Archive for January, 2010

Pray for peace: Israel and Bible Prophecy

January 30, 2010

Me: You cannot deduce the date for the creation of the state of Israel from Deutoronomy or even all the Messianic prophecies. “Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself” is dated to the year, and not much more.

Deuteronomy says that discipline will be multiplied 7 times if they did not repent. The restoration of the state in May 1948 and the capture of Jerusalem in June 1967 took place to the day at the end of the relevant periods. The exact dates are on a tape I have, but it will take time for me to find the right one and get the details right.

That tape surely uses symbols and letters and numbers and formulas to make the claim, but that way lay ruin, as Peter warned about Paul’s letters against twisting the scriptures “to their own destruction”. Those calculations will get you in trouble, except for the seven-year countdown that starts ticking with the “Holy Covenant” of Daniel, and the time line therein. But that one is explicit.

Certainly the end-times references include allusions to the “temple of God” and all that and clearly center around Jerusalem. But these are geopolitical references.

But Christians should remember that the godly Jews in the O.T. were the ones for whom the promise of blessing was made for Abraham’s descendants, and that woudl be those who had the faith to follow the prophets and obey God. In the New Testament, that would mean the Jews that followed Jesus, and the Gentiles that followed Jesus. The blessings of God promised for God’s people apply to the followers of JESUS, NOT THE PHARISEES!

The promises of God in relation to the descendants of Jacob and the land and their position in regard to other nations have not yet been fulfilled. These promises were ultimately unconditional. Although Israel could be disciplined, even to the extent of removing them from their land, this was always going to be discipline, even though very severe. Israel will never be completely cut off. (Romans 11)

It is common to treat the promises to Israel as though they were promises to the church. This is quite invalid. The church unexpectedly allows gentiles to share in the promises to Israel. Israel has temporarily been removed from its privileged position, because they rejected their Messiah. This will not continue forever.

The promises to the descendants of Jacob, and the “unconditional” promises made to Abraham, were very much

  • indeed
  • conditional. God told Abraham he couldn’t inherit the land yet because the cup of iniquity of its inhabitants was not “full”. Moses’ writings said God would drive them out of the land if the followed the pagan practices of the land, and he did. The ten northern tribes are now gone, vanished, that’s ten tribes out of the twelve!!!

    Their blood was assimilated into the surrounding peoples, so maybe some of those “unconditional promises” apply to the Syrians and the Iraquis and the Lebanese, eh? Especially the Bible-believing Christians among them who show the fruits of scripture?

    While the people ruling Israel are descended mostly from European stock. Maybe the Hezbollah have more of Jacob’s blood in them than the converted ancestors of the Ashkenazi, eh?

    After Darby and Scofield and other copycats started the foolishness of pre-trib rapture and dispensations, Christians started getting all confused about it.

    Galatians 6:16 is NOT the only verse that says that Christ-believers are the ones who inherit the kingdom of heaven/kingdom of God, they are multitudes. Matthew 3:9, Luke 3:8, John 8:39 states that the circumcised genealogical descendants of Abraham were NOT Abraham’s children. (If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.). Read Acts 7 again, where Stephen called them stiffnecked and uncircumcised, betrayers and murderers.

    Jesus told a parable in which the stewards of the Master’s land slayed the SON of the Master, thinking they would get away with it, but go read what Jesus said the Master would do with those wicked stewards. It says right there in the text that the Pharisees knew he was talking about THEM. Those are the Pharisees (along with a lot more Saducees now) that rule in Israel.
    “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof”. Romans 4:14-16 makes clear that the promise is sure to those who are of the faith of Abraham. “Romans 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

    I could post a few thousand more but that should be a starter for thinking…

    As to Balfour and all that, many pretribbers give too much credit to Balfour. What brought the Brits’ Empire down was DARWINISM. “If the foundations be removed, who can stand?”

    The Pharisees are in charge again in Israel. The ones in charge there, some of them no doubt, spit sputtle and scrub their hands raw after shaking hands with a Christian. I’ve met some “spiritual” orphans who were disowned by their Orthodox families after they accepted Christ.

    I still love them, and much of this view was inspired by writings from Jewish Christians, by the way. I have lived with them, broken bread with them, slept in their homes and they in mine, and they are as good as blood brothers or better.

    God cannot bless a reprobate attitutde. He will bless anybody with the proper motives in their helping their neighbors, including them, but “without respect of persons”.

    Many Israeli policies have abused its non-Jewish population. A missionary I know visited there in the 1970s, had dinner with a Palestinian Arab doctor who had to make a living as a janitor, a Christian by the way, because he was not allowed to practice medicine. In negotiations the Syrians pulled out a Wanted poster of Begin, “Wanted for Terrorism”, printed by the Brits during WWII.

    Hiding these facts doesn’t help the Jews either in Israel or anywhere else. I do believe in helping them, fighting for peace, real peace, among them all. There are many Jews and Palestinians and Arabs and yes Moslems working on that.

    But they don’t help when for example when they do things like deny the opportunity for a Muslim from Turkey to participate in an anti-terrorism conference, like they did with Harum Yahya, a creationist by the way.

    They bulldoze the houses of an entire family of Palestinians whenever one of them is presumably caught in activities. This is a way of forcing them to move, “ethnic cleansing light”, just as was the policy with the settlements. A news story recently said they announced an end to this policy, but we still hear of bulldozings.. Some Jewish settlements have been razed for sure. It would be interesting to compare…

    Of course Israel makes no real claim to be a theocracy, it’s a secular state, although there is official favoritism toward Orthodox rules.

    I worked with a (very) Jewish fellow once from South Africa who went there to join the Israeli Army. The religious Jews don’t have to serve in the military but everybody else does and the secular Jews bitterly resent it. At least many Christians agree the nation is no more godly than most other nations. A hopelessly wrongheaded interpretation of scripture might only turn out to be supporting an Ahab-and-Jezebel type regime.

    The temple as we think of it will probably be restored eventually, and it is apparently the best interpretation of Daniel 9 and other scripture, as part of the Anti-Christ’s covenant. When the sacrifice is stopped, “then” shall occur the Tribulation, said Jesus, and “immediately after” the Tribulation, said Jesus, he will appear again…

    Nonetheless, Jews among us for these two thousand years have been major contributors to science, and civilization in general, and we cannot forget that. The Koran itself recognizes that the “People of the Book” came before Mohammed, from their prophet’s own mouth, and they are to be respected.

    As a matter of fact, before the troubles that began taking form in the last part of the 19th century, Muslims, Christians and Jews all lived together in harmony and peace for centuries. This proves that only special geopolitical interests are the ones that contort writings on all sides to justify acts of violence against the innocent. Muslims have vented rage with me on the subject, saying there is no justification at all in Islam for killing the innocent.

    –aec

    Little Christian school out-debates them all, again

    January 26, 2010

    Homeschool haven Patrick Henry College tops Harvard and other colleges:

    See this link:

    Just 10 years old, 350-student Patrick Henry College won its fourth national debate championship in six years.

    The Virginia evangelical Christian school, founded by the leading Christian homeschool organization, is the only college or university to win the American Collegiate Moot Court Association national championship more than once.

    Other schools competing included Harvard, Miami, Syracuse, Holy Cross, the College of Wooster and Fitchburg State College.

    PHC, in Purcellville, Va., near Washington, D.C., sent the maximum number of eight teams to the 64-team competition at Florida International University College of Law in Miami and placed first, third, ninth, 11th, 13th and 17th.

    …....more..

    January 8, 2010

    >>….where the bible hinted at reincarnation….?

    ___The Bible does not talk about reincarnation, even hint at it. Men are appointed –>oncejudgment<. That's judgment, not another reincarnation.
    Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

    >>…the transfiguration in the garden where he is asked if he is Moses or Elijah returned, and other citations….our aim is the transfiguration regardless of his stand on resurrection or mine on reincarnation.

