You are currently browsing the yearly archive for 2012.
A church I used to attend once plastered pictures of Bono in their fellowship hall while promoting a food drive. My heart sank in dismay. It was discouraging because I knew the following information. Please read:
THE ROCK GROUP U2
by David Cloud
The following is from the latest edition of the 400-page Directory of Contemporary Worship Musicians, which is available in print as well as a free eBook from the Way of Life web site — http://www.wayoflife.org.
_____________________
U2 was formed in 1978 and has been hugely successful. The band was selected as Rolling Stone magazine’s Band of the Eighties and was still called “the biggest band in the world” in Rolling Stone’s December 2004 issue. U2 front man Bono was Time magazine’s Person of the Year in 2006.
But U2 is much more than a popular rock band. U2 has a great influence in the emerging church and the contemporary worship movement. U2’s lead singer Bono is praised almost universally among contemporary and emerging Christians. Phil Johnson observes that “Bono seems to be the chief theologian of the Emerging Church Movement” (Absolutely Not! Exposing the Post-modern Errors of the Emerging Church, p. 9).
“Bono played a far more significant role on the formative years on those who became emergent than anyone else, from a human standpoint. Bono, in the 1980s, was, if not worshipped, then absolutely adored by millions of Christian youth who were hanging on his every word. They saw his cool kind of Christianity. He helped lead people into what eventually became the emerging church. Bono has led people into a version of Christianity that is so slippery, so undefinable, so liberal, yet he is considered the main icon of the emerging church” (Joseph Schimmel, The Submerging Church, DVD, 2012).
Eugene Peterson, author of The Message, says U2 has a prophetic voice to the world and says Bono is a prophet like John the Baptist (foreword to Get Up Off Your Knees: Preaching the U2 Catalog).
Brian Walsh believes that U2’s lyrics should be used for seminary training and as commentaries alongside the Bible, and that U2’s concerts should be studied to see “how worship really happens in a postmodern world” (Get Up Off Your Knees).
Mark Mulder has taught a U2 course at Calvin College and he observes that the school shares Bono’s view that the world will not be destroyed but will be renewed (“Calvin College on U2,” Christianity Today, Feb. 2005).
Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo say that Bono is moving the world toward the kingdom of God and increasing the kingdom of God in the here and now (McLaren and Campolo, Adventures in Missing the Point, 2003, pp. 50, 51).
Bill Hybels interviewed Bono at Willowcreek Community Church’s Leadership Summit in 2006 and that interview has been shown in thousands of churches all over the world.
Rick Warren invited Bono to Saddleback Church to help launch his P.E.A.C.E. program.
Rob Bell testifies that the first time he really experienced God was at a U2 concert (Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith, p. 72).
Emerging leader Steven Taylor calls Bono “a worship leader” and on his blog promotes “Seven Things I Learned from Bono about Worship Leading.”
Christianity Today almost worships U2. When Episcopalian ministers Raewynne Whiteley and Beth Maynard published “Get Up Off Your Knees: Preaching the U2 Catalog,” Christianity Today responded with a review entitled “The Legend of Bono Vox: Lessons Learned in the Church of U2.”
In fact, U2 is no church and is destitute of spiritual truth when judged biblically. That U2 is wildly popular with contemporary Christians is a fulfillment of the apostasy described in 2 Timothy:
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).
U2’s Early Christian Experience
In their teenage years, Paul Hewson (“Bono”), Dave Evans (“Edge”), and Larry Mullen visited a charismatic house church called Shalom and made a profession of faith in Christ, but they have long since renounced any formal church affiliation.
U2 member Adam Clayton does not make any type of Christian profession, and in my opinion, he is the most honest of the four band members. At least he does not pretend to have faith in Christ while living a rock & roll lifestyle and denying the Bible’s clear teachings.
Bono, Evans, and Mullen admit that they wrestled with quitting rock & roll when they began studying the Bible. They chose to stay with rock & roll and have been moving farther and farther away from the Bible ever since.
Of that early struggle Bono told a Rolling Stones magazine senior editor: “We were getting involved in reading books, the Big Book. Meeting people who were more interested in things spiritual, superspiritual characters that I can see now were possibly far too removed from reality. But we were wrapped up in that.”
This idea of spiritually-minded Christians being “too far removed from reality” is a common smokescreen used by rebels to excuse their worldliness. The Bible says:
“If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory” (Colossians 3:1-4).
Bono mocks as “superspiritual” those who reject the things of this world to set their minds on heavenly things, but that is precisely what God wants His people to do.
U2 guitarist Dave Evans testified that he chose rock & roll over holiness:
“It was reconciling two things that seemed for us at that moment to be mutually exclusive. We never did resolve the contradictions. That’s the truth. … Because we were getting a lot of people in our ear saying, ‘This is impossible, you guys are Christians, you can’t be in a band. It’s a contradiction and you have to go one way or the other.’ They said a lot worse things than that as well. So I just wanted to find out. I was sick of people not really knowing and me not knowing whether this was right for me. So I took two weeks. Within a day or two I just knew that all this stuff [separating from the world] is ——- [vulgarity]. We were the band. Okay, it’s a contradiction for some, but it’s a contradiction that I’m able to live with. I just decided that I was going to live with it. I wasn’t going to try to explain it because I can’t” (Bill Flanagan, U2 at the End of the World, 1996, pp. 47, 48).
Note that Evans did not base his decision upon the Word of God. Contrary to Proverbs 3:5-6, he leans on his own understanding, and in accordance with 2 Timothy 4:3-4 he follows his own lusts.
In an interview with Joseph Schimmel, Chris Row of Shalom Fellowship, Bono’s former pastor in Ireland, said that Bono, Evans, and Mullen chose rock & roll over the Bible. He said that when Bono flew him to Los Angeles to perform his marriage, he wasn’t allowed to go backstage at a U2 concert because they didn’t want him to see the things that went on there (Schimmel, The Submerging Church, 2012, DVD).
There is no evidence in U2’s lives, music, or performances that they honor the Word of God. They have been at the heart and soul of the wicked rock & roll scene for over three decades. They are one of the most popular rock & roll bands alive today and this certainly would not be the case if they were striving to obey the Bible and live holy lives to the glory of Jesus Christ and if they were preaching absolute truth, the reality of heaven and hell, and salvation only through Christ’s atonement.
To the contrary, their lives have been anything but holy and their message anything but Scriptural.
U2’s Christianity
The members of U2 don’t support any denomination or church. In fact, they rarely attend church, “preferring to meet together in private prayer sessions” (U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. 21). Sundays find them in a pub rather than in a pew. They are “not rabid Bible thumpers” (Ibid., p. 14). In the song “Acrobat,” Bono sings, “I’d join the movement/ If there was one I could believe in … I’d break bread and wine/ If there was a church I could receive in.”
One church Bono does attend from time to time is Glide Memorial United Methodist in San Francisco. “When he’s in the area Bono is a frequent worshipper at Glide…” (Flanagan, U2 at the End of the World, p. 99). Bono attended Glide Memorial during a special service to honor Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential election. Speaking at a meeting connected with the 1972 United Methodist Church Quadrennial Conference, Cecil Williams, pastor of the Glide Memorial Methodist Church, said, “I don’t want to go to no heaven … I don’t believe in that stuff. I think it’s a lot of – – – – [vulgarity].” A Jewish rabbi is on William’s staff. Williams was the Grand Marshall of the San Francisco Gay Pride parade and the chairman of his board was a homosexual. He has been “marrying” homosexuals since 1965 and says, “I have not married a single couple at Glide who weren’t already living together” (Williams, speaking at the Centenary United Methodist Church, St. Louis, quoted in Blu-Print, April 25, 1972). Long ago William’s church replaced the choir with a rock band, and its “celebrations” have included immoral dancing and even complete nudity. After attending a service at Glide Memorial, a newspaper editor wrote, “The service, in my opinion, was an insult to every Christian attending and was the most disgusting display of vulgarity and sensuousness I have ever seen anywhere.”
This is U2’s type of Christianity.
The book Bono on Bono: Conversations with Michka Assayas (Hodder & Stoughton, 2005) contains a wide-ranging interview with a music reporter that extended over a long period of time. Nowhere in this 337-page book does Bono give a scriptural testimony of having been born again, without which Jesus said no man can see the kingdom of heaven.
Bono says that he believes Jesus is the Messiah and that He died on the cross for his sins and that “he is holding out for grace,” but Bono’s “grace” is a grace that does not result in radical conversion and a new way of life; it is a grace without repentance; it is a grace that does not produce holiness. Nowhere does he warn his myriads of listeners to turn to Christ before it is too late and before they pass out of this life into eternal hell.
In fact, the only thing he says about heaven or hell is that both are on earth. “I think, rather like Hell, Heaven is on Earth. That’s my prayer … that’s where Heaven for me is…” (Bono on Bono, p. 254). It sounds like Bono has been listening more to John Lennon than the Bible, and in fact, he says that when he was 11 years old he listened to Lennon’s album Imagine and it “really got under my skin, the blood of it” (p. 246). On this album Lennon sang, “Imagine there is no heaven above and no hell below.”
The members of U2 do not believe Christianity should have rules and regulations. “I’m really interested in and influenced by the spiritual side of Christianity, rather than the legislative side, the rules and regulations” (Edge, U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. 21). The Lord Jesus Christ said those who love Him would keep His commandments (John 14:15, 23, 15:10). The apostle John said, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3). There are more than 80 specific commandments for Christians in the book of Ephesians alone, the same book that says we are saved by grace without works. Though salvation is by grace, it always produces a zeal for holiness and obedience to God’s commands, for we are “saved unto good works” (Ephesians 2:8-10). According to Titus 2, the grace of God teaches the believer to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.
Bono says that the older he gets the more comfort he finds in Roman Catholicism. “Let’s not get too hard on the Holy Roman Church here. The Church has its problems, but the older I get, the more comfort I find there … murmuring prayers, stories told in stained-glass windows, the colors of Catholicism–purple mauve, yellow, red–the burning incense. My friend Gavin Friday says Catholicism is the glam-rock of religion” (Bono on Bono, p. 201).
Though he speaks positively of Romanism, Bono has nothing good to say about “fundamentalism,” falsely claiming that it is a denial that God is love (Bono on Bono, p. 167) and calling it vile names (p. 147).
The problem is that Bono defines love by the rock & roll dictionary rather than by the Bible, which says, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3).
U2’s Lifestyle
The members of U2 live in blatant contradiction to the reality of biblical grace. They are described in the following passages:
“They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate” (Titus 1:16).
“Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away” (2 Timothy 3:5).
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).
“He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:4).
The lives of the U2 rock stars exemplify their no-rules philosophy.
In 1992 “Bono was named premier male sexpot” (U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. xxxvi).
Of sexual activity, Bono says: “You know, if you tell people that the best place to have [sexual activity -ed] is in the safe hands of a loving relationship, you may be telling a lie! There may be other places” (Flanagan, U2 at the End of the World, p. 83).
Bill Flanagan, a U2 friend who has traveled extensively with the group, in his authorized biography describes them as heavy drinkers and constant visitors to bars, brothels, and nightclubs. He says, “If I wanted to I could fill up hundreds of pages with this sort of three-sheets-to-the-wind [drunken], navel-gazing dialogue between U2 and me” (Flanagan, U2 at the End of the World, p. 145). Bono admits that he lives “a fairly decadent kind of selfish-art-oriented lifestyle” (Flanagan, p. 79). Their language is interspersed with the vilest vulgarities and even with profanity. Of basketball star Magic Johnson’s widely publicized sexual escapades, Bono flippantly and foolishly says: “Be a [sexual] machine, but for Christ’s sake use a condom” (Flanagan, p. 105).
Many of Bono’s statements cannot be printed in a Christian publication. The cover and lyric sheet to their Achtung Baby album contained photos of the band in homosexual drag (men cross-dressing like women), a picture of Bono in front of a topless woman, and a frontal photo of Adam Clayton completely nude. Bono said the band enjoyed dressing like homosexual drag queens. “Nobody wanted to take their clothes off for about a week! And I have to say, some people have been doing it ever since!” (Bono, cited by Flanagan, p. 58). Bono told the media that he and his bandmates planned to spend New Year’s Eve 2000 in Dublin, because “Dublin knows how to drink” (Bono, USA Today, Oct. 15, 1999, p. E1). Bono has simulated [sexual activity] with women during his concerts. Their concerts have included video clips portraying nudity and cursing. The band members have had serious marital problems and Dave Evans is divorced.
People magazine described Bono’s “nine-hour binge which left him brainless.” “The U2 star … got struck into beer, wine, cocktails and bubbly celebrating the American release of the band’s Rattle And Hum film. ‘He was slobbering, shouting and showing off,’ said a bartender at the Santa Monica niterie that hosted the bash. ‘Even the rest of the band told him to calm down. They should have been kicked out but because of who they are we let them stay…’” (People, Oct. 23, 1988, p. 15).
When asked about his position on homosexuality, Bono said: “My bottom line on any sexuality is that love is the most important thing. That love is it. Any way people want to love each other is OK by me” (Bono, Mother Jones magazine, May/June 1989).
At Wheaton College in 2002, Bono said, “It’s a remarkable thing, the idea that there’s some sort of hierarchy to sin. It’s something I can never figure out, the idea that sexual immorality is somehow much worse than, say, institutional greed. Somewhere in the back of the religious mind is this idea that we reap what we sow is missing the entire New Testament and the concept of grace completely” (“Backstage with Bono,” Christianitytoday.com music interviews, Dec. 9, 2002).
The Christianity Today reporter understood that Bono was saying that reaping what we sow is not a biblical teaching and is contrary to grace. In fact, the Bible plainly says, “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap” (Galatians 6:7), and that was stated in the very context of Paul’s teaching about grace. God’s grace through Christ is offered to all men, but its reception requires repentance and faith (Acts 20:21). Nowhere in the New Testament do we find Christ or the apostles fretting about “institutional greed” or rebuking the Roman government for its institutional sins, but the New Testament says a LOT about PERSONAL sin and sexual immorality! Most of the New Testament epistles warn about sexual immorality.
Appearing on the Golden Globe Awards broadcast by NBC television in 2003, Bono shouted a vile curse word. The incident was investigated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which deemed his language “profane” but decided not to fine the stations. Imagine an alleged Christian shouting such vile things on the public airwaves that he is investigated by the FCC!
In 2006 Bono said: “I recently read in one of St. Paul’s letters where it describes all of the fruits of the spirit, and I had none of them” (“Enough Rope with Andrew Denton,” March 13, 2006).
In October 2008, Fox News reported that Bono and rocker friend Simon Carmody partied with teenage girls on a yacht in St. Tropez. The report, which was accompanied by a photo of Bono holding two bikini-clad teenagers on his lap at a bar, said, “Bono, Carmody and the girls partied into the night on the yacht” (“Facebook Pictures Show Married U2 Singer Bono’s Rendezvous with Sexy Teens,” Fox News, Oct. 27, 2008).
U2’s Message
U2’s Christian supporters tout the band’s “biblical” lyrics as evidence of the reality of their Christianity. But U2’s ambiguous lyrics do not present a clear Christian message, and the few songs that do mention Christ typically do so in a strange, unscriptural manner. “The listener senses something religious is being dealt with but can’t be quite sure what” (Steve Turner, Hungry for Heaven, p. 172). They never preach the gospel of Jesus Christ in a plain manner so that their listeners could be born again. They pose moral questions in some of their songs, but they give no Bible answers. “U2 don’t pretend to have the answers to the world’s troubles. Instead, they devote their energies to letting us know that they are concerned and to creating an awareness about those problems” (U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. 10). What a pitiful testimony for professing Christian musicians who COULD be preaching the light of the Word of God to a dark and hell-bound world.
Consider, for example, the lyrics to “When Love Comes to Town”:
“I was there when they crucified my lord/ I held the scabbard when the soldier drew his sword/ I threw the dice when they pierced his side/ But I’ve seen love conquer the great divide. When love comes to town I’m gonna catch that train/ When love comes to town I’m gonna catch that flame/ Maybe I was wrong to ever let you down/ But I did what I did before love came to town.”
This is typical of U2 songs. It intermingles thoughts about a girl at the beginning with thoughts possibly about the cross at the end, but nothing is clear. Listeners can interpret the ambiguous lyrics in a multitude of ways.
Consider the song “All Because of You” from U2’s 2004 album How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb. “I’m alive/ I’m being born/ I just arrived, I’m at the door/ Of the place that I started out from/ And I want back inside.” That’s a confusing, really meaningless message.
One of U2’s most popular songs even proclaims that they haven’t found what they are looking for. “You broke the bonds/ You loosed the chains/ You carried the cross/ And my shame/ You know I believe it/ But I still haven’t found/ What I’m looking for” (“I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For”).
This is a strange message for an alleged Christian rock band to broadcast to a needy world! They sing about Christ and the cross and then state that they haven’t found what they are looking for.
A Social Gospel
The group is active in political causes, but they are liberal, humanistic ones. For example, in 1992 they played a benefit concert for the environmentalist/pacifist group Greenpeace and joined Greenpeace in protesting against a nuclear power plant. One of their hits, “Pride,” is a tribute to the civil rights leader Martin Luther King; and in 1994, U2 received the Martin Luther King Freedom Award. King was an adulterous, theological modernist who taught a false social gospel. U2 supported the adulterous, abortion- and homosexual-supporting Bill Clinton in his 1992 run for president. Clinton conversed with them on a national radio talk show during the election campaign and met them in a hotel room in Chicago. At the same time they mocked George Bush during their USA concerts that year. They featured a video clip depicting Bush chanting the words to “We Will Rock You” by the homosexual rock group Queen. Members of U2 performed at Bill Clinton’s televised inaugural ball on MTV. Bono said he was glad that Clinton’s election was a victory for homosexuals (Flanagan, p. 100).
Bono’s passion in recent years has been AIDS and poverty in Africa. He has petitioned Western governments to cancel the debts of African nations and to increase foreign aid. While Bono does call upon African leaders to “practice democracy, accountability, and transparency,” he does not tie this in with foreign aid and does not put the blame of Africa’s AIDS and poverty problem where it truly belongs, which is government corruption, pagan religion, and its corollary, the lack of moral character and immorality. If the entire wealth of America, the United Kingdom, and Europe were transferred to Africa tomorrow, it would not result in significant and lasting change unless these factors were first addressed, and Bono’s plan does not significantly address them nor require any such radical systemic change. Instead, Bono puts the largest part of the blame for Africa’s ills upon the unfair trade practices of and lack of aid by Western nations and an alleged lack of compassion on the part of Christians.
Speaking before Wheaton College in December 2002, Bono said, “Christ talks about the poor [and says] ‘whatever you have done to least of these brothers of mine, you’ve done to me.’ In Africa right now, the least of my brethren are dying in shiploads and we are not responding. We’re here to sound the alarm” (Christianity Today, Dec. 9, 2002). Bono thus grossly misapplies Christ’s statement in Matthew 25:40, applying it to the unsaved in general rather than to the nation Israel. This is the Fatherhood of God heresy that Mother Teresa also held, that all men are the children of God regardless of whether they have faith in Christ. Further, if Matthew 25:40 is a reference to the unsaved in general, the apostles and early Christians failed miserably, for there is no record that they attempted to relieve the social ills of the Roman Empire in general. In fact, the context of Matthew 25:32-46 is immediately following the return of Christ at the end of the Tribulation, and it describes how Christ will judge the nations on the basis of how they treated His people the Jews, which will be so viciously persecuted during that period. Compare Revelation 7:4-14.
Universalism and a False Christ
Bono’s christ is a false one. He says he is “attracted to people like Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Christ, to pacifism” (U2: The Rolling Stone Files, p. xxviii). The Lord Jesus Christ of the Bible is not a pacifist. He is not anything like the adulterous Martin Luther King or the Hindu Gandhi. Christ did instruct His people not to resist evil in the sense of taking up arms for religious causes. When persecuted, we are to endure it (1 Cor. 4:12); but Christ did not teach pacifism. Christ’s forerunner, John the Baptist, warned soldiers to be content with their wages, but he did not rebuke them for carrying arms as soldiers (Lk. 3:14). Before his death, Christ instructed his followers to provide swords for themselves (Lk. 22:32-38). Christ said he came not to send peace but a sword (Mt. 10:34). In fact, the Lord Jesus Christ will return on a white horse to make war with his enemies (Rev. 19:11-16). The Christ of the Bible is no pacifist and He did not establish a pacifist movement.
When asked by Mother Jones magazine if he believed that Jesus is the only way and if that excludes other people from heaven, Bono replied: “I don’t accept that. I don’t accept that fundamentalist concept. I believe–what is it? ‘The way is as narrow as the eye of the needle,’ and all that–But I think that’s just to keep the fundamentalists out. I never really accepted the whole ‘born again’ tag” (“Bono Bites Back,” Mother Jones magazine, May 1989).
For their Vertigo Tour in 2005, U2 promoted “Coexist” as an icon for world peace. Bono wore a “coexist” headband that featured the cross of Christianity, the crescent moon of Islam, and the star of David of Judaism and he led the crowds in shouting, “Jesus, Jew, Muhammad, it’s true; all sons of Abraham.”
Anti-Christ
Bono has repeatedly worn upside down crosses in his concerts, which are satanic anti-christ emblems. He has displayed the inverted cross while singing the Beatles’ song “Helter Skelter.” He has worn it while singing the Rolling Stones’ vile song “Sympathy for the Devil” (Joseph Schimmel, The Submerging Church, DVD, 2012).
Bono has aggressively promoted the movies of the occultist Kenneth Anger. When Bono was considering establishing ZooTV to rival MTV, he envisioned it “as a window for the world to see the films of Kenneth Anger” (Bill Flanagan, U2: At the End of the World, 1996, p. 477). Bono told Details magazine, “Part of America’s dilemma is its TV because as a mirror it’s a pretty distorted one. I mean, where can you see Kenneth Anger films in the United States?” (“Turning Money into Light, Details magazine, Feb. 1, 1994). Anger, a homosexual who has “Lucifer” tattooed into his chest, wrote the foreword to Anton LaVey’s books The Devil’s Notebook and Satan Speaks. Anger exalts the occultist and moral pervert Aleister Crowley in the movie Lucifer Rising: Invokation of My Demon Brother. He promotes Crowley’s vision of a New Age world order called the age of Horus. Anger’s movie Invocation of My Demon Brother starred LaVey and Mick Jagger and Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones. Anger joined Led Zeppelin Jimmy Page guitarist in trying to exorcise Crowley’s former residence in Scotland of what they believed to be “a headless man’s ghost.”
No Christ-loving, Bible-believing man would promote the work of Kenneth Anger, and I’m sure he would agree with that statement.
Bono even transformed himself into the devil in the ZooTV tour during the early 1990s. The devil, which he called MacPhisto, was an aging rocker who had sold his soul for fame. That certainly sounds like Bono.
Other quotations demonstrate that U2’s “spirituality” is not based on the Bible:
“Bono dislikes the label ‘born-again Christian’–and he doesn’t go to church either. [He says,] ‘I’m a very, very bad advertisement for God…’” (U2: The Rolling Stone Files).
“A U2 concert aims to raise people’s sense of their own worth. ‘It’s a celebration of me being me and you being you,’ as Bono once put it. The music soars and swirls but never bludgeons. … ‘I want people to leave our concerts feeling positive, a bit more free,’ says Bono” (Steve Turner, Hungry for Heaven, p. 28). A celebration of me is exactly what rock & roll is at its most fundamental level, and it is a fulfillment of 2 Timothy 3:2. “For men shall be lovers of their own selves…”
“I believe that it’s a woman’s right to choose [an abortion]. Absolutely” (Bono, Mother Jones magazine, May/June 1989).
Beware When the World Loves You
U2 is exalted as “the biggest band in the world,” and they are praised by everyone from Christianity Today to Rolling Stone. The world loves U2, and that brings some Scriptures to mind.
“If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you” (John 15:19).
“I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world” (John 17:14).
“They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them” (1 John 4:5).
“And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness” (1 John 5:19).
The world loves U2 because U2 is of the world, and the world recognizes its own. The love that Bono sings about is the world’s love. U2’s philosophy is the world’s philosophy. U2’s lifestyle is the world’s lifestyle.
Consider this line from the song “Vertigo” — “A feeling is so much stronger than a thought.”
Bono quoted this in an interview with the wicked Rolling Stone magazine, and it summarizes the rock & roll philosophy and its blind mysticism, which is to do what feels right regardless of what the Bible or some other authority says about it. The Bible says we are to live by God’s Word, but rock & roll says, “Live by your feelings.” The Bible says the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, but rock & roll says, “Just follow your heart.” The Bible says we can only know God through the sound doctrine of His revelation in the Bible, through right thinking that comes by the right understanding of God’s Word, but rock & roll says, “Feelings are more important than thoughts.”
This is why the world loves U2, and this is why apostate Christianity loves U2.
The following article is from Sword & Trowel, Issue 1, 2011, Metropolitan Tabernacle, London, England:
In reviewing the sins of the flesh (in Galatians 5:19-21) the apostle mentions witchcraft, often today translated sorcery. He actually uses a word which we have in English, although for us it has a much nobler meaning.
The Greek word is a form of our word ‘pharmacy.’ Obviously, no Bible translation would use this term, because for us it denotes a healing profession, not a sin of the flesh. So in what way were the sorcerers and witches of olden times involved in pharmacy?
For them, a large field of expertise was the preparation of drugs and potions with mood-altering, consciousness-altering properties; now known as psychoactive, psychotropic drugs. They prepared hallucinogens, opiates and aphrodisiacs both to heighten and suppress emotions. Some were designed to dull the senses and banish care; to disengage from the world in order to float along in sublime indifference and peace. More commonly (the experts tell us) they prepared euphoric drugs to send people soaring into ecstatic dreams and trances, or to amplify love or deepen hatred. In Galatians 5 ‘witchcraft’ refers to shamanistic pharmacy.
Opium (weaker in those times) was used both for pain relief and euphoria. It as the ancient Sumerian ‘joy plant.’ Cannabis was a very well-known hallucinogen. Jimson weed also was in use as a fantasy producer.
To seek these artificial sensations is listed as a work or sin of the flesh: something base, carnal and injurious. The imbiber effectively says — ‘I don’t want to be a human being. I don’t want my mind to be in charge. I don’t like rationality. I don’t want responsibility. I want exciting sensations, or detachment from reality.’
All this is sought today to a greater degree using even more powerful versions of these drugs. But the level of mood tampering attainable by first-century people was of the same order as that which may be achieved by alcohol, and by heavy, relentless beat music. Amplifiers, tweeters, and woofers now produce the high-decibel excitement and compelling power of rock, securing strong emotional effects. Tremendous skill goes into the production of fascinating, irresistible band arrangements designed to get hold of the emotions and carry listeners along. but it is mood-manipulating ‘pharmacy.’
Hearers may take no potion, but they succumb to sensations, getting outside themselves, and either dulling or exciting the mind. Many come to depend on it for well-being.
Are we hooked on ‘pharmacy’ music? Is the mood-affecting rhythm vital for us? Is it so important to us that we overlook the lyrics that are sensual, anti-moral and anti-God, little realising that the musical vehicle is tampering with the mind, bringing us under addictive power, and becoming our chosen alternative to joy derived from the Holy Spirit?
Does not the apostle also say in 1 Corinthians 6:12, ‘All things are lawful unto me … but I will not be brought under the power of any’?
********
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft (G5331), hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies
Strong’s G5331 – pharmakeia
1) the use or the administering of drugs
2) poisoning
3) sorcery, magical arts, often found in connection with idolatry and fostered by it
4) metaph. the deceptions and seductions of idolatry
HOMOSEXUALS AGAINST JESUS
(Friday Church News Notes, August 3, 2012, David Cloud)
– It is popular among homosexual activists to claim that Jesus didn’t say anything against homosexuality, but this is pure nonsense. Jesus upheld the law of Moses, saying: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-19).
The law of Moses forbad homosexual activity in the strongest terms. In fact, it was a capitol offense. “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 20:13).
Those are the words of the very law that Jesus came to fulfill, which He did by living a perfectly righteous life in our stead and dying to pay the price demanded by the law for man’s sins.
Further, Jesus upheld the original marriage covenant of Genesis 2. When asked about His position on divorce, Jesus replied: “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:4-6).
Thus, Jesus plainly upheld “traditional” one man/one woman marriage. Homosexual activists aren’t just opposed to a few “hard-nosed” Christians, they are opposed to Jesus Himself, at whose name “every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and … every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:10).
How Do You Respond?
Posted on August 9, 2012 by reformednazarene
Scripture teaches over and over that we are to separate from error. We are told to “have nothing with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11). 2 Cor. 6:14 says to not be yoked together with unbelievers.
I am continually amazed, but also not surprised, at the fast pace of compromise in the Christian world, year after year. We are watching once solid leaders ignoring biblical principles of separation as they turn to hold hands with almost anyone who declares themselves Christian, in spite of clear evidence of apostate behavior. As Ken Silva points out in his recent article (David Barton Controversy), one leader after another is becoming involved in various joint ventures to unite all “Christians” with the goal of making the world a better place.
The latest compromise is the Under God Indivisible Leadership…
View original post 849 more words
SOME BRIEF NOTES ON CONTENDING WITHOUT BEING CONTENTIOUS
by Holly Sprenger Garcia
So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath; for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God. James 1:19-20
We have contending and we can be contentious… Two different things. We contend for the faith, or we are accusatory and can be contentious. Let’s sharpen iron with GOD’S WORD, not our feelings, experiences, beliefs, our even our word… Let’s wait on our Master, and let our heart be right with Him. Search our hearts Lord. (Psalm 139:23-24)
■A continual dripping on a very rainy day And a contentious woman are alike;Whoever restrains her restrains the wind, And grasps oil with his right hand.As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend. Whoever keeps the fig tree will eat its fruit; So he who waits on his master will be honored. As in water face reflects face, So a man’s heart reveals the man. Prov 27:15-19
■MOLD ME MAKE ME LORD: Strength and honor are her clothing; She shall rejoice in time to come. She opens her mouth with wisdom, And on her tongue is the law of kindness. PR 31:25-26
This goes BOTH ways, for not only the one contending for the faith, but for those Christians who oppose them, we need to remind ourselves of many passages. Frequently I see people come in to accuse those contending. They ask if you have prayed for them, they say, “they do not want to run out to lynch someone”, or “they don’t want to be condemning” (we should not condemn but speak the Word and hold up all to the light) or “judge not lest be judged”, “or have you used Matthew 18”, or cries of unity, or the funny one that I see frequently is, “You are so judgmental”… The irony escapes them.
■So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath; for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God. James 1:19-20
WE ALL NEED EACH OTHER, AND NEED TO STOP DESPISING OTHER’S GIFTS, ALONG WITH REALIZING THAT SOME DO NOT HAVE THE SAME UNDERSTANDING. SLOW TO SPEAK…
■FALSE UNITY: WHAT IS UNITY? It says, all these things are to equip us, edify the body, till we come to a unity of THE FAITH and of THE KNOWLEDGE of the Son of God….WHY? That we should no longer be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.
SO, WHAT ARE WE TO DO?
Speak the truth in love, WHY?
■So that we may GROW UP in all things INTO HIM….
And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. Eph 4:13-16
■“Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. Matthew 10:16
We have to watch out for how we reveal the truth, how we handle ourselves, and being careful of our speech. For those in the body who oppose those who are exposing a false teacher, and you disagree, you are only doing others harm by claiming they are “a brother” or “a sister” without ALSO having done your FULL proving.
■Attacking others for “TRASHING” a brother, or INSISTING they are a brother, is just as unhelpful as insisting someone is false or a wolf without laying out the case and discussing it.
■Never addressing or listening to the concerns of ecumenism, or associations, or lack of God’s Word in the forefront, etc. is not productive, and I cannot possibly see how it can be honoring to Him.
■Both sides of a discussion on false teaching should always maintain sound speech and a lack of characterization of the other side. We do not have the perception of Jesus to call someone a viper, so let’s proceed carefully.
Otherwise, I believe the Word shows we should stay silent from making absolute statements on both sides, UNLESS we have spent enough time to PROVE ALL THINGS – by His Word. If someone won’t hear you (not agree necessarily – (but hear you out) without getting angry, running off, accusing, or ignoring, then you may have to remember the patience we’re admonished to have with all men. We can be wrong, but another believer will generally hear us out, so that they can admonish us/reason with His Word with gentleness and patience. By the Way, Matthew 18 applies to a sin done to one person in private, then you keep it private, it has NOTHING to do with false doctrine. Nor should we rush out to apply it to someone we disagree with. We see things we may or may not like, but this doesn’t mean we should name names.
■But I believe we do have our marching orders in the verses below.
WE ARE ALL CALLED TO REVEAL THE TRUTH WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT.
So for those of you who feel discomfort when this happens, (you’re favorite teacher/pastor being mentioned), please understand how hard it is for the one who is speaking the truth. Certainly hold them accountable for how they do it, but don’t rush in to accuse them of a witch hunt, and/or pepper them with questions without having had the decency to do your own homework, with the info they already provided.
AND WE ARE ALSO CALLED TO WITHDRAW FROM THOSE WE SEE IN THIS PASSAGE BELOW:
■If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself. I Tim 6:3-5
WE ARE TO KNOW AND BE IN THE MEAT OF HIS WORD SO WE CAN DISCERN BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL:
We are to take heed to the doctrine for a reason:
■Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you. I Tim 4:16
■For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. 14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Heb 5:13-14
DO NOT EVEN GREET THOSE WHO DO NOT BRING HIS DOCTRINE:
■Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds. 2 John 1:9-11
___________________________________
O.K., This is where I’d like to address the people who hang out with the Rick Warren’s of this world, or call Mitt Romney a Christian, or quote Henri Nouwen, or Ken Blanchard, Dallas Willard, link to others pages or products for sale, etc. The Pastors who go to conventions with them or call them brother. The people on FB who put them on their page. I understand completely some will be unknowing, but once you know, you better not compromise the truth of God’s Word, it’s not yours to compromise. So, if you pass along their info, “receive them”, “greet them”, then what?
■YOU ARE SHARING IN THEIR EVIL DEEDS.
I’d also like to address those who defend them as just authors, or fiction (i.e. the Shack) or say they are not pastors, teachers, etc. Please note most of these verses say, WHOEVER, or ANYONE, etc. and does not differentiate that they should not be STOPPED, MARKED, AVOIDED, NAMED, except that there was greater condemnation for the Pharisees or stricter judgment for teachers. And by the way, if YOU are taking teaching, reading an author’s books, sharing them on FB, thereby recommending their speech, YOU are also sharing in their evil deeds. We need to try so hard to be careful, we can all make mistakes, but don’t turn around a snap if someone points it out to you, but be quick to listen, go take some quiet time in prayer and His Word to look for yourself.
■ALL ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THESE PASSAGES BY GOD’S WORD. DON’T EXCUSE THOSE WHO ARE PROPAGATING FALSE DOCTRINE AS NOT BEING “DISCERNING”. WHAT DO WE SEE FROM THE SCRIPTURES I’VE SHARED SO FAR, AND ALSO BELOW AS OUR RESPONSIBILITY? (See if I have missed some)
1.Know His Word.
2.Use His Word, not yours.
3.Be in the MEAT of His Word.
4.Take Heed to His Word.
5.Correct with His Word.
6.Don’t associate with those who will not CONSENT with sound words, withdraw.
7.Get and use wisdom and kindness when you speak.
8.Be slow to speak, and quick to listen. Don’t be quick to wrath.
9.Not associate with those who don’t consent to sound words.
10.Have no fellowship with the unfruitful deeds of darkness, Reveal the truth.
11.Find out what is acceptable to the Lord.
12.Expose those deeds.
13.Prove or test all things and Hold fast to that which is good.
14.Test the Spirits (Because there are MANY false Prophets)
15.Mark and avoid those who bring that divisive false doctrine.
16.Name Names.
1.Eph 5:10, 11, Heb 5:14, Rom 16:17-18, I John 4:1, I Thess 5:21
I’d also like to address the people who defend them as just being “undiscerning” or “deceived”. Go ahead and pray for them, but we cannot excuse as acceptable behavior.
These teachers/pastors/authors are not just being undiscerning (see Rom 1:31), they are being disobedient to God’s Word and we are NOT even to keep COMPANY with them. (2 Thess 3:14) They also are “sharing in their evil deeds” (2 John 1:9-11). Do we want to defend a “deceived” or “undiscerning” person, who is not in the meat of God’s Word, who do not obey His Word; who call themselves a Christian writer, apologist, speaker, teacher, pastor and then listen or share their writings or teachings?
■But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, DECEIVING and being DECEIVED. But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them. 2 Tim 3:13-14
WHY ARE WE ALL CALLED TO DO THIS? SO WE CAN CUT OFF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO LEAD OTHERS ASTRAY TO THEIR DEATHS….
■But what I do, I will also continue to do, that I may cut off the opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the things of which they boast. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light*. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works. 2 Cor 11:12-15
* Angel of light, we need to remind ourselves, ministers of righteousness is what they will look like.
ECUMENICAL?
SPIRITUAL FORMATION?
DABBLING IN “CHRISTIAN” YOGA?
GOING TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?
VISITING YOUR FRIEND’S MOSQUE?
TAKING PART IN REIKI HEALING, ETC.?
What does His Word instruct?
1) Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people.” 2 Cor 6:14-16
2) And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. 2 Cor 6:16-18
■RENOUNCE AND EXPOSE: For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. Eph 5:8-11
I AM GUILTY OF FORGETTING THIS, HELP ME LORD
■Likewise, exhort the young men to be sober-minded, in ALL THINGS showing yourself to be a PATTERN OF GOOD WORKS; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility, SOUND SPEECH that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of you. Titus 2:6-8
WHO WE DO AND DO NOT BREAK FELLOWSHIP WITH. HOW SHOULD WE ADMONISH THEM?
BELOW ARE BIBLICAL EXAMPLES AND PATTERNS FOR THOSE WHO ARE TEACHING OTHERWISE TO SOUND DOCTRINE, AND DOES NOT CONSENT TO WHOLESOME WORDS, OR DOES NOT OBEY THESE EPISTLES…
■WE WITHDRAW,
■WE DON’T KEEP COMPANY WITH THEM.
■WE MARK AND AVOID.
BUT LET’S BE VERY CAREFUL IT IS ABOUT SOUND DOCTRINE AND NOT NON-ESSENTIALS OR PRIDE, BUT DO KEEP IN MIND, IT IS GOD’S WORD THAT IS ESSENTIAL. Let’s also only offend in Christ and not in ourselves.
1.But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary in doing good. And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. 2 Thess 3:13-15
2.If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself. I Tim 6:3-5
3.But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us. 2 Thess 3:6
IS IT O.K. TO DISMISS BAD TEACHING OR KEEPING BAD COMPANY WITH THE COMMENT, “NOT EVERYONE IS DISCERNING?” WHAT DOES HIS WORD SAY BELOW?
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, UNDISCERNING, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are DESERVING OF DEATH, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. Rom 1:28-32
Sounds pretty serious to me . . . and I have been there, there is not knowing, but we do need to test the spirits, and search the Scriptures to see if these things are so. ESPECIALLY if we are recommending or taking teaching from one who may be teaching great error.
- But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Heb 5:14
WE DON’T JUDGE WHETHER SOMEONE IS OR IS NOT A BELIEVER
(We can surmise, but we should speak to the fruits of bad doctrine)
This passage also gives us good advice of judging what a man speaks. Is he/she REALLY speaking the Word of God?
- He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad. “Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or else make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for a tree is known by its fruit. Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
- A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” Matt 12:30, 33-37
WE KNOW FALSE PROPHETS AND RAVENING WOLVES BY THEIR FRUIT’S….
RECENTLY I HEARD A WELL-KNOWN PREACHER, USING THE PASSAGE IN MATT 24, CHANGING IT TO SINGULAR, TO KNOW WHETHER SOMEONE WAS A BELIEVER OR NOT… BE CAREFUL… TAKE HEED….lest we fall… We can examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith, but we judge nothing before it’s time with a professing believer’s justification. We certainly CAN and SHOULD judge unsound doctrine, associations (within the church) and behavior. (I Cor 5 & 6)
THIS PASSAGE SPEAKS TO FALSE PROPHETS (NOT NECESSARILY FRUIT INSPECTING OF OTHER BELIEVERS YOU SAW HAVING A BEER OR WHATEVER ELSE YOU MIGHT PERSONALLY LOOK DOWN ON) I am speaking to those who say definitively that people aren’t saved, I don’t believe we can be sure, and I know we can surmise they may in trouble based on lack of fruit of the Spirit or love for the brethren – but Jesus DID say Judge with a righteous judgment and not according to the appearance – the only place to find righteous judgment I know of, is from His Word, not mine):
- “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them. Matt 7:15-21
- They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work. But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine: Titus 1:16-2:1
-
- But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does not slumber. 2 Pet 2:1-3
(Not really even pointing to the obvious guys/women who are wearing Armani suits, or driving Bentley’s, or have 10,000 square foot mansions, or compounds, planes, or $23,000 gold toilet seats, but reminding us all that they are among us, and secretlybring in these destructive heresies. And MANY will follow their deceptive ways, and most people don’t think they will be deceived, or led astray. Who is it that is being misled if there are MANY DECEIVERS?)
■This comment was from me to a well-known ministry who was hooking up with Chuck Pierce of the NAR movement. “Please consider the fact that many will follow their destructive ways because you invited them to the occasion.”
But I’d like to admonish each and every one of us, we ARE to prove all things and hold FAST to that which is good. (I Thess 5:21), we ARE to be Bereans and SEARCH the scriptures to see if these things are so (Acts 17:11), we ARE to approach Him with humility and with a teachable attitude… (I Pet 5) May we all remember that.
I remember last year, someone from a Bible study had overheard me speaking of the danger of being involved with (yoga), she said, “Oh brother, I am too spiritually mature to be deceived”… I said no more, I was just saddened, I walked with her, and said if she ever wanted to know more, I’d freely share. But she has never asked, and to this day defends the practice. I pray the Lord protects her, and I pray she considers that MANY WILL FOLLOW THEIR DESTRUCTIVE WAYS…
And will it be because one of us haven’t done our proving? Or maybe we’d rather not have a disagreement or deal with the unpleasantness, but think of the alternative….MANY will follow their destructive ways…
EVERYONE… ALL BELIEVERS… ARE CALLED TO DO THIS:
■Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple. For your obedience has become known to all. Therefore I am glad on your behalf; but I want you to be wise in what is good, and simple concerning evil. And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen. Rom 16:17-20
Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. Psalm 119:104-105
IN THE END, WE NEED TO REMEMBER WHERE WE CAME FROM AND THE MANNER OF HOW TO RECOVER SOME FROM THE SNARE OF THE ENEMY. (And that should be our goal, not to be right, but to do right).
■Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men. For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another. But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. Titus 3:1-7
USE THE WORD TO JUDGE BY. THAT IS WHERE YOU WILL FIND RIGHTEOUS JUDGMENT.
Copyright 2012 Holly Sprenger Garcia
(This note may be shared in its entirety by anyone who chooses to use it for the glory of God. It is not for mocking nor to take it apart to either prove their own view, or to dishonor the Lord. It is free, none my work to be sold by another. These are some of the reasons why this is copyrighted – for those who agree with the reasons, please do share!). Also, I am always open to pointing out where I am wrong (I will be wrong), but please just do it with His Word 🙂
.
[See also: Part I, The Christ Anointing and the Antichrist Spirit, Part II, Part IIIb and Part IV (Conclusion).]
…Cosmic humanism forms the basis of the New Age Movement and related religious expressions, particularly Eastern mysticism. It says that man is evolving toward a state of higher consciousness that will result in the attainment of godhood…
…Many have…adopted a form of cosmic humanism, believing that they are capable of achieving the same anointing of Christhood that Jesus had. Their beliefs are predicated upon a new Gnosticism which appears so very Christian as to deceive even the elect if possible. Through close examination, however, they are found in an error so serious that it threatens the stability of the churches in which these people fellowship and, in some cases hold positions of leadership.
– Albert James Dager, Vengeance Is Ours85
Occultists…
View original post 3,671 more words
Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows (Galatians 6:7).
Very few things motivate us to give God our undivided attention like being faced with the negative consequences of our decisions. Regardless of our guilt, we find the courage (or nerve) to turn to God for help and oftentimes a miracle. We make promises to Him as if this would change His mind about our situation. Suddenly, we’re concerned for the welfare of others. We look for whatever leverage we can find to get God to do something on our behalf.
Many of us experience tension because we live daily with the painful consequences of sin. Mistakenly, we thought, hoped, or were told that once we accepted Christ, God would miraculously erase our consequences. With the daily evidence He has not taken away our consequences, some of us conclude we have not…
View original post 687 more words
Answering the Gay Christian Position
Article ID: DG238
By: Joe Dallas
This article first appeared in the Effective Evangelism column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 23, number 1 (2000). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: http://www.equip.org
Twenty-two years ago I craved justification for my homosexuality. I had decided I was gay, and I felt utterly incapable of changing my sexual desires. Instead of conforming my actions to biblical standards, I chose to adjust biblical standards to accommodate my actions. My subsequent six-year involvement as a staff member of the pro-homosexual Metropolitan Community Church became the fruit of that compromise and remains a source of deep regret to this day.
During my tenure as a self-professed “gay Christian,” I was often confronted by believers who argued the standard passages on homosexuality. Like anyone steeped in propaganda, however, I knew which Scripture passages would be thrown at me (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 1 Tim. 1:9-10; all of which clearly condemn homosexuality) and could recite the pro-gay interpretation of each, leaving my Christian opponent and me at a stalemate.1 The problem, of course, was that we were debating my revised view of the Bible without addressing the state of heart and mind that had led me to that revision in the first place.
Clearly there’s a place for arguing doctrine. When biblical integrity is discarded (as it surely is when pro-gay theology is adopted), then a stand for truth is mandated. Crucial to that stand, however — and often missing in our discussions with those in the pro-homosexual religious movement — is a willingness to include, then go beyond, a point/counterpoint approach to the biblical references to homosexuality. “Going beyond,” in this case, means asking questions of a broader, more penetrating nature.
When our friends who call themselves gay Christians insist that God approves of their orientation and behavior, we do well to challenge the interpretation of Scripture they claim supports their position. When that debate concludes, however, they will often fall back on two general arguments by which they accept, and even celebrate, their homosexuality. The first is based on the seeming immutability of their sexual orientation; the second is their sense of God’s presence in their lives while they are openly and actively homosexual. Two questions come to mind as we consider these arguments.
Is there a divine intent for sexual expression, and, if there is, how do we determine what it is? When Troy Perry, homosexual activist and founder of the Metropolitan Community Church, writes about his sexual awakenings, he describes an encounter he had with another man. Although married (his wife, in fact, was in the adjoining room during Perry’s tryst), he explains his rationale for committing homosexual adultery: “Eventually, I came to realize that what we were doing seemed right for me” (emphasis added).2 While admitting it did not constitute love, he nonetheless refers to the episode as “a marvelous education.”3 Consistent with this subjective approach to ethics, Perry’s first sermon to his newly formed church was titled, “Be True to You.”4
Should the authenticity of our sexual desires be the criteria by which we judge their rightness? If so, one wonders whether pedophilia, incest, or sadomasochism might not also be legitimized so long as they “seem right” to an individual.
The pro-gay apologist might indignantly argue that same-sex contact between consenting adults is a far cry from the horror of pedophilia or incest; yet that response evades the broader issue: Are we to conform our sexuality to a revealed intent or to our own deeply ingrained preferences? If we claim to be Bible-believing Christians (which most in the gay religious movement identify themselves as), yet draw our moral conclusions not from Scripture but from our own passions, then a glaring contradiction exists and cries out for correction.
“But,” the gay apologist counters, “how could God condemn something I’ve tried so hard to overcome and even asked Him to remove?” Mel White, gay author and former ghostwriter to a stellar list of Christian leaders, argues this point in his autobiography Stranger at the Gate (Simon and Schuster). Movingly, he recounts years of prayer, psychotherapy, and shock treatment geared toward obliterating his homosexual desires. When all efforts to remove the temptation toward sex with other men failed, he determined by concession that, since his prayers to be relieved of homosexual feelings went unanswered, those feelings were therefore God ordained.
His testimony echoes that of hundreds of religious homosexuals who assume that unwanted temptations that are not completely removed through prayer must therefore be feelings that cannot be removed at all; subsequently, what cannot be removed at all must be, by its very immutability, legitimate. (E.g., “I prayed for God to remove my temptations, but some of them remained. Therefore, God must expect me to yield to them.”)
In contrast, Francis Schaeffer provides a better approach to the frustration of deeply ingrained temptations: “So I must ask, very gently: How much thought does (our identification with Christ) provoke? Is it not true that our prayers for ourselves are almost entirely aimed at getting rid of the negative at any cost rather than praying that the negatives be faced in the proper attitude?”5
Regarding sexual temptation, Schaeffer is more specific: “Here in the midst of life there is to be a strong choice, by the grace of God. It is not a matter of waiting until we no longer have strong sexual desires, but rather — we are to understand what Jesus means when He talks about denying ourselves that which is not rightfully ours.”6
Placing the concept of being true to myself above self-denial, I (and I fear many like me in the gay church) decided homosexuality was natural because it came naturally to me. Having predetermined the rightness of it, I read that determination into the Bible rather than submitting that determination to the Bible’s authority.
That is the crux of the problem. If there is a divine intent for our sexuality — and, indeed, there is — then we do well to face what it is, not what we wish it to be. To do less is to set ourselves up for a lethal combination of heresy and tragedy.
Does God’s presence in our lives indicate His approval of our lifestyle? “I feel God’s presence in my life,” you’re likely to hear from someone aligned with the gay religious movement. “And at my church, people are born again, and God’s Spirit is manifest. How could that be if He disapproves of homosexuality?”
I can testify firsthand to the power of this line of reasoning. If, upon my first visit to a pro-gay congregation, I had encountered a Roman orgy in progress, it would have been easy to dismiss the very notion of “gay Christianity.” At the Metropolitan Community Church, however, I witnessed traditional hymns, sermons that were theologically conservative, and even an occasional altar call. Isn’t this evidence, I thought, that God sanctions homosexuality?
A cursory look at Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian church refutes this erroneous thinking. The Corinthians were carnal and full of divisions (1 Cor. 3:3-4), an incestuous relationship existed openly among them (1 Cor. 5:1-5), and drunkenness occurred during their communion celebrations (1 Cor. 11:21); yet God was present in their lives. At the very least, as born-again believers, they had the Spirit of God within them, however grieved the Holy Spirit may have been with their behavior.
Could God’s presence be construed to indicate His approval of their behavior? Hardly. Likewise, though our friends in pro-gay churches claim ongoing fellowship with Christ, their foundation is experiential, in contrast to the surer foundation Christ commended when warning against claiming a knowledge of Him apart from obedience to Him (Matt. 7:24-27).
All of this makes our encounters with those claiming to be gay and Christian reminiscent of an encounter between Jesus and a rich young ruler (Mark 10:17–23). Christ loved the young man and was acutely aware of the spiritual hunger posed in his question, “Good Master, what should I do to inherit eternal life?” Like our friends or loved ones in pro-gay churches, this young ruler obeyed many of the commandments, but something in his life — his riches, which he deemed invaluable — was holding him back. When Jesus put His finger on this one area, the ruler walked away, unwilling to relinquish and obey.
There, Mark’s account of the conversation ends; but who knows? Someday, perhaps years later, this same man may have reexamined the contrast between earthly and eternal wealth. Maybe Christ’s way of speaking truth — gently but firmly — never left his memory. Perhaps — just perhaps — he finally yielded what seemed so important, only to find a hundredfold more when his life was conformed to Christ’s word, then transformed by it.
I know it’s possible. The sound Bible teaching I received as a young Christian haunted me, pursuing me even in the midst of indescribable rebellion. It would not be ignored; truth finally conquered convenience when I realized I’d been kidding myself into believing what I wanted to believe, rather than what I truly believed.
As we address the issue of obedience and truth with our friends caught in the deception of pro-gay theology (and other self-serving theologies), we prayerfully hope they, too, may find the truer blessing of a yielded life.
NOTES
1. For a fuller treatment of the pro-gay interpretation of Scripture, see Joe Dallas, A Strong Delusion (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1996).
2. Troy Perry, Don’t Be Afraid Anymore (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990), 20.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid., 38.
5. Francis Schaeffer, True Spirituality (Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1971), 26-27.
6. Ibid., 27.
by Mike Ratliff
3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” 4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5 and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? 6 “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” (Matthew 19:3-6 NASB)
My wife and I attempted to eat at our local Chick-Fil-A here in Olathe, Kansas this evening in support of Dan Cathy in light of the completely biased or one-sided coverage of his interview statements as a Baptist in a Baptist publication about religious and theological issues. It seems…
View original post 1,492 more words
Tom Horn’s Apollyon Rising: 2012 – Critique by Dr. Cathy Burns
Here are just SOME of the problems I found with Tom Horn’s Apollyon Rising: 2012.
P.41—He mentions that the descendants of the fallen angels went into hell “in full battle dress.” He used The Message version which states: “…the old-time giants who entered the grave in full battle dress….” Although we know this is a false version, Horn has manipulated the text by saying “hell” instead of the “grave.” (See Ezekiel 32, The Message.) Another problem with this is, we are told in the Book of Enoch that the Nephilim could not enter hell but were doomed to walk the earth as demons so even if Horn did not manipulate the text, this idea is contrary to the very book that teaches the Nephilim idea (which he endorses).
P.44—In reference to Iraq, Horn states: “the very land associated with future Armageddon (and against Saddam Hussein, no less…)….” Last time I checked Armageddon was in ISRAEL—not Iraq!
P. 62—On the copyright page Horn states: “All Scripture quotations from the King James Version.” This just isn’t true for the verse from Zecharaiah 14:3-4 is not KJV but the New International Version. (The verse on P. 41 wasn’t KJV either.) The timeline for Zech. 14 is not what Horn is claiming. He has these verses occurring so that the “tribulation temple” can be built on the site of the Dome of the Rock but if you look closely at the Scripture, the setting is AFTER the Tribulation and at the start of the Millennial reign of Christ (notice especially verse 9). Christ’s feet do not stand on the Mount of Olives at any time during the Tribulation—so Horn is wrong again!
P.67—At least four times, Horn mentions Gabriel as the angel that appeared to Daniel in chapter 10. We do not know for sure who this being is. Gabriel is mentioned in chapters 8 and 9 but this is a different vision—and may possibly be a different being. We can’t say for sure.
P.77—Horn states: “In Luke 3:23-38, there were seventy-seven generations from Adam to Jesus Christ. There were seventy-seven generations from Enoch to Christ, according to one account.” (He doesn’t mention WHICH account—so we can’t check it out.) Going to Luke 3 we find that there are 76 generations (counting Christ but not counting God since He didn’t beget Adam), but what do these generations have to do with Muhammad and faith having “seventy-seven branches”?
P.79—Horn states: “If the number seventy-seven on September 11, 2001, pointed to ‘revenge’ upon the United States by the royal bloodline descendents of Lamech, they were following the footsteps of Tubal-Cain indeed….” This statement cannot possibly be true because we see from Genesis 4:16-18 that Lamech is a descendent of Cain and ALL of Cain’s lineage perished in the flood—therefore there were no descendents of Lamech who could have attacked the U.S.
P.82—Horn refers to the “seed of the serpent” (which would be the serpent seed theory).
P.88—Horn says that the Antichrist “will champion worship of the ‘old gods’…” but Daniel 11:38-39: “But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things. Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory….” This isn’t the “worship of the ‘old gods’” but a strange god and one that his fathers did not know.
P.91—See document about “kosmos” and Horn’s definition.
P.131—Horn writes: “Incredibly, IF this supernatural leader were to be a magical REINCARNATION or resurrection of deity, the body or DNA of this SAVIOR may have been kept in or represented by a coffin….” (Emphasis added.) Horn often refers to REINCARNATION but since there is no such thing as reincarnation NO ONE (mythological or not) can be reincarnated. (See Hebrews 9:27.)
P.134—Once again reincarnation is mentioned. How could Osiris be reincarnated (or resurrected) if he never existed?! By the way, resurrection and reincarnation CAN NOT be equated or interchanged.
P.135 (with P.142)—Horn claims that Apollo, Nimrod, and Osiris are all the same “being.” We know from Scriptures that Nimrod was not a deity or part-god. He was FULLY human and he was the great grandson of the perfect Noah. Noah begat Ham; Ham begat Cush; and Cush begat Nimrod—all humans. (See Genesis 10:1, 6, 8.) We do know that Nimrod existed but Osiris and Apollo are mythological “gods” so these beings cannot be the same. Even if, as Horn is suggesting, they are the same, then Osiris and Apollo would have to be humans not some hybrid as Nimrod was a human.
P.139—Horn states: “Second Thessalonians 2:3 warns: ‘Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition [Apoleia; Apollyon, Apollo].’” Horn’s explanation seems to be highly exaggerated (like normal). The Greek word “perdition” is apoleia which means “damnable(-nation), destruction, die, perdition, X perish, pernicious ways, waste.” Do you see “Apollyon” or “Apollo” in the definition? I certainly don’t. (See the document showing all the verses where “apoleia” is used.)
P.142—Horn writes: “The fallen angel, Apollo, who unlocks the bottomless pit and unleashes the thunderous hoards of Great Tribulation locusts is therefore none other than the son of Satan and the spirit that will inhabit Antichrist.” (Emphasis added.) If (as Horn claims) Apollo is Nimrod, then he CANNOT be a fallen angel as I’ve already given the Scripture where Nimrod was fully human. Notice, too, that Horn says this being is the “son of Satan” but Nimrod was the son of Cush. Horn claims that Apollo unlocks the bottomless pit—but nothing of this sort is in the Bible. Notice Revelation 20:1: “And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.” The one who has the key is an angel FROM HEAVEN—not Apollo or Satan. If Satan had the key to the bottomless pit, do you think he would allow himself to be bound there for 1000 years (see Revelation 20:1-3)? Horn then adds: “Not to put too fine a point on it, but if the reader doubts the authority of the Scriptures cited above concerning the coming of Apollo as Antichrist or the dedication of the occult hierarchy to bring the prophecy on the Great Seal about, the ‘illuminated ones’ have you right where they want you.” In other words, if we don’t believe Tom Horn, we’re playing into the Illuminati’s hand. I don’t think so!!!!
P.175—Horn gives a quote from Scripture and other artifacts: essays on the Bible and archaeology in honor of Philip J. King by Philip J. King, Michael David Coogan, J. Cheryl Exum, Lawrence E. Stager (see footnote reference on P.348 of Horn’s book). I decided to check this reference—and as in previous cases—I found that Horn manipulated the text and DID NOT quote it correctly. Here is the page he is SUPPOSED to be quoting. He leaves out words without indicating that he has done so and then he CHANGED the text as well as ADDING his own words. Compare his quote on P.175 to the EXACT quote below. Notice that he has added (although he did put it in brackets) “including those of great height; giants, offspring of the Watchers.” As you can see from the page the words “giant” and “Watcher” are NOT mentioned AT ALL in the ENTIRE book—so Horn is making these authors say something that THEY DID NOT SAY! Isn’t this lying?
P.176—Horn writes: “If Job 38:31 is therefore interpreted according to these ancient astrological and mythological renderings, it would have God asking Job if he could bind the magic bands (kesatot?) of Osiris-Dionysus or loose the bindings (mispabot?) of the mighty hunter, the giant Orion/Gilgamesh/Nimrod/Osiris/Apollo.” Do you really think that God would ask Job about a MYTHOLOICAL being? Do you think God would refer to astrology when He warned against it? I certainly don’t think so. Besides, as just pointed out, the text that Horn quoted was misrepresented and then he adds further misrepresentation and ends by having God ask Job something that Horn has created in his own imagination!!
P.177—Horn writes: “The Pleiades points to Apollo-Dionysus while the Orion system points to the soul of Osiris in heaven and, on earth, to his speculative tomb location in Giza.” (Emphasis added.) We need to remember that those who teach the Nephilim theory claim that these creatures are without souls…so how could Osiris have a soul?? On P.188 Horn writes: “…I eventually hypothesized that the Watchers had to blend species in the way they did in order to CREATE A SOULLESS or SPIRITLESS body into which to extend themselves.” (Caps and boldface added.)
P.179—On P.142 Horn says Apollo is a fallen angel and on P.179 he asks if Apollo-Osiris can rise from a hidden tomb at Giza. Since angels do not die, how could the fallen angel rise from a tomb?
P.182—Horn states: “…the giants of the Old Testament, such as Goliath, were the part-human, part-animal, part-angelic offspring of a supernatural interruption into the divine order and natural evolution of the species.” Where’s the Scriptural reference for such a fantastical claim? The Bible calls Goliath a “man” (Hebrew: iysh) in I Samuel 17:24, 25, and 33. “Iysh,” according to Strong’s Concordance, means “a man as an individual or a male person.” Noah, Abram, Jacob, Joseph, Adam, etc. were all called “iysh” in the Bible. Were any of these people part-beast and/or part-angel?
P.183—Horn quotes Genesis 6:2 where the daughters of men were fair and then he goes to the Interlinear Hebrew Bible for an interpretation that states that “the daughters of Adam…were fit extensions.” The word “fair,” however means: beautiful, good, cheerful, favour, fine, graciously, joyful, kindly, loving, precious, sweet, etc. There is no indication whatsoever that they were “fit extensions.”
P.184—Horn writes: “…Gilgamesh (the two-thirds god and one-third human child of Lugalbanda and Ninsun).” How can this be possible? A child is 1/2 of each parent, not 1/3 and 2/3. Furthermore, angels are not gods so even if Gilgamesh were an offspring from an angel, he still couldn’t be 2/3 god (or even 1/2 god). It’s impossible!
P.185-186—Horn says: “But of all the ancient records, the most telling extra-biblical script is from the book of Jasher….Jasher records the familiar story of the fall of the Watchers, then adds an exceptional detail that none of the other texts is as unequivocal about, something that can only be understood in modern language to mean advanced biotechnology, genetic engineering, or ‘transgenic modification’ of species. After the Watchers had instructed humans ‘in the secrets of heaven,’ note what Jasher says occurred:
“[Then] the sons of men [began teaching] the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order therewith to provoke the Lord. (Jasher 4:18)”
Does the Book of Jasher actually say what Horn claims it does? Not exactly. Jasher 4:18 states: “And their judges and rulers went to the daughters of men and took their wives by force from their husbands according to their choice, and the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order therewith to provoke the Lord; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon earth, all men and all animals.”
First of all, there is NO mention in this entire chapter to fallen angels or Watchers (see enclosed copy of Chapter 4 of Jasher). There is frequent mention of “sons of men” but remember that “sons of men” refers to HUMANS–not gods, angels, or Nephilim. To claim that “sons of men” are angels is to manipulate the text. Besides, if the “daughters of MEN” (in Genesis 6) refer to humans, why wouldn’t “sons of MEN” also refer to humans?
Second, Horn then goes on to insinuate that the angels (who are definitely NOT mentioned in this chapter of Jasher) mixed animals with humans to produce chimera-like creatures. However, note that Jasher clearly states that the mixture of animals was with other animals and fowl. There is NO MENTION of mixing animals with humans.
Third, if this is the “most telling extra-biblical script” that Horn can find, then his entire theory has just been proven false because Jasher does NOT state what Horn says it does.
P.187—Horn writes that Noah was perfect. He adds: “The meaning was not that Noah was morally perfect, but that his physical makeup—his DNA—had not been contaminated with nephilim descent, as apparently the rest of the world had become. In order to preserve mankind as He had made them, God destroyed all but Noah’s family in the Flood.” This just isn’t true at all. The Bible tells us that Noah had brothers and sisters (Genesis 5:30): “And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters.” Noah’s brothers and sisters were just as perfect in their DNA as Noah was since they all had the same father—yet NONE of Noah’s brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, etc. were spared. Obviously, then, it wasn’t the “perfect” DNA that was the factor in Noah being spared. It was because Noah was upright and righteous before God. It was his spiritual standing in God’s sight, not his physical DNA. Notice what Genesis 6:9 says: “Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.” Genesis 7:1: “And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before Me in this generation.” That’s the secret to Noah finding grace in the eyes of the Lord.
P.190—Horn writes: “Former college professor and BBC correspondent, Dr. I. D. E. Thomas, in his highly recommended book, The Omega Conspiracy, chronicled the burgeoning of so-called ‘alien abduction’ activity and tied it to end-time prophecy concerning the return of the nephilim….and led Thomas to conclude that the identity of the Watchers and whoever the alien entities are were somehow connected.” Notice that the aliens (who are often described as about three-foot creatures) are somehow connected to the nephilim (who are supposedly extremely gigantic creatures). How do we go from such humongous creatures to tiny 3-4 foot creatures and claim they are connected? Also, where can you find “alien abductions” in Genesis 6?
P.191—Horn claims: “…the nephilim becomes important here, as the rephaim were associated by the ancients with the ‘shades of the dead,’ including nephilim in Sheol.” (Emphasis added.) Okay, we have another problem here. Let’s start with a definition for the “shades of the dead”: “Shades are SOULS that have been separated from their bodies, also called ‘disembodied spirits.’ They are thought to be able to be seen, but not touched.” (Emphasis added.) (http://www.ehow.com/facts_6734048_definition-shade-spirit.html) Notice that shades are SOULS and Horn claims that the shades include the Nephilim…but the Nephilim were supposedly SOUL-LESS beings. We can’t have it both ways! We are also told in the Book of Enoch that when the Nephilim died they were doomed to walk the earth as a demon because they couldn’t go to hell because they didn’t have a soul…yet Horn just said that the shades included the “nephilim in Sheol [Hebrew for hell].” Horn’s theory is so full of holes and discrepancies—yet people choose to believe him and ignore God’s Word. As II Thessalonians 2:10b-11 reads: “because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” When the truth is rejected, only the lie remains.
P.192-193—These pages mention “reincarnation” several times—again. One of these occurrences is: “These beings had the power to return from the dead through REINCARNATION into bodily form as nephilim.” (Emphasis added.) Horn then quotes from Mysterious World which mentions “the reincarnation of the demonic spirits of the Nephilim giants who had been destroyed in the Flood.” (Emphasis added.) Isn’t that a little strange? The soul-less Nephilim are “demonic SPIRITS”! Hmmmmm.
P.194—Horn claims that Nimrod changed into a Nephilim. (See separate paper on “Began to be.”) He also claims that “gibborim” is “one of the offspring of nephilim.” In another of Tom’s articles he calls the gibborim a “demon child.” This just isn’t true as the Bible tells us several times that God is “gibborim” and He certainly was not the offspring of a fallen angel or a “demon child”! (See separate paper on “Gibborim.”)
P.194—Horn favorably quotes from Annette Yoshiko Reed’s book where she states: “The Nephilim of [Genesis—Tom Horn] 6:4 are ALWAYS…grouped together with the gibborim as the progeny of the Watchers and human women.” (Emphasis added.) Obviously, this statement is not true but Horn uses it to try to “prove” his convoluted ideas.
P.194—Horn writes: “Therefore, in modern language, this text could accurately be translated to say:
“And Nimrod began to change genetically, becoming a gibborim, the offspring of watchers on earth.”
This is such a twisting of Scripture and II Peter 3:16 warns that we can twist (or wrest) the Scriptures to our own destruction. We are also warned about adding to God’s Word—yet this is what Tom Horn has done.
P.194-195—Horn writes about Nimrod where “he began to be” a Nephilim. If this would be true, then ANYONE can be turned into a Nephilim and no one is ever safe from this possibility. After all, Nimrod was the great-grandson of a perfect Noah and yet he supposedly was changed genetically to become the offspring of a demon. How much more quickly could anyone of us have this happen—especially since we are so far removed (possibly 100-150 generations) from Noah?
P.197—Horn writes about Genesis 11:4-6: “That this section of Scripture could be viewed as a secondary support for the concept of Nimrod having become ‘revived Watcher offspring’….” Nimrod WAS NOT the offspring of a fallen angel as the Scripture clearly shows us that Nimrod was Noah’s great-grandson. He then adds: “…if Nimrod was genetically modified according to the original Watcher formula, he would have inherited animal characteristics within his new material makeup….” Where is proof of this?
P.208—Horn seems to accept evolutionary teaching in this statement: “As an example of this possibility, in 2009, blood was extracted from the bone of a dinosaur that scientists insist is eighty million years old. Nephilim would have existed in relatively recent times comparably, making clonable material from dead biblical giants feasible.”
P.210—Once again we see Horn manipulates a text. He writes: “In my opinion, this is more than a possibility, and I remember with curiosity how in 1998, Zahi Hawass, the current secretary general of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, claimed to have found the burial tomb of the god Osiris (Apollo/Nimrod) at the Giza Plateau.” Really? Was the mythological god Osiris’ tomb found? Well…not really. The article by Hawass that Horn referred to states: “I have found a shaft, going twenty-nine meters vertically down into the ground….At the bottom, which was was filled with water, we have found a burial chamber with four pillars. In the middle is a large granite sarcophagus, WHICH I EXPECT TO BE THE GRAVE OF OSIRIS, the god….So several years will pass BEFORE WE HAVE FINISHED INVESTIGATING THE FIND.” (Emphasis added.) This quote simply states that Hawass was EXPECTING to find the grave but there is nothing conclusive yet Horn states that they “claimed to have found the burial tomb of the god Osiris” which just IS NOT TRUE!!
P.214—Horn writes: “…an incredible tenet emerges—that Satan has seed, and that it is at enmity with Christ.” Here we see the “serpent seed’ idea (as on P.82).
P.215—Horn writes: “Consequently, if the Antichrist is the REINCARNATION of the demon Apollo as prophesied by the apostle Paul, not only will he be the exact opposite of Jesus (Son of God), but the FORERUNNER of the return of the Nephilim.” (Emphasis added.) Let’s look at 3 items in this quote:
1. The idea of reincarnation is mentioned—again. By the way, how can a DEMON “reincarnate”?
2. WHERE is Scripture where the apostle Paul prophesied that Apollo would reincarnate?
3. The Antichrist is the FORERUNNER of the return of the Nephilim. The word “Forerunner” means “One that precedes, as in time; a predecessor” or “One that comes before and indicates the approach of another; a harbinger.” Now, if the Antichrist is the one who COMES BEFORE the Nephilim, then there can’t be ANY Nephilim here until AFTER he arrives—so there aren’t any Nephilim on earth at present yet we are told the Nephilim are here. We can’t have both ways. (Actually, neither view is correct but certainly both views cannot be held at the same time!)
P.215-216—Horn quotes from the Septuagint (Isaiah 13): “…open the gates, ye RULER.” (Emphasis added.) He insinuates that this ruler is the Antichrist, BUT if you go to the Septuagint you will not find the word RULER (as Horn claims) but rather RULERS. By using the plural word you cannot make this into a single Antichrist so Horn had to “manipulate” the text and change it into a singular word in order to continue to promote his false theory. Is this deception? (See enclosed copy of the Septuagint version of Isaiah 13.)
P.219—Horn writes: “According to Enoch, this unparalleled event is scheduled to occur after seventy generations have passed from the time of the Flood.
“This could be troubling.
“Although traditional scholarship places the time of the Great Flood between 2500 and 2300 BC, modern dating by some researchers has roughly estimated the Flood to have actually transpired between 2900 and 2800 BC….Because a prophetic generation is seventy years based on Psalm 90:10 (‘The days of our years are threescore years and ten’), Enoch’s seventy generations times seventy years equals exactly 4,900 years forward from the Flood. If the Flood took place between 2800 and 2900 BC, this brings the return of the nephilim to the immediate hour. In other words, if this 2800 to 2900 BC dating is correct, mankind is on the threshold of Watchers being raised from their underground prisons and thrown into an abyss of fire, while their giant offspring return to the surface of earth in violent fulfillment of multiple prophecies.
“We have no idea whether the modern time frame for the Great Flood is reasonable….”
Once again we find a number of problems with Horn’s comments.
1. There were 67 generations from the time of the flood until Christ (see Luke 3:23-36—starting with Noah and going to Christ) so the seventy generations were fulfilled by about 100 A.D.
2. The Bible does not say a prophetic generation is 70 years. The verse Horn used says nothing about a generation. Here the entire verse: “The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.” Furthermore, the Bible gives its own definition of a “generation” which can be found in Matthew 1:17: “So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.” Each “set” of 14 generations varies greatly in the amount of time. A generation, therefore, has no definite set time frame.
3. The Flood DID NOT occur between 2800 and 2900 BC BASED ON THE SCRIPTURES THEMSELVES.
FATHER AGE AT SON’S BIRTH SON’S NAME
Adam 130 Seth
Seth 105 Enos
Enos 90 Cainan
Cainan 70 Mahalaleel
Mahalaleel 65 Jared
Jared 162 Enoch
Enoch 65 Methuselah
Methuselah 187 Lamech
Lamech 182 Noah
By adding the years from Adam to Noah (130 + 105 + 90 + 70 + 65 + 162 + 65 + 187 + 182) we get the total of 1056 plus we add 600 years because the flood occurred in the 600th year of Noah’s life, we find that the flood occurred 1656 years after creation or 2344 B.C. Notice that Horn states: “We have no idea whether the modern time frame for the Great Flood is reasonable…” but we do know that the “modern” time frame is not correct because the Bible gives us the timing of the flood. The reason why Horn doesn’t want to accept the Biblical record is because the Biblical record shows that Horn’s theory is incorrect about the timing of the Book of Enoch “prophecy.” To make the Book of Enoch correct, we need to disregard the Bible. By changing the time of the flood, and claiming that a generation is 70 years, Horn can manipulate dates to fit his idea that the Nephilim are about to return around…2012!
P.229—Horn writes: “In describing the activity of the Antichrist demon Apollo, Revelation 9:1-11 says this ‘king’ of transgenic locusts opens the bottomless pit and releases synthesized insectoids to torment mankind.” Hmmmmm. For some reason I can’t find this in MY Bible. Can you? He then asks: “Are the locust hordes of Revelation chapter 9 created in human laboratories that employ the same Watchers technology we believe could give rise to Apollo’s return?” Now, how could these locusts be created in HUMAN laboratories and then get into the BOTTOMLESS PIT to be released during the Tribulation?
P.262—Horn writes: “As [Noah] Hutchings points out, the only kind of building in all the world that requires a head cornerstone is a pyramid. Because of this, Hutchings believes the ‘pillar’ that Isaiah (Isaiah 19:19-20) said would stand as a ‘sign and for a witness unto the Lord’ in the end times may be the Great Pyramid on the old border that separated lower and upper Egypt.
“Conversely, a few years ago, another friend of mine named Patrick (Paddy) Heron wrote a book entitled Pyramid of the Apocalypse, in which he postulated that the Great Pyramid at Giza had been built by the nephilim, the offspring of the Watchers. Besides associated legends, part of his reasoning had to do with the scale of the massive undertaking and the same biblical parallels—the one hundred forty-four thousand, the missing capstone, etc.,—which Heron viewed as the Watchers trying to copy, plagiarize, mimic, or borrow from the fame of something known only to the angels, namely, the design of the New Jerusalem in heaven, whose height and width are the same, as in a pyramidal structure (as opposed to those who believe the New Jerusalem will be cube-shaped).”
First of all, when would a pyramid supposedly built by the nephilim stand as a “sign and for a witness unto the Lord”? Second, the pyramid needs a CAPSTONE not a CORNERSTONE (see comment below about this). Third, the New Jerusalem is FOURSQUARE and a pyramid is not. Revelation 21:16 states: “And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.” In other references to “foursquare” in the Scriptures we see an altar and a breastplate (Exodus 27:1; 28:15-16; 39:8-9). Reading the descriptions of these items you will easily see that neither the altar nor the breastplate could have been a pyramidal shape. (See page on properties of a square.)
P.263—Horn writes: “The Great Pyramid capstone is missing, representing temporary vacancy by Apollo according to the mottoes, whose coming will ‘cap’ the pyramid, and yet as we have seen Jesus is also called the head cornerstone….
“Is this what is meant in Psalms 118 and Acts chapter 4 where Jesus is the capstone the builders refused?”
Horn evidently doesn’t know the difference between a capstone and a cornerstone. Let’s look at a dictionary definition for these words: CAPSTONE: “The top stone of a structure or wall.” CORNERSTONE: “A stone at the corner of a building uniting two intersecting walls….” A capstone CANNOT be the same thing as a cornerstone—and Psalm 118:22 clearly tell us that Jesus is the cornerstone—not a capstone as Horn claims: “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.” Acts 4:11: “This is the stone which was set at nought of your builders, which is become the head of the corner.” Once again we can see that Horn is manipulating Scriptures to try to prove his false theory.
Here are more Scriptures showing Jesus is the CORNERSTONE (not a CAPSTONE):
Isaiah 28:16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion [not Egypt!] for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
Matthew 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
Mark 12:10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:
Luke 20:17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
Ephesians 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
1 Peter 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1 Peter 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner.
Notice also the CORNERSTONE is laid as a foundation which means the “basis on which a thing stands, is founded, or is supported.” In no way, shape, or form can Christ be considered a capstone!
P.264-265—Horn writes: “This cipher also confirms the prophecies of Psalms 118 and Acts 4 concerning Jesus as the rejected capstone….
“To further verify this part of the cipher pointing to an ‘alternative capstone’ or second messiah….” Once again Horn is incorrectly referring to Jesus as a capstone.
P.270—Trying to bolster his theory for the Antichrist to appear in 2012, he appeals to an Islamic scholar and he quotes: “‘When Daniel specified the period between its distress and relief, between the era of anguish and the era of blessing, he put it at forty-five years! We have already seen that he specified the time of the establishment of the abomination of desolation as the year 1967, which is what in fact occurred. Therefore, the end—or the beginning of the end—will be 1967 + 45 = 2012.’” Once again we see that Horn’s research is faulty and in contradiction to God’s Word. If you turn to Daniel 12:11-12 you can see that there are 45 DAYS (1335 days – 1290 days = 45 days). Adding 45 DAYS to 1967 would still be 1967 or possibly early 1968 at the latest. This throws out Horn’s theory because he needs YEARS—not-days—to make his theory “fit.”
P.272-273—Horn writes: “John Kehne made an even more intriguing observation, directly coupling the Great Seal’s trestleboard date, 1776, and the Mayan ending date 2012:
“This Seal shows a thirteen-step pyramid with 1776 in Roman numerals.… [The year—T.H.] 1776 was not only the year that the Declaration of Independence was signed, but was also a special year in the Mayan calendar. Just as the last katun in the Great Cycle is “katun 2012,” the first katun in the cycle of thirteen was “katun 1776.” In fact, the katun ended thirty-three days before the signing. So 1776 is the bottom level of the pyramid, where the date is actually inscribed—the top of the pyramid is therefore 2012.
“As we shall show, early Freemasons were aware of the significance of these dates—1776, 2012, and 2016 respectively—and while the thirteen steps of the unfinished pyramid on the Great Seal account for the timeframe 1776–2012 using the slightly less than twenty-year periods (19.7) of the katun, the Gregorian twenty-year cycle produces 1776–2016, both of which fit perfectly within the trestleboard dating on the U.S. Great Seal cipher and the first Masonic tracing board, as we will reveal.”
There’s a problem here. On P. 266 Horn writes: “Yet if the year 1776 represents the starting date….” And on P.283: “This adds clarity to the reasons the designers of the Great Seal of the United States similarly incorporated the Mayan 13 katun system—which started in 1776 and ends in 2012—on the nation’s primary cipher.”
Horn also has a picture on P.273 of his book showing the “13 katuns” and the “13 cycles” on an unfinished pyramid. While he claims that the starting date is 1776, it is not true. Please look closely at the bottom of the numbers and you will find the starting date as 1756—not 1776 as he claims! This throws off his theory by 20 years—and negates his starting date of 1776 which is on the back of the dollar bill. So much for his secret code on the dollar bill!
P.288—Tom Horn quotes William Henry and Mark Gray as thus: “‘The designers of the city of Washington DC oriented it to the Sun – especially the rising Sun on June 21 and December 21 [the same day and month as the end of the Mayan calendar in 2012—T.H.]. The measurements for this orientation were made from the location of the center of the Dome of the U.S. Capitol, rendering it a ‘solar temple.’ Its alignment and encoded numerology point to the Sun as well as the stars. A golden circle on the Rotunda story and a white star in the Crypt marks this spot…It is clear that the builders viewed the Capitol as America’s sole temple: a solemn…Solar Temple to be exact.” (Emphasis added.)
While I do not have a copy of this particular book, I was able to find William Henry’s website and his comments on Washington, D.C. This is what he said on his site: “‘The designers of the city of Washington, D.C. oriented it to the Sun – especially the sunset on March 21 and September 21. The measurements for this orientation were made from the center of the dome of the U.S. Capitol, rendering it a ‘solar temple’. Author David Ovason imagines it as the center of a compass and as a point of stillness, where the arc of the sunset is ‘centered.’ This still point is the tip of an angel’s needle that weaves the abstract, event transcendent, concepts of Freedom and Liberty into the fabric of America.
“It is crystal clear from the statements set in the stone of the Capitol that the builders viewed it as America’s sole temple (a solemn, Solomon’s Solar Temple in Jerusalem to be exact).” (http://www.williamhenry.net/blog.html)
Did Horn change the dates (March 21 and September 21 to June 21 and December 21) and “sunset” to “rising”? Also, December 21st occurs EVERY YEAR—not just in 2012 but Horn has added this to try to prove his theory. This is VERY deceptive.
P.305-306—Horn states: “…an event that occurs only every thirteen thousand years. The precession of the equinoxes will conclude a twenty-six-thousand-year cycle, bringing the astrological Age of Pisces to an end and introducing the beginning of Aquarius, when the next cycle begins….” Horn doesn’t believe the Bible’s creation story if he accepts 26,000 year cycles, etc.
P.309—Referring to Terrance McKenna, Horn writes: “To his surprise, he discovered that the high and low parts of the graph corresponded with times in history when ‘novelty’ or major world events transpired, including a spike around the time of September 11, 2001, and a coming spike for October 2010. But one date was unparalleled elsewhere on the graph. This is when the line simply ends, abruptly plunging off the graph into infinity—December 21, 2012. This finding is all the more astonishing given that McKenna’s research was published in 1973 independent of any knowledge of the ending date in the Mayan calendar.”
Once again, let’s look at the illustration that Horn provided. If you look closely, the “coming spike for October 2010” is really in 2008. He also insists that the line abruptly plunges “off the graph into infinity—December 21, 2012” but that is not true, either. Notice that the graph ends in July 2012—not December 2012. The last number on the graph is “07” which is the 7th month (or July). Furthermore, there are no “days” listed in the graph—only “months” and “years” so there is NO POSSIBLE WAY for Horn to “know” the EXACT day for ANY of the months listed. (Please refer to the chart on the previous page.) How can a person who manipulates text after text and document after document be considered trustworthy?
P.313—See the document referring to “aion.”
P.317-318—Horn writes: “…sometime around the Pleistocene age (thirteen thousand years ago), fossilized human skulls were unearthed together with seashells and remnants of tropical plants. The skulls have nearly three times the cranial capacity of modern man….” This sounds like Horn believes in evolution.
P.318—In referring to an Incan myth, Horn writes: “He (Viracocha) created animals and a race of giants. These beings enraged the Lord, and he turned them into stone. Then he flooded the earth till all was under water, and all life extinguished. This flood was called uñu pachacuti, by the Inca which means ‘water that overturns the land.’ They say that it rained sixty days and nights, that it drowned all created things, and that there alone remained some vestiges of those who were turned into stones. Viracocha rose from the bosom of Lake Titicaca, and presided over the erection of those wondrous cities whose ruins still dot its islands and western shores, and whose history is totally lost in the night of time.
“Inca mythology involving giants, followed by world deluge, agree with similar legends from the Maya, Olmec, and Aztec cultures of Mexico. These stories are consistent with Sumerian and Hebrew accounts of the Flood and of the giant nephilim….” (Emphasis added.) How can such a story be CONSISTENT with the Bible (the Hebrew account of the flood) when it differs greatly from the Bible account?
P.319—He then quotes from a Greek legend to “prove” Giants built megalithic structures: “The Jinn were before Adam: They built huge cities whose ruins still stand in forgotten places.” The Bible clearly tells us that Adam was the first man. The first city recorded in the Bible was built by Cain (see Genesis 4:17).
P.322—Horn writes: “With this in mind, Flynn made the unprecedented disclosure that 33.33 degrees of the great circle of the earth represents 2012 nautical miles, the identical number at the end of the Mayan calendar that ‘measures the ending of the earth.’ Flynn further revealed that Mount Hermon in Phoenicia, the first location of the descent of the Watchers, lies precisely at 33.33 degrees north, 33.33 degrees east, 2,012 miles from the equator, and 2,012 miles from the prime meridian, a location of Mt. Hermon in longitude based on the Paris 0 meridian 2.20 degrees east of Greenwich.”
Mount Hermon is located at 33◦24’38” latitude and 35◦51’26” but Flynn is using the Paris meridian which is 2◦20’14” so the “corrected” location of Mount Hermon would be 33◦24’38” latitude and 33◦31’12” longitude. Neither coordinate is at 33.33—as Flynn and Horn claim. It may be a minor difference—but it dismantles their theory since they are relying on the precise location for their figures. Furthermore, you can do your own calculations at http://www.export911.com/convert/distaCaIc.htm but you aren’t going to come up with 2,012 miles from Mount Hermon to the equator or from Mount Hermon to the prime meridian.
THIS IS THE MAP that is printed on P.322 of Horn’s book. It may look convincing but it is not factual. Notice also that the point where the lines intersect IS NOT at Mt. Hermon but above and to the right of it!
THESE ARE THE ACTUAL COORDINATES which can be found at http://itouchmap.com/latlong.html (and many other sources).
These are just some of the problems in Horn’s book but I believe that any thinking person should be able to see that his book is riddled with errors, miscalculations, incorrect quotes, false Bible interpretations, etc., etc.
Cathy Burns
DiscernIt 
Recent Comments