and refuse to worship graven images (which the Catholic Church took out of the Ten Commandments, splitting the tenth into the ninth and tenth...thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife and thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods. In other words, the Papacy violated God's TIMES AND LAWS and substituted their own.

Since most Christians worship in Sunday, Catholic or Protestant or Non-Denominational, and I am guilty of that as well, this could wind up a very serious issue when the time comes. Observation of Christmas and Easter might also fall under this issue.

But, I am not done in this series by a long shot. There are more positions that need looking into.

Anti-Christ defined in the Bible, and Ted Pike's take on Israel

2011-03-29T14:39:00.005-06:00

From 1 John: "Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that this is the last hour (1 John 2:18). They went out from us, but they did not belong to us; for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But by going out they made it plain that none of them belonged to us (verse 19)....Who is the liar but one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? (or the Messiah) This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son (verse 22)."

So that, in their denial of Jesus Christ as the Son while claiming God is the Father, one could say that Israel, which is working come hell or high water to turn into a Judaistic theocracy and shows its Talmudic, racist and apartheid tendencies more and more every day--knowing what the Talmud says about Jesus Christ, calling Him Balaam--that Israel is the antichrist.

But then again, so is Islam, who merely cites that Christ is a "prophet," not the Messiah, not the Son of God, not the Savior, not the one who sits at the right hand of the Father.

But then again, so is Buddhism, Hinduism, New Age-ism, Paganism, Atheism, and Flying-Spaghetti-Monster-ism.

But then again, so is "the new world order," "transhumanism," "secular humanism," statism, self-glorification, and anything else that puts separation between any human being and God.

Now then...Who is THE Antichrist? The guy who is prophesied to take God's place in the temple in Jerusalem during the so-called Great Tribulation (before or after "the rapture")? You know, the devil's mainline representative here on earth during that period and the guy like that "Left Behind" character Carpathia?

According to Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network and leading anti-Zionist, "the antichrist" isn't Israel, because (while the anti-christ will live in Israel,) Israel isn't the anti-christ because it is "Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots".

Summing up the article here using direct quotes...

"...Israel was the first to marry God (Christ) and be spiritually one with Him. Thus the position she enjoyed as a spiritual bride was unique to her. Likewise, only apostate Israel can be the “mother” of spiritual whoredom. When she was chosen
as Christ’s bride, other nations were disobedient like a child to its parent. Only Israel was made capable of a wife’s infidelity. As a result, when she became a spiritual whore, she was indelibly marked, “Mother of Harlots.” Jeremiah said,
“You had a harlot's forehead, you refused to be ashamed.” (Jer. 3:3) Other apostate systems may be spiritual harlots but only Israel is “mother” of that scarlet sorority. And without repentance, neither time nor wanderings can remove that epithet
from her. When Israel shouted, “Crucify Him! Crucify Him!” her resurrected spouse banished her. The Jewish people were condemned to wander like a woman divorced for adultery, perpetually looking for that substitute husband (anti-Christ) who
would take the place of the One she killed..."

Also:

"Revelation 17 confronts us with the specter of a city “which reigns over the kings of the earth.” It has physical power—more wealth and importance than any other city—but also spiritual power, embodying the full potentiality of human degeneracy. “What city is like this great city?” the merchants of the earth will wail. This city is so commercially important that when she falls, world trade also comes crashing down. The title “the great city” is exclusive. There will doubtless be other powerful cities in the end time but John witnesses “the great city,” an unequaled center of trade, political power, culture and human bondage....And to whom does that term refer? In Revelation, “the great city” (hey polis megaley in Greek) is used to clearly refer to Jerusalem, capitol of the Jewish people! When the two witnesses are killed, their dead bodies lie in the streets of “the great city (hey polis megaley). "... Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified” (Revelation 11:8). This unmistakably implies that powerful, corrupt Babylon and the great city “ Sodom and Egypt, where
our Lord was crucified,” are the same city… Jerusalem."

And:

"The City of Jerusalem as it existed in the time of Christ Jesus was also reckoned to be a 'City of Seven Hills.' This fact was well recognized in Jewish circles. In the Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer, an 8th century A.D. midrashic [Talmudic] narrative (Section 10), the writer mentioned without commentary (showing that the understanding was well known and required no defense) that, "Jerusalem is situated on seven hills." ("The Seven Hills of Jerusalem”)...Armenian Christians, living for centuries in Palestine, taught their schoolchildren that the seven hills are: Mt. of Olives, Mt. Scopus, Mt. Zion, Mt. Moriah (the Temple mount), Golgotha, Hill of Moses, and Mt. Herzl."

"Scripture also describes only one city as center of world rule in the last days, and that is Jerusalem. Paul states clearly that the anti-Christ will declare his one-world authority from the temple at Jerusalem, where he proclaims he is God. (2 Thess.
2:4) When the two witnesses resist him, they do not battle a papal anti-Christ but “the wicked profane prince of Israel” in Jerusalem. (Ezek. 21:25) These scriptures point to Jerusalem as the epicenter of one-world rebellion against God; Jerusalem and Babylon are one!"

Not only that, but the fact that the foremost version of the Talmud is the Babylonian Talmud is, I think, not just a coincidence. Pike believes that modern Judaism is Babylonian, enforced by the Babylonian Talmud and Zohar/Kabbalah, with the occult entering Jewish beliefs as a result of Babylonian captivity under Nebuchadnezzar et al.

Finally:

"How should Christians respond to the fact that Israel and Babylon are one? Jesus tells us the answer. "Come out of her, my people, that you may not participate in her sins, and that you may not receive of her plagues, for her sins have piled up as high as heaven…" (Rev. 18:4-5)"

If Pike is correct, then Christian Zionists MUST leave that doctrine behind!

So, while Talmudic Judaism is antichrist, it is not THE Antichrist! Talmudic Judaism is the BRIDE of antichrist, but not the antichrist himself.

And it is my prayer to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that my fellow Christians of the Christian Zionist persuasion DO NOT become the brides-maids to the BRIDE OF ANTICHRIST!

Still, who is the Antichrist? And, while we're at it, who is the Beast and who is the False Prophet? Further, could a Christian sect or doctrine lead to being "Mystery Babylon" in contradiction to Pike's reasoning? Next Post...

AntiChrist Coming? End Times Coming?

2011-03-25T21:30:00.002-06:00

In the next series of posts I will discuss the discernment I have been given through prayer over who or what is "the" anti-Christ and when is th end-times. It's all in the Bible, but right discernment still ain't easy.

What brought me to this topic is that some say that the "end-times" will come about with all the world's armies besieging Israel. Now, if you believe that the "Israel" that is besieged is the present-day Israel, then you have every right to think that yes, the end-times are coming. I don't see armies besieging Israel but I do see the world shunning Israel, a nation that cares nothing for the court of public opinion as to its slaughter of Gaza, it's Nazi-like settlers ripping up Palestinian olive trees and stealing Palestinian land and homes, under the support of the IDF, killing Palestinian children because in the Talmud it says killing Gentiles is not murder, and other heinous acts, killing folks on the Gaza Flotilla ships including one American-born 19 year old of Turkish ancestry...and, oh yes, the fact that it created the STUXNET worm which contributed to the nuclear disaster in Japan--along with the fact that the company that was in charge of security at the Fukushima nuclear reactors is an Israeli company...is that coincidence or something more sinister? Well, in any case, Israel is getting blamed for that too. So, right now, while Israel isn't surrounded by Gentile armies, it is, symbolically.

The other thing that could lead some folks to think the end-times are coming are all the earthquakes, tsunamis, and other natural disasters, and all the man-made ones as well. BP, for instance. The Bible talks about seas of blood, but symbolically it means all the dead sea life in the Gulf of Mexico. The Fukushima disaster, too, is man-made, and, no, it's not because Japan is mainly Buddhist or because Japan is helping Palestinians.

A third reason, if you follow prophecies about the papacy, is that supposedly Pope Benedict the 16th is the final pope before "the anti-Christ" enters the "abomination of desolation" as the anti-Christ sits in the Temple in Jerusalem "as God." Supposedly.

The score card on who the Anti-Christ is, is as follows: the Pope, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Prince Charles of England, Obama, Islam, Achmedinajad, Rothschild, Rockefeller, the Secretary General of the UN, and, finally, Israel! At least one radio and internet preacher claims that the present-day state of Israel is the "anti-type" to the true God's (Zion) Israel (believers in Christ), and thus Israel today is the anti-Christ. Remember: Jerusalem is "Sodom and Egypt"...

While it is prevalent that many (maybe) believe that since the members of monarchical families in Europe are somehow related to the Merovingians--who, if you believe Dan Brown and others, are the direct descendents of Jesus and Mary Magedeline!--then the King of Spain or the Prince of England must be "the anti-Christ," it is the notion that the anti-christ is the Zionist State of Israel that is the most troubling, especially since I am anti-Zionist and also anti-Christian Zionist. Surely, God's Old Testament "Chosen" couldn't be the anti-Christ!?

Which is why I am going to try to prove it isn't, using only Bible sources. And, who knows? I may not like what I find, because Israel DOES act like anti-Christ sometimes!

Maji, and was Jesus Palestinian?

2010-12-25T17:17:00.002-06:00

First, the "three Wise men," "Three Kings of Orient Are," and the Maji.

BTW, there were NOT three of them! Matthew 2: 1-2 says, "After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Maji from the East came to Jerusalem and asked, "where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the East and have come to worship him." It does not say "three" Maji. Who knows? There could have been three hundred of them.

That "three Wise Men" bit is just another Bible myth along with Veronica and others I have mentioned in the past couple of years. Perhaps the reason there were "three" of them is because they bought three gifts (gold, incense, myrrh), one for each Maji!

Now, Maji means "Wise man," not "King." So, they weren't "kings," either. But then why would the Maji care about worshiping the "king of the Jews"? They were not Jews; however, they were supposedly from Babylon and clearly they were interested in astronomy because they saw this "star" at roughly a thousand miles from where the "star" would eventually rest...above where Jesus was in Bethlehem. Yet, though they were not Jews, they had knowledge of the Jewish community (some of which had stayed after Ahasuerus had them released as per the Book of Esther. When the Babylonian Talmud was compiled, these Jewish stay-behinds may have had something to do with it.) and it seems as though even though they were Gentiles they may have had more knowledge of the Word of God than many if not most Jews did!

Ever notice that though Christ originally came for the "lost sheep of the House of Israel," and even though Israel was "God's Chosen People" in Old Testament times, there are plenty of Gentiles in the Old and New Testament that had been given something special by God in order that His Will be carried out. Any Talmud believer or anyone else that still holds to the notion that only Jews are God's chosen completely miss the impact certain Gentiles had on Prophecy coming about.

On of them, in fact, is in the lineage of Christ. Not only is she a Gentile, but (assuming Jerry Falwell knows what he is talking about when, years ago--on WorldNetDaily in his column there--he called the Palestinians descendants of Edom and Moab), being from Moab (see The Book of Ruth), and marrying Boaz, the father of Jesse, the father of King David, a key person in the lineage of Christ (we know this because Joseph, the earthly father of Jesus, had to report of Jerusalem, the city of David, in the Roman-enforced census under Emperor Tiberias), Ruth just might be part of the ancestry of today's Palestinians!

If this is true--Ruth and Moab, along with Philistines, Edomites, Ammonites, and other groups that hung around the Palestine-Jordan areas--then Christ, even though he was definitely a Jew (as were all from Judah/Judea) and followed the Jewish customs, might have Palestinian blood in Him as well...in any case, He definitely has Gentile blood!

Why (apart from the obvious) is this important? It is just another sign that while Christ came for the "lost sheep of the House of Israel" (a claim He makes in several places in the Gospels), He also came for the rest of mankind!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

So, what is a Christian Outreach?

2010-12-16T13:26:00.003-06:00

There is this big controversy in the small church I go to.

The pastor there explained that an organization called "Smile Train," which is NOT a "Christian" organization because its leadership is NOT composed of a ministry (in other words, its leadership is in the secular realm) or its leadership is NOT sponsored by a church, while it might help children in Third World countries get their cleft pallets repaired for the nominal sum of $250 per surgery and where NOT ONE DIME of this money goes for "administrative" costs--all of it goes to pay for one surgery--it is NOT a Christian Outreach!

Therefore, our small church DOES NOT HAVE A CHRISTIAN OUTREACH! Shame on us!

Therefore, we have to find an organization run by a Christian Church Ministry out of some kind of Christian Church for us to have a Christian Outreach.

In other words, the pastor at our church says that an organization doing God's Work by repairing cleft pallets in children in poverty stricken areas, for children that heretofore were shunned by their parents and shunned in their communities and mocked and harassed and would maybe otherwise be left to starve on their own...children that had their pallets not been repaired might never have an opportunity to learn about the saving power of Jesus Christ, IS NOT A CHRISTIAN MINISTRY even though sponsorship of "Smile Train" was begun in our church by our Children's Church which had at one time been attended by my son and also my daughter and other young children led by a very wonderful woman neighbor of ours.

This pastor said that unless our church had a "Christian Ministry" our church would "fall apart."

And who knows? Because he has, by his words of shame on us, driven off more members than he had already driven off (be saying, among other things, that Catholics aren't Christians) with his "shame on us" talk, he might be right.

Video: "Christian Zionism" from We Hold These Truths/Strait Gate Ministries

2010-12-16T13:22:00.002-06:00

I don't think I can say it any better than this group, that has exposed "Christian" Zionism even better than I can and has done so for years. I hope the readers learns a few things.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Hate the heresy, love the heresy follower

2010-09-01T22:11:00.002-06:00

Jesus said, "Hate the Sin but Love the Sinner," or something like that.

Well, I need to follow that example. So as not to confuse some and divide the faithful, let me even more clarify that when I rebuke the heresies of the leaders of Christian Zionism or Christian Identity or Dispensationalism or other false doctrines that is not to say I "hate" these leaders and certainly I don't hate their followers.

Example for why I can say this is truthful: my own husband is (though he won't admit it, as far as the label is concerned) a Christian Zionist, in so far as he buys into the whole Genesis 12:3 argument about Christians must not criticize Israel (even when she is wrong or persecuting Christians), and believes that 1948 man-made and secular State of Israel fulfills end-times prophecy, and that the end-times eschatology begins with the year 1948. (Note: If the Daniel-ian "70 year" timeline stands, then you count 70 years from 1948 and guess where you arrive? 2017! Do you think this is feasable? and does God work using man-made time frames?) And I do love my own husband (and by that I mean the physical one, the guy I married in 1982, not the spiritual one, Jesus Christ, Whom of course I love even more)

So, if I can love my husband but despise some of the doctrines he thinks are true, then I can love all Christian Zionists as well as Christian brothers and sisters. Of course it is too bad there are all these divisions in the faith. Same goes for Identity...but I can't agree to their racist and bogus British Israelist nonsense.

Because if you don't love these folks now, then how are you going to explain to them the strong delusion when the time comes for it to be explained?

Stop Cursing Israel, and Stop Hating Jews

2010-07-02T15:12:00.003-06:00

It seems that Christian Zionists can't stop giving me a reason to call them to repentance.

Now it is the bit about how the Netanyahu government of Israel has the right to blockade Gaza and stop the so-called Gaza Flotilla from reaching Gaza with humanitarian aid because Israel has a right to defend itself. Further, those on the Flotilla and all who support the Flotilla are "cursing Israel" and God will curse them.
Yet how is the event of several boats from various nations including the US trying to deliver food, medicine, building materials and NOT weapons to 1.5 million people (some of them Christians) in Gaza which has been under siege since Hamas (created by Israel) took over Gaza in 2006--how is this event "cursing Israel"?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Even if I wanted to curse Israel, which I don't, I don't need to curse Israel, because Israel is doing a damned good job cursing itself: from persecuting Palestinian and Jewish "Messianic" believers to starving Gazans, to trying to sell nukes to Apartheid South Africa, to organ harvesting, to being the "lords of war" with their arms deals, to putting advocates of peace in jail, to ethnic cleansing of "Arab-Israelis" from "Greater Israel"...in other words, cursing itself with the worst PR in world history! If someone told me 95% of the world's people hated Israel and Jews in general, I would believe it. Just think: it took a measily 60 years or so to use up all the good will do world Jewry over the Holocaust.

Yet, Israel's leaders aren't the only ones cursing Israel. When believers are spat upon by Yeshiva students and "Ultra-Orthodox" rabbis in the "name of God," they are cursing Israel.

Further, when Christian Zionists support beyond all reason a government that oversees the persecution of believers in Israel--whether these CZs are Hagee-ist dual covenant doctrinal believers of not--as well as in the West Bank and Gaza, then they too are cursing Israel.

Since only God has, during Old Testament times, and is given then and now the authority to act, to curse Israel--giving no human being the right to curse Israel, I submit that any one who curses Israel whether they know they are cursing Israel or not, means taking on the role of God and that is forbidden, no?

Furthermore, stop hating Jews, as well. The whole dispensationalist belief that Jesus can not return until 2/3 of the world's Jews are slaughtered or something like that, if one takes it to faith that dispensationalists desire the return of Christ means that (assuming they believe the 2/3 bit) they want two-thirds of the Jews to die, but not before they are all living in Israel. All the world's Jews living in Israel has to happen first. Then the slaughter. The Christ's return. To have room for all the world's Jews to live in Israel also means the CZs are funding settlements with settlers that are destroying Palestinian property such as olive tree which take years to grow fruitful and with the Israeli govt. authorities forcing Palestinians out of the homes they have lived in for centuries, and in general desire the ethnic cleansing of "Arabs" from Israel ON TOP OF taking of territory from Arab nations around them for "Greater Israel" and all the Jews that are supposed to move there (whether these Jews want to or not).

So: Christian Zionists want Israel to war with Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and others to acquite more territory in addition to deporting or otherwise all the "Arabs" in Israel, a policy advocated by Foreign Minister Avigdore Liebermann; this way all the world's Jews have enough room to live in Israel. Then, at some future time, two-thirds of these Jews will be killed, and the other third will convert to belief in Christ. Then, Christ comes back. Hallelujah! Christ returns on the heels of the slaughter of millions!

Nothing hateful about wanting this to happen, of course. Just like it is fine to starve and otherwise genocide a few million Palestinians.

Happy Resurrection Day, and Have Faith in the Face of Atheist Mocking

2010-04-03T17:57:00.004-06:00

Gee, thanks, Catholic Church! The atheists are having a field day over your pedophile antics!

And right behind the Archarya S's, the Mike Riveros, the Richard Dawkins's, and the Madelyn Murray O'Hares, is Satan, laughing and going "Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!" all the way.

I can just see Rivero, with his What Really Happened site, rubbing his hands with glee that surely if there was a God He would strike down these monsters, but since they haven't been struck down it must mean there is no God after all!

And Archarya S of "Zeitgeist Part 1" fame claiming if there really was a Christ and not some Horus "son" (sun) god "dying" on the Southern Cross (the cross, that is) and not just a myth, then Pope Benedict XVI would be standing before Him right now in judgment. Or, at least, the Pope would be excommunicated.

In actual fact, if wouldn't blame Catholics if they left their church right now, and I wouldn't even blame them if they lost their faith.

I would not have blamed various Protestants for leaving their denominations after all the various sex abusing TV and megachurch preachers being exposed over the years. I would not have blamed followers of various "prophets" for leaving their leaders after various "end times scenarios" failed to come to fruition.

After all, who can forget during the so-called "Babylonian Captivity" (when the Pope moved his seat from Rome to Avignon in the Middle Ages, it is claimed, to partake in pleasures that could not be had in Rome) when various forgeries were created to claim the Pope's dominion over various Islamic places, or the Inquisition, when true believers like Huss were persecuted and early Protestants and even Jews were burned at the stake, or Pope Boniface VIII, whose Satanic acts were recorded so wonderfully by Dante in his "Inferno."

Compared to these, the pedophile priests of Roman Catholicism seem mundane, much of it caused by the fact that priests can't marry and have kids of their own. Put simply, people who are not allowed to have sex in the regular way will have sex in other ways. It is human nature to have sex. Considering there are still priests and nuns who live up to their celibacy is even more amazing than the fact that some nuns have been raped by brothers and priests or that some priests have had sex with altar boys.

But let the atheist reading this post tell me that it is okay for atheists to sin, just because they don't think they'll be held accountable, but it is not okay for priests to do so (and it IS NOT okay for priests to do so! But priests are human, so they will sin no matter what they do). And let the atheist reading this tell me that Catholic authorities have committed more atrocities than their fellow atheists throughout history.

Yes, the Catholics have millions, perhaps, who were murdered in the Inquisition, millions, maybe, murdered in the New World who would not "convert or die," and millions, maybe, who died as "collateral damage" during the Crusades, and maybe a few million more for various corrupt reasons. Add to that millions who have died under corruptions committed by Protestants (starving of the Irish, giving smallpox to the Natives in the US, Canada, Down Under, etc.). I don't have the figures but it is well into the millions.

But the atheists have (leaving out ancient history) the millions killed by the Mongols, Stalin's roughly 50 million Ukrainians/Russian dissidents in the gulags, and a few more millions by Stalin's successors, Hitlers millions of Jews, Gypsys, Communists, Christians, dissident Germans, etc, int he 30s and 40s, Pol Pot's 2 million or one-third Cambodia's population, the Kims of North Korea, several million including those who are starving as I write, millions of Africans either starving or dying of disease or being worked to death in Coltan mines in places like the Congo and the Central African Republic or dying in various "revolutions" there using child soldiers, under the various African dictators, the millions of natives in the New World during the Aztec, Mayan, and Inca Empires who died as slaves or as human sacrifices to "the gods." Well, yeah, but some were pagans and not atheists. Now tell me, what's the difference? Whether you worship a pagan god or "science" or "the flying spaghetti monster" or "rationa lman" or nothing at all makes no difference. If you just include the millions killed by the Communists (Stalin and Mao especially) you likely have at least 150 million.

Even if the Christians killed the same number in corruption of His Word, does this make it less hypocritical to be an atheist?

Yet, if it is the "mission" of the atheist to drive believers away from Christ, then I do indeed have issues with you!

Is that what you are doing, Mr. Rivero?

Then it is the God you don't believe in getting Satan (see Job Chapter 2 for verification that Satan does the Will of God) to move you on this "mission." Please, Mike, give credit where credit is due! Alas, if you don't believe in God you likely don't believe Satan exists, either.

Further, 2 Thessalonians 2:8-11 talks about God sending "strong delusion" to those who believe the lie that God does not exist and Christ does not exist, either, and never did, and was not resurrected and sent to save all mankind.

It is my hope and prayer that NO BELIEVER falls under the strong delusion that just because some priests and preachers are corrupted by Satan and do unspeakable acts, it means God and Christ and the Holy Spirit do not now, and will not ever, and never have existed and there is no plan for salvation, after all. Just as it is my hope and prayer that all those priests or whoever in the Catholic church who have done these acts or are covering them up, repent.

As Bob Marley once sang: "There is no hiding place from the Father of creation."

Happy Resurrection Day!

Not Fair, That God!

2010-03-21T20:14:00.004-06:00

Heard a sermon today, oh boy...

Not about 5,000 holes in Blackburn, Lancashire, either...

Some call it the "Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard" and some call it the "Parable of the Owner of the Vineyard." This is in Matthew 20, where the landowner goes out and hires workers, starting at 6 am, and every three hours or so hires a bunch more, with the final workers hired at 5 pm. The foreman is to give each laborer, regardless of when he was hired, a denarius. Well, at 6 pm, the foreman gives the 5 pm crew their denarius, all the way down the line until the 6 am crew is paid, and having worked all day getting the same wage is the folks who only worked an hour, complained. Not fair, they thought. However, these early birds did accept the contract, no?

Now God is the landowner. Christ is the foreman. The wage is eternal salvation. The land or vineyard is the world during this age (some call it the Church Age).

Now, who are the 6 am laborers? The 5 pm laborers? There could be several possibilities.

The 6 am folks are the disciples and apostles, the earliest followers of Christ. The 5 pm folks are believers of today (or tomorrow...depending on when God decides to bring on the "End Times.")

OR

The 6 am folks are folks who become Christians early in life, and then go out and evangelize or become preachers or Christian school teachers or missionaries--all right after their teen years or even in their teen years. Spoke to a young man in our home school group that plans to go to Abilene Christian University and become some sort of Christian youth group leader or something.

The 5 pm folks become Christians late in life or nearly on their deathbeds. They have dome virtually nothing to advance the cause of the Body of Christ, and yet they get the same reward as those who work nearly their whole lives to advance Christ.

OR

The 6 am folks are the early believers who are mostly Jews, before Paul goes out and begins the conversion of the Gentiles. The 5 pm folks are also...the Jews, who, at the very end of the millennial age, will have Christ and His Word written on their hearts, as prophesied in the Old Testament. Meanwhile, the 9 am, noon, and 3 pm workers are all us Gentile believers and the present day Messianic Jews.

It is not "the eleventh hour" yet, is it? Is this where the notion of "the eleventh hour" comes from? As in...at the eleventh hour, the crisis reached its head...

I'm not hear to debate whether the "eleventh hour" is "the rapture" or the end of the Church Age or the time of the Battle of Gog and Magog (Ezekiel 38 and Revelation 20, after Satan is loosed from the Bottomless Pit).

But I've heard some Christians who have been so for their entire lives believers in salvation through Christ only complain about doing Christ's work their entire lives and not getting more bang for the buck, so to speak, than those who became "Johnny Come Lately" believers. And I've even heard of preachers who do God's work complaining they get the same salvation as those who believe but never go further than attending Church on Sunday.

Doesn't seem fair, does it? But it "wasn't fair," either, that Christ had to be tortured, pillaried, and forced to carry a cross more massive than He was up some mountainside, and then nailed and crucified so that we could get that wage of salvation, now was it?

Thank you, God, that you don't play by human rules of "fairness," otherwise not a one of us would ever be saved!

Christian Unity Would Be Wonderful, But...

2010-01-29T11:07:00.002-06:00

We are all supposed to be the Body of Christ, right?

Well, we should be.

Unfortunately, not everyone who calls himself or herself a Christian actually follows the words of Christ. I will admit here that even I still sin, and so does every other Christian. I am no saint, that is for sure...but whether I'm a "saint" or not is for Christ to decide.

Now we ought to all agree on the fact that in order to be "saved" we must claim Christ as our Savior and do what He says to do. Yet, not everyone who calls himself a Christian believes this.

My big too-doo with Christian Zionists has a lot to do with two things: one, their absolute refusal to side with their Palestinian and Jewish fellow Christians because they are stuck in "we must bless Israel" mode, and, even more agregious, their refusal to see that Jews MUST accept Christ as well as Gentiles. Don't they understand that if they tell Jews the Jews DO NOT have to accept Christ as their Savior, that they are contributing to the condemnation of Jews? If they love Jews so much, how can they do this???

(Note: Maybe they, in fact, hate Jews! And, since they also hate Arabs, they just might be the worlds most numerous anti-Semites!)

My big too-doo with Christian Identity is also two-fold: I will not side with racist doctrine, and, two, I will not side with Christians who place the Old Testament ahead of the words of Christ. I cannot find one Identity Christian who can site any scripture from the Gospels, but boy do they think they know the Old Testament!

My big too-doo with Catholics is their Mary worship and their rituals. My big too-doo with dispensationalists is their love of war, death, and destruction because all they care about is being "raptured." Reminds me of a Dire Straits song: "salvation for nothing, trip for free." My big too-doo with Unitarians is that their really is a trinity which is also a unity, and my big too-doo with Universalists is that there really is condemnation. (Note: yes, all things do get reconciled to God, but how would you like it knowing that while perhaps the one-percent of good you have gets reconciled, the 99 percent of you that is sinful doesn't? Just because I don't buy into the "hell for eternity" argument, doesn't mean I don't buy into the Lake of Fire argument!). And then I have disputes with other groups and even mainline denominations that come up with unsound doctrines.

Yes, I would love it if all Christians took sound doctrines to their hearts. But, until all Christians do, I won't compromise for the sake of unity. Unsound doctrine is unsound doctrine and there is no way around that.

Israel's Persecution of Christians Is So Obvious, Even Arab Zionist Joseph Farah (WorldNetDaily) Gets It!

2009-12-30T23:48:00.003-06:00

Some Christians who read this blog might say, "When are you going to stop bashing Israel?"

Well, when they stop persecuting Christians!

Some might want to know why, if North Korea or the Islamic nations or atheistic Europe persecutes Christians, I don't bash them. Yes, I know North Korea and all Communist countries persecute Christians, as do the Islamic nations (especially the Wahabbist ones like Saudi Arabia), and even some western European countries that have loads of churches with no one attending as much as they are into all that warm-fuzzy Christianity that they have.

But the rub is you can find any Christian group that will point out that honest-to-God believers in Britain are harrassed for being an "idiot" who believes all that "Jesus" nonsense. Or believers in Iran or Syria being harrassed. Or even Cuba, which has a lot of Christians, anyway. Any Christian evangelical group will talk about persecutions of Christians in just about any country...but one.

Ted Pike of National Prayer Network called evangelical Christians "wusses" not only because they won't stand up for Christian values unless it gets them political power, but also because they will not speak out against Christian persecution in Israel, whether it is Palestinian Christians or Jewish "Messianic" Christians being persecuted. That might be the case because many of these "evangelicals" are in fact "Christian" Zionists whom will NEVER criticize Israel under the pretext of Genesis 12:3 and similar verses.

In fact, these groups send millions of dollars every year to supposed Jewish-Christian fellowship groups that are in fact going to support anti-Christ Talmud groups. So says this article on increasing anti-Christian behavior in Israel which is politically allowed as Israel becomes more Orthodox and Talmudic.

And, praise God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit, even Arab "Christian" Zionist Joseph Farah of World Net Daily, who is usually an Israel-Firster, has criticized Israeli Jewish Talmudic persecution of Christians! Amazingly, he published on WND a Ha'aretz
article headlined "Christians want Jews to stop spitting on them". I think Farah might actually be afraid to criticize Israel openly because being a former Jerusalem Post written-correspondent, he doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds him and may still be under strong delusion about the nature of the anti-Christ (there is no more anti-Christ book than the Talmud, unless it is the Zohar and the Kaballa!). But for him to scknowledge Israeli persecution of Christians is quite a leap forward for Farah.

Thank you, my Lord and Savior Christ, for showing this truth to one Christian Zionist. Let us pray that other CZs find this truth as well.

Time to Stop Pussyfooting and Support Our Palestinian Christian Brothers and Sisters NOW

2009-12-13T23:29:00.004-06:00

God expects patience from His Children, the Believers in His Son, Jesus Christ. But when various so-called Christian groups continue to allow their fellows-in-Christ to suffer, AND NOT ONLY THAT, WANT THEM TO SUFFER all on account of Christians "are prohibited from criticizing Israel" (as per Genesis 12:3 and others, which of course, is the false interpretation of those scriptures) and that Talmudic Judaizers are "God's Chosen People", then danged it, I'm gonna do my part to refute this and say the truth that we MUST as Christians support our fellow believers in the Palestinian territories who are asking for our support.

Read this document by Palestinian Christian Church people asking for worldwide Christian support to try to end Israeli Talmudic anti-Christ persecution of Palestinian Christians by Israeli-state-supported Talmudic believing "settlers". And then decide if what you have been told by infiltrating "Christian" Zionists that Christians must support nazi behaving Talmudic Judaizers is what Jesus Christ would want us to do.

A Clarification on Why Christian Zionism is the Main Enemy of Christianity

2009-11-28T10:42:00.003-06:00

I am absolutely sure that the fact that I believe Christian Zionism is the main enemy of Christianity would be jolting for some. After all, Christian Zionists are Christians, right?

I think most Christians today consider Islam the main enemy, and would balk if I said that Christian Zionists were.

Now, ISLAM IS AN ENEMY. In various Muslim countries, Christians are persecuted to varying degrees, I think depending on the fanaticism of the power structures in any given Islamic country. Where Islam is primarily secular or non-fanatical, Christians are likely to be persecuted less. Cases in point: Assad's Syria, where Assad, as an Allawite, is a more secular ruler. Syria has one of the largest populations of Christians in any Muslim country. Lebanon of course, has the largest, but again, Lebanon's (non-Hezbolla) leaders are mostly secular and the Phalangist Christians are still strong and can defend themselves. Then, under Saddam Hussein, Iraqi Christians were persecuted but only in spurts depending on how fanatical the Sunnis were in any given area. Further, Saddam's number two man, Tariq Azziz, was a Christian.

Also, I have never seen in the Koran (and I have actually never read the Koran) that Muslims are supposed to lie to "infidels." But if you take the Koran's version of the Abraham story, it is clear that Muhammed's saying in the Koran that it was Ishmael, not Issac, who was the favored son, opposing the Bible, and then you can say that yes, Muslims lie to infidels. Or that if Muslims believe that Christ is not the son of God but a teacher, then why won't they learn that it is BS to try to spread "God" to "infidels" by "holy war jihad" when only the Holy Spirit can confer upon someone conversion to Christ--not by the sword (as, of course, the Crusaders themselves, as well as the Inquisition and its aftermath in the New World, often forgot). But, of course, the biggest lie in the Koran is the fact that, several hundred years after Christ died to save mankind, some guy comes out with so-called visions from "God/Allah" saying that to heck with Christ's death-to-salvation, that ain't good enough, we need a new "saving" religion!

In fact you can say that Islam IS a lie, and a false religion as well!

But here is why I think it is NOT the main enemy...at least not here in the US (in Europe, where Islam really is spreading its tentacles, it just might be the main enemy...if it isn't warm-fuzzy Christianity, that is.) First of all, a few fanatics like the Fort Hood murderer aside, most American Muslims are not jihading, at least not yet. Secondly, most American Muslims really don't give a damned if you are Christian or not, and, thirdly, American Muslims are within a hair's breath or the next so-called Muslim terrorist act of getting rounded up like Japanese-Americans were during WW2. Many were calling for this after the Ft. Hood incident, and I can see it happening with the next incident. That's because most American Christians see Muslims as an enemy, plain and simple.

But the REAL reason that Islam is an enemy but not the main one is because, I believe, the main enemy is always the one you least expect. It is always the one who has already infiltrated. It is always the one who acts like your best friend, and, not only that, actually takes on the main core belief system that you have...but is capable of betrayal when the chips are down.

Christ talked about a time when husbands and wives would split up because of His name, families split, enmity between parents and children, etc. over His name. Paul spoke about being unequally yoked. This could mean splits between atheist vs. Christian spouses, or mixed religion spouses, but it could also mean splits between spouses, one of whom seeks the truth in the Bible and the other of whom doesn't, and believes false doctrine, and the twain shall not meet...one stubbornly holding th etruth and th eother stubbornly holding to strong delusion (that God has sent because of believing in a lie--2 Thess. 2: 8-11).

So that, yes, Muslims don't believe the truth, but they aren't infiltrating the Christian movement, either, instead perhaps trying to subvert from without. But it is subversion from within that I think makes the main enemy.

Moving on, Talmudic Judaism, with it's sayings in the Book of Sanhedrin, Gittin, and so on, about "Balaam", that is, Christ (and the fact that they refer to Him as a man in the Old Testament who was to betray Israel [see Numbers] until a donkey called him on it), being the son of a whore who is now in Hell for eternity boiling in his own excrement, as well as there vandalizing of Palestinian Christian Churches, and there spitting on Palestinian Christians as well as Jewish believers in Israel, and some various fanatical rabbis who want to outlaw Christianity is Israel outright, IS AN ENEMY of Christianity! Let me repeat that: TALMUDIC JUDAISM IS AN ENEMY OF CHISTIANITY. But again, since they have not infiltrated Christianity from within but want to annihilate it from without using the Noahide Laws, at this time, anyway (but who is to say they won't become the main enemy when the US govt. tried to enforce these Noahide Laws, and that day may be coming), Talmudic Judaism is not the main enemy of Christianity.

Since the majority of Jews in the US do not take the Talmud seriously, they are not even an enemy, at all.

You can make a case that other so-called Christian groupings like Mormonism, Unitarian Universalism, Jehova's Witnesses and the like are enemies, too, but in their belief systems, they do not believe that Christ is the only way to salvation and in some of their other doctrines that contravene the Word of God, so in fact these groups really aren't even Christian.

The Roman Catholic Church? Yes, they have some ridiculous beliefs like the divinity of Mary, Transubstantiation, and confessing sins to a priest instead of Christ, but Catholics do believe that only Christ leads to salvation and do get most of it right. At least they don't come up with heresy such as Jews don't need Christ as Savior.

Then you have the polar opposite of Christian Zionism--Christian Identity--which is another enemy of Christianity, but its power in the US is limited to the fringe right wing and white supremists, Neo-Nazi types, and thus is too much outside the mainstream, especially politically, to be the main enemy of Christianity in the US. Just to review, Christian Identity believes that ALL Jews are the "Satanic Seedline", and blacks and Catholics are just a tad above that...Mud People and all that racist BS! A subset of Identity, British Israelism (espoused by David J Smith of the Church of God Evangelistic Association and perhaps the World Wide Church of God, founded by Herbert W. Armstrong), claims that Jews are not Jews at all, but Khazars (yes, many are from Khazar converts, but still, isn't it true that Khazar converts have Jewish ancestry as well through intermarriage with Pharisaic families?), and that the real Jews are Northern Europeans, and that only Northern Europeans are going to Heaven, based on the Gates of Heaven being named for the Twelve Tribes of Israel.

So, I will now conclude why I think Christian Zionism is the main enemy of Christianity. One, it has heavily infiltrated Christianity to the point where most honest-to-goodness evangelical, fundamentalist, or church-going believers in Jesus Christ are either members of Christian Zionist churches or believe in a "dual covenant" or believe that the 1948 state of Israel is God's Israel, and that to criticize the state or government of Israel is "cursing Israel" which is forbidden by Genesis 12:3 and similar Genesis verses, even when that criticism applies to how the Israeli govt. or institutions persecute Christians, Jewish or Palestinian.

This prohibition is one reason US foreign policy is so Israel-centric to the detriment of peace there and Christianity there. But, as we all know, there will BE NO PEACE there until Christ returns; anything else will be a false peace. Yet, Zvi Kalisher and others are spreading the Word of God there, and for the various Christian Zionist factions to NOT support its spread in Israel is, IMHO, heresy. Israel will allow Christian tour groups to visit Holy Land sites, yet does not allow the Christians on these tours to "prosletyze" the Jews...isn't that what we are supposed to do? And Christian Zionists support this policy of NOT following the Word of God simply because they are sucking up to the Israeli government. They forget that WE ARE IN THE WORLD, BUT NOT OF THE WORLD, and that carnal, materialistic government is NOT what Christianity is about!

And, because of this sucking up to Israel, right or wrong, Christian Zionists consider Islam not only the main enemy but the only one! It is Christian Zionists more than any other religious group (leaving aside the backers of the military-industrial complex, the bankers who get rich off war, and other "new world order" types, who are not religious, are atheist, or are Satanic in other ways, as well as the state of Israel), who want Islam wiped out, and all Muslims either killed or "converted" a la "the Crusades" or "Inquisition". They believe that they would be doing God's work if they kill Muslims, or at least round them up and wall them off (like the Israeli govt. is doing in Gaza). They forget that Christ said, "vengeance is mine" (saith the Lord), and they also forget Christ said, "Love your enemies." Further, only the Holy Spirit can convict Muslims. We must NOT do what the Muslims do--"convert to Islam or be beheaded".

And, thus, I will vow to try to love the main enemy of Christians, that is, Christian Zionists. That doesn't mean I will "kill them with kindness" either, but I will love them in spirit as I rebuke whatever false beliefs they have.

And the Main Enemy of Christianity Is...

2009-11-25T21:56:00.003-06:00

Islam?

Well, let's see. Islamic countries do often persecute Christians. You all remember that guy in Afghanistan who, after converting to Christianity, was put on trial by some Sharia Law court there and was given the punishment of being beheaded, a favorite Muslim punishment, unless he repudiated Christ as the Son of God and the only means to salvation. Well, the guy refused to repudiate Christ, but for some reason was not beheaded. Angels?

Now Islam IS an enemy of Christianity. Thing is, it is NOT an enemy of Christ Himself...though Islam does not consider Christ the Son of God, it does revere Christ as a Teacher and Prophet. Therefore, it is NOT the main enemy of Christianity, not yet, anyway.

There are those that say the Koran teaches that followers of Muhammed ought to lie to "infidels." Someone said that to me just the other day. There was no point in me telling him, "Sounds like the Talmud telling Jews to lie to the gentiles." There was no point because there is no point in reasoning with someone who thinks Israel can do no wrong--and of course this person is a Christian. A Christian Zionist, that is. Arguing with him would just make him mad, like the time I told him that I would support a Palestinian Christian over an Israeli Jew any day. He got man, and, you guessed it, accused me of "anti-semitism." To which I responded, "I grew up with Jews and some of my best friends were Jews, so don't you ever call me anti-semitic again!" This person, as far as I know, has NEVER had Jewish friends!

And, speaking of Jews...

Are Jews the main enemy of Christianity?

If we are talking about Talmud-believing Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel (and some in the US) who spit on Christians every time they see them, or settler Nazis who vandalize Palestinian Christian churches, or rabbis who persecute Jewish Messianic believers like Zvi Kalisher, then the answer may be "yes."

Yet, the vast majority of Jews are NOT Talmudic believers or Kabbalists. The majority of Jew sin Israel and especially in the US and Europe are either reform Jews or secular Jews and could care less about who's a Christian and who isn't. They really don't care much about Christ, either. Thus, taken as a whole, Jews are not the main enemy of Christians.

Hindus? Hardly. Buddhists? Baloney. Scientologists? In Tom Cruise's dreams! Not atheists, because they are enemies to Jews, Muslims and any other religion as well, or New Agers, who change what they believe in every day for the heck of it so they are enemies to everyone and no one.

Nope. The main enemy to Christianity is (besides Satan)...the envelope please...

Christian Zionism!

Why? Number one, Christian Zionists of the John Hagee school deny that salvation comes only through Christ when they say the Jews don't need to believe in Christ to be saved; God has a "dual covenant" with the Jews. By making a claim like this, Hagee essentially denies that Christ will save all nations, which is in the Bible, which is the inspired Word of God, and thus Hagee is saying the Bible is only true some of the time, and that God is a liar. This makes Hagee and his "dual covenant" followers enemies of Christianity.

Not all Christian Zionists follow Hagee, however. Most CZs are not followers of Hagee and say the Jews, too, must accept Christ to be saved. On the other hand, while they say Jews must accept Christ as their Savior, they still continue to claim that--even though the Jews must accept Christ--the Jews, regardless of whether they accept Christ, are still, after all the times God had rebuked and punished the Jews and basically cut them off for 400 years (the 400 years between the prophet Malachi and the time of Christ), the Jews are still "God's Chosen People." Thus, without actually saying it, they are saying that there really is a "dual covenant" after all. They want their cake and to eat it too. They are afraid to go against the Word of God in the open, so they make up this BS that the Jews are God's Chosen People but that's not enough, they still have to accept Christ!

Look. You are either God's Chosen, or you aren't! If there is a dual covenant, and the Jews are chosen under one covenant while Christians are chosen under another covenant--but the Bible says ALL nations will know Christ under a NEW covenant and that Christ was the FULFILLMENT of the Law of Moses, doesn't that make the old covenant with the Jews FULFILLED? That is, it is finished? That is, no longer in effect? And doesn't that make a "dual covenant" a moot point?

So then, who is God's Chosen People now? Christians, followers of Christ, and this includes Jews IF they are Jewish believers! Messianic Jews, that is, followers of Yeshua HaMessiach (aka Jesus Christ).

Oh, and BTW: Hagee says that Jews who follow Christ will NOT inherit the promise, because Jews are not "allowed" to follow Christ!

But it isn't just that they violate the Word of God by their doctrines. Just as bad is that they violate the teachings of Christ by their words and their actions.

Christ said: Love your enemies. CZs say: Love your enemies as long as they aren't Muslims, "anti-semites" who hate Israel (it is against their code to criticize Israel even if Isreal deserves criticism, misinterpreting Genesis 12:3 and Genesis 27:24), or liberals.

Christ said: Blessed are the poor in spirit. CZs say blessed are the poor in spirit as long as they are rich in money.

Christ called the Pharisees (who later would give rise to the Talmud through their unwritten commentaries that bastardized the Torah, called the Mishna), "the synagogue of Satan" and and said to them, "you are of your father, the devil."

Christian Zionists, on the other hand, ARE today's version of the Pharisees. They like the "letter" of Christ's laws but hate the spirit of them. They are Pharisees because more than anything else they seek political power, that is, they violate Christ's dictate: "be in the world but not of the world." They are using the Republican Party as their political platform through alliances between neo-conservative Republicans and "Focus on the Family" and "Moral Majority-Christian Coalition" groups. They seek out the rich and powerful and hoodwink their middle class and working class followers, cajoling those who can't tithe hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars a year into doing their dirty work, working on their off time in trying to get more money for their CZ megachurches or sending money to make more "settlements" in Palestinian areas in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. I wouldn't be surprised if they treated their "non-wealthy" followers like Scientologists treat their non-celebrity followers.

And speaking of Palestinians...

Christian Zionists have NO HEART, NO MERCY, and NO SYMPATHY for their Palestinian brothers and sisters in Christ. They want all Palestinian Christians out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem pronto. I used to think it was because Palestinian Christians tended to be Eastern Orthodox or Catholic Christians. But that is not the case. In fact I have recently heard there are even some Palestinian Christians who are Christian Zionists who of course love Israel! No, it doesn't matter what type of Christian you are; Christian Zionists don't give a crap about you and don't care if you or your children starve, get killed by the IDF, or die from lack of water because Israel won't let you have water (which is what they are doing in Gaza: there are still about 2 thousand Christians left in Gaza) If you are Palestinian, you are the devil to them.

But of course the Body of Christ knows this, but here is something maybe they don't know: Christian Zionists, for all their love of Israel, HATE THE JEWS AS WELL!

There they are at their "Christians United for Israel" conference waving Israeli flags and doing the Hava Negila dance and all, and kissing rabbis and that nonsense, but in reality they hate the Jews so much that they want two-thirds of them slaughtered so that Christ will return. Well, isn't that something! And they want this to happen even though they believe they'll be "raptured" out of there before all this happens!

Which leads me to the latest nonsense from Arab Christian Zionist (that most rare of breeds!) Joseph Farah of Zionist..er, WorldNetDaily, who claims--without actually been accused of what he claims by the person he claims is making the accusation--that the ADL and Abe Foxman have called Farah (and others) "enemies" of the Jews. Farah claims that because he went to tea parties and is a "birther," the ADL considers him their "enemy."

No, Joe. Maybe ADL claims you are an enemy because you want all the Jews to settle in Israel in order for two-thirds of them to be slaughtered. Maybe that is why Foxman considers you an enemy despite your "love" for Israel! Because Foxman is right: you are an enemy to the Jews!

And, because you hate Palestinians who you consider all to be terrorists, even the Christian ones, you violate another dictate of Christ: whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you do unto me.

Like the rest of your Christian Zionist buddies.

Repudiating Idols, Part 1

2009-11-09T22:23:00.003-06:00

It is all over the Word of God: we believers must repudiate idols.

What is an idol? It is anything in the mind or heart, soul or strength that takes the place of God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The first of the "two great commandments" that Christ gave us (with the second being, "Love your neighbor as yourself") was this: Love the Lord God with your whole heart, soul, mind, and strength." And anything that prevents God taking first, second, and third place and more in our minds, hearts, and being such that it becomes a center of life and takes us away from God as well as being with the family is an idol.

Idols in the Old Testament included wooden figures, "the golden calf," engravings and the like, violating the Second Commandment, "Thou shalt not worship graven images."

The New Testament refers to not just graven images that could be openly worshiped but also "images" "engraved" on our hearts and minds.

An idol thus can be someone like Michael Jackson, or political leaders, or philosophers, or authors, or musicians, or family members, even, or organizations, like the military, or sports franchises.

Many folks are "fans" of sports teams, but when the game is over they go back to doing the usual things that have nothing to do with that team, so that for a few hours on Sunday or during the week they care about if their team wins or loses. They are happy if the team wins and miffed if the team loses, but after a short time, they forget about it.

But then you have folks who can think of nothing but the team, being ecstatic if they win but upset and angry if they lose, so much so that they can't sleep the night before the game (especially football fans, since only about twelve games in college and sixteen in pro football are played any season, making the games more important), and so much so that they can't sleep the night the game is over because they are too excited still or too depressed.

And I was one of these folks. Idolizing this team has in fact kept me from posting here. It is an NFL team. I won't mention the team so I will make up the name. It is a big city team (as most are), so I will call this team, in place of the actual team I won't mention since it is not important, the "Big City Bulldogs." I have idolized this team for nearly forty years, off and on. Over the last several years they had become a bad team, but last year they made the NFL playoffs and I was again ecstatic about this team and in the off-season this spring and summer followed their every move, forgetting about this blog and putting God, and family even, not in first place or even second or third. This team this year is not doing quite as well as last year but they aren't doing badly either, so it is not like I am giving up this team because they are losing a bunch again. In fact I have repudiated this team precisely because they can still make the playoffs and I do not want to get involved in that again. Better to do it when the team is maybe not a sure thing to make the playoffs, than to do it when the team is a serious contender, which would make it very hard to do for a serious fanatic.

I simply could not just say it is no big deal, I will ignore them until the playoffs. No, because I have been too fanatical in the past and recently. So, I have had to totally, in private with my Lord and Savior, and also publicly over the Internet, repudiate being a fan of this team. I have skirted this issue the last several weeks and can no longer just gloss over it. I have proclaimed my giving up this team, and following NFL football, period. I can never "take another drink," that is, watch another football game in earnest, again, as an alcoholic can never take another drink of alcohol again.

And no matter how often Satan or his minions tempt me again with following football, I must repudiate him and repudiate football and this team. It is too bad it had to come to that, but it has to come to that.

God has work to do with using me, and He ain't gonna use me if my mind and heart and soul and strength is given over to some football team which has done little to nothing for me lately, except "bragging rites."

In the next post and others, I will relate what I did and how I did it, with the strength of the Lord to guide me, since I didn't do it on my own.

More Hate from the Folks Who Brought You the New "Hate Crime" Bill

2009-07-30T16:34:00.003-06:00

Sanhedrin 59a

To communicate anything to a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.

Libbre David 37

A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them.

Tosefta, Tractate Erubin VIII

When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.

Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156

If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth.

Choschen Hamm 388, 15

Happy will be the lost of Israel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has chosen from amongst the Goyim, of whom the Scriptures say: "Their work is but vanity, it is an illusion at which we must laugh; they will all perish when God visits them in His wrath." At the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exterminate all the Goyim of the world, Israel alone will subsist, even as it is written: "The Lord alone will appear great on that day!...

Zohar, Vayshlah 177b

That the Jewish nation is the only nation selected by God, while all the remaining ones are contemptible and hateful.

That all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which consequently is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples. An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general.

A Jew may rob a Goy, he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of God would become dishonored.

Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L

Everything a Jew needs for his church ritual no goy is permitted to manufacture, but only a Jew, because this must be manufactured by human beings and the Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings.

Schulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim 14, 20, 32, 33, 39

A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as he treats a piece of meat.

Hadarine, 20, B; Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348

A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.

Gad. Shas. 2:2

A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy.

My comment:

And these are the same folks who (just as they want to annihilate Palestinian Christians and Messianic Christ-Believing Jews...don't believe me, Israeli Christian and Evangelist Zvi Kalisher can attest to that!) want to destroy Christianity in this country. Not themselves...they have "Christian" Zionists like John Hagee to be their lap dog.

Guys, THIS is the reason I keep on posting these things of the Talmud believers and "Noahide Law" practitioners. Anti-Christ!

Romans 13 and the Rule of Law

2009-07-20T21:49:00.003-06:00

"Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resisteth shall receive to themselves condemnation..." (Romans 13: 1-2, KJV)

Now, with regards to the United States, what is the "power" and what is the "ordinance of God"? What is the "ruler" spoken of in subsequent verses?

The President? Is the US a one-man dictatorship? Yeah, I know, it seems that way.

The Congress-Executive Branch-Supreme Court? Perhaps, but who or what gives them that authority...some super clique of oligarchs? Sure seems that way.

In fact, the "ruler" is not a who but a what. That "ordinance of God" is none other than the Constitution of the United States of America! And the following and adhering to the Constitution, also known as the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, is what is called RULE OF LAW. Or, I should clarify to say, the RULE OF LAW OVER THE RULE OF MEN.

Thus, President Obama and all presidents before him are NOT the "rulers" we need to obey. THEY NEED TO OBEY THE CONSTITUTION! And what does the Constitution say powers are derived from? "We the People"! That's who!

So that, as our so-called rulers and the oligarchs whom have bought and paid for them and their utter corruption, have refused to follow and adhere to the Constitution and have, as former President Bush has stated in his arrogance, have left the supreme law of the land as a "scrap of paper," is it any wonder than us "little people" do not exactly want to follow the law as well? Is it any wonder that us "little people" would like to be able to "get away with it," as our so-called rulers always seem to get away with the worst corruptions and crimes, being such a criminal class that makes criminal rulers like Robert Mugabe seem like pikers in comparison?

For all intents and purposes, the Rule of Law is DEAD in the USA. Period. If you want to discover just how dead it is, start reading Story's Global Analysis Reports to see just how criminal our so-called rulers are.

And, don't forget: any law passed by these criminals or otherwise that conflicts with the Law of God DOES NOT have to be obeyed and MUST NOT be obeyed.

For instance, there are rumors that Obama wants passed a law that will allow medical practices to terminate hospital patients that are "too old" or infirm for health care benefits under Obama's so-called health care plan. If this is true, and the state is put ahead of God as far as taking life is concerned, then this law absolutely must not be followed. Same for subdermal microchips in humans...you know, what some call the "Mark of the Beast." This chip somehow assumes ownership by the state. Since you the Christian are owned by God as a child of God (under God's Law and also US law in the past, children are "owned" by their parents, which is why children under 18 who want to be legally free of their parents are required to be "emancipated" from them), to take this chip is to give up being a child of God because it means you accept the state as God. Same for forced abortions.

Rapture? Been there, done that...and more

2009-05-22T11:41:00.002-06:00

Yes, you got that right. I was raptured!

Not in the way (of course!) that most Christians take the word: Right before the "seven year great tribulation," all believers in Christ get removed from the Earth, including fetuses, babies, and children in general, afterwhich all hell breaks lose, "the" anti-christ appears, takes over the temple in Jerusalem, makes 3 and a half years of peace between Israel and the Arabs, and midway through exposes himself as the anti-christ, makes everyone take "the mark of the beast" and the rest of this "left behind" verbiage.

Have I mentioned this before? The final weekend of February in 1997, months before the "Republic of Texas" standoff a mile from my house led by ROT leader Rick McLaren, formerly a friend of ours (before he threatened me with death, that is), I was walking down our dirt road from our house and, at an intersection with another dirt road, put my life into the hands of Jesus Christ in a conversion experience. Prior to that I was a Christian but not a committed one.

I don't remember if I got on my knees or not. The road was dirt and plenty of rocks thereon, so I doubt it. My knees don't do well on rocks and stones.

The feeling I got in that moment of commitment was a rapture in the dictionary sense: overwhelming joy, tears of joy, and the knowledge that (knowing I would not go along with McLaren's nefarious plans for setting up a "republic" of Texas with his money-laundering buddies) he could, indeed, threaten to kill me if I "betrayed" him, or, on the other hand, the State of Texas could put me in jail if I would not testify against McLaren AS WELL AS TAKE MY KIDS AWAY (THE paramount issue!)...well, after that moment I had no fear.

I KNEW Christ would take care of not only me, but my kids and husband as well.

Now, the State of Texas did depose me for about 8 hours (with a lunch break) in June, 1997. I was fearful only because I could not remember an event that I had been questioned on, but I had an answer after coming back from lunch. The experience was nerve wracking but I was not really fearful. I knew that by doing this I would not be put into jail over this.

When I was sent by mail McLaren's death threat, I was not fearful. Even though he did have fanatical adherents who could be of the mind to carry it out.

But in the sense that I felt "caught up" (Greek harpazo) with Christ "in the air" as if I had momentarily spiritually "left" the earth, yes, I was raptured.

I had been thinking about this issue for a long time. No issue has brought me as many comments and controversy as "the rapture" issue, which (in terms of the "left behind" version) I have debunked. In John 17:15 and 20, Job 14:12 and other places, the Bible does not give suppport to the notion that Christians will be removed from the Earth (dead or alive), physically, until perhaps a new age (for instance, the "1,000 year reign" of Christ, or the "new heaven, new earth" time period) happens. But, as has happened to me, spiritually, there is no reason to think Christians couldn't get spiritually raptured by the Holy Spirit.

As for "and more"...it has been several months since my last post, but only when I can resist the Holy Spirit no longer.

D. Lagarde

Son of Hamas Leader Now Christian!

2009-02-06T00:16:00.002-06:00

While looking for a website to send money to help Palestinian Christians in Gaza against Zionist Talmudic Israel's onslaught, I found the site http://www.barnabasfund.org, of the British-based Christian Charity, the Barnabas Fund. They list a page where the son of a Hamas leader in East Jerusalem (the West Bank, not Gaza), having been arrested by the IDF for some kind of "wrong place wrong time" connection to some Hamas meeting or protest, and sent to jail by the IDF, discovered while in the jail, filled with many Hamas leaders, that Hamas WAS NOT following the dictates of the Koran (helping the poor with money raised), but following their own selfish dictates of spending raised money for the poor on weapons and personal items! Thus he discovered the organization his dad worked with was NOT what Hamas pretended to be! He got very disillusioned with Hamas. Then when he was released from jail, he found himself inclined to go to a meeting of Palestinian Christians studying the Bible, and was given a Bible to read. So he went, he wrote, to this mountainside place and read the Bible and had a conversion experience!

Because he was threatened by the Muslims in the West Bank area and his family, he had to leave (this was back before Israel kept such a tight leash on the Palestinians and they could more freely leave then), and came to the US to live.

I put this in here to present this really wonderful calling by God, as an example that called by God could mean even someone who was likely to become a terrorist, and to show that "hating Muslims" is NOT the way! By "hating Muslims" we DENY THEM the opportunity to hear the Word, because honey if they don't hear it from us and our fellow Christians, they likely won't hear it and thus are condemned.

And if Zvi Kallisher can do it....

Who is Zvi Kallisher? He is only one of the foremost Messianic Jews in Israel today. His whole family is part of the growing Messianic Jewish community in Israel, a community that is as persecuted as Christian communities are in Islamic nations and places like China and North Korea. It is routine for Talmudic Yeshiva students and rabbis to spit on not just Palestinian ("Arab") Christians, but Messianic Jews in Israel as well, and to threaten them and to beat them up. I have posted links to such stories on other posts, mostly out of Israeli newspapers themselves. Zvi has self-published works including "The Best of Zvi" that can be purchased at Amazon. In this amazing book, he tells how (after coming to Israel from Poland after the Holocaust in 1948) he was called by Christ and has had many discussions with rabbis, neighbors, and even Palestinian Muslims. His son is now a major force in the Israeli Messianic Jewish community as well.

We need to be more like Zvi and think of those in the Muslim community as potentially like this Hamas leader's son.

God "Hooks" Israelis, Palestinians

2009-01-15T15:28:00.003-06:00

Sounds like a New York Daily News headline. Oh, and, BTW, though the notion of hooks used by God is lightly referenced from Ezekiel 38 (Gog Magog War, also see Revelation 20), the Ezekiel reference has little to do with the Gaza war, because the Gog-Magog War (which is what this event is popularly called) takes place under the circumstance of unwalled villages in the vicinity of Jerusalem.

Folks, today, there are simply NO UNWALLED villages in the vicinity of Jerusalem! There are so many walls in and around Jeruslaem that it is nearly impossible for Palestinians to get from one end of East Jerusalem in the West Bank territory to the other in under half a day, because of all the checkpoints. So, what we aer witnessing in Gaza is not the beginning of the Gog-Magog War, Armegeddon, or anything other than just the usual insanity there...insane, because the Israelis and Hamas keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results!

But the other night my husband, staunchly pro-Israel, and me, staunchly pro-Palestinian Christian (meaning, for the dullards out there on your Megaphones, I am not pro-Hamas! Tell that to your local GIYUS goons), had an argument. May the Holy Spirit one day open his eyes as to the nature of what kind of Jews run Israel (will "Anonymous" sue me over this?), and who the Palestinians are really descended from, despite their almost mass forced conversion to Islam before the Crusades. But until then, my husband sees the "Arabs" there (don't Arabs come from Arabia?) as terrorists in general. Same as most American Christians, even those who do not call themselves "Christian" Zionist. May the Holy Spirit take the strong delusion from him and make him love the truth. That is, the Truth, as in "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life". But, until then, he will hate Islam and everyone who believes in it, and of course, those who don't but are associated with it. May the Holy Spirit one day shine the light of the truth of the nature of Talmudic Judaism, anti-Christ, on him. But, until then...

So, we argued, and, without going into all the gory details, we reached the conclusion that this Gaza war was God's Will. That God had put hooks into the Israelis and Palestinians to go to war. We don't need to approve or disapprove or like it or not like it. God's got His reasons. May the faith in Jesus Christ prevail in the Palestinian and Messianic Jewish Communities!

Calling All Body of Christ Believers: Pray without ceasing for our brothers in Christ in Gaza

2008-12-29T14:14:00.003-06:00

Because if we don't, Christ will do to us what He will do to the Laodicians of Revelation 3 fame: "spew" us "out of" His "mouth".

When it comes to the present day State of Israel, my brothers and sisters, we need the Holy Spirit to show us the meaning of just who His "chosen people" are.

It is time to stop supporting "Israel" right or wrong. this is not the time to fear the wrath of Hagee and the Christian Zionists calling for the blood of our Palestinian brothers and sisters and future (that is, Muslim) brothers and sisters.

And, on the side of righteousness, nor is it the time to hate our fellow Jews for what the "snynagogue of Satan" Talmud believers are doing to our bretheren. We need to remember the great Israeli Messianic Jew, Tzi Kalisher, who is spreading the Word of God to both Jews and Palestinians there, and be more like him.

A Challenge to Atheists

2008-12-02T15:27:00.002-06:00

Calling all Atheists:

There are hundreds and maybe even thousands of otherwise reasonably intelligent articles and blog posts that I have come across over the last several months that devote either part or all of the contents into claiming that God and/or Jesus Christ never existed, do not exist now, and never will exist. These posts say nothing about the Holy Spirit. Guess they figure that since Christ and God do not exist neither does the Holy Spirit. Without being absolutely sure of the nature of how God exists in some sort of trinity (and L. Ray Smith will disagree with anything about a "Holy Trinity" but there is a God as "Father" to the "Son" Christ, and there is mentioned in the Bible the Holy Spirit which descended on Christ at His baptism by John the Baptizer, so that while there is a "trinity" there is also a unity, and, besides Ray, in Genesis is recorded God saying, "Let us make man in our image"...), there is definitely an existence of something that got everything that was ever created...well, begun. And, without bringing up St. Thomas Aquinas who philosophized about God's existence in terms of "the First Causer" (actually, it was Aquinas's argument learned in my Philosophy 101 class of "First Causes" among others that--with me being if not an atheist but definitely an agnostic at the time--convinced me that the whole shebang wasn't just some sort of random event (Big Bang or other label).

So, the challenge is this: Athiests, prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that, first, there is no God, never was and never will be. Using the latest pronouncements of guys like Chris Hitchens, Jay Gould, Archarya S (consultant on Part 1 of "Zeitgeist"), and any other atheist academic won't work on me and I can easily refute anything they say or write). Second, there is no Christ, and Christ never existed. Again, using the lack of evidence of archeological artifacts from the Holy Land will get you another refutation from me...I don't buy the "the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence" reverse Rumsfeldian BS, either. Third, prove to me that Creation is utter nonsense and Evolution is the LAW. BTW, I never said that Creation was Science, so don't go to calling me some knuckle-dragging redneck inbred idiot for some bogus claim that I said it was. Understand this: CREATIONISM IS NOT SCIENCE! Ergo, "Intelligent Design" isn't science either, so you'll forgive me for not allowing you to "go there."

And, while you are at it, prove to me that Christianity has been more responsible for death and destruction than atheism, and I'll give you a gold star. I'll make it even easier for you by allowing you to include false Christianity (that is, any beliefs espoused to be "Christian" but which are anti-Christ) in your claim that Christianity has killed more people directly than atheism.

Here is why I am calling all Atheists (agnostics need not take part, and I do know the difference!) to take part in this project. One, you cannot prove God never existed, does not exist and never will exist. Two, you cannot prove Christ never existed no matter how much archeological lack of evidence you site. Three, you cannot prove that everything evolved from nothing--sorry, but this simply cannot be done no matter what the most famous scientists in the world claim.

But don't think I'm not going to be defending my own position while you are trying to debunk my position that God exists now and always has and always will, and the same goes for Christ. Also I will prove that atheism has killed more humans than any true or false form of Christianity has. [Or Judaism or Islam even...in fact it is my position that atheism has killed more humans than all three religions combined or in combination (with each other, or other religions such as Hinduism). Sorry, but animism, shaminism, and other indigenous religions don't count here. By atheism I mean any religion that claims no higher authority than man himself. And by false Christianity I mean any Christianity that is "convert or die" oriented, such as what Spain did to the natives of North and South America during Spain's rule of these areas, and other "forced" conversions.]

BONUS: Prove to me that the books of the Bible are either forgeries, were not written by those Christianity claims wrote the books, or were actually written hundreds of years after Christianity claims they were written.

Special for followers of David Icke: prove to me that Christ really is Satan!

Deborah Lagarde

More on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-8

2008-09-27T08:49:00.003-06:00

This is what the NRSV says:

(6) " And now you know what is now restraining (the lawless one), so that he may be revealed when his time comes. (7) For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains it is removed. (8) And then the lawless one will revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him by the manifestation of his coming."

The King James (which is what the NRSV is based on) only sounds different in verse 7: "For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way."

And let's review what the NIV says in 7: "For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work: but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way."

Let's review the fact that the subject of a sentence in verse 7 is "mystery", and that "of lawlessness" is a prepositional phrase, and a prepositional phrase can NEVER contain the subjec. The "it" in the second half of the sentence MUST refer back to the subject "mystery". (Or, if you prefer, the "secret power" is refered to by "it" in the NIV...and with the archaic KJV, "letteth" must refer back to the "mystery.") Very possibly the major problem with interpreting or "rightly dividing" or "discerning" this passage is that most people do not "rightly divide" (grammatically) this passage! Most think that the "it" refers back to "lawlessness" or "iniquity".

Now then... not only must we discern who is restraining but WHAT is being restrained. Again, most people, and dispensationalists in particular, believe that the Holy Spirit is the restrainer and what is being restrained is either "iniquity" or "lawlessness"...because they don't realize that the subject of the sentence in verse 7 is "mystery" or "secret power". Further, most people, again because they don't realize that the subject of the sentence is "mystery" or "secret power", believe that what is being restrained is "iniquity" or "lawlessness".

So now that we know what the subject is, "mystery" or "secret power", lets "rewrite" verse 7 in all three versions again putting "mystery" or "secret power" as the subject and its reference...

NRSV: "For the mystery (of lawlessness) is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains the mystery is removed."

KJV: ""For the mystery (of iniquity) doth already work: only he who now letteth (the mystery) will let, until he be taken out of the way."

NIV: ""For the secret power (of lawlessness) is already at work: but the one who now holds the mystery back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way."

And who is "restraining" or "holding back" the mystery? In other words, who is the "he" at the end of the sentence in the KJV and the NIV? And who is "the one" in the NRSV? For this refers to who the "restrainer" and the "hold back-er" is.

What we are talking about here is WHO RESTRAINS OR HOLDS BACK THE MYSTERY. If we were talking about who holds back or restrains "lawlessness" or "iniquity" it is clear to every Christian that only the Holy Spirit representing God and Christ holds back lawlessness or iniquity. This is precisely why the rapture theory has such a toe-hold on many Christians. clearly is the Holy Spirit is removed all Christians would have to be removed because it is with Christians that the Holy Spirit resides. So I perfectly understand it when those who believe in the rapture make the claim that since the Holy Spirit is removed then all Christians MUST be taken "out of the way" or be "removed" from Earth in "the Rapture."

The thing is, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the purveyor of TRUTH, Christ, through the Holy Spirit, to "restrain" the truth, WHICH IS WHAT "MYSTERY" IS DEFINED AS--"A RELIGIOUS TRUTH DIVINELY REVEALED AND UNKNOWABLE THROUGH REASON." (Readers Digest Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary).

Okay, so now let's complete the sentences with everything in its proper context:

NRSV: "For the religious truth divinely revealed (of lawlessness) is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains the religious truth divinely revealed is removed."

KJV: "For the religious truth divinely revealed (of iniquity) doth already work: only he who now letteth truth be revealed will let, until he be taken out of the way."

NIV: "For the religious truth divinely revealed (of lawlessness) is already at work: but the one who now holds the religious truth divinely revealed back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way."

NOW, WHO HOLDS TRUTH BACK? WHO RESTRAINS THE TRUTH? "The man of lawlessness" (or in the KJV, the Son of Perdition".)

And now we have our final rewrite:

NRSV: "For the religious truth divinely revealed (of lawlessness) is already at work, but only until the man of lawlessness who now restrains the religious truth divinely revealed is removed."

KJV: "For the religious truth divinely revealed (of iniquity) doth already work: only he who now letteth truth be revealed will let, until the man of lawlessness be taken out of the way."

NIV: "For the religious truth divinely revealed (of lawlessness) is already at work: but the man of lawlessness who now holds the religious truth divinely revealed back will continue to do so till the man of lawlessness is taken out of the way."

So now, the Holy Spirit is not "taken out of the way" or "removed" from the Earth, and, ipso facto, neither are Christians! But what is taken out of the way or removed is the man of lawlessness or son of perdition...that is, the agency of Satan is removed from the believer.

Also, for the (verse 9), "coming of the lawless one is apparent in the workings of Satan (the lawless one works through the agency of Satan, who is permitted by God to work his "agent", lawlessness), who uses all power, signs, lying wonders, and every kind of wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved." Verse 10: "For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion, leading them to believe what is false"

And if you don't believe that God uses Satan to work his agency "lawlessness" on the Earth, then you need to read Job Chapter 2. And if you don't believe that God creates evil, then you need to read Isaiah 45:7--"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." (KJV)

And, speaking of Isaiah 45, verses 22-23 (NRSV) says "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. By myself I have sworn, from my mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: 'To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear." (see also Philippians 2: 9-11)

So that even those under "strong delusion" (KJV) and all unbelievers will be saved, because God has sworn by Himself that this will be so.

The Myth of the "Removal" of the Holy Spirit from Earth: 2 Thessalonians 2:7

2008-09-09T13:14:00.002-06:00

Haven't posted any Bible Myths lately, or anything else for that matter!

But the passage in 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2 verses 6, 7 and 8 (NIV) it says:

"And now you know what is holding him (the "man of lawlessness" in verse 3) back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus Christ will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming."

The King James uses the term "restrainer" to mean the one "holding him back" and (I think, I don't have it in front of me) the NRSV uses the term "retainer" or "holder"...it is commonly thought that the one who holds back or the restrainer refers to the Holy Spirit. Pre-trib rapture folks, post-trib rapture folks, post-millennialists and amillennialists pretty much agree with this.

That's not the argument here...the argument is whether or not the Holy Spirit "leaves" the Earth ("taken out of the way" here and the King James, "is removed" in the NRSV...the Concordant Literal is completely different, confusing, and I will not bring up what it says here).

Those who believe that the Holy Spirit leaves the Earth believes that event happens because it leaves the Earth when God "raptures" up the believers who have the Holy Spirit with them, thus the Holy Spirit will not be able to be found on the Earth once those with the Holy Spirit leave the Earth. But one of the major problems with Rapture Eschatology is that part and parcel with that theology is that "a remnant" will convert to believing in Christ (Jews, mostly) during the time when the Holy Spirit is no longer on the Earth. Now, isn't it true that when one truly believes Christ is his Savior, that Christ died for his sins, that the Holy Spirit is given to the new believer? Thus, one cannot say that once the raptured believers are taken off the Earth, the Holy Spirit goes with them, and will not return until the "lawless one" is defeated by Christ. In fact one of the main things that keeps believers still believing is that they have the Holy Spirit. And in fact the Holy Spirit will ALWAYS remain in the believer if one truly is a believer.

But what if one is a "believer" of convenience, one on which the Word of God has fallen, and then it whithers as if surrounded by thorns or falls on rock or the soil isn't deep enough (see Matthew 13)? What if the believing is not true believing? What if one stops believing, then rebels against God? There are examples of this happening in the Book of Acts, Paul's Epistles and other places. So, perhaps the Holy Spirit "leaves" those particular individuals, but never "leaves" the Earth completely.

The wording is important: Notice the prepositional phrase "of lawlessness" in verse 7; the subject is "secret power", and in verse 7, who does "he" refer to? So let's read this without the prepositional phrase:

"For the secret power is already at work; but the one who now holds back the secret power (it) will continue to do so until the man of lawlessness (he) is taken out of the way."

Or, does "he" refer to the one who holds "it" back?

Stay tuned, and I will discuss this further in the next day or so.

Deborah Lagarde

So Many Anti-Christs, So Little Time...

2008-07-25T10:52:00.002-06:00

One would think that it would be easy to find out who or what Anti-Christ is, because of the nature of the word: anti + Christ. "Anti" means "against". For instance, someone who is "anti-war" is "against war." Someone who is "anti-defamation" is against slander or bad mouthing someone or some group. "Anti-Semitic" means against Semites. IT DOES NOT MEAN AGAINST JEWS! OKAY??? Semites include Jews and Arabs. It includes most of the Middle East, in fact (but not Iranians, because Persians are related to Indo-Aryans and are thus, Biblically, of Japheth). So that, by definition, "Anti-Christ" means "against Christ." That is so obvious that I have to wonder why Christians have such a hard time figuring out who or what is Anti-Christ.

But I have a theory born of discernment and the Holy Spirit.

The problem is that Christians are looking for "THE" Anti-Christ. It is usually expressed as "THE Anti-Christ will, during the Seven Year Great Tribulation, first make peace with Israel (some say "the Jews") to make a false peace, but then will break the peace, sit in the Temple in Jerusalem (which would be rebuilt on the site of the present Islamic Dome of the Rock, one of Islam's holiest sites), proclaim himself God, and proceed to force the 'Mark of the Beast' and '666' and all sorts of calamity on the world, including slaughtering 2/3 of the world's Jews (while 1/3 convert to Christianity) and wind up being defeated at the Battle of Armeggedon by the "Second Coming" of Christ along with His angels." I have heard slight variations on this theme for years. Other than citing Daniel 9, Zechariah 12, Revelation 13 and a few other places in the Bible, I have never heard an explanation form anyone that most assuredly rests on the Word of God. For one thing, only ONE BOOK of the Bible even mentions the word "anti-Christ", 1 John. (One would think that the use of the term "Anti-Christ" by Christians as much as we do would mean the word is mentioned in at least several other "end-times prophecies", but no. This is almost as much bad discernment as use of the word "rapture", the context in which it is meant HAVING NO PLACE IN THE BIBLE, PERIOD! And there is NO ONE SINGLE ANTI-CHRIST, EITHER!

Thus: THE "Anti-Christ" is not the Pope of Rome (Hagee and others). It is not King Juan Carlos of Spain ("Newswatch Magazine's" David J. Smith's routine). It is not George W. Bush (some leftist antiwar bloggers, probably in jest). It is not Prince Charles of Britain (various other Christian Identity sites). It is not Saddam Hussein (he's dead). It is not Osama bin Laden (he is also dead, according to FOX News of December, 2001, and the late Benazir Bhutto, a You Tube video made right before her assasination attests). It is not John Hagee (some radical anti-Christian Zionists), however Hagee is certainly a false prophet. Nor is it Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Hal Lindsay, or any other leader of the Christian Right. It is also not any other world leader, politically, economically, socially, or in any other elite position. It is not a member of the so-called "Illuminati" (Rothschild, Rockefeller, et. al.) There is NO ONE SINGLE "THE" Anti-Christ!

Here is what 1 John 2:21-23 says the Anti-Christ is:

"(21)I write not to you seeing that you are not acquainted with the truth, but that you are acquainted with it, and that no lie at all is truth. (22) Who is the liar, if not he who is denying, saying that 'Jesus is not the Christ'? This one is the antichrist, who is disowning the Father and the Son. (23) Everyone who is disowning the Son, neither has the Father. He who is avowing the Son has the Father also." (Concordant Literal New Testament; I used this version because this is the only Bible version that I have found that properly translates the ancient Greek, using the imperfect aorist tense the original New Testament Aramaic/Greek Scriptures were written in. Most versions use the simple (preterite) past or past participle/progressive past tenses, which are less accurate. Using this tense also shows that doing the Word of God is ongoing, and didn't end in the 1st Century AD.)

Thus, EVERYONE who disowns Jesus as the Christ, or Christ, is anti-Christ. Also, every writing that disowns Christ is anti-Christ. and every so-called Holy Book that disowns Jesus as the Christ (or the Messiah or that Christ is the Son of God) is anti-Christ.

Thus, the Koran, which calls Christ a prophet only, but not the Son of God and the Christ is anti-Christ. While the Torah does not specifically state that Christ is the Son of God, it is implied in its prophecies and is used by Messianic Jews to defend Jesus, the Emmanuel (God with us) (in Hebrew Jesus is "Yehoshua" or Joshua, "Jesus" is a Greek translation), as the Christ/Messiah, thus the Torah and Jews who practice the Torah EXCLUSIVELY as the Word of God in their faith are not necessarily anti-Christ. The problem is most Jews do not consider the Torah exclusively as "the law" and spiritual foundation of their faith. In fact it is true today that the Talmud is now the most important legal and spiritual foundation for Judaism. The Talmud is, by the admission of its reviewers, the written collection of works taken from oral spiritual and legal Pharisee/Sadducee traditions.

The Talmud says: (paraphrased) Christ is in hell, wallowing in boiling hot excrement (Gittin 56b-57a). And the Book of Sanhedrin says, He was a bastard, son of adulterous Mary (Sanhedrin 106b). He was hung on the eve of Passover because He was a sorcerer and apostate (Sanhedrin 43a). He was a fool who fell down and worshipped a brick (Sanhedrine 67a). The Talmud is online now at the "see and hear" website, and you can verify this for yourself. Thus, the Talmud, the "law" and "spirit" for most religious Jews, is DEFINITELY anti-Christ!

In a future post, I hope I can clear up, the Lord willing, other misconceptions about "666" and other end-times concerns.

Deborah Lagarde

What "Voice of the Martyrs" Won't Tell You...So I Guess I Have To!

2008-06-25T15:30:00.002-06:00

As expected from a news source that calls itself Christian and is advertised on World Net Daily, among other places, the magazine "Voice of the Martyrs" DOES NOT report on what Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jews inside Israel, and especially it seems Yeshiva Students, Rabbis, and settlers in the West Bank--especially the new Neo-Nazi kind that Israeli papers like Haaretz report on--are doing to Arab and Palestinian--and NOW MESSIANIC JEWS!!!--Christians. This non-reporting is due, I suppose, to the false notion arising from a misreading of Genesis 12:3--most think it says something like God will bless those who bless Israel and will curse those who curse Israel. As reported in my Israel series, Genesis 12:3 says no such thing. However, as with so many other Christian publications, this one refuses (so far as I know) to report on what some in Israel are doing to Christians, and now are doing to Messianic Jews there.

So I guess I'm gonna have to do their job. I remind the reader that this blog is not in the business of simply denouncing Israel or Zionism just for the heck of it. I do it for a reason, and that reason is to uphold the name and mission of Jesus Christ, as simple as that, because the Babylonian Talmud does such evil as to claim that the Son of God is boiling in hell for eternity in His own excrement.

And, anyway, as far as I am concerned, Israel is cursing itself. They don't need me to do it!

So, if you really want to know how Christians and Messianic Jews are suffering for their faith in Israel and the Palestinian Occupied Territories, follow these links, and I'll leave it up to "Voice of the Martyrs" to cover persecution of Christians in Islamic and Communist countries as they feel a lot more comfortable doing that.

1. Israeli Christians worship under armed guard

2. Israeli theology students fire rocket at Palestinians

3. The Second Crucifixion of Jesus

4. Israel is deporting Jerusalem Christians

5. Hundreds of New Testaments torched in Israel

6. First they burnt the books...then they burnt those who wrote them.

7. Orthodox Jewish youths burn New Testaments in Or Yehuda

8. Jewish settlers at checkpoint threaten to kill Palestinian Christian aid workers as they "killed Jesus"

9. Christians in Jerusalem want Jews to stop spitting on them

10. Rabbis Angry Even at Silent Christians

Deborah Lagarde

Legal Notice

2008-06-01T08:00:00.003-06:00

To the person who wrote in response to my post "Symbolically True or Literally True", the following:

On May 28, 2008,

"you are a very naughty person because i am jewish and from lithuanian parentage and now you tell me i am not jewish but

a khazar

1.well if you have never met me and done a dna test on my blood line how can you make that claim

2.secondly if any person converts to judaism then he is a jew -he has chosen and becomes the chosen

3.jesus was a palestinian when it was called palestine by the romans
he is most definitely not related to modern day palestinians-that was yasser arafats idea to call arabs living in israel

palestinians

4.practice what you preach -do not slander"

and wrote this on May 31, 2008,

"rest your case -what rubbish -go to a site on lithuania jewish history-thousands of jews were murdered by lithuanian

christians-they died for their religous beliefs and you have the audacity to dismiss them as fake jews or "khazars"-this all

before 1948-before the state of israel was formed-that persecuetion led to militant zionism and the formation of a jewish

army to protect jews.the european church states have a history of attacking jews only now you are hoping that muslims

will do your dirty work for you",

After careful consideration, the holder of this blog, the undersigned, has foregone all claims to the above quoted person (posted in his or her original text without changes, herewith called "anonymous", as being "Khazar"; will be called "anonymous" until such time as this person identifies himself or herself; and withdraws all claims that this person "anonymous" is anything but Jewish, in religion and ethnicity.

Furthermore, the owner of this blog, the undersigned, from henceforth will not allow any more individuals to post anonymously. This blogger will no longer post comments from individuals under the rubric "anonymous." This includes the author of the above quotes.

Signed: Deborah Lagarde

A Look at Ezekiel 38 and 39

2008-04-30T21:20:00.004-06:00

This was previously posted on my old (deleted) "Render Unto Christ" blog. I am posting it again because it is relevant to end-times prophesy, because what I wrote I still believe is well Spiritually discerned, and because I haven't posted in three months!

Pre-tribber John Hagee seems to think this prophecy, the "God-Magog War", is a key event in the set of end-times prophecies, and one he expounded on in such a way as to glaring expose his errors. As stated previously, he gets Gog's allies wrong--he claims Ethiopia is Saudi Arabia and the Arab countries south and east of Israel, and he gets Tarshish and his "young lions" wrong; Tarshish is NOT Britain and the "young lions" are not its former colonies America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (Hagee, of course, being the Bushian he is, only mentioned America by name). Tarshish is actually a port city on the Mediterranean in Palestine. Another serious error--and all he'd have to do is read Revelation 20 to figure this one out--is that he claims the Gog-Magog War occurs during the Great Tribulation, probably as the battle of Armegeddon on the Plain of Meggido in Israel. Revelation 20, however, puts this war AFTER the millennial reign of Christ on Earth! Now, unless Hagee is a "post millennial rapture-ist" in disguise, he is mixing up his time periods. In the KJV it says:

"And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison (the bottomless pit--DL)...And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea...(Mr. Hagee--there is even a REFERENCE to Ezekiel 38 here!!! Can't you see that?! Maybe not, since you aren't using a KJV)...And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city (Jerusalem--DL): and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them (ANOTHER REFERENCE to Ezekiel 38!) [Revelation 20:7-9]

ARE YOU BLIND, MR. HAGEE?

Now lets see what Mr. Hagee--who, during his televised sermon series called "Prophecy for the 21st Century" filmed at his Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, discusses this for nearly a half-hour with his congregation, even having them read with him out of their Bibles--claims to back up his assertion. I am not going to get into the business about who Ethiopia is (as far as I'm concerned, he is talking about the lands right below Egypt, which include Sudan or as it was know then, Nubia), because while I think Hagee is in error, it is not a very serious error compared to the error of timing. Hagee read:

"And the word of the Lord came unto me (Ezekiel--DL), saying, Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, and say, Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: and I will turn thee back, and put hooks into they jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armor, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords: Persia, Ehtiopia, and Libya (NRSV-Put) with them; all of them with shield and helmet: Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee." [Ezekiel 38:1-6]

Hagee then, I believe, skipped a few verses, then began reading again (as his congregation read along with him):

"Thus saith the Lord God; It shall come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into they mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought: and thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages (Israel--DL); I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates, to take a spoil, and to take a prey (the reference here mean to enslave them); to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land. Sheba and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, art thou come to take spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take great spoil? Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say unto Gog, thus saith the Lord God; In that day when my people of Israel dwelleth safely, shalt thou now know it? and thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts, thou, and many people with thee, all of them rding upon horses, a great company, and a mighty army: and thou shalt come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in thee, O Gog, before their eyes." [Ezekiel 38: 10-16]

It could be that Hagee did not leave out verse 8, which is a very key verse...I do not have the tape Hagee is selling with this message, and I didn't record it with my VCR, and thus my memory is not that keen on this. The thing is, while I was watching this show (on Daystar Network), I missed verse 8, or at least the implication of it, which through my own study and guidance by the Holy Spirit (which I prayed for), I now understand. Ezekiel 38:8 says:

"After many days thou (Gog-Magog--DL) shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is BROUGHT BACK FROM THE SWORD (emphasis mine), and is GATHERED OUT OF MANY PEOPLE (emphasis mine), against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them."

BROUGHT BACK FROM THE SWORD means brought back from war, which in this case might mean brought back from Armeggedon (Rev. 16:14-21), the final battle of the Great Tribulation when God defeats the beast and the false prophet, saves remnant Israel and (perhaps--I need to study this more) "raptures" the faithful (the "remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony (gospel) of Jesus Christ" Rev. 12:17--the remnant here being Christians, which are grafted onto remnant Israel--you don't have to be a "Branch Davidian" to see this!). Now, if what Hagee says is true, then "brought back from the sword" means that Israel was involved in a war prior to the final battle Armeggedon, but nothing such is mentioned in the Bible...but it is mentioned in Tim LeHaye's "Left Behind" book. (I didn't read the book and don't plan to. But I did see the movie.) In the book (and movie), Israel is attacked right at the beginning by jets from Russian-sponsored Arab nations, but all the jets are blown apart by God. Right after that, the "rapture" happens in the book. The thing is, it isn't Biblical.

There are many places in the prophecies, the epistles, the gospels, and Revelation that use the phrase "gathered out of many peoples", but while the Bible never uses the word "rapture", it does use the word "gathering" or "gathered" or "gathered out of".

Since I wrote this originally, Hagee has put out his "Jerusalem Countdown" book where he explains this more fully, but it doesn't matter. His timeline is still wrong.

What's really wrong, of course, is that this preacher is calling for annihilation of all Islam, and any Christians and Jews who just happen to be in the way. I wonder if Hillary "obliterate Iran" Clinton will try seeking his endorsement? But she'd be wasting her time, since apparently Hagee only endorses Republicans.

Deborah Lagarde

My daughter's recommendation for all terrorists...and that means you, Christian Zionists!

2008-02-29T13:24:00.004-06:00

This morning my daughter of 15 that I homeschool had this recommendation for all terrorists: go on the "Dr. Phil" Show and "talk" about why you have killed millions of people. "Explain" yourself to Dr. Phil, so he can give you "positive regard," to use the form of therapy devised by Dr. Carl Rogers, Psychotherapist.

Now, let me pass the same advice onto all Christian Zionists from John Hagee down to the lowliest "tither" at his Cornerstone Church and other chumps...er, contributers. Get thyself to Dr. Phil! Or you other friendly neighborhood counselor (hey, I don't have a license but I am certified...who knows? You might be certifiable!) or therapist. Doesn't have to be a Christian therapist, either. But you need to sit down (or lie on the couch, Freudian style) and talk to someone. Someone needs to "feel your pain."

Now, from one Christian to another, let me tell you why I think you need help. Now, ordinarily I would suggest prayer, a talk with the Jesus in your heart. However, it is apparent to me that you don't actually believe in Christ, because if you did you would suffer in your heart with the Palestinian people who are being "genocided" by the Zionists in Israel. AND THEY ADMIT IT!

Now, why do I keep harping on the plight of the Palestinians? For one thing, Jesus WAS A PALESTINIAN as well as ethnically and religiously Jewish, a son of David, a son of Judah! And, are you ready for this? The Zionists who are running Israel for the Rothschild agenda (you know, the anti-Christ?) ARE NOT JEWS BUT KHAZARS! Mike Rivero, the anti-Zionist who runs that anti-Zionist website What Really Happened, a "black" or "Spanish" or "Sephardic" Jew, is more Jewish than Ehud Olmert! Ashkenazi Jews are not Jews at all because while they are religious Jews they are not ethnic Jews (as I explained in my "Israel" series, the Khazars in Khazaria were converts to Judaism via the Babylonian Talmud, the same Babylonian Talmud that has Christ boiling in his own excrement in hell for eternity. Thus, the Ashkenazi Jews are not ethnic Jews and thus have NO RIGHT to force Palestinians out of their homeland.)

But I know how hard it must be to get on Dr. Phil...I've never tried, but I can imagine it must be hard. So here's what I'll do instead. I'll post some links, because you might be curious as to why I harp on people you consider animals. Here is the first link: which shows the Shoah against the Arabs in Gaza. Don't know what a Shoah is? What's the matter, John Hagee didn't tell you on his TV show? Well, then, I'll let an Israeli defense official tell you here. And then there is this link, to a blog created by an Israeli journalist, here.

In any case, I don't expect to change your hearts. Only Christ can do that. Still, it could be you are heartless toward the Palestinian people and its anywhere from 2-10 percent Christians because, believing a lie (that the 1948
State of Israel is God's Israel) and loving not the truth about Israel (the truth being that God's Israel is spiritual Israel, that is, US CHRISTIANS!--The Book of Hebrews), that God has sent you strong delusion (2 Thessalonians 2:8-11).

Deborah Lagarde

More on Bible "Myths": Literally True OR Symbolically True

2008-01-29T12:06:00.000-06:00

This has been a busy month: relatives to take care of, son at home, new computer which needed to go back for repairs...and now works great!...health issues, memorial services for two friends who died young (one was a year younger than me and one was about ten years younger than me, and who left behind six children aged 22 to 6!)...

But I won't apologize if I have not been keeping up with Bible issues. Instead of doing what most bloggers do--blog incessantly even if they have little to say (the neocons, for instance, who read each others blogs and link to all of them, so that readers of these blogs are constantly clicking on the same links and reading the same stuff over and over again! And then for some relief from this they go over to "Little Green Footballs" to laugh at the ridiculous hateful commentary spewed out by folks who must look like morons to sane people), just so long as they blog at least once a day--I have made it a point to post blog posts only when The Spirit leads me. Which leads to another Bible Myth.

I call this a "myth" because somehow I grew up believing that either everything in the Bible was literally true ("yes, dear, God made the world in six 24-hour days, and on the 7th day He rested", for instance) or symbolically true but not literally true ("no, dear, God doesn't need a fixed period of 24 hours...and who knew what a day was before He created the Sun, Moon, and Stars to guide the realm of 'day'? So all that "six days" stuff is symbolic...besides, God never 'rests'.). From what I have heard preached or discussed by those who claim to know what's in the Bible, most Christians either believe the Bible is literally true but uses symbolism to explain it's literal truth OR believe the Bible is strictly symbolic and there is no literal truth to it...well, except for the historical books in the Old Testament and the Book of Acts in the New Testament (which most Christians of both stripes agree must be literally true, especially since archaeological evidence proves their truth).

What got me started on this was learning that one of the more Biblically discerning individuals on the Internet, L. Ray Smith of Bible-Truths.com, is giving a lecture series regarding Creation (Genesis) this coming September. I will not be able to attend; however, his audio files will be posted from that conference. Smith takes the line that other than the historical books such as Chronicles, Kings, Acts, Esther and Ruth, everything in the Bible is basically a parable. Smith might believe that there is no literal "six-day creation." It was Smith, for instance, who turned me on to the impossibility of "Hell for eternity" (yet, I feel that I went further than he did because I explained that, due to the fact that God exists outside of time precisely because it was He who created time, BUT simultaneously exists in time, the notion of "eternity" as a time frame has no meaning for God, so then why would He even specify it as a time frame? It is for reasons such as this--to prove punishment CANNOT be "eternal" timewise of "infinity" "number"-wise--that God gave us mathematics [among other reasons, of course!]). But this is not a plea for my understanding "is better than" Smith's. In fact, while Smith gives a fairly good debunking of "the rapture," a local "substitute" preacher, who also is the caretaker of the site of the local "camp meeting" nearby, Virgil Gage, pointed me to the ultimate reasons there will not be any "pre-trib" or "post-trib" or "mid-trib" "rapture" of the Church: John 17:15 and 20, which Christ Himself says there will not be any "removal" of any believers from the Earth comparable to what is claimed by those who preach the rapture theory. In fact, Gage understands too that God has His own time frame which is barely discernible to us humans.

In fact, to even suggest that God either exists in the here and now only or in "timelessness" makes no sense. He exists in both realms and in all realms. How many times is it written in the Bible, "God is the same today, yesterday, and tomorrow"? Or that "God has no beginning and no end," Or that God "was, is, and will be" and "knows the end from the beginning" and other such phrases from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22: 21.

God exists in time (yes, the present-day) and in timelessness simultaneously. Someone on the Bible-Truths forums even suggested that all time periods are fluid, that the 1500s (for instance) co-exist with the 2000s! (The thing is, I have no way to prove this or disprove this, and no way to verify this regardless. But it is interesting, especially for folks like me who think theoretical mathematics is an interesting topic.)

That's because God exists in all things, because God exists in all atoms and molecules. that is, everything is made up of "God". Spirit, that is, as well as matter organic and inorganic, which is why "God" created and creates all things ("Creates"? Here is another good idea from Smith: get yourself a "Concordant Literal New Testament" put out by the Concordant company. In fact, the New Testament translated from the Ancient Greek is in many ways mis-translated because the wrong tense is used. The Greek language also uses the "aorist" tense, which is past, present, and future at the same time, and where properly translated many things mentioned in the Bible are "coming" as well as "has come" or "have come" or "will come," that is, existing in all three time frames simultaneously. For example: with the Concordant Literal Old Testament (available book by book only...the entire Old Testament Concordant Literal Old Testament doesn't seem to be available), where it says "Let us make man in our own image," in Genesis in the King James, it says "Let us be making man in our own image," in the Concordant Literal. So that, in the King James it seems as if God (as "us) made man and that's it, whereas in the Concordant Literal it seems as if God (as "us") is making man continuously. If this "aorist" tense translation is more accurate, then this must prove that God exists in all time frames simultaneously, including outside of time. Thus, if "literal" truth relies on historical time frames while "symbolic" truth relies on no time frames (or timelessness), that God exists in both simultaneously most show that both literal truth in all things in the Bible AND symbolic truth in all things in the Bible MUST BOTH BE TRUE!

And, believe me, without the Holy Spirit guiding me in writing this, I never would have come up with such a conclusion!

Deborah Lagarde

More Myths: So, who was that lady who washed Christ's feet with her tears?

2007-12-21T14:26:00.000-06:00

For more verification that Christ was NOT born on December 25, read this article:

Let's Take Christ Out of Christmas.

One of the most well-known Bible myths is the "truth" about Mary Magdeline: she was a prostitute. And now with Dan Brown, a fiction writer who many believe is a non-fiction writer, we have the myth that Mary Magdeline was not only married to Christ but that after His death, she went westward into the far western Roman Empire, set herself in what was the Roman province of Gaul, and set about to become the forebearer of the Frankish Merovingian line of kings that ended with Charlemagne's Carolingian line. All of this is tied into the not-so-mythical "Illuminati" that heads up the series of monarchies of Europe and gives rise to the notion (expressed so well by Louis XIV with his "Sun King" and his "I am the state") that because these monarchies, which tended to intermarry, are somehow all derived from the Merovingians, that means they are all derived from Christ and are thus ruling by "Divine Right." If I had a million dollars, I would give it to anyone who could prove using only the bible that Jesus did in fact marry Mary Magdeline. Perhaps at that wedding feast at Cana (John 2). But then again I don't have a million dollars.

But, back to Mary Magdeline, the "prostitute." In fact, other than in Luke 8, where it says that Jesus drove out seven demons from her, Mary Magdeline is only mentioned in connection to her visitation at the tomb and at the cross (Matthew 27 and 28; Mark 15 and 16, Luke 24, and John 19 and 20). So where in the blue blazes did anyone, any sect of Christianity, come up with "Mary Magdeline was a prostitute?"

This is how Luke 8 describes her: (Luke 8:2) "And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdeline, out of whom went seven devils," among the twelve disciples. One can infer from this that Mary Magdeline was a sinner and that she, being among the disciples, was one herself. There are various other Marys found in the New Testament (such as Mary the mother of Christ, Mary of Mary and Martha and Lazarus fame and Mary the mother of James and Joses and Mary the wife of Cleopus). From what I had learned in Catholic School, Mary Magdeline is "possibly" the Mary of Mary and Martha fame. But Mary and Martha and Lazarus lived in Bethany not Magdelina where Mary Magdeline is supposed to be from. There are also prostitutes mentioned: the one Jesus prevented from being stoned; the one who washed Jesus' feet and dried the feet with her hair; and other "sinning" women Jesus was associated with. However, except for the woman who was about to be stoned, it is not clear that the woman who washed His feet was a prostitute just from the description of her as a "sinner."

And, speaking of the woman who washed His feet: this occurs in Luke 7 at the end of that chapter, and, the next thing you read, Jesus and the disciples are traveling all over, and Mary Magdeline as well as Joanna and Susanna were with them. But does that mean that the woman of Luke 7:37-50 who washed His feet and Mary Magdeline of Luke 8:2 is the same woman? Further, does that imply that since the "sinning" woman of Luke 7:35-50 was a so-called "prostitute," then the Mary Magdeline of Luke 8:2 was also a "prostitute" or even the same woman in both instances? In fact, the only basis on which the woman of Luke 7 can be considered a prostitute was the Pharisee Simon's supposition that she was. Now, I ask, how would he know, unless he had, perhaps, a sinning relationship with her?

Now, for you Dan Brown-ites who are trying to prove that Jesus married Mary Magdeline. Your so-called "evidence" is faulty. Your evidence consists of the fact that why else would Mary Magdeline be at the foot of Christ's cross, and why else would she go visiting Him at the tomb, unless she was in fact His wife? The thing is, Mary Magdeline was not the only woman at the cross and was not the only woman at the tomb either. At the cross you had Mary Magdeline as well as (Matthew 27:56) Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's children. Mark 15:41 also has Salome there. Then, at the tomb, you had Mary Magdeline and "the other Mary" (Matthew 28:1); Luke 24:10 has Mary Magdeline, and Joanna and Mary the mother of James. Mark has the same women that appear in Mark 15:41. Christ, of course, first appeared to Mary Magdeline. Yet, the Brownites use John's account to "prove" she and Christ must have been married. This gives the account of the nature of Christ's appearance to her. When Mary Magdeline went to the tomb (with the other women) she peeked in and didn't see Him. She ran to Peter and "the disciple that Jesus loved" and told them what happened, so both of them ran back with her to check it out, and saw only His burial clothes there. Peter and the "disciple that Jesus loved" left her there, and, at that point, Jesus appeared to her. He told her He was going to "ascend to" His "Father, and your Father, and unto my God and unto your God."

To paraphrase an old Burger King commercial, "where's the proof?" The "Mary Magdeline married Christ" crowd claims that since Christ first appeared to her, they must have been married! Further, Mary Magdeline, they say, is "the disciple that Jesus loved." Bull hockey! It is clear from this (and other instances of the use of the phrase) that the "disciple that Jesus loved" is John, the same John that Jesus revealed Himself to in Revelation.

But even if Christ and Mary Magdeline were married? So what? He was still going to have to die for the salvation of mankind! All this "Mary married Christ" nonsense cannot be proven using the Bible, and searching for such proof is nothing but a distraction fostered by a fiction writer who maybe has too much time on his hands.

But why do so many Christians believe this stuff, and believe that Mary Magdeline was a prostitute? Simple. They don't read the word of God themselves; instead, they believe what man says the word of God is, and don't bother to verify it.

Just another methodology that has "the Church" heading down the road toward Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots.

Deborah Lagarde

Bible "Myths": the Series

2007-12-08T14:15:00.000-06:00

Over the next few weeks I will be discussing some things that most people assume are in the Bible because of the various "Christian" doctrines they've been taught...but aren't. I have already covered the issues of 1)the rapture, 2)the myth of "hell for eternity" and 3)the myth that the present-day state of Israel is God's "chosen" nation and the Jews are God's "chosen" people. These are real biggies, but these just might be the tip of the iceberg.

Why now? Because Christmas, a myth if there ever was one, is coming. As I explained in my post, "'Zeitgiest' on My Mind," there is no way that Christ was born on December 25! That makes any celebration of Christ on December 25--which in fact is the birthday of just about all the pagan gods (notably Horus, Mithras, and Tammuz)--pretty close to blasphemy. Now if folks want to give gifts (as per the pagan yuletide ritual) that's fine because giving and especially receiving gifts is fine, but to do it with the motive that you think you are honoring Christ is wrong, should not be taught and should be repented of. I see no problem with families getting together. Just don't do it because you think you are honoring Christ. So, celebrate the birth of Christ, but don't insist that He was born on December 25, the birthday of Horus, Mithras, and Tammuz.

The various doctrines of "Christianity" are full of myths. Many of them are minor and cause no harm unless you take them way too seriously. The Catholic Church especially is full of them. Since I grew up Catholic and went to Catholic Church and Catholic School for grades one through four, I know and remember several of them. Again, most of those are minor. Several of them were presented in Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." As Christ was trudging toward Calvary carrying the cross along with Simon the Cyrene, some woman, I presume a disciple, came along and wiped the blood, sweat, and tears off Christ's face. In case the movie didn't mention her name or you missed it, her name was Veronica. If you go into any Catholic Church you will see what are called "Stations of the Cross," which all "good Catholics" say prayers to on "Good Friday," before they go into "confession." One of the "stations" has Veronica wiping Jesus' face. Veronica, of course, is nowhere mentioned in the Bible, and I have no idea where the Catholic hierarchy got her from. But rest assured that the myth of Veronica was well in place before someone found the "Shroud of Turin."

Other myths I will discuss in the coming weeks are these: the myth that Peter was the "first Pope" (Bishop of Rome) because Jesus designated it so; the myth that because Mary Magdeline was the first women or person at Jesus's tomb this indicates (to all those who are using to Bible to "prove") Christ "married" Mary Magdeline, which would shoot the whole death and resurrection for the salvation of mankind out the window; the myth that the Pharisees really are "the Satanic Seedline" of Christian Identity fame; the myth that Jesus is not the Messiah because He never claimed to be the Messiah (a John Hagee favorite that he uses to kiss Zionism's butt); the myth that Mary Magdeline was a prostitute (which even I believed until I did the research); the myth that Christians must not drink alcohol and that Jesus did NOT turn water into wine because wine in those days was in fact just grape juice (a popular belief among Baptists and other self-righteous types). And more myths as I come up with them.

Deborah Lagarde

Israel, 4

2007-11-17T08:53:00.000-06:00

And now I conclude the series. Suffice it to say while I have not found evidence that Zionism is not inherently based on the Talmud or Kabbalah--Zionism is, basically, a movement to found a Jewish homeland, and defend it--it is what Zionists practice, not what they preach, that concerns this post. As with most Jews, I suspect most Zionists are secular, anyway.

So how did the descendants of the Pharisees come up with the Talmud, anyway? Fro the Freedom in Christ website (link below):

This is from a book by Rabbi Roy Rosenberg, "The Concise Guide to Judaism: History, Practice, Faith":

"...The early tradition of the Pharisees had held that, while the written Torah was meant to be transmitted in written form, the oral Torah was not to be put in writing. The teachings of the sages were to be memorized, rather, and transmitted by word of mouth from scholar to scholar. It did not take long, of course, for the number of interpretations and decisions that constituted the oral Torah to become so vast that even the most brilliant scholars would have trouble recalling all of them (they also had to remember the names of the various sages who had originated or transmitted a decision). For this reason the head of the academy in the early years of the third century, Rabbi Judah the Nasi (“prince,” or “patriarch”), resolved to reduce the oral Torah to writing. . . . Then in about 220 A. D., he introduced the first authoritative summary of the rabbinic tradition to that date. This was the Mishna (“repetition”). The Mishna, based upon the laws of the Hebrew Bible, is the source of all subsequent Jewish law to the present day and is an object of study in the academies of all the forms of Judaism."

Josephus wrote in his "Antiquities of the Jews": "What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of Moses; and for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers....What the Pharisees had most against Christ was that Christ and His disciples refused to accord with the oral traditions of the elders. Christ told them, "Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: '"These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"

So the "letter of the Law" is the Pharisee/human interpretation of the Mosaic Torah written down, while the "spirit of the Law" is the actual Mosaic Law Torah. When the "Torah" was codified in 200 AD, the Pharisees had already perverted the Torah beyond all recognition, passed through courts and academies. This is why Jesus refers to what Pharisees have in oral tradition, "You have heard it said:" and why Christ tells the disciples the real Torah, "But I say unto you:"

If anyone questions the hatred the Pharisees had for Christ and his followers, who, shortly after Christ's death, came to be called Christians, one only need think of Saul and his persecutions until Christ converted him into Paul. Paul, in Acts and elsewhere, considered himself to be perfect before Pharisaic law, oral traditions.
Paul, a Pharisee, sets an example of the hatred of the Pharisees against Christians. In the Philippian letter, he describes his ancestry and earlier behavior toward the church: “If anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless” (Philippians 3:4-6) (See also Acts 8:1...Acts was written by Luke).

Why is Paul's statement important today? Because, for one thing, Yeshiva staudents in Israel, today, spit on Christians! I have already stated what some IDF Jews do to Palestinian Christians. Further, I have already stated what the Talmud and the Kabbalah proscribes for Jews to do to Christians.

From the Freedom in Christ website: "After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 Ad the Pharisees established a school in Galilee (Jamnia). Basically the names of the various groupings of Pharisees went under one name, rabbi, at that time. These rabbis led in the constant study of the Torah and especially the oral traditions the Pharisees taught and the legalism handed down because of the oral traditions. While the Mishna is the coded form of law BASED on the Torah, the Talmud (Gemara) is the oral interpretation and written down discussions of these interpretations. [See Adin Steinsaltz, The Essential Talmud, translated from the Hebrew by Chaya Galai (USA: Basic Books, 1976)], where he explains the Talmud:

"The formal definition of the Talmud is the summary of oral law that evolved after centuries of scholarly effort by sages who lived in Palestine and Babylonia until the beginning of the Middle Ages. It has two main components: the Mishnah, a book of halakhah (law) written in Hebrew; and the commentary on the Mishnah, known as the Talmud (or Gemarah), in the limited sense of the word, a summary of discussion and elucidation of the Mishnah written in Aramaic-Hebrew jargon....This explanation, however, though formally correct, is misleading and imprecise. The Talmud is the repository of thousands of years of Jewish wisdom, and the oral law, which is as ancient and significant as the written law (the Torah), finds expression therein."

And the combination of the Mishna and the Talmud is the Babylonian Talmud.

Thanks to the website Freedom in Christ for much of the above information.

At some point between the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the Pharisees in Jamnia and the rise of the Zionist movement in the 19th century, I have determined from research some still rather general knowledge of what happened to the Jews. Many of them wound up in Spain when the Islamic Moors came and were later driven out under Charles Martel after 800 AD. The Jews based in Spain, the Sepharidic Jews (sometimes called Black Jews, though dark skinned were not "black" as with Africans), were led philosophically by Maimonodies, who is affiliated with the Jerusalem Talmud, who was driven out of Spain by a group of Muslims and educated in Morocco. While the Jerusalem Talmud is less popular than the Babylonian Talmud, from this Maimonodies laid out the precepts that the Seven Noahide Laws (again, these are from oral man-made tradition and are loosely based on the Ten Commandments) must be followed by Gentiles in order to be acceptable to Jews. The Talmud and the Noahide Laws complement each other. From Wikipedia: 'The Talmud also states: "Righteous people of all nations have a share in the world to come" (Sanhedrin 105a). Any non-Jew who lives according to these laws is regarded as one of "the righteous among the gentiles". Maimonides writes that this refers to those who have acquired knowledge of God and act in accordance with the Noahide laws out of obedience to Him. According to what scholars consider to be the most accurate texts of the Mishneh Torah, Maimonides continues on to say that anyone who upholds the Noahide laws only because they appear logical is not one of the "righteous among the nations," but rather he is one of the wise among them. The more prolific versions of the Mishneh Torah say of such a person: "..nor is he one of the wise among them.' But here is where I have a problem with these laws: the Noahide Laws only apply to Gentiles! It is as if the Jews set up laws for those they considered inferior, but don't have to subscribe to themselves because they follow the Torah and are not permitted to teach the Torah to the Gentiles! Must be a good excuse for spitting on us!

But I am not going to deal any longer with Maimonodies and the Sepharidic Jews because I want to get back to the Babylonian Talmud which most Jews follow if they follow the Talmud at all. Sometime after Jamnia, the Jews and their Pharisees moved on into the various parts of the Middle East and, apparently, settled in a place called Khazaria, which is close to present-day southern Russia. They were called Khazars. According to my research on Google, the Khazars were either Ottoman Islamics who converted to Judaism or were wandering remnant Jews left over from when they were dispersed while under the rule of the Assyrians after 721 BC or so. Some say one thing and some say another. The point is, it is the Khazars who came up with the Babylonian Talmud. Okay, imagine if the Khazars had been Islamic, but then converted to Judaism: this would mean that they had no clue as to what Judaism really was in either oral or written tradition ("Like, what's the Torah?"), and just who the heck converted them to Judaism in the first place? Obviously, Jews who had come out of Assyria or even remnant Jews in Babylon-Chaldea-Persia who did not return to Jerusalem-Israel with Ezra and Nehemiah and their group, but stayed in Babylon. And if they were not Islamic converts, but diasporah Jews or Babylonian Jews, don't you think that maybe they lost the meaning of the Torah anyway? It is this group, the Ashkenazi Jews, that came to Europe over the centuries of the Middle Ages, primarily to Eastern but also to northwestern Europe, especially Germany. Further, it is this set of Jews who, in the 19th century, came up with Zionism.

There is no direct connection of the Pharisees to the Zionists, but there is probably an indirect connection by virtue of the fact that rabbis used the Babylonian Talmud and possibly even the Kabbalah (which, I have shown previously, is anti-Christian), and I must say there is deinitely a spiritual connection, what with Israeli Jews spitting on Christians and all.

Finally, I get back to where I started with Christian Zionism. This group, based on a misreading of the Bible which says Jews do not have to accept Christ to be saved (and I hope I debunked it thoroughly enough in Part 1 of this series), plays into the hands of the so-called Israel lobby which drives US foreign policy in the Middle East and drives us to further death and destruction in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and (they hope) Iran and Syria. This group claims to honor Israel but refuses to let the Israeli people live in peace with their Palestinian and Arab neighbors; thus, they refuse to let the Jews in Israel live their lives in peace and safety just going about their business. I think I can honestly say that the Christian Zionists SO NOT BLESS ISRAEL BUT CURSE ISRAEL! Further, and even more importantly, Christian Zionists say nothing about Jews spitting on Christians in Israel or about IDF soldiers beating up Palestinian Christians. Not only that, but when in the company of Jews, Christian Zionists don't even mention Christ for fear of offending the Jews! Christians who o to Israel to see holy sites are admonished NOT to prosletize or mention Christ! Just how long will it be before the Christian Zionists become just Zionists, and forget about the Christ part?

And how long before, as we come perhaps to the "time of trouble" or what some call the Great Tribulation and the time of the so-called "Anti-Christ", these Christian Zionists, who refuse to witness on Christ to Jews, refuse to witness on Christ to anyone, who FEAR to mention Christ, who FEAR being called "Christian" because they might be persecuted or tortured or killed for Christ's sake, and "take the mark of the Beast" which is a spiritual sign of rejection of Christ given by God to those who reject Christ? Bcause, if you FEAR to mention Christ is your Savior to a Jew or an Islamic, how long will it be before you forget that Christ is your Savior?

It says in Revelation 21:8-- "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

I forthwith tell all you Christian Zionists out there, and you too Pastor Hagee: REPENT!

Deborah Lagarde

Israel, 3

2007-11-08T11:53:00.000-06:00

As promised, today I will discuss what Christ said about the Pharisees, and next time I will close this series up with proof that today's Zionists are spiritually and in some cases physically/historically descended from the Pharisees, using the Zionists' own theological and philosophical works.

To discuss what Christ said about the Pharisees, I will mostly use the Gospel of Mark. Matthew and Luke say much the same, but Mark is a shorter Gospel.

In Mark 2, four men drop a paralytic on a bed through the roof of the house where Jesus was staying, and Jesus forgives the paralytic's sins. Scribes were there (in using "Pharisees," scribes and priests and others connected to the religious establishment, as well as the Saducees, are implied as well.) The scribes reasoned in their hearts that Christ blasphemed because only God can forgive sins. Christ read their thoughts and said to them, paraphrasing, why should they think it is so difficult to forgive sins verbally than to say get up and walk, which would be a much more difficult thing to make happen verbally; and just to prove He really had that power, he told the partalytic to get up and walk, which he did. Later (verses 15-22), Jesus and the disciples were eating with sinners in the house of a "publican". So the Pharisees and scribes saw this and said to Jesus' disciples how can this be that Jesus could eat with sinners? Jesus answered that He came not to save the righteous but the sinners, calling them to repentance. The Pharisees questioned how is it that they and the disciples of John the Baptist fast for sin, but not Jesus and His disciples? Jesus told them that since "the bridegroom" (HIM) was with "the children of the bridechamber" (which could be construed as the bride), there was no need to fast, but that when the groom is taken away, then they shall fast. Now clearly a Christian can discern this, but not the Pharisees, who, not discerning the meaning of putting new wine only into new wineskins, completely missed the point. It is amazing to me, who grew up believing the Jews were the chosen people, that this statement in Mark 22 about the wineskins clearly states that the Mosaic Law believing Jews (let along the Talmud and Kabbalah believing Jews, Zionist or not) WERE NOT going to be the chosen people, but the Jews of that time who threw aside the rule of the Pharisees and were called to accept Christ would be the new wineskins for the new wine of Christ's Covenant. Then, in verses 23-28, the Pharisees rebuke Christ and the disciples for gathering corn on the Sabbath, which to them was unlawful. Christ said, again I paraphrase, that what King David did in eating the sacred bread of the priests in the Tabernacle of God when he was hiding from his enemies would have bene considered unlawful as well, and that the Sabbath was made for man and not the other way around.

So then in Mark 3, verses 1-6, Jesus cured a withered hand of a man on the Sabbath in a synagogue as the Pharisees watched and as He read their hard hearts. After Christ cured the hand, the Pharisees began to plot to kill Christ, in conspiracy with the Herodians who called themselves Jews but worshiped the Roman Emperor. In verse 21, friends of Christ believed that Christ was perturbed (that is, "beside himself") over not being able to eat the food laid out since multitudes kept on pressing Him for teachings. When the Pharisees heard about this Christ being "beside himself" they conjured up the notion that Christ "hath Beelzebub" within Him and by that Christ "cast out demons". Christ called in the Pharisees and said to them, "How can Satan cast out Satan?" It is in this section, verse 29, where Christ makes His famous "he that shall blaspheme the Holy Spirit" shall (as most Christians falsely believe) be "eternally damned." (As I explain elsewhere, the notion of "eternity" was unknown at that time and the Greeks had no word for "eternity": the word "anion" used here actually means "age-long".) So what does "blaspheming" the Holy Spirit mean? Here it means that the Pharisees, in claiming that Christ (Who had the Holy Spirit within Him as per Mark 1:10) was possessed by demons, meant that the Pharisees were claiming the Holy Spirit within Him as being demons instead. to call the Holy Spirit an agent of Satan is to "blaspheme the Holy Spirit," a sin which is NOT unpardonable, only unpardonable in a certain time frame!

IN Mark 4, where the Sermon on the Mount is given, Jesus tells the disciples that when it comes to speaking to those Jews He has not called and chosen, He will ONLY speak in parables, so that they will NOT discern His words and teachings. The only thing that could possibly mean is that Christ has NO INTENTIONS of truly reaching the average Jew on the street, but only those He calls. He is NOT about to call the typical Pharisee! A few such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Aramathea are called and become His disciples, but only a very few (just as throughout history only a remnant of Jews have become Messianic "Jews for Jesus").

Coming to chapter 5 we have the story is Jesus bringing the daughter of a "ruler of the synagogue" back to life. This could onl have happened because Jairus, the ruler, believed that Christ could do this (see verse 36). Now the rest of the household did not believe, so Christ told them to leave. But Jairus and the mother did believe so were allowed in to see Christ bring her back to life.

In Chapter 6, Christ commissioned the disciples to be able to heal and drive out demons, sending them off (verses7-8 and 12-13...I discussed this issue in my denunciation of Part 1 of the "Zeitgeist" movie wwhich claimed Christ was/is a myth).

Then in Chapter 7 Christ tells the Pharisees that just because the disciples did not wash their hands it didn't mean the disciples were defiled: it is what comes from the heart and from the person that defiles or not. But a very amazing set of verses comes later in Chapter 7, when Jesus cures the daughter of a Gentile (a Syrio-Phonecian of Tyre and Sidon). The woman asks Christ to cure her daughter or demons. Christ replies that (verse 27), "Let the children be filled first: for it is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs" (note, just as Israelis today consider the Palestinians "dogs" [and just as Palestinians consider Jews "dogs"!], so in those days the Jews considered Gentiles no better than dogs, and the same went for Samaritans). But the woman, who obviously had faith, replied that even the dogs go under the table and eat the crumbs (of the Word of Christ). Because of her faith, Jesus healed her daughter (verse 29).

IN Chapter 8, Jesus fed four thousand on seven loaves of bread and a few small fish. When they left and arrived in Dalmanutha, the Pharisees asked Christ to provide them a "sign from heaven." Christ answered there will be no sign given unto "this generation." When Christ and the followers left, the disciples "forgot to take bread." Christ dissed this by saying, "Beware of the bread of the Pharisees and of Herod."

After the Transfiguration of Christ (Chapter 9) in the desert before Peter, James and John, they return to the rest of the disciples, and the multitude and scribes were there as well. A man brought his son who had a "dumb spirit" within him to Christ to be healed because the disciples couldn't do it. Later Christ told the disciples they couldn't cast out the demon because that type of demon only gets expelled through prayer and fasting. They then went through Galilee incognito, where Christ told the disciples that Jesus would soon be "delivered into the hands of men to be killed, and rise on the third day."

Chapter 10 brings another scathing rebuke from Christ to the Pharisees. The Pharisees tried to trap Christ into saying that what Mosaic Law commanded regarding a man "putting away" his wife with a "bill of divorcement" was righteous and pleasing to God. But Christ ripped their logic to shreds by saying even that was wrong, that once God joined man and wife NO ONE should render this null and void EXCEPT for unfaithfulness, and, further, if the divorced man married someone else that was "adultery" against the former wife (and the same for divorcing females). So basically what Jesus was doing was overthrowing the old Mosaic law (by fulfilling the Law in
Spirit if not in letter).

Chapter 11 begins the climactic scenario of Christ being greatly received by the people in Jerusalem, the betrayal of the Pharisees, Herodians (and Judas, who couldn't help it because Satan had, by the Will of God, entered him for this purpose so that Christ could save all mankind...still, Judas, who tended to feel in his heart that Christ was an opportunity for personal enrichment, was the perfect candidate to betray Christ), His death and resurrection. When He overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple, the "scribes and priests" plotted to destroy Him. It gets interesting in verses 27-33. They question as to who gave Christ the authority to perform miracles, cast out demons and speak as sent by God. But again Christ turned the tables on them. Christ responded to their question with a question: He asked them was the baptism of John (the Baptist) given from heaven or from men, and if they could respond He would tell them by what authority He did those things. So, being the hypocrites they were, they plotted which course they would take and, like Hillary Clinton, "triangulated" their response instead to saying what position they took openly. Since they couldn't decide if John's baptizing was from God or from men, they replied, "We cannot tell." So Jesus answered, "Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things."

But instead of just walking away, in Chapter 12 Jesus gets to the heart of the matter with the Pharisees. In this chapter is the parable of the planter, who, having planted a vineyard, sends a servant out to the husbandmen (the Jews) who rented the land. A servant was sent to collect the fruit that was due to the planter, but the husbandmen beat up the servant and sent him away. More servants were sent (by now you know the servants as the Old Testament prophets such as Elijah, Isaiah, and the others), until at last the planter (God) sent His son (Christ) because the husbandmen "would reverence him." Remember Christ is saying this to the Pharisees and scribes and priests. Christ says that "But the husbandmen said among themselves, 'This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.' And they took him, and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard. What shall therefore the Lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard to others." This is in Mark 12:1-9. I am going to stop here with the rebuking by Christ of the Pharisees and their ilk, because this is the parable that gets to the heat of the matter of whom will be considered the chosen people: note, it is clearly not the Pharisees in particular and the Mosaic Law following Jews in general. Here Christ expounds on the fact that the Pharisees (and,ultimately, all the Jews who call for the release of Barabbas and call for the Romans to "crucify" Christ, and their heirs (see Matthew 27:25) will be disinherited from their "chosen people" status, which will fall to all believing Jews and all believing Gentiles (through the discipleship of Paul, who had previously, grievously, persecuted Christ's Jewish followers, the first Christians).

Deborah Lagarde

Israel, 2

2007-11-03T09:03:00.000-06:00

We will now move from discussing the Christian Zionists to the Zionists themselves. I am not here to make a claim that the Jews have no right to a homeland. IMHO every single ethnic group on Earth has a right to a homeland. Yes, that also includes the Palestinians. Sorry, but there is no getting around that truth; further, had Israel decided originally to let the Palestinians (and any Arab now living in either Israel proper or the Occupied Territories is a Palestinian, for the sake of this post) have their own homeland back in 1948-49, the Israeli people wouldn't have the issues they have today to deal with. How they deal with the Palestinian people issue is not going to go away, no matter how the Israeli government (with, it seems, a high percentage of support from the Israeli people) tries to collectively punish the Palestinians for the actions of the terrorists and suicide bombers who, truth be known, if they are Hamas terrorists, Israel, by creating Hamas, definitely has a blowback issue!

And here is the other reason why I rail this way against Israeli treatment of the Palestinians: I don't know the percentage, but I've seen figures as low as 2% and as high as 20%, of the Palestinian population is Christian! It is possible that some of these Palestinian Christians are descended from apostles such as Peter, John, James and the others who were called to stay behind in what was then called Palestine (while Paul went off on his evangelizing missions to the Gentiles). I am again NOT saying the Jews cannot have Israel to be their homeland, I am not denying the "Holocaust" and I am not denying that Jews have throughout history been persecuted as they persecute the Palestinians today. Still, when folks like John Hagee (and I cannot stress this enough!) laud Israel to the skies and say Israel must not let the Palestinians have a homeland and must be as brutal to the Palestinians as they want to be to teach those godless Muslims as lesson, taking into no account that there is a fairly large minority of Palestinian Christians who are being treated just as harshly as the Muslims are being treated (and I do not advocate being hard on Muslims while being soft on Christians there, okay? Because Muslims, moreso than Jews, are capable of converting--at least Muslims revere Christ while Jews completely deny Him!), they are guilty of NOT "doing to the least of My brothers what you would do for Me." But, again, this is not about Christian Zionists, but Zionists.

So, okay, now I bring up the question: why are the Zionists doing these bad things to the Palestinians? It is simply too easy to say, "well, the Palestinians started it under Arafat." Actually, in what is now Israel there has always been a Jew-Arab struggle over the land. But my claim is that after hostilities ceased, Israel was formed, and borders were made, peace could have been at hand; however, the leaders on both sides would rather have fought it out. I am NOT saying the Palestinian leadership is guiltless...they are as guilty as the Israeli leadership; the Palestinian leaders are just as guilty of screwing their people as the Israeli leadership is in screwing their people. But that was then, and, now, Israel is doing everything possible to as I claimed collectively punish all Palestinians to the point where a claim of genocide might be a valid claim. (Okay, now you can say it: if the shoe was on the other foot, wouldn't the Palestinians be doing the same to the Israelis? Perhaps, but hopefully we'll never know. The Jews I feel have suffered enough.) Again, why are the Zionists doing these things?

Now, hold onto your hats, because it turns out (according to Barry Chamish, the Israeli who wrote , "Who Killed Yitzak Rabin?" and has investigated this issue) the Zionist leadership has performed similar treatments on their own! (see here and here and here). Not that Chamish is some kind of Uri Avnery who wants the Palestinians to have a homeland--he doesn't. Chamish believes that the Palestinians ought to be Jordan's problem. So, for Chamish to claim what he does about the Israeli government, for him to make the anti-Zionist claims he does is not out of love for Palestinians, who he says do not exist as a separate people. NO, Chamish's beef is against the Zionists, period, and their leadership of Israel. Actually, to get to the heart of the matter, his beef is with the Zionists because his beef is with the movement that begat Zionism: a movement, funded by the Rothschilds (who he believes founded the "Illuminati" and continues to call the new world order elite by that name), began by Zvi Sabbatai (the Sabbateans), who used the Kabbalah and the Zohar, a perversion of the philosophy of the Talmud, which was a perversion in and of itself of the Torah. The Talmud, based on the oral law of the Torah, is the written law of the Pharisees left from the sacking of Jerusalem (as opposed to the Torah, the Law of Moses given by God), codified around 300-400 AD in the areas around what was left of Jerusalem and Israel. And then, there is also the Babylonian Talmud, as the members of the ten tribes taken to Assyria plus many from Judah taken to Babylon who never returned created their own written law even more loosely based on the Torah. It is the Babylonian version that gained prominence. A perversion (Kabbalah/Zohar) based on a perversion (Talmud) of an original perversion, the corruption of God's Law by the Pharisees (Christ called the Pharisees "you are of your father the devil," NOT because they are actually descended from Satan! Because they are spiritually in line with Satan, not physically). Chamish says it is the Sabbateans in Labor Zionism (which founded Israel, by the way), allied with the Illuminati, which are the problem (and, he claims, I believe with some veracity, THEY are using the Arabs as well to destroy true Judaism and Israel with it).

Reverend Ted Pike, who made this video would agree. Funny, a so-called "anti-Semite" (Pike) and someone who obviously cannot be an "anti-Semite" (Chamish) agree! And who do they agree on? That the Zionists running Israel are NOT the Jews of the Torah but the "Jews" of the Kabbalah and Talmud (in other words, the spiritual and perhaps even the physical descendants of the Pharisees who killed Christ). That the Zionists running Israel are out to destroy Israel. That the Zionists running Israel are in the pay of the Illuminati/oligarchy/new world order elites who care not a fig that as THEY kill off Palestinians THEY will ultimately try to kill off the Jews as well.

So, after all this, we come to the conclusion that because the Zionists follow a secular Judaism that actually follows more in line with the Kabbalah and the Talmud, the same Kabbalah that claims that Christ is the bastard some of the whore Mary, that Christ is in Hell boiling in excrement, and that Christians as well as Muslims, as through the Talmud, are cattle only to serve the Jews (especially its "Book of Sanhedrin"), that it follows from this that the Zionists care not a fig for the lives of a few billion people except as slaves. Sorry, I didn't make this up. Sorry, but a few of the Jews I grew up with in school (NOT the majority...in fact I can rightfully claim that "some of my best friends were Jewish") actually did hate us Gentiles...and now I know why. Sorry, but if you are going to pin the lable "anti-Semite" on me you are just going to piss me off, nothing more. You are NOT going to stop me from defending Christ, and you are only going to make me work harder to prove that the Talmudic-Kabbalahist "Illuminati" "Jews" are the spiritual if not the literal sons of the Pharisees who murdered Christ. In the next post I will go into further detail about what Christ thought of the Pharisees and their law body the Sanhedrin. It is interesting (see Mark chapter 7) that while Christ cut much more slack to Syro-Phonecians (the ancestors of today's Lebanon and Syria) and Samaritans (Jews who had mixed blood with Gentiles, who were shunned by Jews) as to His teachings, he cut absolutely none with the Pharisees.

I will leave you with the following quotes by Israeli leaders, if you still are not convinced:

" Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." -- Menachem Begin - Israeli Prime Minister 1977–1983 (an example of what is in the Talmud)

‘Well, I think it is good…it will generate immediate sympathy for Israel.’
Benjamine Netanyahu on 9-11

"When Jewish women come out of a bath they must take care to meet a friend first, and not something unclean or a Christian. For if so, a woman, if she wants to keep holy, should go back and bathe again."--Talmud

And here are more links.

As far as I know this person is Jewish

Zionism vs. Jesus

Now go ahead and call me an "anti-Semite", knowing as you do that Christ was born a Jew!

Deborah Lagarde

My Israel Piece, 1

2007-10-26T11:49:00.000-06:00

Gosh! I haven't posted since the end of September! Most people think bloggers should post every day! But alas, I am usually too busy. I post here when the Spirit moves me to. Now I realize I should post more, do the Lord's Work every day. But the Lord's Work involves more than just blog posting.

If you want to check out some of the other things I've been doing, go here.

Who can help but be concerned about the Middle East? Certainly not me. But it is not concern over the Middle East that is prompting this post. It is the various falsehoods put forth among circles and ministries calling themselves "Christian" regarding Israel and Judaism and Zionism that have caused me to try to set the "record" straight. In fact, it'll probably take several posts to do so, thus I am calling this "My Israel Piece, 1".

Introduction

First of all, Christians will, naturally, have some sort of position on Israel because throughout their lives Christians have been told things such as "Israel is the Chosen People" or Israel is "the apple of God's eye" or the Jews are "the chosen people" or that Christians have a natural affinity to Jews or "the Jews killed Christ but they knew not what they were doing so don't blame Jews, and besides it was really the Romans" and stuff like that. Further, Israel is so much like the US that naturally Americans want to support Israel against the perfidious Arabs, who are so different. In fact I daresay that probably 100% of Christians have some fairly strong opinion about Israel. It has been the position of this blog that while the present-day state of Israel has the right to exist and conduct its affairs to the benefit of its people--as all nations do!--it must be praised when it does the right thing and denounced when it does the wrong thing (in other words, I do not support the position of "Israel Right or Wrong"), and, further, its persecution of Christians within Israel and especially in the Palestinian Occupied Territories must be denounced! Finally, it is my position that the present-day Zionist, secular, state of Israel is NOT GOD's Israel.

However, through research and communication with some individuals in the know, I have been able to wade through the disinformation and come up with a position on Israel that pretty much jibes with what is in the Bible. Today in this post I want to discuss the veracity of "Christian Zionism" as to whether it holds to Bible truth. I also want to get into the Judaism-Zionism-Talmud-Kabbala issue, but may have to bring that up in a future post, because it is rather involved; indeed the Judaism-Zionism-Talmud-Kabbala issue is VERY involved and often confusing. That's because one must know where the Talmud and the Kabbala (and its prophet, Zvi Sabbatai) are coming from. The answer would surprise most Christian Zionism and might even surprise its main proponent, Pastor John Hagee.

Why Christian Zionism is not Biblical

In the future I will have more on this (just as I have commented on this in previous posts, I am fairly sure), but for right now suffice it to say that the present-day Zionist and secular 1948 State of Israel is not God's Israel, and that is easily proven. God's Israel, in the Old Testament and especially the New Testament has nothing to do with imperfect man who lives by the flesh; witness the countless times in the Old Testament that God cursed both the Northern Kingdom Israel and the Southern Kingdom Judah because of idolatry and other forms of disobedience to God. While God certainly did bless Israel for the few times the Israelites (heretofore called "the Jews" for my purposes) did their best to try to "obey" God, that doesn't mean that God would forever look upon the Jews as His "chosen people." He did not communicate with the Jews through prophets after Malachi for a darned good reason--they had fallen into hopeless idolatry and had perverted His Word and His Laws to the point where He had to do something about it, but not before He sent all sorts of "stranger" invaders to continue to punish them: after the remnant returned to Jerusalem (see Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther) and tried to return to His law (but couldn't...see Malachi, who prophesied the Coming of the Lord and His prophet John the Baptist, the Elijah who "made His way straight") for a time, the Jews continued to violate God, and so, He sent, first the Greeks under Alexander and his minions (see the apocraphyl books "Maccabees 1 and 2" in your Catholic Bibles), and then the Romans, who, further cursing Israel for murdering Christ, Titus, who completely destroyed the Jewish nation in 70 AD. As I will show in either this post or the next or the next after that, it is what happened to the Jews after 70 AD that has seemingly sealed their fate to be thoroughly wedded to Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots, until the cleansing spoken of by Ezekiel, Joel, Zechariah and the other prophets during the last days (after the glory...see Zechariah 2:4 and 8-9), when the Jews will have it written onto their hearts that Christ is Lord of All. Now this doesn't sound very much as if God considered the Jews "His people"! To continue, the situation got so bad that God finally, after promising the Jews (who are NOT the people of promise! see Hebrews 11 and 12) that the Messiah would come, He finally sent Him. As we all know (read the Gospel of Matthew from chapter 5 on at the Sermon on the Mount), the Jews, with a few exceptions, spurned Christ and His Word, and, as we all know, the Jews with few exceptions had him murdered, shouted to "Crucify HIm" and claimed (in Matthew 27:25), "His blood be on us, and on our children." It was the Pharisees along with the Herodians (Jews who supported the Roman Empire), not the Romans (who just did the Jews' dirty work...these are truly the ones who "know not what they are doing"! Since the Pharisees plotted to have Christ killed, they knew EXACTLY what they were doing!) who killed Christ! They paid for it dearly in 70 AD (again, Christ foretold this in Matthew 24 and other places). They will pay for it in the future as well (see Revelation regarding "Sodom and Egypt", that is, Jerusalem in the latter times, the city of whores and (as per Hebrews) the "children of the bondwoman").

This is all very clear in the bible to me, a person who believes every word out of the mouth of God but has no degree in Bible Study at some seminary or Bible College. It is unfortunate that John Hagee, for one, doesn't see this. Now I like some things about Hagee: he is a very charismatic speaker with his booming voice and his "hallelujah to the Lamb of God" and other phrases and the fact that he provided a lot of help to Katrina victims. I like it that he is helping many Jews to return to Israel; the Jews like everyone else should have a homeland (the thing is, they should share it with the original inhabitants, the Palestinians!). Unlike Falwell and some other televangelists, he does not advocate Jewish return to Israel for the so-called purpose (as per Zechariah 12, as some read it, again with an ulterior motive) of two-thirds of them being slaughtered during the so-called "Great Seven Year Tribulation" (that period after the phony "rapture"). What Hagee believes and preaches in his huge Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, is that God has made a Covenant with Christians (culminating in the phony "rapture") as well as another Covenant with the Jews, who will return to an earthly and fleshly Zion here on Earth to live happily ever after WITHOUT ever having to accept Christ as their Messiah! That reading of the Bible is so false I am amazed that anyone actually believes this! (see Ezekiel 39:21-29, as well as Isaiah 45:23-25 and Philippians 2:9-11--EVERY KNEW SHALL BOW, AND EVERY TONGUE WILL CONFESS THAT JESUS IS LORD! That, Mr. Hagee, includes the Jews!!!

Now I want to get to the notion, usually spouted by Mr. Hagee, that the modern-day Zionist and secular State of Israel is "the apple of God's eye." He says this almost everytime I turn on his show on Daystar or CBN or TBN! WRONG! Let us look at the verse that this comes from, Zechariah 2:8, which says (the Lord of Hosts is speaking here to Zechariah--that is, Christ is speaking. God is not speaking here...see the context of the message):

"Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon (verse 7) For thus saith the Lord of hosts (Jesus); After the glory [(meaning the future coming 1,000 year millennial reign of Christ..."unwalled villages" (verse 4) (see Ezekiel 38)] hath he (YHWH Father God) sent me (Jesus, the Lord of Hosts, who is speaking) unto the nations which robbed you (Israel): for he that toucheth you (Israel) toucheth the apple of his (God's) eye. (verse 8)"

Hagee and others like him make a false comparison. First, this verse says that God sent Christ into the nations that robbed Israel. "He that toucheth you" means the nations that robbed Israel. "Toucheth the apple of God's eye" also means that nations that robbed Israel because those nations are where God sent Christ. "The apple of God's eye" means CHRIST, because as Christ is being sent to the nations that touched or robbed Israel, it would be natural that these nations would touch Christ, or "get" Christ or even "rob" (or take the Word of) Christ (who was intended to be sent to the lost House of Israel, only to be spurned by them until the end.)This, of course, makes Christ, not Israel, the "apple of God's eye." Further, you can understand this in the context of a father and child. Your son is the apple of your eye, correct? Now wouldn't Christ, God's only begotten Son, be the apple of His eye? to say that Israel is the "apple of God's eye" is to completely disregard the fact that God so despised the corruption of Israel that He refused to communicate with them for 400 years! And that He sent the Romans to destroy completely the nation of Israel in 70 AD! And that He called Israel "Sodom and Egypt"! NO! ISRAEL IS NOT THE APPLE OF GOD'S EYE!

Another quote that Hagee and others like to use to force Christians to be subservient to the interests of Zionist secular Israel is from Genesis 12:1-3, below:

The Lord (Christ, again) had said unto Abram, "Get thee out of thy country [that is Canaan, the land of Haran], and from thy kindred (Terah's people in Haran), and from they father's house (Terah), unto a land that I will show thee: (verse 1) And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make they name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: (verse 2) And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. (verse 3)"

Hagee reads this to say that all Christians must bless Israel is they expect to get any blessings from God. Period. End of Story! Bless Israel and grow rich! But heaven help you if you curse Israel or say anything bad about it! In other words, if you don't believe like he does in "Israel Right or Wrong," or if you believe it is wrong for Israel to persecute Christians Palestinians (or for that matter Islamic ones) and say so, then God will curse you! RIDICULOUS! Strong delusion propaganda! This is in fact what Genesis 12:1-3 says and it again is very clear what is meant.

Christ tells Abram to get away from his folks into a land that Christ tells him to go to in verse 1. Notice he has not been given the name Abraham yet! In verse 2, Abram will not only produce a great nation but will also be blessed and become a great name. In verse 3, we get to the nitty-gritty. The Lord will bless Abram's defenders and curse Abram's enemies. We can see this happening in subsequent chapters, especially Chapter 14 when Abram and allies (for instance, the Elamites and Shinar) fought against Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim and Bela to rescue Abram's nephew Lot among other reasons. Well, wouldn't it be a truth to say that God cursed Sodom and Gomorrah? And wouldn't it be true to say God blessed Elam and Shinar, which would soon become strong nations (that is, while Sodom and Gomorrah disappeared a short while later, Elam and Shinar stayed on for many hundreds of years after). Verse 3 also says that in Abram all the families of the earth would be blessed. This of course refers to the fact that through Abram would come Jesus Christ. THIS SAYS NOTHING ABOUT ISRAEL...IT IS ABOUT THE COMING OF CHRIST!!! Christ, Who would bless all the nations with His saving grace and His salvation for all mankind!

Well, that's it for today...I am going to have to leave the discussion of the fallacy of Zionism and Talmudism and Kabbalaism for later. By the way, according to Barry Chamish, who is NOT an Orthodox Torah-believing Jew that I have corresponded with, true Judaism has NOTHING to do with either Zionism, Talmudism, Kabbalaism or Zvi Sabbatai, and I'll get into that next time. but I must say this issue is crucial for Christians to understand.

Deborah Lagarde

Romans 13...Again!

2007-09-23T07:27:00.000-06:00

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

"Zeitgeist" on my mind

2007-09-01T11:58:00.001-06:00

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

No Rapture, Part 3

2007-08-12T09:10:00.000-06:00

Well, "Secret Rapture" is at it again with his or her wanting me to go to his or her website. This person loves to spam this site, but what the heck, if it serves to show the difference between spiritual discernment and strong delusion.

7. John 19:30-- “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.” (He died).

8. Luke 23:46-- “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.” (He died)

9. Mark 15:37-- “And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.” (He died)

10. Matthew 27:50-- “Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.” (He died)

Do you get the picture yet? Christ died, like everyone else has or will. The difference is that He was also resurrected, which fulfilled the words of the prophets. Now, if anyone would have had a right to be “raptured” it is Christ, right? But EVEN CHRIST DIED! What makes any of you rapture-lovers think you deserve to be “taken” alive into Heaven, what with the fact that you will have to be taken there with the same corruptible bodies you have now?

11. John 3:13-- “And no man hath ascended into Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of man which is in Heaven.”
Do I really need to explain this one again? See number 1 above.

And, now, for the reason that basically closes the case!

12. John 17:15 and 20-- Here, Jesus is praying to His Father in the garden the night before He is crucified. "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest protect them from the evil one." "Them" refers to the disciples who are waiting for Him. Verse 20: "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word." This means all subsequent believers. That is, this applies to all those who now think they are going to be "raptured".

But for those whose thick heads refuse to let them believe Jesus cannot lie, cannot say what actually will happen, and cannot actually be God, here it is again, with emphasis: JESUS SAID NO RAPTURE! NO ONE WILL BE TAKEN "OUT OF THE WORLD" JUST AS NO ONE HAS EVER BEEN TAKEN OUT OF THE WORLD!

NO Pre-trib rapure. NO Post-trib rapture. NO mid-trib rapture.

NO RAPTURE! NO, NADA, NYET, NON, NEIN, NO, NO, and NO!

Deborah Lagarde

No Rapture, Part 2

2007-08-01T15:43:00.000-06:00

If you haven't seen Max Blumenthal's "Rapture Ready" video taken at the Christians United for Israel conference last week, here is a link: here

You folks who believe the rapture eschatology do realize that by doing so, you are wishing for war, death, and destruction in the Middle East, don't you? After all, if the Middle East has peace that must mean the "Anti-Christ" is here, and we mustn't have that, mustn't we?

Anyway, to continue with the reasons the rapture won't happen, from the Bible:

5. Matthew 24: 37-39: “But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark. And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall the coming of the Son of man be.”

This is another popular set of verses the rapturists use to “prove” the rapture. Bad choice of verses! For whom was taken away? The wicked, that's who! Again, the fact that they DIDN'T KNOW WHEN they would be taken away UNTIL the flood came is a type, sort of an analogy, as to the coming of Christ. That is, they won't be taken away UNTIL a “type” of “flood” comes that will take all wickedness off the earth...which is at the time after Christ's “millennial reign” and the battle with the loosed Satan and his forces against the saints who will reside with Christ on earth.

I will return to Matthew 24 and 25 later when I discuss the so-called “Great Tribulation.” One must understand that the “rapture” and the so-called “Great Tribulation”, the so-called “end times,” the so-called “Second Coming,” and the popular notion of “hell for eternity” are all bound up into one gigantic heresy that nearly 99% of Christians not only believe in but cherish. I do not know the exact number or percentage, but a large majority of Christians seem to think that the “end times” period is coming very, very soon. Most believe some sort of variation on the notion that some “anti-Christ” from the United Nations or the European Union or the Papacy will make peace with Israel for 3 ½ years, after which he will “sit” in the newly rebuilt “temple” in Jerusalem as “the most high God,” after which all hell will break loose. No one “except those who have the Mark of the Beast” will be able to buy and sell...that sort of thing. I know Christian fundamentalists who refuse to use a computer and the Internet because that is how “the anti-Christ” will control everyone (some claim that “www” stands for “666”!) and in a cashless society everything will be bought and sold over the net. I will prove that since before John wrote Revelation, anti-Christs were (as it says in 2 Thessalonians) “already” at “work”! There will be many “tribulations” that will steel the called and chosen, which only the chosen will overcome...there will NOT be some “great tribulation” lasting “seven years.” And I bet you are dying to know who “Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots” is. It is NOT the Pope of Rome!

6. Luke 21: 36- “Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things [the so-called “great tribulation”] that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”

This “escape” is NOT a “rapture”! Remember, Christ told that the ones who overcome these trying times will “not an hair of your head perish.” (Luke 21:18) This implies that instead of escaping a tribulation, these will be kept from harm. Also, remember in John 17: “I pray not that thou [Jesus says to His Father] shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest KEEP THEM FROM THE EVIL.” And where are we to be kept? Colossians 3:3 tells us: “your life is hid with Christ in God.” Revelation chapter 12 also describes how the overcomers are hid, using symbolism that many Christians believe to be coming physical reality.

That is not to say some sort of “great” tribulation won't happen just prior to Christ's coming. Mark chapter 12 describes some of the events that will be part of this tribulation: wars and rumors of wars (7), nation shall rise against nation (8), earthquakes (8), famines and troubles (8), one shall be delivered up to councils and synagogues [and churches, I presume] (9), brought before rulers and kings for Christ's sake (9), the gospel must be published among all nations (10), family members will rise up against each other (12), the appearance of the “Abomination of Desolation” (14; just what this is I will discuss later), false Christs (22), sun shall be darkened (24), stars of heaven shall fall (25), shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory (26). After these transpire, God shall send His angels to gather the elect (the chosen, from the beginning, by God) (27).

Part 3 will appear shortly.

Deborah Lagarde

No Rapture, Period, nein, nada, non, nyet, no, no, and no! Part 1

2007-07-28T11:27:00.000-06:00

In my e-book, soon to be published on my research site here, I will be listing many, many reasons the Bible supports the fact that there will be NO RAPTURE of the Church at any time, with my final reason being the only one that matters: Christ Himself said there will be no "rapture" of the Church. I will list some of the reasons on this blog in this new series of blog posts, beginning today.

1. Hebrews 9:27-- “And it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.”

There is a KJV reference to Genesis 3:19 confirming this: “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” And by the way, lest anyone think that “appointing men to die” does not apply to supposedly “raptured” Enoch and Elijah, I refer you to Hebrews 11: 5 and Hebrews 11:32...well, basically, the entire chapter. Verse 4: “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain...” Verse 5: “By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death...” Verse 7: “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet...” Verse 8: “By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out...” Verse 11: “Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed,...” Then finally in verse 13 it says (despite the fact that Enoch did “not see death”): “These ALL DIED IN FAITH, not having received the promises...” Now, in Genesis 4:21-24 it is said that Enoch lived 365 years and then God took him, God “translated” him, and Enoch “walked with God” and nothing is mentioned about Enoch dying. But then why would Hebrews claim otherwise except for the fact that in being translated, God took Enoch away from where he was and moved him somewhere else so that, not being found, folks could have presumed him to be dead. Or perhaps Enoch's “walk with God” was not physical but spiritual. Yet, ALL MEN are appointed to die, ALL MEN return to the dust, and all these died in faith. Hebrews 11:32 applies the same rule to Elijah (and all the prophets) in verse 39 where even Elijah “received not the promise.” If he did not receive the promise (redemption through the blood of Christ), then by what justification could he then be raptured?

And lest you still think the Bible contradicts itself (to borrow a phrase used often by former President Nixon...”let me make one thing perfectly clear”...the Bible NEVER contradicts itself!), try this from the mouth of Christ Himself: “And no man hath ascended into Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of man which is in Heaven.” (John 3:13) Did you get that? Christ just said that neither Enoch or Elijah were “raptured” into Heaven, because they never came down from Heaven!

2. Proverbs 10:30-- “The righteous shall never be removed: but the wicked shall not inhabit the earth.” (KJV)

3. Job 14:12-- “So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.” (KJV)

Who said you couldn't prove the rapture was false using the Old Testament? Proverbs says that the righteous shall (“shall” implies permission as it is a form of the helping/linking verb “may”) never be removed. From where? The second part of the verse implies from where: the earth. Since permission implies a permitter, and since that “permitter” is God, it is meant that God “shall” never remove the righteous from the earth. This means the “righteous” will not only not be “raptured” but it also means the place the “rapture” is taking them to, heaven, is NOT where the righteous are going! Further, it is also implied in the second part of the verse that the “wicked” forces of the “anti-Christ” so dreaded by the rapturists WILL NOT be allowed to take over!

Job says that when a person dies (see verse 10 for the context), they will not rise from the grave, and shall not awake, until the heavens are no more. Contrary to folks who claim that 1 Thessalonians 4:16 means that “the dead in Christ” shall rise first BEFORE the “second coming” of Christ, this verse of Job is just another “witness” that the hope of the rapturists is false hope, because no dead shall rise until, as it is said in Revelation 21, a new heaven and a new earth will come into being (“til the [old] heavens are no more”).

Part 2, soon.

Deborah Lagarde

Sorry About the Lack of Posts

2007-07-28T11:09:00.000-06:00

June 5, 2007 was my last post? Good Grief!

But I have been busy putting up my new website, "Something Happening Here," devoted to issues related to moving or considering moving to a rural and/or remote location from the city or suburbs, to the hills, mountains, forests, and deserts. The site is: Somethinghappeninghere.net. Check it out!

I plan on posting the work I have been doing in writing about Biblical arguments to debunk the rapture. What with John Hagee's Christians United for Israel conference in Washington DC, Max Blumenthal's video (check the link at What Really Happened...I did not link to the actual video, and, if you can't find it there, google it with "CUFI") at the conference with him interviewing attendees about their End Time beliefs, and Hagee's calling for the nuking of Iran (I heard him do this on his "John Hagee Today" show on Daystar Network, in a sermon at his Cornerstone Church), I feel an even stronger urge to do so (urge! more like God's will!). So, my next post will begin that particular series of article posts.

The other thing I wanted to bring up about Hagee's conference is that NOT ONCE (according to those who attended the conference or wrote about it) did Hagee attribute to Christ anything, although he did mention God. Well, there you have it! It is, IMHO, easy to talk about God or attribute to God. What makes as Christian a Christian, however, is attributing to Christ. No one will persecute you for praising God...it is the upholding of Jesus Christ, however, that will get you persecuted, as Christ foretold in many places in the Gospels. In fact, if Hagee was really honest and not just another Churchian, he would out and out renounce Christ and become a Jew, because the only thing that matters to him is Israel...Jesus and America be damned, no matter how horribly the Likudniks in Israel (and US) treat Palestinian Christians, as well as potential Christians, i.e. Muslims.

American Idol

2007-06-05T10:14:00.000-06:00

If you think this post is about the TV show, then I will disappoint you.

Though the TV show "American Idol" is itself an idol (that is, an idol of the heart), I am not referring to the TV show. I refer to America, itself.

Yes, America IS an idol!

Many Americans have an American Idol.

If you think that America is always good and can do no wrong...or screws up every now and then, yet is at its heart inherently good and was founded by various religious groups as the "shining city on the hill" and, thus, is foreordained by God to be the land of good, then you must have an American Idol.

If you think Americans are generally good, as in "We're the good guys," and thus, as we are good because we are Americans, then, of course, those who oppose us are bad, no matter who it is that opposes us, no matter their religion, economy, political frame of reference, race, color, or creed, no matter what the historical context is, then you must have an American Idol.

If you, as a corollary to the first two, believe that because America is (almost) always good and Americans are (almost) always "the good guys," then we Americans have the right to control the world and it is in the world's interests to do what we tell them to do, and that we have the inherent right to control the world's resources and use them as we please and to heck with everyone else (because they oppose us and thus they are bad), then you must have an American Idol.

I will have more to say about this in my next post, but suffice it to say I am laying the groundwork for expounding on this issue, which, also suffice it to say, all Americans, Christian or not, will have to come to grips with in the long run. Just another part of God's "strong delusion."

Deborah Lagarde

In the World but not of the World: Politically Speaking

2007-05-12T10:09:00.000-06:00

Most of the time it is easy for me to claim I have no interest in presidential races simply because no candidates in the past gave me any hope that any good could come politically--the power elites would do what they always do, that is, screw the rest of us! It's as if someone put a sign, the same sign, up and down out shores and border crossings: "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here." Abandon hope, because the power elites only took care of themselves.

But Presidential Campaign 2008 is WAY different! Not only do we have one candidate that really can make a difference, we actually have two! One in each of the two parties! One Republican, one Democrat! AMAZING! The Republican is, of course, Ron Paul; the Democrat is, of course, Mike Gravel. As far as I'm concerned, all the other candidates are either power elites or are shills of same, and a couple of them are "one trick ponies," so to speak. And one of them, Fred Thompson, who hasn't declared yet, is a red herring of sorts, a guy who will be wined and dined by the neocons who run the Republican party as a "safe" alternative for the masses they despise--anything to get the people to NOT look closely at Paul, who really, really is (more than Gravel, who hasn't given a position yet on key issues like abortion and gun control) the ONLY presidential candidate who will set America back on the right path (no pun intended!), while any other Republican will keep the US on the road to ruin (and, probably, totalitarian police state, or do I repeat myself?).

Here are the rest, first, according to a list of candidates at ABCNews.com:

Republican:

Rudy Giuliani: supports the Iraq war, abortion rights, and is generally regarded as a "law and order" candidate. Scandals, scandals, all around. Also claimed that is the Dems win the 2008 presidency, America will likely have another 9-11 attack, and that only Republicans could prevent that. As a NY prosecutor, was famous for sending so-called white collar criminals to jail. My take--if any Republican would be into instituting a police state, Giuliani is it.

John McCain: his name rhymes with "insane", and with his, "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" shtick, you don't need to be a licensed therapist to make this diagnosis. My take--Maniac McCainiac

Mitt Romney: This is the guy who is so teflon he makes Bill Clinton look like honest John. Now why did the power elites peg this guy who no one ever heard of 6 months ago? He is pro-abortion, which is why now he's "against" it. Supports Iraq war, but is trying hard to make himself out to be "reserved" on continued support...he's one of these "benchmarks" types. And, like Clinton, he's "good looking"! Finally, he's a Mormon. My take--the fact that he's another one of these guys who came outta no where to lick power elite ass makes him no leader in my eyes.

Tommy Thompson: Who? Well, for starters, he's pro-ethanol. Comes from Wisconsin. Too bad you can't make gasoline for cow's milk...on the other hand, one shouldn't be using our nations food corn supply to make it, either! My take--ABC refers to him as being supported by "conservative Democrats", which is code for "flip-flop at any speed!"

Sam Brownback: A one trick pony for sure, being the most liable to have Religious Right support. he's one of the folks who made sure Kansas taught creationism in schools. Now I am no evolutionist by any means, but I know enough about creationism to know it's faith, not science, by even the name "intelligent design." My take--the Religious Right will abandon him when they realize he really doesn't have a prayer (no pun intended).

Duncan Hunter: Who? According to ABCNews.com, this guy supports Bush lock, stock, and barrel. My take--who?

Jim Gilmore: This guy exemplifies "Who?" ABCNews.com considers him a flip-flopper of many proportions. Meanwhile Ron Paul is totally and unequivically consistent in his voting in the House: if it isn't in the Constitution, he votes against it...even if it helps his district! My take--Even if he was "Happy Gilmore" it wouldn't help him.

Newt Gingrich: According to ABCNews.com, the former Speaker of the House believes poor people ae responsible for global warming and is plagued with ethics violations. No wonder the Religious Right loves this guy! My take--actually, he is an undeclared candidate, so why is he up at this site, while Ron Paul IS NOT?

Mike Huckabee: Who? What? Where? He's a Bushian from a Clintonian state. My take--Ron Paul is missing from this list. Why is this joker on it?

Tom Tancredo: Another one trick pony. His big deal is immigration, a real hard-liner. My take: So is Ron Paul, so why is this fascist-lite guy on the list?

Democrats:

Hillary Clinton: ABCNews.com says it well: she's a polarizing candidate. Mention her name to all but the hard core and you can hear a million "I wouldn't vote for her if she was the last perosn on Earth"'s. My take--I wouldn't vote for her if she was the last person on Earth. In fact, I guarantee it if she becomes the President she will do what Bill couldn't do: take all of Bush's police state laws and run with them.

Barack Obama: In a party of Teflons, he's the leader. Totally untrustworthy. My take: Blacks will certainly vote for him.

John Edwards: Just a shade behind Obama in the Teflon department, even to his $400 haircut and hybrid SUV. My take--he was Al Gore's running mate. Enough said.

Joe Biden: According to ABCNews.com, he's "famous for enjoying the sound of his own voice." Mike Gravel called him our on his arrogance. My take--Mike Gravel knows what he's talking about.

Wesley Clark: The bomber of Serbia in 1999 is now against the Iraq War. Appeared on Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now" show on Link Channel, DirecTV 375 a while back to tell why he now opposes the war. My take--I don't particularly support him but if we had to have a high-up military person as President, he wouldn't be too horrible.

Chris Dodd: A "who?" among the Dems. Regrets his pro-Iraq war vote. Flip-flopper. My take--but a flip flopper no one cares about, so he might not be all that terrible.

Dennis Kucinich: Best known as the "true anti-war" candidate. But, on most domestic issues, he's hard core leftist. My take--ignore his antiwar stance and concentrate on the fact that he is pro-gun-control, pro-abortion, and pro-social spending on programs that don't work. He's the kind of guy I would vote for only if it kept up from having someone like Giuliani.

Al Gore: Not really a candidate, but what the hey? If he didn't have power elite support he just might be Mike Gravel, who scares the daylights out of the power elites as much as Ron Paul does (which is why Gravel is not on this list either). My take--"South Park" called him best: "'man-bear-pig, half-man, half-bear, and half-pig."

Bill Richardson: A nicer, more "tasteful" version of Mike Gravel, more power elite friendly. My take--if I had to choose someone the power elites favored on pain of death, it would have to be Bill Richardson, only because it seems he's done less damage to the American people than anyone else on this list.

Not mentioned:

Republican Ron Paul: A few call him "the savior of America." I wouldn't go that far, but as I said before, if it isn't authorized by the Constitution, Paul won't vote for it. This makes Paul the antithesis of the flip-flopper, a statesman in a world of politicians. In short, Paul favors abolition of the IRS and the Federal Reserve (privately-owned) Bank, serious reform of entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Welfare programs (which is why he shouldn't expect much support from welfare recipients, and I'm not being racist making this claim because most people on welfare are white), getting out of Iraq yesterday and totally against war on Iran and Syria, is not beholden to Israel (the other reason he's not on the list!), is against illegal immigration (and, unlike the neo-fascist Tancredo, is not opposed to legal immigration) and is against the "NAFTA Superhighway" and (unlike most of the candidates in both parties) is actually willing to defend US sovereignty. He's anti-UN, anti-Kyoto, and anti- most every program coming out of the UN and NGOs these days. And he doesn't have the endorsement of the Religious Right. In other words... My take--Ron Paul represents, completely and unabashedly, the American people, and I will be honored to vote for him in the primaries! No problem...we both live in Texas. Plus, he's my son's Congressman!

Democrat Mike Gravel: This "cantankerous old man" can be said to have singlehandedly gotten us out of Vietnam, filibustering the Senate against re-authorizing the draft for five months. I do not know his position on some key issues such as abortion and gun control, but, speculating, him being a Unitarian Universalist, he's a liberal, and thus, probably pro-abortion; yet, being from Alaska, probably anti-gun control. If he is pro-abortion I cannot vote for him, but honestly, he's the best Democrat to run for President since Eugene McCarthy. This man (as with Ron Paul) actually has a plan to save the United States from utter ruination--direct Democracy, where citizens help in making laws. My take--Gravel, in his statement during the debate that "I will be the next President," is already the underground favorite (as Paul is the also the underground favorite of the Reps.). As with Paul, if millions of Americans who are fed up with "politics as usual" seek out who really stands for our interests and not the power elites, millions of American will find Gravel (and Paul).

Now, to my point of writing this...

The Bible says that the Kingdom of God is not of this earth, that we must subsume our fleshly desires in the Spirit (and, of course, the Kingdom of God is spirit). Yet, because of the command in Romans 13 that we must obey those in authority, it means that we, who are able to elect our leaders, must choose the best we can. In fact Romans 13 makes it imperative that we do so. Those, as on a forum (http://forums.bible-truths.com) that I have visited in the past, who believe we must as followers of Christ have nothing to do with politics and must not even vote, let alone campaign for a politician, are only seeing the prize without understanding the road to achieving it as a transformation at the end of the road. It is amazing that so many (and by that I mean a few can be "many") believe that they can achieve spiritual rebirth while still in the flesh simply by not having anything to do with anything fleshly or carnal! Amazing! So these people, some of whom are married, have no sex? So these people, all who have taste buds, have no favorite foods? So these people have no favorite TV show or web site or book or artwork or song? So these people, so convinced they can join "the elect" now just be subsuming all desires, really think all they have to do is sleepwalk through life letting anything and all things happen to them, to just be so passive, and this will "force" God to make them part of His elect? While it is true that we have no free will apart from God's Will we do have choices, we do have will (but not free will). Further, we do have to obey our leaders, right? So, who would you, follower of Christ, rather obey? A leader who follows the rule of law and the Constitution, or a leader who does what he damned well pleases and to heck with the law? Would you rather be lead by someone who honors Romans 13 or by someone who dishonors it?

Would you rather be ruled by a group of people headed by Ron Paul, who has consistently followed what is in the Constitution, or by someone like Hillary Clinton, who has a history of flip-flopping on the law, a history of seeking power for its own sake, and a history of being beholden to money, and to heck with the people? Or by someone like Rudy Giuliani, who refused to step down as Mayor of New York City when his term was up, all under the pretext of 9-11, suggesting that he could outdo Bush in the "dictator" department and consider himself "President for life" while instituting martial law?

That is why, even though Christ commands us to live in the Spirit, we must also make sure we are able to put leaders in office who will honor their duty to rule so that we can pursue our living in the Spirit, instead of having to become paranoid that we won't be able to in a constant state of fear.

Deborah Lagarde

Human will, yes...Human "free" will, no

2007-03-21T11:27:00.000-06:00

Lest you think I am some kind of advocate that humans are merely automatons with no will at all, I am sorry you were mislead by anything I said in my previous post. Yes, humans have a will. Heck, animals have wills! Why do you think horses need to be "broken" before they can be ridden? Why do some believe it is do hard to train a cat? (Actually, cats are fairly easy to train...you just can't do it the way you train dogs. Cats are smarter and more willful, so you have to be more subtle in training a cat. Yet, what Pavlov did to his dog also works for cats; I have trained all of our cats, past and present, to respond to being fed by calling out "meow, meow" at which they come running, even from a distance. In fact, it seems to me dogs take more work to train, but maybe that's because they are dumber than cats.)

Anyway, yes, all humans have will, and I mean ALL humans, throughout history, regardless of when you think human history began (4004 b.c.? One millions years ago? Ten thousand years ago? Somewhere in between?).

But there is a difference between human will and so-called "human free will." Anytime someone does something it is CAUSED by something else. Today it is March 21, 2007, and I am wearing sweat shorts and a T-shirt. I live in far west Texas and according to my indoor thermometer it is 74 degrees F in the house but 83 degrees F outside. So, shorts and a t-shirt is appropriate. However, if it was 53 inside and 31 outside, I would be caused by the weather to wear warm clothing. Another example: I was born with dark brown hair, but due to heredity, my hair (at age 54) is almost completely white-grey, and has been that way since about 26...my mother's side of the family (in fact I cannot remember my aunt, my mother's sister, with anything but white hair!). Now I could dye my hair back to dark brown (and possibly make my husband think I was younger looking than I am), but I choose not to, because hair dyes have been shown to cause cancers, because dying my hair would in fact make me look older and accentuate my wrinkles not to mention the white eye-brow hairs, and because hair dying is a pain and has to be done about once a month. I have enough expenses (Imitrex for my migraines being the biggest) that I have to pay myself (on a very small income...I stay home and homeschool so my kids don't have to go to public schools and so my husband can play breadwinner, a role I used to have when he was training to be a medic). So my hair stays white-grey. Further, it stays long. Now I would like to cut my hair especially in the summer but my husband wouldn't like it...he says I'd look like an "old lady," so I have kept it long. If it was strictly up to me, a lot of things would be different, but my life is not strictly up to me because I am married and have kids (and other obligations).

So thus, to sum up: my "willed" choices depended on the weather, on heredity, on medical research, on my husband, on my kids, just as far as the above examples go.

Okay, you who call yourselves "Christians": who or what causes the weather? Winds and rains and the sun and the moon and the natural forces, right? But Who ultimately controls them? God, who created these forces. Who controls my heredity? the DNA passed onto me by my parents, passed onto them by their parents, passed onto them by their parents, passed onto them by their parents...and so on, passed onto the first parents by God Who created them, Adam from the dust and Eve from Adam. QWhere did the medical research come from? From medical doctors and scientists, who grew up to be smart individuals (dummies don't finish medical school, okay, no matter what their connections are!), who grew to be smart because either their parents were smart of they overcame huge obstacles to achieve smartness; further, these individuals became doctors and scientists because they "want to" for various reasons (more money, want to help humanity, their parent is a doctor, etc.) dealing with various causes. But (now think Christians) Who controls their circumstances, ultimately? For instance, a person who lives in the US is more likely to be able to become a doctor than a shepherd in the Congo...isn't it God Who controls where we are born? And as for the results of research, hair dyes might cause cancer, which might not worry me because I tend to live a healthier lifestle than most...yet ALL the recent dead females on my mother's side died of cancer! So I am more aware than most what caner-causing agents might do to me. And Who caused these women to die, both younger than normal, from cancer? You get the picture. And Who caused, ultimately, me to marry the man I did? And Who caused me to give birth to the two kids, providing ,my husband's sperm to fertilize my eggs at the time He caused to happen and not some other time? You know the answer. So if you believe what I am saying and believe the Bible (read Ecclesiastes to start off) as you say you do, then how can you come up and say that humans can do whatever they want OUTSIDE of causation from God, according to HIS WILL? (Let me say right now that if it was up to me, the child that had been conceived between my son who is now 18 and my daughter who is now 14 would not have miscarried, and who knows what would have happened had this fetus been saved? Downs syndrome? Eight fingers? Profound retardation? Or genius? Or superbly athletic? Or incredibly beautiful? Or a wonderful singer? But it was not to be and God had His way with it!)

So do you still think human will is FREE of all external causation? Try this: will yourself to fly on your own and see how far you get. No hang gliders and similar contraptions, okay? Or will yourself to stay underwater for half and hour and see how long you'll live. Or will yourself the next Katrina-level hurricane to stop spinning and destroying. Only one human being has ever been able to control nature, control demons, control anything by His own will. His name? Jesus Christ, aka God.

And now you know why I don't believe in human "free will."

Deborah Lagarde

Man's will, yes...Man's "free will," no! (Part 1)

2007-03-07T23:09:00.000-06:00

Sometime when I was in Catholic School the nuns or the lay teachers or someone claimed that all people have "free will" to choose to believe in Christ or not, to eat meat on Fridays during Lent or not, to commit a "mortal" sin (which would blot their names out of the Book of Life, that is, until they went to Confession...isn't Roman Catholicism wonderful!) or just a "venial" sin (whatever that is...I guess it's a "liitle white lie" instead of a big one!), or to skip mass on Easter (and thus guarantee yourself a place in Hell for eternity...or if the Pope found out, be excommunicated!) or not.

Now of course, the Pope is the final authority for the Roman Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury is the final authority for the Anglican church. The various Protestant denominations have their heads. Various nondenominational churches, esprcially the big megachurches, have their authorities. And God forbid you should approach any of them with the notion that it is not they who are the head of their church, but Christ, and it is not them who are the final authority, but the Word of God. Remember Matthew 4:4--"Man does not live by bread alone but by every word from the mouth of God." Yet, these churches do not follow Christ's teaching and His truth, and instead insist that the "elders" of the church are the final authority. They misconstrue Paul's Epistles' teachings on this.

Anyway, bringing up this point is important if we want to come to some understanding how heresies came into being in the Body of Christ back in Paul's day ("The mystery of iniquity doth already work..." 2 Thessalonians 2:7). When Paul implored each Christian community to have elders it's implied that these elders be righteous and full of the Holy Spirit, Who would guide them in their leadership roles. It did NOT mean that anyone who considered himself a "leader" had authority, it did not mean that someone NOT filled with the Holy Spirit had a right to make up his own doctrines. Paul singled out a few individuals who had corrupted the Christian communities and held them up to denunciation, and, because the churches at the time did not have the wherewithal to ride these fellows out of town on a rail, by the time Paul had died, Christianity had already started down the road to the Mystery Babylon it is today.

It is getting late and I will continue with this shortly.

Deborah Lagarde

Many "nations"? Why not many "countries"?

2007-03-01T10:16:00.000-06:00

When Christ returns at His coming (not to be confused with the so-called "second coming," a term our Christendom friends use because God hasn't told them yet that His coming is something that happens on a continuous basis...that is, when Christ comes for someone it could happen anytime, but most likely when that person won't expect it), He will appear before many "nations and peoples and tongues" (for instance, Rev. 10:11, Rev. 5:13, Rev. 20:9). Nations and peoples and tongues imply nationalities, not members of countries, most of which have several nationalities extant. In the context of "country" or even "nation" the political subdivision known as "state" isn't even mentioned in the Bible.

One has to be careful when dealing with words "not mentioned in the Bible." For instance the popular notion of the "rapture" is like this: rapture isn't mentioned in the Bible and in fact John 17:15, which are Christ's own words, make the point of a rapture, any rapture, moot: there isn't going to be a removal of believers to heaven, PERIOD! There is a good reason the word "state," in the context of political subdivision also known as country, isn't mentioned either; instead the subdivision of "nation" is mentioned as above and many other times, and perhaps that is because the political subdivision known as "state" or "country" as we know it today will no longer exist.

If this is true, and I don't see why it wouldn't be, since the so-called Gog-Magog war mentioned in Rev. 20:8 (and Ezekiel 38) has Satan deceiving the nations which are in the four corners of the earth,...,to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and surrounded the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them." (Rev. 20:8-9, KJV). Afterwhich, the Great White Throne Judgment, and the fleeing away of the earth and heaven at which "no place was found for them".

There is a confluence of people who believe in the rapture/seven year "great tribulation" and in the Gog-Magog war occuring at the end of this erroneous time period on the plain called Meggido (the "Battle of Armeggedon") which is in present-day Israel. These folks believe the forces that God will vanquish are made up of first and foremost Russia and the Arab states; on the other hand, these forces are fighting the US, Israel, and (I'd like to hear them explain where it says this in the Bible) China (Is China even mentioned in the Bible? For that matter, is the US?). But of course this isn't what the Bible says. The Bible clearly says that nations (meaning members of nationalities) from the four corners--literally, from all over the earth--will surround the saints and the beloved city which is clearly spiritual Jerusalem (not the actual Jerusalem we know of today, which is likened to spiritual Sodom and Egypt, "where also our Lord was crucified"), the home of the overcomers mentioned throughout Revelation 2 and 3--that is, the elect. Furthermore, though the Plain of Meggido is large, is it large enough to hold the billions and billions of people past, present, and future who will, according to them, side with "the anti-Christ" in order to defeat "Israel, the US, and China"? Not only that, but is there anyplace on earth large enough to hold this number of people for the purpose of battle, as we know battle? Finally, Ezekiel 38 and 39 talks about the Gog-Magog War occuring in the context of "Israel" being in a state of "unwalled villages". Clearly, today's Israel is anything but unwalled! And even if their notion that when "the Anti-Christ" returns to make peace with Israel is true in the first three-and-a-half years of this erroneous seven year period, knowing how people are and how fearful Israelis are today (to the point where they want to nuke Iran just because they think Iran might be developing nukes...but on the other hand they couldn't even defeat Hezbolla...I'll get to that in a minute), does anyone really believe that even if some god-like figure achieves some sort of peace there that the average fearful Israeli will want these walls taken down, and that the Israeli government, being like any other bureaucracy, will get the walls taken down, not to mention all those checkpoints they've put up, in the rest of the three-and-a-half years all the while with the rest of the earth dealing with boils and sores and earthquakes and the most unimaginable weather conditions, not to mention constant wars and the like? What do they think is happening here, some intafada?

So there is a reason God has said many nations, not countries, not states. It is because politics and military-industrial complexes and governments and armies will have nothing to do with this. It will be all nationalities, all peoples, and all tongues who fight the saints (who, BTW, will also be from all nations, peoples, and tongues). This means Russians AND Israelis. Nationalities from the European Union AND the United States, which is, after all, a country of many if not all nations. This means Arabs AND Chinese. And all Africans and all Asians and all Latin Americans and all Pacific Islanders and all aboriginals and all Europeans and all peoples, nations, and tongues. On BOTH sides! Just as all nations will be represented in the elect, all nations will be represented in the second death, in the Great White throne Judgment, and in the Lake of Fire, where they will be purified as God, the consuming fire, burns the stubble (the sins and other impurities) out of them. After that, they will join the elect in the aftermath of the marriage supper and will be all in all with God, who will wipe away their tears (Revelation 21).

Where did these tears come from? Who would all these people have tears? Because these are the believers who were raptured from so-called "new world order persecution"? From "new world order re-education chambers and concentration camps"? What i want to know is why would believers, having just been married to the Lamb, have tears? NO! people, the tears are not those of the overcomers! The tears are from those who have just come out of the Lake of Fire! Don't you think that those who have had their sins of pride and vanity and belief in their own free will--you know, trying to be like the Most High?--forcibly removed from them were a bit upset that all their machinations and hubris was for nought? I'll tell you that if that which charms me most was forcibly removed or burned out of me I'd be in a fit of tears!

So, yes! Hallelujah, GOD WILL SAVE ALL MANKIND! (1 Timothy 2:3-4) So yes, hallelujah, "that at the name of Jesus EVERY knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things UNDER THE EARTH (that is, the dead); and that EVERY tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Philippians 2:10-11).

Deborah Lagarde

A Parody

2007-02-17T13:12:00.000-06:00

The title of this "parody" is a song sung to the tune of Phil Oches's 1960s sarcastic folk song, "Small Circle of Friends"

I call it, "Let's Nuke Iran." Remember: this song is a PARODY of what certain individuals in the "Christian" churches here in the USA as well as certain politicians and military-industrialists here and in Israel wish for. I in no way are suggesting we do this! Like Phil Oches in his day mocked the warmongers, racists, and profiteers, I am just keeping the tradition alive. The same tradition used by Christ with the Pharisees.

*****

"Let's Nuke Iran" (sung to the tune of "Small Circle of Friends" by Phil Oches)

Come on, all Americans
More war is what we need.
We got all those nukes in storage.
Our enemies, take heed!
What others will take care of them?
What's the reason that we'll stall?
So let's nuke the sons o' guns
Stone age we'll send them all!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

And while we're there, nuke Syria
The rapture will be soon!
And then we'll nuke Lebanon.
See it looks just like the moon.
And while we're at it, Jordan,
And the Emirates will fry
Kuwait is dust, Qatar a must
Wahabis in Saudi, die!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Muslims're taking over Europe
Maybe now we'll have our chance.
We'd be doing them a favor
So let's go nuke France
and the Germans and the Spaniards
and the Poles, Italians, too!
and the Portugese and Danish,
Dutch, Norwegians, Swedish, too!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Then next we'll do the Russkies,
which we shoulda done before!
Then we oughta do Korea
North, and South as well, no more!
And China will be toast, and how
Employment will go up!
Then we'll have to go do India
Our techies'll say 'yup'!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Then we'll turn on Austrialia,
New Zealand, you can bet,
As the South Pacific withers
Cargo Cults'll be all wet
Philippines'll die, Singapore'll fry
Indonesia will wipe out
Thailand, go boom, Vietnam kaboom!
Mayalasia, waste about!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Then Africa must be destroyed
That AIDS virus'll burn
So will Somalia and Kenya
Tanzania, it's your turn!
Nigeria and Togo,
Cameroon, Gabon take that!
You too, Ghana, and on that note
Nuke Libya and Chad!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Chavez is toast, and Castro
Morales, Ortega, more!
Brazil be gone and Uraguay
Paraguay and Ecuador!
Mexico keeps sending wetbacks
and Canuks their cheapo drugs
So we'll nuke our closest neighbors
Since they're all a bunch o' thugs!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Well, we've nuked the world and surely
We've wiped out billions, all!
But we need to go much further
And now we'll heed the call
That the Armageddon chorus
Keeps filling in our ears
Jesus returns, if only
We nuke ourselves. Let's cheer!

So, let's go and nuke Iran
Everybody, for our small circle of friends.

Deb Lagarde

The Impossibility of Infinity/Eternity, Except in God

2007-02-10T10:12:00.000-06:00

From time to time I will repost articles that have been previously posted to "Render Unto Christ". This is one of them.

I thank God He made me at least to partially understand some of the laws of higher mathematics and some of its constructs. Revelations! One is the construct of infinity. Infinity is a construct--that is, something derived by man to explain things man can't explain otherwise because in reality they don't exist apart from man's so-called understanding. Infinity relates to the topic of Bible study because probably 99.999% of Bible-believing Christians believe in eternity, which is the analogous time-element to infinity, the mathematical construct which in higher math is the equivalent to division by zero or the tangent of a 90 degree angle (where tangent of an angle = opposite/adjacent in a right triangle...remember high school trigonometry?). Thus, eternity is like infinity, which is division by zero. Remember high school algebra? Division by zero is "undefined"; for instance, 0/3 = 0 because 3 x 0 = 0. In fact, any number x 0 = 0.But what is 3/0? Since no number times 0 yields 3, then simply put, you can't divide by zero. And anyway, who ever heard of dividing by "nothing" (which is what the number zero, invented as a place holder, really is...nothing!)?

Now, as to the tangent of a 90 degree angle being "infinity"(which is enumerated by thesideways 8), this can be shown on a piece of graph paper using some very simple calculus,using what is called "limits". Remember that the "x axis" on a graph is the horizontal line going across and the "y axis" is the vertical line up and down. Suppose you are graphing a point with a positive magnitude (upward side of a "right triangle") of 6 and a positive direction(horizontal distance of a "right triangle") of 3. So what is the angle that is made by these line 6 up and 3 to the right? The opposite side is 6 and the adjacent side is 3. Since tangent of an angle is opposite/adjacent, the tangent is 6/3 = 2. Now take out your "values of trigonometric
functions" if you have one, and look under the "tan" column for tangent, and find what angle corresponds to "tan = 2" and you approximate an angle of about 63.5 degrees. Okay, now let us decrease the value of the x-direction to 1. Then you get tangent of the angle = 6/1 = 6. Looking up an angle whose tan = 6 we get to 80.6 degrees. Now let us cut the x-direction into half so that we are now dividing 6 by 1/2. We now get 12, because 6 divided by 1/2 is really 6 x 2 (remember when you divide by a fraction you "flip over" the fraction and multiply?). Since the tangent is now 12, the angle is now 85.3.

You get the picture yet? As the distance in the x-direction gets closer and closer to 0, with the magnitude in the y-direction remaining 6(or any number), the angle increases along with the tangent of that angle. What if the angle was 89.9 degrees? The tangent is then measured to be 572.9571! What if the angle was 89.999? The tangent would be 572,957.7951! What if the angle was 89.9999999? The tangent would be 572 million, 957 thousand, 795.1! What if the angle is 89.99999999999? Well, my calculator doesn't go that high in digits! But if it did, the tangent would probably be 5.729571 times 10 to the 150th power or something! You know, a very large number! Larger than a google!

A google is another construct because we never see or experience a number this large in reality with our naked eyes...1 x 10 to the 100th power! This is a 1 followed by 100 zeroes! To make matters ever crazier, mathematicians devised the "googleplex" to denote 1 x 10 to a google of zeroes! That is, the number "googleplex" is so large that to write such a number it wouldn't even fit into the known universe!!!

Okay, the calculus: As "x", that is, the adjacent side of this right triangle, gets smaller and smaller, as "x approaches 0" defined mathematically, the tangent of an angle formed gets larger and larger until, given enough "9s" after the 89.9, the tangent approaches "infinity" so that the tangent of a 90 degree angle, where x = 0, is "defined" as "infinity" which is NOT A NUMBER OR QUANTITY, but simply man's "enumeration" of something impossible. Something that "does not exist." In short, "infinity does not compute"!

Take the construct out of the field of mathematics and put it into the dimension of time and you go from infinity to eternity. Now factor in the concept that God is "the beginning" or "alpha" and "the end" or "omega" and that He "always was, is, and always will be". Everything God created including time (interestingly enough, since God created time, then time came AFTER God, then God must have existed BEFORE time, thus God stands outside of the dimension of time!) is constrained by some limit which, to human understanding--including writers of the Bible--must mean everything God created is constrained by a limit in time, but not God Himself! Since "eternity" also stands outside of time (just as "infinity" stands outside
numeration and quantity), ONLY GOD IS ETERNAL because "eternity" in human
understanding means "timeless"! Since God also created "hell/hades/sheol/lake of fire", then all of these definitions used by Christianity for pain, torment, death etc., must stand within some boundary of time and thus ARE NOT ETERNAL! ONLY GOD IS ETERNAL!

So then, since man applies God's eternity to mean "eternal damnation in hell/hades/lake of fire" in so many Bible translations when there was no meaning of eternity in any of the original documents. In fact, the notion of eternity came from Byzantine Emperor Justinan in the 600s and it was done precisely to convey reward for believers and punishment for non-believers as well as force his subjects into compliance with church hierarchies. Scroll down about a quarter of the way in the article to check this out .

Thus, to conclude, I have shown mathematically that "eternal" torment in "hell" is a MYTH that is NOT supported either in a true translation of Greek scriptures that form the New Testament of the Bible (which I will present in a later post). Those who must be thrown into the "lake of fire" (as per Revelation 20) in the "second death" are there only for a certain period of time until God whips them into shape spiritually so that on the last day of what we would call "time", ALL HUMANITY will reside with Christ!

Yes, Messrs. Falwell, Hagee, Lindsay, Robertson, LeHaye and the rest, Christ really does SAVE ALL MANKIND, just like "it says in the Bible" (1 Timothy 2:3-4)!

Ah, the power of God and His ultimate language--mathematics!

Deborah Lagarde

2007-02-09T10:03:00.000-06:00

I have deleted my old blog called "Render Unto Christ." This blog, "Truth Not Heresy," takes its place.

The old blog, in addition to providing truth of Scripture, also got sidetracked many times with denouncing various political schemes, calling for impeachment of Bush and Cheney, and was all too willing to speak out on issues such as war and what to do about the power elites that--since God is Sovereign over all and all is part of His plan, like it or not--it wasn't my place to speak about. It was as if dissenting over Bushian policy was becoming an idol of the heart in place of Christ. Therefore I had to delete it just as true followers of Christ must do away with all carnality and idols of the heart.

Also, I took a few too many liberties with denouncing the Religious Right, its members personally. Bad practice and bad Christianity. While I must denounce the heresies of, say, John Hagee or Pat Robertson, I MUST NOT denounce them personally or their acts other than preaching heresy (for instance, Robertson's financial alliance with African dictator Mobutu of the former Zaire--now Democratic Republic of the Congo--which was tainted to say the least), because these preachers and pastors, while turning Biblical truth on its head a large part of the time, do commit to good works, do send Bibles overseas, and do get Bibles printed in "closed" countried like the Muslim states in the Middle East.

Just how am I supposed to get to "a higher plane than I have found and plant my feet on higher ground" if I keep getting myself distracted by events of "the world"? So this is a fresh start.

Deborah Lagarde