Search This Blog

Monday, 23 April 2018


For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. (1 Corinthians 3:11-13).

The meetings between the Pope and various New Apostolic Reformation leaders in 2016 is contradictory in many ways, not least because both parties claim the exclusive right to apostolic authority.

The glaring contradiction between "inclusivism" and the Council of Trent. 

Protestantism teaches "exclusivism", namely the biblical view that salvation necessitates personal and explicit faith in Jesus Christ. The official doctrine adopted by the RCC since Vatican II is "inclusivism", the outrageous teaching that non-Christians can be saved by Jesus Christ without faith! (Hebrews 11:6). Confusingly, "inclusivism" stands in opposition to the RC profession that it is the "sole Church of Christ" i.e. "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church", as defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. ALL non-Catholics were anathematized by the Council of Trent during the Counter Reformation (1545-1563). {1} Since RC anathemas are immutable and can never be rescinded, all Protestants remain officially excommunicated. The ex cathedra position held by the RCC is that it continues to condemn as heresy the Protestant tenet of justification by faith alone (sola fide) apart from works, a position confirmed by Vatican I and II. {2} 

Apostolic succession is the assertion that RC bishops represent the only direct uninterrupted line of continuity from the original apostles:

"The principle underlying the Roman claim is contained in the idea of succession. "To succeed" is to be the successor of, especially to be the heir of, or to occupy an official position just after, as Victoria succeeded William IV. Now the Roman Pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position, and perform the functions of  St. Peter; they are, therefore, his successors. We must prove that St. Peter came to Rome, and ended there his pontificate; that the Bishops of Rome who came after him held his official position in the Church." {3}

Problematically for the RCC, the claim that the apostle Peter had supremacy among the twelve apostles, and that he became the first bishop of Rome cannot be proved. No evidence exists that Peter ever went to Rome. As a consequence of this tenuous claim, the so called "separate churches" are officially judged by Trent to be entirely invalid. More than that, their own warped criteria necessitate that it is impossible for the NAR to have any claim to apostolic succession or prophetic authority. How is it conceivable that the Pope has acknowledged NAR "prophets" as genuine and given them his approbation? According to NAR "prophet" Kris Valloten, the Pope's opening comment at their 2016 meeting was: “We must invite the prophets back into the church and welcome them with open arms.” {4)

The NAR is a Protestant coalition consisting of neo Pentecostals and charismatics. NAR leaders claim that the second apostolic age is upon us on the authority of their now deceased "Presiding Apostle" C. Peter Wagner. Wagner announced the beginning of the "second apostolic age", claiming that the lost offices of prophet and apostle were restored in 2001. {5} The NAR is hyper-authoritarian and pyramidal in its hierarchical structure, with the guru "apostle" at the pinnacle.. very similar in fact to the structure of the RCC. NAR cults are the fastest growing sects of Christianity. An estimated 369 million people are a part of this movement worldwide. {6} The NAR have other things in common with the RCC, in particular ecumenism and their plan to infiltrate and dominate all sectors of society via their "seven mountain mandate". If we are to believe the Jesuit Extreme Oath, their aim is to do their uttermost to secretly infiltrate Protestant churches and to ".. extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals' doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, regal or otherwise." {7}

In reality, the New Apostolic Reformation aka Dominionism/Kingdom Now/Replacement Theology is a dangerous heretical movement consisting of proven false teachers such as Bill Johnson, Rick Joyner, Mike Bickle, Todd Bentley, Lou Engle, Cindy Jacobs, Rick Joyner, John and Carol Arnott and many more. {8} The NAR are very fuzzy on doctrine and rely heavily on extra-biblical revelations from their so called "prophets" and "apostles". These wolves have put themselves beyond accountability, since they make themselves the final authority. (Acts 17:10-11). According to the NAR, the church must submit to the authority of their own so called "apostles" in order for their dominionist objective to succeed i.e to transform nations for Christ in order to "establish the Kingdom of God on earth". {9} Wagner established the International Coalition of Apostlic Leaders (ICAL) and the Apostolic Council of Prophetic Elders whose mission it is to "..effectively accelerate the advancement of the Kingdom of God into every sphere of society." {10} The NAR dominionist agenda entirely contradicts the scriptures. Rather than Christians establishing dominion, the scriptures indicate the diametric opposite scenario of increasing godlessness and global hostility against Jesus Christ in the last days. (Revelation 19:19 cf. John 18:36; 2 Timothy 3:1-5).

How does the Vatican square its claim to apostolic succession and the Pope's meeting with NAR "apostles" and "prophets" and vice versa? Surely there is a theological impasse, or are they closer than we are led to believe? Certainly Rick Joyner makes no secret of the fact that he is a Knight of Malta (Order of Malta), an RC lay religious order. {11} The bizarre "knighting ceremony" for graduates of Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry (Bethel Church Redding), apparently resonates with the Order of Malta ceremony. {12} Lou Engle, founder of The Call, who claims the "mantle" of ecumenist Billy Graham, actually participated in a sickening act of mutual prostration with RC leader Matteo Calisi in 2016 at LA event Asusa Now. {13} Calisi proposed a covenant between Engle and themselves stating: "..division is a diabolical sin.. Jesus doesn't care about our differences.. for our doctrines, for our traditions.." These statements from Calisi stand in direct contradiction to the teaching of Jesus Christ and the real apostles! The rejection of the scriptures concerning doctrine is the rejection of Christianity itself! (1 Timothy 4:3,16; Titus 2:1, 9). More up to date is the full Catholic Mass held by RCC clergy at the mega-ecumenical Hillsong Alpha Conference in February 2018. {14} Hillsong was founded on New Order of the Latter Rain (NOLR) principles and is also Kingdom Now/NAR.

NARWatchIsrael describe the NAR as a "cuckoo in the nest". They continue: "Years ago this movement set out to ‘infiltrate and pervert the course of the true Church, in order to plant a whole new understanding of God, the Holy Spirit, the Coming, the Endtimes – and almost everything else’, and it is very close to achieving that -worldwide. So much so, that one of its senior proponents boasted: ‘The NAR, in fact, is the 21st century's mainstream Christianity.’" {15} 

In 2000, the Assemblies of God (AG), the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world, issued a statement warning against Dominion theology, a warning that many individual Assemblies of God churches have wilfully ignored!

This statement was adopted by the General Presbytery of the Assemblies of God on August 11, 2000:

"Kingdom Now or Dominion theology. The thought that God’s kingdom can come on earth with a little help from humankind is intriguing to those who advocate this approach to impacting society. Rather than scoffing at the promise of Christ’s imminent return (2 Peter 3:3,4), this errant theology says that Jesus will not return until the Church takes dominion of the earth back from Satan and his followers. By taking control, through whatever means possible, of political, ecclesiastical, educational, economic, and other structures, Christians supposedly can make the world a worthy place for Christ to return and rule over.6 This unscriptural triumphalism generates other related variant teachings." {16} 

The RCC And The NAR Claim To Apostolic Authority Is False!

The idea of "apostolic succession" is not found in the scriptures. Rather apostolic authority is passed on through the teaching of the original apostles, not through apostolic succession. The inerrant scriptures are the benchmark by which we test all things. (1 Thessalonians 5:21; 1 John 4:1Acts 20:32; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; Acts 17:11). False apostles and prophets would have us abandon the authority of the Word of God in favour of their own unverifiable extra biblical revelations and feigned authority.

Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. (2 John 1:9).

No direct lineage between the RCC and any of the apostles can be established. Critically, deviation from the apostles foundational teaching automatically disqualifies the RCC as the "one true church" and "apostolic succession". The present Pope aka the "supreme Pontiff" has supremacy over the RC church as the "vicar of Christ "(Latin vicarious Christi) from vicarious, meaning...." acting or done for another". This title effectively identifies the succession of popes as antichrists. (1 John 2:18). Antichrist both opposes and stands in place of Jesus Christ. (2 Thessalonians 2:4; Matthew 24:5, 24 cf. Matthew 23:9).

These days we should use the title "Apostle" with extreme caution. The term can be loosely applied to a church planter, a missionary or a pioneer, but nothing more. It is imperative that we understand that those who claim to be "apostles", do not have the authority of Jesus' original apostles and they cannot supersede the apostles teaching. (Acts 2:42). 

The RCC is full of contradictions, and is at odds not only with the scriptures, but also within itself and its previous catechisms. Similarly the NAR is a contradictory confusing movement, continually changing the goalposts, and claiming authority on the precepts of men. (Matthew 15:9). God is not the author of confusion. (1 Corinthians 14:33).

This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. (Titus 1:5-9).

{1} http://heritagebiblechurch.com/PDFs/Facts/Trent.pdf
{2} http://www.liturgyoffice.org.uk/Resources/YOF/Sacrosanctum-Concilium.pdf
{3} http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01641a.htm
{4) https://krisvallotton.com/pope-francis/
{5} https://books.google.co.uk/books?
{6} https://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,136116
{7} http://www.reformation.org/jesuit-oath.html
{8} http://www.so4j.com/new-apostolic-reforma:tion-latter-rain
{9} https://www.icaleaders.com/about-ical/statement-of-faith
{10} https://www.icaleaders.com/about-ical/
{11} https://www.morningstarministries.org/about/questions-and-answers/knights-malta-rick-joyner#.WtS-s0xFzIU
{12} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acEJ78_3ym4
{13} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOMY6jLNTw0
{14} https://emergentwatch.com/2018/02/15/hillsong-sponsoring-contemplative-alpha-allows-catholic-mass-at-conference/
{15} http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/NARWatchIsrael.pdf 
{16} https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index/Revival-Endtime-Revival--Spirit-Led-and-Spirit-Controlled

Friday, 20 April 2018


We know that C S Lewis has been, and continues to be widely acclaimed as a great apologist for Christianity and, while it is not my purpose in this piece to dispute such acclamation - it is certainly my intention to explore the possibility that this prolific writer was not a Christian - by any biblical definition of the term.

Preposterous - untrue - unfair - unfounded - ridiculous - risible - heretical - irrational - you cannot be serious - judge not lest ye be judged…The tirade of comments which I’ve received in knee jerk defence of C S Lewis’ Christian integrity are as endless - as they have been formidable - as they have been hostile. Indeed I sometimes wonder if it wouldn’t be more acceptable in some ‘Christian’ circles to attack Christ’s claims of divinity rather than cast the ‘merest’ shadow of doubt over the authenticity of C S Lewis’ Christian status.

But, setting aside the subject of the popular author’s Christian credentials let me digress, momentarily, by introducing the following questions:

Does a sport’s commentator need to be practised in the sport on which he/she offers informed commentary?

For instance, the renowned, now retired Formula One Racing commentator - Murray Walker - was he ever a Formula One racing driver?

Since the answer to both questions is an emphatic ‘No’, I can promptly return to the main theme with the affirmation that a person doesn’t need to be practised in a discipline to become an ‘expert commentator’ on that discipline. - and it is with this ‘thin edge’ of reason that I hope to begin the arduous process of wedging open the most prejudiced of closed minds to the possibility that a person can have an intellectual grasp of, and be an ‘expert commentator’ on Christianity - without necessarily being a real ‘Christian’.

And, having placed that ‘thin edge’ of reason against, what might only be, the slightest of fissures on the stubborn skull of the partisan, pro-Lewis mindset - let me continue by attempting to hammer the wedge in a little deeper and open the crack a little wider…..

Thwack, thwack.

Window cleaners are an interesting bunch, are they not?

The window cleaner’s task enables him to gather a considerable amount of information about customers’ homes and lifestyles - without any need to enter their houses. When the chamois champ goes about his daily business he can’t help but engage his natural inquisitiveness and explore the furnishings, fittings and personal effects which lie in the rooms behind each of the windows he has cleaned.

Indeed, if such a cleaner, for whatever reason, developed an obsessive interest in any particular customer - he could, if he so desired, prepare a very detailed dossier on that client’s home, habits and interests - and it would all have been done, quite naturally, in the normal course of his work -  without the necessity of entering the home.

So the questions arise, and they are crucial questions:

Was C S Lewis an occupant of a house called ‘Christian Faith’ - or was he merely an inquisitive window cleaner who, for his own selfish reasons, took a special interest in that particular house and occupiers?

Or, to put it another way, did C S Lewis glean all of his information about Christianity purely as a self indulging intellectual exercise - or did he obtain his knowledge by actually becoming a spiritually regenerate  Christian ?.

Thwack, thwack.

Well, despite his copious knowledge of the ‘Christian Faith’ - and his undoubted intellectual familiarity with some of its general precepts and principles, C S Lewis didn’t seem to have much of a ‘inkling’ as to where the only entrance to ‘Christian Faith’ was located - and neither did he have any idea of the doorway’s form - which raises the interesting question of whether or not he had ever actually entered the house………

Thwack, thwack.

So, what of this doorway - where is this ‘one and only entrance’ to ‘Christian Faith’ of which C S Lewis had apparently no personal knowledge and experience?

Well - the door is invisible to the naked eye, indeed it cannot be detected by any natural human sense, nor can it be intellectually appraised - because, like the house which it serves, its substance is spiritual - and therefore, it can only be spiritually discerned and understood.

Yes indeed, as the apostle Paul confirmed in 1 Corinthians 2/14, no natural man (as C S Lewis must have been before his ‘conversion’) is capable of true spiritual discernment:

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Unless, that is - and according to Jesus, the natural man undergoes true spiritual birth:

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. –

 John 3/5-7

Thwack, thwack………

Not that C S Lewis’ experience of spiritual regeneration reflected this.

Thwack, thwack.

Consider the author’s own description of his ‘conversion’ experience:

You must picture me alone in that room at Magdalen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England" (Surprised By Joy, ch. 14, p. 266).

Well - it might have been the ‘unrelenting approach of Him’ whom he so earnestly desired not to meet - but I think that this unwelcome 'god' had a more natural origin - I believe that his unwanted visitor went by the name of 'cognitive dissonance'.

Cognitive dissonance is a common psychological condition experienced by all who can hold established attitudes on any subject. The condition presents as a terrible feeling of unease and occurs when a person, in holding a settled viewpoint, is confronted with information which challenges that viewpoint.

When cognitive dissonance prevails, the host will seek to regain peace of mind by engaging one or, if need be, two consecutively operating mechanisms. Initially the host will stubbornly disregard the opposing information and, if this is successful, peace of mind will, once again, prevail - and there will be no more to be done. However, should the incoming information (in over-riding the initial ‘deaf ear’) be persistent and unrelenting in its presentation and persuasion, this might induce a second, more dramatic and very much different response - that of a sudden ‘paradigm shift’ - the result of which is a complete rejection of the established attitude, and the unconditional acceptance of the new viewpoint.

C S Lewis was friends with the Roman Catholic writer J R Tolkien, and had been influenced by G K Chesterton, another Roman Catholic writer - as well as being schooled and heavily influenced through the writings George MacDonald - a Scottish (Universalist) minister and writer of fantasy tales.

With the weight of their combined theistic beliefs warring against the author's established atheistic mind set, an increasingly unbearable mental stress, i.e., ‘cognitive dissonance’ would have prevailed in his psyche. And, when this tension reached intolerable levels it would have precipitated a sudden 'paradigm shift' in his thinking and, Voila, our reluctant hero moved instantly from being a stubborn atheist to becoming a confirmed 'Christian'.

In other words C S Lewis' conversion was not 'spiritual' - it was a natural phenomenon which had nothing to do with Christ's supernatural union with his hitherto unregenerate spirit......and had everything to do with the author instinctively, naturally and selfishly seeking to preserve and promote the ‘intellectual’ peace of his own mind.

There are many, many people of the C S Lewis type who have become ‘Christian’ based on their own natural, self preserving and self promoting terms and, because 'their god' essentially remains their own (unregenerate) mind and emotion, they will constantly experience difficulty in extending unconditional authority to God's word. And, alas, when a contentious issue raises it ‘discordant’ head, and they start to feel the goads of conflict between God’s Word and their own established opinion they will, quite naturally, seek to preserve their ‘peace of mind’ by ignoring God’s word - while still maintaining, with one excuse or another, that their ‘traditional’ or ‘modern’ slant on Biblical teaching is ‘reasonable and rational’

I understand that C S Lewis perceived his own ‘spiritual’ re-birth as a life long process which involved as much of his own effort and initiative - as it did God’s.

He referred to God’s presence in His own, or anyone’s life as the ‘Christ life’ (how very impersonal) and he also asserted that the way in which to improve - or increase this ‘Christ life’ resource was by a combination of three different means viz. baptism, belief and participation in the Mass, the Eucharist - or Communion.

Baptism (in the true biblical sense) and ‘belief’ (presumably in Christ) are surely things which would be practiced after eternal birth i.e., after a person had been made spiritually alive in and to Christ - and would be undertaken - or practised to confirm rather than initiate or create new eternal life.

And, likewise, participation in the Lord’s Supper is essentially a commemoration of Christ’s sacrifice, which would - and always will be carried out by those who have already been ‘born again’. As for his inclusion of the Roman Catholic Mass……..well, there is nothing biblical - or Christian about that particular ceremony….and to refer to it as ‘Christian’ must, in itself, call his ‘spiritual integrity’ into serious question.

I can only conclude that his understanding of ‘Christian Faith’ was gleaned from his own external observations - and not as one who had truly entered His Father’s house. And I come to this conclusion with Christian conviction because, through the grace of God, I live in ‘Christian Faith’ - and the hallway which C S Lewis describes in one of his books - with its various doors leading to, and occupied by different denominations - it isn’t there - it just isn’t there - and neither is it planned, for it was never in the Architect’s original blueprint:

My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

 John 17/20-23.

Thwack, thwack…….

The problem with C S Lewis and all who come to ‘adopt’ Christianity as a preferred lifestyle - because they have been persuaded ‘intellectually’ that it is in their best personal interests so to do - is that they are ‘coming to Christ’ on their own selfish (unrighteous) terms, and selfish motive (unrighteousness) is not eternal in derivation or spirit - and therefore cannot contribute in the remotest way to eternal birth. It is that simple. New eternal life needs eternal and perfectly selfless - or sinless parentage - which qualities mankind is absolutely incapable of producing.

Eternal conception requires immaculate contribution coming together in immaculate, selfless consummation to give birth to immaculate life, and thanks be to God, it is God who has provided the ‘absolute perfection’ in every instance:

When the eternal Spirit of God descends upon and unites with any person, it does not unite with the sin which has enshrouded and corrupted that person’s true eternal identity, rather it penetrates that sinful mantle - and unites with, and consummates a life giving relationship with that person’s original and true eternal identity.

It is a system which cannot fail, and does not fail, because there is no sin - no anti-life influences to adversely effect a perfect outcome.

God - Jesus Christ is eternally pure; the eternal essence which lies implicit and swaddled within every elect person is eternally pure, the matching of the two partners is perfect because they are the separated parts of a previously intact spiritual reality - and the entire ‘reconciliation’ process is being carried out in the pure and selfless Spirit of Eternal Love.

And the outcome of that eternal consummation is a redeemed and complete child of God - an eternal child of God who will grow and develop as it focuses and feeds exclusively on his/her true eternal companion - on Christ's Holy Spirit for all of his/her spiritual guidance and sustenance:

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

John 16/13-14.

Thwack, thwack.

I believe that C S Lewis lived in a house called ‘Mere Christianity’ - I have never visited it, never had the inclination - but I am aware that the driveway serving this mansion is served by very wide and very grand gates which are situated at the end of a very broad avenue called Destruction Way:

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Matthew 7/13-14.

Thwack, craaaaaaaack.

Why have I written in such a provocative - controversial way about C S Lewis?

The main reason is that I believe that the writings of C. S. Lewis have been directly responsible for the promotion of the strong - and strengthening spirit of Ecumenism which is prevalent in ‘Christendom’ today.

And Ecumenism does not worship God, as Christ directed, in spirit and in truth - God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. – John 4/24. Rather the followers of the ecumenical movement worship ‘God’ in accordance with the lowest common denominator which prevails among their previously mixed and conflicting beliefs - to the continued exclusion, or subsequent rejection of vital eternal precepts.

In consequence Ecumenism produces a false Christianity which does not promote, and therefore cannot produce true conversion (mortal to eternal) in the lives of those who follow its teaching and, as a result, cannot effect real change in the lives of its adherents. 


(Even though several members of my family - including my mother, my sister and her husband, my brother and his wife, and yours truly - have studied at Wheaton College, I'm tempted to pun its name and call it the "Wheaton Tares College" and the following explains why:)

     Several days ago on April 17 the "Pulpit & Pen" site published an astounding article entitled "Marxist Brain Trust Gathers at Wheaton to Discuss Moving Evangelicals Left."

     Here's a portion of it:


It is no mistake, as Pulpit & Pen has thoroughly covered, evangelical “thought leaders” among the pseudo-Reformed camp known as “New Calvinism” have been the financial recipients of millions of dollars from globalist and Marxist financiers, George Soros and James Riady. With Soros funding Russell Moore and Matt Chandler’s Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) – an organization actually belonging to Soros himself – and with James Riady funding Westminster Philadelphia, Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS) and Ligon Duncan, and other religious institutions like Biola University and Ouachita Baptist University, it should be apparent that some kind of quid pro quo exists. Riady’s influence in particular is far and wide in American religious institutions, and particular among New Calvinists, and the gobs of cash he’s giving them is reportedly surpassing unheard of levels. And in spite of Riady being known primarily as the head of corruption during the Clinton Campaign Finance Scandal, in spite of him being kicked out of the country for trying to affect American politics with piles of international cash, and in spite of Riady still funding the Clinton Global Initiative and the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, leaders like Ligon Duncan still readily receive his cash, the Gospel Coalition promotes his Indonesian school on the cyber-pages of their blog, and his wife and children still speak at New Calvinist institutions in the place of their father, who cannot return to the country.
Make no mistake about it, the Evangelical Intelligentsia – which we have defined here – are well-funded by foreign political interests. In the name of “repentance,” these evangelical leaders are promoting purely Marxist ideological inventions like Critical Race Theory, White Guilt, Intersectionality, and Cultural Marxism during 2018’s White Guilt and Gospel-Redefinition Apology Tour that took place last week at Together for the Gospel and the week before that, the MLK50 event hosted by The Gospel Coalition and the ERLC. It’s not conspiracy theory; it’s conspiracy facts. Consult the hyper-links provided and see the primary sources with your own eyes. The fact is that these evangelical leaders who all suddenly, mysteriously, and with suspiciously coordinated timing who came to “repentance” on the issue of race (proposing the social gospel, which they have renamed “social justice”) have taken money from Soros and Riady. It is up to your gullible, incredibly naive judgment if you choose to determine that Soros and Riady are simultaneously funding a globalist-Marxist strategy worldwide while funding a certain stream of American religious thought out of the contriteness of their heart.
In the meantime, these same evangelical “thought leaders” – aka the Evangelical Intelligentsia (EI) – have gathered at Wheaton College to discuss how to shift evangelicals away from supporting conservative politics in the name of “saving evangelicalism.” Yesterday and today – April 16 and April 17, 2018 – these leaders are in a closed-door meeting that, according to the Washington Post, was organized by avowed Marxist and Gospel Coalition co-founder, Tim Keller. Approximately 50 such leaders from the EI are discussing the best ways to shift evangelicals away from supporting conservatism, and they include Keller, Ed Stetzer, A.R. Bernard (the pastor who very publicly resigned from Trump’s faith advisory panel over Trump’s lack of political correctness following the Charlottesville race riot), Doug Birdsall (an honorary chair of the rabidly globalist and pro-Roman Catholic Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, which you can read about in E.S. William’s book, here), Jenny Yang of World Relief (which signed a public statement condemning President Trump over his enforcement of U.S. immigration law regarding the “Dreamers”) Bishop Claude Alexander (who signed a letter from evangelicals condemning Trump, using the ideology of Critical Race Theory to do so), Mark Labberton of Fuller Seminary (who wrote a book, Still Evangelical?, which is a collection of essays encouraging evangelicals to abandon their title for the sake of not alienating the political left), Jo Anne Lyon of the Wesleyan Church (who is a part of Evangelicals for Social Action, along with other progressives like Rachel Held Evans), and Gabriel Salguero of the National Latino Evangelical Association (who, as you would expect, has written articles in places like the New York Times encouraging evangelicals to go politically left if they desire to coalesce with Hispanic believers).

     I'm still reeling - and I'm not a movie projector! And I can imagine that Dr. V. Raymond Edman and the Blanchards who founded Wheaton are doing cartwheels in their graves!
     I invite you to read the entire Pulpit & Pen article. This shocking situation is also being covered by CBN and other members of the media.
     The falling away of II Thess. 2 isn't coming. It's here - in the middle of the road!

Wednesday, 11 April 2018


     Which pretrib rapture view is correct? C. I. Scofield's? John Walvoord's? Hal Lindsey's? Someone else's?
     Walvoord (and Dwight Pentecost) say that the ones "taken" in Matt. 24:40-41 are the wicked taken in judgment at the end of the tribulation while those "left" are left alive.
     Lindsey disagrees with Walvoord and Pentecost and states that the ones "taken" are church members raptured before the tribulation while those "left" are the wicked who are left on earth to go through the tribulation.
     Producers of the "Left Behind" movies also agree with Lindsey (and disagree with Walvoord and Pentecost) that a pretrib rapture takes away the church and that the ones left behind are the wicked.
     Lindsey declares that John actually left the earth and went to heaven in Rev. 4:1. Walvoord and Scofield disagree with Lindsey and maintain that John's body stayed on Patmos and was never raptured away.
     Lindsey sees the tribulation in chapters 4-19 in Revelation while Scofield sees it in chapters 11-18 and Henry Thiessen sees it in chapters 6-19.
     Lindsey holds that Revelation's 24 elders represent the church while Harry Ironside says they represent Old Testament as well as New Testament saints.
     Lindsey believes that Rev. 13's second beast will be a Jew. But Walvoord declares there's no evidence that either one of those beasts is Jewish.
     Lindsey writes that Rev. 3:10 is proof of a pretrib rapture. Walvoord, however, writes that using Rev. 3:10 for this purpose is up for debate.
     While pretribs have long seen prophetic significance in the Jewish feasts in Leviticus 23, there has been disagreement on which feast is symbolic of a pretrib rapture.
     Scofield based his pretrib rapture on the feast of the firstfruits, No. 3.
     Although Walvoord can't find anything in the Old Testament suggestive of a pretrib rapture, his 1966 book based a pretrib aspect of the first resurrection on feast No. 3.
     Although Lindsey doesn't reveal which feast is the significant one, his pretrib rapture lies between feast No. 3 and feast No. 7.
     Another pretrib date-setter, Edgar Whisenant, said in 1988 that the rapture would happen in 1988. His rapture was based on feast No. 5.
     A number of years ago David Webber proclaimed on his "Southwest Radio Church of the Air" broadcast that the Antichrist will be revealed to believers before they go up in the rapture. On the same day, however, broadcaster Oliver B. Greene stated on "The Gospel Hour" that the Antichrist will never be revealed to the church before the rapture!
     Nowadays "Dr." Tommy Ice is promoting the discredited opinion that II Thess. 2:3's "falling away" (from the faith) really means "falling up to heaven" (in a pretrib rapture!). Even his own late mentor, Dr. John Walvoord, writes in "The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation" (p. 125) that this recent "view has not met with general acceptance by either pretribulationists or posttribulationists" and says that this verse "refers to doctrinal defection"! (Google "Walvoord Melts Ice" for more details on this.)
     My book "The Incredible Cover-up" has an entire chapter titled "A House Divided" which shows that pretribs have long disagreed with each other on practically every point and subpoint in their 19th century end time theory!
     Finally, I should add that before 1830 there was never any disagreement among Bible scholars over pretrib rapture doctrine for one paramount reason:
     There was no pretrib rapture!

Tuesday, 3 April 2018


Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers. (1 Timothy 4:16).

Stephen Green is supposedly a "Christian" conservative activist and national director of Christian Voice, a far right UK based lobby group. Green is former Chairman of the Conservative Family Campaign who converted from Anglicanism to Pentecostalism. According to Wikpedia, Green attends an Assemblies of God Pentecostal Church. {1}

The Assemblies of God (AG) is the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world. The AG has spawned many false prophets and questionable TV evangelists, including Benny Hinn, Morris Cerullo, Jim Bakker, Paul Crouch and Jimmy Swaggart to name but a few. Not least of their problems is that the AG are a member of Churches Together in England, which puts them firmly on the ecumenical bandwagon of false unity both with apostate Christian denominations and with non-Christian religions via the closely connected inter-faith agenda. {2} Considering the central tenet of Christianity is Jesus' claim to be the only way to the Father, the AG is completely out of step with the scriptures. (John 14:6).

Green is infamous for voicing strong judgements about moral decline and ungodly government which he describes as his "prophetic duty". Christians are called to preach the gospel to all creation (Mark 16:15), as lambs in the midst of wolves (Luke 10:3). We should warn those involved in all kinds of sexual immorality and other sins, but nothing positive can be achieved by engaging in ad hominem attacks upon gay celebrities, or by verbally abusing individuals publicly as Green has done repeatedly in the past. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person. (Colossians 4:5-6). Is Green's behaviour likely to cause conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit, or alienation and hostility? If you, O LORD, should mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand? (Psalm 130:3). God's kindness leads us to repentance (Romans 2:4). Christians have no business judging those outside the church: For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? (1 Corinthians 5:12). Even Jesus Christ did not come to judge the world. (John 12:47-48 cf. 2 Timothy 4:1).

Green holds a position somewhat analogous to dominion theology:

"Christian Voice is a ministry for those Christians who have had enough of secularist politicians imposing wickedness on the rest of us. We are not even satisfied with trying to get ‘Christian influence in a secular world’. That’s because we know ‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein’ (Psalm 24:1). So by God’s grace we are praying for national repentance and working for godly government. If you have had enough of the way things are and want instead to lift high the Crown Rights of the King of kings, you have found the right place!" {3}

God desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4). However, in reality only a few will be saved. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. (Matthew 7:14). The call for "national repentance" is entirely unbiblical. God calls individuals from all nations, He does not call nations!

The Assemblies of God issued a statement officially condemning the deviant teachings of the New Apostolic Reformation in 2000. However, an appalling situation exists where the practice of many autonomous AG churches contradicts these guidelines, effectively rendering the whole denomination completely impotent in upholding truth!

This statement was adopted by the General Presbytery of the Assemblies of God on August 11, 2000:

"Kingdom Now or Dominion theology. The thought that God’s kingdom can come on earth with a little help from humankind is intriguing to those who advocate this approach to impacting society. Rather than scoffing at the promise of Christ’s imminent return (2 Peter 3:3,4), this errant theology says that Jesus will not return until the Church takes dominion of the earth back from Satan and his followers. By taking control, through whatever means possible, of political, ecclesiastical, educational, economic, and other structures, Christians supposedly can make the world a worthy place for Christ to return and rule over.6 This unscriptural triumphalism generates other related variant teachings." {4}

The scriptures are emphatic that the world will continue to decline and that the end times will correspond to the days of Noah.. just as it was in the days of Noah (Luke 17:26). The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. (Genesis 6:5). Matthew 24 indicates that there will be increase in lawlessness, culminating in the man of lawlessness, aka the Antichrist who will take his seat in the temple of God. (Matthew 24:3-15). Dominion theology denies futurism and the return of Jesus Christ to a godless world that will gather to make war against Him, and yet this is the plain teaching of the scriptures.( Revelation 19:19). The scriptures tell us that Jesus' kingdom is not of this world. (John 18:36).

Christian Voice has called for British law to be based on the Bible: "Her Majesty the Queen promised in her Coronation oath on 2nd June 1953 to 'Maintain the Laws of God and the True Profession Reformed Religion established by Law.'” {5} I find it bizarre that Stephen Green should put any confidence in the Queen's oath (James 5:12), or to expect the government to maintain biblical standards. In a previous post I wrote that the Queen was initiated as a Welsh Druid in 1946 when she was Princess Elizabeth, and that her religion is probably more akin to Freemasonry than Christianity! {6} "Every Prime Minister since Edward Heath has been a Bilderberger, and they (Freemasons) have controlled the leadership of the Conservative party since the late 1960's." {7}

God Hates Hypocrisy!

In 2005 Green condemned the marriage of Prince Charles to Camilla Parker Bowles:

"Colonel and Mrs Parker Bowles should have been divorced for adultery, but they weren't because that would have been too embarrassing," he says. "So in the eyes of God they are still married." He likens Christian Voice to John the Baptist who preached against the incestuous marriage of King Herod. "We're saying to the Prince of Wales: 'You cannot have your brother's wife.' This woman is still married to someone else." {8}

Ironically this situation also applies to Green who has himself broken the seventh Commandment: You shall not commit adultery. (Exodus 20:14 cf. Matthew 5:27). Green's adulterous remarriage to a Kenyan Pentecostal woman some 25 years his junior in 2010 puts him in exactly the same position as Prince Charles and Camilla! (Romans 2:1). Green has made homosexuality his particular hobby horse, and yet adulterers are mentioned in the same sentence as homosexuals in 1 Corinthians 6:9.

"In January 2011, Green's former wife, Caroline Green, accused him of repeatedly physically assaulting her and their children, including one incident where he allegedly beat her with a weapon until she bled, and another in which their son allegedly required hospital treatment after having been beaten with a piece of wood. The couple subsequently divorced." {9}

The scriptures are explicit - remarriage is prohibited on all grounds except adultery!

And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:9).

Green's facade is almost convincing at times, he often rightly identifies sin.. BUT in practice if you have do not have love you are just a resounding gong. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Corinthians 13:1 cf. 1 Peter 3:7).

{1} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Voice_(UK)
{2} https://www.cte.org.uk/Groups/234772/Home/Contacts/Member_Churches_list/Member_Churches_list.aspx

Further Reading: