|
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Thank God for men like Bill Cosby. It is about time that someone told the truth about the fallacy and total irresponsibility and ignorance of political correctness gone viral and the stupidity of the numb-brains foisting it on the majority of intelligent people of the world. - Pastor Max Solbrekken
It is incumbent upon all Born again, Bible believing Christians and Ministers of the Gospel to take a public stand against these apostate and perverted Ministers of the Anglican Church, who are in reality 'wolves in sheep's clothing, sons of Beliel' and enemies of Jesus Christ and His Gospel. It is also incumbent upon the Leaders of the Anglican Communion to remove these hate-filled Monsters from the Church. - Pastor Max Solbrekken
Church Of England's Hostility Towards Jews
A few weeks ago a highly influential Church of England vicar, Stephen Sizer, promoted a website that supports Holocaust denial and warns of a Zionist conspiracy controlling the world. Reverend Sizer just received the support of the Bishop of Guildford Sizer, Reverend Christopher Hill, a former chaplain to the Queen, following calls for him to be suspended for linking to the site.
Sizer used his Facebook page to link to the piece on American website The Ugly Truth, which claims to highlight “Zionism, Jewish extremism and a few other nasty items making our world uninhabitable today.” The site also runs cartoons of Holocaust deniers and supports Iran president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The Bishop of Willesden was suspended in 2010 after using his Facebook page to make inappropriate gossip remarks about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. But in the face of such blatant anti-Jewish hatred, the Church of England took Sizer’s side.
The case is severe because Anglicanism is not just another Protestant denomination; rather, it’s the official UK Church headed by the Queen. Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, is the spiritual head of 77 million Christians worldwide.
The hostility to Israel within the Church is rooted in a dislike for Jews. According to the Jewish Chronicle, “Rav Sizer has a long track record of arguably anti-Semitic behavior.” He has described the IDF as “Herod’s soldiers operating in Bethlehem today” (King Herod ordered his troops to kill all the Jewish babies in and around Bethlehem.)
Sizer promoted boycotts of companies on the basis that they “channel their profits to the Zionist agenda.” Sizer’s book, “Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon?”, which has been endorsed by leading British and American bishops, rejects the eternalness of God’s promises to the Jewish people and revives the obscurantist anti-Jewish theology known as “supersessionism.”
‘Israel an illegal regime’
Sizer’s case is not isolated. In 2006 the UK Church reviewed its investments in companies with ties to Israel’s presence in the territories. Bishop Riah El-Assal, the Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem, is a well-known apologist for Palestinian terrorism. Anglican cleric Naim Ateek is the founder of the notoriously anti-Israel, Jerusalem-based Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Center, which promotes a theology severing any link between God and the Jews.
Sizer is one of the major organizers of the “Christ at the Checkpoint 2012 Conference,” which the Bible College of Bethlehem will host in March. The impressive range of theologians and pastors from churches located in the United States make the gravity of the upcoming conference and Sizer's important position much clearer.
Sizer used his Facebook page to link to the piece on American website The Ugly Truth, which claims to highlight “Zionism, Jewish extremism and a few other nasty items making our world uninhabitable today.” The site also runs cartoons of Holocaust deniers and supports Iran president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The Bishop of Willesden was suspended in 2010 after using his Facebook page to make inappropriate gossip remarks about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. But in the face of such blatant anti-Jewish hatred, the Church of England took Sizer’s side.
The case is severe because Anglicanism is not just another Protestant denomination; rather, it’s the official UK Church headed by the Queen. Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, is the spiritual head of 77 million Christians worldwide.
The hostility to Israel within the Church is rooted in a dislike for Jews. According to the Jewish Chronicle, “Rav Sizer has a long track record of arguably anti-Semitic behavior.” He has described the IDF as “Herod’s soldiers operating in Bethlehem today” (King Herod ordered his troops to kill all the Jewish babies in and around Bethlehem.)
Sizer promoted boycotts of companies on the basis that they “channel their profits to the Zionist agenda.” Sizer’s book, “Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon?”, which has been endorsed by leading British and American bishops, rejects the eternalness of God’s promises to the Jewish people and revives the obscurantist anti-Jewish theology known as “supersessionism.”
‘Israel an illegal regime’
Sizer’s case is not isolated. In 2006 the UK Church reviewed its investments in companies with ties to Israel’s presence in the territories. Bishop Riah El-Assal, the Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem, is a well-known apologist for Palestinian terrorism. Anglican cleric Naim Ateek is the founder of the notoriously anti-Israel, Jerusalem-based Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Center, which promotes a theology severing any link between God and the Jews.
Sizer is one of the major organizers of the “Christ at the Checkpoint 2012 Conference,” which the Bible College of Bethlehem will host in March. The impressive range of theologians and pastors from churches located in the United States make the gravity of the upcoming conference and Sizer's important position much clearer.
Samuel Rodriguez, President of the US National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, “spiritual adviser” to Bill Clinton Tony Campolo, and President of the World Evangelical Alliance and Asia Evangelical Alliance, Sang-Bok David Kim, will all attend the event.
The “Bethlehem Call” manifesto, which serves as platform for the Bethlehem 2012 Conference, has just been published on the websites of the World Council of Churches, the Global Ministries of the United Church of Christ and the Disciples of Christ. It defines Israel as an “illegal regime” and a “crime against humanity” and promotes “international boycott, divestment and sanctions campaigns” against Israel.
In the words of UK columnist Melanie Phillips, these are “Christians who hate the Jews.”
Many UK clerics are now saying openly that the Jewish State should never have been founded at all. In 1190, British Christians slaughtered York's Jews after calling them "serpens antiquus qui vocatur Diabolus et Satans." Now their Intifada from Heaven is breathing new life into a kind of demonology that bans Israel from the family of nations.
