. Simply click "Moriel Ministries" below to go back to the main site

Arrow up
Arrow down
 
 
 
Shoppers - Please note: Be sure to check your purchase and then fill in all your details correctly on the right-hand side, (name, address, city, state, zip etc.) and check our terms and accept them. it will greatly help us to get your order in a timely manner.
Blog Items

Blog Items (2624)

Wednesday, 28 October 2015 03:28

The Islamization of Britain in 2014

by Soeren Kern

  • "Britain remains the world's leading recruiting ground for al-Qaeda." — Con Coughlin,Daily Telegraph.
  • When she sought help from the police and a lawyer, "the family of the defendants were insulted that she had gone to the law. They wanted her back within the family fold... Therefore, it was decided that she should be forced to comply or be killed." — Prosecutor of Ahmed A-Khatib, who murdered his wife for becoming "too westernized."
  • British school teachers are afraid to teach their students about Christianity out of fear of offending Muslims. — Roger Bolton, BBC Radio 4's Feedback program.
  • Rather than taking steps to protect British children, police, social workers, teachers... and the media deliberately played down the severity of the crimes [of Muslim sexual grooming gangs] in order to avoid being accused of "Islamophobia" or racism. — From the report "Easy Meat: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery."
  • A group of British lawyers launched a website, Sharia Watch UK. The group called Sharia law "Britain's Blind Spot."
  • After Adebolajo, who murdered and tried to behead British soldier Lee Rigby with a meat cleaver, was given a "whole-life" prison term, his brother said his sibling was the victim of "Islamophobia."
  • "The problem of honor-based violence and forced marriages in England is "worse than people think." — Claire Phillipson, Wearside Women in Need

The Muslim population of Britain reached 3.4 million in 2014 to become around 5.3% of the overall population of 64 million, according to figures extrapolated from a recent study on the growth of the Muslim population in Europe. In real terms, Britain has the third-largest Muslim population in the European Union, after France and Germany.

Wednesday, 21 October 2015 23:55

The "New Intifada" Direct from Moriel Israel

Dear All,

This is our overview of what is happening, it can't be exhaustive, too much is happening and I can't pretend that this is an in depth analysis either, but perhaps it will give Moriel supporters an idea of what is going on. The news over here and the blogs are full (of course) of reports on this "new intifada,"--though whether it is an intifada or not is a matter of debate; but over here it is called the gal-ha-terror, the "terror wave". It has so far lacked the cohesion and concerted nature of a general uprising, but consists more of "lone wolf" attacks, so called. In one sense these kind of attacks are far more terrifying, because they are not localised, they can occur anywhere (thankfully not in our town so far), and even the Moslem friend or trusted Moslem Arab worker that you have known for years can turn into a killing machine. The attacks are not just being perpetrated by the unemployed or the "poor and disadvantaged" sectors of Palestinian society either; one of the recent attacks in Jerusalem was perpetrated by a Moslem employee of Bezek (our national telecom and phone company and in which jobs are coveted) who drove his company car into a group of pedestrians mowing some down, then leapt out and proceeded to stab them.

PO BOX 793 Swellendam 6740, Western Cape, South Africa

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. Cell: 0823739297

Web site http://www.morielmissions.org.za/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MorielMissions

October 2015

Dear Friends and Family

Greetings in the wonderful name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

First of all thank you to the lovely people who hosted me during my UK visit and Praise God for the newest member of the Royle Household Faye Lyn Royle. Congratulations to Aaron and Erin on the birth of their new daughter and of course young Ethan who now as a baby sister. Every blessing to you all.

Monday, 12 October 2015 17:32

You Need to “Nip it in the Bud”

by Sandy Simpson
Sept 18, 2015

I am writing this article to address a subject that I have often observed. It is the fact that if you do not get the leaven out of your church the leaven will become the leadership.

The Bible teaches quite clearly that if you let the leaven in you will leaven the whole lump.

Galatians 5:9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough.

We see this often in the case of many “Christian” movements that have allowed a small error to exist in their churches and have not dealt with those issues. It then ends up metastasizing into worse and worse problems as time goes by. Some cases in point:

The Third Wave

In the 1950s and 60s there was a movement, especially in Germany and in other parts of Europe, more so than in America, for evangelical biblical Christians to distance themselves from churches that taught that you have to speak in tongues to prove you have the Holy Spirit or that the Holy Spirit would cause you to speak in tongues as a proof of the indwelling Spirit. Many evangelical Biblical churches saw that as being antithetical to what the Bible says because the Bible is quite clear that not everyone has the same gifts.

1 Corinthians 12:30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?

The proof of the fruit of the Spirit, the evidence of the Spirit, is more importantly involved with morality and Christ-like character than it is with signs and wonders. So when you want to test anyone to see if they are truly Spirit-filled believers then you need to primarily test them for the fruit of the Spirit first and then, of course, the gifts of the Spirit.

Galatians 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

But the gifts of the Spirit can vary and often certain gifts of the Spirit are overlooked in favor of others, especially in Pentecostal churches, by those who want to test to see if a person is Spirit-filled. Many European churches recognized early on these issues and distanced themselves from them. But also many evangelical churches backed off and allowed Pentecostals to define pneumatology which turned out to be a mistake. Biblical Christians rejected the idea that the initial sign of the Spirit is tongues but they did not challenge that notion with doctrinal papers on the errors of Pentecostal pneumatology. Because they only distanced themselves from these teachings without challenging them from the Bible they inadvertently allowed error to grow in the Pentecostal and charismatic movements. Instead of clearly defining the position of the Bible on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, they either taught that the Holy Spirit was the “silent” member of the Trinity or that the gifts of the Spirit no longer existed past the first century church. Both of those reactions also had serious side effects.

What should have been done would have been for Biblical churches to agree to a position paper on pneumatology just as they had previously agreed to the core doctrines of the Church as laid out in the book series "The Fundamentals" edited by R.A. Torrey with contributors such as H.A. Ironside and C.I. Scofield. In 1909, God led two Christian laymen to set aside a large sum of money for issuing twelve volumes which would set forth the fundamentals of the Christian faith. These were called The Fundamentals, and consisted of messages written by well-known defenders of the faith from several different denominations. These twelve volumes of The Fundamentals were mailed free to over 300,000 ministers, missionaries and other Christian workers in different parts of the world. The response was far beyond any expectation. The Bible Institute of Los Angeles (BIOLA) through its publication, The King's Business, printed additional copies to meet the demand and finally combined the volumes into a four volume set which was also widely circulated. It was written as a defense of the Christian faith against liberalism, but holds true today in serving as a helpful aid in distinguishing heresy from truth.

Many churches agreed that the core doctrines as laid out in this series of books were doctrines that are essential to the Christian faith and must not be compromised. Of course pneumatology was not included as a core doctrine which is correct. It is an important doctrine but one on which Christians can and do have some disagreement. But little did they know that pneumatology would rise up to be a defining issue and well beyond a debatable issue in the Third Wave. In fact it has become one of the most divisive issues in the Church today.

So what started out as a somewhat innocuous error of people in Pentecostal churches feeling like they had to “speak in tongues” (most of the time not real tongues but babble because due to peer pressure) in order to fit in became the source of more serious error. As that practice became commonplace and, since tongues were not being used scripturally, it naturally began to be upstaged with more and more exciting “signs and wonders” also used to allegedly prove a person is Spirit-filled. As they reached out for more mystical, experiential practices they discovered more of the Latter Rain which some had already been introduced to through the Azusa Street “revival” and ministries of people like William Branham. The teaching then became a matter of “obtaining” the Holy Spirit as Joyce Meyer recently reiterated, obtaining tongues, obtaining the “anointing” which translates to getting “it” from another person or what is called the “transferable impartation”. This is accomplished, according to Latter Rain proponents, “by” the laying on of hands, “by” the will of man. In other words a person can press the Holy Spirit into people’s foreheads or throw Him across the room as many have seen Benny Hinn do. This was a further departure from the truth of Scripture regarding the laying on of hands, which Biblically was done in agreement with the will of God. If a person was filled (not baptized) with the Holy Spirit at the laying on of hands, the words used in those instances were not “by” but “at” or “through” indicating that anything that happened from God was from Him alone. Something to remember is that the filling of the Holy Spirit is not only accomplished at the laying on of hands but sovereignly without that act as well as evidenced in the Bible. As these ideas further infiltrated the churches those practicing them became even further influenced by the Latter Rain and began to introduce manifestations which were brought in from the occult in order to justify their warped ideas of Spirit filling. One of those occult practices was what they called “slain in the spirit” credited by them as what happened to John when he saw Jesus in His glorified body and was given the Revelation. But John was not knocked down backwards by some power fell down as if dead in fear, reverence and awe in the presence of the glorified Christ. Slain the spirit is no different than the occult practice in Hinduism of “shaktipat” in which people are laid hands on and they fall backwards into a trance, speak in tongues, and many other manifestation that are demonic in nature.

These new practices from the occult then became part and parcel of Pentecostal churches, so much so that those involved could no longer distinguish the difference between their old denominations and the new cults they had become. They joined the Latter Rain churches in the Third Wave and New Apostolic Reformation. They began to teach and promote that there is an impartation from God that you can receive from others and pass along, even though that practice is prohibited both in the Old Testament (Ex. 30:32) and in the New (Acts 8:9-25). Simon the Sorcerer mistook the laying on of hands as a magic trick or ability that would be bought and learned. But the disciples were clear that it was not something they could teach or was from them.

This is one example of how a smaller error can become a gigantic one, and basically bring churches into heresy because it becomes a denial of the character and working of the true Holy Spirit, as well as adding works required to prove salvation which is actually by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

I remember back to the 1950s and 60s that a lot of Christians criticized European churches and missions for making the mandatory speaking in tongues a divisive issue. Mission organizations from Europe would not allow people who wanted to become missionaries to even teach on speaking in tongues or claim that they spoke in tongues. At that time I also thought this was rather harsh. But now when I look back I see the validity of their concerns because that erroneous practice resulted in the openness of Pentecostals to embrace further forms of heresy. Demand for Christians to all speak in tongues was followed by dropping the requirement to have interpretation, then tongues became a free for all and people began to utter things that were in no way any language, or perhaps even driven by another spirit. Once they were opened to mistaking the false from the true they then became open to further ecstatic experiences and desired more as they became bored with tongues alone. So, as it turns out, those who opposed the unbiblical use of “tongues” were correct in making this a defining issue because error needs to be rooted out of good churches or else it can and will start to grow into further problems. Those problems have names today. They are the Latter Rain, Third Wave, New Apostolic Reformation, Word of Faith and the Emerging Church. Not only did these errors open people to the heresies of the Latter Rain and Word of Faith, they also opened them up to the heresies of Christian liberalism in the World Council of Churches, United Church of Christ, United Methodists, Friends, etc.

Snake Handling Cults

There are many examples in Scripture of when certain verses are taken out of context and amplified to doctrinal positions; you can end up in utter heresy and cultism. The book of Acts, for instance, is an account of when the Gospel was first preached to the Gentiles and the Holy Spirit was first given to those who are born again. The miraculous things that happened we must not expect to be normative in the churches, such as going out and handling snakes or drinking poison on purpose. We must rely on the Lord to do what He wills, not start snake handling cults. Snake handling churches use the following verses as their justification:

Mark 16:18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Acts 28:1-6 Once safely on shore, we found out that the island was called Malta. The islanders showed us unusual kindness. They built a fire and welcomed us all because it was raining and cold.  Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, “This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, the goddess Justice has not allowed him to live.” But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects. The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead; but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god.  

From these verses groups formed snake handling cults even though the Lord says that he must not be tested.

Matthew 4:7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’

They even forgot to heed the warning to Israel to not test the Lord, or they may be killed by snakes.

1 Corinthians 10:9 We should not test Christ, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes.

They even claimed that if you could not do this you were not filled with the Holy Spirit and not saved. The Lord can save us from poison or snakes, but He does not do that as a result of a test we are putting on Him but as a result of us being His children. This can result in a testimony before an unbelieving world, but God deserves all the glory. When you put God to the test by, for instance, handling snakes, you are trying to share the glory with God and He does not allow that. Sometimes God will put believers to the test, or allow the enemy to do so in order to strengthen their faith.   Sometimes He will heal people in order to give them a chance to believe in Him, or in casting out of demons.

So we have many examples of people taking one or two little things out of their Biblical context and making cults out of them. There is the famous example of this practice if you take two unrelated verses out of context:

Matthew 27:5b … and (Judas) went and hanged himself.

Luke 10:37b Go, and do thou likewise.

You can then make a suicide cult. This is an example of what some people have actually done. Jim Jones in effect told his followers they would not die but “step over into another plane” at the Johnstown Massacre.

Later that same day, 909 inhabitants of Jonestown, 304 of them children, died of apparent cyanide poisoning, mostly in and around the settlement's main pavilion. This resulted in the greatest single loss of American civilian life in a deliberate act until the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The FBI later recovered a 45-minute audio recording of the suicide in progress. On that tape, Jones tells Temple members that the Soviet Union, with whom the Temple had been negotiating a potential exodus for months, would not take them after the airstrip murders. The reason given by Jones to commit suicide was consistent with his previously stated conspiracy theories of intelligence organizations allegedly conspiring against the Temple, that men would "parachute in here on us," "shoot some of our innocent babies" and "they'll torture our children, they'll torture some of our people here, they'll torture our seniors." Parroting Jones' prior statements that hostile forces would convert captured children to fascism, one temple member states "the ones that they take captured, they're gonna just let them grow up and be dummies." Given that reasoning, Jones and several members argued that the group should commit "revolutionary suicide" by drinking cyanide-laced grape-flavored Flavor Aid. Later-released Temple films show Jones opening a storage container full of Kool-Aid in large quantities. However, empty packets of grape Flavor Aid found on the scene show that this is what was used to mix the solution along with a sedative. One member, Christine Miller, dissents toward the beginning of the tape. When members apparently cried, Jones counseled, "Stop these hysterics. This is not the way for people who are socialists or communists to die. No way for us to die. We must die with some dignity." Jones can be heard saying, "Don't be afraid to die," that death is "just stepping over into another plane" and that it's "a friend.” At the end of the tape, Jones concludes: "We didn't commit suicide; we committed an act of revolutionary suicide protesting the conditions of an inhumane world.” (Jim Jones, "Transcript of Recovered FBI tape Q 42." Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Jonestown Project: San Diego State University. 

Since they murdered themselves, and the Bible says that all unrepentant murderers end up in hell (Rev. 21:8), then they truly did step over into another plane; that of Hades awaiting judgment. They were all being unfaithful to the Lord, taking the Word out of context and testing God.

Now we see many other denominations falling away, going into apostasy, because they started with some smaller errors and now because of those errors have left themselves open to false teaching. One is the example of Darby who was the father of Pretribulational Rapture teaching. He ended up being rejected by the Biblical scholars of the time such as H.A. Ironside and D.L. Moody because he had started an exclusive cult which became the Closed Brethren, taught infant regenerational water baptism, etc. Now a number of denominations, though largely unaware of the extent to which Darby’s followers went, have elevated Pretribulational Rapture to the level of a core doctrine by putting it in their statements of faith, thus dismissing anyone who has a different view of the Rapture. But the timing of the Rapture is a legitimately debatable subject amongst Christians and is not a core doctrine. When you make that a requirement to be a true believer or part of a church doctrinal statement then you become cultic yourself. Back in the early 70s I was helped by some debates I heard between Pretrib and Posttrib proponents. It helped me to realize that both sides have legitimate arguments and that we need to be careful not to disfellowship people for having differing views of Pre-Millennial eschatology. Both of those views, for instance, have a different way of interpreting the phrase “keep from” in the Bible … one side saying that they believe is means God will take people out before the Tribulation and the other meaning God will keep Christians safe from the wrath of God through the Tribulation.

If an organization is teaching Preterism, Postmillennialism, Amillennialism or Dominionism that would be a legitimate issue to separate over, but those who are teaching the Truth need not separate over Premillennial views of the time of the Rapture. As long as you teach that Jesus Christ will return to earth bodily to rule and judge and that He will come for His elect, whether in a Rapture or in the Second Coming, as PostTribs combine the event, then you can debate the timing of His taking the church to Himself. Now I have my own view of the coming of the Lord Jesus for His Church which is called Intratrib or Intraseal … that He comes for His Church between the 6th and 7th seal. But I will not disfellowship fellow believers if they happen to think differently on this and can, at least somewhat substantiate their belief. I would advise anyone interested in Intratrib to read Jacob Prasch’s book “Harpazo”. But some denominations have made Pretrib such a big issue that they will not even debate about it and immediately vilify anyone who disagrees. This became very apparent when Prasch released his book. He lost a lot of friends over it. That is a cultic practice.

When something becomes such a part of the fabric of your belief system and is not a core doctrine, you had better test yourself to see if you are becoming cultic when you disfellowship over non-core issues. The problem is that many Christians have no clue what is core and what is not. There are five core doctrines that must not be given away as Christians and over which we do disfellowship.

  1. The Trinity: God is one "What" and three "Whos" with each "Who" possessing all the attributes of Deity and personality.
  2. The Person of Jesus Christ: Jesus is 100% God and 100% man for all eternity.
  3. The Second Coming: Jesus Christ is coming bodily to earth to rule and judge.
  4. Salvation: It is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.
  5. The Scripture: It is entirely inerrant and sufficient for all Christian life. (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/5doctrines.html)

Number 3 above is why Premillennial believers need to stick together because in Postmillennialism and Amillennialism you don’t have Christ coming back to RULE on earth, in Preterism He has allegedly already done so and in Dominionism He rules spiritually through His Church which is to take over everything on earth before the Second Coming, sans Rapture. So if you are going to be out of fellowship with people that should be done on the basis of the core doctrines, not secondary debatable ones.

Amillennialism

The problem with Amill in particular is that they come to their eschatology by allegorizing Scriptures like 2 Peter 3:8 to try to make the references to 1000 years in Revelation 20:2-4 allegorical or of some nebulous time period that does not equal a Millennium of time. But that verse in 2 Peter is explaining what it is like for God who is outside of time and space, not explaining a literal meaning of 1000 years. As stated before, when you start with a smaller error you end up in bigger ones. Most Amills I know often move on to allegorizing Genesis and do not believe in a 24 hour creation day. They make that well-defined “day” out to be any amount of time to try to bring it into line with evolutionary science, this idea being called “Theistic Evolution”. They use the wrong excuse that a “day” can be anything in Scripture as in “the day of the Lord”. But “the day of the Lord” is talking about a general time period whereas the “days” of Creation are defined as 24 hour days.

Genesis 1:5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

The next step which I have seen among Reformed Theology adherents is that you end up with a low view of Scripture, not really believing in inerrancy. But God said some things about His Word that ought to give those who have a low view of Scripture pause.

Psalm 119:160 The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.

Psalm 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Are there various minor mistranslations in English and other languages in the Bibles today? Yes. Were there errors in the original manuscripts which no longer exist?   No. Do the less than 1% of errors in Bibles today compromise core doctrinal issues? No. Can you get the Truth from good English translations? Absolutely. Translation is not an exact science. It is very difficult to boil down the meaning of many Hebrew words to one English equivalent. It is also very hard to translate Greek word for word. But we have many shining examples of great English translations today such as the NASB, the NKJV, the KJV, the RSV and the NET. There are also bad translations out there by cults and even non-translation “commentaries” such as the Message Bible which should be avoided at all costs. But we do have God’s Word preserved for us down through the centuries in many languages around the world.

The last step for Amills is to finally disregard Scripture as the Christian’s highest authority in all matters of faith and practice. I have seen this happen although it has not happened to all Reformed people yet. But many are well on their way. The Catholics are already there and certainly the pope. The RCC is a perfect example of leaven growing into a loaf that is rotten to the core. 

You can start with small errors and it always becomes worse the longer it is allowed to fester. You can even end up in denial of one or more of the core doctrines of the Faith, which destroys true Faith and without repentance can cause a person to apostatize. False ideas do not get better with time but worse. The only cure is a radical surgery to remove the offending bits so that the body can be healthy. Things do not get better on their own when left alone but need to be corrected. The Bible says to get the leaven out (1 Cor. 5:7). It says to disfellowship the sinful unrepentant man (1 Cor. 5:5). It says to stay away from false prophets and false teachers (Rom. 16:17). Yet unfortunately it has become politically incorrect in our modern churches to follow what the Bible says in these matters. Therefore these errors are compounding on themselves and we’re ending up with a large segment of Christianity which is into a counterfeit Christianity of their own making, into a type of cultism because of this lack of obedience to the Lord. The problem is that they think they are fine because no one has the fortitude to challenge them about their lack of action against internal error. Oh, they are quick to point out the error of cults but they absolutely rebel if you point out error in their little church. They say “Oh, its fine. We’ll be ok. We’re teaching the Bible”, etc. But they refuse to acknowledge that they are teaching the Bible is a wrong way, picking and choosing what they will follow and what they will ignore.

I have a problem with the way Pretribulational Rapture is being taught today. I don’t have a problem with it being taught, I have a problem with things like “Don’t worry you won’t see the antichrist” or “you won’t be here for any hard times” being taught. I believe, no matter where you place the Rapture in the scope of the end times, that you need to present two things: (1) People need to be ready for Christ to come back at any time, in particular on a personal level as God can end your life anytime and (2) be ready to stand up for the Gospel and the Faith under persecution. Those things are happening now for many around the world and can happen for any Christian any time. The idea of a Pretrib Rapture is actually a very popular modern view and fits our American sensibilities very well … that somehow we are a privileged generation that will always be blessed and never have to go through hard times. But that has never been the case in the history of the Church, only the delusion of Laodicea that they (and we by extension) are rich and have need for nothing, when in fact we are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.   This is why Word of Faith and Prosperity Gospel teachings are doctrines of demons.

Another pet peeve of mine is listening to five-point Calvinists say things like “you don’t have to believe to be saved, God will just cause you to believe” or “if you are a Christian and you commit suicide you will still go to heaven (this is what Charles Stanley said on a radio program)” or “you can take the mark of the Beast and repent at the last moment and still go to heaven (this is what John MacArthur said in a message)”. These are ridiculous and foolish ideas. The Bible is clear that you must believe to be saved (after hearing the Gospel and being convicted by the Holy Spirit - Acts 16:31). God is not going to believe for you nor will He go against His Word (2 Pet. 3:9) by sending some to heaven and some to hell based on a choice He made in eternity. It is rather based on His foreknowledge (Rom. 8:29) of whether or not a person will believe when they are convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit. You cannot murder yourself and expect to be in heaven (Rev. 21:8) and taking the mark of the Beast will send you to hell along with the Antichrist and False Prophet (Rev. 14:11). Arminianism, on the other hand, teaches that man is not completely fallen or sinful, that man does not have a sin nature contrary to Scripture (Rom. 7:18 & 25). The Bible says we are desperately wicked (Jer. 17:9) and that all men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23, 5:12). If you subscribe to either five-point Calvinism or five-point Arminianism you are going to be in error because there are points in both that are incorrect or only partly correct. So when you drift over into the full belief in either system, systems that are of man and do not entirely follow the Scripture, you are going to begin to have your belief system corrupted little by little. Pretty soon you will end up teaching false teaching that is dangerous to the beliefs of Christians who can end up believing in vain (1 Cor. 15:2).

There are many errors in Christian churches that were left to grow into major problems. It use to be a problem mainly for cults which would start following certain Scriptures taken out of context or some person who brings “new revelation”. But now “new revelation” is happening in what used to be evangelical Biblical churches, so much so that even the word “evangelical” has been co-opted by heretics and can no longer be used in reference to Bible-believing Christ-centered churches. When I look at how many Protestant denominations are getting together with Roman Catholics and the pope these days it is a symptom of a long festering problem of interfaithism, inclusivism, pluralism and ecumenism that have crept into churches and now, like the proverbial frog in a pot of water brought slowly to a boil, they don’t even realize they are right in the middle of apostasy. They used to recognize that you can’t do ministry, in particular evangelism, with an organization like the RCC that teaches works salvation and is in denial of the core doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone and at least one other core doctrine in adding tradition on the same level as the written Word. The RCC has never been able to accept the definition of salvation in the “solas” because they cannot say that salvation is by grace alone. So “evangelicals” who don’t know their Bible have not gotten together with them and signed off on a statement that reads: “Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ”. So everyone, enamored with people like Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Chuck Colson and others, line up like lemmings and head for the cliff of compromise. Christians can agree with Catholics on some social issues, but not on ministry and evangelism. But even on social issues we do not agree with their policy of priests and nuns not marrying because the Bible clearly teaches that the overseers of the churches should be married (1 Tim. 3:2). When you start with the error of pluralism you end up mixing everything together in one big pot and creating a new one world religion. This is what is going on today and we are well on our way to what the Bible predicted would happen in the end times. We are not going to see a worldwide revival but rather a worldwide apostasy in the churches. There may be a worldwide revival, but it is a revival of demonic religions from the past and occultism. With the “new revelation” of Dominionism, the teaching that the Church must take over the governments and every aspect of the world in order for Christ to return, you have the full fledged fulfillment of the passage on the woman who rides the beast (Rev. 17:3 & 7).

Small errors ALWAYS develop into larger errors if unchecked. Small errors don’t go away by themselves. They have to be dealt with and abandoned. They have to be repented of. They have to be extricated, removed by precise surgery, from the Body of Christ, and from the local church in order that the local church can survive. This was the case with the man Paul told the Corinthians to excommunicate for committing incest. This was done so that the man might be brought to his lowest point by Satan and that he might possibly repent and turn, which he in fact did. But if he had been left in that church that sin would have become commonplace and all kinds of sexual sins follow. We see this happening in a number of churches today. The leadership gets people all riled up on “slain in the spirit”, appealing to the flesh, and gets them hooked. Once they are an addict, if they cannot get another fix, they go searching for alternatives which almost always involve sex, drugs, alcohol, perversions, and adultery. I know someone who works in a garment factory and she could not believe how women, who were allegedly Christians and choir members, talk about the most base sexual details of their lives in front of everyone. They have been misled by the enemy and yet they still think they are true Christians. They have been fooled into substituting spiritual things for soulical things.

Conclusion

The problems in Christendom today are there because discernment has not been taught. People are left with milk only and never move on to meat. They never have to use their own brains or discern what is right or wrong. This is a failure of the leadership. Any church that teaches verse by verse with correct interpretation will cover everything a Christian needs for life and practice. But this is not generally being done. Rebuke is seen as an evil, ugly thing instead of remaining open to the voice of the Spirit through the Word. Christians cannot just “proclaim” and “think positively” out of these problems. They need to study the Word of God and allow the Holy Spirit to show them their errors. We are all sinners saved by grace and we all need our Father to teach us and discipline us when needed. None of us are perfect, none of us have arrived. So let’s admit we have some major problems and begin the process of dealing with them.

 

 

 

 

Monday, 12 October 2015 17:32

You Need to “Nip it in the Bud”

by Sandy Simpson
Sept 18, 2015

I am writing this article to address a subject that I have often observed. It is the fact that if you do not get the leaven out of your church the leaven will become the leadership.

The Bible teaches quite clearly that if you let the leaven in you will leaven the whole lump.

Galatians 5:9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough.

We see this often in the case of many “Christian” movements that have allowed a small error to exist in their churches and have not dealt with those issues. It then ends up metastasizing into worse and worse problems as time goes by. Some cases in point:

The Third Wave

In the 1950s and 60s there was a movement, especially in Germany and in other parts of Europe, more so than in America, for evangelical biblical Christians to distance themselves from churches that taught that you have to speak in tongues to prove you have the Holy Spirit or that the Holy Spirit would cause you to speak in tongues as a proof of the indwelling Spirit. Many evangelical Biblical churches saw that as being antithetical to what the Bible says because the Bible is quite clear that not everyone has the same gifts.

1 Corinthians 12:30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?

The proof of the fruit of the Spirit, the evidence of the Spirit, is more importantly involved with morality and Christ-like character than it is with signs and wonders. So when you want to test anyone to see if they are truly Spirit-filled believers then you need to primarily test them for the fruit of the Spirit first and then, of course, the gifts of the Spirit.

Galatians 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

But the gifts of the Spirit can vary and often certain gifts of the Spirit are overlooked in favor of others, especially in Pentecostal churches, by those who want to test to see if a person is Spirit-filled. Many European churches recognized early on these issues and distanced themselves from them. But also many evangelical churches backed off and allowed Pentecostals to define pneumatology which turned out to be a mistake. Biblical Christians rejected the idea that the initial sign of the Spirit is tongues but they did not challenge that notion with doctrinal papers on the errors of Pentecostal pneumatology. Because they only distanced themselves from these teachings without challenging them from the Bible they inadvertently allowed error to grow in the Pentecostal and charismatic movements. Instead of clearly defining the position of the Bible on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, they either taught that the Holy Spirit was the “silent” member of the Trinity or that the gifts of the Spirit no longer existed past the first century church. Both of those reactions also had serious side effects.

What should have been done would have been for Biblical churches to agree to a position paper on pneumatology just as they had previously agreed to the core doctrines of the Church as laid out in the book series "The Fundamentals" edited by R.A. Torrey with contributors such as H.A. Ironside and C.I. Scofield. In 1909, God led two Christian laymen to set aside a large sum of money for issuing twelve volumes which would set forth the fundamentals of the Christian faith. These were called The Fundamentals, and consisted of messages written by well-known defenders of the faith from several different denominations. These twelve volumes of The Fundamentals were mailed free to over 300,000 ministers, missionaries and other Christian workers in different parts of the world. The response was far beyond any expectation. The Bible Institute of Los Angeles (BIOLA) through its publication, The King's Business, printed additional copies to meet the demand and finally combined the volumes into a four volume set which was also widely circulated. It was written as a defense of the Christian faith against liberalism, but holds true today in serving as a helpful aid in distinguishing heresy from truth.

Many churches agreed that the core doctrines as laid out in this series of books were doctrines that are essential to the Christian faith and must not be compromised. Of course pneumatology was not included as a core doctrine which is correct. It is an important doctrine but one on which Christians can and do have some disagreement. But little did they know that pneumatology would rise up to be a defining issue and well beyond a debatable issue in the Third Wave. In fact it has become one of the most divisive issues in the Church today.

So what started out as a somewhat innocuous error of people in Pentecostal churches feeling like they had to “speak in tongues” (most of the time not real tongues but babble because due to peer pressure) in order to fit in became the source of more serious error. As that practice became commonplace and, since tongues were not being used scripturally, it naturally began to be upstaged with more and more exciting “signs and wonders” also used to allegedly prove a person is Spirit-filled. As they reached out for more mystical, experiential practices they discovered more of the Latter Rain which some had already been introduced to through the Azusa Street “revival” and ministries of people like William Branham. The teaching then became a matter of “obtaining” the Holy Spirit as Joyce Meyer recently reiterated, obtaining tongues, obtaining the “anointing” which translates to getting “it” from another person or what is called the “transferable impartation”. This is accomplished, according to Latter Rain proponents, “by” the laying on of hands, “by” the will of man. In other words a person can press the Holy Spirit into people’s foreheads or throw Him across the room as many have seen Benny Hinn do. This was a further departure from the truth of Scripture regarding the laying on of hands, which Biblically was done in agreement with the will of God. If a person was filled (not baptized) with the Holy Spirit at the laying on of hands, the words used in those instances were not “by” but “at” or “through” indicating that anything that happened from God was from Him alone. Something to remember is that the filling of the Holy Spirit is not only accomplished at the laying on of hands but sovereignly without that act as well as evidenced in the Bible. As these ideas further infiltrated the churches those practicing them became even further influenced by the Latter Rain and began to introduce manifestations which were brought in from the occult in order to justify their warped ideas of Spirit filling. One of those occult practices was what they called “slain in the spirit” credited by them as what happened to John when he saw Jesus in His glorified body and was given the Revelation. But John was not knocked down backwards by some power fell down as if dead in fear, reverence and awe in the presence of the glorified Christ. Slain the spirit is no different than the occult practice in Hinduism of “shaktipat” in which people are laid hands on and they fall backwards into a trance, speak in tongues, and many other manifestation that are demonic in nature.

These new practices from the occult then became part and parcel of Pentecostal churches, so much so that those involved could no longer distinguish the difference between their old denominations and the new cults they had become. They joined the Latter Rain churches in the Third Wave and New Apostolic Reformation. They began to teach and promote that there is an impartation from God that you can receive from others and pass along, even though that practice is prohibited both in the Old Testament (Ex. 30:32) and in the New (Acts 8:9-25). Simon the Sorcerer mistook the laying on of hands as a magic trick or ability that would be bought and learned. But the disciples were clear that it was not something they could teach or was from them.

This is one example of how a smaller error can become a gigantic one, and basically bring churches into heresy because it becomes a denial of the character and working of the true Holy Spirit, as well as adding works required to prove salvation which is actually by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

I remember back to the 1950s and 60s that a lot of Christians criticized European churches and missions for making the mandatory speaking in tongues a divisive issue. Mission organizations from Europe would not allow people who wanted to become missionaries to even teach on speaking in tongues or claim that they spoke in tongues. At that time I also thought this was rather harsh. But now when I look back I see the validity of their concerns because that erroneous practice resulted in the openness of Pentecostals to embrace further forms of heresy. Demand for Christians to all speak in tongues was followed by dropping the requirement to have interpretation, then tongues became a free for all and people began to utter things that were in no way any language, or perhaps even driven by another spirit. Once they were opened to mistaking the false from the true they then became open to further ecstatic experiences and desired more as they became bored with tongues alone. So, as it turns out, those who opposed the unbiblical use of “tongues” were correct in making this a defining issue because error needs to be rooted out of good churches or else it can and will start to grow into further problems. Those problems have names today. They are the Latter Rain, Third Wave, New Apostolic Reformation, Word of Faith and the Emerging Church. Not only did these errors open people to the heresies of the Latter Rain and Word of Faith, they also opened them up to the heresies of Christian liberalism in the World Council of Churches, United Church of Christ, United Methodists, Friends, etc.

Snake Handling Cults

There are many examples in Scripture of when certain verses are taken out of context and amplified to doctrinal positions; you can end up in utter heresy and cultism. The book of Acts, for instance, is an account of when the Gospel was first preached to the Gentiles and the Holy Spirit was first given to those who are born again. The miraculous things that happened we must not expect to be normative in the churches, such as going out and handling snakes or drinking poison on purpose. We must rely on the Lord to do what He wills, not start snake handling cults. Snake handling churches use the following verses as their justification:

Mark 16:18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Acts 28:1-6 Once safely on shore, we found out that the island was called Malta. The islanders showed us unusual kindness. They built a fire and welcomed us all because it was raining and cold.  Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, “This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, the goddess Justice has not allowed him to live.” But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects. The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead; but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god.  

From these verses groups formed snake handling cults even though the Lord says that he must not be tested.

Matthew 4:7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’

They even forgot to heed the warning to Israel to not test the Lord, or they may be killed by snakes.

1 Corinthians 10:9 We should not test Christ, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes.

They even claimed that if you could not do this you were not filled with the Holy Spirit and not saved. The Lord can save us from poison or snakes, but He does not do that as a result of a test we are putting on Him but as a result of us being His children. This can result in a testimony before an unbelieving world, but God deserves all the glory. When you put God to the test by, for instance, handling snakes, you are trying to share the glory with God and He does not allow that. Sometimes God will put believers to the test, or allow the enemy to do so in order to strengthen their faith.   Sometimes He will heal people in order to give them a chance to believe in Him, or in casting out of demons.

So we have many examples of people taking one or two little things out of their Biblical context and making cults out of them. There is the famous example of this practice if you take two unrelated verses out of context:

Matthew 27:5b … and (Judas) went and hanged himself.

Luke 10:37b Go, and do thou likewise.

You can then make a suicide cult. This is an example of what some people have actually done. Jim Jones in effect told his followers they would not die but “step over into another plane” at the Johnstown Massacre.

Later that same day, 909 inhabitants of Jonestown, 304 of them children, died of apparent cyanide poisoning, mostly in and around the settlement's main pavilion. This resulted in the greatest single loss of American civilian life in a deliberate act until the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The FBI later recovered a 45-minute audio recording of the suicide in progress. On that tape, Jones tells Temple members that the Soviet Union, with whom the Temple had been negotiating a potential exodus for months, would not take them after the airstrip murders. The reason given by Jones to commit suicide was consistent with his previously stated conspiracy theories of intelligence organizations allegedly conspiring against the Temple, that men would "parachute in here on us," "shoot some of our innocent babies" and "they'll torture our children, they'll torture some of our people here, they'll torture our seniors." Parroting Jones' prior statements that hostile forces would convert captured children to fascism, one temple member states "the ones that they take captured, they're gonna just let them grow up and be dummies." Given that reasoning, Jones and several members argued that the group should commit "revolutionary suicide" by drinking cyanide-laced grape-flavored Flavor Aid. Later-released Temple films show Jones opening a storage container full of Kool-Aid in large quantities. However, empty packets of grape Flavor Aid found on the scene show that this is what was used to mix the solution along with a sedative. One member, Christine Miller, dissents toward the beginning of the tape. When members apparently cried, Jones counseled, "Stop these hysterics. This is not the way for people who are socialists or communists to die. No way for us to die. We must die with some dignity." Jones can be heard saying, "Don't be afraid to die," that death is "just stepping over into another plane" and that it's "a friend.” At the end of the tape, Jones concludes: "We didn't commit suicide; we committed an act of revolutionary suicide protesting the conditions of an inhumane world.” (Jim Jones, "Transcript of Recovered FBI tape Q 42." Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Jonestown Project: San Diego State University. 

Since they murdered themselves, and the Bible says that all unrepentant murderers end up in hell (Rev. 21:8), then they truly did step over into another plane; that of Hades awaiting judgment. They were all being unfaithful to the Lord, taking the Word out of context and testing God.

Now we see many other denominations falling away, going into apostasy, because they started with some smaller errors and now because of those errors have left themselves open to false teaching. One is the example of Darby who was the father of Pretribulational Rapture teaching. He ended up being rejected by the Biblical scholars of the time such as H.A. Ironside and D.L. Moody because he had started an exclusive cult which became the Closed Brethren, taught infant regenerational water baptism, etc. Now a number of denominations, though largely unaware of the extent to which Darby’s followers went, have elevated Pretribulational Rapture to the level of a core doctrine by putting it in their statements of faith, thus dismissing anyone who has a different view of the Rapture. But the timing of the Rapture is a legitimately debatable subject amongst Christians and is not a core doctrine. When you make that a requirement to be a true believer or part of a church doctrinal statement then you become cultic yourself. Back in the early 70s I was helped by some debates I heard between Pretrib and Posttrib proponents. It helped me to realize that both sides have legitimate arguments and that we need to be careful not to disfellowship people for having differing views of Pre-Millennial eschatology. Both of those views, for instance, have a different way of interpreting the phrase “keep from” in the Bible … one side saying that they believe is means God will take people out before the Tribulation and the other meaning God will keep Christians safe from the wrath of God through the Tribulation.

If an organization is teaching Preterism, Postmillennialism, Amillennialism or Dominionism that would be a legitimate issue to separate over, but those who are teaching the Truth need not separate over Premillennial views of the time of the Rapture. As long as you teach that Jesus Christ will return to earth bodily to rule and judge and that He will come for His elect, whether in a Rapture or in the Second Coming, as PostTribs combine the event, then you can debate the timing of His taking the church to Himself. Now I have my own view of the coming of the Lord Jesus for His Church which is called Intratrib or Intraseal … that He comes for His Church between the 6th and 7th seal. But I will not disfellowship fellow believers if they happen to think differently on this and can, at least somewhat substantiate their belief. I would advise anyone interested in Intratrib to read Jacob Prasch’s book “Harpazo”. But some denominations have made Pretrib such a big issue that they will not even debate about it and immediately vilify anyone who disagrees. This became very apparent when Prasch released his book. He lost a lot of friends over it. That is a cultic practice.

When something becomes such a part of the fabric of your belief system and is not a core doctrine, you had better test yourself to see if you are becoming cultic when you disfellowship over non-core issues. The problem is that many Christians have no clue what is core and what is not. There are five core doctrines that must not be given away as Christians and over which we do disfellowship.

  1. The Trinity: God is one "What" and three "Whos" with each "Who" possessing all the attributes of Deity and personality.
  2. The Person of Jesus Christ: Jesus is 100% God and 100% man for all eternity.
  3. The Second Coming: Jesus Christ is coming bodily to earth to rule and judge.
  4. Salvation: It is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.
  5. The Scripture: It is entirely inerrant and sufficient for all Christian life. (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/5doctrines.html)

Number 3 above is why Premillennial believers need to stick together because in Postmillennialism and Amillennialism you don’t have Christ coming back to RULE on earth, in Preterism He has allegedly already done so and in Dominionism He rules spiritually through His Church which is to take over everything on earth before the Second Coming, sans Rapture. So if you are going to be out of fellowship with people that should be done on the basis of the core doctrines, not secondary debatable ones.

Amillennialism

The problem with Amill in particular is that they come to their eschatology by allegorizing Scriptures like 2 Peter 3:8 to try to make the references to 1000 years in Revelation 20:2-4 allegorical or of some nebulous time period that does not equal a Millennium of time. But that verse in 2 Peter is explaining what it is like for God who is outside of time and space, not explaining a literal meaning of 1000 years. As stated before, when you start with a smaller error you end up in bigger ones. Most Amills I know often move on to allegorizing Genesis and do not believe in a 24 hour creation day. They make that well-defined “day” out to be any amount of time to try to bring it into line with evolutionary science, this idea being called “Theistic Evolution”. They use the wrong excuse that a “day” can be anything in Scripture as in “the day of the Lord”. But “the day of the Lord” is talking about a general time period whereas the “days” of Creation are defined as 24 hour days.

Genesis 1:5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

The next step which I have seen among Reformed Theology adherents is that you end up with a low view of Scripture, not really believing in inerrancy. But God said some things about His Word that ought to give those who have a low view of Scripture pause.

Psalm 119:160 The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.

Psalm 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Are there various minor mistranslations in English and other languages in the Bibles today? Yes. Were there errors in the original manuscripts which no longer exist?   No. Do the less than 1% of errors in Bibles today compromise core doctrinal issues? No. Can you get the Truth from good English translations? Absolutely. Translation is not an exact science. It is very difficult to boil down the meaning of many Hebrew words to one English equivalent. It is also very hard to translate Greek word for word. But we have many shining examples of great English translations today such as the NASB, the NKJV, the KJV, the RSV and the NET. There are also bad translations out there by cults and even non-translation “commentaries” such as the Message Bible which should be avoided at all costs. But we do have God’s Word preserved for us down through the centuries in many languages around the world.

The last step for Amills is to finally disregard Scripture as the Christian’s highest authority in all matters of faith and practice. I have seen this happen although it has not happened to all Reformed people yet. But many are well on their way. The Catholics are already there and certainly the pope. The RCC is a perfect example of leaven growing into a loaf that is rotten to the core. 

You can start with small errors and it always becomes worse the longer it is allowed to fester. You can even end up in denial of one or more of the core doctrines of the Faith, which destroys true Faith and without repentance can cause a person to apostatize. False ideas do not get better with time but worse. The only cure is a radical surgery to remove the offending bits so that the body can be healthy. Things do not get better on their own when left alone but need to be corrected. The Bible says to get the leaven out (1 Cor. 5:7). It says to disfellowship the sinful unrepentant man (1 Cor. 5:5). It says to stay away from false prophets and false teachers (Rom. 16:17). Yet unfortunately it has become politically incorrect in our modern churches to follow what the Bible says in these matters. Therefore these errors are compounding on themselves and we’re ending up with a large segment of Christianity which is into a counterfeit Christianity of their own making, into a type of cultism because of this lack of obedience to the Lord. The problem is that they think they are fine because no one has the fortitude to challenge them about their lack of action against internal error. Oh, they are quick to point out the error of cults but they absolutely rebel if you point out error in their little church. They say “Oh, its fine. We’ll be ok. We’re teaching the Bible”, etc. But they refuse to acknowledge that they are teaching the Bible is a wrong way, picking and choosing what they will follow and what they will ignore.

I have a problem with the way Pretribulational Rapture is being taught today. I don’t have a problem with it being taught, I have a problem with things like “Don’t worry you won’t see the antichrist” or “you won’t be here for any hard times” being taught. I believe, no matter where you place the Rapture in the scope of the end times, that you need to present two things: (1) People need to be ready for Christ to come back at any time, in particular on a personal level as God can end your life anytime and (2) be ready to stand up for the Gospel and the Faith under persecution. Those things are happening now for many around the world and can happen for any Christian any time. The idea of a Pretrib Rapture is actually a very popular modern view and fits our American sensibilities very well … that somehow we are a privileged generation that will always be blessed and never have to go through hard times. But that has never been the case in the history of the Church, only the delusion of Laodicea that they (and we by extension) are rich and have need for nothing, when in fact we are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.   This is why Word of Faith and Prosperity Gospel teachings are doctrines of demons.

Another pet peeve of mine is listening to five-point Calvinists say things like “you don’t have to believe to be saved, God will just cause you to believe” or “if you are a Christian and you commit suicide you will still go to heaven (this is what Charles Stanley said on a radio program)” or “you can take the mark of the Beast and repent at the last moment and still go to heaven (this is what John MacArthur said in a message)”. These are ridiculous and foolish ideas. The Bible is clear that you must believe to be saved (after hearing the Gospel and being convicted by the Holy Spirit - Acts 16:31). God is not going to believe for you nor will He go against His Word (2 Pet. 3:9) by sending some to heaven and some to hell based on a choice He made in eternity. It is rather based on His foreknowledge (Rom. 8:29) of whether or not a person will believe when they are convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit. You cannot murder yourself and expect to be in heaven (Rev. 21:8) and taking the mark of the Beast will send you to hell along with the Antichrist and False Prophet (Rev. 14:11). Arminianism, on the other hand, teaches that man is not completely fallen or sinful, that man does not have a sin nature contrary to Scripture (Rom. 7:18 & 25). The Bible says we are desperately wicked (Jer. 17:9) and that all men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23, 5:12). If you subscribe to either five-point Calvinism or five-point Arminianism you are going to be in error because there are points in both that are incorrect or only partly correct. So when you drift over into the full belief in either system, systems that are of man and do not entirely follow the Scripture, you are going to begin to have your belief system corrupted little by little. Pretty soon you will end up teaching false teaching that is dangerous to the beliefs of Christians who can end up believing in vain (1 Cor. 15:2).

There are many errors in Christian churches that were left to grow into major problems. It use to be a problem mainly for cults which would start following certain Scriptures taken out of context or some person who brings “new revelation”. But now “new revelation” is happening in what used to be evangelical Biblical churches, so much so that even the word “evangelical” has been co-opted by heretics and can no longer be used in reference to Bible-believing Christ-centered churches. When I look at how many Protestant denominations are getting together with Roman Catholics and the pope these days it is a symptom of a long festering problem of interfaithism, inclusivism, pluralism and ecumenism that have crept into churches and now, like the proverbial frog in a pot of water brought slowly to a boil, they don’t even realize they are right in the middle of apostasy. They used to recognize that you can’t do ministry, in particular evangelism, with an organization like the RCC that teaches works salvation and is in denial of the core doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone and at least one other core doctrine in adding tradition on the same level as the written Word. The RCC has never been able to accept the definition of salvation in the “solas” because they cannot say that salvation is by grace alone. So “evangelicals” who don’t know their Bible have not gotten together with them and signed off on a statement that reads: “Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ”. So everyone, enamored with people like Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Chuck Colson and others, line up like lemmings and head for the cliff of compromise. Christians can agree with Catholics on some social issues, but not on ministry and evangelism. But even on social issues we do not agree with their policy of priests and nuns not marrying because the Bible clearly teaches that the overseers of the churches should be married (1 Tim. 3:2). When you start with the error of pluralism you end up mixing everything together in one big pot and creating a new one world religion. This is what is going on today and we are well on our way to what the Bible predicted would happen in the end times. We are not going to see a worldwide revival but rather a worldwide apostasy in the churches. There may be a worldwide revival, but it is a revival of demonic religions from the past and occultism. With the “new revelation” of Dominionism, the teaching that the Church must take over the governments and every aspect of the world in order for Christ to return, you have the full fledged fulfillment of the passage on the woman who rides the beast (Rev. 17:3 & 7).

Small errors ALWAYS develop into larger errors if unchecked. Small errors don’t go away by themselves. They have to be dealt with and abandoned. They have to be repented of. They have to be extricated, removed by precise surgery, from the Body of Christ, and from the local church in order that the local church can survive. This was the case with the man Paul told the Corinthians to excommunicate for committing incest. This was done so that the man might be brought to his lowest point by Satan and that he might possibly repent and turn, which he in fact did. But if he had been left in that church that sin would have become commonplace and all kinds of sexual sins follow. We see this happening in a number of churches today. The leadership gets people all riled up on “slain in the spirit”, appealing to the flesh, and gets them hooked. Once they are an addict, if they cannot get another fix, they go searching for alternatives which almost always involve sex, drugs, alcohol, perversions, and adultery. I know someone who works in a garment factory and she could not believe how women, who were allegedly Christians and choir members, talk about the most base sexual details of their lives in front of everyone. They have been misled by the enemy and yet they still think they are true Christians. They have been fooled into substituting spiritual things for soulical things.

Conclusion

The problems in Christendom today are there because discernment has not been taught. People are left with milk only and never move on to meat. They never have to use their own brains or discern what is right or wrong. This is a failure of the leadership. Any church that teaches verse by verse with correct interpretation will cover everything a Christian needs for life and practice. But this is not generally being done. Rebuke is seen as an evil, ugly thing instead of remaining open to the voice of the Spirit through the Word. Christians cannot just “proclaim” and “think positively” out of these problems. They need to study the Word of God and allow the Holy Spirit to show them their errors. We are all sinners saved by grace and we all need our Father to teach us and discipline us when needed. None of us are perfect, none of us have arrived. So let’s admit we have some major problems and begin the process of dealing with them.

 

 

 

 

by James Jacob Prasch
September 22, 2015 

As Pope Francis arrives in the USA, the Vatican characteristically expects the media, the Congress, and the public to simply ignore the fact that when Cardinal of Buenos Aires, Francis staunchly refused to meet with the children sexually victimized by his priests and nuns and with their families. His pedophile sex criminal clergy were protected as the defenseless little children were raped and he refused to even meet them or their parents. So the College of Cardinals in a convocation that included multiple protectors and de facto enablers of baby raping sexual deviants frocked in their vestments, habits, and cassocks, including Los Angeles Cardinal Mahony and Boston Cardinal Law, elected Bergoglio pope and said he is 'the 'Vicar of Christ'. But didn't Christ say that “It is better to have a millstone tied to one's neck and be cast into the sea rather than harm a helpless little child”? Now this same Francis is coming to the land of Mahony with his lies and baloney, and of Law, who rather proved himself to be utterly law-less. These reprobates who shielded dangerous sexual deviates at the expense of the children whose molestation and sexual and homosexual violation these servants of Lucifer helped facilitate are among those who helped elect Bergoglio, so why wouldn't George (Jorge) Bergoglio cum Pope Francis come to the USA? How can such a disgusting pretender misrepresent himself as the vicar of a Christ whose very Words he nullifies and whose example he shuns in favor of a public relations motivated charade packaged in pseudo sanctimonious pomposity of the very same brand Jesus flagrantly condemned in the Gospel of St. Matthew chapter 23?

It is obvious to any honest observer that Bergoglio's only real god is the centuries old Vatican idol of theocratic politics that millions of former Roman Catholics who have accepted the real Christ, including now regenerate priests and nuns, can readily testify to. The real Jesus did not double talk or engage in the legalistic practice of pilpul in their attempt to defend the indefensible. Jesus appealed to the spirit of the law and did not engage in the pilpul of disputing about words Bill Clinton style as in: “it depends on what the definition of 'is' 'is'”; or ' “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” (when he performed acts other than intercourse). Jesus issued clear unambiguous moral dictates in response to hypocritical religious rhetoric looking for technical loopholes to avoid what in substance amounted to perjury or in practice amounted to transgression despite religio-legal attempts to camouflage it with pilpul and the Gospels are emphatic that He did so 'speaking as one with authority not like the scribes' (Matthew 7:28-29). There was no ambivalence or uncertainty as to what He meant. What Clinton was in the White House however, Pope Francis is in the Vatican. We see a return to the pilpul condemned by Jesus in The Sermon on The Mount. Concerning the issue of homosexuality Pope Francis stated “if two men are in a committed relation - who am I to judge”? The point is that Jesus Christ has judged the matter already and the Judeo- Christian Scriptures say so plainly (Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Timothy 1:10, 1 Corinthians 6:9). If the Scriptures judged it and he claims to speak for Christ (which he most certainly does not nor does any other Pope), why does he not simply uphold the teaching of Scripture judging it wrong?

What we see from Pope Francis is the pilpul that Jesus taught against and was a well defined alternative to. In Pope Francis we see a Pharisaical faker magna cum laude. Indeed, after his wife Laura and his former Vice President Dick Cheney (who daughter is in a lesbian marriage) appeared on YouTube urging Republican Party support for same sex marriage, former president George W. Bush stated with regard to homosexuality “I have to remove the log from my own eye”, as if his out of context citation of that verse from Scripture justified his ignoring that God's Word strongly calls homosexuality morally abominable. The Sanhedrin may have invented pilpul but phony unprincipled politicians have perfected it with media spin, and as is solidly evident Pope Francis is nothing more than just another such politician whose theological roots are not in the Jesus whose vicar he fraudulently pretends to be, but in the Sanhedrin who collaborated with the Roman government to turn the Jewish people against their own Messiah and have Him murdered. It is of course a factually ridiculous legally and doctrinally false contention to corporately blame Israel and The Jews for the death of Jesus. Jesus stated that He laid His life down and no one took it from Him. The Hebrew prophet Isaiah informs us in chapter 53 that it was His Father's will to slay Him as an atonement for our sin when He took our sin on Himself and thus in the larger sense we are all His killers. Moreover , all of His initial followers and the New Testament authors were themselves Jews with Jewish belief in Him as Messiah reaching a very high percentage of the Jewish population by the early Second century. Juridically, all four Gospels and the earliest Creeds of the church dogmatically profess that He was crucified by the Roman government under Pontius Pilate. Yet, although He forgave His executors – and us - from the cross, there is no question that the pagan Roman government and Sanhedrin conspired to kill him and they are still conspiring to kill Him. Only today the Roman authorities are the Roman Catholic church, the Sanhedrin are the College of Cardinals and Papal Curia, and Pontius Pilate is now called the Pope. My own family is a combination of Jewish and Roman Catholic backgrounds, and as such I would not be surprised if the pedophile protecting Roman Catholic church gambled for His cloths at a Bingo game.

Like all such phony politicians be it a Clinton, a Bush or otherwise, Francis has his media spin. His PR machine says “He has not changed the moral teaching of the church, only the emphasis”. He has done this in two ways. The first is divert away from inconvenient issues by changing the narrative. Thus we see Francis railing about capitalism and global warming in a cheap ecclesiastical version of 'Occupy Wall Street'. The second, as we have stated is to engage in a Roman Catholic imitation of pilpul. So when Francis concerning homosexuality publicly asks “who am I to judge”? The liberal wing of Roman Catholicism can claim that pope has modified the Roman Catholic opposition to homosexuality and he no longer will say it is flatly wrong; he says “who is he to judge”? Simultaneously, the traditionalist hypocrite wrong of Roman Catholicism reacts by saying “the Pope has not officially changed the opposition of the church to homosexuality”. For the sake of political expediency he placates everybody but offers no clear moral direction. This Jesus did not do according to St. Matthew, yet this impostor Francis claims to be The Lord's personal vicar acting vicariously on Christ's behalf.

Another example is his liberalization policy on the issuing of marital annulments. To begin with the term itself as it is used colloquially or legally is not found in the New Testament. The only New Testament basis for the nullification of a marriage is only where in God's eyes there was no valid marriage to begin with due to one partner already being married (John 5:17-18). In Roman Catholicism an annulment may amount to nothing more than a mere euphemism for divorce. Apologists for Roman Catholicism of course conventionally resort once again to pilpul; the strategic use of semantics is of course pivotal in pilpul. In the political hypocrisy that we witness in the parlance of international diplomacy we encounter this all of the time where a synonymous or ambiguous phraseology can be interpreted by two different parties to mean two different things in order to forge a meaningless agreement or concordat that eventually breaks down. In ecumenical dialogue between Roman Catholic and supposedly 'Protestant' theologians we see the same hypocritical idiocy. Both panels of theologians sign a joint declaration stating “we agree both Catholic and Protestant that we are saved by grace”, when in fact the Protestant understanding of grace is unearned and undeserved favor deriving from the Greek and Hebrew definitions of the term etymologically, while the perverted Roman Catholic definition is an ethereal substance , (be it actual or sanctifying grace as they describe it) that is ritualistically earned by sacraments even in the ex opera operato case of infant baptism (which in fact most Reformed, Anglican, and Lutheran Protestant denominations absurdly an unscripturally share). Both can agree they are saved by grace and issue a worthless proclamation to that effect that has no capacity to do anything but deceive, yet in actuality they have two fundamentally variant definitions of what grace is. While this fails theologically and spiritually, it works politically. It is little wonder St. Paul condemned such semantically charged dialogue involving disputes about words in circumlocution of the divinely intended meaning of Holy Writ (1 Timothy 6:4).

The Roman Catholic church engages in this kind of stupid semantic dialogue without reference to what the Scriptures actually state concerning the issue divorce by a convoluted argumentation that declares a marriage invalid for considerations that are extra biblical and grant annulment when in fact they are simply calling a divorce by another name. For many centuries popes routinely granted European monarchs annulments to remarry when it was in the political and or economic interests of the papacy to do so. Thomas Moore, the notorious villain who was party to the horrific persecution of regenerate Christians during the Reformation was executed by King Henry VIII not because Moore opposed Henry's divorce and remarriage, but rather because the pope did not approve of it for political reasons. Pope Francis did not invent this 'divorce by another name' practice of the papacy. He is just making it easier to do in order to be 'seeker friendly' to trim his falling mass attendance numbers. Likewise with the majority of reported cases of clerical pedophilia by his priests and nuns being of a homosexual and lesbian nature, Francis knows that without homosexuals and lesbians the already thin ranks of religious vocations in the Roman Catholic clergy would be much thinner still and he would not have enough priests and nuns for his religious system to function. It is all pilpul and all politics from homosexuality to annulment to pedophilia.

“Gorgeous George” Bergoglio has changed his name to “Frank the Phony”. But he is no Vicar of Christ. Like his papal predecessors he is just another anti-christ and as he visits New York and Washington, the other crooked politicians will roll out the red carpet for him and listen to his pilpul. And why should they not? He is the only politician in the world who can give the other politicians in the congress, White House and at the UN lessons in hypocrisy and how to connive.

Pope Francis is truly a religious charlatan whose hypocrisy knows no limits. When he changed his name from George (Jorge) , instead of Francis he should have called himself Caiaphas or maybe Pontius. But he should not be calling himself 'The Vicar of Christ'. What he does, Christ did not do.

 

May The Lord Jesus graciously continue to save Roman Catholic souls and deliver them from the demonic clutches of the pedophile cult and anti-christ false religious system of Roman Catholicism. Please pray for the salvation of Roman Catholic people and for their clergy who mislead them with lies and hypocrisy and destroy their children.

James Jacob Prasch

 

 

 

 

 

by James Jacob Prasch
September 22, 2015 

As Pope Francis arrives in the USA, the Vatican characteristically expects the media, the Congress, and the public to simply ignore the fact that when Cardinal of Buenos Aires, Francis staunchly refused to meet with the children sexually victimized by his priests and nuns and with their families. His pedophile sex criminal clergy were protected as the defenseless little children were raped and he refused to even meet them or their parents. So the College of Cardinals in a convocation that included multiple protectors and de facto enablers of baby raping sexual deviants frocked in their vestments, habits, and cassocks, including Los Angeles Cardinal Mahony and Boston Cardinal Law, elected Bergoglio pope and said he is 'the 'Vicar of Christ'. But didn't Christ say that “It is better to have a millstone tied to one's neck and be cast into the sea rather than harm a helpless little child”? Now this same Francis is coming to the land of Mahony with his lies and baloney, and of Law, who rather proved himself to be utterly law-less. These reprobates who shielded dangerous sexual deviates at the expense of the children whose molestation and sexual and homosexual violation these servants of Lucifer helped facilitate are among those who helped elect Bergoglio, so why wouldn't George (Jorge) Bergoglio cum Pope Francis come to the USA? How can such a disgusting pretender misrepresent himself as the vicar of a Christ whose very Words he nullifies and whose example he shuns in favor of a public relations motivated charade packaged in pseudo sanctimonious pomposity of the very same brand Jesus flagrantly condemned in the Gospel of St. Matthew chapter 23?

It is obvious to any honest observer that Bergoglio's only real god is the centuries old Vatican idol of theocratic politics that millions of former Roman Catholics who have accepted the real Christ, including now regenerate priests and nuns, can readily testify to. The real Jesus did not double talk or engage in the legalistic practice of pilpul in their attempt to defend the indefensible. Jesus appealed to the spirit of the law and did not engage in the pilpul of disputing about words Bill Clinton style as in: “it depends on what the definition of 'is' 'is'”; or ' “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” (when he performed acts other than intercourse). Jesus issued clear unambiguous moral dictates in response to hypocritical religious rhetoric looking for technical loopholes to avoid what in substance amounted to perjury or in practice amounted to transgression despite religio-legal attempts to camouflage it with pilpul and the Gospels are emphatic that He did so 'speaking as one with authority not like the scribes' (Matthew 7:28-29). There was no ambivalence or uncertainty as to what He meant. What Clinton was in the White House however, Pope Francis is in the Vatican. We see a return to the pilpul condemned by Jesus in The Sermon on The Mount. Concerning the issue of homosexuality Pope Francis stated “if two men are in a committed relation - who am I to judge”? The point is that Jesus Christ has judged the matter already and the Judeo- Christian Scriptures say so plainly (Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Timothy 1:10, 1 Corinthians 6:9). If the Scriptures judged it and he claims to speak for Christ (which he most certainly does not nor does any other Pope), why does he not simply uphold the teaching of Scripture judging it wrong?

What we see from Pope Francis is the pilpul that Jesus taught against and was a well defined alternative to. In Pope Francis we see a Pharisaical faker magna cum laude. Indeed, after his wife Laura and his former Vice President Dick Cheney (who daughter is in a lesbian marriage) appeared on YouTube urging Republican Party support for same sex marriage, former president George W. Bush stated with regard to homosexuality “I have to remove the log from my own eye”, as if his out of context citation of that verse from Scripture justified his ignoring that God's Word strongly calls homosexuality morally abominable. The Sanhedrin may have invented pilpul but phony unprincipled politicians have perfected it with media spin, and as is solidly evident Pope Francis is nothing more than just another such politician whose theological roots are not in the Jesus whose vicar he fraudulently pretends to be, but in the Sanhedrin who collaborated with the Roman government to turn the Jewish people against their own Messiah and have Him murdered. It is of course a factually ridiculous legally and doctrinally false contention to corporately blame Israel and The Jews for the death of Jesus. Jesus stated that He laid His life down and no one took it from Him. The Hebrew prophet Isaiah informs us in chapter 53 that it was His Father's will to slay Him as an atonement for our sin when He took our sin on Himself and thus in the larger sense we are all His killers. Moreover , all of His initial followers and the New Testament authors were themselves Jews with Jewish belief in Him as Messiah reaching a very high percentage of the Jewish population by the early Second century. Juridically, all four Gospels and the earliest Creeds of the church dogmatically profess that He was crucified by the Roman government under Pontius Pilate. Yet, although He forgave His executors – and us - from the cross, there is no question that the pagan Roman government and Sanhedrin conspired to kill him and they are still conspiring to kill Him. Only today the Roman authorities are the Roman Catholic church, the Sanhedrin are the College of Cardinals and Papal Curia, and Pontius Pilate is now called the Pope. My own family is a combination of Jewish and Roman Catholic backgrounds, and as such I would not be surprised if the pedophile protecting Roman Catholic church gambled for His cloths at a Bingo game.

Like all such phony politicians be it a Clinton, a Bush or otherwise, Francis has his media spin. His PR machine says “He has not changed the moral teaching of the church, only the emphasis”. He has done this in two ways. The first is divert away from inconvenient issues by changing the narrative. Thus we see Francis railing about capitalism and global warming in a cheap ecclesiastical version of 'Occupy Wall Street'. The second, as we have stated is to engage in a Roman Catholic imitation of pilpul. So when Francis concerning homosexuality publicly asks “who am I to judge”? The liberal wing of Roman Catholicism can claim that pope has modified the Roman Catholic opposition to homosexuality and he no longer will say it is flatly wrong; he says “who is he to judge”? Simultaneously, the traditionalist hypocrite wrong of Roman Catholicism reacts by saying “the Pope has not officially changed the opposition of the church to homosexuality”. For the sake of political expediency he placates everybody but offers no clear moral direction. This Jesus did not do according to St. Matthew, yet this impostor Francis claims to be The Lord's personal vicar acting vicariously on Christ's behalf.

Another example is his liberalization policy on the issuing of marital annulments. To begin with the term itself as it is used colloquially or legally is not found in the New Testament. The only New Testament basis for the nullification of a marriage is only where in God's eyes there was no valid marriage to begin with due to one partner already being married (John 5:17-18). In Roman Catholicism an annulment may amount to nothing more than a mere euphemism for divorce. Apologists for Roman Catholicism of course conventionally resort once again to pilpul; the strategic use of semantics is of course pivotal in pilpul. In the political hypocrisy that we witness in the parlance of international diplomacy we encounter this all of the time where a synonymous or ambiguous phraseology can be interpreted by two different parties to mean two different things in order to forge a meaningless agreement or concordat that eventually breaks down. In ecumenical dialogue between Roman Catholic and supposedly 'Protestant' theologians we see the same hypocritical idiocy. Both panels of theologians sign a joint declaration stating “we agree both Catholic and Protestant that we are saved by grace”, when in fact the Protestant understanding of grace is unearned and undeserved favor deriving from the Greek and Hebrew definitions of the term etymologically, while the perverted Roman Catholic definition is an ethereal substance , (be it actual or sanctifying grace as they describe it) that is ritualistically earned by sacraments even in the ex opera operato case of infant baptism (which in fact most Reformed, Anglican, and Lutheran Protestant denominations absurdly an unscripturally share). Both can agree they are saved by grace and issue a worthless proclamation to that effect that has no capacity to do anything but deceive, yet in actuality they have two fundamentally variant definitions of what grace is. While this fails theologically and spiritually, it works politically. It is little wonder St. Paul condemned such semantically charged dialogue involving disputes about words in circumlocution of the divinely intended meaning of Holy Writ (1 Timothy 6:4).

The Roman Catholic church engages in this kind of stupid semantic dialogue without reference to what the Scriptures actually state concerning the issue divorce by a convoluted argumentation that declares a marriage invalid for considerations that are extra biblical and grant annulment when in fact they are simply calling a divorce by another name. For many centuries popes routinely granted European monarchs annulments to remarry when it was in the political and or economic interests of the papacy to do so. Thomas Moore, the notorious villain who was party to the horrific persecution of regenerate Christians during the Reformation was executed by King Henry VIII not because Moore opposed Henry's divorce and remarriage, but rather because the pope did not approve of it for political reasons. Pope Francis did not invent this 'divorce by another name' practice of the papacy. He is just making it easier to do in order to be 'seeker friendly' to trim his falling mass attendance numbers. Likewise with the majority of reported cases of clerical pedophilia by his priests and nuns being of a homosexual and lesbian nature, Francis knows that without homosexuals and lesbians the already thin ranks of religious vocations in the Roman Catholic clergy would be much thinner still and he would not have enough priests and nuns for his religious system to function. It is all pilpul and all politics from homosexuality to annulment to pedophilia.

“Gorgeous George” Bergoglio has changed his name to “Frank the Phony”. But he is no Vicar of Christ. Like his papal predecessors he is just another anti-christ and as he visits New York and Washington, the other crooked politicians will roll out the red carpet for him and listen to his pilpul. And why should they not? He is the only politician in the world who can give the other politicians in the congress, White House and at the UN lessons in hypocrisy and how to connive.

Pope Francis is truly a religious charlatan whose hypocrisy knows no limits. When he changed his name from George (Jorge) , instead of Francis he should have called himself Caiaphas or maybe Pontius. But he should not be calling himself 'The Vicar of Christ'. What he does, Christ did not do.

 

May The Lord Jesus graciously continue to save Roman Catholic souls and deliver them from the demonic clutches of the pedophile cult and anti-christ false religious system of Roman Catholicism. Please pray for the salvation of Roman Catholic people and for their clergy who mislead them with lies and hypocrisy and destroy their children.

James Jacob Prasch

 

 

 

 

 

Sunday, 13 September 2015 14:23

Prayer Request

Moriel and Jacob Prasch request prayer for Dr. Arthur Dell, a longstanding
friend of Moriel and specialist medical practitioner who has been diagnosed with
Cancer. Important decisions regarding whether he and his wife Alice should remain
in Australia or relocate back to the UK for medical treatment are pending. Please
Pray for The Lord's intervention in his fight and for wisdom for his own physicians
as well as guidance as to whether or not to return to Scotland,

Sunday, 13 September 2015 14:23

Prayer Request

Moriel and Jacob Prasch request prayer for Dr. Arthur Dell, a longstanding
friend of Moriel and specialist medical practitioner who has been diagnosed with
Cancer. Important decisions regarding whether he and his wife Alice should remain
in Australia or relocate back to the UK for medical treatment are pending. Please
Pray for The Lord's intervention in his fight and for wisdom for his own physicians
as well as guidance as to whether or not to return to Scotland,

Monday, 07 September 2015 17:40

Prayer Request

Since May I have been doing open-air preaching/evangelism/witnessing on the weekend evenings.  I preach the word on street corners in Phoenix, Tempe, and Scottsdale, and give out Bibles to whoever wants one, and witness one-on-one.  On average I give out about 5 or 6 Bibles per day that I preach.  I just leave them in a stack nearby and let people know there are free Bibles and they pick them up if they are interested.  I get the Bibles at Goodwill, Savers, used book stores, and from my church.  I go out at night after the kids are in bed because I don't want to give up my time with my family during the day and early evening.  It's been a blessing to see people respond to the Gospel, take Bibles, even repent and believe right there on the street!  There is also lots of opposition both "on the field and off the field," so to speak.  Of course the enemy likes to mock, taunt, ridicule, attack anything that is of the Lord and His Word.  
 
I'm writing to request prayer.  I'm usually out on Friday or Saturday evenings.  Your prayers for lost souls, for the furtherance of the Gospel, for protection from the enemy, for favor with the authorities, for words that are not mine - but God's, etc., are greatly greatly appreciated.  If you are in a prayer group or know a "prayer warrior" who would be willing to keep this in prayer, please pass the request along.  At times it's very difficult and discouraging but there is always hope and joy in it no matter how hard it seems, because I know the Lord is doing His work, and "...neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase."[1Co 3:7].
 
Thank you and God bless you.
 
Art
Newsletter signup
  1. Full Name(*)
    Please type your full name.
  2. E-mail(*)
    Invalid email address.
  3. Address(*)
    Invalid Input
  4. City(*)
    You have to enter a value for the City
  5. Province/County/State(*)
    Invalid Input
  6. Country(*)
    Invalid Input
  7. Post/Zip code(*)
    Invalid Input
  8. +4 US(*)
    Invalid Input
  9. Telephone
    Invalid Input
  10. Your closest Moriel Location(*)
    Invalid Input

Blog by Subject

Aberrational Theology Abuse Reports Alpha Course Announcements Antichrist antisemitism apologetics Archeology Australia Author backsliding Berit Kjos Bezaleel Bill Alnor Bill Randles Bill Walthall Brian Broderson Buddhism calvary chapel Calvin Smith Canada Catholicism Central and South America Charley Carle Christopher Fisher Church Issues Comforting Those Who Mourn D. E. Isom Dave Royle David Lister D E Isom dental mission Discernment doctrine Ecumenism Elon Morah Elon Moreh Emergent Church End Times End Times Archive eschatology europe Evangelism Evolution False Prophets feminism former gay germany Hare Krishna heresy Hinduism history hollywood information In the Land Islam Israel Israel Missions Items of Various Interest Jackie Alnor Jacob Prasch James Jacob Prasch Jan Markell Japan Jehovah's Witnesses jewhatred jezebel joyce meyer Kenya Missions last days Latest News luther Mexico Mike Gendron Mike Oppenheimer Missions Missions in Rome Moriel japan Mormonism Nessim Muse New Age New Apostolic Reformation News & Info New Zealand Persecution petition Philippine Garbage Dump Children Philip Powell pope Popular Teachers posttrib Prayer Request prayer requests pretrib prewrath pride Prophecy News Purpose Driven Question and Answer Quote of the Day rapture Render to Caesar Ruckmanism russia Sandy Simpsom Scott Noble seal sin South Africa South Africa Missions Steven Boot Tanzania Missions Teaching Testimonies testimony Thailand Toronto, Pensacola & Lakeland Toronto, Pensacola & Lakeland tribulation Uncategorized United Kingdom United States USA Missions Word Faith wrath yeshua

Filter and Search Articles

Articles of note

Random Product from the Webstore

/0001191_true-church
True Church
$4.00

Your Shopping cart

 x 

Cart empty

Holyland Design

If you, your church or your ministry need graphic design, we recommend Holyland Design (who built this site).

Holyland Design