The Dunamis Word

Persons Or Manifestations? "neither one of them totally get it for me" ~ Bishop T.D. Jakes

2012-01-27T12:22:00.002-06:00

Recently (1/25/2012) at an event named "The Elephant Room" a round table discussion was moderated by Mark Driscoll and James MacDonald in which Bishop T.D. Jakes was put on the spot regarding his proposed belief in modalism aka" oneness doctrine.

I have featured posts on modalism on this blog. Sabellianism, as it was initially known, was a third century teaching deemed a heresy by the early church. The concept, rooted in a method of interpretation of certain biblical passages, affirms that there is only one God, but claims that the one God's name is Jesus and that Jesus simply changes role from Father to the Son and from Son to Holy Ghost. Sabellianism holds that Jesus merely "manifests" himself as the Father, and as the Holy Ghost. In contrast, trinitarian believers hold that based on the biblical description, that there is only one God who eternally exists as three persons. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. Trinitarians affirm an eternal distinction of the personal identity of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost based on mind, will, intellect, self-awareness and not merely based on role or actions.

Semantics

In essence, it seems that Jakes, although affirming a quasi- trinitarian position, and stating that his understanding has taken him beyond modalism, suggests that the teaching and doctrinal debate between oneness and trinitarian believers is more a matter of semantics than anything else.

"Here is why I am there. I am not crazy about the word 'persons' ... most people who know me know that ... my doctrinal statement is really no different from yours except for the word 'manifest' instead of 'person,' which you describe as modalist and I describe as Pauline,"

Reducing the conversation to an issue of semantics seems to be the aim of many, especially among the modern mega-ministry elite. Not long ago Bishop Noel Jones woefully attempted to find this middle ground also calimg that neither "manifestations" nor "persons" was an adequate description and that he had adopted the terminology "revelatory expressions". While making statements to the contrary, Jones remains oneness in his theology even if his oneness belief is not a traditional description of such. It seems that the effort is on to make changes to the words and descriptions to make oneness doctrine more palatable to the average believer. At the end of the day Jones, like Jakes, also appears to suggest that the entire argument is one of semantics, rather than substance of scripture.

Clarifying 1 Timothy 3:16

During the discussion Bishop Jakes pointed to 1 Timothy 3:16 to make his case as to why he wasn't comfortable using the word "persons" when it came to describing God. The verse is as follows:

1 Timothy 3:16 ~ "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

The Bishop stated the following as his reason for liking "manifestation" as opposed to "persons":

"That is what Paul describes as a 'mystery' and I don't think we should do that,"..."Now, Paul is not a modalist, but he does not think it is robbery to the divinity of God to say God was 'manifest' in the flesh," ~ Bishop T.D. Jakes

Since the Bishop offered this as a basis for his belief that the word "person" is possibly inappropriate, we should ask, does his view represent what the verse teaches? I don't believe it does for the following reasons the second of which I will elaborate upon:

1- God being "manifest in the flesh" does not suggest that the line of ontology or being has been crossed. However, without the need to argue that point, the greater problem is what I assert in #2

2- The verse does not in any way teach that the "mystery of godliness" is limited to God being manifested in the flesh. Paul is pointing to the message of the gospel and the whole process by which God has offered salvation to the world. Paul, in this verse uses a technique that we find common among biblical writers called anabasis and enumeration. Anabasis, literally meaning a military march upward, is a technique that implores the description of an ascending scale with increasing emphasis. In this case the "mystery of godliness" includes all of the the following elements which Paul enumerates:

God was manifest in the flesh

Justified in the Spirit

Seen of angels

preached unto the gentiles (Christ & his message)

Believed on in the world

received up into glory

Thus the whole process, which is the basis of the gospel, from incarnation to ascension, is called a mystery aka "the mystery of godliness". The mystery is not solely that God was manifested in the flesh and neither is that the emphasis of Paul's declaration. He is not teaching a "mode" of god's existence but rather a method of God's actions among mankind.

From One Confusion To The Next

The problem with the Bishop's statements is in how far he goes in delivering his contrast. He says this:

"When we start talking about that sort of thing, I think that it is important that we realize that there are distinctives between the Father and the working of the Son: the Father didn't bleed, the Father didn't die, only in the person of Jesus Christ, coming back for us in the person of Jesus Christ ... Jesus Christ has been with us, but only indwelt in the person of the Holy Spirit. We are baptized into the Body of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. That is consistent with my belief system." ~ Bishop T.D. Jakes (emphasis added)

Now, whether it is a relic of his past or not, the Bishop yet describes the distinction between the Father and the Son as a matter of role or mode of operation and not that of being or ontology. He describes the distinction between the Father and the Son as a matter of their works or their actions using the phrase "working of" to emphasize the varying roles between both.

That is NOT fully a biblical description. The Bishop's description goes one step further separating the Father so far from the Son based on distinctive works until the question arises what or who actually died upon the cross? At the same time, he suggests that "the person" of Jesus Christ, who shall return for us is distinct from being God. For sure God cannot die, but the moment we ask and distinguish between the work of Jesus and the works of the Father in salvation we fall into trouble. That is the essence of modalism.

Jesus said that the works he did were not those done of himself, (Jn. 8:28, Jn. 10:25) but they were his Father's works which he was accomplishing. It all began with a subjugation of will and not role or operation (works) Jesus consistently asserted that his will (distinguishing him as a person) was to do the will (distinguishing the Father as a person) of the Father. (this is identity) The scripture accords:

John 4:54 ~ "Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work."

In addition Jesus didn't do anything that he was not to do as his will was subject to the Father's

John 5:30 ~ "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."

Conclusion:

I understand that many of today's ministers feel that their mission is to not alienate folk, but to draw them all in. That is a commendable attitude born out of the desire to see all men blessed and saved. However, the problem exists is that if we have to create a different image of God other than what is described within the writ of holy texts what have we really done and what do we really believe?

The scripture is clear. The nature of God and the being of Jesus was not to be confused with or lowered down to the status of man and mankind. Trying to make God be something that he is not is not what we are supposed to do and very well could have eternal consequences. Do we or are we required to understand it all? Certainly by no means NO! Some things we can only apprehend even if we don't fully comprehend. Alas, that is the nature of the God that we serve, certainly beyond our full comprehension. In those cases all we can say is simply YES!

Romans 11:33 ~ "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!"

Blessed!

Source: The Christian Post

States Rights, The U.S. Constitution & The 2012 Presidential Election

2012-01-26T00:15:00.017-06:00

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The 10th Amendment Of The United States Constitution

ratified 12/15/1791 In Virginia

I find it interesting how various individuals interpret the United States Constitution. For some, with certain experiences, the interpretation of the document falls along a certain line of reasoning. For others with other experiences, the interpretation falls along another line of reasoning. This difference is never marked more so than when it comes to the the rights of the States vs the rights of the Federal Government.

As some reason, the States are always under the control of the Federal Government. Others affirm that the States are free to implement laws independent of the Federal Government and in some cases even in violation of Federal mandates. Two such arguments that have reared their head and will have serious implications toward the 2012 Presidential election are the cases of health care and immigration.

The United States Supreme Court has undertaken both issues. The "individual mandate provision" of health care reform will either cause the legislation to sink or swim, or possibly open the door for states to administer their own brand of health care reform. What is at steak here is the apparent requirement of all citizens of the United States to be required to have health insurance. This could violate the Constitutional rights of everyone making health insurance a requirements for citizenship.

Ariz. Governor Jan Brewer scolding President Barack Obama 1/25/2012

Then on to immigration. The government recently sued Arizona claiming that portions of it's state approved immigration law was in violation of federal law and ultimately unconstitutional. This sparked outrage from Arizona's Republican Governor, Jan Brewer, causing her to state the following:

“I was stunned at the audacity of the Obama administration to file suit against an individual state seeking to safeguard its people,”...“That shock turned to outrage as the federal government proceeded to file suit against three more states — South Carolina, Alabama and now Utah — that followed Arizona’s lead.”

~ Before I go further, I'm STUNNED that a Governor would have the AUDACITY to front a sitting President in front of a nation and look as STUPID and RIDICULOUS as she did. I am APPALLED at Jan Brewer's disregard for the office of the President of The United States regardless of what she claims to the contrary. I am certain that never in a million years would she have acted in such an unstatesman like manner toward a white President. This is UTTERLY RIDICULOUS and she should be ashamed and her actions decried by ALL leading political officials including Senator John McCain who should take the lead.~

SORRY, BACK TO MY TOPIC

Federal judges have now struck down portions of state immigration laws in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Utah and South Carolina. But not all rulings have favored immigrants’ rights groups. In Alabama, a federal judge upheld the majority of the state law.

States that have implemented their own processes do so claiming state sovereignty and that sovereignty is usually rooted in the interpretation of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The 10th Amendment is the last Amendment under the section of the Constitution known as The Bill Of Rights

This understanding directly impacts issues regarding the implementation of Civil Rights and in many cases human rights.

The 2012 Election & Issues Of Race

Newt Gingrich

Needless to say that when Newt Gingrich shows up there will always be implications of race and racism. Why, because he is a republican vocal on issues of race from the south. Notions such as these are at an all time high because a black President is currently in office. The conservative "right" has defined the Obama Presidency as one of emergent socialism and one of big government. The liberal "left" has focused on "fairness" which was a word repeated in the recent Presidential State Of The Union, and a level playing field whereby the government is empowered to enact on the behalf of the people.

In a recent article Rev. Jesse Jackson stated the following:

Rev. Jesse Jackson

"Gingrich endorsed Texas Gov. Perry's focus on the 10th Amendment, promising to return power to the states and local governments. States' rights is the doctrine of the Confederacy, of the Fort Sumter party, not the Boston Tea Party. This doctrine was invoked in defense of slavery, of secession and of segregation." ~ [The Huffington Post Black Voices, 'Gingrich Plays Old South Race Card of a Bygone Era' 1/24/2012]

The problem seems to be that even if the States believe that the 10th Amendment applies to them and that they can make certain laws, many civil rights advocates such as Jackson, believe that is trumped by the by the Supremacy Clause found in Article VI section 2 of the US Constitution. The Supremacy Clause is as follows:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Gov. George Wallace

Note that the Supremacy Clause only applies if the federal government is acting in pursuit of its constitutionally authorized powers, as noted by the phrase "in pursuance thereof" So here is the problem in a nutshell...We have some who believe that the States should have the right to implement their own laws and that government should be silent on issues where states rights or involved. On the other hand, individuals believe that the federal government has been extended the authorization to implement certain laws and supports that supersede states rights. It would seem in public debate on the issues that those who are looking for greater federal governmental regulation are demonized as socialists and quasi-communists, while those who are looking toward the expansion of States rights, desiring less federal governmental involvement are demonized as racist. We need not commemorate the name Governor George Wallace of Alabama who opposed desegregation saying "Segregation now! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation forever!" then later, "States' rights now! States' rights tomorrow! States' rights forever!" Thus the term "states rights" became synonymous with individuals who affirm racism. Are these arguments true in either case currently or in this era? That much is arguable but we should be informed as to why the seeming "knee-jerk" reaction to certain words and statements from certain people and individuals.

Was Dr. Jackson right about his assessment of the historical use of the 10th Amendment?

President John F. Kennedy

Yes he was. He was correct that during the Jim Crow and Civil rights era in which States rights was used as a political issue to perpetuate segregation and support racism. States held, and continued to hold even against federal regulation, that segregation in education should remain law,claiming that the 10th Amendment combined with the 14th Amendment guaranteed that States rights superseded governmental regulations and controls. The 14th Amendment of The United States Constitution known as the "Equal Protection Clause" said the following:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." ~14th Amendment Clause 1 ratified 7/9/1868

When Plessey v Ferguson of 1896 was overruled by Brown vs. The Board Of Education of 1954 it was determined that the doctrine of "separate" was unconstitutional and that the 14th Amendment had been violated by the prior ruling. It took the imposition of Federal regulations and law to override state opposition which up until that point had been rooted in states rights, bypassing provisions contained within both the 14th and 15th Amendments. This would lead to The Civil Rights Act of 1964, signed into law by the late President Lyndon B. Johnson, which was called for by the late President John F. Kennedy in his address to the nation June 11th 1963.This legislation and an overturn of states rights would cost President Kennedy, Dr. Martin Luther King, Medgar Evers and a host of other civil rights leaders their lives.

President L. B. Johnson present with Dr. ML King Jr.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964

Conclusion:

It would seem that a Black President has presented many issues to Americans which were not previously issues. Yes he is liberal, but we have had liberal Presidents before. I wonder if any of these things would be issues if the nation's economic outlook was more favorable at this point? I wonder if the nation had not been involved in wars, which were inherited, or a financial depression, which was also inherited, would we be seeing a different response from those who are currently advocating States rights?

I certainly believe in a smaller government, but not at the expense of the people. Unfortunately, history tells us what a state will do to it's people without being checked by the federal government. That's just a reality supported by historical facts and I don't see any reason to believe that if left unchecked, they will do any better now.

Does that make me a socialist or a communist...BY NO MEANS NO!!! I am the best distributor of any my earnings and I don't want the government intruding into my affairs any more than they have to, but it seems that they have to far too often. I believe that Christ is the only answer and hope for this nation. We have crossed some bridges that we simply will not cross again. Maybe we should stop hoping for that trek backwards and make what we have to deal with right now, much better than it currently is.

Blessed!

Additional Sources:

The New York Times 12/12/2011: "Court To Weight Arizona On State Immigration"

The New York Times 1/19/2012: "Immigration and Emigration"

Pulpit Whores

2012-01-20T00:00:00.003-06:00

1 Samuel 2:22-25 ~ 22-Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. 23-And he said unto them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil dealings by all this people. 24-Nay, my sons; for it is no good report that I hear: ye make the LORD'S people to transgress. 25-If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them.

Pulpit Rapist Whore
We Know Who U R

As Christian bloggers we routinely receive information from various individuals. Recently, I met an individual in another internet forum that delivered information stating that she had been raped by one of the nations more visible ministers ie: a widely known "leader". For now, he and his name are unimportant and I won't focus on that. Initially, I didn't believe it nor did I believe her and wasn't too nice. She had to prove her case to get my respect and she did prove it, by certain means that I will also go without noting in this story. Even though I advocate for victims and victims rights, I know that the internet if filled with libelous statements, character bashing and just plain old false representations of people claiming many things about other persons when they get upset for whatever reason. So my "third degree" was not wasted, neither was it misdirected. Trust me on that one.

Unfortunately, in modern times, one can never really know a persons motivations for anything. I mean look at it, I have endeavored to tell the truth with evidence, and featured various of those that I have called pimps, charlatans and false teachers on this site and in response some of them have lied, trumped up issues and continued to make a mockery of themselves in effort to win the minds of people. Some, from what I've come to understand, don't care one bit about living a holy lifestyle. they never were really saved. They simply use the church and salvation as a means to their materialistic ends. For them all things are about image, image management and making "mo-money". Resistance to exposing charlatans, and confusion over the nature of God's love and justice abounds. Many of the same charlatans are the ones confusing the people how to balance love and justice and it always comes out in their favor. Criticism is leveled many times toward those who would engage the internet, a post modern culture, and a back-slidden Christian church. One can expect to hear almost anything almost anytime.

With all of that said, there are people who have been hurt and simply don't know what to do or who to turn to, so they express their hurts, pains and frustrations the best way they can and to whomever they can. It's for those real victims that I render this article to let them know that they are not alone and that there is help and healing at the end of the day. To all those that have suffered sexual abuse, and who have been the victims of these seducing charlatans whom I have chosen to call "pulpit whores", (and I use the word "whore", and not "pimp", because what I will describe is nothing less than whoreish) you need to know that you don't have to be a lifetime victim. You can take steps to liberate yourself, with the help of the Lord, and there are plenty of people who will accept and receive you and do their best to help you heal. For the whores, there is redemption also, as we will discover at the end of the article. You too can be free from this bondage that doesn't let you rest at night and that drives you to drugs, drinking and erratic behavior.

Reach Out!

If one happens to reach out to me, I have four rules that must be followed, 1- Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, even if it is to your own hurt. You may have done some things to contribute to the problem, but don't run away from your part or responsibility in the matter. 2-Whatever statements or accusations that are made should be supported by the appropriate evidence. If you are not willing to produce such evidence then you are not willing to be free. 3- Once a plan of action has been established, follow through on it exactly as I have laid it out without deviation. I won't allow anyone to undermine my assistance or reputation. And 4- Don't over-spiritualize criminal activity and have no remorse in bringing a criminal to justice. In many cases of abuse and misuse, there is a sort of "abuser loyalty" that victims experience. This is called "The Stockholm Syndrome" and can be a very powerful psychological issue. Religion seems to make this worse in the hands of the wrong councilors. I'll throw in 5, Don't speak to everyone, only speak to those who challenge you to the next level and support you with scriptural direction and sound and reliable actions. Remember this:

Silence & Inaction Is The Only Reason That Pulpit Whores & Rapists Continue Perpetuate Their Sins

Whores Want What They See

Pulpit Whores Have Their Eyes On What Belongs To God. The whores to which I am referencing in this post are those who look over the church or gatherings where believers congregate, to see what and whom they can find to entertain themselves sexually, emotionally, financially and in whatever manner they deem necessary. Whores will spot you out no matter what you are wearing. Clothing is of no significance. Dresses could be down to the floor or above the knee. Blouse necklines could be low or high. Jeans could fit tightly or loose. It doesn't really matter, because foolishness and lust is bound in their hearts and although they make you feel as if you are responsible for their attention and lust, the truth is that they are drawn away by what's in them. There is no real reason why they do what they do except for reasons of self satisfaction and a deep down need for self worship.

Don't for a minute think that whoreish actions are relegated to men seeing women. They are not. there are many undercover pulpit whore homosexuals that are spotting out young men and other men to fulfill their lust and their fantasies. Some of these men look and act like men and deny that they are homosexuals, but they get sexual satisfaction from other men and male counterparts. They live life, as we say, on the DL (Down Low)

The marching of the Saints can be especially problematic. One particular whore watches women place their offerings into the bucket. This one observed a woman evidently fantasizing in his mind. As a side note: some women like the attention, and if that pleases you, you need to take responsibility for your part, but that's no excuse for the actions of a pulpit whore. In this case, after service, the whore made a bee-line to deliver a "word" to his prey. He even left the building so that he could have a conversation and make a covert special invitation for her to come to his hotel room. At the end of the day, the Lord didn't say anything more than he had said on the inside of the building, because what the whore doesn't realize is that he doesn't speak or regard the word of the Lord. In fact it was the devil himself speaking at that point. This particular whore was married but as we also know, commitments don't matter to whores.

Pulpit Self Exalted Whore
We Know Who U R

James 1:14 ~ But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

Some Whores Have Special Status

To these whores, degrees and titles are a part of the stigma, attraction and the overall seduction. Emphasis on these things seduces the minds of their victims producing stigmas and demands placement into a special class or category, almost like a snake charmer charms a King Cobra. This is a "god class" individual who appears to be larger than life, without moral wrong even when moral wrong is obviously seen. It is thought that he (the whore) knows more, is more and becomes more than all those around him. In reality the titles make up for the poor performance, and accolades from unknowing and duped crowds make up for spiritual and sexual impotence and incontinence.

As stated, some whores are single and some whores are married. Some whores like men and some like women. Some of them have babies and revealed lovers outside of their marriage, and dare the church or anyone else to do or say anything to them. One infamous whore demanded his church to accept both the the young girlfriend, (made slut by her own allowance) and the bastard child he fathered. He simply told the church to shut up talking about it, and of course, the old mind manipulation message "we all have sinned"...What is AMAZING is that even in modern times, mind bending works. He yet maintains his offerings, his church and salary and the membership that still attends the church, claim that they are praying for the "direction of the Lord"...As if God somehow and for some reason approves of sin. What is this? It is apostasy, seduction and total deception.

Whores Speak In An Unredeemed Fashion

Matt. 12:34 ~ O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

Whores need attention and they will do everything and almost anything to get it. Like ravenous animals that travel and hunt in packs, when a pulpit whore confronts you in public with his friends in a licentious and lascivious manner, you can best believe that his friends are just as savage as he is if not worse. Their talk is an unredeemed talk...It's "man"...this and "man"...that and "Nigga"...this and "Nigga"...that...If you're not careful and you catch them at a bad time, the whores will cuss you out making you wonder what bible they ever read. There is very little or no Christ language except when the whore is in the pulpit supposedly delivering "heavenly council" or when they are around persons that they are reasonably sure really are saved. Another characteristic is that there are always big boisterous words. Adjective and descriptive on top of adjective and descriptive. There are misdirected philosophical conundrums and this is done in effort to seduce adherents into believing that they just stepped out of the throne-room of heaven. This adds to their "God like" and exalted persona.

1 Peter 1:14-16 ~ 14-As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: 15-But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; 16-Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

Whorish Demands & Hotel Whores

There seems to be a rather consistent flow of information regarding road ho's. It seems that when traveling on the "mission", some of these whores request and demand sex and fill their hotels with immorality. Not only are there drugs in some cases but if they are alone, they seem to need a consort. Believe one thing that they need to inculcate their environments with others deemed to be weak and just as carnal as themselves. Although I'm not trying to make a blanket statement or create a litmus test, various whores seem to do similar things. I received information that one undercover homosexual pulpit whore would arrange for his boyfriend to have a room in his hotel during certain conventions. Of course no one would notice, because he was a man respected and people didn't thank that he would have another man. Certainly it would be a woman. Whores have no boundary or conscience.

Pulpit Alcoholic Whore
We Know Who U R

Is There A Little Black Book?

When they travel from region to region its usually with a list of phone numbers of ready, willing and eager individuals to serve their needs. Sometimes it's by the gift of a phone number or even a key to the hotel room directed to a willing participant, who thinks that they have somehow struck gold. Whores need people that are willing to meet their need for worship and self gratification. In essence, they expect to find other whores in the church willing to bow down at the altar of self accepting their proclivity to sin. Some people are seduced by what they initially thought was a safe, and pure love and affection. Still others are willing participants, having their minds manipulated into thinking that their mission is to service the sexual and intimate needs of these pulpit whores. Other have further been seduced by the bright lights and hopes and expectation of what could be and how they could be seen as a result of being with these whores. In other words, it is a deception sparred by fantasy.

I'll Do This...But I Won't Do That

Some pulpit whores don't have normal physical sexual intercourse. For them it's about control. Some of them will do and gravitate towards the absurdly weird. Some just like to watch, some are just overtaken by their fetishes, which may stem from more looming psychological problems. Many of these type of pulpit whores have hours of unaccounted for time (because that's how every addiction manifests itself at some point) some have late night dinners with strangers, some even drink wine and hard liquor, because they are either alcoholics or borderline alcoholics. Some get sloppy drunk and think it goes without notice. Pulpit whores take certain liberties with their consorts which are normally reserved for the benefit and commitment of marriage. They don't seem to care what the word says because they have established their own set of beliefs.

Their beliefs equivalently make them the "alpha male", the leader of the pack. As the self proclaimed purveyors of God's kingdom, they claim to see "what's going on in the body" (The body of Christ aka: the church on earth) as if God has made them among the chief leaders of all servants of Christ, and interacts with them before interacting with anyone else. They certainly feel as if they are the most privileged to have what they want and have it when they want it. Houses (mini-mansions), jets, expensive cars and nice clothes are a standard part of their vocation. Many rationalize that their sufferings, when they were trying to live right, (if they ever did) gives them the right to access excess and even sin whenever they want to. In their world God owes them the opportunity to serve themselves in exchange for faithfulness to his mission. Their message always centers around "sow into what I have done" and "the world will open to you if you obey me".

Whores Out Of Control

A particular person recounted the pulpit whore that addressed her, got drunk one day before the service, preached while drunk, and at a certain point after the service even passed out. The people of God clamored around thinking that he was "in the Spirit" but he was actually in a drunken stupor. The people viewing this put off his incoherence as some high and mighty rambling, as he had done all that he could to drown the smell of alcohol on his breath so that the average believer would have no clue. This is the condition of the modern church. However, there is a biblical report that this has happened before. There are two priests that didn't live to tell the story:

Leviticus 10:1-3 ~ "1-And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. 2-And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.

3-Then Moses said unto Aaron, This is it that the LORD spake, saying, I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified. And Aaron held his peace.

History accounts that Nadab and Abihu were also the drunken sons of Aaron. They tried to mix the profane or that which was not ordained of God, with the holy. What makes these modern pulpit whores think that they will fare any better? it is simply and purely by the grace of the Lord that we are not consumed.

Psychology & Clergy Sexual Sins

Pulpit Undercover Homosexual Whore
We Know Who U R

Clergy sexual sins are bad enough, but there is an additional level of problems with clergy rape or conspiracy to abuse. The problem with rape and pastoral sexual abuse is that it is devastatingly mind-twisting. As stated victims often suffer from Stockholm Syndrome and feel that there is a level of loyalty to their abusers. The damage done by these whores is paralyzing and incapacitating both mentally, emotionally and physically. This sort of sexual aggression can cause people to snap or simply loose their minds or revert to altered states of mind creating personalities best suited to deal with the issue. It is a drive into schizophrenia and multiple personalities that on one hand speak the right things and repeat chiche's, but on the other hand has no understanding of the true nature and power of God.

The danger is that no two people handle things quite the same. Where one may simply revert to being withdrawn, another may become an extrovert. Where some may become sexually repressed, others may become sexually promiscuous and perverse.

The damage of the pulpit whore has never been more evident than it is within the modern day church. Under these whores and at their direction, the modern church has created a set of individuals who struggle with gender identity, and other sexually perverse and morally impure individuals.What these whores need to know is that sin has a cost and they will pay for what they have caused and created.

The Remedy For All Pulpit Whores

No matter the size of the church or the scope of "ministry" turned whoredom, there is an answer for the ailment of all Pulpit Whores. It is called repentance!

2 Chron. 7:14 ~ If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Repentance and turning from one's evil ways will cause the Lord to change in how he intends to deal with the actions and sins of the pulpit whore. The damage has been done and there is no escaping the consequence and what has been taken must be restored. However, there is nothing greater and nothing more restorative than the power of God.

As simple as it may seem, the unrepentant pulpit whore would rather fake and pretend their way to hell, rather than humble themselves under the mighty hand of God through repentance. The seduced followers cannot possibly reconcile how they have been duped and the whore can't take a chance that the illusion, once revealed, will not cause the benefits to cease. This is the same selfishness that led the pulpit whore into his current condition. Ladies have been raped. Sons and daughters have been turned out and we are left with the fallout from the whorish ways of those who have no regard for God or for his ways.

For some that would repent, and we hope that there are many, there are issues of acceptance. Shame comes with repentance. Sometimes that shame is overwhelming. What must it be like for a minister to realize that he has played the whore and lived contrary to what he has taught almost every week of the year? He has taught against homosexuality, while he has met his homosexual lover in hotels and dark alleys away from the congregation? He has taught against adultery, while he has engaged in the very act and taken his love and attention away from his family and his God. For them that realize this, there can be nothing but shame. But yet there is hope:

Psalms 51:17 ~ "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise."

God will not despise them that turn to him in sincerity and true repentance. The commitment that must be made is the commitment to not do the same things that led to the situation or that gave it life. Evil must die and self must die so that Christ can live in you!

I have taken the time to speak in an unusual format in this post. I have named no names. but one thing is for sure, if I or we don't know who you are, God certainly does and you do to. You know what you need to do. Now get the courage and do it, because you don't want to be left with your work undone.

Blessed!

Detroit Funeral Directors ~ "Enough Is Enough, I Do Not Want To See Young People Destroy Themselves Like This"

2012-01-19T14:36:00.000-06:00

Cantrell Funeral Home at 10400 Mack Ave. handled the arrangements of the last funeral that I did in Detroit wonderfully. Prior to that I conducted a funeral At Swanson's Funeral Home, who also did a wonderful job and who's leader is featured in the video.

All of the Directors I've met are some great people. All of them are saying that they don't want the type of business they have been receiving lately. Coming off a year in which there were 344 homicides there has been 19 murders in the last 17 days. Sons are dying senselessly when there is yet so much to live for. These directors are taking a stand in their community. The question is will the church also take a stand? Without Christ we can do nothing.

Special thanks to a reader and poster FM

The New Civil Rights ~ "You're Not Black If You Don't Support Obama"

2012-01-16T12:00:00.002-06:00

As we arrive at the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday season, commemorating the struggle for civil rights and freedom from racial oppression, I want to deal with the sentiment that seems to be arising within the black community. It seems that a new thought has arisen that says that if a black person does not endorse President Obama, or if he/she critically assesses him or what he has delivered during this Presidency, that they themselves are less faithful to the black community and in many cases not really black.

Blacks Rejecting Other Blacks With Various Opinions

Although I have been observing this phenomena for a while, recently, in my community, Tavis Smiley was rejected from being a featured speaker at the annual MLK Jr. Luncheon by a group of women calling themselves the Colored Ladies Book Club. This group, consisting of what would be considered successful, black women, many of them wives of successful black men, many of whom assume the civil rights leadership position as it pertains to the local black community. The Colored Ladies Book Club threatened to "boycott" the event because they had a problem with the criticisms that Tavis regularly levels towards President Obama and his actions during his presidency in relationship to the needs of the black community. In response to the abrupt end to his invitation to motivate the Peoria black community, Tavis said this:

“I don’t see my role as one of criticizing the president. I see my role as one of holding the president – this and every other president accountable,”...“Something is wrong with this country…that so often the political right, and I am no defender of the political right…gets accused of playing the game of political correctness. What this underscores is that those on the left, the Democrats can play that game of political correctness as well,” ~ Tavis Smiley

My thoughts and insights into the situation and a review of what I believe is the error of the Book Club, can be found on the Peoria Pastors Blog.

Revelation

What this sparked were thoughts towards what the black community has done to itself in light of a this black President. As I have written before, it seems that prior to this President's election, I had never seen so many relationships broken. I have seen preachers get mad and angry at one another and vow to never speak to one another again over the issue of Obama and what he means or doesn't mean to the black community and the nation. At the same time I have seen people who pay blind allegiance to everything that President Obama does simply because he's black. He is certainly a polarizing figure.

It is the thought of blind allegiance among those who assume the lead in the fight for civil rights in this new post civil rights era that I find very dangerous. Their sentiments of "follow, don't criticize and shut up or you're not one of us" are the same type of sentiments that gave Hitler control over a nation of people and almost the world. Those type of sentiments gave Jim Jones the ability to destroy the lives of countless thousands individuals. It has been reported that many people wanted and tried to stop Hitler, and many who wanted to stop Jones, but all opposition failed because there were people willing to spot out others who may have said things that criticized the Fuehrer or their favorite religious leader, calling them, the critic, into question and public embarrassment. In case of Hitler's critics, many of them were placed in death camps because of words that didn't express complete and utter support for the leader. It seems that the new civil rights is centered around what and who a person assess or evaluates and is tempered by a political and social correctness designed to limit or impede what a person says towards certain political figures or arrangements.

The "Black Based" Presidential Campaign

It is no secret that prior to his 2008 election, President Obama came to the black church providing promises of making history and creating a better plateau of hope for all people. He was at all major conventions and church gatherings speaking and shaking hands. He has continued to seduce organizations by sending video congratulations for their meetings and letters of excellence and support for programs. At the same time he has instituted more anti-biblical policies than has ever been seen coming from the Executive Branch of the government, even stating that "obscure portions of scripture" shouldn't be used to deny rights to millions of "loving Americans" (ie: homosexuals), So beginning at the church, the black community has been used and targeted clearly for the core support of Obama and even more so toward the upcoming election process.

The thought is that if you are black and you don't support Obama, you're not really black and you're not really in touch with what black people want. If you don't agree with this President's policies, you're either a hateful conservative or a republican or an out of touch democrat. The sentiment is that, "after all, all he's tried to do is give health care to countless uninsured, rescue the country from the Bush financial recession, and provide a plain landscape whereby we all can experience equality" But is any of that true or to what extent is any of it true, and even if it is all true, is it the position of any advocate of civil rights to not hold leadership accountable for their actions and policies based on the color of their skin, ethnicity or race???

The Non-Criticism Myth of the New Civil Rights Movement

First to disagree with the President is not disagreeing with God! President Obama has represented one train of though that exists within the black community, not a total summary of thought that represent blacks. President Obama's views are boarder-line radical left wing views. For example, as our President has displayed, he believes in governmental control and intervention in the affairs of our lives and that monetary policy has no room for the disproportionately wealthy who have gained that wealth by means of work, employment opportunities or entrepreneurship. Many of the new civil rights leaders have been seduced into this same train of thought not considering that such sentiments are much more close to sentiments of communism than towards sentiments of capitalism and freedom. Prohibiting and redistributing wealth and robbing the wealthy are all signs of socialism, the vehicle upon which communism is built, plain and simple.

The seduction of the argument is where do the poor fit in this equation? It may sound like, taking from the wealthy and giving to the poor is the answer, but there are better solutions. The solution of equipping the poor to be wealthy is a much better answer to the problem. However, the new civil rights movement, can't seem to grasp that one because, quite naturally not everyone can become equipped because of individual ability. The next best step, according to them, is to do what Obama espouses, put a break or limits on the success of others through law and governmental control and penalty through taxation.

Beyond that there is social policy that leaves much to be desired. President Obama has spent significant time developing a social policy that includes the promotion of homosexual marital rights and "equality" while paying very little attention to the needs of people at the baseline of the political and social process. His moves are in direct opposition to the held values of the core of his base which begins in the black church. It is interesting that the church would rather remain silent on issues such as these rather than holding the political leader accountable in light of his wooing of the masses in their own churches.

Finally, It can be proven that the black community has been most severely negatively effected under the Obama Presidency. In almost every category of unemployment, poverty and crime, blacks have suffered severely under this Presidency. Some can assert that if he hadn't been President, it may have been worse for the black community, which is an argument that may have some truth to it, however the fact exists that black are suffering in most categories at twice the rate of whites in this same economy and most proponents of civil rights think the best way to address the issue is through silent criticism (which is no criticism at all) and public support based on skin color, which is a reversion of civil rights itself.

Conclusion

Now, does criticizing the President in any of this make a person less black? Last I looked in the mirror, I was just as black today as I was yesterday. In fact, because I tend to get darker with age, I'm at least a little more dark today than I was yesterday.

To criticize the President whether black or white has no bearing on a person's commitment to their community. In fact if a person is committed to their community and the betterment of all people they have no other choice but to examine ways that all governmental and political leaders should be and can be better. It would seem to me that the TRUE spirit of civil rights and the civil rights movement is rooted in actions such as these and visibly holding political officials accountable for their actions and policies.

President Obama says that the best way to commemorate Dr. King is to commit ones's self to service of their community through volunteerism. I believe the best way to commemorate Dr. King, is to find solutions to the problems that exist and create a plan of attack to address the problems at all levels within the community. The former civil rights generation was attacked for taking the idea of a new consciousness to the streets and placing their actions where their mouth was against the politically correct positions of the times. It seems that this new civil rights generation, have made the mistake of basing their allegiance to individuals based on skin color have violated the fundamental tenet of civil rights, which is the valuation of character and morality.

Regardless of what one may think about the theology of Dr. King, I can appreciate his dedication and commitment towards the improvement of circumstances and the equality of all people. I believe that this new civil rights generation lacks the conviction that was the staple of the success of the old.

Blessed!

Current Criticism That Black Elites Don't Think Should Be Made 2011

Assessment Of The Obama Nomination Speech 2008

In The Defense Of Marriage

2012-01-13T21:19:00.004-06:00

American Catholics Call All To Defend Marriage And Reject Notions Of Bigotry

In a Jan 12th, 2011 release, the American Conference Of Catholic Bishops released a statement calling on all Christians and all people to defend the traditional views of marriage as being between one man and one woman as well as reject the notion commonly promoted by the homosexual extremists that those who oppose gay marriage are bigoted. Outlining the problem as being beyond the Catholic Church and its agenda, the latter part of the statement said:

"For example, in New Jersey, the state cancelled the tax-exempt status of a Methodist-run boardwalk pavilion used for religious services because the religious organization would not host a same-sex "wedding" there. San Francisco dropped its $3.5 million in social service contracts with the Salvation Army because it refused to recognize same-sex "domestic partnerships" in its employee benefits policies.Similarly, Portland, Maine, required Catholic Charities to extend spousal employee benefits to same-sex "domestic partners" as a condition of receiving city housing and community development funds.

In short, the refusal of these religious organizations to treat a same-sex sexual relationship as if it were a marriage marked them and their members as bigots, subjecting them to the full arsenal of government punishments and pressures reserved for racists. These punishments will only grow more frequent and more severe if civil "marriage" is redefined in additional jurisdictions. For then, government will compel special recognition of relationships that we the undersigned religious leaders and the communities of faith that we represent cannot, in conscience, affirm. Because law and government not only coerce and incentivize but also teach, these sanctions would lend greater moral legitimacy to private efforts to punish those who defend marriage."

In essence the statement introduces the notion that the government, by redefining marriage, as President Obama has committed and vowed to do, vicariously become agents supporting religious discrimination. In

addition to the cases that are outlined, none of us forget the recent reversal of fortunes that the Catholic Church received in Illinois by the Department Of Child & Family Services (DCFS) when over $24 Million of child placement contracts reversed. So not only is there a monetary element involved, but at heart and issue and greater moral, religious and social element also.

The Domino Effect

The conference states, and rightfully so, that redefining marriage, does not simply have an effect on marriage and how couples interact with one another, but has an effect on almost all other aspects of life even for citizens and institutions who are otherwise neutral on the issue:

"These conflicts bear serious consequences.They will arise in a broad range of legal contexts, because altering the civil definition of "marriage" does not change one law, but hundreds, even thousands, at once.By a single stroke, every law where rights depend on marital status—such as employment discrimination, employment benefits, adoption, education, healthcare, elder care, housing, property, and taxation—will change so that same-sex sexual relationships must be treated as if they were marriage.That requirement, in turn, will apply to religious people and groups in the ordinary course of their many private or public occupations and ministries—including running schools, hospitals, nursing homes and other housing facilities, providing adoption and counseling services, and many others."

Far from being the only group speaking to many of these same things, The Family Research Council has been speaking truth in every venue as much as possible. In his his article, "Same Sex Marriage Would Lead To a Push For Polygamy" Peter Sprigg stated the following regarding the redefinition of marriage:

"Changing the natural definition of marriage would amount to a declaration that procreation is unimportant, and that children do not need a mother or father. This would inevitably lead to a further deconstruction of marriage and the family-and fewer children being raised by a married mother and father-at a time when those institutions should be strengthened instead."

So here another social ill and the further disintegration of the family. I don't believe that any rational human will affirm that having a family or family values are not good. I also don't believe any rational person will say that having strong parents isn't a good thing.

The "Trickle Down" Promotion Of Sin

We've heard of the economic strategy of taking care of those at the top of the economic ladder with the assumption that their success will filter down to those at the bottom of the economic ladder. This is called "trickle down economics". A product of the Reagan era, this strategy is the source of much debate and protest and promises to be a hot campaign issue in the 2012 election.

The "trickle down" approach is being used by those who want to change morality also. With no supportable evidence, gay right advocates assert that two fathers or two mothers in place of a father and a mother (specifically a male and a female) in a family are just as beneficial in child rearing as any other arrangement. Of course this is a myth. An unproven position promoted by the most liberal in effort to support the sin of homosexuality and to manipulate public opinion. The "trickle down" begins within the highest ranks of the United States governmental circles. In fact in a speech to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) President Obama outlined:

"My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians whether in the office or on the battlefield. You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognized relationships between two men or two women, are just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman." ~ President Barack Obama 10/10/2009 to The Human Rights Campaign

So there is ample evidence that we have governmental leadership committed to the destruction of the traditional family unit and traditional family values that underpin it. This is without question and an argument against which no rational opposition can be leveled. Here are a few more ways in which our government under President Obama's leadership is trying to promote gay unions and ultimately redefine marriage:

President Obama pushed for the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in his first State of the Union address, and followed through to sign the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010 into law. On September 20, 2011, the discriminatory law known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was finally and formally repealed.

President Obama has expressed his support for the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation that would uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples.

The President signed the certification stating the statutory requirements for repeal of DADT (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) have been met, ending the discriminatory law that undermines our military readiness and violates American principles of fairness and equality.

The President issued a Presidential Memorandum directing the HHS Secretary to ensure that those hospitals that receive Medicare and Medicaid funds will give gay and lesbian patients and their families the compassion, dignity and respect they deserve in difficult times, as well as widows and widowers with no children, members of religious orders, and others whom otherwise may not have been able to receive visits from good friends and loved ones who are not immediate relatives, or select them to make decisions on their behalf in case of incapacitation.

President Obama signed a memorandum expanding federal benefits for the same-sex partners of Foreign Service and executive branch government employees.

This is a systemic problem within the government itself, because President Obama has also instructed The Attorney General of the United States to not defend the law enacted by Congress, The Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) claiming that in his opinion (their opinion) DOMA is unconstitutional. Although the full brief can be found HERE The following is part of what was stated:

"After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the president has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny. The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination." ~ US Attorney General Eric Holder 2/23/2011 DOJ Letter to Congress

Further, with the assistance and efforts of his appointee, Secretary Hillary Clinton, our President has used the US State Department to proliferate the gay agenda allowing Secretary Clinton to proclaim that "gay rights" (including the right to marry and establish a family under the approval of the state) "are human rights once and for all", (Hillary R. Clinton June 2010 -parenthesis added) Proudly promoting its own record, The US Dept. Of State, representing the US Government's official position, continues to consistently speak in favor of the proliferation of gay rights and the gay agenda. At this moment it is decisively clear what position our government takes both nationally and internationally on the issue of gay marriage and the redefinition of marriage to include gays.

In response to all of this, in June 2011 US District Judge Thomas Donovan, a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge for the Central District of California, was the first to oppose DOMA calling it unconstitutional in a ruling on the joint bankruptcy of a gay couple married in 2008. At the conclusion of his ruling he stated:

"In the court's final analysis, the government's only basis for supporting DOMA comes down to an apparent belief that the moral views of the majority may properly be enacted as the law of the land … in disregard of the personal status and living conditions of a significant segment of our pluralistic society,"

Out of 24 of his peers, 19 signed on with his assessments regarding the issue in what was called an "unusual show of empathy" and consensus for the ruling and finding of a judge. Here even in bankruptcy, marriage and traditional values were attacked and those who uphold traditional values are basically called undeserving bullies by this judge and his peers.

The Church Is The Hedge

Amazingly, even with as much talk as there is regarding the issue, there is yet much ignorance to dispel as it pertains to the knowledge of why marriage should be preserved and why those that want to redefine marriage should be opposed. Many organizational churches, including my own Church Of God In Christ, appears to be more enamored with the personality and the accolade of political leaders, rather than with what these leaders are setting forth in real time, and what they actually believe. If these leaders are not held accountable, then anything, as we have seen, is subject to happen. Within this Grand Ole Church, it will take an act of The General Assembly to set forth the official position of the church because leaving it in the hands of Bishops elected by democratic process has proven to be a shambles.

In a greater context what will the church do and how will it respond? Will the church simply gloss over this issue as another issue of personal choice and preference? Or will the church make a stand to speak to power to preserve the culture? Some think that there is no moral harm in any of it, and that the church shouldn't do anything but preach and teach to itself. However what of the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18? If the church does not visibly stand for issues and oppose evil, the church cannot possibly preach and teach the gospel or fulfill the Great Commission, and that is the only purpose and objective of the church.

The questions that are posed are of a very serious nature. These issues, centering around how we live and what we value, simply can't be shouted and danced away. These issues can't simply be glossed over by crowds and conferences, neither can "seed offerings" relieve our personal, individual or collective responsibility to preach truth to this dying world.

To their credit, the Catholic Church, in spite of all that it has been and is being criticized for, is certainly willing to make its voice known in a clear way regarding the issue. I wonder will we make our voices known also? I can only hope that the church will arise.

Blessed!

Dr. Steve Perry...Need I Say More?

2012-01-10T13:44:00.000-06:00

When I first saw this video, I was motivated and inspired by what I see as one of the greatest educators of our time. When I saw it again recently, I am even more so inspired. If we had a Steve Perry in each community, the educational system and the world would be a different place. This is the cutting edge and we need to be there. Take a minute and listen to this. Your perspective will forever be changed.

I challenge each reader of the Dunamis Word, to take one day every two weeks to volunteer your time, talent and energy at the local school. I guarantee the principals and teachers will love it and even more, the young people you touch will too.

Blessed!

Why Do We Hear "Black People" When White People Mention "Food Stamps"??

2012-01-09T17:25:00.005-06:00

Let's Get The Story Straight

Although I will agree that under this President that there are more people on welfare than ever before and that black people have been disproportionately effected. According to Fox News food stamp (EBT) participation and costs have risen under Obama, from 28.2 million participants at a cost of $37.6 billion in 2008 to 44.7 million participants at a cost of $75.3 billion last year, according to federal data of what is officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

This is Newt Gingrich's original speech referencing the food stamp issue at the Georgia Republican Party Convention May 13th, 2011. Proceed to about 14:40 & 19:30-20:05 & the kicker 26:20-27:30

Did you hear that? Amazingly, there was NO MENTION of Black people in this speech! NONE!

Then why did David Gregory in a May 15th 2011 interview on the issue, use Gingrich's after session of the above speech as a reference to suggest that Gingrich was using "racially tinged" language directed towards President Obama because Obama was the "first black President"?:

From a political standpoint we find that some of the problems with the expansion of food stamp benefits began in 2008 at the end of 8 years of a Bush regime.

However, why was the media's emphasis on associating food stamps with special sensitivities with a black President? Further why is this an implication towards all black people? Are Black folk being played? How? Certain media personalities tell black people when to be sensitive to racial comments, because our President is black??? Could it be that the ones telling us that certain statements are racists are racists themselves? They are the one's who assumed that saying food stamps to a black president was "racially tinged" language. I don't assume that saying "Grey Poupon" to a white person is "racially tinged" language. How does talking about getting people off of food stamps apply to me in any way because I'm black?

Shamefully Uninformed

Obviously some of our supposed black "leaders" buy into this sort of distraction and subversion rather easily. In fact either they didn't hear the speech for themselves or they simply believe what they want to believe or what certain white journalists tell them to believe. Dr. Ben Jealous, the Boule leader of the NAACP (Not Actively Advancing Causes for any People) stated:

"It is a shame that the former speaker feels that these types of inaccurate, divisive statements are in any way helpful to our country,"..."The majority of people using food stamps are not African-American, and most people using food stamps have a job."

What is he saying? Did he even listen to the speech? It sounds like the tail wagging the dog. Gingrich didn't reference that the "majority of people using food stamps" were black. He did draw the line regarding food stamps vs paycheck, however I consider that political speech to make an analogy.

Fact is that Dr. Jealous is almost right. He is correct in that the majority on benefits are not black. From the information available, the facts are these:

34% of food stamp recipients were white,
22% of food stamp recipients are black and
16% of food stamp recipients are Hispanic

He is incorrect stating that "most people on food stamps have a job". It seems that only 41% of recipients lived in a household that reported "earnings". This is NOT a majority as he claims. Are his statements to be considered class condemnation statements? This is ridiculous. It just so happens that he is also wrong.

This Video, Touted As The Lynch-pin, Is Gingrich In Response To The Criticisms From NAACP And Other Boule.

In RESPONSE to the complaint on the statements leveled by the NAACP and unlike former President Bush, at least Gingrich says that he will go to the NAACP membership if called and say exactly what he said and why he said it. Another lie was that he said all this on the same day...What are we doing??? The question is, are Boule Blacks ready to hear what Gingrich has to say? Will they allow Gingrich to explain himself? Or, does someone have a vested interest in keeping us confused and ill-informed? I think so.

Blessed!

COGIC Clergy Sexual Abuse Interview

2012-01-07T06:00:00.009-06:00

Here is the interview I did in October 2011 with Elder D. L. Foster of Gcmwatch.com regarding COGIC clergy sexual abuse. Elder Foster was able to put the audio together and Youtube part 1 for us.

2012 presents some special opportunities. If you are a member of COGIC and are a delegate to the General Assembly and would like to be a part of an initiative to address and change the culture of silence as it pertains to victims of clergy sexual abuse and misconduct, please email me at dunamis1@netzero.com. This is not a task for those willing to conform to the establishment or cower behind personality. So please serious inquiries only.

Part 2 (audio only) of this interview and all other broadcasts that I do can be found HERE.

Blessed!

What Do George Bloomer, Bethel Family Worship Ctr. & Drug Money Have in Common?

2012-01-04T06:00:00.007-06:00

You have heard of the expression, "the truth is stranger than fiction"? Well it cetainly is that. In an unbelievable confession on his Rejoice In The Word program, Friday 12/30/2011, the bishop George Bloomer stated that he purchased his church with $600,000 of DRUG money that he had earned during his drug sales days.

He stated that when he was selling drugs, there were many safe houses that he would use where he would have young ladies hold his ill-begotten drug sales earnings so that when and if he got caught he wouldn't loose his money. This is common in street corner drug sales and the reason that some folk hang out at some folk houses that don't really belong there...but that's another story...In this case, Bloomer explained how he had gone to jail, gotten out, and supposedly during the process, got "saved". We don't know if this was the "use cocaine while preaching saved" or the "cocaine free" version of saved, because according to Bloomer, they are very similar to the same thing. Also according to him a person can be "anointed" in both instances simultaneously. (which is yet another story as well)

Nonetheless, Bloomer recounted that when he got out of jail, he needed some money and this particular lady was in jail and he couldn't get to his money. He said that during this time, he needed money to complete the financial arrangements for his new church and was praying to God that God would intervene and provide the necessary resources for the church. The woman got out of prison and eventually delivered the drug money back to him. He stated that he took it, approximately $600,000, and used it to secure the mortgage on his church. He went on to expound how that event was a "blessing" for both he and his ministry and the unsuspecting audience applauded.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Even though this was met with applause, there are many things wrong with what this bishop stated. I'll outline a few of them and ask that you chime in on the issue if you'd like.

First, this was not a blessing from God. Let's get one scriptural myth out of the way right now...the wealth of the sinner being laid up for the righteous (Prov. 13:22) has nothing to do with this or what happened here. First, the context of that scripture does not allow it and secondly, this was supposedly the bishop's "wealth". So if he's the sinner, he can't also be the righteous for who this wealth is laid up for. Allow me to challenge you on this and we'll save that for later...let's deal with the greater issues for now:

Money Laundering & Tax Evasion

Bloomer in no uncertain terms stated that this money was gained by illegal enterprise and means. He, in his

past life, sold illegal drugs. As the gain of such illegal enterprise, the money was never taxed. Saints, I know that many of you have never committed such crimes, but you should know that even when someone goes to jail and does time for their "dirt" the money that they earned during the process is not suddenly "clean". Time served has nothing to do with the cash profits gained from a criminal enterprise. For every crime there is a such thing as restitution and illegal drug sales is certainly NOT a victimless crime.

When I first mentioned this on Facebook, one of the impressions was that the money should be used according to when it was received and that because he had served his time (as mentioned above) he had a right to obtain the funds and do what he wanted to do with them. The problem is, as I have stated, what Bloomer described was the perpetuation of gains from an unlawful enterprise after he was supposedly "saved". Saved or not, this is called Money Laundering.

Yes, Money Laundering

Bethel Life Family Worship Ctr. Durhan NC.
Was This Church Paid For In Part By Drug Money?

Money is laundered when it is gained illegally and then turned into a legal instrument such as being funneled into a bank, a legal business entity, insurance policy or some other financial instrument. When "dirty money" is converted to a legal instrument and used for whatever purpose, this is called money laundering. By Bloomer's own description, going back to money that was received under a criminal enterprise and not just any criminal enterprise, but HIS former criminal enterprise, and using it for "church purposes" there appears to be a strong possibility that this was a money laundering transaction which may be subject to possible criminal prosecution.

Money laundering is a federal offense. Here's what a web site says about this type of transaction:

"It is a federal offense to engage in money laundering, and the penalties can include a substantial prison sentence. The laws that make money laundering a criminal offense are found at Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1956 and 1957. These statutes were passed as part of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986.

18 USC 1956 is concerned with financial transactions involving proceeds of illegal activity. It prohibits anyone from conducting or attempting to conduct a financial transaction that involves the proceeds of specified unlawful activity either:

1- with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity; or
2- with intent to engage in conduct constituting avoidance of taxes (eg, violation of 26 USC 7201 or 26 USC 7206)…"

The article goes on to say this also:

"The penalty for federal money laundering can up either a fine up to $500,000, or double the amount of money that was laundered, whichever is greater. The court is also authorized to sentence the defendant to a term of 20 years in federal prison.

During the course of a prosecution for money laundering, the court may issue an injunction to freeze the assets of the defendant. See 18 USC 1956(3). The restraining order may also appoint a receiver to disburse the funds in the account(s).

The money laundering statute prohibits financial transactions where the source of the funds is from specified criminal activity. The term, “specified criminal activity” is broad and includes any state law crime that is a felony.See 18 USC 1956(c)(3)."

Remember, this man described going back to ill-begotten gains after serving time, receiving those funds upon which no tax has ever been paid, depositing them either in or through the church, and using the funds to benefit the church in which he was also drawing a salary...One can say, he may not have known the law, and that his "intent" wasn't to defraud. However, if you are in or around a criminal (as Bloomer claims to have been) for any length of time, you will find that they know the law very well if they know nothing else...So an argument to the contrary would be very difficult to find credible.

What Else Did The Bishop Confess To?

Not only did the good bishop confess to money laundering and using the church as a vehicle to make ill begotten funds good, but, in the process, he also vicariously confessed to tax evasion. How? Because this money was gained illegally and kept secret, he didn't pay taxes on any of it. What makes it even worse is that the funds were directed through the church which is a tax exempt entity. So in essence George Bloomer described to a series of potentially, serious federal crimes beginning with tax evasion.

And the CHURCH Applauded!!! Lets graduate to the spiritual issues of his confession:

This Money Was Blood Money

Drug money is blood money! Unfortunately we have become desensitized to the fact that lives are lost, families are destroyed and communities are set on edge due to the packaging and delivery of drugs to the community and home is simply not home when drugs are proliferated on the streets. For years many of our church leaders have felt that receiving funds gained by illegal enterprise is some sort of blessing. There is nothing further from the truth, especially when the blood of victims is all over it. Does anyone remember Zachery Tims? A glassine envelope in his pocket found on his DEAD body may have and in all likelihood DID contain drugs. Can anyone question what drugs has done to many individuals in our community and suggest that it is no big deal?

Many persons ask, "what should the church do with money contributed by a criminal?" There are many things that can be done, but let me just say what it should do and is obligated to do with funds generated by a known criminal enterprise is inform the authorities that such funds have been distributed to it. This is without question if we abide by the word that requires the church to be subject to the higher authorities.

Romans 13:1 ~ Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

To this issue however, with all the death and destruction as a result of illegal drug sales to begin with, even if Bloomer didn't personally kill anyone, we are confident that someone was killed over or because of it, or some family was disturbed in some way shape or form because of it. There is death in the streets and further than that, if it is drug money today, what stops it from being money from prostitution tomorrow? Should the church be a participant with pimps and drug kingpins?

Even devils Don't Want Blood Money!

Judas, whom Jesus described as a devil (Jn. 6:70), after he had betrayed Jesus, sought to give the money back to the Chief Priest and the council:

Matt. 27:3-5 ~ "3- Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, 4-Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. 5-And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself

The council, as evil hearted as they were, would not take it because it was BLOOD MONEY. So certain leaders authorized the purchase of the field that Judas hung himself in, and the field was purchased in Judas's own name, which was a common practice for certain purposes at that time:

Matt. 27:6-10 ~ 6-And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. 7-And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. 8-Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. 9-Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; 10-And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.

Now as stated, these leaders were all defiled, had rejected Jesus, and conspired to have him crucified, but even they had more sense than to accept blood money in return. They did not want the use of money that had been used to destroy lives upon their heads. Yet this modern church sees and only thinks about what it calls a "blessing"!

NO WONDER THE NEW, MODERN CHURCH IS POWERLESS!...It's not about some mystical lack of effort through prayer and fasting. It is about a total disintegration of biblical moral value ethic. The modern church really doesn't look, act, feel like or have regard for anything that would make it a Christian church according to biblical standards is this is the value ethic that it espouses. Further, the modern church suffers by allowing men and women of this caliber to be honored as leaders in turn.

From a biblical value ethic, Bloomer had an obligation to make an effort to restore what he has stolen and taken by ill-gotten means from the community at large.

Lev. 6:4 ~ "Then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found,"

The Government Would Use It For Themselves

Some have said giving the money to the government would be like giving it to nobody at all and at least he used it for God. This is a horrible theology for starters, and is a very low view of what god needs and uses for HIS service. In addition, sentiments like this ignores the many options that were available for the use of the funds.

How Could The Funds Have Been Used?

In the realm of possibilities, Bloomer could have presented a plan to the police and civic authorities along with the money, holding authorities accountable in serving the families in the communities where his former drug sales proliferated. In other words, in conjunction with authorities, he could have requested and brought a great deal of attention to the fact that funds previously delivered as profits from illegal drug sales, would now be used, under his direction and administration, to minister to the needs of families and individuals devastated during his drug sales years.

Attention as a result would CERTAINLY have given the bishop enough funds for a down-payment on the church and exponentially increased the membership necessary for the task. Can anyone argue that he and the church would not have been blessed as a result of yielding themselves to the service of the community as opposed to the service of a building and looking good in that current moment?

The Devil Wants Worship For His Methods?

There seems to be a low perception of the blessing ability of God toward his people. maybe this is because many of these teachers have pillaged the church for so long until many people simply say, every man and woman for him/her self. The fact is that the devil is not in the business of blessing God's people, but he will do anything to get the credit and to take the glory, because that's what he wanted from the very beginning:

Matt. 4:8-11 ~8-Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9-And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10-Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. 11-Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

Jesus did not argue that the devil had it within his power to give him the accolades of the world. What he did do however was equate the devil's ability and desire to perform with his desire for worship. Jesus rejected what the devil had to give on the basis of the word of the Lord and specifically the command to worship no other God other than God alone.

Conclusion

Money, fame, being seen, large buildings, and the desire for relevance has allowed many of our leaders to fall into the snare of the devil, compromising in favor of associations at almost any cost and by almost any method and means. What makes it difficult to discern, is that everyone would agree that it is a good thing to desire a church or a place where the people of God can worship and fellowship. It is a good desire to want to be able to spread the gospel. However, even in that, we should ask at what cost we are willing to pursue even things that "appear" to be a righteous causes? Will we have to compromise all the values that we hold dear to lift up values that we teach that are dear to us and according to the word of God? If so, can we adduce that what we have compromised to achieve is a blessing from the Lord?

Bishop George Bloomer is currently involved in a serious legal matter which potentially involves defrauding investors out of $300,000. Although, this is a claim that Bloomer adamantly denies, he cannot deny that he spoke the things that I have written about out of his own mouth on national television, in the presence of witnesses, and that he has also written and testified to these things personally by way of speaking engagements and in books.

When all of this is combined and IF all of this is true, what greater testament is there that speaks directly to his character and ethical morality. A mistake? I hope so! But I'm not counting on any repentance for what he readily confesses that he has done.

Blessed!

Special Note: {Nothing in this article is rendered as legal or tax advice on any particular situation or aspect of law. This information is rendered to examine the material facts and statements of the bishop and to educate the public as to what they are seeing and hearing. All allegations are only that until they have been proven by proper authorities.}

Immutability

2012-01-01T00:00:00.007-06:00

Happy New Year!
May 2012 Be Blessed & Prosperous For All!

Malachi 3:6 ~ "For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed."

The nature, actions and purpose of God is the ultimate puzzle of all generations. Many have attempted to define these things in many ways. Attempts have given rise to multiple thousands of religions, religious beliefs and interpretive systems over time.

One of the ways in which God is described within scripture is as unchanging. The term that is used in the New Testament is a term translated as "immutable". The Greek word is "ametathetos", which literally means unchangeable. It is a legal term, an adjective, describing an unalterable or unabridged position, intent or will. One of the biblical proofs that Jesus is God and not merely a lesser being such as an angel, is that he is also described as immutable in the same fashion that God is described as immutable in the Old Testament. Example:

Hebrews 13:8 ~ "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."

How is God Immutable Or Unchangeable?

As referenced above, God clearly describes that he is not changeable. However God also deals with man in a continuum where there is constant and consistent change. There is physical, social, and moral change among men and mankind. Many things that men thought were right yesterday or in another age and epoch, are not necessarily right today. Yet the bible describes that God is unchanging and delivers an objective and unchanging truth.

To begin with, God has clearly described that he is not a man and does not have the inconsistencies of men:

Numbers 23:19 ~ "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

Here God states the difference between he and man affirming that unlike man, he has the intent and the ability to make good on his promises and does not fail in doing so. It is important that one doesn't get confused over this very important point. Why? Because scripture is full of instances where God has clearly modified or changed in his stance in dealing with men and mankind.

Lets look at some examples:

Using the Hebrew word "wə·yin·nā·ḥêm" or the transliteration "nacham" in the book of Genesis God stated that he has "repented" as it pertains to his actions in dealing with the evil of mankind that man had perpetuated within his creation:

Genesis 6:6-7 ~ "6-And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.7-And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them."

In Exodus 32, Moses pleads with God to not destroy the people for their idol worship after they have been delivered from Egypt. Moses asks God to "repent" of the evil he intended to do (Ex. 32:12) and remember his covenant of promise to Abraham (Ex. 32:13) Then we see v. 14:

Exodus 32:14 ~ "And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people."

In addition we can point to the time when Abraham negotiated with God over the destruction of Sodom in Genesis 18. Although God destroyed Sodom, Abraham was able to change the mind of God (or so it appears) over the number of righteous individuals found in order to avoid destruction.

More Apparent Changes

In 2 Samuel 24, 1 Chronicles 21, God was moved to judge the nation because of David's sin of "numbering the people". This may have been an effort to create a tax of the inhabitants of the nation which was common during the period, or simply an effort to count his strength or appease his human sense of pride. At either rate God then sends an angel, in the form of a plague, to smite Israel and further moves to destroy Jerusalem.

2 Samuel 24:16 ~ "And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite." (Also See: 1 Chron. 21:15)

After being granted the opportunity, repentance is made and offerings are delivered. God then removes his hand of destruction and and blesses the people. He obviously changes his plan and course of action in dealing with man. Psalms 106:45 reminisces how God remembered his covenant, repenting of his intent to destroy man and mankind in the previous instances mentioned and then some. Once again the word "nacham" is used to describe the actions of God.

In Jeremiah 26, the Lord speaks to Jeremiah challenging the people to repent so that he (God) would "repent" of the evil he had purposed to cause to fall upon the people for their rebellion.

Jeremiah 26:3 ~ "If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings"

In v.13 Jeremiah states that God would repent of the destruction that he intends to bring if they would hear and obey God. Of course, the people didn't want to hear Jeremiah and were intent on killing him. The people who were intent on killing Jeremiah for his prophecy were reminded by certain Elders of Micha's prophecy (Micha 3:12) during the reign of Hezekiah in which the Lord promised the destruction of Jerusalem. What is interesting is that toward the end of Micha's prophecy, after prophesying destruction of Jerusalem, Micha begins to praise God for his mercy and states the following:

Micah 7:18-20 ~ 18-Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy. 19-He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea. 20-Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.

The phrase "turn again" indicates that God would change from the path of previous dealings into a new path remembering and emphasizing what he had promised previously.

In the book of Jonah, God goes to great lengths to instruct Jonah to warn Ninevah of the promised upcoming destruction. God tells Jonah that they have 40 days before he destroys them (Jonah 3:4) Ninevah repents of evil and God does not destroy them:

Jonah 3:10 ~ "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."

Now some have alluded to the fact that Ninevah was destroyed years later indicating that repentance of the people only delayed the actions of God. In other words God was going to destroy them, by course of action and that it was only just a matter of time. Aside from the fact that sentiments such as that are full of determinism, such interpretations are also a highly questionable. The fact is that God told Jonah in his time, that destruction would fall upon Ninevah, and further gave a time frame that he did not ultimately follow because the people repented. This indicates that God changed something no matter how one looks at it.

Unalterable Actions vs. Unalterable Purpose

So when God says that he doesn't change, the questions are first, in what way do those statements apply to God? Secondly, we could ask is it necessary or is it the intent of scripture to communicate that the immutability of God applies to God's actions or dealings with man and mankind or does it apply to God's nature, being, essence and purpose only?

What we can readily observe from scripture is that God changes his dealings with man and mankind, based on mankind's response to him. So, as it pertains to the inability of God to change, I believe that scripture is communicating a deeper message than that of stasis in a particular or predetermined course of action.

On the other hand, the writer of the book of Hebrews is certainly convinced of God's immutability as he states the following:

Hebrews 6:17-19 ~ 17-Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: 18-That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: 19-Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

Two Immutable Things

The "two immutable things" that the writer of Hebrews is actually referring to seem to be outlined in v.14 of the chapter. Here is the verse:

Hebrews 6: 14 ~ 14-Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.

Let's walk this back a minute: These things are actually referring to the Abrahamic promise found in Genesis after Abraham had proven his faith and obedience to God by his willingness to place all things, including his life and the life of his son (representing his future), before his own will and desire. When the Lord stopped him, which is what God would have done anyway, before Abraham realized that God did not want this type of sacrifice, Genesis recorded the following statements:

Genesis 22:15-18 ~ 15-And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, 16-And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: >>>17-That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore;<<<<< and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; 18-And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice

Hebrews 6:14 repeats part of v. 17 and followed by the 2 immutable promises found within the latter half of v. 17 and the first part of v.18:

1- "thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies"
2- "in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed"

These blessings indicate the deliverance of Israel and the messianic promise that will be delivered to the world. This is defines the statements "in blessing I shall bless thee" and "in multiplying I shall multiply thee". The conclusion then is that the providence or purpose of God was the element that was static, or immutable. The goodness or God or his ability to bring about the blessing was unalterable.

Immutability of Nature & Character

When we put this together the picture begins to emerge that God's nature is constant throughout the complete struggle of man's existence and God alters his dealings with mankind based on his unalterable nature. Let's briefly look at a few instances where the notion of God's stability in character are challenged.

Israel In The Wilderness

As noted earlier, God delayed and turned from the destruction of Israel in the wilderness. This was because there was a deeper and more unalterable principle at work. Moses displayed the character of selfless love (Exodus 32:13) when he asked God to not destroy the encampment of Israel. He displayed the righteousness and justice of God when he commanded that those who had partaken in false worship and riotousness be put to death (Exodus 32:27) and he displayed the holiness and mercy of God when he required that the people repent and consecrate themselves. (Exodus 32:29) When the people responded to God in repentance, God altered his dealings toward the people as we have already mentioned. Notice on the other hand however, when the people forsook him, his nature did not simply adjust to their sins. God was grieved and moved to deal with the issues in a manner consistent with a holy nature or a nature that wasn't appeased by sin and unrighteousness.

Marriage & Polygamy

Some say, "Well look at polygamy and divorce...God allowed both then and now both are considered to be a sin. So God's character has changed towards these two practices."

Although I won't deal with a full scriptural treatment of those two examples in this writing, I will call your attention to the steadfast facts consistent with both of those behaviors. First, God never condoned those who divorced without cause (Matt. 19:8) or those who lived in polygamous relationships. (Matt.19:5) Taking the latter, if we examine every polygamous relationship outlined within scripture, we find that there was always a negative outcome for the families involved. There was no "blessing" pronounced on individuals who engaged in the practice. As to marriage, it was a blessed relationship and union since it's inception and honored by God. (Heb. 13:4)

Given the evidence contained within scripture we begin to see that the character of God was always about holiness, righteousness and blessing mankind and that never changed neither was it altered. It was and yet remains immutable.

Conclusion

When these things are taken into consideration the declaration of Malachi becomes more clear. Malachi indicates that the people of God (Jacob) is not consumed because the Lord DOESN'T change. So this verse emphasizes the unalterable nature of God's character in dealing with man and mankind. God may change his actions or methods in dealing with men, but the ultimate end is consistent and in line with an unalterable purpose and immutable character.

God's mind does not change from the intent of doing good towards his people. Although in many instances people do things that violate the nature of God and frustrate his purpose. Even then, God yet allows the opportunity for repentance and restoration. In fact, within scripture, many times God changes from the destruction that the people brought upon themselves to apply mercy and a pardon of sins. This is an undeserved and unearned revelation of God's character. It is called grace, and we thank God for it!

Blessed!

Additional Reading:

The character of God is a topic of high discussion in debate circles. We have had the opportunity to discuss these issues with some leading atheists and those who view God and Christianity negatively. The following dialogue with atheist Dr. Hector Avalos may offer some insightful information as you continue to study this and related topics concerning the character and nature of God.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

We got pretty deep and the content may be somewhat advanced in some areas, but the conversation was a spirited and gracious one. Thank you.

The Divination Of Cleveland ~ More Prophe-lying Profits

2011-12-27T06:00:00.005-06:00

In a previous post "The Divination Of Detroit", I spoke regarding Juanita II's encouragements to the Greater Grace City Of David. More recently I featured her again in "Speak It In The Atmosphere" showing that the basic premise of what she was encouraging and teaching was rooted in metaphysical and metaspiritual concepts, specifically the "Law Of Attraction" rather than in solid biblical or scriptural concepts and encouragements.

I've also detailed the false teachings and doctrines of master prophet E. Bernard Jordan, in "Prophe-Lying For Profits" in which Jordan supports not only his lust for money, but his association of Astrology with the power and move of God. In addition, I've also featured the false prophecy of Brian Carn that he so eagerly documented, but is more easily used to discredit his prophetic office.

Not to be outdone while taking apostasy and false doctrine to a completely new LOW level, the Word Network, in conjunction with false prophet George Bloomer, and his apostate co-host, Pimpoliscious, (and that should say it all) will bring some of the nations leading false prophets together under one roof hosting another False Profit Summit for the program "Rejoice In The Word" at the New Spirit Revival Center of Cleveland Heights, OH.

In what is bound to be an event filled with everything except a solid biblical understanding of prophecy, the advertisement says that the Summit will also feature a special opportunity to receive a "2012 prophetic word" from either or both Dr. Belinda Scott, co- pastor of New Spirit Revival Ctr., or Juanita Bynum II the false prophetess to the nation herself.

Can Bloomer Rejoice In The Word?

Ephesians 4:29 ~ "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers."

Bishop George Bloomer

As stated the summit will be taped for the Word Network and a show "Rejoice In The Word". The primary host of the show and the Prophetic Summit is Bishop George Bloomer who admittedly cusses when he gets angry (Rejoice In The Word~ Spiritual Sons and Spiritual Fathers~12/23/2011) Can you imagine going in for prayer and he's having a bad day and displaying it by cussing someone out?

That's not the half of it however. He also admits to using cocaine before preaching before he was "delivered". (11:27pm EST 1/20/08 on Streaming Faith West Angeles Church of God in Christ) So he used to "fake" being saved claiming that God was still yet using him during this time. (I think NOT! God doesn't need to use the profane when the Holy will do his will!) In addition, he is a gay affirming pastoral leader in his own words. Read about that at GCMwatch.com.

Remember, this is not only the same bishop Bloomer (less about 150 lbs) due to cancer and a resultant lap-band surgery, who prophesied miraculous healing to Fantasia in early 2008, BEFORE she had to have surgery on her throat in May 2008 to remove a tumor that almost derailed her singing career, but it is the same person who said that pastors of "small churches" and those who don't have a "national stage" for ministry are "loosers". (Rejoice In The Word~ Spiritual Sons and Spiritual Fathers~12/23/2011) However, according to recent reports at ObnoxiousTV, Bloomer may become an ultimate looser by "loosing" his freedom and everything else if the allegations of a lawsuit recently filed against him proves that he was engaged in a criminal enterprise to defraud some of his church associates out of some $300,000.

Colossians 3:8 ~ "But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth."

If all of that weren't enough, Bloomer has further revealed his lack of biblical understanding through his concept of spiritual sons and fathers. He believes that the voice of the persons ascribed by individuals as their "spiritual father" within the church is the "preeminent voice of God in your life".(Rejoice In The Word~ Spiritual Sons and Spiritual Fathers~12/23/2011) In other words he believes in the utter control of who he deems to be a "spiritual son" One can readily see that this type of belief and teaching is not only contrary to scripture which is an authority greater than any of us, but that this sort of understanding encourages and gives way to cultism, mind control, manipulation and a whole host of ungodliness. The question is why would a man want to be the "preeminent voice of God" in another man's life to begin with? That seems to be a very strange proposition. By the way, I forgot to mention that Bloomer claims to be a "spiritual son" of bishop Eddie Long. Can you believe that???

The Valley Of Self Exaltation

It seems that Bloomer's issues are just a small snippet of the real issues of many of the adherents and participants of the Profits Summit. Not only have I laid out and addresses the flat out false prophecies and fallacious teachings of many of the guests as listed above, but all indications are that they are persisting in the resurrection of the "Touch not mine anointed" motif substituting it with the "I'm great and you're not" routine that the self exalted invariably follow.

Pastor Belinda Scott

Someone contacted the ministry with details of a recent statement by Pastor Belinda Scott in which she addressed her participation in this ungodly summit. Obviously upset over being questioned, she responded as follows:

"I have been asked to do Prophetic Summit with people from every prophetic background to debate, discuss, and determine the truth and the light. What is amazing to me, is how people who have never been on any type of major platform can comment on any of these things. Prophets from every time and every arena will be there...I know who called me and why I've been sent, I have to declare God's prophetic Word as He has given it to me! Whoever else is on the panel isn't my call, and some smalled little ppl without purpose have the nerve to speak! The Devil is a liar...SMH! The bible say's let the prophets speak, and the other judge!" (emphasis added)

In other words, "I'm bigger than you. I'm more important than you, shut up and leave me alone" Believe me, we're Shaking Our Heads too!

Galations 6:3 ~ For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

Not only does a blatant arrogance seethe through clearly from Pastor Scott's statements, but a lack of understanding is present as well. For example: since when did anyone have to have a "major platform" to address truth claims or any of these issues? What is a "major platform" and how does she know that she has one? Further, did the biblical prophets have a "major platform"? Were they considered to be more than "small little people"? Did God use them because of a platform, or did God create his own platform?

The historical FACT is that Christianity was considered to be a back water religion for many years and was not a threat to Rome for quite some time. It was born on anything but what could be considered to be a "major platform". Was the platform of Christianity too small to make a change in the world? I think not!

Further, why can's can't "small little people" have something to say about her actions, claims or the actions of any of these so called prophets and pulpit liars? What is a "small little person without purpose"? God has a providential purpose for all of his children. While I agree that charlatans will continue their evil ways in a mindless fashion, (such as has been described with evidence to support it) how can a child of God not have purpose if God is the architect of a life given to him and purpose?

Conclusion:

As we can see it seems that the primary prophe-liars that will be involved in this conference continue to persist in the same sins that have derailed many ministries in recent times. Remember, it was Bloomer's "spiritual father" Eddie, that claimed he wasn't a preacher where "all we're doing is baptizing babies", (Watch This Pt. 6) and Juanita II claimed that she wasn't an ordinary preacher and that she was a cut above all ministers and leaders. Remember the man that influenced Long? It was the bishop and apostate Earl Paulk, that felt that he had privilege to claim what he taught was the "kings meat", that allowed him to have sex outside of marriage and molest young persons within his church. He would eventually die in shame and under the weight of his sins.

God rejected the actions of Paulk then and God is rejecting this new generation of preachers who want to use God's people to support their ungodly habits and sins now. This is the light that they do not want shone upon their deeds and their ways. The light of TRUTH, RIGHTEOUSNESS and HOLINESS from those who are committed to biblical truth with their last breath.

John 1:5 ~ And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Let the light of TRUTH shine to dispel this darkness so the body of Christ can be blessed and free from the resurgence of lies and apostate doctrines contrived by men giving heed to seducing spirits. On CHRIST the solid Rock I stand! Watch out Cleveland, you will be divined!

Blessed!

~ Banned ~ By Radio One

2011-12-26T17:52:00.002-06:00

Music World Music, founded by Matthew "The Baby Is Yours" Knowles, has been listed in a lawsuit brought by Cathy Hughes of TV One. According to EurWeb:

"Mathew Knowles’ Music World Music is listed in the lawsuit because his company brokered the deal for the Essence Music Festival broadcast with TV One. His company is being accused of re-issuing the content BET, MTV and BET’s Centric Network despite TV One’s four-year exclusivity agreement."

As a result of the action, the sister company of TV One, Radio One, who owns at least 12 of the larger gospel music radio stations across the country, has pulled ALL Music World Music Artists from their rotation which has been the primary resource for the promotion of Music World Music Artists. Here's a report from a certain anonmyous source:

Matthew Knowles & Kathy Hughes

“All Radio One personnel were told to pull all Music World artists out of rotation immediately and indefinitely! We were told that the mandate came straight from Ms. Hughes and that there would be ramifications for anyone playing or mentioning a Music World artist or song on air,”

You Betta Have My Money!

The news is that not only does this show a continued lack of integrity by the chief executive of Music World, Radio One's actions also directly effect both Music World Music's and the artists ability to sell units and ultimately earn an income.

Airtime is still the number one method by which artists are heard and by which sales are ultimately made, and to be banned from such a large analog and digital internet venue will have an effect potentially of epic proportions on the artists which Music World Music represents.

Although one may think that this effects the secular artists and music to which Matthew Knowles is tied to by name recognition, such as Beyonce or either one of the Destiny Child spin-offs, there is nothign further from the truth. You see Music World Music is the 5th largest Gospel music Label in America, and claims to have been in gospel music for over 10 years now. In addition 90% of the radio promotions for its artists are done through Radio One. So ultimately, it is the gospel artists themselves who are be banned from the radio air waves.

Music World Music Gospel Artists Include:

Le'Andria Johnson &
Amber Bullock

There are more than a few of some of the more popular personalities who depend upon Music World Music for the promotion of their CD's and projects. Some of them include, Juanita Bynum, Trin-I-Tee 5:7, Brian Courtney Wilson, Vanessa Bell Armstrong, Micah Stampley and new “Sunday Best” winners Le’Andria Johnson and Amber Bullock.

So this is a very important issue for both old and new artists looking to at least keep a small portion of an ever decreasing market share of gospel music. It's important to the bottom line. How much exposure can the artist receive with Music World Music and ultimately how much money can be made?

Bad Businsess Move, Greed Or Plain Ole Laziness

Prophetess
Juanita Bynum II

Remember in our story, "We Are Crying For You Juanita II...What A Mess" Juanita II said that Mr. Knowles was one of the most wise business persons that she knew. She stated this:

"...when you join wisdom, with gift and talent and the anointing you have power. And I was honored that he immediately recognized the anointing on my life and the God on my life and his press is, "the world has got to hear this" and he didn't come trying to make me anything but who I already was..."

She then went on to say that Mr. Knowles was going to help her evangelize the world:

"his wisdom recognizes the anointing and the gift that I have, so now the two of us joined together will be messengers around the world."

Although Mr. Knowles views it as an opportunity to expand and gain some new relationships with stations that neither he nor his company previously sought, it seems that Mr. Knowles realizes that his move was anything but wise, and now he has to go back to work to salvage his brand and his artists:

“We didn’t, as a company, we didn’t focus as much. (on other venues) And that was a mistake on our part as a label, It’s allowed us to give our focus to the entire radio community fully rather than just putting a lot of eggs in one basket. Not that we overlooked the other ones. We never would overlook them. It’s just that we didn’t focus as much as we should and we didn’t build those relationships as strongly as we should."...“It’s an opportunity for us. In the 20 years, we’ve always thought outside the box and it’s been real successful for us,”...“I’m so happy to be able to understand AM radio better and continue to build relationships with all gospel stations. So it’s been an opportunity for us.”

Now, please keep this in mind, Juanita II said that her "prophetic gift" gives her the ability to discern the "times" for the people of God, allowing her to express what God is doing "in the earth realm" while simultaneously stating that she only knows "in part". (which is merely a biblical cover for when the unexpected happens) But the part that she did know did not allow her to discern the integrity of Matthew Knowles some years ago, when he destroyed his family, or the "actions" of Matthew Knowles violating his contractual agreement with TV One. Neither could she discern his ethic of placing all of his business efforts in one venue both of which would have its effect on her CD sales and her world evangelism at the hands and direction of Matthew Knowles (we'll discuss more on the modern FALSE prophets in an upcoming post) But I would really like to look at the following issue:

Angel Taylor & Chanelle Haynes
Trin-I-Tee 5:7

Can The World & The Gospel Artist Walk Together?

Amos 3:3 ~ "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"

Can a person who is not saved or a company which is directed under Christian leadership, properly represent gospel artists? Now I know that many of the artists represented here are suspect. We've already mentioned Juanita II whom I believed may have snapped when Thomas Weeks beat her up. Further Trin-I-Tee 5:7 who said in a Feb. 2011 Radio One Baltimore Interview that "In order to be attractive to this generation they have to see what they are used to seeing" ???? doesn't appear to have a clue or conviction on presenting anything whereby one would consider them to be saved...but ASIDE from all that...can gospel artists place their talents and gifts in the hands of the unsaved and expect to be successful? If they can, is that relationship pleasing to God?

On both notes, I will take what the bible says over what men say. Yes, I believe it can be more lucrative, at least in the near short term, but that's the problem, when gospel folk present what they tell everyone is "MINISTRY" for the profit or the monetary value that can be gained, there always will be a problem. Since when is the devil ever interested in promoting and properly handling ministry? Please tell me that.

Blessed!

Christmas 2011 ~ The Lesser god Thesis

2011-12-25T04:16:00.003-06:00

Merry Christmas To All As We Celebrate The Miraculous Birth Of Our Lord And Savior Jesus Christ

We Look Forward To A Blessed And Prosperous New Year!

As we examine the birth if Jesus it is more important for the believer to remember who Jesus was as it pertains to his inception and entrance into the world in a physical form.

As in mid to late Second Century there was a controversy swirling over exactly how Jesus was divine. At the Council Of Nicea in 325 AD Arianism was condemned as a heresy. Arius (250-336 AD) taught that Jesus was a "lesser god" and was a created being, a personification of wisdom (Prov. 8:22) whom God the father used as an agent to create the world. In other words all creation was through Jesus but he was not necessarily the architect of creation and no matter how far back his existence was pushed, the existence of the Father preceded his. This whole theology has not only led to a whole host of confusions, but also to one that is called the lesser god thesis by some in theological circles.

Who Teaches The Lesser god?

Some of the groups that yet hold to forms and variations of this heresy are denominations such as the Jehovah's Witness and the Mormons, to name two of the more popular. Because of the belief that Jesus is a created being ie: "lesser than God", these organizations and others are rightfully considered to be non-Christian cults. Christians believe that Jesus was equal with the Father. There are no Christians who deny this essential tenet of the faith. Unfortunately, due to media, political and social pressures, this fact and line of reasoning seems to be lost on many individuals.

Now, notice that the thesis doesn't deny that Jesus is essential, or that he is the most important vessel of creation. It also doesn't deny that Jesus is "a god" (with a small G). However the thesis, in all forms, denies that the preexistent Christ is God and is a being co-equal with the father which is ultimately a denial of the clear claims within scripture and also a denial of the faith once established for all times.

Jesus Is Described As God Within Scripture

John 1:1-3 ~ 1-In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2-The same was in the beginning with God. 3-All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

There are many places and arguments that can be made from scripture that will affirm Jesus as God. I'll only deal with a few of them in this article. Feel free to add much more support in the comments section.

Some of the most controversial scriptures regarding this subject are contained within the Gospel of John. They are controversial because they seem to be so to the point and so clear on the issue that those who dissent must change the translation to suit their beliefs. For example, in the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses, the identity of Jesus as the Word is revised from the King James Version at the end of the 1st verse to "the Word was a god" instead of "the Word was God". Is there any warrant for this change? I say ABSOLUTELY NOT!

First, the translation, without warrant assumes that the scripture is speaking of a being less than the Father, calling him "god". This would be an unheard of concept in the first century Jewish society in which Christianity was birthed. First Century Jews were staunchly monotheistic. Remember, the Jews had fought a war over the desecration of their worship system and the worship of multiple gods (The Maccabean Revolt 167-160 BCE) just a relatively short time earlier. The cultural setting and other evidence within scripture makes the teaching that John was talking about a plurality of Gods highly unlikely.

The second part to that argument mentioned above regards the absence of the article "the" in front of "God" in the second clause of verse one, but not before "God" in the third clause of verse one. Some critics use the absence of article to denote that Jesus was a "lesser being" and certainly no co-equal with the creator. What is true is that the article "the" (Greek: ho) does not exist in the third clause of the first verse. Let me explain: Borrowing from the book, "Putting Jesus In His Place" ~ Robert M. Bowman Jr. & J. Ed Komoszewski [2007 Kregel Publications] pgs. 140-141 we can outline the 3 clauses of John 1:1 as follows:

1st Clause:

en arche en ho logos

in the beginning was the word

2nd Clause

kai ho logos en pros ton theon

and the word was with "the" God

3rd Clause

kai theos en ho logos

and God was the word

As Bownam Jr. and Komoszewski point out, the critic asserts that John does not say both that the Word was with "the" God and was "the" God and call it a day assuming that their argument that the Word (which they attribute to being Jesus) was a lesser divine being stands. This is what the scholars state in response to this type of argument:

"The translation "a god" is especially erroneous, for this very reason. variations in the biblical writings, including those of John, between theos (God) and ho theos (The God) have no effect whatsoever on the meaning of the word theos. If John had meant to signal that ho theos meant "God" and theos meant "a god" the wording in the rest of the prologue(John 1:1-18) is very strange. After verse 2, which summarizes the first two clauses of verse 1. theos appears five times in the prologue, each time without the article, and in the first four occurances everyone agrees it means "God"(vv.6,12,13,18a,18b)" ~ pg. 141 ibid.

In essence the only way that the argument can be supported is if the whole discourse is de-constructed and de-contextualized and all other verses, even those in the same general text, are stripped of their meaning. Following this line of argumentation is not only unsupportable, it is highly unwise if the object is to get to the truth.

Creator Of All Things NOT A Jr. Partner:

Isaiah 37:16 ~ "O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth."

This is just one rendering of verses within the Old Testament that affirm that God is the creator of all things. The New Testament continues in this theme but the attribution is to Jesus himself. Here is one verse among many that could be used to support our argument:

1 Corinthians 8:6 ~"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

At this point the critic asserts that all things are "of" the Father and "by" Jesus Christ, that, at best, it only indicates a working relationship between Jesus and the Father. However, what does that do to the text and the understanding? It creates 2 Gods! Even if one is a lesser god the problem still exists that there is a complete violation of what we understand from the Old Testament that there is only ONE creator of all things!

In the text itself, Paul affirms his dedication to the these that there is by one God, the Hebrew Shema (Deut. 6:4) in 1 Corinthians 8:4:

"As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one."

He also acknowledges that pagans believe differently in v.5

"For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)"

and then reverts to a strong statement in verse 6 to delineate the difference as referenced above. So this affirms the contextual flow of the verses.

So what of the "from" (Greek: ek or ex) and the "through" (Greek: dia)? Certainly they must have different objects.

Not necessarily so. We find this in the following scripture:

Romans 11:36 ~ "For of [ex] him, and through [dia] him, and to [eis] him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen."

Noone can dispute that this scripture is referring to God and his ability to subdue and bring all things and events unto himself. Therefore we understand that God IS the one at work through and in all things. So the question is how does a "lesser being" or "Jr. Partner" achieve these accolades? To render such is an unsupportable argument.

In addition, please note that EACH of the prepositions used in 1 Cor. 8:6 are present in Romans 11:36 not only that but they are written by the same person. What is the message?

Jesus is the FOR, the THROUGH and the BY whom all things that exist, exist. This is a strong affirmation of the deity, supremacy and work of Christ, not as a lesser god, or a jr. partner but as God himself, without question and without reservation.

How does this refer to Jesus and yet Jesus as theantropist or God/Man that never ceases from being one to be the other, maintain and ontological distinction between he and the Father? That is a mystery and also another article, but it is biblical fact as well.

Who Is It That Dwells Among Us?

Isaiah 7:14 ~ "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

One thing is for sure, out of all that we don't know, there are some things that we do know. That Jesus, as God, put on the likeness of sinful flesh , was born of a young virgin and came to live among us. It was him that displayed his power over creation, the elements, sin, sickness, disease and death and rose again the third day. He didn't have to become the Son of God over time, neither did he need a committee or council to approve him. He WAS God, he IS God and he lives today.

That's the true and real meaning of Christmas and I hope that everyone comes to know that in this life.

Merry Christmas and a blessed and Happy New Year!

New Destiny...Same Ole Sins

2011-12-20T03:00:00.007-06:00

Bishop Dr. I V Hilliard has announced his resignation from the Board of Bishops that were to help secure the transition of leadership for New Destiny Christian Center, the church which Pastor Zachery Tims pastored. In a video announcement he stated the following among other things:

“Now after being involved for sometime in the process, I have decided to resign my position in this bishop’s council. Now my commitment to integrity will not allow me to support something that I believe is deceptive and that compromises previously agreed upon procedures and protocol.”

He also stated this by twitter:

“Who stands by and watches a theft take place and does not sound the alarm? Only the irresponsible and the uncaring..NDCC members we care...”

Dr. Hilliard's video announcement can be found HERE.

Now, I ask: Can a devil be trusted to follow any agreement? The obvious answer is no. How did Dr. Hilliard feel that the unrepentant devil of New Destiny Christian Center (NDCC) representative leadership was going to honor any agreements or even desire a reversion to spiritual renewal? Keep reading, my statement will become very clear.

Even Guests Are Changing Their Minds

Dr. Hilliard's isn't the only one disassociating themselves from the ministry, or at least so it appears. Dr. Michael A Phillips, who appears to have been slated as a guest minister at New Destiny, has spoken this in a special announcement:

"Regretfully, after prayer and consideration, I have chosen to cancel my time of ministry at New Destiny Christian Center this Thursday evening, December 22, 2011. Please join us in keeping New Destiny & its people covered in prayer during their season of transition."

Dr. Phillips announcement can be found HERE Great idea..."cast NOT your pearls before the swine"...think I'm too rough? Keep reading...

So Who's "Stealing & Deceiving " Their Way Into Leadership At New Destiny?

Could it be pastor Paula White the supposed "spiritual mother" of the late Pastor Tims? Reports are circulating that Paula has been appointed in some fashion to take over the church. Remember she denied that she was there in any capacity previously. It seems that everyone affirms that she is and has been there during this "time of transition".

UPDATE: 12/29/2011 ~ It has been confirmed that Pastor Paula White has been announced as pastor and Pastor Riva Tims will be challenging the process in court. WESH.COM Orlando for the full story

Pastor Rico Sharp who leads Spirit of Truth Worship Ministries in Lake Mary, Fla., affirms as much and sheds some light on Paula's association with the ministry as he has published on Facebook:

"It is true and of no doubt that Paula White is the new pastor of New Destiny Christian Center. This is not speculation but true. I know!!!!! Pastor Dana and I will be praying for and standing with all of you as things develop. Dr Zach would have never put Paula in this place, neither did they have any relationship for the past four years. I know this because Dr Zach told me that she cut him off when he fell, so therefore he moved on from that connection. There is a malicious story of deception, manipulation, and greed developing and surfacing about Paula White that will totally dishonor The Holy Spirit, Dr Zachary Tims, and the innocence of the NDCC family."

He also added:

"There is a lot of corruption that has been going on behind closed doors and it hides behind the disguise of prayer, fasting and the voice of God. I personally know that NDCC you have been lied to, misinformed, and not taken to heart during this whole process."

First of all NDCC is in not way innocent. They are guilty as they can be. through their representative leadership, they have LIED and SINNED as well. Secondly, the pastor, Zachery Tims, BACKSLID according to this minister that supposedly knows the happenings at NDCC. So in effort to tell the story he also tells his inability to provide any spiritual insight or suggest a system of accountability or restoration to help any of these folk. That's to his shame, but all SINS will be revealed and what is done in secret shall be preached from the housetops.

So far as who will be next, no official announcement will be made until New Year's Eve.

My Take:

Church transition is never and easy thing to go through. COGIC is full of transitions and many of them are froth full of trouble and embarrassment to whatever degree that trouble and embarrassment comes.

The thing I find most disturbing here is that many of these folk appear to be around for "fishes and loaves". In other words some seem to be hanging around to get what they can get and receive. Here, we have a pastor, who within 48 hours we will know whether he died of a drug overdose, that was well received by all of these people even through his reversion into personal sins. He was in the group with them, endorsing them, helping them make money and they were doing the same for him. They facilitated his sins and endorsed his evil by silence.

As one of the "transition leaders", T D Jakes (who hasn't resigned) spoke, that he knew Tims was suffering:

"I thought I was the only one who know how unhappy Zach was, how broken he was, how afraid he was if anybody was to see any flaw in him. He tried hard to heal himself, to fix himself," ~ Bishop T. D. Jakes

However, none of these folk made one attempt to stop him in his track and give the ultimate call to righteousness to him and help him overcome what they SAW him struggling with.

The one person that tried to bring Zachery to a place of doing right and honoring the word of God was his former wife, Pastor Riva Tims.

In response to her efforts to save her family and bring her husband to accountability which WOULD have saved him, the church allowed Zachery to kick her out and followed that up by disassociating themselves from her. At least until he died! From a recent Facebook posting the church CONTINUES to persist in their abuse and ungodly manner both towards Pastor Riva and the Tims children. In response to a friend expressing that she was "shocked" at the news coming from New Destiny Christian Center, Riva responded with the following statement:

"i am too, you should have seen zion today wearing his father's suit and shoes. he is only 12 years old. this was a tough day for the children. the board has never reached out to them and has refused any meetings with me. God is in control. My faith will not waiver. love you both very much,"

Where was Hilliard in this? Where was Jakes voice in this? Where is Paula's voice in this? Where is Shane's voice in this? A church continues in the culture of worldliness and ungodliness that wrapped up and enveloped their pastor and contributed to his death, and leaders responsible for righting the wrong that has taken place, fail to speak a definitive word against it???

A voice and direction against this SIN may have been present, but it seems that no one was really concerned about anything until things simply didn't go their way in the process of transition. How much respect can anyone be expected to have for any of these people? Pray for me, because IF what is reported is true, and the SINS of New Destiny persist as they obviously do, I find VERY LITTLE to associate with INTEGRITY, and very little to feel sorry for when it all blows up and leads to further and greater embarrassment. If the leaders of NDCC were God's people, the FIRST thing they would do is REPENT!

I find no integrity with anyone who sat around rubbing hands and exchanging money when souls were at stake and this man was sleeping with strippers and reverting to drugs.

I find no integrity with ministers who were so eager to take the pulpit, expand their "ministry" and receive an offering, more than they were willing to ask questions about who they were associating themselves with and demanding holiness and right associations.

I find no integrity among leaders who claim to be "spiritual fathers and mothers" who added to this man's sins with silence and endorsed evil through inaction and failure to correct a church for the treatment of a founding member of the church.

This is deplorable and believe me, EVERY tower of Babel is coming down. This is just ONE of them. We've seen Schuller's Paulk's, Long's and the list goes on as they begin to line up to be brought low. I am convinced that we will see some more fallout because anything and every kingdom not built on the SOLID ROCK of Christ, will come down. These folk are building on people power, politics, associations and money and have forsaken the God that calls men from darkness into the light.

This is a sad state of affairs and we can only know that somehow God WILL get the glory even if he has to drive all of these that have some responsibility to their knees by continually frustrating their plans. God will get his glory!

Blessed!

"Speak It In The Atmosphere"

2011-12-18T09:00:00.010-06:00

The New Gnostic Thought

In 2007 I featured a post called "The Divination Of Detroit" in which I highlighted the efforts of Juanita Bynum II (or whomever she is currently named) pointing to her practices during a prayer service at Greater Grace Temple, Detroit Michigan. Juanita was presenting a 3 pronged strategy as a key to receiving your blessing and seeing a "manifestation of the Spirit", "in the earth realm".

Now, I want you to know that the terminology is suspect to begin with. There is no other "realm" whereby we can perceive a "miracle" from God. So cliches such as this aren't really worth their salt and certainly aren't inspired by the spirit...at least not the Holy Spirit!

Back to the issues...Juanita's strategy was to :

Praise the Lord intensely
Wait for the anointing to come.
After the anointing "arrives" call out your name in the atmosphere to attract or draw what you need in the spirit.

As I pointed out then and still do now, Juanita's teaching in this regard was a repackaging of PAGAN ideas and teachings on the "Law Of Attraction". Her teaching was froth full of scripturally unsupportable assertions and dangerously ungodly implications.

Unfortunately, gnosticism and cultism is in full swing within the modern church and especially within some of my fellow Pentecostal circles. It seems that this saying of "speaking what you want into the atmosphere" has permeated the landscape and many are being fed a deadly diet of toxic spirituality that is destined and bound to kill and subdue one's spirit to the enemy of our souls.

Donald Lawrence

Example, Donald Lawrence in his work, "The Law Of Confession Pt. 1" which was inspired in part by a series of teachings by his pastor Bill Winston of Chicago (who has also said that if you believe in the "word of faith" you can be a millionaire in 30 days) said that "you are what you speak into the atmosphere" he also said this on the website under his biography as it pertains to the "Law Of Confession" itself:

“A law is simply a principle, based on the predictable consequence of an act, confession in the Greek language is homo-logeo which means to say what has been said. There is a spiritual law for confession: you just say what God has already said...`Speak The Word.’”

Another artist, Myron Butler and Levi, in his song "Speak" stated:

Myron Butler

"I shall have what I decree, yes I believe, It belongs to me, So I'm going to speak into the atmosphere"...Speak it, speak it, open up your mouth and declare it."

Both of these songs and artists are very popular within the black church and community of gospel artists especially. They are certainly not the only one's promoting this type of message, but they are notable because they are so popular and many choir presentations are full of or have been full of their music.

What neither Donald nor Myron may not realize is that they are actually dealing in metaphysical concepts erroneously claiming two things: 1- That words (whether repetitions of biblical verses or not) are a force that manipulates the material world similar to performing an incantation over some object expecting it to change shape and form and. 2- That there are laws instituted by God that govern such transactions but are hidden to the general public and only revealed to certain among us for all to enjoin.

NEITHER of these thoughts or assertions are true however. Words do not metaphysically create material substances. Words certainly may arrange certain circumstances that may impact ones future or current status or condition, however words have no ability to manipulate material either positively or negatively.

The more ominous assertion is that words manipulate spiritual reality. That words that are spoken out loud work behind the curtains of reality to create circumstances that would not have otherwise been created without the words being spoken. Thoughts along this line are equally as faulty or fallacious of an argument. Although the communication of certain words can either energize, motivate or deflate and depress is obvious, but that is not a meta-spiritual process.

Where Does All This Come From?

"If you want it, you can have it, if you get out of the way" ~ Abraham-Hicks

Some say that the bible is the basis for the beliefs mentioned here. Certainly there are texts when taken out of context and expanded into places and areas that they were not meant to expand, that seem to support much of what was said. In other words one has to misinterpret the bible to truly find support for much of what is commonly preached and sang about in many of our churches. On the other hand, no one makes it a habit of talking negatively and expecting positive results for anything. But could there be something else at work here?

Before there was "The Secret" there was the world of Abraham-Hicks and the Law Of Attraction. It is also known as the science of deliberate creation.

"That which is like unto itself is drawn"

Esther & Jerry Hicks

Defining physical bodies as "clumps" and asserting that we are not living souls or don't possess souls, but are a continuous stream of "source energy", Esther Hicks is a woman who is said to "transfer blocks of thought from a non-physical source energy using the word Abraham". In her seminars she "channels" (although she doesn't like to use that word) the "source energy" which appears to be a multiple "infinite" entity or being from whom Esther translates both energy and intent and assigns the name "Abraham". Once again, this is the name Esther gives the entity based on her interpretation of the message and intent of the "source energy" speaking to her. (at least so the "entity" says)

"When you begin to understand Law of Attraction, and you understand that which is like unto itself is drawn, then it is easier and easier to understand that you are offering a signal, and the entire Universe responds."

Abraham, (through Esther Hicks) says that humans are here to "co-create" with him/them, it also says that humans are simply "vibrations" of "source energy". In fact according to this spirit guide, everything in the physical world was once vibration, that was thought upon until it became thought form, until it eventually became a physical manifestation. According to this spirit guide, it takes 17 seconds for thoughts to become vibrations and ultimately thought form not only expand individual reality but it also expand the universe. This leads to the conclusion that all thoughts create some form of reality.

The 17 Second Vibration

Remember, according to this new gnostic teaching, it takes 17 seconds for a thought to become a vibration and ultimately thought form. Once that happens, it brings other thoughts in line with it. This is because of the the Law Of Attraction, which is the most important element of 12 Universal Laws as outlined under the principles of the Laws Of Attraction. Once those thoughts are repeatedly meditated upon, they become "chronic" thoughts also known as a set of beliefs that only attract other similar beliefs to it. So in the universe, whatever thoughts or vibrations that are put out ultimately receive equivalent results.

The Negative

Generally speaking out and rendering thoughts "against" things are considered to be negative and not something that helps one grow. In fact Abraham says that when you push against things such as drugs and even terrorism, ("which is minimal is the scheme of things", at least according to this supposed source energy) it causes you to not "go with who you are". So in short, one can't dwell on the negative because in doing that one is not pursuing their positive self. If one let's go of negative expressions and thoughts and focus on the brightest times and reality of things in the current time and reality, resistance will go away and the "stream" (of source energy) will carry one to the "exalted expression" of who one truly is.

Inspiration

In this strange world, the Law Of Attraction is responsible for one wanting to fulfill their purpose or calling. This is nothing more than a non-physical energy vibration that one views as a sensation. Ultimately the Law of Attraction should lead persons to bliss if done right. Abraham says this through Esther: "Nothing is more important than I feel good". This is hedonism and totally contrary and incompatible with a biblical world view.

What You Want & The Ultimate Condition

When asking for something that you want (which is the first step to receiving it) one cannot continue to SAY that they do not have what they are asking for. One cannot tell the story of "what is" if one wants something to change because, according to the Universal Law of Attraction saying things activates the vibration within. Abraham says that we are "spiritual and physical beings" who live in an environment "where that which is spirit materializes". One can become the vibrational equivalent to the source within and begin to look and see things through the experience of that source.

Modern religious teachers call this tapping into the divine nature inside of one's self. In fact Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar and many other teachers claim that God only produces after his kind and since he produced man he produced little god's like himself with the same attributes to create with the power of words just like he did in the beginning.

“Now I gotta hit this thing real hard in the very beginning because I ain't got time to go through all this, but I am going to say to you right now you are gods, little “g”, you are gods because you came from God and you are gods. You are not just human. The only human part about you is this physical body that you live in.” Creflo Dollar (Sept. 15, 22, 2002, Made after his Kind)

"God's reason for creating Adam was his desire to reproduce himself...He was not a little like God. He was not almost like God. He was not subordinate to God even."~ Kenneth Copeland "Following The Faith Of Abraham" Kenneth Copeland Ministries 1989 Tape # 01-3001 side 1, as cited in "Christianity In Crisis" ~ Hank Hanegraaff [Harvest House Publishers 1993]Pg. 108

Most of this information can be found on this web page: Laws Of Attraction Videos

The 2nd Of The Universal Laws

The Law of Vibration: The Law of Vibration is all about how everything in this universe vibrates or moves. It also explains how each thing, sound, thought, emotion and words all have there very own vibration or frequency in which it lives.

This seems to be the principle of focus that is being "christianized" by many of the proponents of these concepts. The thoughts, after 17 seconds become vibrations and vibrations attract other vibrations of the same or similar frequency.

"Speaking it into the atmosphere" or "calling the name of what you want when the spirit is high", is said to draw what is desired to one's self. This is a NON-BIBLICAL practice that has no warrant within scripture and is firmly rooted within new gnostic thought and cultism based on the Universal Law Of Attraction.

There are an additional 10 Universal Laws:

Law of Divine Oneness: The Law of Divine Oneness explains how we are all connected in someway. Everything we do, say or think is connected and effects all others and this vast universe we live in.

The Law of Action: The Law of Action states that we must move in the direction of our dreams in order to achieve them. We must engage in some action that supports what we think about and or dream about.

The Law Of Correspondence: The Law of Correspondence states “as above, so below” or in other words, everything has it’s own corresponding counterpart.

The Law Of Cause And Effect: This Universal Law I’m sure you’ve heard of. Maybe you know it by another name. You know: every action has an equal or opposite reaction. Yep, that’s this law in a nutshell.

The Law Of Compensation: The Law of Compensation is really the Law of Cause and Effect as it relates to how we are provided with blessings based on our deeds and daily actions. You’ve heard what comes around goes around, well here it is, as a Law of Nature.

The Law of Transmutation Of Energy: This Universal Law demonstrates how all people have the ability and the power to change there current situations in life. You can do this by changing the energies that you are putting out into the world, by following and understanding these universal laws of attraction.

The Law of Relativity: The Law of Relativity states that all things are relative. We are all given our own roadblocks, our own personal challenges we must face in order to grow as individuals and by comparing yours to other peoples circumstances is a waste, because there situations are different, yet, relative.

The Law of Polarity: This law states that just like a magnet that has opposite polarities so does everything else in nature. Everything has an equal opposite such as good and evil or yes and no.

The Law of Rhythm: The Law of Rhythm explains how everything in the universe has it’s own rhythm. These rhythms are important to our very existence. These rhythms are what create the seasons. This rhythm is what the cycle of life is all about. All cycles have parts to them that we favor less and it is in how we deal with these things that are important.

The Law of Gender: This law simply states that there is both a feminine and a masculine principle to all things in nature. It is up to us to open ourselves up to these gender principals to create balance in our lives. Imagine this law as the law of yin and yang.

Conclusion:

Does any of this sound familiar? If one were to walk in many of our churches today, one would find elements of the same concepts and ideas many almost verbatim with Jesus name slapped on top of it. How many times have you heard, "don't speak negatively into the atmosphere"? As if negative spirits will be drawn to you and something bad will happen as a result or that the plan of God would be undermined by what you think or say.

How many times have you heard your choir sing something to the effect of praise the Lord so that we can be more "attractive to the Spirit"? Or been encouraged to worship to "change the atmosphere" as to prepare for some spiritual importation or supernatural blessing?

Ephesians 3:20 ~ "Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,"

In this strange new gnosticism, words and what one says either brings blessings or curses. God is not the author of all things and according to many of the leading proponents of these teachings man becomes a god even if it is with a little "g". Words and mans ability to speak to the atmosphere takes precedence over the Power of God. The problem is that the "universe" didn't die for any of our sins, not is the universe anything but a material existence. Ultimately, God is simply a manager or an incidental part of all that happens.

When will we wake up and stop allowing leaders and music ministries to lead us into apostasy and false doctrine? I challenge you, when you hear this in your church, as you may, stand up and present this information and more to your pastor and music leader and see what type of response you get. Listen to the messages even more intently looking for signs of meta-spiritual affirmations or metaphysical presentation of biblical concepts. Usually error begets error, and although this may challenge the way you've worshiped in times past, it will prepare you for much more effective and Christ centered worship in the future.

Blessed!

Is Marriage A Relic Of The Past?

2011-12-17T03:00:00.004-06:00

Hebrews 13:4 ~ "Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."

Nearly 40% of individuals say that marriage is an obsolete part of American life. A recent PEW Research Center analysis of the US Census reports recently surfaced that claimed that the marriage rate is down within the United States to historic lows. Example:

In 1960, among young adults ages 18-29, nearly 60% of them were married.

In 2010, among young ~ 18-29 only 20% are married.

In 1960 71% of all adults age 18 were married

In 2010 51% of all adults age 18 are married

The new marriage rate from 2009 to 2010 fell by 5% overall

Women on average are waiting to get married until age 26.5, while men are waiting until almost 29 years old to get married.

61% of Black adults were married in 1960, 31% of Black adults are married in 2010

74% of White adults were married in 1960, 55% of White adults are married in 2010

As the very first statement suggests, according to Pew, marriage is becoming a more and more unnecessary part of American life and family. For many, marital commitments don't offer either solid or noticeable benefits to entice them that are single to jump the broom. For many the idea of marriage has simply been relegated to the status of an "arrangement of convenience" with "mutual financial benefits", rather than a lasting and enduring commitment between two individuals.

"For Richer Or For Poorer"

"...to have and to hold from this day forward for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health to love and to cherish, till death do us part,..."

This is the part of the wedding ceremony that often gets much attention. Everyone seems to like the "for richer" part, but not many like the "for poorer" part. The "feeling" may get one to accept the "for richer", in fact now days, one doesn't need too much of a feeling for that. All it takes is $$$...However, the point is that only COMMITMENT causes one to accept the possibility of the "for poorer" part of the vow. This reluctance seems to be the foundation of the declining marriage rate as you will see.

According to the numbers, the declining marital trend is not just limited to the United States. It seems that most developed countries are experiencing the same or a similar trend or decline in marriages overall. The interesting thing is that the decline has continued in both good and bad economic times. Why such an alarming drop over 50 years in commitments of marriage within the US?

It seems that trends may be rooted in the need for economic stability. Individuals who "shack up" view relationships in terms of economic benefits, business relationships and the maintenance of independent financial lives rather than in terms of commitment. In other words, for many single individuals, the concept of marriage is no longer about "for poorer" as is the standard commitment, but about the "for richer" or at the very least, for "the way hings are right now" and "for what I have that belongs to me...stays with me" and "what you have that belongs to you...stays with you".

Show Me The Money!

Stephanie Marshall & Kelton Scott

"We haven't necessarily combined our income together, but what we're doing is working," ~ Kelton Scott

According to CNN Living blog report, money may be yet another consideration for individuals not getting married but yet having a live in lover. They stated the following:

"The median household income for college-educated cohabiting couples, aged 30 to 44, in 2009 was $106,400, compared to $101,160 for their married counterparts. College-educated adults without live-in partners had a median household income of $90,067, according to the study...."

The reports and trends seems to suggest that within committed relationships of marriage, many times one spouse either won't or doesn't work for whatever reason, leaving less money to pad the financial bottom line. The CNN report also said this regarding Kelton's statement:

"Working" in more ways than one: Among the college-educated, the study said, in 78% of cohabiting couples, both partners had jobs. For college-educated married couples, only 67% were in two-earner marriages."

"Why Buy The Cow When You Can Get The Milk For Free?"

Many of us have heard this saying once or twice especially from some of the older and more wise members of the family. The statement is plan, simple and true...who, in their right mind, wants to pay for what they can get for free???

"Star Power" has reaffirmed that the lack of marital commitment is not an inhibitor to starting a life and a family, and that marriage is only an incidental part of relationships. Individuals such as Nia Long (aka: Jordan in the movie "The Best Man") recently gave birth to her second child, Kez Sunday Udoka, in November 2011. The problem is that Nia was praised by the community when she became pregnant, even though she wasn't and has not been married. Kez is her second child born "out of wedlock" and without the blessing of a marital commitment. Her older child Massai, who is about 10 years old, also has a different father.

Then there's the lovely and talented Lauyn Hill (aka: L Boogie), who not only had one or two children out of wedlock, but 6 children by a man who is reportedly still married to another woman. She delivered her 6th child in July 2011 to an "unknown" father. Rohan Marley, who was married to another woman, is said to be the father of her first 5 children. Unfortunately, her allegiance to the teachings of Haile Selassie and Rastafarianism, won't allow her to comfortably enter into contractual agreements and relationships of course, so therefore she does what she does to the praise of the public.

Fornication, for whatever reason or convenience is simply wrong. No matter the benefits, economically or socially, sin is still sin.

There are an ever alarming number of church folk that feel they can "play house", "pretend to be married" and claim that they are still saved. There are those that do all the things that married folk do, all the while making the claim that "God understands them"...I'll be the first to say, you're right. He does understand. He understands that you are in SIN.

I am reminded of a couple some years ago, who came asking for me to preform a "renewal" of their wedding vows stating that they wanted to do so because of all the things that they had been through and they wanted a fresh point of reference within their marriage. I said OK, and set a time for the event which I understood would be a small, private event to be done in the living room of my home.

At the time of the event, family and friends showed up and everyone was dressed to a "T". My living room was over-flowing with people. The groom eventually delivered an official "marriage license" to me to complete. I said, "Wait a minute, we're not preforming a marriage, this is simply a renewal service."...they responded by saying that, they felt they needed to pick up the certificate to make the renewal feel more official...My name wasn't "Joe Sausage Head".What did I know? I KNEW these folk weren't married for whatever reason. They were faithful to the church, but never did get married...and what made it so bad, I point blank asked them if they were really married and they continued to answer YES. They wouldn't confess their sin. Needless to say they left the house still unmarried and I never completed or filed the certificate. One can't force blessings upon individuals who refuse to admit they are wrong and refuse to repent.

Conclusion:

"For Better Or For Worse"
Tyler Perry On TBS

Surprisingly once individuals make the commitment to marry, almost half of the commitments don't last 5 years. Surprisingly, current studies reveal that finances possibly contribute only 5% to divorce rates. In other words the things that single persons seem to value that keeps them from marriage, is not as great of a factor as it pertains to the enduring nature of the marriage as previously thought. It seems that the primary factors for divorce include, lack of compatibility, lack of support, abuse, and even sexual dysfunction.

It seems that spending too much time being shaped by and focusing on material issues such as money, takes time away from truly building sustainable emotional relationships and the support necessary to make a house a home.

I recently had the opportunity to watch a few episodes of the new series "For Better Or For Worse". In it the writer and director Tyler Perry presented a whole series of marital issues, problems and concepts some more serious than others. In one particular episode the character, sportscaster "Joseph Jetson" (actor Jason Olive) , when talking with the producer of his show, "C-Sports Now" said the following about a live in lover in contrast to a wife:

"Technically, until you put a ring on her finger, she's still fair game."

In the picture above, Kelton says "it's working" as it pertains to the financial arrangements of shacking up with Stephanie. In other words he feels that he can keep what he earns without obligation, and she can keep what she earns without obligation. However, there's just one thing I find troubling about the whole thing. Look at the picture. Do you see what I see? Why do these two "single people" have on wedding rings or at the very least matching rings on their wedding fingers?

Might it be that they need to be reminded that they are in a relationship? Or could it be that "playing house" for adults is really a matter of shame and they don;t want others to know they are not married? Too late: one may fool all of the people all of the time, but God is never fooled...he knows if you married and when you are, you'll observe the laws of the land in displaying your commitment.

1 Corinthians 7:9 ~But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

Blessed!

Reference Information:

Pew Research ~ Barely Half Of US Adults Are Married

Pew Research ~ The Decline Of Marriage & The Rise Of New Families

Pew research ~ Living Together, The Economics Of Co-Habitation

MSN ~ Money Isn't The Culprit In Most Marriages

Jerry Sandusky's Attorney, Joe Amendola

2011-12-16T11:45:00.000-06:00

Mr. Amendola explains many things here including that the vilification of someone who is "alleged" to be a criminal is not and American value and that "alleged victims" aren't really victims until the case has been proven in court. Legally, he certainly has a point, but there seems to be something missing...I know this, if you know of abuse can stop or prevent it and you don't do so, that is immoral:

Homosexuality & Moral Harm

2011-12-12T15:45:00.011-06:00

Everyone Has Rights!

Let me first say that violating the basic rights of any human being should not be upheld. Every person, qualified for a job should be able to work. Every sick person, should have adequate health care. In most instances, no one should be discriminated against in housing and basic access to the essentials services of life and living. (Just in case you want to know why I say "in most instances" well, that's because I believe that child molesters shouldn't live next to schools and parks where children play etc...I think solid moral arguments can be used to justify those sorts of things) However, what is in question here, is not simply a matter of rights, it is a matter of normalizing, endorsing and even favoring certain types of "politically acceptable" behaviors that have moral implications.

The problem is this: When certain types of what could be considered immoral behavior are accepted as normal or moral, one must review the basis upon which other forms of behavior are excluded or considered to be immoral.

Politics & Morality

Have you ever herd someone say, "You can't legislate morality"? The fact is that someone's morality is being legislated every day in the courts. What can't be established through the courts and legislative system is objective morality itself. Court and legislative standards are subject to change because they are products of men dealing in specific times and eras.

The political and legislative arena is the primary venue in which proponents of the homosexual agenda have created a space for the acceptance of homosexual practices. Many of their leaders are deeply politically connected. However, what they know is that political intervention only goes so far. A society must be retrained and re-educated if the desire is to normalize things that have questionable moral implications. Therefore, the rise of the homo-agenda in efforts such as GLSEN's ALLY Week, and the ominous and deceptive "It Gets Better" campaign, go a step further, catering to the youth and playing on the emotions of individuals seeking to condemn opponents of homosexuality by associating them with bias and discrimination and thus illiciting an overtly emotional response.

Family Re-Engineering

Some years ago, instead of announcing layoffs, many major corporations said that they were going through a "corporate re-engineering". This was the "new socially sensitive" way to say that they were laying off good employees while at the same time placing a greater burden on the remaining employees who would be retained for the same amount of money. In the meantime the corporations would also keep the savings in salaries and benefits as a result of the layoffs using it to pad the bottom line of the balance sheet. In fact some CEO's were hired with the express mission of cutting the corporate workforce and causing the company to "operate more efficiently". Although some companies benefited as a result, all it really was, was an attempt to increase company stock prices and dividends for its shareholders at the expense and cost of everyone else.

Gay advocacy is really no different in this regard. A considerable amount of time, resource and energy has been spent by the gay advocacy movement focusing on concepts of family and what a family is supposed to be as discovered by Dr. David Parker in our post, "When Gay Day Comes Your Way". In gay advocacy, a family with two mothers yields the same results as a family with two fathers yields the same results as a family with a man and a woman as parents. There is no quantifiable difference as to the results in their analysis. In addition, even as Michelle Bachmann learned on the campaign trail, there is no age too young for the brainwashing that gay is OK. As I also reviewed, in Illinois, when the Catholic Church took a differing opinion with the State on the issue of placing children into what it considered family structures harmful to the growth and development of children based on religious values and principles, they lost over $30 M as a result! So the grassroots effort to restructure and "re-engineer" the family with an intent to affirm homosexual normalization is in full effect and in full swing at every level.

However, there is another and more ominous argument that is hung over from the days of "free love" during the 50's and 60's. this argument has been repackaged for consumption by the modern politically connected and socially accepting masses. This argument is highly emotional and is being used to support the moral acceptance of the gay agenda and gay lifestyle in general. It is called the morality of harm.

Gay Love Harms No One!

Anyone that has argued against homosexuality at any level has run into this opposition once or twice I'm sure. This is the theme song of the modernists not just toward the gay agenda, but in almost every other argument you can name that either prohibits or restricts persons from certain actions.

It is called the morality of harm. Simply put this argument when applied to homosexuality, states that personal expressions of love are of a private nature and that homosexuals agree to be with one another as a matter of free will, and that their expressions of love are not intrinsically harmful to anyone. Therefore, homosexuality is not wrong and should be socially accepted and is justifiable as a human right and a right of those seeking to engage in such behavior.

Is any of that true however? Is homosexuality "harmless"? If it is, should homosexuality be deemed to be "right" simply because it does not appear to "harm" anyone? Are behaviors socially and morally acceptable simply because they do not "harm" anyone? Are the only ones that stand to be harmed as a result of homosexuality the participants in the relationships themselves? ie: can anyone else be harmed as a result of their actions and acts?

As you can see, these are some rather profound questions. Let's look at what I call the "harm principle" for a minute:

The "Harm Principle"

There are generally two types of recognizable harm:

1- Active Harm
2- Passive Harm

Very briefly, many Christians can associate these things to concepts of sin such as the sin of commission (active harm) and sins of omission (passive harm) Whereas active harm would be similar to someone beating a person to death, passive harm would be similar to watching a person get beat to death and offering no or very little assistance in mitigating the circumstance.

Most often, when defending homosexuality, modern moral relativists, tend to defend the active harm associated with homosexuality. While most people that attack homosexuality as a lifestyle choice tend to attack it from the position that it would be a passive harm to remain silent while those who are engaged in the lifestyle do so to their own hurt and to the hurt of others.

Is Homosexuality Harmless?

While gay advocacy places considerable time, resource and energy promoting the idea that homosexuality is harmless, the actual statiscs say otherwise within the United States. According to the Centers For Disease Control (CDC)

Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM) are the population of individuals most severely affected by HIV/AIDS within the US.

Although these men (MSM) represent roughly 2% of the US population they account for nearly 61% of all new HIV infections annually.

In 2009 although Black men account for 14% of the US Population, Black (MSM) accounted for nearly 44% of all new HIV infections.

Estimation of new HIV infections among Black women are 15 times that of new infections among White women.

Several studies done by the American Psychology Association (APA) in 2002 suggest that:

"...gay men, lesbians and bisexuals appear to have higher rates of some mental disorders compared with heterosexuals, although not to the level of a serious pathology."

Their rationalization for this was that "Discrimination may help fuel these higher rates." I certainly don't believe that homosexuals are crazy (no more crazy than me or anyone else) but it should be pointed out that a lifestyle contrary to God's purpose, whether one is a heterosexual or a homosexual, is bound to be filled with mental anguish and frustration because it is not blessed!

Continuing: In 2002 Several large population based public heath studies were discussed in the November American Psychologist (Vol. 56, No. 11) by Susan Cochran, PhD, an epidemiologist in the University of California, Los Angeles School of Public Health, who authored or co-authored many of the studies. Specifically, the studies find that there were:

Higher rates of major depression, generalized anxiety disorder and substance use or dependence in lesbian and gay youth.

Higher rates of recurrent major depression among gay men.

Higher rates of anxiety, mood and substance use disorders, and suicidal thoughts among people ages 15 to 54 with same-sex partners.

Higher use of mental health services in men and women reporting same-sex partners.

As one can see, from just these stats alone, homosexuality is anything but harmless. Now, the critic associates these numbers with a lack of public education on homosexual issues. They would claim that distributing condoms and total social and societal acceptance of homosexuality would solve all the problems, and that resistance to allowing homosexuals their "rights" are what is damaging to both the psychology and the culture. None of those arguments are supportable by any evidence and are merely emotional assertions placed within the argument to incite an emotional response.

Closer Look At "Harm Morality" And Its Implications

I think it can be clearly established that homosexuality, as an act, is harmful both psychologically and physically to its participants to whatever degree. However, I think we should also look at "harm morality" in general to see if it is a rationally based approach to morality to say that just because something doesn't appear to be "harmful" there's no problem with it...

I almost don't know where to begin...

Consider this, would adultery be right simply because the unwitting spouse doesn't know about it? Surprisingly, under concepts of harm morality one would have to say yes! If the unknowing spouse doesn't know, then "no harm, no foul"!!!

Of course we KNOW that this is a ridiculous notion. Just because an adulterous spouse doesn't know about the affair and doesn't suffer emotionally because of the affair, does not mean that the affair is not harmful. Both the personal character of the adulterer and to the marriage in general has been damaged and compromised. Whether in secret or public knowledge, it is fully and immoral act and an act to be condemned.

What about drug usage? An addict takes crack in the basement of his house. Is it a moral act because no one else appears to be "harmed"? Modern moral relativists think its OK. This is what we are facing.

Let's look a little further; How about a robber who robs a bank? The monetary system has plenty of money and taking paper from the bank doesn't effect anyone's account. Therefore, because no one is "really harmed", is it OK to rob banks?

How about squatters on land such as we see with the "Occupy" protesters. State and public land is paid for with our tax dollars therefore we (the occupiers) have a right to claim it indefinitely for our own purposes. Claiming taxpayer land harms no one?

Are any of these things considered "moral actions" solely of themselves? I venture to say NO way!

However, these are the thoughts of modern moral relativists who believe that, if it doesn't "harm" it should be allowed. I mean, look at all kinds of immoral activities that persons could consent and agree to do and maintain between themselves and others claiming a moral act is allowable. However what is in question is does the thought that , "I ain't harming nobody" trump the immorality of the performance of one's actions? I think when it is rationally thought through we can clearly see "harm" is a intellectually unfulfilling basis from which to assess sexual morality or the moral status of many other actions.

Conclusion

As we can see "harm morality" is full of problems as it pertains to assessing the moral "rightness" of many situations and the assessment of many moral issues. When it comes to homosexuality and sexual issues in general, though the adherents may "agree" to do many things, that doesn't make their agreement nor the resultant actions "morally acceptable" by any means. Agreement or consent to evil DOES NOT make evil right!

Isaiah 5:20 ~"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

I believe that I have shown that the implications of assessing morality based on "harm" are enormous. The fact is that "harm" is also a subjective standard. What may be considered to be harmful to one, may be something normal, harmless and socially acceptable to another.

When it comes to assessing the moral value of sexual activity, there IS a right way and a wrong way. The bible has outlined an OBJECTIVE standard whereby we must live to obtain the optimal amount of peace and blessings upon our lives. The fact is that God created a MAN for a WOMAN and a WOMAN for a MAN without any deviation or mixture of the two. though sin has brought many perversions of this truth into our genome, the fact remains that God has spoken, has not modified what he said and will judge every man according to what he has stated from eternity.

I believe that the Christian who knows the truth and refuses to tell those engaged in sexually immoral practices the truth, adds an insurmountable amount of harm to those engaging in sexually immoral practices themselves. Sitting passively and not pointing out the dangers and ultimate immorality of the homosexual lifestyle would be a SIN of omission in a world full of darkness a mere excuse for sin that perpetuates sin. That is not the testimony that the believer is to leave to this world, no matter how unpopular and politically incorrect the sentiment may be.

Will we add to the harm of sexual immorality by remaining silent? I won't!

Blessed!

O Canada!

2011-12-10T13:22:00.001-06:00

President Barack Obama &
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper

This week President Barack Obama stated this about the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, and the American relationship with Canada:

"...In Stephen, (Prime Minister Stephen Harper) I've got a trusted partner, and I think he’ll agree that perhaps no two nations match up more closely together, or are woven together more deeply, economically, culturally, than the United States and Canada.

And that deep sense of interconnection, our shared values, our shared interests, infused the work that we have done today -- from supporting a resolution to the eurozone crisis to moving ahead with the transition in Afghanistan, from deepening security cooperation here in the Americas to supporting reform and democratic transitions in the Middle East and North Africa." ~ President Barack Obama South Court Auditorium Washington, DC. 12/7/2011( parenthesis & emphasis added)

Almost a year ago, we have featured Dr. Charles McVety on our blog in the post "When Canadian Freedom Meets Canadian Censorship". At the time we noted that Dr. McVety was speaking out against the proliferating gay agenda in Canada which seems to be growing at the direction and under the protection of the state and governmental authority. Dr. McVety has been censured by the Canadian broadcasters for speaking against a proposed new school based agenda claiming that there were six genders among humans. Dr. McVety said this:

"We spoke against a new proposed sex education curriculum that would teach gender identity, six genders, and sexual orientation to our children,...And I believe that this curriculum was for the purpose of teaching our children to be homosexuals." ~ Rev. McVety

Dr. Charles McVety

Here's an email from Dr. McVety that I recently received about the current happening in Canada and amongst the Canadian government regarding this Six Gender identity garbage.

*********************************

"Hi Pastor Harvey:

Last week Ontario’s Premier Dalton McGuinty seized the opportunity to write his radical six gender sex education in the new anti-bullying law. Everyone agrees that bullying is a serious threat to children and must be combated with strong, stiff programs and penalties. Children’s lives depend on it. Unfortunately the Premier is using everyone’s good will to advance his agenda.

The Anti-bullying Bill 13 uses the force of law to make teachers in both Public and Catholic to:

· Teach Radical Six Gender Curriculum - Equity and Inclusive EducationBill 13 Section 2. (1) Paragraph 29.1 of subsection 8 (1) of the Act is repealed and the following substituted: equity and inclusive education 29.1 require boards to develop and implement an equity and inclusive education policy, and, if required by the Minister, submit the policy to the Minister and implement changes to the policy as directed by the Minister;

· Support Homosexual Clubs in all Public and Catholic SchoolsBill 13 Section 9. Board support for certain pupil activities and organizations303.1 Every board shall support pupils who want to establish and lead,(a) activities or organizations that promote gender equity;(b) activities or organizations that promote anti-racism;(c) activities or organizations that promote the awareness and understanding of, and respect for, people with disabilities; or(d) activities or organizations that promote the awareness and understanding of, and respect for, people of all sexual orientations and gender identities, including organizations with the name gay-straight alliance or another name.

· Force Churches Renting School Property to Follow Province’s Radical Agenda.
Bill 13 Section 7 (2) Agreements with third parties re use of schools(3.1) If a board enters into an agreement with another person or entity, other than a board, respecting the use of a school operated by the board, the board shall include in the agreement a requirement that the person or entity follow standards that are consistent with the code of conduct.

It is egregious to impose, with the force of law, this bizarre social engineering experiment on Ontario’s children under the pretense of protecting children from bullying. There is no proof that forcing all schools, Public and Catholic, to teach this material and host gay clubs will stop bullying. This guise doesn’t hold water with standard pedagogical practices. Our schools don’t have to teach the intricacies of every element of difference to combat bullying. Teachers don’t need a 219 page curriculum guide extolling the virtues of being short, overweight, Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other identifying factor. They simply need to combat bullying.
Think of the millions of small, innocent children who will be subjected to this agenda if we do nothing. Last year tens of thousands of parents spoke out, the Premier heard our cries and cancelled a similar program.

Please act to protect children and do the following:1. Call Premier McGuinty at 416-325-19412. Send Premier McGuinty an email by clicking here. A copy will be sent to every Ontario MPP. CLICK HERE TO EMAIL YOUR MP(If this doesn’t work with your system go to www.stopcorruptingchildren.com and click on Email Premier McGuinty)3. Sign the Petition at www.stopcorruptingchildren.comPlease make your voice known. If not you, then who? If not now, when?I want to thank you for protecting children from this hostile, confusing, radical experiment.

Merry Christmas and May 2012 See Protection for Children.Dr. Charles McVetyPresident, Institute for Canadian ValuesP.S. If each of us sends this email to our contacts, the impact on Mr. McGuinty will be multiplied.

Link Bill 13 http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&Intranet=&BillID=2549Link to Equity and Inclusive Curriculum http://word.ca/TDSB%20Equity%20%20Inclusive%20Curriculum%20-%20See%20page%2010%20!.pdf

**************************************************************

First of all I commend Dr. McVety for taking an open stand against the enemy and the proliferation of what is a moral issue; the education or should I say "programming" and "conditioning" of our children to favor and accept the homosexual agenda and homosexuality in general.

There is also something else to note. Canada, having certainly advanced the gay agenda further than the United States at this point, is doing the same thing with anti-bullying as is happening within the United States. As I noted in "Political Pandering For The Gay Vote", noone wants violence against children to continue or be an acceptable part of our education system. However, President Barack Obama says that Canada and the United States are "woven together more deeply economically and culturally" and that we have "shared values and interests".

Does anyone think that President Barack Obama's words are coincidental to the fact that the United States is approaching the full ratification of the gay agenda through politics and education as I have pointed out? I think as a people we should open our eyes or we will be dealing with "Six Gender Identity" reprogramming within the United States educational system very soon.

Blessed!

Political Pandering For The Gay Vote

2011-12-08T07:00:00.006-06:00

The United States, under the Obama administration, and the leadership of Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton, has taken the notion that it should officially state it's accomplishments in support of the gay agenda and gay advocacy, by releasing a laundry list of things that it has done.

“Gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights, once and for all.”

Secretary Hillary Clinton, June 2010, Washington, D.C.

Only to name a few, such things include:

At the UN Human Rights Council’s (HRC) June 2011 session, the United States, South Africa, and Latin American and European Union countries led efforts to pass the first-ever UN resolution on the human rights of LGBT persons.

At the HRC’s March 2011 session, the United States co-chaired efforts of a core group of countries to issue a statement entitled “Ending Acts of Violence and Related Human Rights Violations Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.” The statement garnered the support of 85 countries, including 20 that had never before supported similar statements on the promotion of LGBT persons’ rights.

In December 2010, the State Department led efforts at the UN General Assembly to reinsert language on sexual orientation into a resolution on extrajudicial, summary, and arbitrary executions, after the language’s removal in committee. The amendment was approved by a 93-55 margin.

The State Department is working to establish a special rapporteur on the protection of the human rights of LGBT people within the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights, after President Obama raised the importance of LGBT issues in a meeting with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff earlier this year.

The United States also partnered with Brazil and others to secure adoption of a resolution on human rights, sexual orientation, and gender identity at the Organization of American States General Assembly in June.

The statement released by the US Dept. Of State 12/10/2011 prefaces by saying this:

"Human rights are inalienable and belong to every person, no matter who that person is or whom that person loves. Since January 2009, Secretary Clinton has directed the Department to champion a comprehensive human rights agenda—one that includes the protection of the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. The Department uses its full range of diplomatic and development tools to press for the elimination of violence and discrimination against LGBT people worldwide, particularly those forced to flee their homes or countries.

The Department continues to counter efforts globally that discriminate against, criminalize, and penalize members of the LGBT community. The United States recognizes the unflagging efforts and courage of advocates and organizations fighting to promote equality and justice around the world, especially in countries where doing so puts their lives and their families at risk. At the same time, U.S. personnel policies must protect the human rights of all LGBT people, and consular and other tools must be used to provide equal access and equal rights to LGBT people.

U.S. leadership on advancing human rights for LGBT people is consistent with the Obama Administration’s policy of principled engagement with the world and our commitment to uphold universal standards that apply to everyone. By supporting the inherent dignity of each person we help to foster a just world for all people and we lead by example, enhancing U.S. strategic interests as we advance our values."

Misdirection

While it is commendable to fight for human dignity, as no one deserves to be unjustly persecuted, what is amazing here is that the gay agenda has come front and center as a world political football kicked around whenever it may be convenient. Within the United States it has become entangled with almost every issue you can name. In almost every sector of life, there is now "special protections" for being gay. One can't hardly say the word "gay" in the public square without someone bringing scrutiny to what is said. In fact saying the "wrong thing" invokes a ghestopo fashioned scrutiny as if personal freedoms are trumped by being gay. If one doesn't affirm the lifestyle CHOICE of homosexuality, then one is relegated to being called "HOMOPHOBIC", which is a made up word and title ascribed to those who don't affirm gay choice, given by the same group of people who previously condemned homosexuality as a mental illness (American Psychology Association ~ APA) prior to their vote in 1974.

Wrapped Up & Undercover

The political misdirection is at every hand. It was just yesterday that Lady GaGa the champion of gay rights went to the White House to meet certain officials to talk about "bullying" while President Obama went to Kansas. CNN's 1600 Report stated the following regarding Lady GaGa's visit:

"The White House held an anti bullying conference earlier this year bringing together educators, parents, students and policymakers in an effort to make schools and communities across the country safe for all students."

Be 4 REAL! She wasn't just talking about bullying...she was talking about bullying of GAY children and affirmation of the gay agenda. At least be honest with the commentary.

Unfortunately, for years, STRAIGHT children and children of all sexual proclivity, have been committing suicide and being killed. For example,

In Chicago, IL. during the 2008-2009 school year, about 27 Chicago Public School (CPS) students lost their lives to crime and violence.
If that weren't bad enough, during the 2009-2010 school year over 37 (CPS) children were murdered.
The injury rate of CPS youth was 100 TIMES that of the murder rate...that means for every 1 child that was killed, there were over 100 nonfatal injuries...Add up the numbers; there were nearly 400 injuries of students in the CPS system during the 2009-2010 school year. ~ Dr. Dexter Voisin, a researcher at the University of Chicago as reported by The Washington Times 5/13/2009

Remember, this President LIVED in Chicago and was a Senator from Illinois for at least 2 months??? before he was elected President Of the United States. Where was the ANTI-BULLYING THEN??? Where was the Obama White House in addressing a student murder rate that is still too high in Chicago(for example)? Why is the current anti-bullying push so closely tied to and associated with gays when we can PROVE that bullying and deaths have nothing to do with sexual proclivities?

That's because it is a POLITICALLY driven issue, not one of pure moral substance or based on a commitment to do right by ALL of our children.

To her credit, Lady GaGa became concerned about the welfare of children when one of her 14 year old fans committed suicide. However, even that was full of self-interest because children have been having a hard time long before this tragic event in many places since. Her efforts are NOT about saving children, they are about the POLITICS of gay normalization and social acceptance. The politics associates suicide with being gay, add a commercial, trick some senators (which appears to be easy to do) seduce certain apostate religious leaders (which seems to be more easy than tricking the senators) , give them an ultimatum of popularity or infamy and WHAAAA-LAAAA!...There you have it, a totally NEW issue wrapped up in old clothes appearing to be based on a morally sensible issue, at center stage, receiving support because NONE of us want ANY child to commit suicide because they are being bullied or harassed.

Conclusion

Tomorrow, the California 9th Circuit 3 judge panel will consider the constitutionality of Prop 8 (even after the CA. Supreme Court last month UNANIMOUSLY upheld its constitutionality) They will also be considering the unilateral actions of homosexual Judge Vaughn "that time has passed" Walker, who will rightfully come under scrutiny because of his decision to release videotapes of the original Prop 8 trial and because he also failed to disclose that he himself was gay and in a homosexual relationship.

What makes it so bad is that the Governor, Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris, the top law making officials of the state REFUSE to defend the law! Similar to our President and Attorney General Holder now laws are of no consequence when politics could potentially get in the way. Remember that all of this, right along with the political wrangling is done at the further expense to the taxpayers of California.

What do I see?...INSANITY!

Blessed!

Additional Reading:

The UN Declares "Homosexual Rights" A Human Right

In Defense Of Marriage

President Obama's "It Get's Better" Message

The TRUTH is that current studies say that gay children hardly commit suicide at higher rates than straight children. Even though they are more than likely to report a "feeling" or an attempt to do so:

"The article, by Cornell University's Ritch C. Savin-Williams, PhD, reports on two studies that conclude that even though sexual-minority teens are more likely than heterosexual youth to report suicide attempts, half of those reports are false--that is, the young people had thought about suicide but hadn't acted on it. In addition, Savin-Williams found, many of the true attempts the young people reported weren't life-threatening.

"When you ask in-depth questions about suicide attempts, the responses you get account for the rate differences between heterosexual and sexual minority youth suicide," Savin-Williams says. "The heterosexual youth had hardly any false attempts, while those with same-sex attractions had a lot of them."

There's more that I'll save for a future article, bur why is being gay so favored that top officials are bending over backwards to accommodate and even welcome gay proclivities? We need to ask, not because we don;t love the kids, but because we DO love them and know that kids need direction and that morality doesn't just happen. It's taught.

Prophe~lying For Profits. Astrology & False Prophet E. Bernard "Mar Elijah" Jordan

2011-12-05T23:08:00.004-06:00

Master Prophet
E. Bernard Mar Elijah Jordan

"The prophets are Jupitarian. Jupiter is the expanse, but Jupiter also means what else? 'Money'. Thank you...and prosperity, believe the prophets so shall you prosper. God connects the prophets with the star that deals with the most money."..."Gemini(es) are the talkers of the Zodiak" ~ Master Profit E. Bernard Mar Elijah Jordan

The Word Network is airing a "Prophetic Summit" on the program 'Rejoice In The Word ' with Bishop George Bloomer. The center of attention seems to be "Master" Prophet and (I'll add "False Prophet") E. Bernard Mar Elijah Jordan. (Read where the names come from HERE) There are so many problems and scriptural issues with certain assertions that have been delivered by the panelists, I almost don't know where to begin. There are some good and insightful guests of course, but you know it was a bad show when Pimpoliscious himself served as a co-moderator.

Ahhhhh.....In what I believe was segment 2 of this program Bishop Bloomer asked the panel to address the difference between a prognosticator and a biblical prophet, asking the question does one facilitate the other. For a point of reference, the word prognosticator is defined as follows:

Prognosticator:One who foretells the future from signs or symptoms.

To be clear, a biblical and Christ centered prophecy HAS NOTHING TO DO with prognostication which includes the reading of horror-scopes (telling or diving times) or reading or defining information from current symbols contained within the natural universe as it pertains to issues of righteousness and holiness.

Something That Must Be Understood

There are some difficult passages to understand within the bible. However, to understand them correctly, we must remember that God was the only entity that was to be consulted for direction of the people. For example, we must keep in mind that God didn't allow the Urim and Thummim (Ex. 28:30) to speak or tell the Priest anything on it's own, and nether did they look to it without looking first to God and following his direction regarding the stones. When Saul did this, he was punished for his actions(see 1Samuel 28) This was to be a major difference between the people of God and pagans. In addition, we must also clarify that the "glory" that the heavens declare (Jer. 23:24, Ps. 19:1) is a teleological or creative glory of the Lord. The created order of the universe and it's precision speaks to both the existence and the magnificent greatness of the Lord, not some mystical or meta-spiritual direction or path that we are to enjoin, entertain or follow.

Within the word, it was the heathen nations, and peoples that did not know God that relied upon the stars, astrology and secret knowledge called "gnosis" (secret or hidden knowledge) for direction and understanding of the universe and of God. Teachings of meta-spiritual laws, practiced and developed within past generations, exist today wrapped up in principles such as "speak it into existence", "the laws of attraction", "the laws of prosperity" " the laws of wealth" and includes other practices such as speaking to one's wallet until it is filled with money. These meta-spiritual and gnostic principles and concepts ARE NOT biblical laws nor are they biblical principles. In fact many of these so called laws fly directly in the face of biblical principles and scriptural demands. One very popular pastor from the Chicago area recently stated on his 30 minute commercial that if a person really understood the word of faith as he was teaching it, and began to use it, the person would be "a millionaire in a month" Of course, all one had to do was buy his current series to learn how to get that million. These are ridiculous notions. This is simply "snake-oil", sold by television carnies, putting on a traveling show filled with bogus promises to attract whatever dollars that they can from the masses of needy people.

Is Mar Elijah Jordan An Astrologer?

Another question that came up, actually at the direction of Pimpoliscious himself, regarded Jordan's use of astrology within his prophetic practice...In this, Jordan did two things. First, he denied that he was an astrologer and claimed that he didn't know when and how people thought he used astrology. However, take a look at this video and it will be clear that Jordan himself makes the statements regarding his use and understanding of astrology. His answer to the panel was a complete fabrication. Take a look:

4:11-9 Teaching with Master Prophet E. Bernard Jordan
(Video has built in commercials, it may stop suddenly. Please work with it and restart, it is about 10 minutes long)

One can clearly see, that Jordan not only associates astrology with biblical prophecy, but he has also developed a complete hermeneutic to justify it. This is in clear violation of the scriptures:

Deut. 18:9-14 ~ 9-When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. 10-There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times or an enchanter, or a witch, 11-Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. 12-For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. 13-Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God. 14-For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.

Astrology is not neither has it ever been a biblical practice. Consulting stars is not and was not, neither has it ever been a way that people were told to consult the God of the universe. The names attributed to Barnabas and Paul were names given to them by PAGAN GREEKS who practiced idolatry, NOT by God himself. God didn't change Paul's name to Mercurius, neither did God call Barnabas Jupiter. Men did that.

Acts 14:12 ~ "And ***they*** called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker."

Redefining False Prophet

A second thing that Jordan, with very little scriptural resistance IF ANY, was redefine the term "false prophet" to mean anyone who delivers a word who's life wasn't centered in Christ. Jordan even stated that it was impossible for a Christian believer to be a "false prophet" no matter what. Aside from the fact that this is a totally biblicaly illiterate rendering of what false prophet means it is also yet another fabrication. May that is due to the fact that Jordan regularly prophesies falsely both on his show and on the Al Sharpton radio program almost weekly.

To clarify, SAINTS don't look to anyone who is not centered in Christ for information into spiritual things anyway. Secondly, anyone speaking presumptuously, falsely or delivering false or inaccurate information was considered a "false prophet". The "false" of the false prophet was based on the content of what was said, not because of their supposed relationship to or within the natural body of believers.

Deut. 18: 20-22 ~ "20-But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. 21-And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? 22-When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

The prophet speaking as inspired by God was never wrong and although he may have delivered conditional prophecies, such as the one Jonah delivered to Nineveh, was never ashamed or embarrassed by the word not coming to pass, because it was IMPOSSIBLE for God to lie.

Numbers 23:19 ~ "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

and

Heb. 6:18 ~"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:"

TO further debunk Jordan's atrocious presentation of esotericism, in Jeremiah, Hananiah delivered a false prophecy causing Israel to believe in a lie. Hananiah was in the school of the prophets, therefore he was associated with them that called upon the name of the Lord. However, his false words sealed the fate of Israel at the hands of their enemies and also cost him his life.

Jeremiah 28:15 ~ "Then said the prophet Jeremiah unto Hananiah the prophet, Hear now, Hananiah; The LORD hath not sent thee; but thou makest this people to trust in a lie."

The "Master" Prophet

Called by a self ascribed and made up title, "master prophet" Jordan also declared that he is a "master" because he has spent well over the 10,000 hours necessary to "master" his office. Surprisingly, the panel guests were anxious to accept that rendering claiming that their education had qualified them to be considered "masters" at what they do. After all, most of them had to get their "Masters Degree" before their Doctorates, so that made sense...

HARDLY!!! What he actually did was follow in the line of ANE (Ancient Near Eastern) mysticism in ascribing the term "master" to himself. Under ANE systems and terms. The word "Adoni" was translated as the word master. It was also translated as "my Lord" at times. nonetheless, the context of the word was primarily a declaration of supreme authority and superiority. Here is it's etymology:

Master ~ O.E. mægester "one having control or authority," from L. magister "chief, head, director, teacher" (cf. O.Fr. maistre, Fr. maître, It. maestro, Ger. Meister), influenced in M.E. by O.Fr. maistre, from L. magister, contrastive adj. from magis (adv.) "more," itself a comp. of magnus "great." Meaning "original of a recording" is from 1904. In academic senses (from M.L. magister) it is attested from late 14c., originally a degree conveying authority to teach in the universities. The verb is attested from early 13c.

In the sense that it is used before the word prophet it is descriptive of the prophecy and is therefore an adjective. This is what the word "master" means when used as an adjective to describe prophet:

~ dominant, chief or principal:(such as a master list) directing or controlling: (such as a master switch) of or pertaining to a master (from which copies are made: master film; master matrix; master record; master tape) dominating or predominant; eminently skilled: (a master diplomat; a master pianist) being a master carrying on one's trade independently, rather than a worker employed by another ~

First, of all 10,000 hours of ANYTHING has nothing to do with being a "master" in this sense. Being a "master" with God cannot be gained by time or money. Large crowds won't provide it either. Secondly noone one is a "master" of anything spiritual or that pertains to God because God himself is dominate and not man or men. We have been given GIFTS that do not belong to us that we are to use responsibly and skillfully.

Conclusion:

The sad part is that noone

I haven't even touched on his requirement saying that anyone who receives from God must have some money to pay in return. This was BLATANT apostasy hailed as some great spiritual truth. These are the PROFITS...Now, where where are the real men and women of God?

Blessed!

Additional Reading:

The 2008 Bloomer-Burrino Prophecy

Is There Room For false Prophecy Or "Inaccuracy" Among Modern Day Prophets?

"Watch This" Pt. 10 ~ Bishop Eddie Long "Takes A Little Time Off"

2011-12-04T17:04:00.007-06:00

Jeremiah 33:14-18 ~ "14-Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. 15-In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. 16-In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness. 17-For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; 18-Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually."

"If you go out there, the news said I stepped down,"...
" I haven't stepped down, I've actually stepped up."...
"I'm still your pastor. You'll still receive my direction,"...
"You've given me some weeks to take care of some family business."
(Source-The Huffington Post Black Voices)

I'm sorry, my initial report was wrong and one can view the video below the commentary to see why...the bishop has decided to take an extended and undetermined vacation to deal with family issues. He didn't say that he was relinquishing the pulpit or the pastorate and didn't say that he was "stepping down" from being pastor as many are saying including the commentary page that I am referencing. Watch the video and tell me what you think, it's pretty clear to me. The bishop is going on a "potentially" long sabbatical.

Here is the initial report from Pimppreacher.com. which I believe is in error so far as describing what Long did as "srepping down". That's not the case. The following information is from a person who was there at the time:

"Eddie Long took the stage at 8:00 AM. Everyone surrounded the pulpit and he continuously wiped away tears. He told us over 5 times that him and Vanessa still love each other. He said, about New Birth: "We are a family. She is your mother, and I am your father."

He talked about the impact the allegations have had on his family for years, including long before this last year. He said the greatest thing the church can do is continue to show up, and continue to give money. We don't need to listen to the media.

He compares his situation with the Israeli battles where Moses had to keep his hands raised and Aaron would hold up his arms when Moses was tired. He said the battle has lasted longer than originally thought, and he needs us to hold up his arms.

Eddie Long said he needs to take time away to take care of his family and we shouldn't worry. He always puts good people in front of us. He said to still believe in all the prophecies of 2011 and that he already had all of 2012's lesson plans laid out.

The attacks from the media were taking a toll. There are things he'd like to say but can't because he's been advised not to, but he said the divorce has nothing to do with infidelity or the allegations. He said he is not Superman and he doesn't want to be compared to him. He then said he would pray for our families, and he wanted us to pray for his.

After this he sat down and a guest preacher, ( Indian man first name Samuel. Couldn't understand the last name) preached for an hour from 2 Kings 4-8. He spoke about the 4 keys to the church and how New Birth had everyone of them. He said we can go anywhere for church, but only Mew birth for fellowship. Afterwards, we had offering and Eddie Long left after the offering was collected.

As I was leaving, I saw a line of people in front waiting to shake Eddie Longs hand. I stood in line and asked him, "When are you coming back Bishop?" he said, "I'll be back soon. As soon as I can"

There are many things that one could say regarding this whole fiasco. It seemed to be a "no-brainer" that a leader with over 400 counts of impropriety against him would either step down from his position or step aside and work vehemently to clear his name. it seems that the pressure and continued negative publicity took its toll. It doesn't hurt that the money of persons like this is effected. That usually does the trick.

Update: CNN Video Reveals "Correct" Reporting:

Remember, YOU are the only reason that a charlatan leader continues in his ways of charlatanism. When you decide that it's over and discontinue your support of both attendance and money, things will change. Until then, don't complain about the python that squeezes the life out of you after you've nurtured it and caused it to grow. You knew it was a snake to begin with, and snakes do, what snakes do!

Blessed!

Bishop Noel Jones / LisaRaye McCoy...Marriage, Engagement Or Dating?

2011-12-03T10:10:00.005-06:00

LisaRaye "Platnium Digger" McCoy
Noel "A Pimps Best Friend" Jones

Hits and searches on Bishop Noel Jones have been off the hook on this site. Rather than spend a lot of time trying to find out (because these people are deceptive & secretive) I'll turn the fact finding over to you. Since YOU want to know, maybe this will help 'cause I can't call it.

Here is Lisa's Response to it all:

This should settle the issue. Let me tell you this though, if Bishop Noel Jones is "like a father to the faith" which was said on another program when Raye was interviewed...why didn't they ASK HIM instead of asking the woman? Especially since Noel Jones regularly appears on radio...In all of this, I haven't heard the Bishop say a word, but I suppose one is not necessary anyway.

Blessed!

Additional Reading:
"Revelatory Expressions" Does Bishop Noel Jones Deny "Oneness"?

"Watch This" Pt. 9~ Vanessa Long Divorce Confusion

2011-12-02T13:36:00.003-06:00

1 Cor. 14:33 ~ "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

Elder Vanessa Long

Friday Morning By Statement

{I have}"decided to terminate my marriage" {after a} "great deal of deliberation and prayer"..."It is my sincere hope that this matter can be resolved expeditiously, harmoniously, and fairly,"..."I ask that you respect my privacy and that of my family, as my attorneys and I have agreed that we will not try this case in the media, and I do not intend to make any further statements concerning this matter,"..."I also ask that the public pray for my entire family during this difficult period of transition."

Friday, Early Afternoon By Email:

"Upon prayerful reflection, I have reconsidered and plan to withdraw my petition for divorce from my husband, Bishop Eddie L. Long,"..."I love my husband. I believe in him and admire his strength and courage."

Update: Friday 12/2/11 NIGHT:

"Consistent with her original statement made this morning, Mrs. Long continues to hope that this matter may be resolved expeditiously, harmoniously and fairly; however, she has determined that dismissal of her divorce petition is not appropriate at this time.

To avoid any undue confusion, Mrs. Long's future statements, if any, will be issued through her attorneys only. At this time, neither she nor we will have any further comment on this matter.

The statement was issued by Michael W. Tyler, a Kilpatrick Townsend partner."~ Fox 5 News Atlanta

Well, we all knew that if bishop Long wasn't guilty of the over 400 allegations of sexual and financial impropriety against him, that like Bob Costas told Jerry Sandusky, he was one of the most lied on individuals that ever lived.

This morning, Vanessa Long released the above statement in part regarding her marriage to who we know as bishop Eddie Long. She later released another statement recanting her decisions to divorce bishop Long. Although we may not know whether she is actually filing for divorce not, or whether she intends to follow through or not, we are certain that ALL of this CONFUSION is authorized by the devil and has been perpetuated by bishop Long himself. With confusion as this we can gain a better picture of just why the bishop may have dropped those stones that he said he had to throw.

Unfortunately for this woman and her family we get a glimpse of just what happens when people, no matter who they are, exalt themselves and play with God, the people of God and those that love them as if they were a toy. Eddie Long destroyed his own family with his deliberate actions and self exaltation. We remember this Eddie:

"We're not just a church, we're an international corporation. We're not just a bumbling bunch of preachers who can't talk and all we're doing is baptizing babies. I deal with the White House, I deal with Tony Blair, I deal with presidents around this world. I pastor a multi-million dollar congregation. You've got to put me on a different scale than the little Black preacher sitting over there {who's} supposed to be just getting by because the people are suffering." ~ Bishop Eddie Long ATL Journal Constitution 2005 ("Watch This" Pt. 6 ~ Weighed On A Different Scale)

Being honest, until today, I had no clue as to what Vanessa Long was really thinking. Although there have been reports that she moved, and was considering leaving the bishop etc. It is hard to tell an individual's motivations to either do or not do something. One wonders, is the money more important than anything? Is God more important than anything? Is the stability of the family and church most important?

Caught in the wake is a family. We can only pray that his children are blessed and supported through this very trying time. I can't fathom the emotions that their children experienced at the revelations of sexual sins and inappropriate sexual activities that have been exposed in this case. I can't imagine what the holiday season has become when everyone gathers together. Caught in the wake is a church. Though there have been various reports as to what is happening at New Birth, and many (including myself to a degree) have criticized the members for heaping what appears to be worship upon this man, as a community of believers we can only imagine the pain that this is causing all families related to and associated with this ministry.

All we can do, the BEST thing we can do is pray for their strength and stability of all the people involved. The confusion of Sister Long in this issue is understandable and seeing that there is such a delicate balance at this point, we must pray that she finds the strength of God to stand in this very trying situation.

2 Cor. 12:9 ~ "And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me."

Blessed!

(Source)