The “Bethlehem Call” manifesto, which serves as platform for the Bethlehem 2012 Conference, has just been published on the websites of the World Council of Churches, the Global Ministries of the United Church of Christ and the Disciples of Christ. It defines Israel as an “illegal regime” and a “crime against humanity” and promotes “international boycott, divestment and sanctions campaigns” against Israel.
In the words of UK columnist Melanie Phillips, these are “Christians who hate the Jews.”
Many UK clerics are now saying openly that the Jewish State should never have been founded at all. In 1190, British Christians slaughtered York's Jews after calling them "serpens antiquus qui vocatur Diabolus et Satans." Now their Intifada from Heaven is breathing new life into a kind of demonology that bans Israel from the family of nations.
While the United States & Europe are moving ever nearer to a major Depression and simultaneously sacrificing precious lives and megabucks trying to straighten out Middle Eastern countries which their "peaceful religion of Islam" demands that they are constantly at war killing one another, the Chinese are gaining the upper hand in outer space technology which could cripple the West in years to come. The handwriting is on the Wall and the Coming of the Lord is near. - Pastor Max Solbrekken
DIA Director: China Preparing For Space Warfare
Army Lt. Gen. Ronald L. Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, disclosed new details of China’s space weapons programs last week, including information regarding China’s anti-satellite missiles and cyber warfare capabilities.
Burgess stated in little-noticed written testimony prepared for an appearance before the Senate Armed ServicesCommittee that Beijing is developing missiles, electronic jammers, and lasers for use against satellites.
Much of the space warfare activity is being carried out under the guise of China’s supposedly non-military space program, he said.
“The space program, including ostensible civil projects, supports China’s growing ability to deny or degrade the space assets of potential adversaries and enhances China’s conventional military capabilities,” Burgess said.
“China operates satellites for communications, navigation, earth resources, weather, and intelligence surveillance, and reconnaissance, in addition to manned space and space exploration missions,” he said.
“China’s successfully tested a direct ascent anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) missile and is developing jammers and directed-energy weapons for ASAT missions,” he said. “A prerequisite for ASAT attacks, China’s ability to track and identify satellites is enhanced by technologies from China’s manned and lunar programs as well as technologies and methods developed to detect and track space debris.”
China’s January 2007 anti-satellite missile test involved a modified DF-21 missile that destroyed a Chinese weather satellite. The blast created a debris field in space of some 10,000 pieces of space junk that could damage both manned and unmanned spacecraft.
For the U.S. military, the successful 2007 ASAT test represented a new strategic capability for China. Analysts estimate that with as many as two-dozen ASAT missiles, China could severely disrupt U.S. military operations through attacks on satellites.
Burgess said China rarely admits that its space program has direct military uses and refers to nearly all satellite launches as scientific or civil.
Additionally, Burgess said Chinese state-run enterprises “continue to proliferate space and counter-space related capabilities,” including some with direct military applications.
For example, China’s Beidou global positioning system satellites will be available for regional users this year and globally by 2020, he said.
The satellites will provide foreign militaries with precision targeting capabilities through purchases of Chinese Beidou receivers and services.
The system will provide foreign militaries with “greater redundancy and independence in a conflict scenario that employs space assets,” he said.
The Chinese, as well as the Russians, are also developing space capabilities that interfere with or disable U.S. space-based navigation, communications, and intelligence satellites.
Moreover, North Korea has demonstrated its ability to disrupt U.S. navigational capabilities through Soviet-made electronic jammers placed on vehicles near the North-South demarcation line that, when activated, were able to disrupt U.S. Global Positioning System signals up to 62 miles away.
Burgess stated in little-noticed written testimony prepared for an appearance before the Senate Armed ServicesCommittee that Beijing is developing missiles, electronic jammers, and lasers for use against satellites.
Much of the space warfare activity is being carried out under the guise of China’s supposedly non-military space program, he said.
“The space program, including ostensible civil projects, supports China’s growing ability to deny or degrade the space assets of potential adversaries and enhances China’s conventional military capabilities,” Burgess said.
“China operates satellites for communications, navigation, earth resources, weather, and intelligence surveillance, and reconnaissance, in addition to manned space and space exploration missions,” he said.
“China’s successfully tested a direct ascent anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) missile and is developing jammers and directed-energy weapons for ASAT missions,” he said. “A prerequisite for ASAT attacks, China’s ability to track and identify satellites is enhanced by technologies from China’s manned and lunar programs as well as technologies and methods developed to detect and track space debris.”
China’s January 2007 anti-satellite missile test involved a modified DF-21 missile that destroyed a Chinese weather satellite. The blast created a debris field in space of some 10,000 pieces of space junk that could damage both manned and unmanned spacecraft.
For the U.S. military, the successful 2007 ASAT test represented a new strategic capability for China. Analysts estimate that with as many as two-dozen ASAT missiles, China could severely disrupt U.S. military operations through attacks on satellites.
Burgess said China rarely admits that its space program has direct military uses and refers to nearly all satellite launches as scientific or civil.
Additionally, Burgess said Chinese state-run enterprises “continue to proliferate space and counter-space related capabilities,” including some with direct military applications.
For example, China’s Beidou global positioning system satellites will be available for regional users this year and globally by 2020, he said.
The satellites will provide foreign militaries with precision targeting capabilities through purchases of Chinese Beidou receivers and services.
The system will provide foreign militaries with “greater redundancy and independence in a conflict scenario that employs space assets,” he said.
The Chinese, as well as the Russians, are also developing space capabilities that interfere with or disable U.S. space-based navigation, communications, and intelligence satellites.
Moreover, North Korea has demonstrated its ability to disrupt U.S. navigational capabilities through Soviet-made electronic jammers placed on vehicles near the North-South demarcation line that, when activated, were able to disrupt U.S. Global Positioning System signals up to 62 miles away.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
God created marriage, sanctioned marriage and promoted marriage! He created a man and a woman and joined them together in Holy Matrimony. There was no argument about what marriage was then and there is no argument about what marriage is today. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. Period. Anything else is a three-dollar-bill, an invented and imagined term to fit a selfish, carnal and sinful lifestyle. - Pastor Max Solbrekken
Why Jay Leno’s pro-gay marriage position is flawed
Written on February 25, 2012 by Dennis Marcellino
I’m sure that many of us have fantasized being on TV or radio giving our political views (which I’ve actually been on radio and TV a number of times doing just that).
One such fantasy for me was last night when Bill O’Reilly was a guest on the Jay Leno show and the issue of gay marriage came up because of Rick Santorum’s recent comments.
Jay said that he was for gay marriage because it didn’t affect his marriage. But it actually does affect heterosexual marriages because their kids will now grow up in an environment where, due to the tolerant attitude of society and peer pressure based on gay propaganda TV shows like Smash, Glee and “Will and Grace” and movies like “Brokeback Mountain”, they might see a gay lifestyle as an alternative to facing and resolving the difficult problems that often happen in a heterosexual relationship in this modern world and its flawed morals.
And they could end up dying from AIDS as a result of “experimenting” with homosexuality in a society that says that it’s not only okay, but it is “liberated thinking” and that it’s bad to be “intolerant.”
Obviously nature is saying that it’s NOT okay (via STD’s like AIDS). And God says that it’s not okay in a number of places in the Bible, both in the Old and New Testaments. For example in Leviticus 20:13 “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
And in Romans 1:26-27 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (“In themselves” can either mean experiential or physical through STDs).
In fact the Bible even says that God is the inventor of AIDS and that death is a just punishment for homosexuality. Romans 1:32“Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death” (e.g. AIDS), “they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.” (Here is a condemnation of liberals).
But Jay Leno doesn’t have any kids. So the threat of a gay-okay culture wouldn’t impact him directly. Therefore he feels okay to take the seemingly nice, tolerant position. But that would be a selfish, insensitive position in that it doesn’t care about the kids in our country in general … not to mention the confused adults who might be tempted into the dangerous lifestyle of homosexuality due to perhaps past traumas with the opposite sex or their parents or people in general.
I imagine that if I did share these views on Jay Leno’s show, the audience would have booed me (given their repeated applause when the “tolerant” stance was expressed). But here’s what I would have said to them. “Keep in mind that you are not only booing me, you are booing God and the Bible.
And if the Bible is true – which I prove it to be in my book THE PROOF that God exists and the Bible is true, then you are creating a dangerous situation for yourself and your eternal destiny, as is expressed in 2Thessalonians 2:12, That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.”
Although God is loving and forgiving and “wishes that no one should perish” (2Peter 3:9), the Bible says that He still “hates” sin (Proverbs 6:16-19) and can only be pushed so far before He has an angry reaction. Remember, He wanted to wipe out all of humanity because of its sin (Genesis 6:6, “And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.”) and even came close to doing so with a flood. So in that context it can be seen how intensely He is against sin.
And His anger for the sin of homosexuality was the cause of His destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:1-7,9-13). And it was also the cause of Hurricane Katrina, whose main thrust was steered right into an area that was filled with casinos and an upcoming very large gay pride parade the weekend that the hurricane hit. (I would think that He’s also not happy about Mardi Gras).
Therefore, by this country allowing homosexuality, even to the point of redefining marriage, it puts us all in jeopardy: Matthew 5:45 “He makes His sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust.” Therefore it’s the responsibility of all voters to not vote for any politician who stands for a tolerance of homosexuality or gay marriage.
Byline:
Dennis Marcellino is the author of THE PROOF that God exists and the Bible is true (which can be seen atwww.ConclusiveProofOfGod.com) as well as the political books The Plague Of Liberalism (which can be seen at www.ThePlagueOfLiberalism.com) and THE Solutions (which can be seen atwww.TheOptimumPoliticalSolutions.com
Thank God for U.S. Lawmakers who are standing against the "out of control novices" in the White House who are intent on destroying Christianity in the U.S.A. Focus on the Family reports good news: "Late last week, Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., introduced a bill aiming to protect chaplains and other members of the Armed Services who oppose homosexuality from being targeted for discrimination. It also seeks to keep military property from being used to perform same-sex ceremonies. May God bless America and keep her free! - Pastor Max Solbrekken
Chaplains threatened, retaliated for Religious Views. Hero Congressman Steps Up.
It seems like common sense. Chaplains should be free to express their religious beliefs, and freely teach and counsel against immorality in our military. But after repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," religious liberty of our military chaplains and troops is under attack.
Focus on the Family reports good news: "Late last week, Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan.,introduced a bill aiming to protect chaplains and other members of the Armed Services who oppose homosexuality from being targeted for discrimination. It also seeks to keep military property from being used to perform same-sex ceremonies.
"In part, the Military Religious Freedom Protection Act (HR 3828) reads that 'a service member cannot be denied promotion or other training opportunities for any sincerely held beliefs he has about the appropriate or inappropriate expression of human sexuality.'"Though the First Amendment to the Constitution already protects those rights, Huelskamp said in a press release it’s necessary to shore them up with a law since the repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy.
"Fundamental to the core of this nation is the protection of religious liberty," Huelskamp said. "The Military Religious Freedom Protection Act will ensure that none of our men and women in uniform - including our chaplain corps - is asked to compromise their religious and spiritual beliefs. It will also protect the freedom of those in the military to express vocally the tenets of their faiths. And it will make certain that our military facilities are not used in contravention to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which states that marriage is between one man and one woman only.
[CHAPS COMMENT: Military chapels in all 50 states must now be open to desecration.]
"Military installations exist to carry out the national defense of our nation, not to facilitate a narrow social agenda," said Huelskamp.
"According to the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, the repeal immediately created achilling effect on free speech among the troops and a 'climate of fear' for chaplains who didn’t know what their rights were in the new environment, especially when it came to addressing and speaking about homosexual behavior," FOTF continued.
"In some cases, said Executive Director Ron Crews, chaplains "suffered retaliation, including having their careers threatened, for being 'politically incorrect.'"
Let's petition Congress to support this new bill...
Please select here to sign urgent petition, and we will fax all 535 Congressmen and Senators (saving you time!) to PROTECT MILITARY CHAPLAINS AND TROOPS RELIGIOUS FREEDOM to oppose immorality, and co-sponsor and pass H.R. 3828.
The National Organization of Marriage President Brian Brown wrote:
"Did you see this day coming?
"Who would have thought we needed a federal statute to protect military chaplains-and other servicemen and women-who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman?
"But just months after the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, there is a full-on battle for marriage raging within our nation's armed forces.
"Last April, the Navy issued new 'sensitivity training' guidelines that required Navy chaplains to perform same-sex marriages. Thanks to leadership from Congressmen Tim Huelskamp and Todd Akin, the Navy backed down and rescinded the guidelines.
"In September, the Department of Defense issued two more memos, requiring all military facilities to be available for same-sex weddings and allowing chaplains to participate in same-sex ceremonies.
"Recognizing this growing threat to the religious liberty of our armed forces, Rep. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas last week introduced the Military Religious Freedom Protection Act (H.R. 3828). The bill does three things:
--Protects military chaplains from being forced to participate in any ceremony or function that is against their conscience or religious beliefs.
--Protects our men and women in uniform from being discriminated against because of religious beliefs opposed to same-sex marriage or homosexuality.
--Prohibits the use of military facilities for same-sex marriage ceremonies.
"But President Obama is refusing to do his job as President-picking and choosing which laws are worth enforcing. He refuses to defend DOMA in court and is actively undermining it at every turn. And same-sex marriage activists have been working to leverage the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell to harass and intimidate chaplains and other service members who are standing up for marriage.
"Tell your Congressman we need to protect the religious liberty of our armed forces-just like they put their lives on the line to protect ours. Tell your Congressman to co-sponsor the Military Religious Freedom Protection Act (H.R.3828) today."
[Chaps comment: Folks, we must take a stand for our troops and chaplains. Let's bury all 535 Congressmen and Senators in fax paper today.]
Please select here to sign urgent petition, and we will fax all 535 Congressmen and Senators (saving you time!) to PROTECT MILITARY CHAPLAINS AND TROOPS RELIGIOUS FREEDOM to oppose immorality, and co-sponsor and pass H.R. 3828.
God Bless you, in Jesus' name,
Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt
For media interviews, select here.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
The Bible says, "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away; Behold all things are become new." (2 Cor. 5: 17); "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." (2 Cor. 2:10) Amen.
The High Road T o Victory
By Pastor Max Solbrekken, D.D.
“Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God. He that doeth evil hath not seen God.” (3 John 11)
In this brief pastoral letter, the Apostle John addresses several important issues that affect us in the Church today. It deals with our daily conduct within the Body of Christ and in the community at large! It also tells us that the same problems that we may be facing today were prevalent in A.D. 90.
St. John has been aptly called the ‘Apostle of Love’, but I would name him the ‘Apostle of Tough Love’. Although he was filled with God’s agape love, he knew how to discipline those who turned from the truth! The love he wrote of was grounded and guarded in ‘TRUTH’.
In this general letter he wrote about three men – Gaius, Diotrephes and Demetrius - and how their characters, life-styles and actions either helped or harmed the Church! The Bible states that these things were written for our admonition as well as a warning. (1 Cor.10: 11)
St. John writes: “The elder unto the well beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.” (v.1) The Scripture teaches that Jesus is the truth, and that God’s love is safeguarded by truth! His love for Gaius was anchored in Jesus Christ Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life. (John 14:6; John 1:17; Eph.4: 21)
ALL SCRIPTURE IS INSPIRED OF GOD!
Here is his prayer of blessing for this faithful servant of Jesus Christ: “Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health even as thy soul doth prosper.” (3 John 2)
The Apostle’s desire or wish for Gaius is exactly the same as God’s desire for us. It is the will of God that we prosper in every area of our lives and be healthy, even as soul prospers spiritually!
Since all Scripture is “inspired of God” (2 Tim.3:16; 2 Peter 1:21), therefore we know that God desires the best for His children. The first two blessings, however, are contingent upon how much we allow the Lord to bless us spiritually!
Evidently, Gaius was Apostle John’s son in the faith and was a humble, selfless, devoted, generous servant of God who lived a pious life! It doesn’t appear that Gaius was a gifted preacher, but was a man who was sold out to God and a genuine follower of Christ who was beloved by the church and cared deeply about the saints!
He wrote: “For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee even as thou walkest in the truth. I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.” (3 John 3, 4)
John the Apostle was a great preacher of LOVE but he was even a stronger preacher of TRUTH. In other words, truth trumps love when it is not anchored in truth. True love is honest, truthful and allows no hypocrisy! And God’s agape love is pure, selfless, genuine, unfeigned and unconditional.
After rejoicing with Gaius because of his Christ-life which exuded the Truth of the Gospel and exemplified the Lord Jesus through his loving and caring lifestyle, he commended him for his generosity to itinerant preachers’. He had befriended and embraced them graciously in the Assembly, even reaching out to help strangers - who without visible support - were spreading the Gospel.
This of course, is an example of how we should treat those who preach the Gospel in Spirit and in truth and turn men to Christ, “for His name’s sake”. (3 John 7). Whatever one does in word or deed to exalt the name of Jesus Christ and build His Eternal Kingdom is worthy of our support!
St. John encouraged him to continue helping those who were called of God and by faith had stepped out to share Jesus and His Gospel to those who knew Him not! By doing so he writes: “We become fellow helpers to the Truth.” (3 John 5-8).
JESUS’ GOSPEL BRINGS LIBERTY!
Who is the Truth and what is the Truth? Jesus Himself is the Truth! The Gospel of Eternal Salvation purchased for us through His sacrificial all-atoning death on Calvary’s cross embodies the Truth. (Rev.5:1-14). His glorious resurrection from the dead conquered Satan’s evil kingdom of lies and deception, substantiating Christ’s eternal claim to Truth. (Rom.1: 3, 4).
And our Saviour’s on-going intercession for us as our High Priest at His Father’s right hand verifies His unblemished perfection and righteousness! (Heb.7: 25). Hallelujah to the Lamb of God forever and ever!
Diotrephes was the second man St. John refers to in this epistle. He appears to have been a well known man in a church. He may have been a bishop or a pastor because he had authority to make important decisions.
The Apostle did not have any good words to report about Diotrephes. He was a proud individual who loved to have the preeminence and had even opposed St. John the Apostle. He was jealous and wanted the spotlight on himself only and had refused to help itinerant preachers who had put themselves at great risk, fearlessly preaching Christ’s true Gospel!
He writes: “I wrote unto the church; but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, will remember his deeds, which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doeth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.” (3 John 9, 10)
Then, the great Apostle gives some sound advice: “Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: But he that doeth evil hath not seen God.” (v. 11)
In his great tent crusades, Dr. Oral Roberts often repeated the following slogan: ‘God is a Good God and the devil is a Bad devil. Everything that is good comes from God and everything that is bad comes from the devil. God is a Good God and the devil is a Bad devil.’
TAKE THE HIGH ROAD!
Taking the High Road to Victory demands that we follow Jesus. He said: “Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls, For My yoke is easy, and My burden is light.” (Matt.11:28-30)
Our Lord said: “Whosoever will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.” (Mark 8: 34); “Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Matt.6: 33)
Taking the High Road to Victory is to commit oneself without reservation to follow Jesus Christ and to reject the world, the flesh and the devil. (1 John 2: 15-18). The High Road to Victory is attainable only through “the blood of Lamb and the Word of God in our testimony.” (Rev. 12: 11)
It is “casting all our cares upon Him because He cares for us.” (1 Peter 5: 7) Every obstacle is but an opportunity to demonstrate the love and grace of our blessed Lord Jesus Christ and the awesome overcoming power of His great and glorious Gospel.
The third man St, John referred to in his letter was Demetrius. What a wonderful man he was. He seemed to have been a well known person, probably a gifted preacher with a powerful ministry and a genuinely kind heart and gracious spirit!
He had good report of all men, believers and non believers. His testimony for Jesus Christ was crystal clear, his lifestyle was transparent and godly and his ministry was Biblical and doctrinally sound! St. John could vouch for him without hesitation because Christ was living in him. This old poem carries a powerful message for us today:
‘To every man there openeth
A way and ways and a way
The high soul flies the high way
And the low soul gropes the low
And in between on the misty flats
The rest drift to and fro
But to every man there openeth
Only a high way and a low
And every man must decide
Which way his soul shall go’.
As a young lad in the Evangelical Lutheran Church - when it was still a Bible-based church - we used to sing the beautiful Gospel song: ‘I have decided to follow Jesus. No turning back. No turning back’! Tragically, now some sing: “I have decided to follow the New Agers, Modernists, Hollywood, Homosexual Revolution.”
St. Paul wrote: “Now the just shall live by faith: But if any man DRAW BACK, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them that draw back unto PERDITION; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” (Heb.10:38, 39)
WHAT IT MEANS TO DRAW BACK!
God’s Word states: If you draw back and depart from the Faith of Jesus which St. Paul preached, you will be lost! He declared that, “Jesus Christ gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God our Father.” (Gal.1: 3, 4)
Then he warned: “But though we, or an angel from Heaven, preach any other gospel unto you then that which we have preached, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach ant other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Gal.1: 8, 9)
Writing to Timothy, the Apostle expressed sadness: “For Demas hath forsaken me having loved this present world…At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me; I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge.” (2 Tim.4: 9, 10, 16)
St. Paul warned: “…But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned…And that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim.2: 13-15)
Here is the key for staying on track: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfected, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
“Preach the Word; be instant in season, out of season; reprieve, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth...” (2 Tim.3: 16, 17; 4: 2-4)
LET US HEED PAUL’S WARNING!
May we ever be vigilant and be on guard in order to keep the Gospel of Christ pure! Why is this important? Sexual perverts and Modernists often enroll at Bible Colleges and Seminaries for the express purpose of gaining positions of power so they can influence church denominations into adopting their unbiblical and perverted doctrines!
Unfortunately, this has happened! I remember as a boy hearing sermons denouncing smoking cigarettes, dancing, movie going and drinking alcohol. Now those same churches allow homosexuals to preach from their pulpits! What would St. Paul say? What would Martin Luther say and what would Jesus say?
TAKE THE HIGH ROAD:
GET OUT THE FILTH!
The Bible says: “For when they speak of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness those that for a while escaped from them who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
“For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again tangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
“For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, then, after they had known it, to turn from the Holy commandment delivered unto them.
“But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The Dog is TURNED to his own VOMIT again; and the SOW that was washed to her wallowing in the MIRE.” (2 Peter 2: 18-22)
I’M PRESSING ON THE UPWARD WAY
I’m pressing on the upward way,
New heights I’m gaining every day;
Still praying as I’m onward bound,
“Lord, plant my feet on higher ground.”
New heights I’m gaining every day;
Still praying as I’m onward bound,
“Lord, plant my feet on higher ground.”
Lord, lift me up and let me stand,
By faith, on Heaven’s table land,
A higher plane than I have found;
Lord, plant my feet on higher ground.
My heart has no desire to stayBy faith, on Heaven’s table land,
A higher plane than I have found;
Lord, plant my feet on higher ground.
Where doubts arise and fears dismay;
Though some may dwell where those abound,
My prayer, my aim, is higher ground.
I want to live above the world,
Though Satan’s darts at me are hurled;
For faith has caught the joyful sound,
The song of saints on higher ground.
I want to scale the utmost height
And catch a gleam of glory bright;
But still I’ll pray till Heav’n I’ve found,
Lord, plant my feet on higher ground.
May God keep His Church pure.
In Jesus’ Precious Name! Amen.
In Jesus’ Precious Name! Amen.
Some people are thinking out loud and asking: "Could Putin be the 'Gog' referred to in Ezekiel 38 & 39? Only God knows, however, he does have the earmarks of a ruthless leader who could fill that leadership role, having earlier been the head of the KGB. - Pastor Max Solbrekken
RUSSIA WARNS ISRAEL NOT TO ATTACK IRAN: PROPHETIC IMPLICATIONS?
Joel C. Rosenberg
Joel C. Rosenberg
(Washington, D.C., February 22, 2012) -- Make no mistake: the Russian-Iranian strategic alliance that I've been writing about for the last several years has deepened to the point where Moscow is now unequivocally and quite openly backing the mullahs in Iran.
"Russia warned Israel on Wednesday that attacking Iran would be a disastrous and played down the failure of a U.N. nuclear agency mission to Tehran, saying there is still a chance for new talks over the Iranian atomic programme," reports Reuters.
"'Of course any possible military scenario against Iran will be catastrophic for the region and for the whole system of international relations,' Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov told a news conference. It was one of Russia's starkest warnings against resorting to force, an option Israel and the United States have not ruled out if they conclude that diplomacy and increasing sanctions will not stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."
The big question now is this: Will Vladimir Putin win his bid for become Russia's President again during the March 4 elections, and would Putin then directly threaten Israel with retaliation for an attack on Iran? So far, Russia hasn't gone so far as to threaten a military response, but it's not out of the question.
The latest poll shows Putin in a commanding lead to regain the presidency, with 58.6% support, compared to Gennady Zyuganov, the head of the Communist Party, who has 14.8% support.
And Putin in recent years seems itching to rebuild the Russian military (something he promised again just this week; he's called for a $770 billion upgrade of Russia's military), strengthen his alliances throughout the Islamic world, and give the West a black eye. He's explicitly running his campaign on anti-Americanism, for example.
He's close to the Iranians. He's defending the Bashar al-Assad, the butcher in Damascus. He's growing closer to the Turks, as they become hostile to Israel. Putin hasn't directly threatened Israel, but he's backing all of Israel's worst enemies and could find himself drawn into a war to prove his alpha-dog machismo.
The Russians are back and aggressively pursuing a leadership role and joining with Iran and Turkey against Israel and the West. Is this a prelude to the arms build-up necessary for the fulfillment of the Ezekiel 38 & 39 prophecy of the Gog & Magog War? - Pastor Max Solbrekken
Putin: Russia Needs Stronger Military
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has backed the modernisation of his country's military, less than a fortnight before the presidential vote.
"We must not tempt anyone with our weakness," he wrote in a newspaper. Mr Putin is widely expected to win the 4 March election and demonstrations have taken place both against and in support of his likely return to power.
President Dmitry Medvedev was meeting opposition movement leaders on Monday in an attempt to calm the protests. It was the first such meeting at the Kremlin since Mr Putin's United Russia party won December parliamentary elections that have been overshadowed by allegations of widespread vote-rigging.
President Dmitry Medvedev was meeting opposition movement leaders on Monday in an attempt to calm the protests. It was the first such meeting at the Kremlin since Mr Putin's United Russia party won December parliamentary elections that have been overshadowed by allegations of widespread vote-rigging.
Although no information was given by the Kremlin, a leading figure in the opposition movement, Sergei Udaltsov, wrote on his Twitter feed that they would discuss political reform and demands for meetings about fair elections.
The meeting came after opposition activists were reportedly involved in a scuffle with pro-Putin supporters outside the Moscow mayor's office on Monday morning, as both sides attempted to file applications for rallies on 5 March, the day after the vote.
Hundreds of motorists drove around the Kremlin on Sunday flying white ribbons and balloons - symbols of the protest movement. A separate rally took place on Saturday in support of Mr Putin.
In his article published on Monday by state newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta, the leading presidential candidate said Russia was planning to spend 23tn rubles (£487bn; $772bn) over the next decade on 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles and more than 600 warplanes as well as nuclear submarines and S-400 missile defence systems.
Mr Putin said Russia would never give away its potential of strategic deterrence and had to look ahead to the next 30-50 years. Moscow would provide an "effective and asymmetrical" response to Nato's planned missile defence shield in Europe, he said.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Only Jesus Christ, Sovereign Lord & Liberator of the Human Race, knows the end from the beginning. He alone knows when the hammer of God's judgment will fall upon a pagan world that hates His people Israel and has rejected His Son Who died on the cross to redeem us all. His glorious resurrection from the dead defeated Satan and his evil powers. Jesus Christ alone is Saviour, Healer, Deliverer, King of kings and Lord of lords and will soon return to rapture His blood - bought Church and sit in judgment against all liars, thieves, false prophets, terrorists, murderers and Christ haters. - Pastor Max Solbrekken
Israel and Iran: What Might History Tell Us?
Much of the world seems riveted by the question of whether Israel will attack Iran in order to destroy or at least delay its development of a nuclear weapon. This contingency is seen in Israel as an existential threat as articulated in one form or another by Iran's leadership including a reference to Israel as a “cancerous tumor” made by the Supreme Leader on February 3, 2012.
The November 2011 report of the International Atomic Energy Agency removes the last shred of doubt with respect to the intentions of Iran towards its nuclear program. This, in turn, has mobilized the European Union to elevate its sanctions regime to include a boycott of Iranian oil. The United States has also been strengthening its sanctions regime with the addition of these steps taken against Iran's economy.
As a sovereign nation, it is Israel's decision to think about what steps it must take to defend itself against a nuclear Iran – a danger viewed by many as a grave threat to the Arab world, Europe, the United States, and most of the world.
Examining Israel's history seems to lead in opposite directions as to how we can expect Israel to respond to the existential threat posed by a nuclear Iran. (Keeping in mind the dangers of comparing historical scenarios disparate in time, country, technology and subsequent history.)
In 1967, Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser precipitated a crisis with Israel and created a casus belli by closing the international Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, which was an economic lifeline for Israel. This siege was an act of war accompanied by not-so-subtle radio speeches proclaiming the “liberation of Palestine” and other threats hurled against Israel.
(Earlier in the 1960s, Egypt had worked to develop missiles capable striking Israel, which Israel obstructed by assassinating the former Nazi scientists directing the program.)
For two months, Israel sought every possible international intervention to prevent war in the context of President Johnson's cryptic formulation that “Israel would not be alone unless it went it alone.” Indeed, then Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin noted: “I wanted it to be recorded for history that before acting, we did everything we could to find a diplomatic solution.” Israel's forbearance in the face of the extreme provocation ended with the realization that no other country would assist Israel in the lifting of the siege.
Israel's preemptive attack on Egypt soon followed on June 5, 1967, and the Six Day War with Israel's great victories over Egypt, Syria and Jordan changed the map of the modern Middle East, but sadly did not bring about the peace and recognition by its Arab neighbors that Israel has always sought. For the authoritative history of the Six Day War, I highly recommend Ambassador Michael Oren’s Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East.
The Yom Kippur War of October, 1973 cast Israel in a much different position as it awoke to the near certainty of a surprise attack on two fronts from Egypt and Syria. The Six Day War left Israel dangerously over confident towards the military capability of the Arab world despite its massive rearming by the Soviet Union and the casualties suffered by Israel during the War of Attrition in 1970 with Egypt.
Israel's intelligence services completely discounted the possibility of war even as the preparations for an Egyptian Suez canal crossing and the mobilization of the Syrian army could scarcely be hidden. (Indeed, Jordan's King Hussein traveled secretly to Israel to warn of the impending attack.) Only 24 hours before the attack, when Israel's top agents in London were provided information from an individual impeccably sourced, did Israeli intelligence admit the obvious.
Unlike 1967, though, Israel did not launch a pre-emptive strike but rather absorbed the first blow with the confidence it could repel the two-front invasion while gaining the political high ground by having not responded until attacked. This decision nearly proved fatal.
After suffering heavy losses, Israel eventually regained its military equilibrium only with the assistance of a massive American arms airlift. After many bloody battles, Israel expelled the Syrians from the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon and moved even closer to Damascus. Meanwhile, the Israelis conducted their own cross Suez Canal operation and trapped the Egyptian Third Army while gaining a bridgehead in Egypt proper.
Golda Meir's political judgment not to launch a preemptive attack may have been militarily disadvantageous, but was a successful turning point in terms of Israel's relationship with the United States. President Nixon launched a cascade of C-130s transporting to Israel much needed supplies. Secretary of State Kissinger brilliantly recognized the possibility for direct Egyptian-Israeli talks to disentangle Israeli and Egyptian forces with the Israelis positioned on the west side of the canal and Egyptian forces positioned on the east side of the canal.
Kissinger was shocked when President Sadat readily acceded to direct Egyptian-Israeli military negotiations to address the consequences of the war, which included the fate of an Egyptian army. Drawing a line between the end of conflict negotiations to Sadat's trip to Jerusalem and the ultimate trade of Sinai for peace – albeit a cold one – by a conservative Israeli prime minister is a historically valid progression of events. As collateral benefit, the United States was able to wean Egypt away from its alliance with the Soviet Union.
Abraham Rabinovich's outstanding book on the Yom Kippur War, The Yom Kippur War: The Epic Encounter That Transformed the Middle East, provides a riveting account of another war which changed the topography of the Middle East.
His afterward contains a rumination of Israel's great air combat victories and destruction of Syrian SAM missile batteries in the Beqaa Valley – learning the lessons of the Yom Kippur War – laying the groundwork for the dissolution of the Soviet Union as its client states lost faith in Soviet military support.
Moving forward in the generation's time since the Yom Kippur War, Israel has shown little tolerance for allowing nuclear weapons programs in Arab countries to proceed once discovered. The Israel Air Force destroyed the Osirak reactor in Iraq in 1981 – provoking condemnation around the world which was of no great shock – and a Syrian site of a nuclear reactor in 2007.
Moving forward to the present crisis with Iran, time will soon tell if Israel elects to follow the course it did in 1967, or in 1981 and 2007 for that matter, and strike first in self-defense, or whether Israel will pursue the diplomatically advantageous, but militarily perilous course it followed in 1973 of allowing a sworn enemy to gain the upper hand before responding to ensure the survival of the Jewish State.
The November 2011 report of the International Atomic Energy Agency removes the last shred of doubt with respect to the intentions of Iran towards its nuclear program. This, in turn, has mobilized the European Union to elevate its sanctions regime to include a boycott of Iranian oil. The United States has also been strengthening its sanctions regime with the addition of these steps taken against Iran's economy.
As a sovereign nation, it is Israel's decision to think about what steps it must take to defend itself against a nuclear Iran – a danger viewed by many as a grave threat to the Arab world, Europe, the United States, and most of the world.
Examining Israel's history seems to lead in opposite directions as to how we can expect Israel to respond to the existential threat posed by a nuclear Iran. (Keeping in mind the dangers of comparing historical scenarios disparate in time, country, technology and subsequent history.)
In 1967, Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser precipitated a crisis with Israel and created a casus belli by closing the international Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, which was an economic lifeline for Israel. This siege was an act of war accompanied by not-so-subtle radio speeches proclaiming the “liberation of Palestine” and other threats hurled against Israel.
(Earlier in the 1960s, Egypt had worked to develop missiles capable striking Israel, which Israel obstructed by assassinating the former Nazi scientists directing the program.)
For two months, Israel sought every possible international intervention to prevent war in the context of President Johnson's cryptic formulation that “Israel would not be alone unless it went it alone.” Indeed, then Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin noted: “I wanted it to be recorded for history that before acting, we did everything we could to find a diplomatic solution.” Israel's forbearance in the face of the extreme provocation ended with the realization that no other country would assist Israel in the lifting of the siege.
Israel's preemptive attack on Egypt soon followed on June 5, 1967, and the Six Day War with Israel's great victories over Egypt, Syria and Jordan changed the map of the modern Middle East, but sadly did not bring about the peace and recognition by its Arab neighbors that Israel has always sought. For the authoritative history of the Six Day War, I highly recommend Ambassador Michael Oren’s Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East.
The Yom Kippur War of October, 1973 cast Israel in a much different position as it awoke to the near certainty of a surprise attack on two fronts from Egypt and Syria. The Six Day War left Israel dangerously over confident towards the military capability of the Arab world despite its massive rearming by the Soviet Union and the casualties suffered by Israel during the War of Attrition in 1970 with Egypt.
Israel's intelligence services completely discounted the possibility of war even as the preparations for an Egyptian Suez canal crossing and the mobilization of the Syrian army could scarcely be hidden. (Indeed, Jordan's King Hussein traveled secretly to Israel to warn of the impending attack.) Only 24 hours before the attack, when Israel's top agents in London were provided information from an individual impeccably sourced, did Israeli intelligence admit the obvious.
Unlike 1967, though, Israel did not launch a pre-emptive strike but rather absorbed the first blow with the confidence it could repel the two-front invasion while gaining the political high ground by having not responded until attacked. This decision nearly proved fatal.
After suffering heavy losses, Israel eventually regained its military equilibrium only with the assistance of a massive American arms airlift. After many bloody battles, Israel expelled the Syrians from the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon and moved even closer to Damascus. Meanwhile, the Israelis conducted their own cross Suez Canal operation and trapped the Egyptian Third Army while gaining a bridgehead in Egypt proper.
Golda Meir's political judgment not to launch a preemptive attack may have been militarily disadvantageous, but was a successful turning point in terms of Israel's relationship with the United States. President Nixon launched a cascade of C-130s transporting to Israel much needed supplies. Secretary of State Kissinger brilliantly recognized the possibility for direct Egyptian-Israeli talks to disentangle Israeli and Egyptian forces with the Israelis positioned on the west side of the canal and Egyptian forces positioned on the east side of the canal.
Kissinger was shocked when President Sadat readily acceded to direct Egyptian-Israeli military negotiations to address the consequences of the war, which included the fate of an Egyptian army. Drawing a line between the end of conflict negotiations to Sadat's trip to Jerusalem and the ultimate trade of Sinai for peace – albeit a cold one – by a conservative Israeli prime minister is a historically valid progression of events. As collateral benefit, the United States was able to wean Egypt away from its alliance with the Soviet Union.
Abraham Rabinovich's outstanding book on the Yom Kippur War, The Yom Kippur War: The Epic Encounter That Transformed the Middle East, provides a riveting account of another war which changed the topography of the Middle East.
His afterward contains a rumination of Israel's great air combat victories and destruction of Syrian SAM missile batteries in the Beqaa Valley – learning the lessons of the Yom Kippur War – laying the groundwork for the dissolution of the Soviet Union as its client states lost faith in Soviet military support.
Moving forward in the generation's time since the Yom Kippur War, Israel has shown little tolerance for allowing nuclear weapons programs in Arab countries to proceed once discovered. The Israel Air Force destroyed the Osirak reactor in Iraq in 1981 – provoking condemnation around the world which was of no great shock – and a Syrian site of a nuclear reactor in 2007.
Moving forward to the present crisis with Iran, time will soon tell if Israel elects to follow the course it did in 1967, or in 1981 and 2007 for that matter, and strike first in self-defense, or whether Israel will pursue the diplomatically advantageous, but militarily perilous course it followed in 1973 of allowing a sworn enemy to gain the upper hand before responding to ensure the survival of the Jewish State.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)