Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Isaiah 5:20:

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

from Mass Resistance:

The horrific treatment of Dr. Paul Church has become a nightmare – affecting him, of course, but ultimately all of us as well. Because he told the medical truth and refused to bow to political correctness on this critical public health issue, he has now been banned from four prominent Boston area hospitals and a urology clinic.

This is the frightening state of today’s medical profession.

Dr. Church is a urologist who was on the staff of several major Boston area hospitals and clinics for nearly 30 years. He was on the faculty of Harvard Medical School. He has done research on diagnosing prostate and bladder cancer, and has spoken to educational and civic groups on the subject of high-risk sexual behaviors.

In 2015, as we reported, Dr. Church was expelled from the staff of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) where he had worked for 28 years. The reason? His comments to colleagues that homosexuality is medically unhealthy and that a hospital should not be promoting and celebrating that behavior in “gay pride” events and other hospital-sponsored activities.

Subsequently, he was expelled from two more Boston area hospitals, Brigham & Women’s Faulkner, where also had worked for 28 years, and Beth Israel Deaconess-Needham, where had worked for over six years. Both hospitals admitted that they did not expel Dr. Church because of anything he said or did at those hospitals. He had a perfect performance record. They expelled him because of his original comments made at BIDMC.

After being expelled by the three hospitals, Dr. Church needed a hospital for patient referrals. A fourth hospital, St. Elizabeth’s in Boston, made an offer in 2016 to bring Dr. Church onto their staff, but then abruptly cancelled it. He had been approved by hospital officials all the way up the ladder to join St. Elizabeth’s. Contracts had been signed and even business cards had been printed up. But as he was about to start work, he was informed that they had disapproved his credentialing. The administrators cited “other disputes” and his hiring was cancelled. Dr. Church later found out that hospital officials feared repercussions by the LGBT community for his views expressed at BIDMC.

He has also been dismissed from an independent urology clinic. In addition to the four hospitals, Dr. Church was asked to leave the staff of Men’s Health Boston, a urology clinic where he had been in practice for more than 10 years. He was told that the reason was his dispute at BIDMC. They told him, “We don’t agree with what you’re doing,” and that the BIDMC issue would be “bad for business.”

At no time throughout his career had Dr. Church ever been accused of any discrimination in his treatment of patients, nor had there been any complaints at all from patients.

Currently, Dr. Church continues to see some patients at a private office in suburban Boston. But without hospital staff privileges, he can no longer do hospital work or perform needed surgeries himself. His livelihood has been significantly impacted as a result.

The medical profession is out of control

What is going on?

Most people don’t realize how extensively the medical profession is ignoring critical medical and public health risks in favor of outrageous LGBT political correctness, and has even incorporated that ideology into their institutions.

All the major Boston hospitals now participate in the annual “Gay Pride Week” – a public display of sexual and emotional dysfunction. They also heavily promote LGBT events and issues internally.

read the full article here

Read Full Post »

from Breitbart:

More than 90 per cent of Christians in the UK believe their faith is being marginalized in British society, a survey has revealed.

It also found a majority of Christians thought their faith was not given the same respect as other religions in the UK, with most feeling it was considered unacceptable for them to share their beliefs in public.

The survey, conducted by Premier Christian Communications, questioned more than 12,000 “ordinary Christians” as part of a ‘State of the Faith’ study.

93 per cent of respondents said they “believe that Christianity is being marginalized” in Britain, and half said they had experienced prejudice because of their faith.

80 per cent of respondents said “Christianity is not given equal respect” compared with other religions and worldviews, and 67 per cent said they did not think it was considered acceptable in society for Christians to share their faith with others.

Younger Christians were more likely to say that they experienced prejudice for their faith, with 70 per cent of respondents aged 15 to 19 reporting negative experiences.

“Partly because of illiteracy [and] partly because of those who have a very different agenda, we may be moving into a period when debate is shut down — where you can’t have an honest debate and agree to differ,” said Nola Leach, head of a Christian lobbying group Care.

Premier CEO Peter Kerridge said in a statement that “It’s clear we are not the liberal accepting society we think we are if we don’t tolerate and accept everyone, including Christians.”

He added that the survey “clearly indicates how it feels to be an ordinary Christian today … This is not the clergy talking, or academics theorising, or politicians making a case.

“These are ordinary Christians who feel overwhelmingly that their Christian beliefs are being marginalised and that as a result, it is becoming far more difficult to live as a person of faith in the UK.”