    ___The transfiguration was when the historical Elijah and the historical Moses came to a high mountain rendevous with with the “transfigured” Jesus Christ before the eyes of the apostles: Matthew 17:2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
    3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

    Note that at that time Jesus told the apostles to hold quiet the telling of that encounter until after his resurrection:
    Matthew 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

    All of us are going to live again past the death of the flesh, some get rest and recreation and more work from Jesus directly, like Paul said, 2 Corinthians 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. Others like the rich man who could have helped the beggar Lazarus, go to hell. (Luke 16:23). Others get everlasting shame and contempt (Daniel 12:2).

    God promises eventual reconciliation of “all things” to himself, but some people are striving to be their own saviors, and thereat lies deceit, since it won’t work.

    >>(Someone said..)…can pray, visualize, and send loving energy to those black hole vortices that seem to perpetrate violence or I can do nothing. I have learned that all those years of being a peace activist did nothing….

    ___I got fed up with trying to change the world through political revolution when I realized the “leaders” were hypocrites, and nothing in the larger picture was changing. And I had realized by then the cultural glue, the rock music, was not only not helping, it was destructive…

    At the same time, other things were interfering with my atheism. Things like science. History. Truth. And the disillusion with some of the subtly evil lyrics in the rock music I had been so much into. And reviewing the fulfillment of prophecies from the Bible.

    Then I met a couple of people from the missionary movement I later joined, prayed with them, went back home for a couple months, then left to join them. Urban missions in the USA then overseas, and brightening the life of thousands, encouraging more thousands, distributing food to poor, presentations in orphanages, and most importantly, introducing people to eternal life in Jesus Christ through the cross and with his resurrection from the dead bearing witness to the power to do it.

    That was a revolution to beat all of them, changing lives from the inside out and one heart at a time. Changing John Newton from a heartless cruel slave-ship captain to ferocious enemy of the vile trade, inspiring William Wilberforce to make the abolition of the slave trade his personal missionary work. Christ, inspiring David Livingston to drive into the heart of Africa with the good news, another plague upon the slave trade.

    Where Christ went, I did NOT say the church, not Christianity, but Jesus Christ our Lord, where people carried him to others, cultures changed. The Romans gave up gladiator slaughter, the Irish got a written language along with Christ’s love at the hand and mouth of Patrick and saving the classics during the sacking of vandals across Europe. Pagan tribes gave up human sacrifice, to the gratitude of no less a witness than Charles Darwin to the gratitude of world travelers at the sight of a steeple on the faraway isles of the sea.

    >>(Someone said:)…the fundamental assumptions of Christian theology require that your child be described as being “possessed by demons”?

    __Some “Christian theologian” might say that but so what? Did Jesus Christ say that? Sure he cast out demons from many children and from lots of adults too, and it’s real. I KNOW that demon-possessed kids exist. This kid may or may not be, but I think not. NOT. My reference is not the inventions of the traditions of men, but in the word of God!

    I am NOT “required” by “Christian theology” to think anything other than what’s in the Bible, and Jesus had some very damning things to say about the pretenders of his day and of our day too.

    Kids and adults with “memories” from past lives is usually not demon possession, it’s more often mistaken identity. There are ministering spirits, some departed saints. And, there are plenty of demons who have a little more self-control among their peers, who go about to deceive.

    The founder of the missionary work I served with had a spiritual helper, a gypsy leader who had been victim in a massacre by Turks invading into Europe. He met with some gypsies and spoke an ancient dialect of their language that they recognized as such. This gypsy was a helper, not a prior incarnation.

    “It is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment.

    But without the Prince of Peace, the Beast will deceive the nations with a false peace, a “holy covenant” centered on the Middle East, and “when they cry peace, peace then sudden destruction shall come upon them”. Because they will persecute the saints.

    Folks, the time will come soon enough when you will have to decide whether to remain silent while Christians are taken to the ovens.

    Because after the dark night will come the dawn, because Christ will descend from heaven with a shout, and in triumph will end the reign of the terror of the Antichrist, Hallelujah!

    >>….what both the Sadducees and Pharisees ‘thought’ about the Doctrine of “resurrection” : that anyone who claimed such memories was very simply possessed. Which is what they accused Jesus of being in the Gospels.

    __You should study the Bible more if you’re going to try to talk about what it says. The Pharisees did believe in the Resurrection, while the Saducees denied it.

    But neither of them is quoted as saying “past memories” only meant demon possession.

    They did accuse Jesus of having a devil: John 7:20 The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?

    >>And, if not, I would ask them to explain what is going on. And whether the reply of Jesus to the Sadducees and Jesus claim of John the Baptist being Elijah could be evidence that Jesus also believed in previous lives. Michael Cecil

    ___Elijah never saw corporal death anyway, but Elishah saw him taken up in a fiery chariot. Enoch “did not see death” but “walked with God” instead it also says. Elijah appeared on the hill with Jesus, with Moses, who came back in a glorified body. It does not specify whether this was the physical resurrected body of Moses.

    Luke 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
    17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

    In my opinion the prophecy at Malachi 4:5 as to Elijah the prophet is to be yet fulfilled, or is fulfilled in an endtime prophet, as we speak, somewhere, because it’s to happen “before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord”, which invokes not so much Jesus’ appearance in the 1st century, but the idea of the Second Coming just before Armageddon.

    Prophets and Heretics

    January 4, 2010

    #1.TRUE PROPHETS: Some in ancient days were true prophets, and many of them uttered prophecies that were recorded and became part of the canon of scripture. In those cases, most of the time in the scriptures themselves they were proven to be true prophets because #1.Some prophecies came to pass in their own generation, and #2.They directed worship to the one true God.

    #2.HERETICS. If you are among believers in the true God, and change and preach false gods, like Baal or Molech, then you are indeed a heretic. If you never knew of God directly, that’s not “heretic”, that’s just “pagan”. But it’s false gods and evil spirits all the same.

    One of the most repeated condemnations of worshippers of false gods in the Old Testament books is for the infant sacrifices to the fires of Molech. The priests built this big idol with fires inside its “belly”, and pulleys to hurl the babies into the fire.

    Fase prophets sometimes made predictions that happened, but if they pointed to false gods, there was an eventual catastrophe waiting.
    2 Thessalonians 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
    11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
    12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

    #3.INSANITY: That’s what a lot of atheists would do with Joan of Arc today. In my opinion France as a nation would have had a much better history if they had respected her gifts. Actually the world would have been better off.

    There are indeed also people who “hear voices”. Some of them actually may be too much tuned to spiritual matters, and there are some who have chemical imbalances.

    The Bolsheviks and Stalinists certainly put plenty of Christians into asylums.

    That reminds me of the “mad monk” image of Rasputin. I believe he was a man of God and a true prophet, womanizer or not. One of his prophecies was of his own death and the approximate time. But it looks like from the prophecy that there were two spiritual forces wanting to get rid of him.

    He wrote a letter to the Tsar predicting his own murder before the end of the year. Apparently at the time there was a possibility it would come from the peasants, the poor, and he said if they were the ones to do it, the Czar and his family would rule another hundred years. (As in, at least).

    But if it came to be from the royal family, then the Czar and his immediate family would not last more than two more years, and the whole royal family would be beset by all kinds of problems and there would be no more Russian nobility after 25 more years.

    And that’s what happened. A prince invited him and gave him brownies that were soaking in enough poison to kill a team of horses, and there was absolutely no effect on him. Finally he shot him point blank and left, only to return and find himself suddenly with the monk’s hands around his throat. Finally fleeing again, he and the other conspirators got him crawling outside the palace, and pumped him full of bullets and beat him and tied him up. Then they threw him in the river.

    The body was found later with the binding ropes loosened, and his hand across his own chest as if in benediction, and lungs full of water, indicating death by drowning. Two years later the royal family was dead, including the princess who was the later target of identity theft.

    Darwin and Marx

    January 3, 2010

    From a darwinist, talking about Darwin’s racial bigotry, and prediction that the “inferior races” would be obliterated eventually by the “civilized” races:

    > > To repeat, I don’t think Darwin had a change of heart. He just changed the message he wanted to give out, from one of “horrid things are happening in the colonies but active liberals are fixing that” to one of “there’s no hope for the savage races”>>


    In sharp contrast to the legacy left to him by the tireless work of William Wilberforce, who made the abolition of slavery in the Empire his Christian mission.

    And in great contrast to the never ending tirades against the slave trade by the missionary David Livingstone, whom the Arab and Portuguese held in awe and respect and fear, a man who loved the African people with an immense love.

    >It would seem that Darwin had come to think that there was no hope for the “savage races” and that they would all be exterminated by the advance of the “civilized” (i.e. European) nations. We can be thankful that in this case he was not an infallible prognosticator.

    And yet we see this self-fulfilling prognostication, with its painfully obvious applicability to Malthusian practices, borne out in the racist political ideologies of the 20th century, always with reference to the same idea of superior and inferior races that Charles Darwin saw, logically, as an implication of his theory. Not only in the genocide and eugenics of the fascist regimes of the Axis powers of World War II, but on the American side of the Atlantic in the eugenicist policies and practices of their ideological allies, Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control League, now known as Planned Parenthood, which would be better called Planned Sterilization.

    >Sure, and he (Dawkins) chooses to act as an Englishman of a certain class and heir of a particular science tradition. Whether he does so consciously or not is another issue. Being English, where the class tradition is still alive and well and not swept under the carpet as in America, he could well be conscious of the fact that he is of a certain class and chooses to uphold its traditions. Darwin, perhaps, even more so, for it would be a rare person of his time who thought class barriers should be eradicated, in spite of the contemporary work of Marx.


    Darwin and Marx are hand-and-glove. Karl Marx, the founder of Communism, described Charles Darwin’s book The Origin of Species, which set forth the basis of the theory of evolution, as “a book which contains the basis of natural history for our views.” (David Jorafsky, Soviet Marxism and Natural Science, New York: Columbia University Press, 1961, p.12

    Marx demonstrated his regard for Darwin by dedicating his own most important work, Das Kapital, to him. His own handwriting in the German edition of the book read, “Mr. Charles Darwin / On the part of his sincere admirer / Karl Marx.” Ralph Colp, Jr., “The Contacts Between Karl Marx and Charles Darwin,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Apr.-Jun., 1974), pp. 329-338

    The social scientist Tom Bethell, who works at the Hoover Institute in America, explains the fundamental reasons for the link between the two theories: “…Marx admired Darwin’s book not for economic reasons but for the more fundamental one that Darwin’s universe was purely materialistic, and the explication of it no longer involved any reference to unobservable, nonmaterial causes outside or ‘beyond’ it. In that important respect, Darwin and Marx were truly comrades…”
    And what “eradication of class barriers”? Karl Marx’ gargantuan tomes in “Das Kapital”, written for the UPPER classes, NOT the masses, should give an independent thinker a clue, for starters. The fact that Marx trotted all over Europe expensively enjoying himself with no “visible means of support” (they are obscure, aren’t they?) should be another, while his own kids suffered low-class ravages.

    Scant few people ask if it is so egalitarian, why are the richest and most powerful plutocrats in the whole world behind what is supposedly a poor-friendly socialist model that will overthrow their power? Why did they support Lenin’s Bolshevik revolution in Russia, Mao Tse-Tung in China, the Castro brothers in Cuba, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, and most recently, the dictator golpista Manuel Zelaya in Honduras, a guy who had already overthrown his own constitution and government by ruling by decree, ruling as if Congress and the Courts did not exist?

    Harun Yahya did exhaustive and indisputable research showing the connections between not only Darwinism and Marxism but the persons Darwin and Marx:

    http://us1.harunyahya.com/Detail/T/EDCRFV/productId/16463/MARX,_KARL

    >> The reason why I think these naturalists [Paley & Selbourne]were right is because it seems to me that in the Western spiritual tradition, “God” is the word we use for what did create the universe, so that “through Nature up to Nature’s God” is correct. We learn about God partly by learning about Nature. That was what the Victorian biologists sought to overturn.>

    > I don’t think the Victorian biologists sought to overturn the creative relationship between God and creation. I would agree that we learn about God partly by learning about Nature. But we can only do that if we accept Nature as it is. To the extent that Paley or Selbourne attached their view of Nature’s God to the separate and independent creation of species fixed in forms designed for their specific habitats, they were wrong.

    Oh rich. “Nature’s God” is a stupid oxymoron if you don’t conceive of that God as existing as Creator, which by the way is another explicit reference to God in the Declaration of Independence, for example, showing that the concept of Nature’s God held by philosophers of the day.

    And guess what? Creationists are the ones who are even willing to learn about God from accepting Nature as it is. Otherwise it’s just some stupid homage to the cultural use of the word.

    > It’s obvious that coming to grips with that error rattled a lot of theological assumptions. Yet the Church provided almost immediately a way of grasping the new insights into nature theologically. That God, rather than designing specific species for specific habitats, both unchangeable, created a dynamic interaction among changing habitats and changing species in a cosmic dance gives us a new view of Nature and God, but is just as conducive to the principle of “through Nature to Nature’s God”.


    Try to learn what creationists actually think instead of the caricature pounded into your head by operatives of dogma in school years. Creationists don’t regard the created species as “specific species for specific habitats, both unchangeable”. ROTFL! That’s such a hilarious error that I think I’ll share it for a joke on another Creationist email list!

    In years past, before darwinists found that any creationist scientist could beat them in a fair debate almost every time (I’ve never heard of a different outcome), that’s just one of the reasons darwinists looked so foolish. Their cartoonish ideas of creationists crashed and burned with a debate opponent who knew more about what the darwinist was talking about than the darwinist himself!

    For example, an “evolutionary biologist” who has several articles on the darwinist site TalkOrigins, in one exchange in early Internet days, called me an “unmitigated liar” for daring to say that Piltdown man was a fraud! I had to post a link to a darwinist web site about science frauds to show him!

    –Alan

    January 2, 2010

    Adam Savage was quoted in a blog referring to a Popular Mechanics podcast in a rant against creationism. He showed historical illiteracy and some short-circuit logic. He said attacks on (darwinian) evolution were attacks on the scientific method as religious. He said attacks on darwinism were “damaging scientific exploration”. He claimed that reminders by creationists that (darwinian) evolution was only a theory were because people have an erroneous idea that science is the search for ultimate truths.

    Wow. So much delusion in one article. Let us clarify some things here.

    #1.Scientific method in the real world:

    a.In the real world, Adam Savage cannot quote ONE creationist who asserts that the scientific method is religious.

    b.In the real world.It was creationists like Roger Bacon who formalized the scientific method by steps.

    “**************”

    #2.Science exploration in the world:

    “That kind of attack absolutely is damaging science exploration across the whole country.”

    —a.Any attack on the scientific method is damaging to science activities for sure.

    —b.It was creationists like Isaac Newton, a young-earth creationist, who birthed modern science and science exploration across all countries of the world.

    “**************”

    #3.Willingness to have your mind changed:

    –You’ve never seen a stubborn refusal to change when it comes to the more religious believers of darwinism.

    “**************”

    –From Alan,
    a former darwinist who actually was willing to really, truly, consider challenges to his darwinian beliefs…(Are you?)