Find any Holy -- Cross-- Brothers.. ???
no they are all spineless--church--going --perverts..
that's the Roman Catholic Church.. deciple ship... training..
...4--Uuuu---
Monday, June 28, 2010
Alvin Glombowski, training at thomas more high school
Find any Holy -- Cross-- Brothers.. ???
no they are all spineless--church--going --perverts..
that's the Roman Catholic Church.. deciple ship... training..
...4--Uuuu---
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
10 righteous ? no--way---God is making allowance for the possibility that some people might REPENT
Ezekiel 3:20 Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die:
because thou hast not given him warning,
he shall die in his sin,
and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Ezekiel 18:21
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
We see that God is making allowance for the possibility that some people might REPENT between the time of Abraham's intercession and the time of the Judgment concerning Sodom's destruction.
But why would God allow a city of immorality like Sodom to be PRESERVED if as many as 10 righteous men be found, but destroy the city if only ONE righteous man might be found? These are difficult questions to answer, but perhaps wherever there is a COMMUNITY or CONGREGATION of RIGHTEOUS, however small, THEN there is hope that others will repent and reform through the power of example and fellowship and association with the righteous few.
Of course, God in his FOREKNOWLEDGE, from God's atemporal vantage point of the pre-Eternal "Now", can see as present the outcome of each person's freewill decisions. Yet that foreknowledge in no way robs the individual of his free will choice at the moment he makes it. Yet obviously, God also must have foreknown that ten men would NOT repent and become righteous. But still, God left open the possibility that it might happen, indicating the POTENCY of man's free will choice and cooperation with the Divine Will, and God's reluctance to suggest in scripture any sort of election or predestination which would rob individuals of the potency of their choice.
Another valuable lesson from the story of Abraham's intercession on behalf of Sodom is that "THE WORLD IS SUSTAINED FROM MOMENT TO MOMENT for the sake of the righteous few." One day, a woman asked me with some concern what good work she might do to help the world. I pointed out to her, that on the basis of this story of Sodom, she may possibly PRESERVE THE VERY WORLD by her own personal sanctity and devotion.
Regarding the notion of "not looking back" as Lot's wife did, we may look at the passage where Elijah Recruits Elisha:
(1 Kings 19:19-21)
19 Elijah went from there and found Elisha son of Shaphat. He was plowing with 12 pairs of oxen; he was near the twelfth pair. Elijah passed by him and threw his robe over him. 20 He left the oxen, ran after Elijah, and said, “Please let me kiss my father and mother goodbye, then I will follow you.” Elijah said to him, “Go back! Indeed, what have I done to you?” 21 Elisha went back and took his pair of oxen and slaughtered them. He cooked the meat over a fire that he made by burning the harness and yoke. He gave the people meat and they ate. Then he got up and followed Elijah and became his assistant.
From the description we are given of Elisha, he is a man of real character. When singled out by Elijah, he goes to his home and announces his calling and departure. He then returns to offer a sacrifice, using the oxen he had been plowing with—an expensive meal, indeed. And he burns the yoke and the harness to cook as fuel for the sacrificial fire. It is as though he had said, “I’ve made this decision to follow God, and Elijah, as a prophet, and I have no intention of turning back.” Today we would say, Elisha burned his bridges.
Ezekiel 3:20 Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Ezekiel 18:21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
We see that God is making allowance for the possibility that some people might REPENT between the time of Abraham's intercession and the time of the Judgment concerning Sodom's destruction.
But why would God allow a city of immorality like Sodom to be PRESERVED if as many as 10 righteous men be found, but destroy the city if only ONE righteous man might be found? These are difficult questions to answer, but perhaps wherever there is a COMMUNITY or CONGREGATION of RIGHTEOUS, however small, THEN there is hope that others will repent and reform through the power of example and fellowship and association with the righteous few.
Of course, God in his FOREKNOWLEDGE, from God's atemporal vantage point of the pre-Eternal "Now", can see as present the outcome of each person's freewill decisions. Yet that foreknowledge in no way robs the individual of his free will choice at the moment he makes it. Yet obviously, God also must have foreknown that ten men would NOT repent and become righteous. But still, God left open the possibility that it might happen, indicating the POTENCY of man's free will choice and cooperation with the Divine Will, and God's reluctance to suggest in scripture any sort of election or predestination which would rob individuals of the potency of their choice.
Another valuable lesson from the story of Abraham's intercession on behalf of Sodom is that "THE WORLD IS SUSTAINED FROM MOMENT TO MOMENT for the sake of the righteous few." One day, a woman asked me with some concern what good work she might do to help the world. I pointed out to her, that on the basis of this story of Sodom, she may possibly PRESERVE THE VERY WORLD by her own personal sanctity and devotion.
Regarding the notion of "not looking back" as Lot's wife did, we may look at the passage where Elijah Recruits Elisha:
(1 Kings 19:19-21)
19 Elijah went from there and found Elisha son of Shaphat. He was plowing with 12 pairs of oxen; he was near the twelfth pair. Elijah passed by him and threw his robe over him. 20 He left the oxen, ran after Elijah, and said, “Please let me kiss my father and mother goodbye, then I will follow you.” Elijah said to him, “Go back! Indeed, what have I done to you?” 21 Elisha went back and took his pair of oxen and slaughtered them. He cooked the meat over a fire that he made by burning the harness and yoke. He gave the people meat and they ate. Then he got up and followed Elijah and became his assistant.
From the description we are given of Elisha, he is a man of real character. When singled out by Elijah, he goes to his home and announces his calling and departure. He then returns to offer a sacrifice, using the oxen he had been plowing with—an expensive meal, indeed. And he burns the yoke and the harness to cook as fuel for the sacrificial fire. It is as though he had said, “I’ve made this decision to follow God, and Elijah, as a prophet, and I have no intention of turning back.” Today we would say, Elisha burned his bridges.
because thou hast not given him warning,
he shall die in his sin,
and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Ezekiel 18:21
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
We see that God is making allowance for the possibility that some people might REPENT between the time of Abraham's intercession and the time of the Judgment concerning Sodom's destruction.
But why would God allow a city of immorality like Sodom to be PRESERVED if as many as 10 righteous men be found, but destroy the city if only ONE righteous man might be found? These are difficult questions to answer, but perhaps wherever there is a COMMUNITY or CONGREGATION of RIGHTEOUS, however small, THEN there is hope that others will repent and reform through the power of example and fellowship and association with the righteous few.
Of course, God in his FOREKNOWLEDGE, from God's atemporal vantage point of the pre-Eternal "Now", can see as present the outcome of each person's freewill decisions. Yet that foreknowledge in no way robs the individual of his free will choice at the moment he makes it. Yet obviously, God also must have foreknown that ten men would NOT repent and become righteous. But still, God left open the possibility that it might happen, indicating the POTENCY of man's free will choice and cooperation with the Divine Will, and God's reluctance to suggest in scripture any sort of election or predestination which would rob individuals of the potency of their choice.
Another valuable lesson from the story of Abraham's intercession on behalf of Sodom is that "THE WORLD IS SUSTAINED FROM MOMENT TO MOMENT for the sake of the righteous few." One day, a woman asked me with some concern what good work she might do to help the world. I pointed out to her, that on the basis of this story of Sodom, she may possibly PRESERVE THE VERY WORLD by her own personal sanctity and devotion.
Regarding the notion of "not looking back" as Lot's wife did, we may look at the passage where Elijah Recruits Elisha:
(1 Kings 19:19-21)
19 Elijah went from there and found Elisha son of Shaphat. He was plowing with 12 pairs of oxen; he was near the twelfth pair. Elijah passed by him and threw his robe over him. 20 He left the oxen, ran after Elijah, and said, “Please let me kiss my father and mother goodbye, then I will follow you.” Elijah said to him, “Go back! Indeed, what have I done to you?” 21 Elisha went back and took his pair of oxen and slaughtered them. He cooked the meat over a fire that he made by burning the harness and yoke. He gave the people meat and they ate. Then he got up and followed Elijah and became his assistant.
From the description we are given of Elisha, he is a man of real character. When singled out by Elijah, he goes to his home and announces his calling and departure. He then returns to offer a sacrifice, using the oxen he had been plowing with—an expensive meal, indeed. And he burns the yoke and the harness to cook as fuel for the sacrificial fire. It is as though he had said, “I’ve made this decision to follow God, and Elijah, as a prophet, and I have no intention of turning back.” Today we would say, Elisha burned his bridges.
Ezekiel 3:20 Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Ezekiel 18:21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
We see that God is making allowance for the possibility that some people might REPENT between the time of Abraham's intercession and the time of the Judgment concerning Sodom's destruction.
But why would God allow a city of immorality like Sodom to be PRESERVED if as many as 10 righteous men be found, but destroy the city if only ONE righteous man might be found? These are difficult questions to answer, but perhaps wherever there is a COMMUNITY or CONGREGATION of RIGHTEOUS, however small, THEN there is hope that others will repent and reform through the power of example and fellowship and association with the righteous few.
Of course, God in his FOREKNOWLEDGE, from God's atemporal vantage point of the pre-Eternal "Now", can see as present the outcome of each person's freewill decisions. Yet that foreknowledge in no way robs the individual of his free will choice at the moment he makes it. Yet obviously, God also must have foreknown that ten men would NOT repent and become righteous. But still, God left open the possibility that it might happen, indicating the POTENCY of man's free will choice and cooperation with the Divine Will, and God's reluctance to suggest in scripture any sort of election or predestination which would rob individuals of the potency of their choice.
Another valuable lesson from the story of Abraham's intercession on behalf of Sodom is that "THE WORLD IS SUSTAINED FROM MOMENT TO MOMENT for the sake of the righteous few." One day, a woman asked me with some concern what good work she might do to help the world. I pointed out to her, that on the basis of this story of Sodom, she may possibly PRESERVE THE VERY WORLD by her own personal sanctity and devotion.
Regarding the notion of "not looking back" as Lot's wife did, we may look at the passage where Elijah Recruits Elisha:
(1 Kings 19:19-21)
19 Elijah went from there and found Elisha son of Shaphat. He was plowing with 12 pairs of oxen; he was near the twelfth pair. Elijah passed by him and threw his robe over him. 20 He left the oxen, ran after Elijah, and said, “Please let me kiss my father and mother goodbye, then I will follow you.” Elijah said to him, “Go back! Indeed, what have I done to you?” 21 Elisha went back and took his pair of oxen and slaughtered them. He cooked the meat over a fire that he made by burning the harness and yoke. He gave the people meat and they ate. Then he got up and followed Elijah and became his assistant.
From the description we are given of Elisha, he is a man of real character. When singled out by Elijah, he goes to his home and announces his calling and departure. He then returns to offer a sacrifice, using the oxen he had been plowing with—an expensive meal, indeed. And he burns the yoke and the harness to cook as fuel for the sacrificial fire. It is as though he had said, “I’ve made this decision to follow God, and Elijah, as a prophet, and I have no intention of turning back.” Today we would say, Elisha burned his bridges.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Protection of Property 1 "If a man steals ..Leviticus 19:11 (New International Version)
Leviticus 19:11 (New International Version)
11 " 'Do not steal. " 'Do not lie. " 'Do not deceive one another
Exodus 22:1 (New International Version)
Exodus 22
Protection of Property 1 "If a man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, he must pay back five head of cattle for the ox and four sheep for the sheep.
Leviticus 19:11 (New International Version)
11 " 'Do not steal. " 'Do not lie. " 'Do not deceive one another.
Exodus 22:7 (New International Version)
7 "If a man gives his neighbor silver or goods for safekeeping and they are stolen from the neighbor's house,
the thief, if he is caught, must pay back double.
Exodus 22:8 (New International Version)
8 But if the thief is not found, the owner of the house must appear before the judges [a] to determine whether he has laid his hands on the other man's property.
Zechariah 5:3 (New International Version)
3 And he said to me,
"This is the curse that is going out over the whole land; for according to what it says on one side, every thief will be banished,
and according to what it says on the other, everyone who swears falsely will be banished.
Footnotes:
Exodus 22:8 Or before God ; also in verse
Exodus 22:3 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
3 but if it happens [a] after sunrise, he is guilty of bloodshed.
"A thief must certainly make restitution, but if he has nothing, he must be sold to pay for his theft.
Leviticus 6:5or whatever it was he swore falsely about.
He must make restitution in full, add a fifth of the value to it and give it all to the owner on the day he presents his guilt offering.
Leviticus 5:16 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
]16 He must make restitution for what he has failed to do in regard to the holy things, add a fifth of the value to that and give it all to the priest, who will make atonement for him with the ram as a guilt offering, and he will be forgiven.
Exodus 22:11 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
11 the issue between them will be settled by the taking of an oath before the LORD that the neighbor did not lay hands on the other person's property. The owner is to accept this, and no restitution is required.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Brenda Kunneman, has a supernatural ability for you to believe that everything that the Bible
SID: My guest has a supernatural gift that will absolutely convince you that there is an awesome
power of God just waiting to be released from deep within you. Learn how you too can access
that supernatural power.
It’s Supernatural.
SID: Hello. Sid Roth here. Welcome to my world where it’s naturally supernatural. My guest,
Brenda Kunneman, has a supernatural ability for you to believe that everything that the Bible
says you are is really true, and to just draw that out of you. In fact, Brenda, were you a
cheerleader? Because you have that capacity of drawing people out and getting them to really
believe.
BRENDA: You know God has put something in my heart that I want everybody to be able to
partake of and everybody to be able to be supernatural. Everybody has, you know, we’re made in
the image of God, are we not? And everything that we know about God from the Book of
Genesis all the way to the Book of Revelation, He is supernatural. We see the Red Sea turned up
on its side. We see the plagues of Egypt. We see all kinds of supernatural happenings through the
Proverbs.
SID: But it wasn’t always that way with you. I’m going to take you back as a young person.
You’re raised in a Bible-believing home.
BRENDA: Yes.
SID: But it’s kind of like part of the Bible was left out, the supernatural part, and especially
speaking in supernatural languages. But what I find amazing is God obviously wanted you to
understand this because, were you a military brat?
BRENDA: Yes I was. I was.
SID: That’s what I thought.
BRENDA: My father was in the military. Now we moved all around and my parents were
Christians. They loved the Lord. But there was that little piece, like you said, that was missing
and in my Christian experience I was hungry. I said, “You know, there has to be more.” I got
kind of tired of knowing a God that was a concept and a God that was on paper. I wanted to
know a God that I felt. I want to feel Him.
SID: May I be candid with you?
BRENDA: Yes.
2
SID: I don’t understand how Bible believers cannot believe in the supernatural or if they do and
they’re not moving in it be very frustrated, and that’s where you were.
BRENDA: That’s right.
SID: But how in the world did your father, who was against things like speaking in supernatural
languages, how in the world did it happen to him?
BRENDA: Well as a teenager I went to my mother one day, and I said, “Mother, now what is
this thing about supernatural languages, this thing, this Holy Spirit?” She says, “Well you know,
there are some people that believe in that, but we don’t do that.” And the funny thing was in the
military you move around all the time. We moved from station to station, and there was always
that one person that worked with my father that spoke in supernatural languages. They were real
spiritually empowered people, and I got hungry for that. Well we kind of went through that. See,
when you live powerless Christianity or you live concept Christianity there isn’t any real
presence that empowers you to be victorious, to overcome your problems, to deal with difficulty.
There’s so many people that they’re trying to connect with God but it’s like there’s no gas in the
car. And so we were at a time where we were just waning from any relationship with God. And I
thin in desperation my father went to a gentleman that he worked with and began to talk to him
about the Holy Spirit. And this man said, “I’ve been waiting for you to ask.” And he absolutely,
he prayed with him. He was filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke in a supernatural language, and
from that moment on I knew that’s for me. And I said, “God, I’m gonna get that.” And for the
first time, Sid, in all of my experience in Christianity I felt, now here’s the key, I felt God. That’s
what, I mean, come on, let’s face it, is that not what people are hungry for? They want to feel the
presence of God. They want to feel His power. They want to feel that electricity of God. I
remember when the Holy Spirit first came in to me fully. I was baptized in the Holy Spirit. My
stomach would jump up and down. For the first time I felt like an electricity jolt of God. I knew.
And I didn’t understand it all at the time.
SID: Now you told me that you literally would go to sleep at night praying in supernatural
languages and wake up praying in supernatural.
BRENDA: I could not get enough of this new supernatural power because, for the first time, I
felt something real. I discovered a God that wants to heal people. You know, people want a
power that’s bigger than themselves. But God has always been supernatural. And the thing of it
is that’s so incredible about God His supernatural wants to help you. He wants to heal you. He
wants to help you with your financial situation and give you a real tangible power to do that.
SID: Speaking of power, 1999, Brenda is praying in this supernatural language, which the Bible
says charges up, builds up your spirit so you can walk in the same power that the Messiah
walked in. And so one night your father is critically ill. He’s in the hospital. Was he dying?
BRENDA: He was really dying. He had renal failure. He had a complication with diverticulitis.
His bowel had exploded and it had been leaking in his cavity for about six months, and his body
began to shut down. He was on a hundred percent oxygen, kidney malfunction, liver
malfunction. All of his organs were completely infected. And the doctors pretty much said, “We
3
don’t know if he’s gonna live.” And so we prayed, and I think we just paced the hospital floor up
and down just seeking and calling out to God. And I knew how to draw on the power within me,
because I knew when I had the Holy Spirit I had seen so many supernatural occurrences with
God before, and so I went back to that. And one night I was in the hotel room and I was praying,
and I began to pray in the spirit, pray in supernatural languages. I said, “God, I don’t know
anything else to pull on, but I know you’re supernatural. I know that I have that supernatural
power in me. I’ve seen it operate. I’ve seen it manifest.” And I prayed, and all of a sudden it was
like I was transported into the hospital room. It was as real as I could ever remember. And Sid,
let me just interject this. This is what God wants to do with every person that wants the Holy
Spirit. This isn’t just because I’m special or you’re special, or we’re doing a TV program. It’s for
every person to have in their own life, their loved ones, their relatives. And I was transported
instantly into the hospital room and I saw Jesus, and he walked into my father’s room. Now if
you’ve been in a hospital with someone critically ill, here he’s laying there. His body has blown
up three times its normal size. The doctors are giving him no chance to live. He’s convulsing.
And I remember I said, “Lord, I need you now.” And Jesus walked in. Now I know, Sid, this was
because I’ve learned how to pull out the supernatural that God has put in me that Jesus came in.
SID: But if you had not been praying in supernatural languages, do you know in Romans 8 it
says, “All things work together for good to those that love God.” But just before the verse before
that says, “If you’re praying in groanings and utterances that you...” That’s speaking in
supernatural languages. If pray in supernatural languages all things work together for good.
We’ll be back in just a moment. I want to find out what happened to her dad who was dying, that
Jesus walked into his hospital room. Don’t go away.
We’ll be right back to It’s Supernatural.
***
We now return to It’s Supernatural.
SID: Hello. Sid Roth here with Brenda Kunneman. And just before we went to break we
found out that Brenda learned the doorway into the supernatural. Praying in supernatural
languages she got to a point where she had a vision. It sort of reminds me of Paul, whether in the
body or out of the body, I don’t even know. I just know that my dad was dying in the hospital
room and I was there, and I saw Jesus. What else did you see?
BRENDA: Well he walked into the room and there were two angels, one on his right, one on his
left, and he walked over to where my father was laying out in a coma. He walked over to the tray
that’s normally used for the food for the patient. Of course, it was covered with medical records.
Now keeping in my mind my father’s medical records, it was in a three-inch binder like this.
There was paper stacked at least three or four inches deep all over that. It was huge. I mean, how
daunting this was. Jesus walked in the room. He said nothing. Didn’t really look at me or
anything. He just walked over to that table. He turned around and pointed his back towards the
table, almost as if he was turning his back on my father, and the angels stayed on either side.
They turned around, too.
4
SID: There were how many angels?
BRENDA: Two angels, one on his right, one on his left. Jesus turned around, put his back
directly in front of the medical records. The angels reached up. There were two little gold clips
on his robe or tunic, or whatever you want to call it, and they released the clips, and his tunic fell
down. He was uncovered from his top to his waist and his back, Sid, was covered with scars.
Well we know what Isaiah 53:4 and 5 says. It says, “That the chastisement of our peace was
upon him and with his stripes we are healed.” And at that moment I broke down and I knew my
father was healed. Jesus was telling me that my stripes paid for his healing. My stripes are
pointed at these medical records. And the moment that happened, now all of a sudden I was back
out of that vision, out of that moment, and from that point on my father immediately began to
improve, and within about two weeks was sitting up and literally eating popsicles.
SID: Now one of the things that I loved when you teach, things happen. Things happen. I mean,
people just literally believe they can do what you can do.
BRENDA: That’s right.
SID: And they should believe that.
BRENDA: That’s right.
SID: Because the fact is God says His promises are for whosoever, and they’re all of His
promises are yes, and so be it. So Brenda, you compare the spirit of God to a river.
BRENDA: Yes.
SID: Tell me a little bit why.
BRENDA: Well you know, Jesus said it. He said it in John 7:37 and 38. He said that, “He that
believes on me out of his belly,” out of HIS belly. Now I like to emphasize “his belly”. That’s
our own spirit that the river of God comes from, you know, the same God that created the
universe, the same God that put the stars in the sky and said, “Light be” is wanting to live from
within us and pour out. Now notice Jesus said this. He said, “It’s rivers”, plural, “of living
water.” So that means there’s a river for healing. That means there’s a river for financial
blessing. There’s a river for emotional problems. In fact, Sid, I really feel right now God is doing
something with people with emotional problems. Can we pray for that for just a moment so
people--
SID: Yes. Look at--
BRENDA: I feel like you’re sitting out there listening to this, and God is saying that you have
been, you’re dealing with schizophrenia, depression, bi-polar disorders. There are people sitting
out there today, you’re dealing with all sorts of emotional imbalances that God is wanting to deal
with right now by the supernatural anointing. Now here’s the key. All you have to do is believe
that. If you are a Christian today, maybe you’re not a Christian, you know, all you have to so is
5
just simply say, “Jesus, come into my heart. Be the Lord of my life. I just commit myself to you.
Forgive my sins. I want to make you Lord.” But maybe you are a Christian and you’re still
struggling saying, “You know, God, I’ve kind of lost track with that power.” Well you know
what? If the Holy Spirit is in you all you need to do is prime the pump a little bit with some faith.
And so I want to encourage you right now just to stretch your faith with me at the screen. And I
just decree over you in the name Jesus the Messiah, I decree over you right now by the power of
God that your mind comes in order. Now right there. You feel that, don’t you? You feel the
power of God right there. I feel it so strong as I’m sitting here looking at this camera, that right
now in the name of Jesus bi-polar disorders, you come in line. Depression, you come in line. In
Jesus’ name I stretch the power of God to every emotional imbalance, every emotional struggle,
every mental problem, schizophrenia, personality disorders. I break the power of that right now. I
feel like there’s somebody out there. You said, “I think I’m losing my mind. I’m losing control.”
And I say to you right now, no you’re not losing control. There’s a river of anointing being
extended to you right now in the spirit. You grab a hold of that in Jesus’ mighty name. And I call
you delivered. I break the power of evil over you and I say the supernatural power of God goes
into you right now. Right now just receive that by faith in Jesus’ name.
SID: You know, Brenda, as you just started speaking I heard so clearly about you, you that have
Alzheimer’s.
BRENDA: Yes, yes.
SID: Alzheimer’s is being reversed right now.
BRENDA: That’s right, yes.
SID: And pain of any kind, like pain in your neck, in your back, hip.
BRENDA: Yes.
SID: Anywhere, fingers, anywhere. The spirit of pain is bound in Yeshua’s name. That’s
Hebrew for Jesus. And it’s gone in Jesus’ name. You know what I want to hear about when we
come back from the break, I thought it was so amazing. You were speaking one time for a large
group and you spoke in supernatural language. Her whole message before she went into the
auditorium, she spoke her whole, I mean, were you really like--
BRENDA: I preach in it.
SID: You are preaching in supernatural languages.
BRENDA: Yes.
SID: Then she gets out and does the message. And wait until you hear what happens. Don’t go
away. We’ll be right back after this word.
We’ll be right back to It’s Supernatural.
6
***
We now return to It’s Supernatural.
SID: Hello. Sid Roth here with Brenda Kunneman. And just before the break we found out,
now I’ve heard about people praying before a meeting. But what Brenda was instructed to do
was to preach her message in a supernatural language just as if the audience was there. Then she
goes into the meeting and what happens, Brenda?
BRENDA: Well of course I do this more than once now. But on this first occasion the Lord
instructed me to do this, and we went out in that meeting that time, and there were, I don’t know,
maybe three, four, 5,000 people. I’m not real good with numbers, but a big crowd. And healing,
the power of God just broke out. It was almost like it went beyond me. It was like there was
nothing I could do to control it. Called some people up for healing. The place went wild. People
were jumping out of wheelchairs. And I received that day a supernatural strength. I literally
prayed and God as my witness for about 4,000 people individually that day. That is super human.
SID: I’m glad it was you and not me.
BRENDA: It was super human. But it took that, tapping into that river, that power of God that,
listen, every person can do, every person who has the Holy Spirit can do, that will affect
everyday life, affected them in supernatural ways.
SID: Do you see an increase of the supernatural occurring?
BRENDA: Yes. One of the things that the Lord told me is that we’re coming into a time where
there’s gonna be supernatural protection, protection from accidents, protection from injuries,
protection from potential robbers or burglars and attackers. There is going to be times when
people are literally going to see angels come on their defense to protect them from would-be
tragedy. And so the Lord spoke in my spirit during times of prayer. And I just want to encourage
those that are out there. God, you believe the Lord for supernatural protection right now, because
this is the prophetic thing that is upon the nation. And the Lord also told me that, Sid, we’re
going to come into times where people are going to have more dreams. The spirit of God spoke
to me at night in a dream and said, “Get ready. It’s the season of dreams.” People are going to
start having dreams that they’re going to wake up and go, “Wow, I have the answer. I know what
to do.” People are going to begin to have dreams about situations that are going to be warnings
from God. And listen, it’s going to come on political leaders right now.
SID: Really? Listen, I would hate to be President of the United States with the complex
problems that are going on in the world today. Could you picture President Barak Obama having
a dream of what to do?
BRENDA: I believe that because right now we’ve got, if we have a praying people, cannot God
in this season of dreams that we’re in speak to political leaders and then the church people, the
7
Christians were right there to interpret those dreams. And I believe we’re in a time when world
leaders are going to call on God because of the dreams that are coming into their life right now.
SID: Now because Brenda has been causing her spirit to be edified, and in Greek that means
“built up” by praying in supernatural languages, many times almost non-stop, some of the most
outstanding supernatural things are happening. Like for instance, sometimes you will see or hear
something about an individual. Give me an example.
BRENDA: It happens all the time in meetings. I can be looking out in a crowd of people and the
light of God will come over somebody, or I’ll call people up maybe just to pray for a group of
people that’s dealing with maybe a problem.
SID: Do you ever hear a specific name when you’re speaking?
BRENDA: Absolutely. I have one story. I was in Guatemala, one of the most awesome,
touching stories, and I was doing a women’s conference. Now here’s the thing. I said, “The Lord
says He wants to minister to somebody, and your name is Angel. Either it’s your nickname or
your real name.” Now this is a women’s conference. It’s all women. And a man comes up. Now
this man was working in the parking lot, just a servant around the church, helping the meeting to
go off, and he just happened to be walking through the auditorium at that time and heard his
name called. He came to the front and God ministered some powerful things about his future. At
the same time, a woman came up and she says, and she was standing there, and I thought, well
her name is Angel. I’ll get to her in just a minute. And after I got done ministering to him I
paused and I said, “God says there’s somebody that’s come to this meeting and you didn’t know
if you should come, but your baby was at home sick, and your family criticized you and said,
‘You can’t go. Your baby is home sick.’” But you came here believing for a miracle for your
child. And this woman was in the front and she says, “That’s me. That’s me.” And she says,
“The funny thing is my baby, her name is Angel. I left her at home on the ICU. She was born
prematurely. She’s in the ICU right now. The doctors didn’t know if she would live, and I came
here anyway, the criticism of my friends and my family believing for a miracle.” The spirit of
God, see this is what this supernatural power within does, the spirit of God came up in me and
said, “Woman, go home. Your child is healed from this hour.” And before she even got home the
family called and said, “You’re not gonna believe it. The doctors took the baby off the tubes. The
baby is well. The baby is strong. The baby is breathing on its own.” And Sid, I believe that we
are in a season right now in the church when God is wanting to manifest that level of power on
every believer.
SID: I believe that God wants you to be so filled with the Holy Spirit that you are going to
actually speak in a supernatural language. Brenda, would you pray for them?
BRENDA: Yes. In fact, let’s do this. Why don’t we pray. Can we pray in supernatural languages
for the people? Let’s do that.
SID: Yeah. And you pray with us right now as we’re praying, okay?
8
BRENDA: Let’s do that. So right now just say, “Holy Spirit, I receive you and I expect to pray
in supernatural languages.”
SID: Holy Spirit, I receive you and I expect to pray in supernatural languages.
BRENDA: Now just move your mouth and move your tongues [foreign language]
SID: [foreign language] You can sing your language. [chanting]
BRENDA: [foreign language] Now let me encourage you. If you would just begin to work that,
it may just come out a little bit simple and maybe just a few syllables. But keep practicing that.
Keep doing that. The more you do it, the stronger it’s becoming in your heart and in your life.
God is on you. The power of God is on you and I know you’re going to begin to walk in the
greatest supernatural occurrences of God that you have ever experienced. I experienced it. The
people can experience it, the supernaturals for every person that has the Holy Spirit. Miracles.
We’re in the season and we need it, Sid, more than ever. We need the miraculous of God. We’re
not going to be able to weather these times without it. And so people need to step into it. It’s not
even optional now. You’re at a point where you need to say, “God,” you know, I may not
understand it all. When I first got filled with the Holy Spirit I didn’t understand it all. But you
know what? I just plunged into the river. And you’re going to need that supernatural power to get
through some of the financial turmoil that we’re coming into in the world. You know, we can see
that happening. There’s uncertainty. There’s fear in the world. There’s new diseases that they’re
reporting everyday. You need that supernatural .There might not be somebody there to help you.
You might be alone in your living room feeling, “God, I don’t even know where to turn.”
There’s a supernatural power, Sid, that’s there for every person.
SID: Well you heard what Brenda prophesied. There’s going to be such a dramatic increase of
the supernatural and the choice is yours. Do you want to be involved in that increase? I hear you
saying, “Yes, Sid.” Of course you want to be involved in that increase. So I urge you, if you pray
in supernatural languages do it more than you’ve ever done it before. And if you haven’t yet,
don’t give up. You only lose by giving up. Don’t give up.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
basic differences between Evangelicalism and Roman Catholicism
A Primer on Roman Catholicism
from John Gerstner
In this excerpt from John Gerstner’s Primitive Theology, Dr. Gerstner carefully sketches the basic differences between Evangelicalism and Roman Catholicism, focusing on the differing views on justification. Over the coming days we will highlight this unique resource.
*****
Several years ago, a Presbyterian-turned-Romanist wrote a book detailing his journey to “Rome Sweet Home.” I maintain, “Rome is Not Home.” Let me explain.
Rome affirms the Bible and its account of the creation of Adam and Eve, their temptation, and the fall of mankind by the disobedience of Adam. So Rome agrees with most Protestants that this is a fallen world and that it needs redeeming, which can only be done by God through His Son Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium pretends that agreement on the deity of Christ and His bodily resurrection is an adequate foundation for Christian unity. As a matter of fact, there has never been any disagreement on those doctrines. Rome separated from the true church in the 16th century because she rejected Christ’s way of salvation!
Let me now sketch the basic differences between Evangelicalism and Romanism. Let us begin with the lost person’s becoming acquainted with the way home. He gets information about a way out of his wilderness. Here Rome and Protestantism agree. Both know that a person must hear the gospel of Christ and its divinely appointed way. So Rome is involved in propagating her message, just as all Protestant churches are. Rome has a different road map from the Protestant one. Both agree, however, that unless a person gets on the Christian road he cannot find his way home to God. The views of the road may differ crucially, but there is a concurrence on the fact that the Christian road is the necessary road out of the wilderness and into God’s celestial home.
From that point on, the two descriptions of the one way differ fundamentally. Both these theologies, the Roman and the Reformational, believe that lost man can grasp the meaning of salvation, of Christ, and of the atonement. When lost man does grasp the Christian message, his next step is diversely viewed by Rome and Geneva. Rome thinks that he can be persuaded of the truth of the Christian religion centering on an infallible papacy. Reformed theology believes that the Reformed pastor can prove that is not the true way, but that the Protestant, Reformational way is the biblical way.
Continued in Part Two
*****
Excerpted from Primitive Theology by John H. Gerstner.
According to Rome, seeing the truth of the Roman way does qualify him for baptism.
Primer on Roman Catholicism (pt. 2)
from John Gerstner
Continued from Part One
Baptism
If the lost person is persuaded that the Roman way is the Christian way, his first duty is to be baptized. The Calvinist, however, says that once the person understands that the Christian way is the true way which he ought to accept, he neverthelesss is incapable of accepting it. Rome differs drastically there. She maintains that the enlightened unconverted person can see the truth of the Roman way and can decide to be baptized. The Protestant says the person can see the truth of the Reformed way and the need of baptism; but he can also see that “seeing the way” does not qualify him for baptism. According to Rome, seeing the truth of the Roman way does qualify him for baptism. According to Reformed doctrine, seeing the truth of the Reformed doctrine, including the necessity of water baptism, does not of itself alone qualify that person to be baptized.
What is the essential difference here? You see the two traditions are viewing the sinner as lost, but one of them says he is able to save himself by submitting to baptism. The other says he is not able to save himself by submitting to baptism. Rome says to the person, “Be baptized and you will be born again into the kingdom of God.” The Calvinist says to the person, “Be baptized at this time and you will be bringing yourself under additional judgment of God by taking a sacrament you are not yet qualified to receive.” Rome thinks a person even in his unregenerate state is qualified to receive baptism. Reformed Protestantism says that, in his unregenerate state, he dare not take the sign of baptism.
Do we Reformed charge Rome with heresy at this point? We certainly say she is wrong. But do we charge her with deep heresy for urging the unregenerate to be baptized in the name of the Trinity? We certainly do, because we claim that baptism is a sign of sin having been washed away, and that this person has not had his sin washed away because he has not yet had saving faith. Rome replies to that by saying he has not had the forgiveness of his sins as yet—that is true— but if he will receive baptism he will be born again and thus receive the forgiveness of sins by faith.
So for Rome, the baptism of an adult is not the sign of his sins having been forgiven, but the way by which his sins are to be washed away. The Reformed faith is saying, in contrast, that baptism can be administered to an adult person only if that person has professed faith and received the forgiveness of sins. Rome is saying that baptism is not a sign of the forgiveness of sins but a means to it. We are saying it is not a means to it but is only a sign when other means to salvation have occurred.
Now what are these other means of salvation to which we refer that Rome denies at this stage? The other means of salvation, and indeed the only means of salvation which we Protestants find in Holy Scripture, is the converting or regenerating work of the Spirit of God. When God has regenerated a person, and thus brought that person by the new birth into adoption into the family of God, then and only then is he to receive the baptismal sign of such membership. It is appropriate then, and only then, to be baptized. Prior to that experience, it is hypocritical for him to claim the cleansing of sins symbolically when he does not claim them actually or experientially.
Rome thinks of the candidate for baptism as an unregenerate son of the devil at the moment he receives baptism. She does not always make this clear to those whom she baptizes. But doctrinally speaking, that candidate for baptism, even though he has had a long catechumenate, is still an unregenerate child of the devil. It is that servant of Satan who is being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit at a Roman font. Such baptism does not signify that he is God’s child, but assumes, in fact, that he is a child of the devil, at that point in time.
However, Rome says, the moment the water is applied in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that person is transformed into a child of God. We admit that is theoretically possible. A person could be an unregenerate child of the devil and yet it could be God’s plan to persuade him to come to baptism and thus become (by the Holy Spirit’s regenerating work at the time of baptism) a child of God. There are Protestants who believe that as well as Roman Catholics. Why do the Reformed differ with it? We do differ with it drastically. The question right now is, what right do we have to differ with it? I will not now ask what right Rome has to teach and practice it. I rather ask the question, How can we Calvinists and Evangelicals be sure that the Roman way of bringing a person into the kingdom of God is erroneous?
There are several arguments we present to demonstrate the error of the Roman view of baptism. The first is this: If a person is a child of the devil, loves the darkness and hates the light, and hates the Christ who is the light of the world, he cannot gladly accept baptism. In truth, he wants nothing to do with the God he hates as a sinner against Him. He is a bondservant of sin. He will not go happily to something God is supposed to have established which is actually going to make him something he does not want to be.
Second, it misrepresents God’s attitude toward the sinner. According to the Scripture, as even Rome admits, men are fallen and under the wrath of God. If they are not delivered, they must go eternally to suffer the torments of the damned at the hand of God. So God wants nothing to do with this person except to give him the wages of his sin, which is eternal death. But in the Roman picture of things, he is coming voluntarily and even gladly anticipating the presence of the God he hates. Meanwhile, God, who hates him with a wrath which will destroy him forever, is presumably standing there ready to convert him against his spiritual desires. That is, the sinner wants nothing to do with God. And yet here he is virtually standing and saying, “Baptize me, God, make me the kind of person who loves and serves You.” That is simple hypocrisy on the part of an unregenerate sinner. Rome is playing the role of promoting hypocrisy by urging this person to come to baptism, and simultaneously suggesting that God is pleased with him even as he sinfully comes before he is regenerated.
Rome can’t have it both ways. She can’t say that men are fallen servants of the devil under the wrath of God who is going to punish them eternally, then at the same time say that God is well disposed to them and pleased to have them come as hypocritical sinners into His presence and receive His sacrament of baptism.
By contrast, in the Reformed view the person has been born again. He is a child of God. He is coming to Christ for the symbolic cleansing of his guilt. God has regenerated him and forgiven him and is now giving him the sign of the washing away of his sin. That is very appropriate and suitable and compatible with the doctrine of Holy Scripture and Protestantism (and even of Catholicism, if it were consistent with its view of unregenerate man).
A third indictment of Rome for this practice is that she has no ground for believing that every time baptism is administered to someone that person is born again. She does champion the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. She does teach that the sacraments “work” ex opere operato in their very administration.
The Bible does not teach any such doctrine. It nowhere says that everyone who is baptized is born again. It does teach that the born again should be baptized. It nowhere teaches that adults not born again should be baptized, or that, being baptized, they will be born again.
Rome tries to counter this with the contention that in Titus 3:5 baptism is represented as the washing of regeneration. “He saved us, not because of righteous things we have done, but because of His mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior.” That text refers to the washing of rebirth or the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit, to be sure. It does not say that the washing of baptism is the washing of rebirth. Rome reads that into it. The text simply says, “He [God] saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.” Now the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit is by no means the same thing as baptism with water in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Rome will say, “Granted, it is not the same thing, but is the text not saying, when it refers to washing, that the Holy Spirit through baptism creates the new birth and renewal?” We say, “No, not at all.” It simply says that God saves us by the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. We admit that the word washing does sometimes suggest the rite of baptism. But it does not say it. Washing and baptism are not necessarily identical. It is true that baptism is a kind of washing. But every washing is not necessarily baptism. Every water baptism is not necessarily washing. The washing in Titus 3:5 is qualified by rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. Even Roman Catholics admit that baptism can occur without rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, and that rebirth and renewal can occur without baptism. That is the reason they say a person (be he a priest or some other person in an emergency) must have a sincere intention when he administers baptism. Presumably, if he does baptize in the triune name with a serious intention, then it “works.” God regenerates. Without a sincere intention, baptism presumably does not work.
What I am observing here is that Rome admits that the baptism could occur without a sincere intention and no change would happen. As soon as you add a human factor, such as intention, you are adding something to the Titus text. Titus simply says we are saved by washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. It says nothing about baptism. It says nothing about intention. It says nothing about the trinitarian formula. It says nothing about water. It simply refers to the washing. It simply refers to rebirth and renewal.
Rome appeals to John 3:5: “No one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.” This, Rome falsely teaches, is baptismal regeneration, by means of which a person is translated out of the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of God’s dear Son. But John 3:5 says this no more than does Titus 3:5. It simply says that one is born of water and the Spirit, obviously meaning born of water as well as the Spirit. John 3:3 had already said it was necessary to be born of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God. One can be born of the Spirit. It is meaningless to say that washing with water creates a new spirit. Even those who teach the error of baptismal regeneration do not believe that. They deny any “magic” in the water. So new birth is a work of the Spirit, not of water. Why then is water mentioned in John 3:5? Obviously, baptism is associated with being born of the Spirit. It does not regenerate but is inseparable from it. How? One born of Christ professes Christ. His first confession is receiving the sign (baptism) of being a Christian. If he does not confess Christ he is not a Christian (Romans 10:9).
Continued in Part Three
consider the Roman Catholic eucharist in itself
A Primer on Roman Catholicism (pt. 4)
from John Gerstner
Continued from Part Three
Let us now consider the Roman Catholic eucharist in itself. I have been considering sacraments as received by a person who is not qualified to receive. Now let us look at the doctrine itself as Rome promulgates it before the world. It is not only that it may be abused by people who use it unqualifiedly. What I will now show is that it is intrinisically and in itself, as understood and taught by the Roman church, a travesty of that which the Lord Himself established.
Everyone knows that the Roman church teaches transubstantiation. Virtually everyone knows what that means. Somehow the bread becomes the body of Christ. The substance of the bread is changed into the substance of the body of Christ. The result is that when a person communes properly he actually eats the body of Jesus Christ miraculously present now in the transubstantiated bread. When the priest drinks the cup, he drinks the very blood of Jesus Christ now miraculously, corporeally, and substantially present in the cup.
I will ignore here the contention of Rome that the person does not taste what tastes like flesh, and he does not drink what tastes like blood, because of the nature of “substance.” The teaching is that it is the “accidents” of anything which a person actually encounters in an experience with it and not the “substance.” So a person actually devours the substance of the body of Christ. Because it is the substance and not the accidents of His body, it does not taste as if the person were actually masticating the body of Christ and drinking the blood of Christ. It is a fact even though it does not seem to be a fact. It is a fact because it is a transubstantiation of the substance but not a transubstantiation of the accidents of the substance.
This is just by way of reminding the reader what the doctrine is. My concern here is to show that there is no biblical warrant for such teaching. The first thing we observe is that to say Christ’s body is literally present in the bread is a meaningless proposition. When we were considering baptism, we noticed that even though Jesus says (John 3:5) that we cannot enter the kingdom of God except by water and the Spirit, we know that He does not mean, and could not mean, that the water itself has the power to convert. There is no magic in the water, nor does God use it miraculously. While Christ is making it very clear that baptism is necessary, it is also obvious that it is not necessary as being power-water when actually all the power is in God.
Here too we have a situation like baptism. One cannot entertain a conception of bread being literally the body of anyone, not to mention the body of Jesus Christ. Bread is bread and it cannot be something other than that as long as it remains bread. Roman Catholics will say I am being rationalistic here. They will say that I am not being truly humble, accepting the teaching of the Bible which has Jesus saying, “You must eat My flesh,” and “This is My body which is given for you,” in the Lord’s Supper. “That is what the Lord says and, whether you can understand it or not, you’d better believe it!”
I am not trying to be wiser than God, nor do I have the colossal audacity to reject His teaching and substitute my own. What I am saying, as a child of God trying to grasp the words of God, is that there is no meaning for the human intellect in saying that bread is the body of Jesus Christ. The resurrected body of Jesus Christ is at the right hand of God the Father in heaven right now, and will remain there until He comes again in His body to “judge the quick and the dead.” He is not in this piece of bread, nor is His blood in the cup we drink.
When we contradict the Roman Catholic testimony of people (in their great exuberation and jubilation when they receive the wafer in their mouth), we are not denying their experience. They usually reply to our criticism by accusing us of consummate arrogance. They say, “You claim to know that we do not have an experience which we say we have? Aren’t you being very, very presumptuous? How can you know what we do experience or what we do not experience? How are you qualified to say we do not actually have this immense transforming satisfaction in participating in the Mass?”
I am not denying anybody’s experience. As long as I believe as I do, that they are honest persons, I am sure that they are testifying to feelings which they truly have. Nor do I deny that they are having those feelings when they are actually eating that wafer which the priest puts on their tongue. Nor do I deny that when they eat that wafer they think they are devouring the body of Jesus Christ. Nor do I question them when they say that “we have this experience because we are eating the very body of our Savior who died to save us.” I do not doubt that they think that is the case. But I do not only doubt, but I am certain that is not the case, and that I can prove it.
You see, there are two points at issue, not only one. These people are saying two things: (1) we have this wonderful experience; and (2) this experience comes from our masticating the body of Jesus Christ. Now I am not questioning that they have this experience. I am not questioning, in other words, the first part of their affirmation. What I am questioning is the second part of their statement, that this experience comes from the masticating of the body of Jesus Christ. They believe that as firmly as they testify to the experience they have based on that belief. But the experience is one thing, the basis for it is another. The experience can be theirs, without doubt. But the masticating of the body of Jesus Christ, which they think is the source of it, is utterly impossible, I say.
There is nothing arrogant about making that statement. I am not presuming even to know their feelings except as they reveal them to me. But is it any presumption for me to question whether they can have ever masticated the body of Jesus Christ? If I can show that they could not have, that it is impossible to have, masticated the body of Jesus Christ in the Mass, then have I not demonstrated the second part of their testimony is absolutely false, even though they believe it to be true, and feel joyful for so believing?
I do not have to do this because I have already shown that there is no warrant for believing in transubstantiation. It is not taught by the Bible, nor is it even rational to the human mind. A finite body can only be in one place at one time. It is a doctrine of Roman Catholic orthodoxy as well as Protestant orthodoxy that the body of Jesus Christ is a finite body. It is also a part of Roman orthodoxy as well as ours that Christ is corporeally present at the right hand of God in heaven right now. So if a finite body has to be at one place at one time, and the body of Jesus Christ is in heaven now and not on earth, then it follows immediately that His body is not on earth anywhere. Christ’s body is not in the wafer nor any place else, not to mention on thousands of different altars. Christ’s body is only in heaven.
If we have proven that, we have proven those to be false witnesses who claim that their exhilaration at eating the wafer comes from actually masticating the body of Christ. That is impossible. The body of Jesus Christ is in heaven. You cannot see it or touch it, much less eat it. Your experience may be real, but the basis on which you rest it is nonexistent. It is nonreal.
I do not presume to say where these people get their feelings, but I do presume to say as a sane human being, along with the rest of the human race, that there is no way of conceiving that the body of Jesus Christ is in that wafer that Romanists eat at the Mass. I beg Romanists to realize that, though they may have a wonderful feeling, it does not come from the so-called sacrifice of the Mass.
If it cannot possibly come from that source, and if they realize that, then they can ask themselves, “How do I come to feel so exhilarated and joyous when I participate in the Mass?” They will know the nonanswer is that they have masticated the body of Christ. It is not that, whatever else it may be. An intelligent person will realize that if it is not what he thinks it is, he will become extremely dubious about the experience based on it. It is based on he knows not what, because what he thought it was based on it could not possibly be based on.
It is a sad fact that people can have exhilarated feelings about something they believe which is later demonstrated to be nonexistent. People hear at times that they are inheriting fortunes, and of course they are delighted at the prospect of having so much cash suddenly. As soon as they realize that was a false report and they do not have the cash, then exhilaration collapses and they wish they never had had it. This is what I think would happen to any Roman Catholic who sits down and deliberately thinks through this matter. It ought to lead to his conversion to realize that all his joy is resting on a non-existent fact, and that he is involved in perpetuating a fundamental fraud to the whole world, namely, that he is happy because of an experience which he could not possibly have had.
Romanists (and some Protestants) will charge me with rationalism for denying that a body can be at many different places at the same time. I am being rational (as the Bible is), not rationalistic. Christ has one body, not many bodies as transubstantionism affirms. Every Sunday, He is supposed to have different bodies all around the world. That would not be a thousand miracles, it would be a thousand lies. Christ miraculously multiplied one boy’s lunch. He does not multiply His one body. The very utterance of such an absurd error involves a half-dozen Christological and her-meneutical errors.
Continued in Part 5
*****
Excerpted from Primitive Theology by John H. Gerstner.
Series Contents: Part One, Part Two, Part Three
Note: This primer is intended to give an overview of the significant theological differences between historic Protestantism and historic Roman Catholicism. In a primer of this size, it is not possible to give a thorough examination of a theology that has been controverted for centuries. For a fuller treatment of the main difference between Catholicism and Protestantism—justification by faith alone—see Justification by Faith Alone or, for Dr. Sproul’s response to “Evangelicals and Catholics Together,” see Getting the Gospel Right: The Tie That Binds Evangelicals Together.
Another one of the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic church
BlogArticles
A Primer on Roman Catholicism (pt. 5)
from John Gerstner
Continued from Part Four
Another one of the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic church which we want to look at briefly is the penitential system. This system begins with a contradiction in terms. The Roman church teaches that when a person is born again and repents, he is forgiven. The guilt of his original sin is canceled. The remaining sin (which Rome calls concupiscence) is not sin at all. I say this is a contradiction at the very beginning of the penitential system. It says the sin has been forgiven and is no longer sin but is now concupiscence. Nevertheless, it has to be repented of and it has to be punished.
The nonsensical character of this teaching may be seen more evidently by contrasting it with the understandable Protestant view. Even a person who may not believe the Protestant view will see that it is comprehensible, while the Roman view, even if he does believe it, is not comprehensible. So I am requesting all of you, whether you are Protestant or Roman or secularist, to read carefully as I try to show that the Roman view is actually a contradiction in terms.
That is to say, the Roman church teaches that original sin is really remitted and the remaining sin is not sin at all, but they treat it as if it were. Manifestly, as soon as you treat something as if it existed when, according to your teaching, it does not exist, you are communicating incomprehensibles. It would have to be one or the other. Either it is sin or it is not sin. Either it is punishable or it is not punishable. You cannot have something which is sin and yet not sin, punishable and yet not punishable. Yet this is the heart of the penitential system which in many ways is the heart of the Roman Catholic lifestyle.
To make matters more absurd still, the punishment of non-sin actually continues into purgatory. Persons who go to purgatory are persons whose sins in this world have not been adequately punished in this world. We have already indicated that, according to Roman theory, these things are being punished in this world, not to mention punished further in the world to come, are not sins at all! But that is the oxymoronic Roman Catholic penitential system. The penitential system which is what is occupying most Roman Catholic minds most of the time is, strictly speaking, a nonexistent system, an incomprehensible system.
Someone is very inclined to say at this juncture, “Gerstner, you are the one who is talking in contradictory terms. You are telling millions of people who are living in this system that they are living in a nonsystem. Now who is the idiot around here, they or you? Aren’t you like a person saying to a flesh-eating animal that flesh-eating animals cannot eat flesh?” Yes, if you wish to put it that way. This doctrine is as absurd as saying that a certain creature is a flesh-eating animal who cannot eat flesh. Man is a person who has no sins, but whose sins must nevertheless be punished in this world and in the world to come. When you ask how I can be sane when I contradict something that millions of people testify to, my answer ought to be very evident. Crazy as it may sound, they are testifying to something which does not and cannot exist. They must have some sort of coherent concept in their own minds if penitence is meaningful to them. What they must have in their own minds which is meaningful is, however, not what the Roman Catholic church teaches which is unmeaningful, nonmeaningful, impossible to be understood meaningfully.
I will now point out the Protestant way to show the absurdity of the Roman view in contrast to a comprehensible view. Protestantism, I would say, is a meaningful teaching, that a person can understand who nevertheless may deplore it, hate it, and reject it. But he can know what it is. Even though he rejects it, he knows what he is rejecting. If he accepts it, he knows what he is accepting. The Roman view, by contrast, is something which a person cannot know, whether he says he believes or disbelieves it.
The Protestant doctrine teaches that all the guilt of a person’s sin (past, present, and future) is eternally forgiven the moment he receives justification by the imputation of Christ’s perfect righteousness. Also, the power of his remaining sinfulness and sins remains but does not reign. These remaining sins bring chastening (not wrath or punishment), by his Father who loves him and for that reason chastens him so he becomes more and more like the One who died for him. That is understandable doctrine, and the Bible proves it true.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
My escort informed me that he wanted me to see a demon in the process of actually possessing a human being.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
lust
My escort informed me that he wanted me to see a demon in the process of actually possessing a human being.
At this point in the trip, I was escorted back through the dimension wall separating the Second Heaven from the physical world.
When we came back into this world, we were in the same hospital with my body but in a different room.
The room appeared to be an employee's lounge. I saw tables, chairs, dishes with food, and in the room were a young man and a young lady facing each other while laughing and talking. It was obvious that they could not see nor the angels, yet I was so close to them I could almost reach out and touch them.
I could hear and understand every word they said.
They thought they were alone and as they laughed and talked, they were unaware of the horrible creature standing between them.
This demon was so horrible in the appearance of his shape and form that I recognized him immediately to be from the lower group, the perverted group.
The angels, the demons, and I were in the spirit in that room and were aware of everything that was happening.
Those in the flesh were only aware of themselves for they could not see or hear us even though we were back in this physical world.
Since we were in the spirit, we still communicated with our minds.I was not really paying close attention to the words the two were speaking.
My entire attention was focused upon the demon.
He was a most horrible looking thing, reminding me of an over–grown, stuffed, slimy, green frog all out of shape and proportion.
He moved slowly up into the face of the man then, suddenly, like a puff of smoke, he seemed to disappear into the face of the an just as if he went through the pores of his skin.
When the demon had entered the man, the angels said, “Now it's done.”
The angel then proceeded to tell me how it was that this man was possessed. He stated, “The demon made himself desirable and attractive to the human.”
The angel then pointed out to me that mankind has a sovereign will, all his own, beyond which the demons cannot come.
He also pointed out to me that the angels could not come beyond that sovereign will of man. God, Himself, will not violate that will.
We are made in the image of God, therefore, we were given, like God, a sovereign will, the right to choose our destiny.
I was not permitted to retain all that I learned along these lines.
lust
My escort informed me that he wanted me to see a demon in the process of actually possessing a human being.
At this point in the trip, I was escorted back through the dimension wall separating the Second Heaven from the physical world.
When we came back into this world, we were in the same hospital with my body but in a different room.
The room appeared to be an employee's lounge. I saw tables, chairs, dishes with food, and in the room were a young man and a young lady facing each other while laughing and talking. It was obvious that they could not see nor the angels, yet I was so close to them I could almost reach out and touch them.
I could hear and understand every word they said.
They thought they were alone and as they laughed and talked, they were unaware of the horrible creature standing between them.
This demon was so horrible in the appearance of his shape and form that I recognized him immediately to be from the lower group, the perverted group.
The angels, the demons, and I were in the spirit in that room and were aware of everything that was happening.
Those in the flesh were only aware of themselves for they could not see or hear us even though we were back in this physical world.
Since we were in the spirit, we still communicated with our minds.I was not really paying close attention to the words the two were speaking.
My entire attention was focused upon the demon.
He was a most horrible looking thing, reminding me of an over–grown, stuffed, slimy, green frog all out of shape and proportion.
He moved slowly up into the face of the man then, suddenly, like a puff of smoke, he seemed to disappear into the face of the an just as if he went through the pores of his skin.
When the demon had entered the man, the angels said, “Now it's done.”
The angel then proceeded to tell me how it was that this man was possessed. He stated, “The demon made himself desirable and attractive to the human.”
The angel then pointed out to me that mankind has a sovereign will, all his own, beyond which the demons cannot come.
He also pointed out to me that the angels could not come beyond that sovereign will of man. God, Himself, will not violate that will.
We are made in the image of God, therefore, we were given, like God, a sovereign will, the right to choose our destiny.
I was not permitted to retain all that I learned along these lines.
talk of a "sinner's prayer,"
Beware the beast Man, for he is the devil's pawn. Alone among God's primates, he kills for sport or lust or greed.
There is often talk of a "sinner's prayer," in which an interested party is to be led in order to become a Christian.
Of course, praying doesn't make one a Christian anyway, but there's also folly in thinking that an unconverted person would ever want to pray such a prayer prior to being born again.
What would a true sinner's prayer look like? In other words, what would an honest prayer from an unconverted person* look like?
John Gerstner, mentor of R.C. Sproul, gives this suggestion:
"Dear God, whom I hate with all my being precisely because you hate and threaten me with hell, I hate this punishment perhaps even more than I hate you. Or, maybe I should say that I love my comfort even more than I hate you. For that reason I am asking a favor of you. I want you to make me love you, whom I hate even when I ask this and even more because I have to ask this. I am being frank with you because I know it is no use to be otherwise. You know even better than I how much I hate you and that I love only myself. It is no use for me to pretend to be sincere. I most certainly do not love you and do not want to love you. I hate the thought of loving you but that is what I’m asking because I love myself. If you can answer this 'prayer' I guess the gift of gratitude will come with it and then I will be able to do what I would not think of doing now—thank you for making me love you whom I hate. Amen."
-John Gerstner, Rational Biblical Theology of Jonathan Edwards (Powhatan, VA: Berea Publications, 1993), 3:81.
*As described by Scripture ... e.g., 1 Cor 2:14; John 3:3, 6-8, 19-20; 6:44; Acts 16:14; 2 Cor 4:4; Jer 17:9; Ezek 36:26-27; etc.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Communicate with the Saints (St joan of Arc) and others
Spiritualism is a monotheistic belief system or religion, postulating a belief in God, but with a distinguishing feature of belief that spirits of the dead residing in the spirit world can be contacted by "mediums", who can then provide information about the afterlife.[1]
Spiritualism developed and reached its peak growth in membership from the 1840s to the 1920s, especially in English-language countries,[2][3] By 1897, it was said to have more than eight million followers in the United States and Europe,[4] mostly drawn from the middle and upper classes, while the corresponding movement in continental Europe and Latin America is known as Spiritism.
The religion flourished for a half century without canonical texts or formal organization, attaining cohesion by periodicals, tours by trance lecturers, camp meetings, and the missionary activities of accomplished mediums. Many prominent Spiritualists were women. Most followers supported causes such as the abolition of slavery and women's suffrage.[2] By the late 1880s, credibility of the informal movement weakened, due to accusations of fraud among mediums, and formal Spiritualist organizations began to appear.[2] Spiritualism is currently practiced primarily through various denominational Spiritualist Churches in the United States and United Kingdom.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Ya But .. i go 2 daily Mass.. i..mm better than you !!
Monsignor Ricardo Bass is a canon lawyer and pastor of Prince of Peace Parish, West Bloomfield.
He currently teaches canon law at the graduate level at SS. Cyril and Methodius Seminary, Orchard Lake.
Msgr. Bass served as pastor of St. Joan of Arc Parish, St. Clair Shores, from 1993 to June of 2004.
Prior to that assignment, he served as Judicial Vicar of the Metropolitan Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Detroit from 1990 to 1993.
06.02.10 . 17:27
» all paintings » art galleries guide » 1870s » 1880s » 1890s » 1900s » 1910s » undated » © credits
Paintings › View › St Joan 19xx
Miss Margaret Henderson (19xx)
Juliet (1898)
Jason and Medea (1907)
Cleopatra (1888)
Arranging Flowers (1890)
19xx . Oil on canvas
Private Collection
Actual Size (W x H): 48cm x 55cm [ 18.91" x 21.67" ]
John William Waterhouse: St Joan - 19xx
» Send as Postcard » Create As Calendar
Patron of soldiers and France
b.1412 d.1431
St. Joan of Arc is the patroness of soldiers and of France. On January 6, 1412, Joan of Arc was born to pious parents of the French peasant class, at the obscure village of Domremy, near the province of Lorraine.
At a very early age, she heard voices:
those of St. Michael, St. Catherine and St. Margaret. and what was their PROOF..
DUhh
At first the messages were personal and general.
that farmilar spirit would know
\
Then at last came the direct order.
In May, 1428, her voices " of the familar spirit's
of St. Michael, St. Catherine, and St. Margaret"
told Joan to go to the King of France and help him reconquer his kingdom.
For at that time the English king was after the throne of France, and the Duke of Burgundy, the chief rival of the French king, was siding with him and gobbling up evermore French territory.
After overcoming opposition from churchmen and courtiers, the seventeen year old girl was given a small army with which she raised the seige of Orleans on May 8, 1429.
She then enjoyed a series of spectacular military successes, during which the King was able to enter Rheims and be crowned with her at his side.
In May 1430, as she was attempting to relieve Compiegne, she was captured by the Burgundians and sold to the English when Charles and the French did nothing to save her. After months of imprisonment, she was tried at Rouen by a tribunal presided over by the infamous Peter Cauchon, Bishop of Beauvais, who hoped that the English would help him to become archbishop.
Through her unfamiliarity with the technicalities of theology,and bible studies and training by the roman catholic church
Joan was trapped into making a few damaging statements.
When she refused to retract the assertion that it was the saints of God who had commanded her to do what she had done,
she was condemned to death as a heretic, sorceress, and adulteress, and burned at the stake on May 30, 1431.
She was nineteen years old.
Some thirty years later, the roman catholic said "OPPs" we made a mistake !!!
she was exonerated of all guilt .. of listening to familar spirits, and following their advice!!
and she was ultimately canonized in 1920,
but the roman catholic church..."could not raise her from the dead"
darn.. it...
making official what the people had known for centuries.
Her fe ast day is May 30.
Joan was canonized in 1920 by Pope Benedict XV.
because they couldn't put her back together again
Catholic Online
© Image Copyright and Reproduction Information
View...
-A Female Study - 1894 A Hamadryad - 1895 A Mermaid - 1901 A Naiad - 1905 A Naiad (study) - 1893 A Sick Child brought into the Temple of Aesculapius - 1877 A Song of Springtime - 1913 A Tale from the Decameron - 1916 After the Dance - 1876 Apollo and Daphne - 1908 Ariadne - 1898 Arranging Flowers - 1890 At Capri - 1890 Boreas - 1902 Circe Invidiosa - 1892 Circe Offering the Cup to Ulysses - 1891 Cleopatra - 1888 Consulting the Oracle - 1882 Danaë - 1892 Dante and Beatrice - 1915 Destiny - 1900 Diogenes - 1905 Dolce Far Niente - 1880 Echo and Narcissus - 1903 Fair Rosamund - 1905 Flora [picking flowers] - 1890 Flora [white dress] - 1890 Flora and the Zephyrs - 1898 Gather Ye Rosebuds (study) - 1908 Gather Ye Rosebuds While Ye May - 1909 Gather Ye Rosebuds While Ye May (study) - 1909 Gathering Almond Blossoms - 1916 Gathering Summer Flowers in a Devonshire Garden - 1893 Good Neighbours - 1885 Grecian Flower Market - A (aka. A Flower Stall ) - 1880 Hylas and the Nymphs - 1896 Hylas and the Nymphs (study 1) - 1896 Hylas and the Nymphs (study 2) - 1896 I am Half-Sick of Shadows - said the Lady of Shalott - 1915 In the Peristyle - 1874 Isabella and the Pot of Basil - 1907 Jason and Medea - 1907 Juliet - 1898 La Belle Dame Sans Merci - 1893 La Belle Dame Sans Merci (study) - 1893 La Fileuse - 1874 Lamia [by the pond] - 1909 Lamia [on her knees] - 1905 Lilies, Poppies and Carnations - 1916 Listen to my Sweet Pipings - 1911 Maidens Picking Flowers by a Stream (study) - 1911 Mariamne Leaving the Judgement Seat of Herod - 1887 Mariana in the South - 1897 Mariana in the South (study) - 1897 Miranda - The Tempest - 1916 Miss Betty Pollock - 1911 Miss Margaret Henderson - 19xx My Sweet Rose (a.k.a 'The Soul of a Rose') - 1908 Narcissus - 1912 Nymphs Finding the Head of Orpheus - 1905 Nymphs finding the head of Orpheus (study) - 1900 Ophelia [blue dress] - 1905 Ophelia [by the pond] - 1894 Ophelia [lying in the meadow] - 1905 Pandora - 1896 Penelope and the Suitors - 1912 Portrait of Mrs. Charles Schreiber - 1912 Portrait of Phyllis Waterlow - 1895 Psyche Entering Cupids Garden - 1905 Psyche Opening the Golden Box - 1903 Resting - 19xx Sleep and His Half Brother Death - 1874 St Cecilia - 1895 St Eulalia - 1885 St Joan - 19xx Study for The Lady Clare - 1900 Study of Miss Muriel Foster - 19xx Sweet Summer - 1912 The Annunciation - 1914 The Awakening of Adonis - 1900 The Bouquet (study) - 1908 The Charmer - 1911 The Crystal Ball [with the skull] - 1902 The Crystal Ball [without the skull] - 1902 The Danaïdes - 1903 The Enchanted Garden - 1916 The Favorites of the Emperor Honorius - 1883 The Flower Picker - 1900 The Household Gods - 1880 The Lady Clare - 1900 The Lady of Shalott [looking at Lancelot] - 1894 The Lady of Shalott [looking at Lancelot] (study) - 1894 The Lady of Shalott [on boat] - 1888 The Love Philtre - 1914 The Magic Circle - 1886 The Magic Circle (study) - 1886 The Missal - 1902 The Necklace (study) - 1909 The Orange Gatherers - 1890 The Remorse of Nero after the Murder of his Mother - 1878 The Rose Bower - 1910 The Shrine - 1895 The Siren - 1900 The Sorceress - 1913 The Unwelcome Companion: A Street Scene in Cairo - 1873 Thisbe - 1909 Tristan and Isolde - 1905 Tristan and Isolde Sharing the Potion - 1916 Two Little Italian Girls by a Village - 1875 Ulysses and the Sirens - 1891 Vanity - 1910 Windflowers - 1903
I think so, but... uh... something about a duck. - Pinky
Current Waterhouse Posters Promotion
22% Off Entire Order!, use coupon code BASE during checkout (expires 5/7/2010).
copyright © 1998 - 2010 www.jwwaterhouse.com | site designed, developed and maintained by alan do.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Prayers to Mary and Saints
Prayers to Mary and Saints
The problem with these wishful prayers is more than that they are praying to the wrong people for help.
They are praying to DEAD people.
This sin of necromancy is expressly forbidden in the Bible (De. 18:10-13).
Necromancy is defined as:
"conjuration of the spirits of the dead for purposes of magically revealing the future or influencing the course of events."
(Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/necromancy).
That means anything asked of dead people is communicating with them in order to influence the course of events.
The reason this is forbidden in the Bible is because it gives the enemy a big opening to deceive people.
Yet the Roman Catholic Church has been promoting this practice for centuries!
There is only one God and His Son is alive sitting at the right hand of God. Christians are to pray to our living Savior.
Mary recognized her Son as her Savior (Luke 1:47).
Therefore it is useless to pray to a dead woman who has no power to do anything for the living.
She is to be remembered for that fact the God chose her to bear His Son, but she is not to be venerated and worshipped.
The same goes for dead Christians. By the way, every Christian is a "saint" (Col. 1:26, Eph. 3:18) not those installed by the Pope and his Cardinals.
Articles to read:
Doctrines of the Rosary And Prayers To Mary (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cat971.html)
Prayers From The Dead (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cat956.html)
Prayers For The Dead (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cat958.html)
Roman Catholicism Compared To Biblical Christianity (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/rcc.html)
Praying to Mary and the Saints (http://www.letusreason.org/RC7.htm)
The "Evangelical" Seduction (http://www.thebereancall.org/node/5829)
History & Development of Mariolatry (http://www.christian-witness.org/archives/cetf2004/mary_mary27.html)
"God has many names and can be worshipped under other names as long as he is identified in the culture as a
'supreme being'" (Or the FATHER")
There is an immediate problem with this idea.
Ac 4:12 Salvation is found in no-one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
That name is Jesus Christ and He is the only way to eternal life and the Father (John 14:6).
God gave Moses His name when He asked Him. It is "I Am That I Am" or YHWH (YHVH). That is His name and Yeshua is a derivative of Yahweh.
He does not go by the name of Baal, or Allah, or Osirus, or any other name.
Joh 20:31 But these are written that you may {Some manuscripts may continue to} believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
Mt 12:21 In his name the nations will put their hope." {Isaiah 42:1-4}
Mike Oppenheimer and I wrote a very important book on this subject called
"Idolatry In Their Hearts".
I hope many Christians will read this book to remind them about what the Bible tells us about YHWH.
The fact that many Bible translation organization as substituting the general term of "God" in the Bible for the specific false god called "Allah" has already gotten people killed in Muslim countries.
YHWH is not Allah.
Articles to read:
Is Allah The Same As YHWH? (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/allahyhwh.html)
Allah of Islam, Is He Yahweh God of the Bible? (http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Abualrub/allahs_identity.htm)
IPM False Teaching About The Names Of God (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/ipmnamesofgod.html)
Is Allah God's name (http://www.letusreason.org/islam6.htm)
Io- The Hawaiian Supreme God (http://www.letusreason.org/Current68.htm)
"Blasphemizing" The Bible (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/blasphemizingthebible.html)
The problem with these wishful prayers is more than that they are praying to the wrong people for help.
They are praying to DEAD people.
This sin of necromancy is expressly forbidden in the Bible (De. 18:10-13).
Necromancy is defined as:
"conjuration of the spirits of the dead for purposes of magically revealing the future or influencing the course of events."
(Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/necromancy).
That means anything asked of dead people is communicating with them in order to influence the course of events.
The reason this is forbidden in the Bible is because it gives the enemy a big opening to deceive people.
Yet the Roman Catholic Church has been promoting this practice for centuries!
There is only one God and His Son is alive sitting at the right hand of God. Christians are to pray to our living Savior.
Mary recognized her Son as her Savior (Luke 1:47).
Therefore it is useless to pray to a dead woman who has no power to do anything for the living.
She is to be remembered for that fact the God chose her to bear His Son, but she is not to be venerated and worshipped.
The same goes for dead Christians. By the way, every Christian is a "saint" (Col. 1:26, Eph. 3:18) not those installed by the Pope and his Cardinals.
Articles to read:
Doctrines of the Rosary And Prayers To Mary (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cat971.html)
Prayers From The Dead (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cat956.html)
Prayers For The Dead (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cat958.html)
Roman Catholicism Compared To Biblical Christianity (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/rcc.html)
Praying to Mary and the Saints (http://www.letusreason.org/RC7.htm)
The "Evangelical" Seduction (http://www.thebereancall.org/node/5829)
History & Development of Mariolatry (http://www.christian-witness.org/archives/cetf2004/mary_mary27.html)
"God has many names and can be worshipped under other names as long as he is identified in the culture as a
'supreme being'" (Or the FATHER")
There is an immediate problem with this idea.
Ac 4:12 Salvation is found in no-one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
That name is Jesus Christ and He is the only way to eternal life and the Father (John 14:6).
God gave Moses His name when He asked Him. It is "I Am That I Am" or YHWH (YHVH). That is His name and Yeshua is a derivative of Yahweh.
He does not go by the name of Baal, or Allah, or Osirus, or any other name.
Joh 20:31 But these are written that you may {Some manuscripts may continue to} believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
Mt 12:21 In his name the nations will put their hope." {Isaiah 42:1-4}
Mike Oppenheimer and I wrote a very important book on this subject called
"Idolatry In Their Hearts".
I hope many Christians will read this book to remind them about what the Bible tells us about YHWH.
The fact that many Bible translation organization as substituting the general term of "God" in the Bible for the specific false god called "Allah" has already gotten people killed in Muslim countries.
YHWH is not Allah.
Articles to read:
Is Allah The Same As YHWH? (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/allahyhwh.html)
Allah of Islam, Is He Yahweh God of the Bible? (http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Abualrub/allahs_identity.htm)
IPM False Teaching About The Names Of God (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/ipmnamesofgod.html)
Is Allah God's name (http://www.letusreason.org/islam6.htm)
Io- The Hawaiian Supreme God (http://www.letusreason.org/Current68.htm)
"Blasphemizing" The Bible (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/blasphemizingthebible.html)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