Read Full Post »

from Got Questions:

The Bible does not use the phrase “one-world government” or “one-world currency” in referring to the end times. It does, however, provide ample evidence to enable us to draw the conclusion that both will exist under the rule of the Antichrist in the last days.

In his apocalyptic vision in the Book of Revelation, the Apostle John sees the “beast,” also called the Antichrist, rising out of the sea having seven heads and ten horns (Revelation 13:1). Combining this vision with Daniel’s similar one (Daniel 7:16-24), we can conclude that some sort of world system will be inaugurated by the beast, the most powerful “horn,” who will defeat the other nine and will begin to wage war against Christians. The ten-nation confederacy is also seen in Daniel’s image of the statue in Daniel 2:41-42, where he pictures the final world government consisting of ten entities represented by the ten toes of the statue. Whoever the ten are and however they come to power, Scripture is clear that the beast will either destroy them or reduce their power to nothing more than figureheads. In the end, they will do his bidding.

John goes on to describe the ruler of this vast empire as having power and great authority, given to him by Satan himself (Revelation 13:2), being followed by and receiving worship from “all the world” (13:3-4), and having authority over “every tribe, people, language and nation” (13:7). From this description, it is logical to assume that this person is the leader of a one-world government which is recognized as sovereign over all other governments. It’s hard to imagine how such diverse systems of government as are in power today would willingly subjugate themselves to a single ruler, and there are many theories on the subject. A logical conclusion is that the disasters and plagues described in Revelation as the seal and trumpet judgments (chapters 6-11) will be so devastating and create such a monumental global crisis that people will embrace anything and anyone who promises to give them relief.

Once entrenched in power, the beast (Antichrist) and the power behind him (Satan) will move to establish absolute control over all peoples of the earth to accomplish their true end, the worship Satan has been seeking ever since being thrown out of heaven (Isaiah 14:12-14). One way they will accomplish this is by controlling all commerce, and this is where the idea of a one-world currency comes in. Revelation 13:16-17 describes some sort of satanic mark which will be required in order to buy and sell. This means anyone who refuses the mark will be unable to buy food, clothing or other necessities of life. No doubt the vast majority of people in the world will succumb to the mark simply to survive. Again, verse 16 makes it clear that this will be a universal system of control where everyone, rich and poor, great and small, will bear the mark on their hand or forehead. There is a great deal of speculation as to how exactly this mark will be affixed, but the technologies that are available right now could accomplish it very easily.

Those who are left behind after the Rapture of the Church will be faced with an excruciating choice—accept the mark of the beast in order to survive or face starvation and horrific persecution by the Antichrist and his followers. But those who come to Christ during this time, those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life (Revelation 13:8), will choose to endure, even to martyrdom.

Read Full Post »

from The Federalist:

Politicians in the Netherlands are discussing the possibility of legalizing euthanasia for healthy people. The proposed “Completed Life Bill” would allow any person age 75 or over who decides their life is “complete” to receive euthanasia. It doesn’t matter if they are otherwise perfectly healthy.

Under current Dutch law, a person only becomes eligible for euthanasia when they have a terminal illness and are suffering unbearably. Pia Dijkstra, an MP for Dutch political party D66, is preparing to introduce the Completed Life Bill. D66 spearheaded most of the groundbreaking socially progressive legislation for which the Netherlands is famous. They are historically a smaller party—they’ve never had a Prime Minister—but they’ve proven themselves to be politically effective.

What Would It Take For This To Pass?

D66 would eventually like to legalize euthanasia for any adult who wishes to die. They openly admit that the Completed Life Bill is a step towards realizing that goal. In March, D66 leader Alexander Pechtold was confronted on a political talk show by a 57-year-old man who said he wishes to die. He asked why the Completed Life Bill is only persons age 75 and older. “I have to wait 18 more years. I don’t feel like waiting 18 years. I want it now,” he said.

Pechtold replied, “It’s my personal opinion that in our civilization dying is an individual consideration. You didn’t ask to be brought into the world.” He went on to explain that currently there is political support for legalizing euthanasia for healthy elderly persons. “If we want to maintain that support and not disrupt the discussion then we have to take it step-by-step. In 2002 we passed the euthanasia law for unbearable suffering. In my view, Pia Dijkstra can now continue persuading parliament and the country to—in my own words and personal opinion—take the next step for our civilization.”

Ironically, the Dutch public news broadcaster decided to include a notice with the number for a suicide prevention hotline directly below where the video of Pechtold’s comments is embedded on their website.

If the Completed Life Bill comes to a vote in Parliament, it will most likely pass. Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy has said he is willing to enact it. The question is whether the bill will be placed on the legislative agenda.

In Dutch politics, no party ever wins a majority of seats in parliament. The largest party has to form a coalition with several smaller ones. National elections were held in March, and Prime Minister Rutte is currently negotiating with D66 and two Christian parties—the Christian Democratic Appeal and the Christian Union—about forming a coalition. Both Christian parties are opposed to the Completed Life Bill. The Christian Union in particular is likely to make preventing a vote on the bill a condition of joining the coalition.

Some Doctors Believe This Is Too Much

While politicians debate such a drastic expansion of euthanasia, the manner in which it is currently being carried out in the Netherlands is coming under fire. Earlier this year, a group of 220 doctors took out an advertisement in a major newspaper saying they will refuse to euthanize patients with advanced dementia who are unable give verbal consent. Under Dutch law, an elderly person who is still compos mentis can write a legal declaration stating that they wish to be euthanized when they develop advanced dementia. They can specify conditions about when they want to die, e.g. when they no longer recognize their immediate family.

The doctors who signed the advertisement say they cannot accept these legal declarations. They write, “Giving a deadly injection to a patient with advanced dementia on the basis of their written declaration? To someone who cannot confirm that they wish to die? No, we’re not going to do that. Our moral abhorrence at ending the life of a defenseless person is too great.”

Many of the doctors who signed the advertisement actually administer euthanasia, but they draw the line with patients who are unaware of what is being done to them.

The doctors were motivated by a 2016 case in which the Dutch committee that oversees euthanasia concluded a doctor had acted negligently. An elderly woman with advanced Alzheimer’s had previously written a legal declaration requesting euthanasia, but her specifications about the point at which she was ready to die were open to interpretation. The doctor who euthanized her began by secretly placing a sedative in her coffee. The woman subsequently woke up wide-eyed and resisted the fatal injection. She was restrained by family members and the doctor proceeded.

The controversy flared up again in June when Boudewijn Chabot, a psychogeriatrician and prominent euthanasia supporter, published a 2,600-word op-ed in which he argued that euthanasia now “getting out of hand.” He believes that the euthanasia oversight committee is lax in carrying out its duty and also insufficiently transparent about what it communicates to the public. Chabot argued that legal protections for patients have been quietly eroded over time. He is particularly concerned about the way euthanasia is administered to patients with advanced dementia or chronic psychiatric illness.

The Increase In Euthanasia Is Shocking

In 2016, there were 6,091 reported instances of euthanasia in the Netherlands. Of those, 141 were for patients with dementia. That is up from 12 such cases in 2009. Also for patients with chronic psychiatric illness, there were 0 instances of euthanasia in 2009, but by 2016 that number had risen to 60. “The numbers are small, you could argue,” Chabot writes. “But look at the rapid increase…The financial gutting of the health care sector has particularly harmed the quality of life of these types of patients. It’s logical to conclude that euthanasia is going to skyrocket.”

Chabot is concerned that the legal guidelines for euthanasia for patients with physical illnesses are applied without any further qualification to patients with dementia and psychiatric illness. He believes that simply doesn’t work and can lead to ethical violations.

Speaking to Dutch media, Dijkstra said the concerns expressed in Chabot’s op-ed have no bearing on the Completed Life Bill. “The euthanasia law is being carried out carefully. It’s a pity that certain people constantly want to bring it up for discussion.” Though, in this instance, it is doctors who practice euthanasia who are saying things have gone too far.

Read Full Post »

from The Review Journal:

A man yelled “Freedom!” as he crashed his vehicle into Arkansas’ new Ten Commandments monument early Wednesday, nearly three years after he was arrested in the destruction of Oklahoma’s monument at its state Capitol, authorities said.

The privately funded Arkansas monument had been in place outside the state Capitol in Little Rock for less than 24 hours before it was knocked from its plinth and smashed to pieces.

Michael Tate Reed, 32, of Van Buren, Arkansas, was booked in the Pulaski County jail shortly after 7:30 a.m. on preliminary charges of defacing objects of public interest, criminal trespass and first-degree criminal mischief. An arrest report lists his occupation as “unemployed/disabled.”

Authorities did not know whether he had an attorney who could speak on his behalf, and a video arraignment was set for Thursday morning, a Pulaski County sheriff’s spokesman said.

Arkansas Secretary of State’s Office spokesman Chris Powell said officials believe a Facebook Live video posted on a Michael Reed’s Facebook account that depicted the destruction is authentic.

In the video, the sky is dark and the Arkansas Capitol’s dome is visible. Music is heard followed by a female voice, likely on the radio, saying, “Where do you go when you’re faced with adversity and trials and challenges?” The driver is then heard growling, “Oh my goodness. Freedom!” before accelerating into the monument. The vehicle’s speedometer is last shown at 21 mph (33 kph) and then a collision can be heard.

Arkansas’ monument fell from its plinth and broke into multiple pieces as it hit the ground. The debris had been cleaned up by midmorning Wednesday.

Oklahoma County Sheriff’s spokesman Mark Opgrande told The Associated Press on Wednesday that Reed was arrested in October 2014 in the destruction of Oklahoma’s Ten Commandments monument at the state Capitol. Opgrande confirmed that the suspect arrested Wednesday in Arkansas was the same person arrested in the Oklahoma case.

In a 2015 email to the Tulsa World , Reed apologized for wrecking Oklahoma’s monument and said he suffered from mental health issues.

“I am so sorry that this all happening (sic) and wished I could take it all back,” Reed said.

Read Full Post »

I saw this coming for years, but no one would believe it!

from Christian News Network:

Megachurch leader and author T.D. Jakes says that homosexuals should attend congregations that affirm their lifestyle and that politics do not need to reflect biblical ethics, adding that his position on homosexuality is both “evolved and evolving.”

During an interview with the Huffington Post on Monday, Jakes was asked by a viewer if he believes that homosexuals and the black church can co-exist.

“Absolutely… I think it is going to be diverse from church to church. Every church has a different opinion on the issue and every gay person is different,” he replied. “And I think that to speak that the church—the black church, the white church or any kind of church you wanna call it—are all the same, is totally not true.”

 Jakes said that he thinks homosexuals should find congregations that affirm their lifestyle.
“LGBT’s of different types and sorts have to find a place of worship that reflects what your views are and what you believe like anyone else,” he outlined.

“The church should have the right to have its own convictions and values; if you don’t like those convictions and values [and] you totally disagree with it, don’t try to change my house, move into your own … and find somebody who gets what you get about faith,” Jakes added.

He said that the issue of homosexuality is “complex.”

“Paul spends a lot of time wrestling back and forth, trying to understand should a woman wear a head covering, should you cut your hair,” Jakes stated. “I mean, they grappled back then and we’re grappling now because we’re humans and we are flawed and we’re not God.”

“Once you understand you’re not God, you leave yourself an ‘out’ clause to grow,” he said.

When asked if his position on homosexuality has “evolved,” Jakes agreed that it has.

“Evolved and evolving,” he replied. “I think that where I am is to better understand we, the church, bought into the myth that this is a Christian nation.”

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states must legalize same-sex “marriage,” igniting a battle between the Church and State over the issue. In his comments on Monday, Jakes advocated for the separation of Church and State, which would allow for “all types of people” to have whatever rights they desire despite biblical prohibitions. He said that politics don’t need to be based on Christianity.

“[O]nce you get past [thinking America is a Christian nation] … Once you begin to understand that democracy—that a republic actually—is designed to be an overarching system to protect our unique nuances, then we no longer look for public policy to reflect biblical ethics,” Jakes explained.

“If we can divide—or what you would call separation of Church and State—then we can dwell together more effectively because atheists, agnostics, Jews, all types of people, Muslims, pay into the government. The government then cannot reflect one particular view over another just because we’re the dominant group of religious people in [this] country because those numbers are changing every day,” he asserted. “We need a neutralized government that protects our right to disagree with one another and agree with one another.”

Jakes had visited the Huffington Post to discuss his new book on “destiny.” The interview focused on motivational subject matter in following one’s dreams and passions as opposed to the eternal destiny of the soul.

Read Full Post »

come-into-my-fathers-teepee

There is sometimes a common belief that just because one side in an argument or an analogy is wrong then that automatically makes the other side right. In the case of this book that clearly does not hold to be true. It is true that what we know of as the modern “church” is not, and has not been what God intended it to be for almost 1600 years now and is for the most part a flawed creation of man. The author offers an alternative that on the surface looks to be a better alternative and fits more with how the original New Testament church functioned, and how churches should function, however after that premise as presented in the book the author diverges into a mish mash of flawed personal opinions and unfounded theories. The author also takes it upon himself to personally reinterpret scripture in order to validate his own flawed opinions.  He also infers that what we know of as the canon of scripture may not be valid, and suggests that what was chosen as the canon of scripture may have been due to political expediency rather than via the inspiration of God. And the author overtly adds to his suggestion that the canon of scripture may not be valid by using a quote from the Gnostic false gospel of Thomas! He further quotes from a badly paraphrased bible called the “Original People’s Bible”  And then goes further to suggest that Native Americans may have actually worshiped and possibly been in right relationship with the one true God of the Bible, prior to Europeans arriving in the new world.

The author in reinterpreting scripture makes a stunning claim: That God may want a relationship with man because God is lonely! He does this by taking the following verse from Genesis 2 out of context and then re-imagining it to fit his flawed premise that God is lonely: Genesis 2:18: “And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”

Some newer Bible translations change the word “alone” in the above verse to “lonely”. The author uses one of these newer translations and then flips the verse on its head to say that it actually could mean that God is lonely and desires or needs a relationship with man to take away that loneliness.

Near the end of the book the author offers his opinion on the six literal days of creation, why he offers this is unknown as it does not add to or bolster his premise on why the modern church does not reflect how God intended the church to be! The Author believes in the “Gap Theory” which postulates that there may have been a literal six day creation but that this was actually a “recreation” or restoration because there could have been a “millions of years” GAP between the first and second verses of Genesis 1. and prior to the six day “recreation” or “restoration” the earth in eons past had been  a paradise but then devastated making it “without form, and void” possibly from when Satan was cast of Heaven.

In the book the author also criticizes what he calls the new “liberal” Christianity which pushes “Social Justice” and Socialism and he calls out famous pastors such as Rick Warren for pushing this false gospel. The ironic part that is completely lost on the author is this: You cannot call out others for pushing a false gospel via their own flawed reinterpretation of scripture when you choose to do that yourself. It is obvious in reading the book that the author has a conservative political ideology as opposed to most of the “emerging church” liberal Christian pastors such as Rick Warren. However again, you cannot call out others for their mishandling of scripture when you choose to do the same thing but for a political ideology that is opposite to those that you disagree with.

It is well known that the books and letters that became the canon of scripture were pretty much agreed upon long before any corrupted man made church structure came along. The author misses that, yes the known church at the time of the Council of Nicea was heading in a direction of apostasy, however God was still able to use the known apostatizing church at that time to protect the canon of Scripture. I found it ironic that the author believed and accepted that God used the Israelite’s/Jews to preserve knowledge of the one true God and were the ancestral line from which Jesus would come, even though for most of their history they lived in apostasy, but he virtually refuses to believe that God could work through an apostate church up to a certain point, just as God did through Israel.

The author also infers a strong “Dominionist” theology. Inferring that if only the church changed to what God intended it to be that it could convert the world and change the world for God as the “Bride of Christ” Unfortunately this flies in the face of the plain reading of God’s word! Christians will not convert the entire world before Christ returns, there will only be increasing apostasy. Yes there may be a remnant that remain faithful to God and they will be groups of Christians who meet informally and not part of any formal man made denomination, and the denominations that do exist will be apostate and persecute these groups, along with the Anti-Christ system, but there will be no worldwide revival to turn the world to God and then further to return it to a “Heavenly” paradise.

The author also asserts that the vast majority of Christianity today is not in right relationship with God because it does not use the “correct” name for God. He postulates that the word God is a common noun, and that false god’s could be known as God! This to be quite honest is a very shallow understanding of English grammar. By making the word God begin with a capitalized G you are in effect changing a common noun into a proper noun, or a proper name with context! For example: using god as a common noun in a sentence would look like this: “A man can claim to be a god”. However it becomes a proper noun and a unique proper name with context when you use it in the following manner: “A man named Jesus was God!”  The capitalization of the word god puts a specific context around it, and it becomes a proper noun, a proper name, and the context for it is determined by the text where the proper noun God is used, in this case the Bible, the Written Word of God! Now I agree that a majority of Christians today may not be in right relationship with God, but not because they use the wrong name for God, it is because they have stepped away from a belief that the Written Word of God, The Bible as we have received it is clear (it has perspicuity), is God breathed, and can be relied upon to be the only written text to instruct mankind on how to be in right relationship with God!

2 Timothy 3:16: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”

Lastly, I would say this in conclusion, although I agree with the author on the condition of what we currently know as the “church”, and Christians do need to return to the form of the “New Testament” church, it would be useless for Christians to do so if they did not have the right Biblical doctrine to follow, and instead allowed themselves to be cast about via false good sounding fables and a false gospel.  During the great persecutions of Christians during the Roman Empire before the practice of Christianity was made legal under Constantine, albeit for political expediency there were Christian groups that were persecuted and who died but who practiced a false gospel! Just because someone offers an alternative to what we know is flawed does not mean that what they offer is a valid Biblical alternative. I would say: Beware of this book, it does not offer a valid Biblical alternative!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: