Feeds:
Posts
Comments

And they wonder why mainline churches are closing down. Woke “Preachers”

from The Post Millenial:

A “woke” preacher was speaking at a panel during the summer of 2021 in London and he mentioned that, in his opinion, Jesus “transgendered himself” many times in the Bible.

Speaking in front of a rainbow-colored altar cloth, the preacher told the panel and his audience that “God is queer”, and that we have misinterpreted him through the ages due to our heteronormativity.

“I think Jesus ‘transgenders himself’ on a number of occasions,” said the preacher.

“I think, even just a little phrase: ‘Jesus is lamenting after Jerusalem, longing to gather Jerusalem as a mother hen gathers her chicks.'”

“I think if you look at the foot-washing from John’s Gospel, foot-washing elsewhere, in both [the] Old and New Testaments, it’s consistently done by women, and yet Jesus takes that on.”

“People often cast that as being the servant’s role; it was the woman’s role. And Jesus does it, and becomes the woman at that point.”

“Here’s the wider context. From a panel on “Queer Theology” last summer. Speaker is Simon Woodman, of London’s Bloomsbury Central Baptist Church,” tweeted Woke Preacher Clips, who originally uploaded the clip to Twitter:

In a similar speech, another controversial “woke preacher” said back in Nov 2021 that America should be called a “tossed salad” instead of a melting pot.

from Lighthouse Trails Research:

Here in New Zealand, we are opening up after Auckland, our largest city, has been in lockdown for quite a while. We have been going to the Salvation Army in _____________. They have now decided that because of the new restrictions coming into place this Friday they will not allow people without a vaccine passport to attend any of their services or even go on their premises. This came as a huge shock as we are not vaccinated yet. We are older people and were told through a Pastoral letter that we are now banned from their services; how about that? Their rationale was it’s the government’s decision, which is just not true—it’s their decision from a list of different options. They also say that it’s done as a safety precaution for our health. I’ve not been able to work that one out yet. How can a church ban anyone from their services? It goes against everything the church stands for. I’ve written to them to tell them of our disgust with their decision. You just can’t do that! They sent back a feeble reply.

What a world we live in, and it will probably get worse.

I have copied the relevant part of their Pastoral Letter detailing their decision, just to confirm to you we do have this right to share this with you.

“After much thought, prayer and discussion the unanimous decision of the Corps Leadership team and Pastoral Care council is that once the new COVID-19 Protection Framework comes into play on Dec 3rd, we will require those eligible for a vaccination, to be fully vaccinated to attend any activity held within our buildings, including Sunday Worship.  This applies to both ourselves and those who hire our facilities for other purposes.”

This simple means anyone without the vaccine passport and those who are not eligible for the vaccine passport will not be permitted to attend their services.

We will keep you updated on any further developments.

Take care, bless you.

From The Chattanooga Times Free Press:

That Tuesday night’s “special service” was supposed to be a joyous one for televangelist Perry Stone. He circled the room singing along to the music. He cracked jokes about gaining weight over Thanksgiving.

But as Stone was describing to his followers how some people walked away from religion in recent years, the voice of a woman in the back brought the auditorium to silence.

“Probably because you keep touching them, you nasty perv,” she yelled. “Why don’t you tell them the real reason why they left? Because you kept touching them.”

“Ma’am, I’ll have you arrested, and I’ll bring a lawsuit against you for making statements like that,” Stone said, as his security guards rushed toward the woman.

His voice held steady for a few more words before he began yelling, “You’ve talked to people who told 16 lies on my wife and I! That’s who you’ve been talking to.

“Last month, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began questioning people connected to Stone and his Cleveland-based ministries, according to five people with direct knowledge of the interactions.

At least seven people connected to the ministry, including some couples, have shared information that investigators sought about sexual misconduct allegations against Stone as well as the evangelist’s connections to Bradley County law enforcement, according to the five people.

In a statement to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, an FBI spokesperson said Department of Justice policy “prohibits us from confirming or denying the existence or non-existence of FBI investigations.

“Meanwhile, more than a dozen people connected or formerly connected to Stone’s ministry told the Times Free Press they are becoming more concerned about the perceived lack of accountability for the internationally known spiritual leader a year and a half after allegations of inappropriate conduct involving women were first made public.

Some are angry at the board of directors at Voice of Evangelism, believing the ministry did not involve law enforcement or fully investigate claims of misconduct against Stone by women in his ministry, which included groping, unwanted kissing and showing women he was aroused.

Others believe the safety measures originally discussed for Stone when allegations were made were not followed and the pastor returned to full-time public ministry too soon. Many of the people who spoke with the Times Free Press are worried a lack of accountability and awareness could put others at risk as Stone begins traveling and leading services again.

The Times Free Press gathered information about Stone and his organizations from 19 people connected to the ministry, including interviewing four women who said they were victims of Stone. Most asked their names not be made public for fear of retribution from Stone or his followers. Some individuals, including people who declined to speak with the Times Free Press, received threatening text messages or found their property vandalized in recent weeks.

How this story was reported

The Times Free Press gathered information from 19 people connected to Perry Stone’s ministry to help publish this story. That information included documents, internal communications and voice recordings, as well as interviews with 16 people connected with Perry Stone’s ministry or with direct knowledge of events relevant to the story. The reporter also attended events hosted by Stone’s ministry, such as the special service on Nov. 30.

Stone has recently posted to his hundreds of thousands of online followers about a spiritual vision in which he strikes a fish, which symbolized someone standing against his ministry, in the head and it “died instantly.” Stone has said Christians should not trust negative things said about others and said people who challenge him are demonic.

In a statement to the Times Free Press, John Rodriguez, an outside spokesperson for Voice of Evangelism, defended the board’s handling of the allegations and characterized the internal investigation as “appropriate and intensive.”

“The conclusions reached and actions taken by the board were determined by the board to be reasonable and appropriate and in the best interests of Voices of Evangelism, its supporters and even its detractors,” Rodriguez said in a statement.

According to Rodriguez, the board of directors “does not believe that it is appropriate to further characterize the nature and content of any allegations against Perry Stone.”……..

read the rest of the article here.

from The Washington Examiner:

A preacher dressed in drag led a sermon for children on Sunday in Chicago.

Aaron Musser, the preacher at St. Luke’s Lutheran Church of Logan Square, said that instead of telling people how they should be joyful, he was showing them what makes him joyful, arguing his attire served as a dress rehearsal for the ultimate joy experienced upon the return of Jesus Christ.

“It’s been so hard to know what that joy will be because it’s been so long since some of us have been joyful. It’s been a difficult and tiring couple of years,” Musser said. “And I decided instead of telling you, ‘This is how I want you to be joyful,’ as we prepare for this dress rehearsal, I figured I would instead put on a dress as so many who have inspired me have done. I decided to follow their example, showing that liberation from oppressive laws clears a path for joy.”

Children have been increasingly exposed to drag queens in recent years, with several attending drag queen story hours at public libraries, museums, and recreation centers since 2015.

“Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is just what it sounds like — drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores,” the Drag Queen Story Hour website reads. “DQSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models. In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real.”

Isaac Simmons, known by his drag name of Ms. Penny Cost, became the first drag queen certified as a candidate for ordination in the United Methodist Church earlier this year. The ordainment process takes five years to complete.

I am pleased to see Herescope dive into this subject, as always they see the trend clearly and articulate it so well! Read all four parts:

Read Part 2: The Fishbowl

Read Part 3: Fake Normal

Read Part 4: Fake Choice

From Herescope:

“…FAKE prophets shall rise,
and shall shew signs and wonders,
to seduce,
if it were possible,
even the elect.”

(Mark 13:22)

Christians tend to think of FALSE prophets in terms of purveyors of heretical religious doctrine within the Church only. We also recognize false prophets in cults, the occult and the New Age Movement. But for the past half century we have also witnessed the rise of false prophets coming from seemingly secular paradigms in society such as Progressivism, Humanism, and Postmodernism. But these worldviews come with their own belief systems, codes of ethics, and behavioral norms. In other words, these ungodly systems promote a DIFFERENT spirituality based on FALSE theses which are not biblical Truth. In our lifetimes we have watched as advocates of these worldviews use their platforms of influence to proselytize their dogma.

The extent to which these false prophets have entered the Church is a concern we have often warned about. We are warning once again, but this time in a different context. It was the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer who tipped us off about FAKE prophets over fifty years ago. He identified the rise of a FAKE science that would be enhanced by technology and spun by media. He warned that their FAKE facts could be deadly.

“But wait:
Can we really trust the government of a scientist
merely because he wears a white coat?
Can we actually believe that such people will not manipulate
just because they are scientists?”
– Dr. Francis Schaeffer

“Modern Man the ManipulatorFAKE science narratives are what Scripture calls “science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20). Many science myths have now become part and parcel of our modern society. Concurrently there is much scientific fact that is being squelched. Thus many believers are having difficulty sorting out TRUTH from ERROR. This “sorting out process is known as DISCERNMENT.   In 1970 Dr. Francis Schaeffer warned the church about the rise of Progressivism, Humanism and Postmodernism. Specifically he wrote about “modern man the manipulator in chapter 7 of his book The Church at the End of the 20th Century (Inter-Varsity, 1970). With great foresight he predicted:

It is obvious: The future is open to manipulation. Who will do the manipulating? Will it be the new elite on the side of an Establishment totalitarianism or the Left Wing elite? Whichever side wins–or whoever achieves political or cultural power in the future–will have at his disposal manipulations that no totalitarian ruler in the past has ever had. None of these are only future; they all exist today waiting to be used by the coming manipulators.(p. 91)

 Dr. Schaeffer grimly anticipated a time when there would be an aggressive propagation of fake science that would establish an alternative worldview. It would set itself in opposition not only to Christianity, but also to freedom itself. He identified key “manipulators” of the truth “who change the TRUTH of God into a LIE” (Romans 1:25). He saw ominous signs of an arising scientific and technocratic elite who would aggressively alter law, history, religion, art, media, and technology in order to put themselves in power.  That day has now come upon us. 

The Original FAKE Science

Schaeffer classified the original fake science as evolution, i.e., Darwinism. Darwinism was really the first big experiment — not a true science experiment, but rather a grandiose psycho-social-spiritual experiment in altering man’s perception of God’s true reality. As a result much science has been flawed for the past several centuries. Darwinian science gave birth to a faulty geology (pun intended) about earth’s true age, Noah’s actual flood and current (and endtime) seismic events.[2] Evolutionary biology gave rise to tinkering with DNA.

 The false evolution paradigm obliterated the story about the fall of man in the Garden of Eden, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). To offer man a pathway to self-fulfillment other than the Gospel of salvation, evolution forged other disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, and psychology. In this way evolution has permeated the entire mindset of Western civilization, supplanting biblical Truth about the nature of man and the creation of the universe. (Read our landmark article “Esoteric Evolution”.) To a staggering extent the compromised postmodern Church world has bought into the Darwinian mindset, eviscerating the Gospel of salvation.[3]
 Schaeffer described how this evolutionary worldview could become a tool for manipulation of people: 

Note well: This is a non-objective, sociological science. Conclusions are determined by the way a scientist wants the result to turn out sociologically. It is a science which will manipulate society by the manipulations of scientific ‘fact.’ I do not believe that man without absolutes… will continue to maintain a high sense of objectivity. On one side, I think science will increasingly become only technology. On the other side, it will become sociological science and be a tool of manipulation in the hands of the manipulators.(p. 92)

 He presciently warned about a day when the science establishment elites would be tempted to seize power:

Beware, therefore, of the movement to give the scientific community the right to rule. They are not neutral in the old concept of scientific objectivity. Objectivity is a myth that will not hold simply because these men have no basis for it. Keep in mind that to these men morals are only a set of averages. Here, then, is a present form of manipulation which we can expect to get greater as one or the other elite takes more power–and especially if the Establishment elite takes over.(p. 92)[emphasis added]

 Observing the terrifying potentials of the new science that was emerging fifty years ago, he warned specifically about both “chemical and electrical manipulation.” He cited Arthur Koestler’s book The Ghost in the Machine which advocated drugging man to assist in our evolution. He reported on a December 1, 1969 Newsweek article predicting “drugs to blunt curiosity and initiative.” (p. 97) He also noticed  high profile scientists plotting ways to reduce the world’s population.

A DEADLY Science Narrative
The first global science experiment to reduce the world’s population was abortion. The public was fed the LIE by the Establishment Media and certain segments of the medical scientific community that an unborn baby is a merely a piece of tissue. Many believed this fake science narrative.
Personal Testimony: In 1984 I was a right to life leader.  A brave young college student volunteered to take a specimen of my pregnant urine into the local Planned Parenthood clinic so she could investigate them. She wanted to know what options they would give her when the urine sample tested positive for pregnancy. She was given a photocopied line drawing of a uterus with squiggly lines depicting the contents. No baby, no embryo, only black and white lines. The abortion industry wasn’t going to tell her the truth about fetal development. They made more money by persuading her to undergo the surgical procedure.

A year later I organized a local television showing of Dr. Bernard Nathanson’s film The Silent Scream which filmed an actual abortion via ultrasound. Dr. Nathanson was an atheist at the time. He told us he had personally been responsible for over 72,000 abortions. This new technology persuaded him that the very babies he had once killed could be saved. He believed in the potential of man’s reason, and he decided to employ ultrasound technology to show the accurate fact that a baby was being dismembered by suction. Once enlightened by this incontrovertible evidence, Dr. Nathanson assumed that rational scientists, medical personnel, politicians, the courts and the public would be appalled at the obvious destruction of a human life and seek to save it.

What happened when emerging neonatal technology revealed indisputable facts about the baby in the womb? Was there a return to rational thinking and reason? Did this change the scientific narrative? Was there widespread repentance amongst evangelicals, who were already complicit in abortions? No! By this time Christians were engaging in the same sexual sins that lead up to abortions. The media continued to parrot the fake science that the tender developing baby was “just a piece of tissue.” Many willfully chose to believe this obvious fraud. But, as Schaeffer noted, “modern man is a mystic” and “irrational” (p. 18). The silent Church was already compromised!

Read the full article here.

from PJ Media:

As if we needed more proof that indeed nothing is sacred these days, Newsweek reported that The Salvation Army (SA) is “incorporating Critical Race Theory (CRT)” and using an “anti-racist lens” throughout its organization in order to “analyze and combat racism.” That’s right, the 156-year-old Christian charity known worldwide for its Holiday Red Kettle campaign has gone “woke.”

Recently, the SA launched The International Social Justice Commission to serve as “The Salvation Army’s strategic voice to advocate for human dignity and social justice with the world’s poor and oppressed.” So, what exactly does that mean? That means that even the simple traditional act of charitable holiday giving has been appropriated by the social justice leftists as an opportunity to club white people over the head with racial wokeness.

According to another report, the Commission is “part of a push by the Christian charitable organization to embrace the ideas of Black Lives Matter, an activist group working to, among other things, ‘dismantle white privilege’ and ‘disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure.’”

Most concerning is the SA’s Let’s Talk About Racism “resource” that was “developed to guide The Salvation Army family in gracious discussions about overcoming the damage racism has inflicted upon our world.” Included in the resource are social justice “definitions of institutional and systemic racism.” Actual differences in life outcomes or “inequities” are attributed to racism and discrimination “not to individual effort and other circumstances.” Other topics covered in this resource are “police brutality, health care, and black unemployment,” which are linked to so-called “racial inequity.” In other words, the SA has adopted the leftist CRT racial social justice agenda, which holds that all white people are racists whether they admit it or not and all people of color (POCs) are victims of the racism of whites.

Another SA “resource” within the Commission is a “Study Guide on Racism” which says “the subtle nature of racism is such that people who are not consciously racist easily function with the privileges, empowerment, and benefits of the dominant ethnicity, thus unintentionally perpetuating injustice.” SA see racism as being so entrenched in society’s institutions and culture “that people can unintentionally and unwittingly perpetuate racial division.” For example, “a well-intentioned Sunday school curriculum that only uses white photography and imagery” is clearly racist, “systemic, and cruel.”

It’s ironic then that The Salvation Army Mission Statement is still:

The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God.

Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.

Where in the Bible does it say we should fight racism by turning racist hate against white people in some kind of cosmic quest for justice? It seems to me that the meaning of meeting human needs “without discrimination” has been twisted by the woke social-justice warriors forcing all white people “to assess their present circumstances and work towards just and equal communities” as the leftist think they should be and if that means discriminating against white people, so be it. How is any of that preaching or following the gospel?

On Saturday, Fox News reported the Salvation Army tried to distance itself from the Commission in a statement:

“The Salvation Army is not asking donors to apologize for their skin color, and we do not endorse any philosophy or ideology. Such claims are simply false and injure our ability to fulfill our mission, which is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.”

It’s interesting that SA is now trying to distance itself from the Commission, however, on the Commission’s website it clearly states: “We are part of The Salvation Army’s International Headquarters and our office is based in New York City.” That seems like an endorsement of the Commission’s mission to me.

from The Most Important News:

Things are starting to get really weird.  What I am about to share with you sounds very strange, but it is all true.  Before I get into it, let me ask you a question.  If you could have a vaccine passport permanently embedded into your hand, would you do it?  Amazingly, some people in Sweden are willingly doing this to themselves.  They are putting microchips that contain their vaccine passport information into their hands, and they are raving about how convenient this is.  You can actually watch a video of this being done to someone right here.  The video is not in English, but you will be able to understand what is happening.

I was absolutely floored when I first watched that.

Do they not understand where this could lead?

Society is increasingly being divided into two classes of people, and the class of people that is willingly conforming is being granted many “privileges” that the other group is being denied.

Many believe that this is “just a phase” and that things will eventually go back to normal.

But the truth is that this is not “just a phase” at all.

For a long time, health authorities were promising us that if we all did exactly what they asked that the pandemic would come to an end.

Unfortunately, now they are openly admitting that COVID is going to be with us permanently

The White House’s chief medical adviser, Anthony Fauci, says it’s unlikely that the Covid-19 coronavirus will ever be wiped out, and insists the world is just going to have to start living with it.

During an interview with CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ on Sunday, Fauci said he didn’t believe Covid-19 was ever going to entirely go away. He noted that the world had only ever eliminated one infection completely: smallpox.

“We’re going to have to start living with Covid. I believe that’s the case because I don’t think we’re going to eradicate it,” Fauci told CBS.

If we are “going to have to start living with COVID”, that means that all of the infrastructure that they are now putting in place will be with us from now on.

That means that there isn’t going to be an end to the vaccine passports, the mandates or the injections.

In fact, the CEO of Pfizer says that “we’re going to have an annual revaccination”

“I think we’re going to have an annual revaccination and that should be able to keep us really safe.”

You are going to keep getting shots year after year after year in order to keep earning the “privileges” that you have been granted.

How sick is that?

They want to make their authoritarian measures a permanent part of our lives, and this is what our society is going to look like from now on unless we take a stand.

The good news is that some courts here in the United States are starting to reject the mandates that Joe Biden tried to implement.  On Monday, a federal court blocked Biden’s mandate for health care workers in 10 states, and on Tuesday a different court blocked that same mandate on a nationwide basis

A federal court has issued a nationwide injunction protecting health care workers across the country from Joe Biden’s COVID vaccine mandate.

Yesterday, in response to a multi-state lawsuit led by Missouri, a federal court barred the Biden administration from enforcing a vaccine mandate for health care workers in 10 states who are employed at federally-funded health care clinics. That means they doctors and nurses can’t be fired for refusing the COVID vaccine despite Biden’s federal mandate requiring them to get it.

Today, a federal court in Louisiana expanded on that ruling and blocked the vaccine mandate nationwide.

But just because they have a legal setback or two does not mean that they are going to stop trying.

Over in Germany, it is being reported that incoming Chancellor Olaf Scholz wants to impose a vaccine mandate on every single German starting in February

Germany’s incoming Chancellor Olaf Scholz is in favor of introducing mandatory coronavirus vaccination for all Germans as early as February, an official close to Scholz said.

During a crisis meeting Tuesday between the outgoing government of Chancellor Angela Merkel and the premiers of the German federal states, Scholz “signaled his sympathy for such a regulation,” the official told POLITICO.

Such a measure would have to be approved by the German Bundestag, the official said, adding that the mandatory vaccination could come “at the beginning of February.”

Other major industrialized nations are considering similar measures.

If I was living in Germany, I would leave.  Of course the same thing could be said about Australia, New Zealand and a bunch of other countries that have gone in a deeply authoritarian direction.

Once vaccines become mandatory for an entire population, vaccine passports will be absolutely necessary for anyone that still wants to live anything that even resembles a “normal life”.

Whether it is on your phone, on a card that you show or actually embedded in your skin, you will need to take it with you wherever you go in case you are stopped by law enforcement authorities.

Needless to say, all of this sounds eerily similar to what we witnessed back in the 1930s.

The people that are doing this to us have taken their masks off and they are showing us who they really are.

These are such dark times, and I have a feeling that they are about to get a whole lot darker.

from Culture Watch:

DIFFICULT BIBLE PASSAGES: MALACHI 2:10: On a surface reading this verse does not appear to be all that problematic. But as with many passages in this series, it is the way it is so readily misused and abused by many others that causes the problem. The verse in question says this: “Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us?”

The misuse of this text comes about when cultists and heretics try to make the case that we are all not only God’s children by physical creation, but we are all also his children in a spiritual sense as well. Universalism is one of the names of this particular heresy – the idea that we are all saved, that there is no hell and final judgment, and that we are all doing just fine with God. See more on this theological error here: billmuehlenberg.com/2011/03/12/against-universalism/

There are several challenges that we can bring to bear in dealing with such a faulty understanding of this verse in particular and the whole of Scripture in general. The first thing to say is this understanding is only partly right. And that is how cults and heresies usually flourish: by using part of the truth, and twisting it as well.

We ARE all God’s children in the obvious sense that God created every single one of us. We all exist because God made us. So in that sense, sure, everyone is a child of God. But Scripture also uses this notion of being a child of God in a different sense – a different spiritual and theological sense.

That is, only those who are in a right relationship with God are seen to be children of God. This is clear from all of Scripture. Ancient Israel as a whole was seen as being part of God’s family, but not the surrounding pagan nations. And in the New Testament only those who come to Christ in faith and repentance are regarded as being a child of God.

Jesus made this crystal clear when he rebuked the religious leaders of the day who were clearly NOT in right relationship with God. He called them children of the devil (see the whole exchange in Matthew 25:31-46). That is the condition of everyone unless they make a deliberate turn away from sin and turn to God. But all this I discuss in much more detail elsewhere: billmuehlenberg.com/2016/01/13/no-we-are-not-all-gods-children/

The second obvious thing to say about this erroneous interpretation of this text is this: as always, context is king. Simply reading this verse in light of its immediate context makes it clear that there is no universalistic mush being promoted here. Here is what we find in verses 10-12:

Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers? Judah has been faithless, and abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem. For Judah has profaned the sanctuary of the Lord, which he loves, and has married the daughter of a foreign god. May the Lord cut off from the tents of Jacob any descendant of the man who does this, who brings an offering to the Lord of hosts!

These few verses make it quite clear that not everyone is in right relationship with God and all part of one big happy family. Here we read about the great sin of going after other gods. We even read about how such people will be “cut off”. So even the Israelites, who were seen as being God’s people, God’s children, had to abide by the covenant conditions, or they would be cut off. They would NOT be part of God’s family.

Let me appeal to a few commentators here. One thing that arises here is this: there has been some question as to who the ‘father’ is in this text. Some think it is Adam, or Abraham. But most see God as the referent here. Says John Mackay:

But it is more probable that ‘Father’ refers to God, who has already been likened to a father in 1:6. Such a description of God is found frequently in the Old Testament (Exod. 4:22-23; Deut. 32:6; Isa. 63:16; 64:8; Jer. 2:27; 3:4, 19; 31:9). It is God’s covenant relation to Israel by which they were adopted as sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty (2 Cor. 6:18) that is being presented, and not some universal fatherhood of God.

Read the full article here.

To what extent a patented synthetic life form places a lien on an individual who may wittingly or unwittingly consume it.  Well, if you have any doubts about the ultimate answer to that question and the lengths that those in power intend to go, check out the following article.

As the article notes, the “plan” was outlined in a United Nations-sponsored conference known as the Brundtland Commission, which was later published by Oxford University Press, under the title Our Common Future.

The article is well worth reading in its entirety, especially for its focus on the hypocrisy of global and corporate elites when they express concern for “the environment” and it lays bare Satan’s attempt to try and co-opt and take over ownership of the Human Race and the rest of God’s creation. We all know where that leads but we also know the destruction that will be wrought in this attempt!

From the article:

“In other words, to establish ownership over “biodiversity” it was only necessary to establish a patent lien on a species by the biotechnological or genetic manipulation of that species. The implication of this statement is that every species on the planet will have to be so modified in order to establish that lien. The process can be made much simpler by the introduction of genetic technologies capable of traveling from one species to another and executing biotechnological programming. Think of it as the next step in the Mon(ster)santo strategy of suing farmers whose property is discovered to have GMO plants growing on it, whether known to the farmer or not. Unlike the Mon(ster)santo strategy, it is no longer necessary to send out actual human spies, one can simply engineer the tracking of the modifications by including the tracking in the modification.  Think Baal Gates here.”

—————————————————————————————————————————–

In 1992, the original UN Convention on Biological Diversity was conducted in parallel with the Agenda 21 Conference under the name of the UN Conference on Economic Development (UNCED). Both were held in Rio de Janiero, Brazil, and were sponsored by the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Agenda 21 was called “the agenda for the 21st century” and was centered around Sustainable Development, a resource-based economic system closely resembling historic Technocracy.[1]

According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development:

Sustainable development has been defined in many ways, but the most frequently quoted definition is from Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report:

“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”[2]

The book, Our Common Future, was published in 1987 and became the blueprint for the Rio conference just 5 years later. The author and head of the UN study known as the Brundtland Commission, was chaired by Trilateral Commission member Gro Harlem Brundtland. She was the Prime Minister of Norway and previously, the Minister of the Environment. It is no surprise that a Trilateral Commission member created this policy that has literally turned the world upside down. In fact, it was the Trilateral Commission in 1973 who originally declared that their members would create its self-declared “New International Economic Order”. (see Trilaterals Over Washington, Volumes I and II, Wood & Sutton)

The Rio conference proposed the question, what can be done to save the world from excessive development that causes pollution, global warming, loss of rain forests, etc. The answer was that more development was needed and by the same actors that were previously wrecking habitats and plundering nations. In other words, more development was needed to erase the effects of previous development. Brundtland convinced the UN that this somehow made sense, and it was subsequently adopted as “the agenda for the 21st century” in 1992.

Others saw through the smoke and mirrors. Two environmental researchers and authors noted in their book, The Earth Brokers“free trade and its promoters came to be seen as the solution to the global ecological crisis.”[3] They could not have been more blunt:

“We argue that UNCED has boosted precisely the type of industrial development that is destructive for the environment, the planet, and its inhabitants. We see how, as a result of UNCED, the rich will get richer, the poor poorer, while more and more of the planet is destroyed in the process.”[4]

In 2021, this result could not be more clearly seen: the rich are off the charts, the poor are in the gutters and the planet and its economic systems are in tatters.

How did we get here? Here is the first hint when they concluded:

“Neither Brundtland, nor the secretariat, nor the governments drafted plan to examine the pitfalls of free trade and industrial development. Instead, they wrote up a convention on how to ‘develop’ the use of biodiversity through patents and biotechnology.”[5]

For all else that UNCED purported to be, its true mission was capturing and using biodiversity for the sake of the biotechnology industry.

This fact has been largely overlooked until the Great (pandemic) Panic of 2020, when it became apparent that the global takeover was being orchestrated by elements of that very same biotechnology industry.

Agenda for the 21st century, indeed.

What Biodiversity really means

Once I learned what to look for, I saw it everywhere. Let’s start with Our Common Future (Brundtland, 1987):

“The diversity of species is necessary for the normal functioning of ecosystems and the biosphere as a whole. The genetic material in wild species contributes billions of dollars yearly to the world economy in the form of improved crop species, new drugs and medicines, and raw materials for industry.”[6]

The specific development of biodiversity is seen in Chapter 6, Species and Ecosystems: Resources for Development:

“Species and their genetic materials promise to play an expanding role in development, and a powerful economic rationale is emerging to bolster the ethical, aesthetic, and scientific case for preserving them. The genetic variability and germplasm material of species make contributions to agriculture, medicine, and industry worth many billions of dollars per year… If nations can ensure the survival of species, the world can look forward to new and improved foods, new drugs and medicines, and new raw materials for industry.”[7]

Further on, Brundtland states:

“Vast stocks of biological diversity are in danger of disappearing just as science is leaning how to exploit genetic variability through the advances of genetic engineering… It would be grim irony indeed if just as new genetic engineering techniques begin to let us peer into life’s diversity and use genes more efficiently to better human conditions, we looked and found this treasure sadly depleted.”[8]

Conclusion #1: The word “biodiversity” is explained to mean “genetic resources”. Genes are something to be exploited and used more efficiently than they are used in their natural state.

Turning back to The Earth Brokers, the authors’ observations provide an eye-witness account of what they actually saw at the UNCED and Biodiversity Convention summit:

“The convention implicitly equates the diversity of life – animals and plants – to the diversity of genetic codes, for which read genetic resourcesBy doing so, diversity becomes something that modern science can manipulate. Finally, the convention promotes biotechnology as being ‘essential for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.”[9]

If there is any doubt as to what the goal is, they conclude with this mind-blowing statement:

“The main stake raised by the Biodiversity Convention is the issue of ownership and control over biological diversity… the major concern was protecting the pharmaceutical and emerging biotechnology industries.”[10]

To reinforce the thought, the authors bluntly stated,

“they wrote up a convention on how to ‘develop’ the use of biodiversity through patents and biotechnology.”[11]

Note carefully that ownership and control over genes was not a side issue or a minor stake:It was the MAIN STAKE!

Conclusion #2: Genetic resources means genetic material is to be owned, exploited and controlled through genetic engineering performed by the Biotech industry.

Conclusion #3: UNCED and Agenda 21 was largely a smokescreen to obscure the reality of Conclusion #2.

Read the full article here.

from Got Questions:

Some see in Hebrews 12:1 the idea that people in heaven might be able to look down and see us: “Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses. . . .” The “witnesses” are the heroes of faith listed in Hebrews 11, and the fact that we are “surrounded” by them leads some commentators to understand those heroes (and possibly other people) are looking down on us from heaven.

The idea that people are looking down from heaven to see what we’re doing is common in popular culture. But, as much as we might like the notion that we’re being watched by our departed loved ones, that’s not what Hebrews 12:1 is teaching. Building on Hebrews 11, the author begins drawing up some practical lessons (that’s why chapter 12 begins with “Therefore”). The “witnesses” are the people whom God commends for their faith in chapter 11, and there is a large crowd of them in heaven. The question is, in what way are they “witnesses”?

The proper interpretation of Hebrews 12:1 is that the men and women forming the “great cloud of witnesses” are witness to the value of living life by faith. Their Old Testament stories give testimony to the blessings of choosing faith over fear. To paraphrase the start of Hebrews 12:1, “Since we have so many tried-and-true examples of proven faith . . . .” So, it’s not that people are in heaven watching us (as if our lives on earth are so interesting or they have nothing better to do!), but that those who have gone before us have set a lasting example for us. The record of their lives bears witness to faith and God and truth.

Hebrews 12:1 continues, “Let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us.” Because of the faith and endurance of believers who went before us, we are inspired to stay the course in our own race of faith. We follow the examples of Abraham and Moses and Rahab and Gideon and etc.

Some people point to the rich man’s mention of his brothers in Luke 16:28 as proof that departed souls (in Hades, at least) can see events on earth. However, the passage never says that the rich man could see his brothers; he knew he had brothers, and he knew they were unbelievers. Also, some people use Revelation 6:10 as a proof text: the tribulation martyrs call for God to avenge their deaths. Again, this passage says nothing about the martyrs seeing people on earth; it simply says that they knew they deserved justice and desired the Lord to take action.

The Bible doesn’t specifically say that people in heaven cannot look down on us, so we can’t be dogmatic. However, it is unlikely that they can. People in heaven are likely preoccupied with other things such as worshiping God and enjoying the glories of heaven.

Whether or not people in heaven can look down and see us, we are not running our race for them. We are not hoping for their approval or listening for their applause. Hebrews 12:2 keeps our focus where it belongs: “Fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith.” Jesus is our blessed hope, no other (Titus 2:13).

%d bloggers like this: