Beware of disdain for Bible truth

Open letter to an author at https://www.lewrockwell.com..

I have written you before about mistaken perceptions about Christian Bible believers. Most self-described evangelicals are stupidly dupes of the state, what else is new? Jesus said long before you were born that the “children of this generation are wiser than the children of light”. They are some of them. Characters like Rothbard, Walter Block, Laurence Vance, Norman Horn, Chuck Baldwin, these are only representative of tens, probably hundreds of thousands, of Christians, maybe even millions, who are banned from conservative and liberal (government-permitted) media as non-persons, along with ex-homosexuals, abortion survivors, and you yourself. Yes, and opponents of “green socialism”.

First thing is to stop thinking they’re any more monochrome as atheists and agnostics, who run the entire gamut (just like Christians, and even evangelicals as such), from total totalitarians to die-hard complete anarchists (such as myself, Jesus Christ, and God himself). Although statistically atheists, agnostics and unbelievers tend MUCH more heavily toward the totalitarian side than Christians. As such outstanding atheists and agnostics as Rothbard and Walter Block and Herman Hoppe have acknowledged. (Although some superstitious pagan religions and most anti-Christian religious regimes in history show similar tendencies).

Second – The tendency to include little swipes like the out-of-context mention of Mike Pence, Adam and Eve, and Noah’s Ark shows a weakness toward intellectual hubris shared by many non-libertarian atheists and so-called skeptics.

REMINDER: Isaac Newton (who wrote more about Christianity and prophecy than science and math), Michael Faraday, Francis Bacon, Blaise Pascal, these also “believe[d] in Adam and Eve and Noah’s Ark”. So does Russell Humphrey, a scientist with a significant number of patents in very large-scale electro-magnetic mechanics, who accurately predicted the measurements of the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune (based on GENESIS ONE), confirmed by the Voyager II fly-by, to the shame of NASA scientists who were exponentially wrong, wrong, wrong. NASA learned then not to make a prediction about Mercury, but Humphrey’s was vindicated again.

Romanian creationist Nicolae C. Paulescu announced the discovery of insulin in 1921. The two Canadians who got the Nobel Prize for the discovery later apologized to Paulescu for misunderstanding his paper on the subject due to their faulty French. The Nobel Committee has never apologized for this slight or other blacklisting of creationists.

Creationist Raymond Damadian discovered the principles of MRI scanning.

Creationists ridiculed the idea of non-functional “vestigial organs” and “vestigial DNA” the very instant the terms were publicized.

Creationists from decades before the political academic elites theorized that variations within species in reaction to environmental conditions were managed by natural mechanisms within the genome itself. Not in a neo-Lamarckian sense, as Stephen Gould wrote about, but adaptations were built-in, part of the design. Note also that Stephen Gould said that gradual evolution as understood at that time, was not reflected at all in the fossil record. Instead of accepting that the fossils were a proof against Darwinism, he originated the “punctuated equilibrium” theory: spurts so fast they left no evidence. I call it the first “science” theory that is based on the lack of evidence for it. This is

The Bible anticipated DNA: “Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.” – Psalm 139:16

There is a description of the effect of an atomic bomb, even a “neutron bomb”, in Zecariah 14:12: ”
And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.”

This is the foreknowledge of prophecy.

Austrian economics is anticipated by Biblical economics, which adds some spiritual truths on top of it. Statism of ALL forms is condemned outright by scripture, notwithstanding the bloviations of both atheists and Christians against this fact based on narrow-colored glasses, and “we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth”.

Day the Towers Fell: Unanswered Questions

—What of the “five dancing Israelis” that same day that were barely a flash in the pan in the news cycle, and the dozens (hundreds?) of Israelis that were deported in the following days?
—Who shorted the airlines involved in the four hijackings and made big money?
—Why was every aircraft in the entire country grounded immediately, including military aircraft, while the bin Laden family took off in the hours following?
—Why did we never see a photo of the aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon, but we all saw the photos of the building and the hole in the building without the remains of the aircraft?
—What happened to the investigation into the billions of dollars of Pentagon budget not accounted for, after the papers were destroyed in the Pentagon hit in that section of the building?
—Why are NONE of the multitude of security videos in that area ever available? Did every one of them have top secret evidence? If so then why was that secret evidence in plain view enough for an open-air video to capture it in the first place?
—How, and when, did major CIA asset Osama bin Laden become Enemy of the State Number One?

–Why do freedom-loving Americans buy into the fraud that State Security would protect them, and protect their freedoms, while it was assaulting those freedoms in their face?

–The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good. –Proverbs 15:3

 

Maybe Babylon is as a symbol of “false worship” in seminary textbooks and in many old Christian writings, but the Bible itself, indeed The Revelation of Jesus Christ (as given to John) overrules. 

In Rev. 17 and 18 you can find the interpretation of who the Whore of Babylon actually is, “that great city”, and it says “wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness”. 

The Vatican is a sucking parasite and does not make anybody rich. This Babylon does. And in her is the blood of all that were slain upon the earth. 

That’s a good description of a “great city” that enriches kings all around the planet with its dollars and its foreign spending, and moves merchandise trade around the earth with the international medium of exchange (the dollar) and its multinational monsters. 

The woman sitteth upon the seven kings, “five are fallen”, as described in Daniel, that is, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. “One is” would be Rome. “One is yet to come”, that would be the last superpower on Earth before the time of the Beast, as described in Rev. 17 because who else? The Roman Catholic Church is not so powerful, hah, somebody just engineered a coup d’etat to finally install the Jesuit socialist in power at the Vatican. 

The most fitting entity for Rev. 17 today is either Washington D. C. or New York, but most likely the latter because of so much talk of trade and merchandise. And it sits on the seventh mountain, the seventh world kingdom, and that would be the United States of America.  

The Jesuit is ‘preparing the flock” to be sheared and butchered by the Beast, so he could be the False Prophet of Rev. 13. 

Get ready, to be ready, to meet your maker, after the November elections and the inauguration it is going to be a wild, wild, ride. The enemies of the “everyday man” are now saying it is time for “the elites to rise up against the masses”. Maybe when Trump said “the gloves are off”, he was talking about those “elites”  themselves.

Why did Americans accept “modern” substitutes for their (KJ) BIbles?

I am a “product” of the Jesus movement, and my father was a Pentecostal pastor, associated by some people with the rise of the Pentecostal movement, and I once briefly worked with Charismatic-associated missionary organization.

All of that has nothing to do with a more “accessible” Bible.

The KJB never lost “accessibility”. American Christians only began to accept substitutes in the post-WWII years. “Acceptance” got more traction in England earlier, surely due to their nobility-class oriented culture, or the push in clerical circles for it earlier on, and more centralization of clerical authority. And the ascendance of man’s wisdom over God’s wisdom with the quicker takeover of Darwin’s revived ancient pagan myth, dressed up in “modern language”.

There was also the decay in the faith of pastors educated in the seminaries, which became hotbeds for deviation from the faith of the fathers. Questioning miracles, Creation, and so on, and the heavy drumbeat in the media that youngsters were getting their news from, like a run of about a decade I remember that Time Magazine always put the Jesus Seminar foolishness on their front cover. Add to that the commands from wickedness in high places to expunge God from education and from city squares. Young people in my generation were indoctrinated with doubt and godlessness.

I was part of that Jesus’ people movement in fact for many years. I used the KJB without a good understanding of why except that it was obviously “stronger” language.

Believers did NOT have a problem with it in the 1950s, and even them most scholars, including in Divinity School with lots of alphabet titles after their names, would have said that the average KING JAMES Bible reader was of less scholarly education than readers of “modern” translations.

Madonna’s openly gay brother defends Kim Davis’ rights

The new thoughtcrime regime drew a line in the sand. Two thirds of Kentucky’s voters recently passed a constitutional amendment to incorporate into law what has been understood for marriage licenses for since there were any marriage licenses. Marriage a union of man and woman according to the understanding of the Framers at the time, as one of those “self-evident” truths they referred to in the Declaration of Independence.

At this next URL, an atheist defends Kim Davis:

http://christophercantwell.com/2015/09/05/the-religious-persecution-of-kim-davis/#more-6877

And here’s a report on Madonna’s openly gay brother defending Kim Davis and blasting the militant gays for their “sore winning”:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/madonna-openly-gay-brother-defends-ky-clerk-kim-davis-article-1.2350959

I agree with Chris Cantrell above, this is all about control. Centralizing government command-and-control obedience. Punishing thoughtcrime. They’re showing their hand with this. They had to use something to consolidate the Gramschi strategy for socialist tyranny.

(See this link for an explanation of the Gramsci strategy: http://www.wnd.com/2000/09/103/.)

See 2 Samuel 15 and Daniel 11 for examples of the strategies used by socialists today,  one by an ancient power-hungry operator and another a prophecy of the times we are living in.

 

Does God punish the innocent for the sins of others?

I suggest a new perspective on the passage used by a webmaster at the link http://www.religioustolerance.org/sin_trans.htm:

“Yes, God can personally take an active role in transferring punishment among generations from the guilty to the innocent:

…for which you quoted:  “Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them (idols), nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

My comment to the writer follows here (comments are not accepted at the web pages there).

Spiritually speaking, especially after the universally expiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross for the sins of the world for all those who believe in him, I do not know of any Christian theology or Christian teacher that says that the sins of the unbeliever can be laid at the feet of another. Jesus is THE Sacrificial Lamb, period.

As to consequences in the world, the quoted scripture is best understood in its context. The very next verse shows that it is not set in stone, so to speak:

“And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” – Exodus 20:6

It is also best to take this in the context of even the laws of Moses it’s in. I doubt you know how much it’s mentioned, your tolerance theme does not seem to reach into much Biblical scholarship. Many pastors may not have satisfactory answers, but that’s true about many, many things, in some groups more than others.

Rahab, Ruth, Naaman, even Abraham himself were raised in wicked cultures and renounced the sins of their pagan upbringing, so Exodus 20:5 cannot mean that there is an inescapable scapegoating of the children in the sense implied by your quote. It’s illogical for one who believes the Bible, whether they see it or not, no matter.

The passage is true, though, in this physical world, as a general spiritual truth as good as gravity. The children suffer for the sins of the parents and grandparents, as a natural consequence. Those raised in a culture that practices child sacrifice is more likely to follow suit. Those raised by abusive parents are more likely to have problems that affect children and grandchildren. We now have fourth generation welfare babies who are suffering for the sins of the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration. We have even great-grandchildren suffering for the sins of the evil American Congress of 1913, who inflict us to this day with the evil oppressions of the Federal Reserve Bank so-called, fiat currency, and the income tax, and the sins of our own antecedents that accepted this.

The God of the Bible is a God of love and of perfect justice.

“And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” – Exodus 20:6

It is also best to take this in the context of even the laws of Moses it’s in. I doubt you know how much it’s mentioned, your tolerance theme does not seem to reach into much Biblical scholarship. Many pastors may not have satisfactory answers, but that’s true about many, many things, in some groups more than others.
Rahab, Ruth, Naaman, even Abraham himself were raised in wicked cultures and renounced the sins of their pagan upbringing, so Exodus 20:5 cannot mean that there is an inescapable scapegoating of the children in the sense implied by your quote. It’s illogical for one who believes the Bible, whether they see it or not, no matter.

Copernicus, the Printing Press and the Reformation

Some secular writers need some  education on the realities of history. As we can see in looking around us, neither good nor bad “religion” suffered at all from Copernicus’ theory, and neither did God, any more than it did from the pagan mass murders of the Roman emperors, or at the hand of the atheist and secular mass murderers of the Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, or Maoist regimes.

They even admit that at first the Pope himself was pleased to learn from Copernicus. Then came the secular “science” lobby with its emotional attachment to their own clinging to Aristotle instead of Ptolemy, and they found a way to convince the Church Establishment that their pet paradigm was scriptural and the Church itself was in peril if it did not accept the established “consensus” view of science”, their take on it.

After all, the geocentric view was taken from one of the secular/pagan Greek traditions, not the Biblical. We have the same problem today.

False “Religion” took a blow because it cowed to the secular lobby then, until new generations took to the new paradigm. This happened as well with Mendelssohn’s inheritance experiments with plants, until Darwin’s ideas were “safe” enough to let it hit the presses.

And then the howls of pain at the very idea that the universe had a beginning like the Bible said, earning this discovery the atheist pejorative of “The Big Bang”.

The process of liberation from the religious and secular leaders began NOT with Copernicus but the process began more with the printing press, which made it easier to spread ideas, and made Bible reading available to many times as many people. Therefore, while John Huss had been burned at the stake for his Bible-believing heresy, the ideas of freedom that the Bible itself had spread lit the fire in Martin Luther’s bosom and inspired his friends in nobility to hide him from the oppressor.

And while a lot of Christian kings including King James himself believed in a false doctrine of “divine right of kings”, what the Bible itself teaches is that ungodly and unrighteous kings don’t have any such “right” at all. It is a testament to the man himself and to the King James Bible that the translation that is known by his name today rings a death knell for any “divine right” of anybody to rule over anybody else.

In fact it is very clear that God himself was very angry with the Israeli elders when they demanded a king at all to rule over them. People who want kings (or rulers, or even representatives) to rule over them are declaring that they do not want God to rule their lives.

Jesus wisely replied to his enemies, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”,  meaning render NOTHING unto him that you are not forced to do under threat of violence. Jesus’ lesson the apostles at the end of Matthew 17 makes clear that kings and conquerors are thieves by definition. “We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.”

 

IRS and Feds engaging in more prosecutorial criminality

Here’s another case of federal and IRS prosecutorial criminality.

He’s a creationist who is well-known among Christians who are interested in the topic. He was, in the opinion of m many, the most effective creationist speaker. His invitations to speak were many, he had years scheduled in advance. They sold the videos in DVDs but made clear that permission was granted to copy them, as long as they were given away, and they were download-able on the Internet.

The IRS put him away for 10 years claiming “structuring”. Structuring is when somebody follows the law but somebody at the IRS decides you’re trying to avoid the reporting requirements. They got the structuring laws passed by claiming it was a “tool” to go after drug traffickers.

There were other bogus charges and then the first thing the judge did after a request from prosecution was to ban the defense strategy. There were all kinds of things they also threw at him.

He had been denounced by a jealous Christian school director in the same town of Pensacola.

I just discovered that as the end of his sentence draws near, they have created more bogus charges to keep him in prison. The judge presiding –note this!– has banned all taking of notes, and has banned everyone from having a Bible open in the courtroom. I am not making this up.

Outside the courtroom after one session:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgaZFQrKBn4

Kent Hovind’s blog: http://www.kenthovindblog.com

https://www.facebook.com/drkenthovind

http://ytmp.blogspot.com

Forbes is reporting on it:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2014/10/29/government-coming-down-harder-on-kent-hovind/

Christians, libertarians, gay marriage, who wants big government?

I am a very vocal Bible-believing Christian, and I got to tell you, that Christian libertarians are now in very great numbers, and the numbers are growing by leaps and bounds, as they realize that it is this approach to society that is the only view that anyone can say with certainty that God actually endorsed.

We have no king but JESUS!

Like God told Samuel, when the people demanded a government, a king, “They have rejected ME!” Because they didn’t want GOD to rule over them.

And Samuel warned them with the same warnings conservatives used to repeat in this country: The king will take your sons off to war, he will take your daughters off to his palaces to cook their delights, he will build his palaces with the burdensome taxes that will be to your grief. Needless to say, God’s warnings against government were validated with only the third king in Israel, because Solomon did all these things when he strayed from God’s wisdom. The result was a divided kingdom after his passing.

Even then, they said they wanted it because Samuel’s children were corrupt, after he appointed them judges, meaning they also wanted a king to protect them from abuse by their neighbors. BUT that means they themselves were already so corrupt they could not see that there was no obligation to follow those corrupt appointees. The laws of Moses are very clear, and there is NOT ONE reference or mention to ANY kind of government there. That’s how the custom of judges arose, they were spontaneous callings of God to the farmers like Gideon who raised armies to expel invaders who did impose kingships on them. Then they beat their swords back into plows and farmed again. And sometimes the people went to those judges to mediate disputes and for guidance later on….

In fact, the laws of Moses not only makes no provision for government of any kind, except the individual’s governing of himself and what is his, the Ten Commandments condemn it explicitly.

If somebody takes your property without your explicit permission, that’s THEFT. That’s why taxation is pure THEFT. THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

Romans 13 was very specific and the reasons given for respecting secular authority was contextual and conditional. The Romans actually kept the high priests in check, and God anointed them to both protect the Messiah from the persecutors and to expand the early reach and the future of the Gospel.

The “libertarians” that promote government intervention in things like marriage are just as clueless as Christians who look to government instead of God for a marriage certificate!

Remember the presidential debates, when they asked the question about “gay marriage”, the born-again Baptist who said EVERYTHING he did was from his Christian faith, Ron Paul, said the government should get out of it and leave it to churches like it was before. And the not-so-Christian Gary Johnson actually said the same thing!

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. Ask yourself: what in the entire world did Caesar have that did not come from conquering by THEFT and spoils of the wars of lust that James spoke of?

Matthew 17 tells you what Jesus thought of tribute to Caesar.

He said we pay taxes so as not to offend them, in other words, so they’ll leave us alone.

Atheism is irrational

The insanitybytes blog at: https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/on-being-crazy/ inspired this response…

Many an anti-creationist posting on Christian blogs is just a troll.
He’s just ranting and accusing others of ranting.
He’s condescending and sneers that you’re condescending. He ridicules, and just makes a caricature of himself.
His whole rant is ad hominem, and he thinks it makes him smart to accuse somebody else of ad hominem.
He uses an Egyptian-sounding moniker, thinking this makes him some kind of spiritually superior, but it only labels himself as a snob.

His ravings turn his accusations of lunacy upon himself and corroborate this blog.
The most loudmouth anti-creationist scientists go into panic mode when they contemplate debating a real live Creationist scientist. Even with an audience full of people who have been indoctrinated in the materialist (null) explanation of Origins through twelve and even sixteen years, while subjected to the same indoctrination in “news” reports, movies, anti-Christian lawsuits, they still go into panic mode and warn their colleagues against trying it. I saw the memo in the book “Science and Creationism”, in which the editor and compiler of these anti-creationist essays admits having been resoundingly humiliated in such a debate. In order to bolster his darwinian fantasies, he asked a bunch of people for their essays.

In those essays, a biochemist in the book fantasized how a few linkups among a few amino acid molecules “proved” abiogenesis. Harvard recently got a million-dollar grant to study how abiogenesis could have happened.

Meantime, anti-creationists run with panic from the issue, saying it’s not part of evolution. Read on ahead when you can stop laughing.

Asimov made his points against a creationist argument that creationists would never use with an unbeliever, and avoided the science.

Stephen Jay Gould came right out and said explicitly that science has to believe some things that are not provable using the scientific method.

One guy from UC Berkeley couldn’t refrain from proudly using the label “pagan”. A haughty spirit goeth before a fall.

Just shows: The mouth of a fool poureth out foolishness.