Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Apostasy’ Category

Just give me a few days and I will come up with an even more outlandish reason for the coronavirus that misquotes the Bible very badly to justify it. Meanwhile the following articles show some of the horrible blindness coming out apostate Profits:

“Prophet Says Coronavirus Would Be Over ‘In an Hour’ If China Gave Religious Freedom”

“Prophetess From Bethel Decrees and Declares Coronavirus “Conquered”

“Prophet Says Coronavirus is the Devil’s Way of Stopping President Trump”

“Prophet Says Coronavirus Vaccine Will Be Mark of the Beast”

“Prophet, Lou Engle, Says Three-Day Fast Will Stop Coronavirus”

“Perry Stone Says Coronavirus is a Scheme of Satan to Promote Socialism”

“Rodney Howard Browne promised to bind coronavirus from the United States”

“Jim Bakker claimed his venereal disease ointment also heals coronavirus”

“Rick Wiles claimed Christians are immune altogether from coronavirus”

“Another prophet declared that Republican states were immune from the coronavirus”

“Kenneth Copeland said that touching his oily hand through the television would heal coronavirus.”

 

Read Full Post »

from Reformation Charlotte:

CRU — formerly Campus Crusade for Christ — has been exposed as a social justice political organization with the sole intention of turning young, Christian-minded students into progressive activists. Ranging from LGBTQ activism to Cultural Marxism and intersectionality, CRU has hosted a number of events with the intent of advancing both political and theological liberalism.

Sojourners is an ecumenical publication founded by the progressive political activist and theological mystic, Jim Wallis, who has admitted to — along with SBC leader, Russell Moore — receiving funding from George Soros to advance an open-borders agenda in the US. Sojourners hosts a number of Roman Catholics and mystics — among them, Kaitlin Curtice.

Curtice is described on her website as,

… a young, Native American Christian mystic who portrays the sacredness of the human condition in everyday language through her writing.

Curtice promotes the heresy of contemplation (contemplative prayer and meditation) and writes of her experiences with “other realms” of life,

By contemplation, I am basically referring to the work of creating and sustaining an inner life of peace, quiet, listening to the Divine/Mystery/Higher Power/God , and letting the overflow of that love stretch into other realms of life.

She is a climate change activist who worships the creation over the creator,

Perhaps if we returned to loving the land, waters, and all beings that live and breathe around us, we might learn how to love our human relatives again.

Nowhere in any of Curtice’s works or writings does she show one iota of understanding of the biblical gospel. Of course, we should not expect a Catholic to understand the gospel as the Catholic Church’s gospel is false. Yet, even in the spiritual blindness of the Roman Catholic Church, many Catholics still have a good grasp on general revelation, morality, and general common sense. This common grace is a gift from God to all creation — not just Christians. Yet, Curtice has not only suppressed the truth of the cross, but the truth of God and his revelation altogether.

Yet, for some reason, the Evangelical organization CRU — who is closely tied to the Southern Baptist Convention and The Gospel Coalition — sees a need to partner with people like this. Why? Because CRU, as outlined in Romans 1, has exchanged the truth about God (the gospel) for a lie (social justice activism).

By the way, did you know Reformation Charlotte has a Christian gear and apparel store? Check it out at ReformedGear.com.

Matt Mikalatos, a CRU leader in Portland Oregon desperately tried to invite Curtice to speak at one of CRU’s events. Thankfully, she declined and thousands of students did not have to be exposed to her spiritual poison. As seen in the screenshot below, Curtice did not want to sign the contract that was required.

When Mikalatos was asked about her up and coming presence at the event, Mikalatos was seemingly ecstatic that they were trying to get more Roman Catholics — including a priest who does idolatrous paintings of Jesus — involved in their work.

20190929_1409146123474437059293183

It is safe to say that CRU has largely apostatized from its original biblical, gospel-centered founding. What used to be a mission-focused evangelistic organization centered around biblical truth has now become an ecumenical gospel-less social justice and progressive political activist crusade.

If you were to die today, where would you go? Heaven? Hell? Not sure?

Read Full Post »

2 Corinthians 11:13-15:

“For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their actions.…”

from OneZero:

One of the charges against Socrates was that his arguments were like robots. As the Greek philosopher approached his own trial, Euthyphro told Socrates, “You are like Daedalus.” He meant that just as Daedalus made automata that moved on their own in Greek myth, Socrates’ arguments were so persuasive that his ideas seemed to move under their own power. Even 2,500 years ago, automata inspired both fascination and fear.

I recently speculated about whether a machine could have a mystical experience. If we aren’t careful, the claim of divine inspiration can make the mystic’s words influential. When someone, whether human or machine, claims to have peeked behind the veil, we don’t know whether the prophet or the mystic has really glimpsed the divine. We only know what they claim, and it’s up to us to decide whether to trust them.

Deus ex machina

My interest in the connection between religion and robots is related to the charge against Socrates, and it’s a pragmatic interest rather than a technical one. What matters is not whether we have invented true artificial intelligence, but whether we believe we have invented it. If we trust the machine, we might let it function as a mystic or a priest, even if it isn’t one.

This raises the interesting question of what to do when someone makes a machine that is actually intended to play the role of clergy. Some pastors joke that they help people “hatch, match, and dispatch,” by celebrating births, weddings, and funerals. They joke, but even if we aren’t religious, we do tend to trust professionals to guide us through those serious moments. A few years ago, Mark Zuckerberg suggested that Facebook could play a similar role, giving meaning to lives just as a pastor does for a church. Given the amount of trust we put in clergy — and given the many examples of Facebook’s untrustworthiness — Zuckerberg’s suggestion is alarming. What does that trust entail?

Maybe our intention is to distance ourselves from the difficult work of care. Our machines might offer one kind of care, while being the physical expression of our lack of interest in those who need the care.

That’s an important question, because we’re being given more and more opportunities to trust machines to act in the roles of clergy. The company SoftBank Robotics created Pepper the robot to chant at Buddhist funerals in Japan, and a church in Germany programmed a machine to pronounce traditional blessings. Very recently in Dubai, the government’s cultural and Islamic affairs agency IACAD launched the first-ever “Virtual Ifta” that uses A.I. to issue fatwas. Other groups have experimented with machines that can hear confessions, offer prayers, or even offer sacraments.

Sinless machines?

Religious communities will need to decide whether they accept machines performing these functions within their traditions, but there’s a bigger issue that affects all of us: these machines are tools we have made, and to various degrees, they already “make arguments move around.” If they persuade us with voices that sound divine, we only have ourselves to blame.

Ursula Le Guin once wrote that “a machine is more blameless, more sinless even than any animal. It has no intentions whatsoever but our own.” The function of machines is the result of their design, even if the designers did not intend that function. As Charles Sanders Peirce wrote, even if we eventually make machines that can “wind their way through the labyrinths” of complex thinking, “the machine would be utterly devoid of original initiative, and would only do the special kind of thing it had been calculated to do.”

Perhaps someday Peirce will be proven wrong, and we will have machines that act originally and creatively. But in general we want machines that do what we tell them to do. We might want a machine to write original music, but we don’t want too much creativity; what we want is a machine that figures out what people already like, and writes songs that will sell. Only quirky academics are likely to pay for a machine that wrote songs that machines wanted to hear. Peirce adds, with some irony, “We no more want an original machine, than a housebuilder would want an original journeyman, or an American board of college trustees would hire an original professor.”

So we might not want a truly mystical machine, but maybe we could use machines that do the best things clergy do for us. A machine that resembles a human could chat all night with a lonely person, and might make a very good counselor. It could offer comforting words at the bedside of someone who suffers from dementia, or who needs a listening ear. It could read stories or sing songs. Why not automate the singing of hymns, the reciting of scripture, the chanting of prayer, the pronouncement of blessings? All of those things are desirable, at least to some people.

What risks come with the benefits of care-machines? As Euthyphro and Socrates point out, automated ideas and religious authority can be very persuasive.

But are there kinds of work, like caring for our communities and for our own bodies, that we should not automate? Tools amplify our efforts. They also amplify our intentions, and maybe our intention is to distance ourselves from the difficult work of care. Our machines might offer one kind of care, while being the physical expression of our lack of interest in those who need the care.

Here’s another question: What risks come with the benefits of care-machines? As Euthyphro and Socrates point out, automated ideas and religious authority can be very persuasive. Automata that speak and act with religious authority could be doubly persuasive. We worry about the influence of corrupt human clergy; what political, ethical, and economic influence could automated clergy have?

And here’s a third question: A machine can repeat ritualized “hatch, match, and dispatch” words for us, but can it share our experience as an empathetic companion? And if it can’t, does that diminish the meaning of the ritual?

What has it got in its pocketses?

In Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels, the Lilliputians try to understand Gulliver by looking in his pockets. They have never seen a pocket watch before, so they observe how he uses it. They decide it must be “the god he worships: for he seldom did any thing without consulting it. He called it his oracle, and said it pointed out the time for every action of his life.”

The pocket watch was a new technology in Swift’s time. At first, pocket watches helped us to be on time. Little by little, we shifted from measuring our lives in hours to measuring them in seconds. The technology we invented to help us observe time wound up changing the way we viewed our own lives. There is a lesson here.

Paul Virilio puts a finer point on this: “When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck; when you invent the plane you also invent the plane crash; and when you invent electricity, you invent electrocution… Every technology carries its own negativity, which is invented at the same time as technical progress.”

Whether we believe in gods or not, our technologies can begin to function like gods, or like the priests that tell us how to behave. Even if we don’t intend them to, our machines can become our oracles, and where there are oracles, there are people ready to profit from those oracles.

Pandora’s Facebook Box has been opened. I don’t know if robots can be priests, but some are beginning to function like priests. This calls for care on our part, and I don’t think it is wise to expect a machine to care on our behalf.

Read Full Post »

from Life Site News:

November 29, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – Chick-fil-A has betrayed its Christian customers, and emboldened the LGBT mob. If you’re still defending them, then please, read on.

Chick-fil-A provoked the ire of the LGBT lobby in 2012 when its CEO Dan Cathy affirmed the Biblical view of marriage. But in the process they became a cultural icon for Christian conservatives, who flocked to the restaurant in droves. With their support, Chick-fil-A’s sales have more than doubled since 2012.

But after seven years of attacks from the LGBT mob, Chick-fil-A announced Nov. 18 that it would cease funding its remaining grantees that oppose same-sex “marriage,” including the Salvation Army.

Many of Chick-fil-A’s supporters, including LifeSite, have decried the decision as a capitulation.

At LifeSite, we have run countless articles over the years touting Chick-fil-A, and now we have taken a leading role in raising the alarm. We launched a petition to the company, garnering over 40,000 signatures so far. The American Family Association launched a petition that has grown even larger, with 102,000 signatures.

But Chick-fil-A has gone on the offensive, denying that it capitulated and claiming that its Christian mission remains as strong as ever. They managed to convince Franklin Graham, who sought to reassure Christians of Chick-fil-A’s commitments.

As a result, Chick-fil-A’s supporters have claimed the capitulation narrative is fake news, and have accused LifeSite and others of perpetuating a false story.

But that is wrong, and naïve.

Chick-fil-A did cave. Sure, they have kept God in their mission statement. Yes, they say they will remain closed on Sundays. They are keeping a soft Christian identity, for now. But where it’s hard – where the Gospel butts up against our culture of death and sexual licentiousness – they have indeed caved. And that’s where it counts.

Let’s remember that Chick-fil-A was clear when they announced the decision on Nov. 18 that defunding these groups was about rebranding in order to expand into new markets. The company’s president, Tim Tassopoulos, said:

There’s no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are. There are lots of articles and newscasts about Chick-fil-A, and we thought we needed to be clear about our message.

The decision comes as Chick-fil-A is beginning to expand out of the U.S., into Canada and the U.K. Their new restaurant in Toronto faced immense backlash. And in London, England, the backlash was so severe that they are closing their first restaurant.

With a massive push from its Christian fan base, Chick-fil-A has skyrocketed to the third largest restaurant chain in the U.S. – behind only McDonald’s and Starbucks – with over $10 billion in revenue. Of course they want to expand now outside the U.S. But it appears they are willing to abandon their core customers to do it.

This was a flash point – a big cultural moment when the mob can declare victory in the public eye. But the reality is Chick-fil-A went off course very soon after Cathy’s comments in 2012, when they began withdrawing funding from the most ardently pro-family of the Christian groups they had been supporting, like the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family. In 2014, Cathy said that while he maintains his personal opposition to same-sex “marriage,” he had decided to keep quiet about it:

The bottom line is we have a responsibility here to keep the whole of the organization in mind and it has to take precedence over the personal expression and opinion on social issues.

Now, as supporters dig deeper, they’re seeing that Chick-fil-A has quietly been betraying their Christian customers for years. According to the Chick-fil-A Foundation’s IRS filings they have already been giving money to pro-abortion and leftist groups. Most shocking, as revealed Nov. 26 by pro-life leader Ryan Bomberger, Chick-fil-A donated $2,500 to the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2017.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a virulently anti-Christian group, and arguably one of the biggest agents of the soft persecution of faithful Christians in the U.S. today. It is famous for its “hate map” targeting pro-family groups that promote Biblical teaching on homosexuality.

In 2012 domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins cited their hate map as his inspiration after he entered the Family Research Council’s DC headquarters with the intention of gunning down its employees. In his backpack Corkins was carrying Chick-fil-A sandwiches, and intended to rub them in the faces of his victims. Thank God for the courage of FRC’s security guard Leonardo Johnson, who was shot while subduing Corkins.

And we learn now from the Family Research Council that Chick-fil-A never reached out to them even privately after the attack.

Yet five years later Chick-fil-A gave money to the very anti-Christian group that inspired the attack.

Chick-fil-A is continuing to tout its Christian values, remaining closed on Sundays, but as they abandon their principles, it’s beginning to appear that they are using the Gospel as a marketing tool.

This isn’t about the groups they are defunding. The Salvation Army, in particular, is not fully pro-life and I would not advocate giving them money. It’s about the message Chick-fil-A is sending by defunding them – and that is that they are distancing themselves from organizations that uphold a Biblical view of sexuality. They are capitulating to the LGBT mob, and emboldening them, showing that their persistence pays off. That we will cave if they come at us hard enough and long enough. And thus, Chick-fil-A is, in fact, encouraging the persecution of faithful Christians who cannot and will not capitulate.

The persecution is growing in Europe, North America, and around the world, and we need to be ready. It will take a heroic faith – deep conviction, and a willingness to give up everything. Christ is clear in the Gospel:

They will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name’s sake. … You will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and kinsmen and friends, and some of you they will put to death; you will be hated by all for my name’s sake.

You know what we should fear more than persecution? That the persecution would come, and we would miss it because of our own apathy. That our faith is so lukewarm that we’re not deemed worthy of suffering for it. We don’t seek out martyrdom – but we should make sure our conviction is worthy of it.

Read Full Post »

Where do you start with detailing how fundamentally flawed this pronouncement is? The Pope’s statement, to anyone who knows God’s word, is like the final punctuation in a multi-volume book detailing why the Roman Catholic Church always has been and still is a false church!

Now I have no doubt that there may be climate change, however THERE IS NO verifiable proof that this is caused by man. Secondly Anthropomorphic Climate Change clearly denies Biblical creation. It views man as just another species no different than animals, and whats worse classifies mankind as a kind of out of control virus that throughout most of his history has wreaked havoc on the earth!

from the Daily Mail:

Pope Francis is considering introducing ‘ecological sins’ in a new bid to battle climate change.

Speaking in Rome on Friday, Pope Francis said it’s ‘a duty’ to introduce the new sin to the Catholic Church’s teachings as a way to protect ‘our common home’.

This comes after the Pope held a three-week bishops’ assembly, called a synod, last month which addressed environmental dangers in the Amazon

Speaking on Friday, he said: ‘We have to introduce, we are thinking about it, in the catechism of the Catholic Church, the sin against ecology, the sin against our common home, because it’s a duty.’

He was addressing members of the International Association of Penal Law in Rome, Crux Now reports.

At the same event, the pope also said that politicians who rage against homosexuals, gypsies and Jews remind him of Hitler.

‘It is not coincidental that at times there is a resurgence of symbols typical of Nazism,’ Francis said in an address to participants of an international conference on criminal law.

‘And I must confess to you that when I hear a speech someone responsible for order or for a government, I think of speeches by Hitler in 1934, 1936,’ he said, departing from his prepared address.

‘With the persecution of Jews, gypsies, and people with homosexual tendencies, today these actions are typical (and) represent ”par excellence” a culture of waste and hate. That is what was done in those days and today it is happening again.’

During the 1933-45 Nazi regime in Germany, six million Jews were killed and homosexuals and gypsies were among those sent to extermination camps.

Pope Francis did not name any politicians or countries as the targets of his criticism.

In Brazil, President Jair Bolsonaro had a history of making homophobic, racist and sexist public remarks before he took office on January 1. He told one interviewer he would rather have a dead son than a gay son.

 

Read Full Post »

Update: Pope Francis’s apology over Amazon statues theft

from The American Spectator:

Tourists in Rome are long familiar with the image of Romulus and Remus suckling the teats of a wolf. But this week visitors to the Pan-Amazon Synod encountered a new image: an Amazonian mother suckling a dog. That picture hangs in a church next to the Vatican: Santa Maria in Traspontina. I wandered into it the other day and was struck by the jarring contrast between its stunning Baroque interior and the bonkers propaganda plastered on and near its walls. Much of the church had been turned into a shrine to the plight and nature-worship of Amazonians. Beneath the picture of the woman nursing a dog (while carrying a baby), a poster declares fatuously, “Everything is Connected.”

The poster captures the sheer obnoxiousness of the pope’s “ecological” kick. What a dismal devolution Rome has suffered under him. What will he do next? Turn the Pantheon back into a pagan temple? Why not? If Amazonian pantheism is a “religious experience” worthy of Catholic respect, why not revive ancient paganism, too? Perhaps the pope’s next synod can rehabilitate Nero.

Stripped of all of its pious cant, the pope’s Pan-Amazon Synod is nothing more than a bald violation of the First Commandment. Pope Francis is placing strange idols before the Triune God — in this case, Amazonian ones. Last week, he had a contingent of Indian activists — some of whom I have heard were flown over to Rome first-class by the German bishops — perform pagan rituals in the Vatican gardens. In that moment, every prediction of his anti-modernist predecessors came true: they all said that if the Church adopted the subjectivism of the “Enlightenment,” it would end up blessing false religions.

But more is at work here than simply the pope’s usual religious relativism. Why did he select the Amazon as his pretext to undermine doctrine and discipline? He could have chosen other remote regions. Why that one? I am told by a seasoned Vatican observer that the answer lies with the German bishops, who are largely financing this farce and its accompanying propaganda.

“This is about bringing the Vatican and the United Nations closer together,” he says. “The German bishops don’t care about Amazonian Indians, and they certainly don’t care about people not receiving the sacraments. Just look at Germany and how few people even frequent the sacraments there. What the German bishops care about is that the Church is more and more incorporated into the work of the United Nations.” The subject of suffering Amazonians is just an excuse, he says, for the “United Nations to treat the Church as one of its instruments,” with the complete backing of the Vatican.

Before the synod started, the pope had been babbling on about the binding quality of UN pronouncements. It is no coincidence that his silly gathering is crawling with UN observers, such as Jeffrey Sachs, whose consulting racket includes trying to convince dioceses and religious orders to “divest from oil companies” and the like. I have seen a number of these UN creeps self-importantly jump out of gas-guzzling SUVs near the Vatican. They don’t appear too worried about their own carbon footprint. Indeed, they always seem to be accompanied by a raft of superfluous security guards and flaks.

The Vatican is looking awful these days — graffiti, ugly cattle barricades, and a paramilitary presence, as if it is waiting any moment for an outbreak of the kind of Islamic terrorism the pope assures us doesn’t exist. At times, I feel like I am in the middle of an Italian farce. The other day I was eating next to an African priest and nun who appeared to be on a date. Sure enough, her hand slid over to his hand.

Architecturally and artistically, Rome remains a treat. But religiously, it is depressing as hell. Just stand by one of the Vatican gates and watch priests whip off their collars the moment they step outside, as if the priesthood is nothing more than a 9-to-5 job. Or sit in a café and listen to their pathetically worldly banter.

The street Borgo Pio, not far from one of the Vatican’s gates, is where many of the ecclesiastical heavies hang out. Last Sunday I saw Cardinal Seán O’Malley, Cardinal Joseph Tobin, and Bishop Robert McElroy eating dinner at one of the restaurants on the street. Here was my chance to ask them about the synod and related matters. As they ambled back to the Vatican, I caught up with them and tried to conduct a brief interview. They disdainfully begged off, with Tobin, who no doubt remembered my article about the soap actor living in his rectory, saying laughingly, “Oh, George, oh, George.” O’Malley called my questions “hostile.” McElroy, the most darkly ideological of the three, just broodingly and quietly walked away. For all their talk about “dialogue,” the last thing they wanted to do on the eve of the synod was to speak with a journalist critical of it. The synod is in effect a raised middle finger to orthodox Catholics — a declaration that everything they hold dear no longer exists at the highest levels of the Church.

The Vatican is under enemy occupation and will remain so for many years to come. There is much chatter among Vaticanistas about a “Francis II,” now that the composition of the next conclave is largely liberal. By the time his pontificate ends, Francis will likely have selected two-thirds of the cardinals. The current secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, is thought to be the leading Francis clone. I have been told that Pope Francis is waiting for Benedict to die so that he can “then pass the pontificate to Parolin.”

Parolin is just a circumspect version of Francis. He holds the same batty views but presents them more diplomatically. Here and there one hears grumbles about the pope’s bumptiousness, but for the most part the Catholic Left is thrilled with him. The mask of modernism has been ripped off, only to reveal, in the words of Francis, an “Amazonian face,” beneath which is a UN body.

Read Full Post »

from 828 Ministries:

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. — Romans 16:17-18 (ESV)

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel– not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ. — Galatians 1:6-10 (ESV)

Only let your manner of life be worthyof the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, – Philippians 1:27 (ESV)

https://www.charismanews.com/opinion/77917-join-kenneth-copeland-and-lou-engle-in-these-healing-prayers-for-the-body

The bible prophesies in Revelation the state of the world leading up to the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. While the date cannot be known, the birth pains can be felt, and one area of Eschatology experts agree on is the establishment of a one world religion. We need to be ever vigilant against the calls for false unity, which are heard nearly every day from the purpose driven industrial complex. To them, a unified church means more suckers to sell their wares to. To Satan however, it means unifying the people of God in something other than His Gospel and we need to make sure that the true remnant stays unified in Christ. The above link is to the most recent call for false unity. So, let us reason together once more and be reminded what we need to be watchful for.

This week, we are in the midst of praying through the 40-day Jewish season of repentance, Teshuvah. The word “Teshuvah” literally means to return to the presence of God. It is a season of introspection and repentance for Christians to come into unity with God, as Jesus prayed in John 17:21. However, as Jesus prayed, unity with God also requires unity with each other in Christ (John 17:20-23). Yet, almost since the beginning of Christianity, believers have quarreled about Christian doctrine and church government. The first Jerusalem Council served as an example of a favorably resolved dispute (Acts 15). However, other disputes resulted in division and treatment of opponents as non-Christians. As Ralph Martin famously said, “The body of Christ is broken.” Today there are many denominations and doctrines which create a great diversity within the body of Christ. Yet, we can still be united in Christ. Lutheran theologian Oscar Cullmann said, “Unity in the church … is unity in diversity … recognizing others in all their variety as true Christians.” — Ron Allen

Would it surprise you to learn that there is no Christian season called Teshuva? Or that the word actually means to simply repent? When scouring the Jewish calendar, we see no such record of the season of Teshuva. The only Christian referent we could find was to the wildly heretical ministry of Perry Stone. So, the notion that this Jewish word for repentance is secretly a season for Christians to return to the presence of God, be introspective, and come into unity is absolutely made up. The entire thing is a work of fiction. Christians have quarreled since the beginning because God is so clear about being careful to avoid false doctrine. Paul only tells Timothy to guard two things. His life and his doctrine. His doctrine because the eternal lives of his listeners is at stake. Our first key verse is crucial to understanding unity because disunity is sown in the body through the admission of false teaching. Most charlatans point to discernment ministries or people criticizing what is false as the source of disunity but it is their false teaching that divided the body to begin with. The second key verse is crucial to remember that only the Gospel, the true Gospel, has the power of God to save someone. What does that mean preacher? That means without the preaching of the uncompromised Gospel of Jesus Christ, no one gets saved — period, full stop. I have had well intended people ask me if people can get saved through a heretical ministry such as Joel Osteen’s and the answer is no. Not according to the bible anyway. Now, can Osteen force someone to seek the truth and thus get saved by someone else presenting the Gospel? Of course, but that person is saved in spite of Osteen, not because of him.

read the full article here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: