The cancellation news is here.

from Christian Headlines:

The conservative Christian group One Million Moms has launched a petition urging Disney to cancel its FXX animated sitcom series Little Demon. The show features a mother who was impregnated by Satan and gives birth to an Antichrist daughter.

The show, rated TV-MA, features graphic violence, nudity and satanic imagery. One Million Moms, which has petitioned against other controversial shows, is urging parents to sign their latest petition calling for Disney to cancel Little Demon.

According to Deadline, “Among other shenanigans, the comedy … shows Laura [the mother] nude with no pixelation. She strips down in the first episode to perform a ritual, while there are multiple instances of nudity throughout the series.”

“Thirteen years after being impregnated by Satan, a reluctant mother and her Antichrist daughter attempt to live an ordinary life,” Disney describes the show, according to The Christian Post.

In the petition, One Million Moms quotes the series creator Seth Kirschner, who allegedly told reporters, “We are going to keep going for it until we are told no.”

“Let us be sure they are told, ‘No!’ quickly!” the group contends.

“We must do so because Disney is introducing viewers, including children who might stumble across this series, to a world of demons, witches, and sorcery,” the petition says. “Along with the demonic content of this series, the minds of younger viewers will also be inundated with secular worldviews that reflect the current culture.”

One Million Moms also warns that the previews and commercials “include such horrific content that it is difficult for families who watch FXX to avoid its evil subject matter completely.”

“It is evident that Disney is trying ‘to portray witchcraft as a positive tool to fight evil.’ The first episode is more than enough for most Christian families to realize that Little Demon is an extremely dangerous series,” the organization stresses in the petition. “Titled “First Blood,” this initial episode of the premiere season is currently streaming.”

One Million Moms concluded the petition by urging Disney to “cancel this demonic show, Little Demon, immediately.”

As of this writing, over 20,000 people have signed the petition.

“Young Americans are now less likely to become or remain Christian….”

Christianity has remained at the forefront of the nation’s political and social conversations for centuries — but new research shows that could be changing. 

new report by Pew Research Center and the General Social Survey published on Tuesday found that the large numbers of people in the U.S who practice Christianity are declining. The religion’s demographic has been dwindling since the 1990s, the report said, as many adults transition to an identity of atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular.” 

In the early ’90s, about 90% of people in the U.S. identified as Christians, the report said. In 2020, Christians accounted for about 64% of the U.S. population, including children. Meanwhile, those who are not affiliated with a religion has grown from 16% in 2007 to 30% in 2020, according to the research. All other religions, including Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism, accounted for about 6% in 2020. 

As recently as the early 1990s, about 90% of U.S. adults identified as Christians. In 2007 the share was at 78%. Today, that number is down to 64%. Since 2007, the share of adults who identify as religious “nones” has grown from 16% to 29%. 6/ https://t.co/BELUlKdCdu pic.twitter.com/WbBRTcf93v— Pew Research Center (@pewresearch) September 13, 2022

Pew and GSS paired up to analyze how those numbers could change if the Christian decline accelerates or stops, and how other demographic trends, including migration and rates of birth and death, would influence the outcomes. The researchers only looked at religious identity, rather than religious beliefs and practices. 

Four potential scenarios were considered: a stable rate of people moving in and out of Christianity; an increasing share of Christians leaving their religion as a decreasing number of people with no religious affiliation switching in; the same as the former but with no more than 50% of Christians switching their identity; and a scenario in which no person changes their religion.

“Depending on the future of religious switching, people who identify as atheist, agnostic or ‘nothing in particular’ could become America’s largest (non)religious group within our lifetime,” Pew researcher Stephanie Kramer tweeted.

In all of the scenarios, even if nobody switches their religious affiliation in the coming decades, the number of religiously unaffiliated people is hypothesized to approach or exceed the number of Christians by 2070, the report found. 

None of the models considers Christianity numbers increasing, researchers said, as they are based on “dynamics currently shaping the religious landscape.” Dramatic events, such as armed conflicts, social movements, or rising authoritarianism could trigger social and religious upheavals, they added.

A scenario of steady switching – which would mostly happen among young people between the ages of 15 and 29 – could result in Christians losing their majority ranking in 2070, although the demographic would still be the largest U.S. religious group. 

“If switching among young Americans continued at recent rates, Christians would decline as a share of the population by a few percentage points per decade, dipping below 50% by 2060,” the report says. 

A decade later, in 2070, Christians would make up 46% of the U.S. as the number of those who are secular rises to 41%, researchers said. 

If leaving Christianity becomes more popular, but no more than 50% of the demographic leaves the institution, the religion would again lose its rank as the majority – and as the largest group – at 39%. Instead, those who who do not identify with a religion would become the largest religious group, accounting for 48% of those in the U.S. 

The report found that if the number of Christians disaffiliate by the time they turn 30 rises with every generation, and there is no limit imposed to how many people would leave, Christianity would lose its majority status by 2045 – in 23 years. In 2070, 52% of people in the U.S. would have no religious affiliation, while just 35% would be Christian under this scenario. 

There’s only one scenario in which Christians would retain their religious majority through 2070 – one in which no person changes their religion after 2020. 

“But even in that hypothetical situation, the religious makeup of the U.S. population would continue to shift gradually,” the report says, “primarily as a result of Christians being older than other groups, on average, and the unaffiliated being younger, with a larger share of their population of childbearing age.” 

If that happens, Christianity would decline by 10% by 2070. But as Pew noted, this situation “is not realistic.” 

“Switching has not ended and there is no reason to think it will come to an abrupt stop,” researchers said. “…Still, if fewer future young adults switch from Christianity to no affiliation, or if movement in the opposite direction increases, the future religious landscape might resemble the results of this projection.” 

The most likely scenario to occur, if recent generational trends continue, researchers said, is No. 2 – when Christianity declines but at a cap of no more than 50% leaving. 

Related Article: World Economic Forum Calls For Merging of Human and AI Intel to Censor ‘Hate Speech’ & ‘Misinformation’

from Alt.Market:

I concluded that globalists do indeed have a religion, and their root belief system according to the evidence is Luciferianism.

Why do globalists have a deep rooted obsession with Artificial Intelligence (AI)? What is it about the fervent quest for an autonomous digitized brain that sends them into fits of ecstasy? Is it all about what AI can do for them and their agenda, or, is there also a darker “occult” element to the concept that is so appealing?

The World Economic Forum, an organization dedicated to the globalist “Great Reset” agenda, the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the “Shared Economy,” dedicates a large portion of every annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland to discussion on AI and the expansion of its influence over daily life.

The United Nations holds extensive policy sessions on AI and has been spending a considerable amount of energy to establish “ethics rules” for the development and use of Artificial Intelligence. At the core of the UN’s efforts is the assertion that only the UN is qualified to dictate and control AI technologies; for the good of all mankind, of course. AI governance is slated to go into full effect by 2030 according to the UN’s own white papers (All globalist institutions have set 2030 as the target date for all of their projects).

Another lesser known but substantial organization is the World Government Summit held every year in Dubai. These summits are attended by many national leaders and representatives as well as corporate CEOs and celebrities. The primary subjects of focus at the WGS are usually climate change propaganda, centralization of the global economy, Transhumanism and AI.

Most of the public discussions on AI revolve around positive narratives; we are meant to be convinced on the many great advancements that AI technology will provide. Some of the “advantages” include transhumanist health modifications, computer implants in the body or brain, and even nanobots which may one day be advanced enough to change our very cells. In other words, in order to benefit from AI we must become less human and more machine.

Other supposed benefits require a vast array of new systems (some of them are being built now) that would allow algorithms to monitor every facet of our lives. Globalists often refer to these systems as the “internet of things” – Every appliance you own, the car you drive, every computer, every cell phone, every surveillance camera, every stop light, everything would be centralized into a single AI network within a city, and each city would be connected in a great spider’s web to a national AI database.

The Internet of Things is regularly mentioned in conjunction with climate change governance and carbon restrictions. The purpose is crystal clear – Governments and corporate elites want the ability to monitor every watt of energy you use everyday. This kind of full spectrum information makes it easier to dictate our decisions and our access to goods and services. They would have total control of anyone living within these “Smart Cities.” Your entire life, every second, would be watched and scrutinized.

But how could this be made possible? Millions upon millions of people living day-to-day; that’s a LOT of data to sift through to find anyone not following the rules. This is one of the reasons why the globalists are salivating over AI technologies – It’s the only tool available to collect and delineate mass data collection in real time.

Already, there are efforts to use AI systems to predict crime before it happens (pre-crime). These experiments are rather overhyped as they don’t actually predict specific crimes or identify specific criminals. Rather, they use statistical analysis to predict which areas of a city certain crimes are most likely to occur. You don’t need AI for this, any cop that’s worked in a city long enough can tell you when and where certain crimes are most likely to happen.

Hilariously, AI algorithms have recently been accused of “racial bias” when it comes to the areas they select for predictive crime, because often these areas tend to be in predominantly black neighborhoods and the most predicted criminals tend to be young black men. So, the computers have been accused of racial profiling just as many cops are accused of racial profiling.

Just another classic contradiction of the political left: They love the idea of climate change restrictions, transhumanism, and even AI surveillance when it suits them, but a computer does not care about your feelings and it doesn’t care about social taboos. It only cares about the numbers.

And this is where we get into the greater dangers inherent in AI. Imagine a world micro-managed by a cold dead algorithm that views you as only one of two things: A resource or a threat.

Prediction of pre-crime is nonsense; algorithms monitor habits and patterns and human beings tend to break patterns abruptly. People are affected by crisis events in different ways that are impossible to portend. There are far too many variables and there will never be a system that is able to predict the future, but that’s not going to stop the globalists from trying to force the issue.

AI governance is an inevitability according to globalist institutions – They claim that one day Artificial Intelligence will be used to govern whole societies and dole out punishment based on scientifically efficient models. They act as if this is just the natural path of mankind and one we cannot avoid, but in reality it is a self-fulfilling prophesy. It’s not necessarily meant to happen, it is being engineered to happen.

AI proponents argue that the algorithms cannot act with the same bias that humans do, therefore, they would be the best possible judges of human behavior. Every decision from production to distribution to healthcare to schooling to law and order would be managed by AI as a means to achieve ultimate “equity.”

As noted above, they’ve already run into the road block of statistical probability and the fact that even if AI is left to autonomously make decisions devoid of emotion, millions of people will still see those decisions as biased. And, in some ways they would be right.

The most logical decision is not always the most moral decision. Furthermore, an AI is programmed by its creator and can be engineered to make decisions with the creator’s biases in mind. Who gets to program the AI? Who gets to dictate its coding? Global elitists?

And here is where we get to the more “spiritual” element of the AI issue in relation to the globalists.

A couple years back I wrote an article titled ‘Luciferianism: A Secular Look At A Destructive Globalist Belief System.’ My goal in that piece was to outline the large amount of evidence that globalists are in fact a kind of cult of organized psychopaths (people without empathy that take joy in destruction for the sake of personal gain). I concluded that globalists do indeed have a religion, and their root belief system according to the evidence is Luciferianism.

Yes, I’m sure there will be naysayers out there that will scoff at this notion, but the facts are undeniable. There is a distinct occult element to globalism, and Luciferianism pops up consistently as the root philosophy. I think I broke this down rather effectively in the article and I won’t rehash all the evidence here; people are welcome to read it if they wish.

I wrote from a secular standpoint because Luciferianism is an inherently destructive ideology even when viewed outside of the lens of Christian belief. Beyond that, there are psychological elements that need to be addressed that Christianity often ignores. Luciferian philosophy is tailor made for narcissistic and sociopathic people. The root of the cult is about “special” human beings that are not hindered by the boundaries of conscience, morals or ethics. Lack of empathy is seen as an advantage to progress and the ultimate goal of Luciferianism is godhood – A person becoming like a god, whether through being worshiped by others, the power of influence or by technological methods of extending life and abilities.

But what does this have to do with AI?

I believe that globalists view AI with such reverence because they think it is a new form of life, or an ultimate form of life – A life that they are creating (as gods create life). And, if you think about it symbolically, this new “life” is actually made in the image of its creators: It has no empathy, no remorse, no guilt, no love. For lack of a better word, it is soulless, much like globalist psychopaths are soulless.

If we are to look at AI in religious terms for a moment – AI is a kind of antithesis to the figure of Christ. Christ represents an all-knowing form of ultimate love and ultimate self sacrifice according to Christian doctrine. I don’t think there is a word for what AI ultimately represents. The only term that seems to fit is “Antichrist”: The all seeing eye. A rulership of a super-intelligence devoid of humanity.

To be clear, I DO NOT believe in end-of-the-world concepts portrayed by those that adhere to more popular interpretations of Revelations. I think the world changes. I think empires rise and fall and this can often be seen as the “end of the world” when it’s really just the end of an epoch. That said, I wholeheartedly believe in the existence of evil; evil being defined as willfully deceitful or destructive actions for purely personal or organizational benefit, such as murder or enslavement. Evil does indeed exist and is an observable element of human life.

There are also traits of humanity that lead to good, that prevent us from self destruction when we listen to them. Conscience, reason, wisdom and often faith can provide a shield against evil actions for the majority of us. If we didn’t have these pillars within our psyches we would have annihilated ourselves long ago. But, there are some who do not have conscience, that do not have empathy and they despise these traits as “limiting.”

AI is being designed by these kinds of people. And maybe they won’t cause the “end of the world” in terms we commonly understand (or in biblical terms), but over time they could take away everything that makes humanity worthy of the world. In a way, this would be an Apocalypse. It would be a living nightmare run by psychopathic people using sociopathic artificial intelligence, actively encouraging and enabling the masses to abandon their human bodies to become digital monstrosities and technological chimera.

If successful, it really would be the ultimate defilement of nature, or of God’s design if that is what you believe in. The pursuit of godhood is not worth it for most of us, but for the globalists it is the dream of an age, and they will do ANYTHING to achieve it.

from zerohedge:

Would leftists actually target a Christian school church service with a sexualized drag show?  Of course they would.  

Students at Manhattan’s Grace Church High School say they were supposed to attend Wednesday church services on April 27th, 2021 when they were greeted with a surprise substitution show featuring a dancing drag queen in orange go-go boots called “Brita Filter” (the symbolism of the stage name is unknown).  The event was sponsored by “Spectrum,” the school’s LGBT support club and members of the school faculty.

The students allege they felt pressured to participate and had to pretend they enjoyed the event.  Some Spectrum club members tapped teens on the shoulders and ordered them to stand for the show, while others handed out pride stickers and stated “Take one or you’re homophobic.”  Other kids got involved in the show and began twerking in the chapel.

After the dancing was over, Brita discussed being “pansexual.”

Said one student, “It’s notable that this person consistently called themselves fabulous and talented and beautiful. Not just once or twice, but over and over this person reassured themselves that way…”

The inherent narcissism of the pride movement is easily observed.  

The school website details their pride related programs and Brita Filter’s performance. 

Beyond the obvious affront to Christian doctrine, the trend of sexualized drag performances for kids sponsored by schools has become an epidemic.  Numerous schools over the past year have been caught secretly hosting drag queen shows without asking parents for permission.  The wider media exposure of these events has been met with attacks from leftists, claiming that there is no sexualization agenda in schools.       

The gaslighting has been rampant and the goal behind trans indoctrination and school drag shows is openly admitted:  It’s about political activism and normalization.

On TikTok, Brita bragged about the event:

“I literally went to church to teach the children today…A Catholic High School here in NYC invited me to their Pride Chapel. Visibility matters and I’m so honored to have had the chance to talk to you about my work as a LGBTQ+ Drag Queen Activist.”

Grace Church Schools plan to introduce pride events to younger middle schoolers as well, with lessons on the “history of the pride flag” and what it symbolizes. 

What many Christian Prophecy Teachers and Prophecy followers do not understand is that the Anti-Christ system IS being set up, and it will all be ready and functioning when the “Man of Sin”, the Anti-Christ emerges.

What is also not understood or accepted is that Israel will be tied into that Anti-Christ system before the “Man of Sin” is revealed!

Israel has had the most draconian of COVID restrictions, vaccination programs, and lock-downs, now it is going to be one of the most Draconian in moving from paper currency or cash to a digital currency!

from themedialine:

ash deals exceeding 6,000 NIS ($1,700) will be illegal, as part of the effort to fight against money laundering and criminal activity; the law will exempt charitable institutions and trade with West Bank Palestinians

A new law is set take effect in Israel starting August 1 that will ban payments of large sums of money in cash and bank checks. The goal of the reform, according to a statement issued by Israel’s Tax Authority, is to fight organized crime, money laundering and tax noncompliance.

Under the new law, any payment to a business above 6,000 NIS ($1,700) must be made using alternative methods, such as a digital transfer or a debit card. Trading between private citizens who are not listed as business owners will be limited to 15,000 NIS ($4,360) in cash. In both cases, deals exceeding these sums can include a cash payment worth up to 10% of the total value of the deal. This is another step in Israel’s fight against the use of cash. Previously, cash up to the amount of 11,000 NIS ($3,200) could be used in business deals.

“We want the public to reduce the use of cash money,” Adv. Tamar Bracha, who is in charge of executing the law on behalf of Israel’s Tax Authority, told The Media Line. “The goal is to reduce cash fluidity in the market, mainly because crime organizations tend to rely on cash. By limiting the use of it, criminal activity is much harder to carry out.”

For that to happen, there must be less cash in the market.

Attorney Uri Goldman, an expert in tax civil and criminal law, and money laundering who represented clients in an appeal against the cash law in 2018, claims the main problem with the law is that it is simply not efficient.

“We were in the discussions about the bill. The data we brought showed that since the first phase of the law was in effect, the amount of cash on the market only increased. So clearly, something’s not working,” Goldman told The Media Line.

Goldman also explained the downside of the law. “When the bill passed there were over a million citizens without bank accounts in Israel. The law would prevent them from conducting any business and would, practically, turn 10% of the population into criminals,” he said.

There are some exemptions to the new law: charitable institutions, which are most common in ultra-Orthodox society; and trade with Palestinians from the West Bank, who are not citizens of Israel. In the case of the latter, deals including large amounts of cash will be allowed, yet they will require a detailed report to Israel’s Tax Authority.

Bracha says these exceptions are limited in time and are meant to help institutions and populations that have no other alternative, by giving them time to change their payments methods.

Goldman does not think this will help. “I don’t think anyone will find a solution,” he said. “This part of the law basically promises Palestinians from the West Bank and ultra-Orthodox Jews a way out. It’s unfair to the rest of the people, and I’m doubtful it will change in the future.”

The law, originally proposed in 2015, was initially approved in 2018. In its original form it included an article banning the private holding of large sums of cash money, and limiting the permitted sum to 50,000 NIS ($14,500). While this article did not pass at the time, Israel’s Finance Ministry intends to bring it to a vote in the country’s parliament again after the upcoming elections.

According to the Tax Authority, several other countries have parallel laws, and they have proven to be effective. Critics, however, think at least one aspect must change for the law to work.

“They should permit people, at least once, to declare all the cash money they have and put it in the bank. Otherwise, the cash might not be used like before, but it’s still out there, going around. If they find the legal way to do this, it could start a change,” Goldman said of the idea that he noted was suggested in the preliminary discussions about the law but was never approved.

from zerohedge:

Most of the narratives surrounding the covid pandemic and the lockdowns were illogical and faulty, based in propaganda rather than science and fear instead of reason.  One key issue that was never addressed by lockdown proponents was the question of “risk.”  Doesn’t every individual have a natural right to take whatever risks they see as acceptable when it comes to their own health?  If a group of people want to go to a church service and take the risk that they might get covid, don’t they have the right to do that?

Of course, lockdown supporters will claim that those refusing to comply with mandates don’t have a right to put “other people at risk,” but how much risk from covid is there really?

According to dozens of independent and peer reviewed studies from around the world, the actual “risk” of death from covid is limited.  Studies indicate that the median Infection Fatality Rate (or Ratio) of covid is between 0.23% and 0.27% of the population.  This is the contrary mainstream science that the media rarely talks about.

So, 99.7% of all people (according to the science) on average face no mortal risk from the worst variants of covid.  IFR is in most cases the most accurate statistic on the death rate of a virus because it accounts for asymptomatic cases.  Case Fatality Rate (CFR), the stat often used more by the mainstream media, does not.  Even the World Health Organization notes on its website that:  “The true severity of a disease can be described by the Infection Fatality Ratio…”

When comparing covid to a virus like the Spanish Flu, which killed over 50 million people worldwide according to the CDC, one would think that there would be a measure of apprehension when it comes to violating the freedoms of the public.  Nope.  The relatively low level of risk associated with covid made no difference to governments or global institutions.  They charged forward like bulls in a china shop breaking everything in their path and treating unilateral “mandates” as if they were laws. 

Luckily, the tide has been slowly turning back and resistance to lockdowns and vaccine passports has been more pervasive than many officials seem to have expected.  In most conservative states within the US, the lockdowns ended quickly, within a few months in many cases, once it was realized that covid was not the population killer that the media, the CDC and the WHO had made it out to be.  Leftist blue states and countries like Canada were not so lucky.  

Canadian Pastor Artur Pawlowski experienced the full brunt of medical authoritarianism first hand when, on May 9, 2021, he sought to hold a church service for his congregants only to be arrested along with his brother Dawid Pawlowski for “inciting an in-person gathering.”  

In October of 2021, a Judge ruled that the Pastor was in violation of a covid health order.  The punishment was bizarre and Orwellian; he was heavily fined, and whenever he spoke publicly about covid he would be required to recite a government-approved statement saying that “most medical experts support social distancing, face masks, and vaccines.”  When the court says “most experts,” they are of course referring to government paid “experts.”  There are many medical experts that disagree with the efficacy of the lockdowns and other mandates.  

Researchers, with over 18,000 studies and after four levels of screening, found 24 papers that would provide a stringent comparison of lockdown effects. They found that lockdowns reduced covid mortality in the United States and Europe by only 0.2 percent on average. They also looked at forced shelter-in-place, which reduced mortality by only 2.9 percent on average.

The researchers had this final conclusion:

“While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”

This week an appeals court ruled that the Alberta Health Agency’s order prohibiting “illegal public gatherings” was “not sufficiently clear and unambiguous” in connection to the Pawlowskis.

“The Pawlowskis’ appeals are allowed. The finding of contempt and the sanction order are set aside. The fines that have been paid by them are to be reimbursed,” the three-member panel proclaimed in a 16-page ruling. 

Pawlowski grew up under communist rule in Poland and this is likely the root of his refusal to comply.  He’s seen all of this before, including the typical religious persecution inherent in communist societies. 

The legal victory is a clear reminder that the fear surrounding potential crisis events is often exploited and abused by governments to erase personal freedoms and legal protections.  It is these moments in history when individual rights are MORE important, not less, because whenever there is a crisis the worst types of tyrants tend to come out of the woodwork. 

Peruse some the so called “Christian Blogs and you will see this is true:

“Almost nine out of 10 U.S. adults (88 percent) have an impure, unrecognizable worldview that is nothing more than a customized personal blend of disparate ideas adopted from multiple philosophies of life. This worldview is called Syncretism.

“People who are driven by this unique, highly individualized mishmash of ideas simply combine them into what is usually an inconsistent, sometimes internally contradictory, hot mess of a worldview. Syncretism reflects the superficial thinking and feelings-based decision-making that prevails in our cut-and-paste society.”

From Pajama Media:

This will perhaps come as a shock to them, but the doggedly secularist elites of 21st century America and Europe view Christianity, especially in its Evangelical and traditional Catholic assemblies, in much the same way as the Roman elites of the second-century empire viewed a movement that was then but a minor irritant.

Or to put it another way, George Soros and your buddies with the Davos Great Reset crowd, meet Emperor Marcus Aurelius and the Pax Romana.

For one thing, both eras feature widely diverse religious groups professing multiple understandings of and approaches to living a good life. As George Barna puts it in his latest American Worldview Inventory:

“Almost nine out of 10 U.S. adults (88 percent) have an impure, unrecognizable worldview that is nothing more than a customized personal blend of disparate ideas adopted from multiple philosophies of life. This worldview is called Syncretism.

“People who are driven by this unique, highly individualized mishmash of ideas simply combine them into what is usually an inconsistent, sometimes internally contradictory, hot mess of a worldview. Syncretism reflects the superficial thinking and feelings-based decision-making that prevails in our cut-and-paste society.”

The America that not so long ago was predominantly made up of people who considered themselves to be Christians, mostly of a Protestant persuasion but a great many Catholics as well, has degenerated into a “hot mess” that includes New Age spiritualism, Mormonism, Hinduism, Islamists, Buddhists, “Nones” and Atheists.

Compare that with the religious demographics of the second-century Roman Empire. In his The Patient Ferment of the Early Church, Alan Kreider tells us that “the Roman religious world was extremely tolerant, and many Roman citizens cobbled together religious lives as they participated in a wide range of religious observances.”

And remember, the Roman Empire of the second century stretched from Spain and Eastward across the entire Mediterranean Sea, covering most of Western and parts of Eastern Europe, as well as the entire expanse of North Africa from Morocco to Egypt, and thence throughout the Holy Land and into and somewhat beyond Mesopotamia.

Literally hundreds of tribes and dozens of nations, as well as countless local and national deities, languages, and traditions, were encompassed within the boundaries of the empire. Rome was tolerant of all of these so long as the Emperor was honored as divine and his governing authority respected.

But what of those Christians who refused to bow down to Marcus Aurelius and acknowledge him as one of the many gods? That inevitably led to frustration, then punishment, and finally persecution that saw Christians thrown to the lions simply because they admitted to being followers of Jesus Christ.

“But wait a minute,” you might be thinking, “nobody in the West today is murdering Christians by putting them in arenas to be torn apart and eaten by wild animals, so where’s the parallel here, Tapscott?” You’re right, of course; Christians aren’t being thus treated, at least not today, but that just indicates we haven’t quite reached the persecution stage.

But it takes little observational effort to see there are widespread and systematic efforts to punish Christians who refuse to bow to the secular agenda of the Great Reset elites in the United States and Europe.

Yes, the Supreme Court recently in a unanimous decision instructed Boston authorities that they cannot bar the display of a Christian flag on the public square simply because it represents a particular faith. But that case took years to make its way through the judicial system and cost thousands of dollars and hours to make a point that not so long ago nobody in America would question.

And consider the censorship that is endemic on social media of Christians who express agreement with the Biblical view that marriage is solely between a man and a woman. Of all the secular orthodoxies, the gay agenda is all but sacrosanct, and to dissent from it is to subject oneself to a variety of punishments.

Finally, are you aware that thousands of members of the U.S. military — men and women who have sworn to give their lives to protect your freedom and mine — are being tossed out of the service because they claimed a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccine? The majority of these men and women are Evangelical Christians.

In Rome, tolerance meant as long as you bowed down to the Roman god, you could worship any other deity you chose. In America and Europe today, according to the International Institute for Religious Freedom, the fear of punishment for publicly expressing views consistent with traditional Christianity is so pervasive that there is a “widespread chilling effect” on such speech……

read the full article here.

Webster’s Dictionary Goes Woke!

from The Dissenter:

In an era of subjectivism and confusion unlike any time in recorded history, one thing we’ve always been able to rely on is the objectivity of language. Historically, language has bound people groups together as they are able to communicate effectively and understand the thoughts and intentions of others through the words they speak.

Sadly, that is no longer the case as the woke crowd has been fighting long and hard to destroy objective truth.

In the midst of this war against truth has been the LGBTQ mob’s battle against gender. In the eyes of the woke camp, gender no longer has anything to do with one’s objective biological sex—it is nothing more than an expression of one’s subjective sexuality. In this imaginary world they’ve created, anything goes, and along with it, goes the language used to describe reality.

Such is the case with Merriam-Webster’s latest iteration of caving to the woke mob’s language demands. Merriam-Webster, one of the English-speaking world’s foremost dictionaries for everyday language, especially in the United States, has now redefined the word “female” to include men.

As you can see from a previous snapshot of Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary, the term female included the following definitions:

Now, its current definition of female includes men who “identify” as female as its second definition, defining it as “having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.”

Webster also defines “gender identity” as “a person’s internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female,” which would include men who “identify” as women, or, as in its definition of female, “the opposite of male.”

We are at a turning point in society with the divide between the rational and the irrational continuing to widen. Society cannot continue to exist where such irrational behavior prevails. Sooner or later, something will have to give, and either the entire world caves to the ever-growing side of the irrational woke, or by the grace of God, a miracle would have to turn things around and bring this world back to sanity. Sadly, I see no evidence of that happening anytime soon. Pray that the Lord returns soon!

from The Christian Post:

Seattle police arrested a street preacher on charges of being a risk to public safety for reading his Bible aloud at a public park near an LGBT pride event.

Matthew Meinecke, who identifies himself as The Seattle Preacher on Twitter, was surrounded by Seattle police officers as he was reading his Bible and was subsequently arrested and fingerprinted at a police station before being released.

“SPD has enough resources to send 10 police officers to arrest a preacher reading his Bible in a public park. Because it’s such a horrible crime now!” Meinecke wrote on Twitter, posting a video showing his arrest.

“So at this point, we can no longer stand by. The risk that you pose for public safety by remaining here can be mitigated if you leave. It’s your last chance,” a police officer can be heard saying.

The preacher told the officers, “I don’t want to leave because I’m not in danger.”

“I was at the Seattle Center, reading the Bible, not aggressively preaching, not stirring people up, not anything. People throwing things. People vandalizing our property. I think about 10 police officers showed up,” the pastor told journalist Jonathan Choe with the Discovery Institute.

“Your job is not to silence me and move me. Why are they so offended by words? I just believe in using the word of God.”

The preacher also posted a video showing a protester seizing his Bibles and ripping pages while shouting, “Get the f— out of here! Get your holy water off my ovaries, b—-! Get the f— out!”

Another person shouted at him, saying, “Forget about your imaginary fairy in the f—ing sky.”

Meinecke said he saw “a bunch of naked people walking around over here, not even 200 feet away. … Naked grown men around little children.”

Last weekend, Meinecke was also arrested during a Roe v. Wade protest, Choe added on Twitter. “Far-left extremists ripped up his Bible and assaulted him. But they got away.”

In a video Meinecke shared online, he added: “We’ve got a city full of crime. We’ve got needles all over the place. Lawless homeless camps everywhere. We’ve got assaults. We’ve got broken glass. We’ve got Antifa running the place. But they’ve got time to send in 10 police officers to arrest a street preacher reading his Bible in a park.”


from National Interest:

It seems increasingly likely that Israel will strike Iran to prevent the Islamic Republic from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Iran, Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett warned on June 12, “is dangerously close to getting their hands on a nuclear weapon.” In an interview with The Telegraph, the premier pointed out that “Iran is enriching uranium at an unprecedented rate.” Bennett added: “Iran’s nuclear program won’t stop until it’s stopped.”

Bennett isn’t alone in expressing concern.

The United States has also raised alarm. In a March 2022 hearing of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) observed that “Iran has made key advances” and has “decreased its [nuclear] breakout time to several weeks from a year” compared to what it was under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), colloquially known as the Iran nuclear deal. Indeed, in April 2022, U.S. secretary of state Antony Blinken said that Iran’s breakout time was “down to a couple of weeks.”

On June 6, 2022, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, said that Tehran was “very close” to crossing the nuclear threshold and that it “cannot be avoided at this point.” Grossi also presented the board with a report “showing that Iran effectively already has enough enriched uranium for three bombs,” the news service JNS reported.

Grossi also told the IAEA’s board of governors that “Iran has not provided explanations that are technically credible in relation to the Agency’s findings at three undeclared locations in Iran.” Grossi noted that Iran has also failed to provide the IAEA with “the current location, or locations, of the nuclear material and/or of the equipment contaminated with the nuclear material” that was moved from the site of Turquzabad in 2018.

Adding to concerns, the Islamic Republic has begun installing advanced IR-6 centrifuges at its underground enrichment plant in Natanz and has said that it plans to install more at other sites. The centrifuges will enable the Islamic Republic to increase enrichment by as much as 50 percent.

The agency formally censured Iran for its activities.

In response, the Islamic Republic called the IAEA “ungrateful” and cut off the agency’s camera feeds which monitor Tehran’s nuclear activities at declared facilities. This, Grossi asserted, was a “fatal blow” to negotiations between the United States and Tehran over its nuclear weapons program. But this overlooks some key points.

As Reuters, among others, has noted, the IAEA hasn’t had access to the data collected by the cameras for more than a year. The agency “hopes that it will gain access to that data, which remains with Iran, at a later date.”

Hope, however, is not a good basis for policy—particularly when it’s a policy designed to prevent the world’s leading state sponsor of terror from acquiring nuclear weapons.

But while several analysts have pointed to a stall in U.S.-Iran negotiations as increasing tensions and making a breakout possible, it is worth noting the following: the very terms of the JCPOA did not prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. And Israel will not allow the Islamic Republic to become such a power. It is that simple.

The JCPOA’s sunset provisions and poor verifications regime enabled Iran to eventually join the nuclear club. Indeed, in a 2015 interview, then-President Barack Obama admitted that the deal would enable Iran to have “near zero” breakout time in as little as thirteen years—or six years from now.

But even this assessment was overly optimistic: the JCPOA did not require Iran to come clean about its past nuclear behavior—thus preventing an accurate benchmark of its progress. Similarly, the JCPOA only allowed inspections at “declared” facilities. And it didn’t fully restrict research and development in key areas, thereby allowing Iran to reduce the time of a nuclear breakout potentially further. This, of course, is to say nothing of the decision by JCPOA architects not to address Iran’s other “malign activities”—code for its support for terrorism and development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, among other things.

The limits of that policy were highlighted in 2018 when Israel revealed that it had broken into Iran’s so-called “nuclear archive.” The findings, later authenticated by the United States, showed that Iran not only lied about its nuclear program but was engaged in hiding it during negotiations with the United States and others.

Iran may lie about its nuclear activities, but it doesn’t always hide its intentions.

Regime apparatchiks from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on down have called for Israel’s destruction. The history of both the Jewish people and the Jewish state show that such calls aren’t to be taken lightly.

In June 1981, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) successfully took out Iraq’s nuclear reactor. And in September 2007, the IDF carried out a strike against Syria’s nuclear program. Israel has been clear: it will not tolerate a hostile power acquiring nuclear weapons. But this time promises to be different.

Unlike the 1981 and 2007 strikes, Israel faces a more difficult security predicament. The Islamic Republic has proxies wrapped around Israel like a snake. Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Gaza’s Hamas are funded, trained, and equipped by Tehran. And both have documented histories of using human shields.

Hezbollah alone is widely regarded as the most well-armed terrorist group in the world and maintains a global presence with operatives in dozens of countries. And it has carried out attacks against Jewish communities worldwide, murdering hundreds.

Similarly, Iran is also deeply embedded in both Syria and Iraq, with capabilities to strike Israel from these satrapies.

In recent weeks, Israel has carried out several targeted assassinations in Iran itself, taking out top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) operatives as well as nuclear scientists. It is not the first time that Israel has taken out high-level targets inside Iran. But the increase in strikes—nearly half a dozen in less than a month—suggests a shift.

Ditto for Bennett’s vow to implement the “Octopus Doctrine.” The Israeli prime minister recently stated: “We no longer play with the tentacles, with Iran’s proxies: we’ve created a new equation by going for the head.” By letting Tehran know that it can and will be struck, Israel is changing the rules of the game. Jerusalem is no longer content to “mow the grass”—an expression for strategically limited strikes—but is upping the ante in response to what it sees as a growing threat.

Israel has also stepped up the scale and scope of its strikes in Syria, recently hitting the Damascus airport. The IDF recently held the largest military drill in decades, dubbed “Chariots of Fire.” In its own words, the exercises “aim to both increase the IDF’s defensive readiness and examine its preparedness for an intensive and prolonged campaign.”

In late May 2022, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) conducted drills which included “long-range flights, aerial refueling and striking distant targets.” It was, the Times of Israel noted, meant to simulate striking Iranian nuclear facilities. According to Israel’s Channel 13 news, the exercises spanned more than 10,000 kilometers and included more than 100 aircraft and navy submarines.

The IAF, the Jerusalem Post reported in early June 2022, can now fly F-35 fighter jets from Israel to Iran without refueling. And now they can be equipped with a new one-ton bomb “that can be carried inside the plane’s internal weapons compartment without jeopardizing its stealth radar signature.”

The IDF is, of course, an exceptionally well-trained military. It isn’t a stranger to major drills and exercises. But it seems clear that something is afoot and the parameters of the long-running conflict between Israel and Iran are changing. Coupled with Tehran’s imminent “nuclear break out,” such developments indicate that Jerusalem is doing more than mowing the grass—it might be preparing to get rid of the entire yard.

Should Israel strike Iran’s nuclear facilities it would likely bring about the worst war that the Middle East has seen in decades—if not longer. The conflict that would follow would look nothing like many of the recent wars between Israel and Iranian proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah. For both Israel and the Islamic Republic, it would be an existential battle, with the fate of both the Jewish state and the regime in Tehran hinging on the war’s outcome. The losses and destruction would be devastating.

Hezbollah is estimated to have 130-150,000 rockets and missiles and Hamas is thought to have at least 30,000. Both hide their arsenals behind human shields.

Indeed, according to a 2021 study by the Alma Center, numerous Hezbollah military sites in southern Lebanon are “located in buildings within populated villages and areas very close to villages.” Researcher Tal Beeri found that “each of the 200 Shi’ite villages in the area south of the Zaharani River up to the border with Israel and the adjacent areas have become part of Hezbollah’s military infrastructure,” constituting part of the terror group’s “regional defensive plan.” Further away, Hezbollah is also firmly ensconced in major cities like Beirut.

And costs will likely extend beyond the Middle East. Iranian proxies have shown themselves to be capable of attacking both Jewish and American targets throughout the world. It also seems likely that a war will fuel anti-Semitic attacks in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere—just as the conflict between Iranian proxies and Israel did in the spring of 2021.

And, of course, a major war will also upset already-strained global energy markets. It will also usher in a harsh verdict on both U.S. nonproliferation policy and credibility in the region.

The Middle East isn’t short of kindling or matches. And it looks ready to explode.

%d bloggers like this: