And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mark 16:15 King James Bible

събота, 31 декември 2016 г.

Free will and conversion praying

Look, If you believe in free will, why are you still praying for God to convert your relatives and friends? Has he not already decided that he wants to save all? It makes no sense to pray that he save them, because you have already limited his power and will up to the decision making process of man. Do you make him want  to save some people more than others? Why are you still praying to the calvinist God and not leaving the matter in the free and intact will of man?

Did you not already make the right choice because you are any of the following:

Have more common sense
Less inclined to sin
Love sin less
More humble
Less proud
More wise

Or maybe luckier?

Than those millions of souls, who read the bible daily and don't find salvation, but will go to hell? Do you think they are all worse than you or dumber than you or more dishonest and lovers of lies than you? I know they are not, I dont think you do think that either.
Do you not claim with this teaching that its you who has born yourself again, and not the limited will of God?

A God, who can't perform his will is no God at all. But we believe that God performed all of his will in Jesus, including the gathering of all Ephesians 1:10-11.

There are many devices in a man's heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand
You want to leave the choice of choices in the hands of the natural man, to whom the cross is foolishness, but the true God has made his own choice, and its the right choice, because its HIS, not ours.

петък, 30 декември 2016 г.

The doctrine of free will is rotten

The doctrine of free will undermines true biblical christianity. Decision based theology is useless at best and, when explicitly preached, dangerous. This theology supports the vain ambitions of missionaries and "revivals", which bear rotten, reprobate fruit.

But praise God for his unspeakable gift, the gift of Faith and Repentance and the Gift of Jesus, the Christ, for those, whom he loved before the foundation of all worlds. Praise him also for the means of grace, that is the ordinances and the Word, that has not only through the providence and special protection of God reached our eyes and ears, but opened them with the power of the Holy Ghost unto eternal salvation.

The american revivalism of the 19th century, motivated by new found belief in human will, bore rotten fruit which then gave birth to experience based christianity, which we now see - the altar call, the "raise your hand" call, the "say this prayer and be saved" formula etc. Read these 5 verses from a book (Romans) and make a decision right now, because you can! Millions of people "saved" because their pastor told them so. Millions "saved" and unrepentant from the "accept jesus" sermons of Billy Graham. But you might respond "oh, but look, even if thats the case a few get really saved", yes, "a few get saved" in the Catholic church as well, when they hear the words of the gospel. Does that mean I am to praise and approve of their church and doctrine?

The revivals of eastern Europe - in Russia and the CIS region in the early 90s were NON-EXISTENT. There was no revival. Missionaries eager for success handed out  free bibles and gospel tracts (including chick tracts) to the masses and whoever in the crowd said they believe and raised their hand, got a bible and was reported in a card back to the US as "saved". I have people, who were in the field back then give me an account about it. It is was a complete sham, a mockery of the gospel and the church.

If there was truly a revival 20 years ago with tens of thousands of converts, where are they now? Did God close the door suddenly in the 2000s? Only a handful remain. Most were in the church building for a while and then left their pastor-given, not God-given faith. In that period after the fall of communist indoctrination people were curious and flocked to all kinds of cults and sects, but were by no means believers in anything, but themselves.

So pernicious is this free will doctrine, which teaches men to trust in the imaginations and decision of their hearts. Modern evangelicalism and baptist churches are factories for false converts. We, predestinarians, who are careful to proclaim a person saved, are blamed to be in the camp of murderous Calvin, but free-willers are in the camp of the "Holy" orthodox church and the jesuits, who fought the doctrine of  predestination so fiercely that they accused the dominicans of being calvinists! I refuse to be lumped with Calvin or Luther, but if i have to be, free-willers have to be lumped with Origen, the Orthodox church and the jesuits in the council of Trent.

Jesus told us to make DISCIPLES of the nations, not CONVERTS. But vain people like to count their "converts" as coins for heaven, because they will be given praise at the judgment seat of Christ. They tap a person on the back, give him a bible and tell him he is saved, before any work of God is evident or even begun in the individual. So they find the lost sheep and tell it "get yourself out of the pit" and then go away merrily. They meet the injured man Luke 9, and tell him to heal himself. They tell dead Lazarus to resurrect himself from the dead.

It is brutal, animalistic ignorance and disregard for people's souls, for which these baptists and evangelicals, hungry for praise and success, will be judged accordingly. (May God spare them and myself included for my time in this absolute madness)

It is a teaching so deadening, so paralysing that it renders a man entirely helpless before the stony hearts of men, a man of God dumb, with no power in his word.

No man can change his own heart. Proverbs 20:9

Here is the father of free will 1-2-3 gospel

Finney on Human Ability


A key principle that controlled Charles Finney’s approach to theology was the axiom that God never commands that which humans are unable to obey. For example: "The command itself implies ability to obey it. Every command of God implies this in the strongest manner. It should be remembered that God is perfect in both love and wisdom: therefore He cannot be so unjust as to demand of us an impossibility, nor so ignorant as not to know the real limits of our powers.”7 (can we perform the law, then) Finney repeats this principle often. It is clear that he considers this a natural ability that has not been destroyed by Adam’s sin. Finney did not deny human sinfulness, but denied constitutional depravity inherited from Adam. According to Finney, the human will is capable of obeying all of God’s commands aside from any work of grace other than the Holy Spirit’s work in convincing the human mind of the truth of the Gospel. Finney thought that sin would be even more reprehensible if humans were considered capable of overcoming it simply by acts of the will.

Finney held his teaching on human ability as a "first truth.” It controlled both his theology and hermeneutics. Any verses that might seem to say something different cannot be allowed to contradict this basic philosophical and legal axiom. For example, in his Systematic Theology,
We have seen that the ability of all men of sane mind to obey God, is necessarily assumed as a first truth, and that this assumption is from the very laws of mind, the indispensable condition of the affirmation, or even the conception, that they are subjects of moral obligation; that, but for this assumption, men could not so much as conceive the possibility of moral responsibility, and of praiseworthiness and blameworthiness.8
Charles Finney allowed such assumptions to control his Biblical interpretation. This is seen in his "well-settled rule” of Biblical interpretation: "Language is to be so interpreted, if it can be, as not to conflict with sound philosophy, matters of fact, the nature of things, or immutable justice.”9
However, there is a serious problem when one compares Finney’s principle of "sound philosophy” with the Bible. It does not stand up to Biblical scrutiny. Does the Bible teach that God can only command what humans (as they are apart from special grace) can obey? For example, consider Paul’s argument in Galatians 3:10: "For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.’” Clearly, Paul believed that abiding by all things written in the law was impossible, or else he would not conclude that all who sought to be justified by keeping the law were cursed. John MacArthur comments on this passage: "In other words, the fact that those who trust in the works of the Law are obligated to keep all things in the law, without exception, places them inevitably under a curse, because no one had the ability to abide by everything the divine and perfect law of God demands.”10 Paul’s use of the passage from Deuteronomy shows that he did not believe Finney’s logical axiom.

God’s holy nature is such that He does command what is fully compatible with his holiness and righteousness, even if human sinfulness means we cannot perfectly obey God’s moral law. The whole idea of the substitutionary atonement (which Finney basically rejected) is that the sinless and perfect Son of God fulfilled the righteous requirements of God that we did not nor could not fulfill. Yet Finney’s position is that for God to command anything, humans must actually be able to fully obey God’s commands, lest God be unjust in giving them.

Finney, though believing that the millennium could come soon, was disgusted that it had not already. If man is capable, this side of the resurrection, of consistently and perfectly obeying God, why should not the church be able to establish a millennial kingdom without Christ? The moral powers were there but they needed to be roused to obedience to Christ: "There must be excitement sufficient to wake up the dormant moral powers, and roll back the tide of degradation and sin.”11 His confidence in natural human ability was firm and often reiterated:
From what has been said, we may learn what the true doctrine of natural ability is, namely, that every moral agent is really able to do whatever God requires of him; that when God requires us to believe in Christ He gives us so much light as renders us able to believe; that when He requires us to repent, He gives us so much light that we are able to repent; but that we are not able to work out that which is good by virtue of possessing the powers of a moral being, independently of divine light. Again, we may see what I meant by the assertion that Christ is the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world. Every moral agent, in just so far as he is a moral agent, is enlightened by Christ.12
Though we need Christ’s light to repent and believe, we already have it by virtue of being human beings. This teaching on natural ability is clearly Pelagian. Every human, as he or she is now, already has everything necessary to fully obey God. In Finney’s theology, enlightenment by Christ is not a special work of grace, but a natural endowment to all humans. That Finney and before him Pelagius were wrong on this point is shown by this passage: "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised” (1Corinthians 2:14). If all humans were already enlightened by Christ, prior any work of grace through the gospel, then who are these "natural” men who cannot fully grasp the things of God?

Finney on Original Sin

An important issue in the Pelagian controversy that resurfaces in Finney is the manner in which Adam’s sin influences the Adamic race. Finney’s Calvinistic background, that apparently had little influence on his theology, held that Adam sinned on behalf of the human race, that original sin included a "sin nature,” and that all are "by nature children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3).13 Finney rejected that notion and taught that depravity is moral and not physical. He meant by this that the will, though strongly influenced by "sensibilities” and temptations, commits itself to selfish gratification.14 Since there is no physical depravity15 and "moral depravity can only be predicated of violations of moral law,”16 sinfulness is an act of each individual’s will and not a "sin nature” that can be predicated of the whole Adamic race. Thus Adamic guilt and corruption of nature, the historical doctrine of original sin, is denied by Finney as it was by Pelagius.
Studying Finney’s Systematic Theology shows that this is not a caricature of his position. For example:
Moral depravity, as I use the term, does not consist in, nor imply a sinful nature, in the sense that the substance of the human soul is sinful in itself. It is not a constitutional sinfulness. It is not an involuntary sinfulness. Moral depravity, as I use the term, consists in selfishness; in a state of voluntary committal of the will to self-gratification.17
The reason this is significant in relationship to Finney’s millennial teaching, is that it implies that if enough influence is exerted on the minds and hearts of humans, they could be persuaded to commit to a different principle. This principle, according to Finney, was to be "disinterested benevolence.”
The Holy Spirit is necessary to convince the mind of the need to repent of selfishness and turn to the principle of divine love, but the human will is innately capable of choosing to obey God’s moral law. This would make a millennial kingdom without a bodily resurrection of the saints and the return of Christ seem feasible.
James H. Moorhead comments on Finney’s hopes for society:
The reform of society was equally certain if Christians had the determination to attain it, and Finney expected nearly Utopian results to flow from evangelical enterprise. "Let Christians,” he said, "do business one year on gospel principles,” and the Christian spirit will "go over the world like the waves of the sea.” Every goal Finney wished for society — among others, the abolition of slavery, the promotion of temperance, and an end to Sabbath violation — would, he believed, speedily be achieved if Christians united to promote these reforms.18
If the sin nature is non-existent and the human will capable of being persuaded, what stands in the way of reforming society? Finney’s answer was merely the lack of Christians getting on board his process of "new measures” revivalism.

Finney on Christian Perfection

That brings us to the final tenet of Pelagianism that has its counterpart in Finney’s teaching — Christian perfection. After showing what it is not, he states his definition of Christian perfection in its simple form: "It is perfect obedience to the law of God.”19 That such obedience is remotely possible can only be appreciated by his concept of the simplicity of moral action. Humans are only actuated by one principle at any given time: either that of selfishness or "disinterested benevolence.”20 If it is possible for the later to be true, what logic would prevent it from continually being the case?
Finney’s biographers indicate that Finney came to this teaching out of his disappointment that converts of his revivals had not made the progress he expected and that the church had not prevailed in the world as he hoped. For example, G. Frederick Wright, who wrote as a professor at Oberlin in 1891 (where Finney was previously a professor of theology), comments on Finney’s motives to write Lectures to Professing Christians, which express his views on perfection: "At the same time, his mind felt with increasing keenness the necessity of a higher state of consecration on the part of the church, if Christianity was ultimately to prevail in the world.”21 Charles Hambrick-Stowe recounts the fact that controversy attended this teaching, but that one supporter thought that it would usher in the millennium.22

Finney and Theological Innovation

In many ways Charles Finney led a wave of theological and practical innovation that has become the bane and the hallmark of American evangelicalism. That a person whose teachings were heretical by classical Christian standards is somewhat of a hero to popular evangelicalism says much about the problems in the contemporary church. This is at least partly due to the fact that American evangelicals are so impressed with success and results. Finney is credited as being the developer of planned mass evangelism.23 As is the case today, if a mass evangelist is highly successful, it is considered inappropriate to question his teaching. Finney’s successful revival meetings created credence for his teachings.
In a sense, one could say that Finney was the fore-runner of the modern "Word of Faith” movement. I say that because of the similar emphasis on the ability of man to cause his own spiritual effects by the right use of means. The "Faith” movement, as characterized by Kenneth Hagin and Kenneth Copeland is well known for claiming that there are "laws” built into the universe that can be tapped into by those who have the right "revelation knowledge” and put it to use to create the desired spiritual effects. The similarity with Finney is the unbridled optimism that humans with the right spiritual knowledge can solve every important problem and create their own desired results by the right use of means.
Finney had a slightly different emphasis in that he desired to create revivals of religion, a millennial age before the return of Christ, and a Christianized society, (rather than health and wealth); but his approach was similar. Consider his teaching on producing revivals:
A revival is not a miracle according to another definition of the term"miracle” — something above the powers of nature. There is nothing in religion beyond the ordinary powers of nature. It consists entirely in the right exercise of the powers of nature. It is just that, and nothing else. When mankind become religious, they are not enabled to put forth exertions which they were unable before to put forth. They only exert powers which they had before, in a different way, and use them for the glory of God. A revival is not a miracle, nor dependent on a miracle, in any sense. It is a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means — as much so as any other effect produced by the application of means.24
The power to produce the desired results are in the hands of humans whose minds are enlightened by the right spiritual principles. This "can do” attitude, which is so American, has permeated modern evangelicalism. Finney certainly deserves some "credit” for first articulating and popularizing it, but it is also American evangelicalism’s worse shame. The errors and excesses of revivalists and evangelists whose "success” in finding followers has served as cover for their false teachings has roots that go all the way back to Charles Finney.

R. C. Sproul included a chapter on Charles Finney in a recent book and questions whether Finney deserves the term "evangelical” if it is defined in its classical sense as a believer in sola fide (justification by faith alone).25 Sproul shows that Finney denies "forensic” (legal) justification, a key teaching of the reformers in their dispute with Roman Catholicism.26 Finney denied both the imputation of Adam’s sin to the human race and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the believer. Finney wrote:
The doctrine of a literal imputation of Adam’s sin to all his posterity, of the literal imputation of all the sins of the elect to Christ, and of His suffering for them the exact amount due to the transgressors, of the literal imputation of Christ’s righteousness or obedience to the elect, and the consequent perpetual justification of all that are converted from the first exercise of faith, whatever their subsequent life may be I say I regard these dogmas as fabulous, and better befitting a romance than a system of theology.27
The Roman Catholic Council of Trent in its condemnation of the Reformation, called forensic justification "legal fiction.” Finney evidently agreed.

Another one of Charles Finney’s famous deviations from Christian orthodoxy concerned the substitutionary atonement. He rejected the definitions of the Westminster Confession on the topic of the substitutionary atonement,28 though as an ordained Presbyterian minister he was supposed to believe it.29 Finney reasoned that Christ could not have satisfied "exact justice” in that the penalty for sin was eternal damnation, and Jesus did not suffer eternal damnation. Therefore, he could not have satisfied the demands of the law in this regard.30 Finney, holding to a moral government theory, reasoned that Christ’s death satisfied "public justice” by showing God’s hatred toward sin and providing for the "well-being of the universe.”31 R. C. Sproul provides an insightful and accurate description of Finney’s unorthodox view of the atonement.32 Sproul answers Finney’s charge that Christ’s sufferings were insufficient to satisfy the legal demands of "retributive justice” as follows:
The satisfaction view of the atonement does not see the law, in and of itself, as being satisfied, but rather the Father whose law it is that is satisfied. It is God who is both Just and Justifier. His justice is propitiated by Christ, and his demands are satisfied.33
Finney, trained as a lawyer, used legal theory as he understood it to produce his own version of Christian theology. No important Christian doctrine seemed immune from his tampering.

Charles Finney’s Legacy

The greatest damage Finney did to American evangelicalism, in my opinion, was his legacy of pragmatism. Ideas of what ought to be achieved and the necessary means to that end take priority over everything else. Finney was known for "new measures” revivalism. The new measures, viewed in their practical aspect, are rather tame by modern standards:
The "new measures” included praying for persons by name, allowing women to pray and testify, encouraging persons to come forward to the "anxious seat” (a front pew for those under conviction), mobilizing groups of workers to visit all the homes of the community, and displacing the regular services with "protracted meetings” (lengthy services held each night for several weeks).34
Though these were the issues raised at the time, the real legacy of Finney was the willingness to sacrifice Biblical truth for the sake of teachings that were deemed to work better to achieve the desired ends.
For example, if Christians were deemed lax, perfectionism was taught; if respect for law was needed, the moral government theory was the answer; if revival seemed to tarry, the problem was the belief that the conversion of sinners was an act of God rather than human use of means. Likewise, if the millennium had not come, it was simply because people were not getting with the plan. Finney exalted human ability to its highest level and made the whole of religious conversion a matter of human decision that required no change in the sinner’s basic nature, but an act of the will: "The Holy Spirit reveals God and the spiritual world, and all that class of objects that are correlated to our higher nature, so as to give reason the control of the will. This is regeneration and sanctification, as we shall see in its proper place.”35

Finney rejected the teaching that regeneration is a supernatural changing of heart affected by the Holy Spirit.36 He realized that this teaching is based on the doctrine of "constitutional moral depravity,” which he has rejected.37 Finney claims we can make new hearts for our selves and that: "Regeneration is ascribed to man in the gospel, which it could not be, if the term were designed to express only the agency of the Holy Spirit.38 For Finney, regeneration is a choice of the will of man: "Regeneration, to have the characteristics ascribed to it in the Bible, must consist in a change in the attitude of the will, or a change in its ultimate choice, intention, or preference; a change from selfishness to benevolence; from choosing self-gratification as the supreme and ultimate end of life, to the supreme and ultimate choice of the highest well-being of God and of the universe. . .”.39

For Finney, the will of man reigns supreme. The right choices, in response to God’s moral government of the universe, not only will cause regeneration, but Christian perfection, and ultimately a blissful, millennial kingdom before the return of Christ. R. C. Sproul contends that Finney’s theology, in its emphasis on human decision, has had "a massive influence on modern evangelicalism.”40 Sadly, this "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps” approach resonates with evangelicals who may not realize how strongly they have been influenced by pagan American culture.


The next time you hear about the latest innovation that promises to "win the world for Christ in our generation,” think about the legacy of Charles Finney. For all his talents and persuasive abilities, and working in a mid nineteenth century culture that was far less pagan than ours, he was unable to deliver a millennial kingdom as he hoped. 1Corinthians 1:21: "For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well, pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.” One cannot "improve” on the message of the cross by adding a mixture of distorted teachings to new techniques that "cannot fail.”

сряда, 28 декември 2016 г.

Not really a calvinist

I'm predestinarian, but I don believe in these calvinist doctrines:

1. Infant baptism - self explanatory, im first and foremost a baptist

2. Most calvinists' engagement in trying to influence politics (baptists are also guilty of this)

3. Hyper-calvinism - the belief that we shouldn't preach to all, because they cannot by themselves believe. The gospel is to be preached to all, otherwise how will some not have obeyed? (2 Thess 1:8) This doctrine is rare, but people who believe in free will use it against every predestinarian they meet.

4. Puritanism and experimental calvinism. This is very popular among young people, but very dangerous. The puritans occupied themselves with introspection and looking for evidences and assurance in the individual too much, which is like looking down in the abyss, it can never lead to anything good. The human heart is a dark place. They over-emphasized God's wrath and many times confused preaching for unbelievers with that for believers. They marred the simplicity of the gospel and true, simple biblical assurance.They were also of a very severe and unforgiving nature, and the love of God was hid from most of them.

5. Arbitrary reprobation. Based on exegesis of Romans 9, but without much warrant or proof.
God actually damns people for unbelief and sin and being in Adam. Otherwise God would have to judge men for his own decision, which is ridiculous. It is the mark of a wicked person to hate without a reason. John 15:25

6. Pre-word regeneration. This damnable thing is also believed by many and is very pernicious, because it makes people look into themselves and their circumstances for the right kind of experience. I do not believe God regenerates people before the hearing of faith, but rather gives them irresistible conviction and desire for salvation with the hearing of the word.

7. Total depravity - I believe this is somewhat of a misnomer. It should be total inability or complete blindness. Not all people are "depraved" per se, but all are blind and unaware of God by nature.

понеделник, 31 октомври 2016 г.

Love the brotherhood

but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.                Acts 10:28

Any man who loves the truth and obeys it, and who looks up to God for salvation and strength to fight sin is my brother, irrespective of whether he is arminian, calvinist or someone who does not like those names.

Honour all men. Love the brotherhood

петък, 28 октомври 2016 г.

"It is seemly for a christian to condemn and curse heretics"

The words of Joseph Volotsky (persecutor of "judaizers"/christians in the Novgorod region)

"We will now open the words of Godly Chrysostom, when he says: "we shouldn't detest any person or do him evil, even if he is a wicked person or a heretic" This great and equal to the apostles man points to specific temporary conditions, because it is not the will of God that this should be always so. Great Chrysostom testifies that we shouldn't do evil or detest any man, be he wicked or heretical, UNTIL HE CAUSES US SPIRITUAL HARM


If godly shepherds see an unbeliever or a heretic, who isn't doing any spiritual harm, let him go, to learn the letter, or to admonish him with all meekness and humility. If, on the other hand, they see the wretched heretic, worse than any wolf, attempting to destroy and pervert Christ's flock

 - then it is befitting not only to detest and condemn him, but to curse and give the blasphemer wounds, which will sanctify your hand. That is what holy Chrysostom is saying.

So did Leo, bishop of Catania, he didn't condemn Heliodor, the heretic, at once, but when Heliodor went into the church and started doing some kind of spell, to seduce the godly,  Leo went out of the church and burned Heliodor with fire, then got in and performed the godly service. (!!!!!!!)

Such judgement (condemnation) did the righteous perform - and were not condemned for it. Agreeing with this is the teaching of Chrysostom: 

 "Whatever happens according to the will of God, even if it seems evil, is the ultimate good, and whatever is against the will of God and is not pleasing to him, could seem good, but it is the ultimate evil and a lawless deed. If anyone murders according to the will of God- this murder is better than any love for man, if anyone shows mercy from love, but it is against the will of God, that mercy surpasses any murder. What makes man good or bad is not the nature of things, but the will of God" - Chrysostom

Joseph Volotsky is also known to have been a staunch opponent of the heretical sect which was spreading in Russia at that time ("Judaizers"). During the Church Sobor of 1504, he demanded that all heretics be executed by the state.

In his major work, called The Enlightener (Просветитель), which consisted of 16 chapters, he tried to prove the wrongfulness of the "new teaching" in order to be able to prosecute the heretics and convince people not to believe in the sincerity of their repentance. Taking inspiration from the Roman-Byzantine treatment of heresiarchs and the Dominican-led persecutions in Spain and Portugal, he called for a civil inquisition against heretics and championed their imprisonment and execution. As with the controversy over monastic ownership of estates, Joseph Volotsky was opposed in this matter by St. Nil Sorsky.

четвъртък, 27 октомври 2016 г.

Lutherans calling calvinists and baptists gnostics and devils to this day

This is a Lutheran responding to an article about a Reformed person who was worried many calvinists were becoming liturgircal and trusting in the sacraments, i.e going over to the Lutheran side.

Anyone that really understands Calvinism ought not the least be surprised by this. As a calvinist you have understand what he means by "leading souls into hell".
It boils down to this, anyone placing certitude, assurance, trust, or faith in the sacraments are being deceived. Put another way if you were to say actually trust Christ's words for you in say, "take eat/drink...this is my body/blood...given/shed for you FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS", or say that "Be baptized (you) FOR THE FOREGIVENSS OF SINS and that by this you are assured, certain beyond any shadow of doubt, faithed entirely receiving these, believe you received what is said...then THAT is the danger he (and ALL Calvinist) say lead men's souls into hell. Because at the end of the day "only the elect" are saved and NOT those who trust in these words for them (you have to keep in mind Calvin's calling of original sin, enthusiam, to be "christianity" that "inner word" gnosticism of his. That's how they peel out the elect from the Word and sacraments, you have to have the "inner word", the "outer word means nothing".

( What "outer word" you bread-worshipper, would you call "outer" the word, which "enters a gracious and good heart", the "engrafted word, which is able to save", the word that is "the word of God that abides within you". Was Paul sent to evangelize or to baptize? Did God choose baptism or the preacing to save the believing?)

So the rich irony of this fallen demonic theology is that If you basically trust and are assured what Christ said "take eat/drink, be baptized for the forgiveness of sins" you are being lead to believe, trust, be assured and be certain through deception because only the elect (per Calvin) are actually saved. You might trust these words to and for you from Christ as outwardly spoken, but not be elect and thus lost. This is how they aim faith away from the Word as did the serpent to an inward enthusiam, where we (Lutherans, Moses and Paul, et. al.) know is really hell and the soul is truly lost.

 (the sacraments are worth nothing without the gospel, did Simon Magus trust his baptism? We will never know, but we know he had no reason to, because HIS HEART WAS NOT RIGHT WITH GOD)

This is the common link they see often in Lutheranism and FV. Lutherans make a GREAT MISTAKE if they think the issue surrounding the sacraments is primarily or even really about "real bodily presence". It is about, what they hate, what their theology rages against the FACT OF forgiveness of sins given in Word from a pastor, water, bread and wine and it is a true and absolute absolution from God Himself. If you trust and are assured that way, that is the "deception" they speak of leading men to hell. This is why they equate FV with Lutheranism because FV leans that way, assurance actually found in the outward Word, water, bread and wine body placed on and in you in particular. This they deny is the Spirit when in fact it is ALWAYS and ONLY the Holy Spirit absolution breathed, water, sacrament = real forgiveness given. This they replace with a false spirit they call the HS and this inner word concept. This Luther said was to hear not the Holy Spirit but a thousand devils.

 (Not one verse in the bible about the Spirit being water or acting through actual water, not to mention of being within the elements of the Lord's supper)

Once you "get this" you realize they really do have another Gospel. It's ALWAYS about the Gospel and NEVER otherwise. The Gospel is ALWAYS the thing the devil attacks, "hath God really said", 'this is My blood shed for you for the forgiveness of sins". Old Adam bites Eve's fruit and says, "no inner word". Faith draws the sword and says, "Yes in fact that is EXACTLY what God has said".
This is why they never answer how they are assured of their election except to display works as proofs of faith or faith itself (enthusiam) and not the external ear drum hitting Word, very wet water hitting the body, very dry bread and very sweet wine hitting the tongue, mouth and throat

Luther and Paul say God elects by baptizing and giving the preacher the promise in hand to go about electing. Calvin says this inner word breathing spirit does a secret election. Ironically Paul's entire summary argument from Romans 8 - 11, especially 9 is the strongest rebuke of Calvinism and Arminism. As is always with heretics what they think is their best verses, are in fact their greatest destroyers.


Ultimately what Calvinist despise in the sacraments is the ENFLESHED nature of the "I God Myself am forgiving you in this and you can bet your eternal soul on it, this is how I'm actually electing you." This is why what Luther said is right, they despise the sacraments and those who despise the sacraments at the end of the day is no Christian. Very particularly the "I God forgive you and yes this water is doing that". Because we say that for there to be a sacrament AT ALL, there must be the forgiveness of sins given in it. This is what they hate or despise and thus so far Luther!

(Christ, the Word was enfleshed once and has since sat on the right side of God and will come a second time to those who wait him for salvation, WITHOUT DEALING WITH SIN. His sacramental blood was delivered to God the Father and is being poured out spiritually by the Holy Ghost over men in the new covenant, we won't be drinking any of it, for sure)

Whether you actually have Gospel or another gospel ALWAYS reveals itself in the realm of assurance and certitude. Note how the standard MO of the Calvinist is "introspection" (i.e. enthusiam, i.e. original sin). Also note when a Calvinist is comfortable and will speak to what his/her assurance is linked to its works and faith, again enthusiam and original sin. Also note that what I said is true, they don't really despise so much "presence" but assurance derived from Word and Sacrament.

(So now what Paul says to "examine yourselves, whether you are in the faith" and what John says about the heart that "if our heart does not condemn us (we have a clear conscience) we have boldness with Him" , now all of this looking for Christ in us and our fruit has become original sin. What a travesty of a charge and slander. I wouldn't have believed if someone told me about SEMI-papists such as this one)

вторник, 25 октомври 2016 г.

King James Only-ism is not wise

While the King James Bible is a literary masterpiece and a milestone in the history of biblical translation, and while it was the spiritual bread and butter of early modern English christianity, I have to "tell it like it is", its language is lamentably outdated and not accessible to modern English speakers, not to speak of non-native speakers. I can compose a list of several hundred words (many of which latinisms or old English artefacts) which even natural literature-savvy speakers(readers) would need to process through a large dictionary to understand.

I am in no way endorsing any other English translation as superior, most others are based on faulty texts,but works like the Modern English Version, the Greene KJB and even the "satanic" NKJV have their merits.

I cannot help but wonder if the KJB only movement is a brainchild of the jesuits with the purpose of

1 Keeping honest and zealous christians in ignorance
2 giving baptists a cultic status among the rest of christianity.
3 preventing translation work from the TR for missionaries, who feel pressed to follow the KJB blindly

It is in little different than the "latin vulgate only" movement within traditionalist catholicism, which actually was the prevalent sentiment, which had dogmatic weight from the middle age through Trent, up to vatican II and was only interrupted by unknown good men and women and the reformers, who rendered the scriptures in the common/vulgar language (most of it language you could hear around town)

With the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew we have in the 21th century it is a shame nobody has taken up the task to prepare a translation, which is readable, comprehensible and applicable in day-to-day life. Or perhaps they have, only to be disregarded by the "enlightened" fundamental independent baptists, who care little for anything outside their dogmas.

неделя, 23 октомври 2016 г.

Why did we believe

""That God saves from corruption and damnation those whom he has chosen from the foundations of the world, not for any disposition, faith, or holiness that he foresaw in them, but of his mere mercy in Christ Jesus his Son, passing by all the rest according to the irreprehensible reason of his own free-will and justice.""

- Waldensian creed

We have been known, we have been loved, our misery has been seen, we have been drawn, we have been humbled, we have been given life, we have been justified, sanctified, glorified, before the foundation of the world. Our salvation in its entirety has been accomplished and finished before and outside of time.The LAW couldn't annul the promise of God, but enabled it, as the FALL couldn't cancel the afore prepared glory of God in his saints, but enabled it, so that even the fall is ultimately and finally for our good.

Why God chooses not to save some is not in our business, but his choice of many within our own nation and abroad is our life commitment and business. As Paul the Apostle said "
I endure everything for the sake of the elect ....that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory."

вторник, 18 октомври 2016 г.

Grace GEMS

I highly, highly recommend this website for devotion, edification, understanding. It surpasses many others by its practicality and honesty.

Grace Gems
Our Purpose
To humble the pride of man,
to exalt the grace of God in salvation
and to promote real holiness in heart and life.

петък, 14 октомври 2016 г.

New general of the jesuits

Arturo Sosa Abascal SJ (born 12 November 1948), is a Venezuelan priest of the Roman Catholic Church. As of October 14, 2016, the 36th General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, the largest male religious institute in the Catholic Church, elected him as its thirty-first Superior General. He succeeds Adolfo Nicolás Pachón, S.J., who served as Superior General for eight years.

сряда, 12 октомври 2016 г.

68 million years old T rex meat

Dinosaur Shocker

Probing a 68-million-year-old T. rex, Mary Schweitzer stumbled upon astonishing signs of life that may radically change our view of the ancient beasts

Stretchy matter
A tiny blob of stretchy brown matter, soft tissue from inside the leg bone, suggests the specimen had not completely decomposed. (© Science)

Smithsonian Magazine | Subscribe
Neatly dressed in blue Capri pants and a sleeveless top, long hair flowing over her bare shoulders, Mary Schweitzer sits at a microscope in a dim lab, her face lit only by a glowing computer screen showing a network of thin, branching vessels. That’s right, blood vessels. From a dinosaur. “Ho-ho-ho, I am excite-e-e-e-d,” she chuckles. “I am, like, really excited.”
After 68 million years in the ground, a Tyrannosaurus rex found in Montana was dug up, its leg bone was broken in pieces, and fragments were dissolved in acid in Schweitzer’s laboratory at North Carolina State University in Raleigh. “Cool beans,” she says, looking at the image on the screen.

It was big news indeed last year when Schweitzer announced she had discovered blood vessels and structures that looked like whole cells inside that T. rex bone—the first observation of its kind. The finding amazed colleagues, who had never imagined that even a trace of still-soft dinosaur tissue could survive. After all, as any textbook will tell you, when an animal dies, soft tissues such as blood vessels, muscle and skin decay and disappear over time, while hard tissues like bone may gradually acquire minerals from the environment and become fossils. Schweitzer, one of the first scientists to use the tools of modern cell biology to study dinosaurs, has upended the conventional wisdom by showing that some rock-hard fossils tens of millions of years old may have remnants of soft tissues hidden away in their interiors. “The reason it hasn’t been discovered before is no right-thinking paleontologist would do what Mary did with her specimens. We don’t go to all this effort to dig this stuff out of the ground to then destroy it in acid,” says dinosaur paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., of the University of Maryland. “It’s great science.” The observations could shed new light on how dinosaurs evolved and how their muscles and blood vessels worked. And the new findings might help settle a long-running debate about whether dinosaurs were warmblooded, coldblooded—or both.

Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian [apparently there is some other religion called "christianity", because IN MY BOOK and my christianity, the Trinity created all in 6 days.].” On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”

It may be that Schweitzer’s unorthodox approach to paleontology can be traced to her roundabout career path. Growing up in Helena, Montana, she went through a phase when, like many kids, she was fascinated by dinosaurs. In fact, at age 5 she announced she was going to be a paleontologist. But first she got a college degree in communicative disorders, married, had three children and briefly taught remedial biology to high schoolers. In 1989, a dozen years after she graduated from college, she sat in on a class at Montana State University taught by paleontologist Jack Horner, of the Museum of the Rockies, now an affiliate of the Smithsonian Institution. The lectures reignited her passion for dinosaurs. Soon after, she talked her way into a volunteer position in Horner’s lab and began to pursue a doctorate in paleontology.
She initially thought she would study how the microscopic structure of dinosaur bones differs depending on how much the animal weighs. But then came the incident with the red spots.

In 1991, Schweitzer was trying to study thin slices of bones from a 65-million-year-old T. rex. She was having a hard time getting the slices to stick to a glass slide, so she sought help from a molecular biologist at the university. The biologist, Gayle Callis, happened to take the slides to a veterinary conference, where she set up the ancient samples for others to look at. One of the vets went up to Callis and said, “Do you know you have red blood cells in that bone?” Sure enough, under a microscope, it appeared that the bone was filled with red disks. Later, Schweitzer recalls, “I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can’t be. Red blood cells don’t preserve.”

Schweitzer showed the slide to Horner. “When she first found the red-blood-cell-looking structures, I said, Yep, that’s what they look like,” her mentor recalls. He thought it was possible they were red blood cells, but he gave her some advice: “Now see if you can find some evidence to show that that’s not what they are.”
What she found instead was evidence of heme in the bones—additional support for the idea that they were red blood cells. Heme is a part of hemoglobin, the protein that carries oxygen in the blood and gives red blood cells their color. “It got me real curious as to exceptional preservation,” she says. If particles of that one dinosaur were able to hang around for 65 million years, maybe the textbooks were wrong about fossilization.

Schweitzer tends to be self-deprecating, claiming to be hopeless at computers, lab work and talking to strangers. But colleagues admire her, saying she’s determined and hard-working and has mastered a number of complex laboratory techniques that are beyond the skills of most paleontologists. And asking unusual questions took a lot of nerve. “If you point her in a direction and say, don’t go that way, she’s the kind of person who’ll say, Why?—and she goes and tests it herself,” says Gregory Erickson, a paleobiologist at Florida State University. Schweitzer takes risks, says Karen Chin, a University of Colorado paleontologist. “It could be a big payoff or it could just be kind of a ho-hum research project.”

In 2000, Bob Harmon, a field crew chief from the Museum of the Rockies, was eating his lunch in a remote Montana canyon when he looked up and saw a bone sticking out of a rock wall. That bone turned out to be part of what may be the best preserved T. rex in the world. Over the next three summers, workers chipped away at the dinosaur, gradually removing it from the cliff face. They called it B. rex in Harmon’s honor and nicknamed it Bob. In 2001, they encased a section of the dinosaur and the surrounding dirt in plaster to protect it. The package weighed more than 2,000 pounds, which turned out to be just above their helicopter’s capacity, so they split it in half. One of B. rex’s leg bones was broken into two big pieces and several fragments—just what Schweitzer needed for her micro-scale explorations.

EUREKA!, cartilage and red blood cells preserved for 68 million years by the incredible, never failing, eternal preservative qualities of ...... red blood cells.  Our work is done, the creationists are proven un-scientific again!

Give me a break.

четвъртък, 6 октомври 2016 г.

вторник, 16 август 2016 г.

Donald Trump and the book of Revelation

Trump is a cartoon of Christ, created by the jesuits. More specifically, he seems to be a cartoon of the millennial reign and the second coming, with multiple concealed references to the book of revelation in his appearances and speeches, down from the start of his campaign.

A video of the famous descent of Trump , after his announcement of running for POTUS.

Trump Comes Down Escalator - 2016 Presidential Announcement

Notice three things. He is coming down with his wife, Melania. She is wearing all white, as Christ's heavenly assembly, the church, coming down for the reign of Christ, Rev 19:8; 21:2-3. He doesn't seem to care about her at all, and instead is looking for praise and approval by the crowd.

The music playing is clearly a satanic mockery of Rev 12,


"Rockin' In The Free World"

I see a woman in the night
With a baby in her hand
Under an old street light
Near a garbage can
Now she puts the kid away,

and she's gone to get a hit
She hates her life,
and what she's done to it
There's one more kid
that will never go to school
Never get to fall in love,
never get to be cool.

 The kid is the King to rule all nations, Jesus, the light is the heavenly sanctity of the church, the implication in this satanic song is that the baby is worthless garbage and will not amount to anything, let alone be king of the world. 

1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 
2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. 
3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. 
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. 
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

1. That Trump represents the archon might be deduced by the frequent remarks that he is childish by the media and himself:  "I've been 'a little childish'" And by the size of his fingers . . . . .

2. Trump's bright blond hair could be an allusion to the golden crowned Son of man of Revelation 14:14

3. Trump is unchanging, like Jesus

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

"I have always been the same person-remain true to self.The media wants me to change but it would be very dishonest to supporters to do so! Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Aug 14 "

4. Trump uses the word "win" liberally, much like Jesus speaks of "overcoming" in his admonitions in the first three chapters of revelation.

5. Trump tells it like it is, like Jesus spoke "plainly" to his followers, but the media is perplexed with his comments, like Jesus spoke to the unbelieving masses in parables.

6.  Trump promises to build a wall to keep all un-american people outside the US and shut the mouth of "the lying media", This is reminiscent of the new Jerusalem of Revelation 21-22, which will be free of gentiles and liars (false christians/jews).

Rev 21:
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:

27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

There may be many more, but i dont have time, resources, patience to seek them out.

неделя, 17 юли 2016 г.

Dugin "Turkey and Russia have a common enemy"

Putin will not fight Turkey

The third Rome scheming against the 2nd (and 1st?)

The geopolitical program for eastern Europe is clear for the next 2-3 years.

Alexander Dugin gave a press conference in Ankara


Friday, 15 July (COUP ATTEMPT DAY), 2016 - 14:45
In his speech Alexander Dugin, the leading expert of analytical center "Katehon" spoke about the efforts made for the restoration of Russian-Turkish relations after the provocation organized by US intelligence agencies, as a result of which a Russian aircraft was shot down, and the pilot was killed.
The press conference was held yesterday, July 14 and broadcast live on one of the central Turkish TV channels.
At the moment, the Turkish leaders have changed their strategy towards the Middle East and Russia. Future rapprochement between Ankara and Moscow on the Syrian issue and other issues directly destroys Washington's plans for the reconfiguration of the region and its transformation into a zone of chaos and instability, like Libya and Iraq.
Alexander Dugin stated: "Turkey and Russia have the same enemy - first of all it is US hegemony and radical islamic terrorism as its instrument"

неделя, 26 юни 2016 г.

Naive again americans and the Piper Francis


Name of God: I AM (Exodus 3:14), referring to the "archon" or that Pope Francis proclaims himself as God, the I AM?

Red blends with Blue to make IMPERIAL Purple. The pope is the emperor of the world.


via Douglas Willinger

Sunday, June 26, 2016

7-16-2016 Evangelicals To Unite With The Beast

at Washington, D.C. event

So there you have it. The pope beast will gather the beasts of the field to himself. Why do I call them beasts? Because it is biblical. Because these people don't have the heavenly wisdom, reason to worship God in spirit and truth and to live repentantly, to avoid sin and communion with evil and so forth. Therefore, they are as the brutes of the field, fresh meat for the Devil. And this event isn't the beginning of a one world religion. Hello, Catholicism has been a one world religion since times roman. It has always been. The pope is simply the main idol and the God of gods and King of kings and Priest of priests of this world religion. 16.07.17 is 777, the archontic reference. Perhaps we are to be spectators of a strike by the archons, who want to prevent this peaceful fellowship?

 IN OTHER NEWS, (TRAGIC TOMFOOLERY). Yes, Trump accepted Evangelicalism as much as Hitler accepted Protestantism or Putin renegade Orthodoxy. To drag it down.

Dr. James Dobson says Trump accepted Jesus Christ

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump poses for a photo after an interview with Reuters in his office in Trump Tower, in the Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., May 17, 2016. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

(TRUNEWS) Dr. James Dobson says Donald Trump has recently accepted Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior, and that Christians should be praying for him.

In an interview with the President and CEO of Godfactor, Michael Anthony, Dr. Dobson said “I think he is listening, theres a lot of people ministering to him personally, a lot of ministers. He did accept a relationship with Christ, I know the person who led him to Christ, and thats fairly recent.”


Expanding on that statement, Dr. Dobson went on to say:

“I don’t know when it was but it has not been long, and I believe he really made a commitment, but he’s a baby Christian (IN THE MIND OF GNOSTICS GOD THE CREATOR IS INFANTILE), we all need to be praying for him, especially if theres a possibly of him being our next chief executive officer, and I think that he’s open. He doesn’t know our language, you know, we had 40 Christians together with him, he used the word hell four or five times, he doesn’t know our language, he really doesn’t, and he refers a lot to religion and not much to faith and belief.”

Mr. Anthony responded to Dr. Dobson’s comments about Trump’s ignorance of Christian etiquette, “you know its interesting that you say that, I’m sure Saul when he became Paul didn’t know much of the language either.”
To this, Dr. Dobson said:

“Ya well you’ve got to cut him some slack he didn’t grow up like we did. And I think theres hope for him, and I think theres hope for us. I have great concerns about the next election.”

Dr. Dobson was part of a select group of Evangelicals who were invited to meet with the presumptive nominee in private prior to the main event in New York City Tuesday — which included 1000 Christian leaders from around the country, and TRUNEWS President Rick Wiles.

Regardless of who led Donald Trump to Christ, and whether this conversion is genuine, Christians throughout the world should be praying for blessings of safety and wisdom over the man who may very well be the next President of the United States of America.
May God work in his heart and soul as our nation faces the largest crisis of character since its inception.

сряда, 22 юни 2016 г.

Icebreaker #2


Sunday, December 6, 2015


PutinPutin Accuses West of Underestimating Terrorism And Nazis

Putin accused the global community of underestimating Nazism and “certain Western governments” of failing to admit that Nazism was arising in Western Europe and of doing the same today with the rise of “terrorism.”

“This common threat is spreading its danger before our very eyes,” Putin said. “We must create a modern collective security system beyond blocs and with all countries on an equal footing. Russia is open to discussions on this most important issue and has repeatedly stated its readiness for dialogue. For now though, as was the case on the eve of World War II, we see no positive response.”

The Kremlin has pushed for Western and Middle Eastern states to join efforts of the Syrian government to crackdown on militant groups, though many have refused, objecting to the authoritarian regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Putin accused NATO of “stepping up its aggressive rhetoric” and vowed that Russia will increase its military capabilities in response.

The Russian president has repeatedly been accused of playing up Moscow’s role in combatting Nazism in World War II, but whitewashing the initial partnership with Adolf Hitler, the subsequent occupation of the likes of Poland and the Baltics, as well as the repressions of the Soviet government that followed.


 is a book which alleges that Stalin used Nazi Germany as an "icebreaker" to start a war in Europe which would allow for the Soviet Union to come in, clean up, and take control of all of Europe

Of course, Putin's good friend Stoltenberg and all his other good friends in NATO are actually helping Putin's cause by posturing and increasing tension, thus preventing the formation of a international security organization. Putin relishes this, because he doesnt need terrorism to be prevented, but increased, as it is......Europe is being systematically infused with terrorism and terror and Putin will enter the scene when NATO is no longer needed.

вторник, 21 юни 2016 г.

Killing sodomites in the name of who?

Anderson and his disciples are not standing for the bible, but are doing Satan's work by wishing praying and preaching capital punishment on sodomites.

A workman of God preaches the judgment of GOD and the gospel of CHRIST, not temporal punishment. Sodomy was prevalent at the times of the apostles and many sodomites converted to Christ. Pastor Romero, Anderson, and all of the same stock,  do not speak of the spirit of God, but of the hateful spirit of man.

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor ABUSERS OF THEMSELVES WITH MANKIND, ...................

11 And SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of

Now Sodomites will flee to the moderate camp i.e catholic-evangelicalism. Anyone using the law in passing temporal judgement should be careful not to be found under death penalty ...., Matthew 7:1-2.

неделя, 19 юни 2016 г.

Putin's strange retreat n2

Putin just said USA is the only world superpower. This is a curious move, to say the least, even surprising to his nationalist electorate, considering the recent massive build-up of  NATO weaponry and personnel on the west border of Russia and his hard stance against the west since his famous Munich speech about the uni-polar world.

"America is a great power - today probably the only superpower. We accept that," Putin said at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. "We want to and are ready to work with the United States."

Putin said he welcomed Trump's desire to restore U.S.-Russia ties. "What's wrong with that?" Putin asked, drawing applause from the audience.

Russian hackers reportedly stole data from the Democratic party (Clinton) two days ago. That may explain why Putin is suddenly warming to the USA. Because Trump may be handed the victory by a blow to Clinton and Trump's USA will aid Putin in his future annexations.

петък, 17 юни 2016 г.

The jesuits in prophecy

Prophecy concerning the repairers of the gates of hell, the resuscitators of the son of perdition, the jesuits.

1 Samuel 5:3
And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of the LORD. And they took Dagon, and set him in his place again.

Revelation 13:3
And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

сряда, 15 юни 2016 г.

The third Rome scheming against the 2nd (and 1st?)

Putin, on his visit to ATHOS, sat on the Byzantine emperor throne.

Okay, things have started to finally appear as they are.Putin must do LOADS of damage both to europe and russia. HE will create the chaos and will not be the saviour, but the Hercule Poirot novel type villain discovered at the last minute.

The eurasian program of Putin is not simply russia-centric, but russian orthodoxy centric. I will now skip the role of orthodoxy in eurasian ideology, Dugin is sufficient reference material.

If Putin wants Russia to become the new third Rome imperially, he would want to get rid of the old ONES. And I write "would want", because in reality Putin's mind is aligned with the catacombs of the old 7 hill Rome, not Moscow or St Petersburg. But for his theatric part, if he is the chief archon, the usurper of the Pope's power, he would want those two to fall or at least to be subjected to his clerical lap-dogs. And this is preciselly what we are seeing with the drama around the proposed Great and Holy orthodox council. Russia won't participate. And more than that - It has destroyed the council. Several churches have pulled, last one being Serbia, all secretly good old KGB workshops. But Moscow doesn't want the world to realize its her hand breaking apart the council, so the Serbian church, which would be the first to be suspected of being controlled by the Kermlin, has now declared attending. Clever moves. The damage has been done and now Bartholomew, the buddy of Francis is disgraced. And any hope of further ecumenism is destroyed. Because, aside from everything else, the council was to include ecumenical discussion. The gist of this all is that Moscow wants to take the place of Constantinople as the third Rome and acts in the manner of the old papacy back in the 1400s!!!!!- actively participates in its destruction and marginalization. And the first step to accomplish this is to act defiantly by putting a great reproach on Bartholomew, and who knows, maybe Moscow will even let Turkey  dissolve the Constantinople patriarchate.

I suggested before that for a lesser reason (kings glory), Putin won't fight Erdogan. In fact, with the dowining of the russian plane and Putins strong man reaction, and with the refugee crisis, Erdogan helped Putin carve his image of a christian-rescuer, perhaps even with a view to the future Putin ivasion of Europe, in return for something (THE MIDDLE EAST?) And  he prepared a scape-goat - DAVUTOGLU, who called the felling of the plane and was discharged. Erdogan doesnt want the situation to escalate yet. (I think he will backstab russia when the opportunity arises)

Lies, lies, lies, lies:

Why The Russian Orthodox Church isn't going to the council of Crete and where does the controversy lay

BBC BBC: What is the essence of the problems on the eve of the Council on Crete contradictions?

Andrew Kuraev, theologian, professor at the Moscow Theological Academy: content claims our church is not expressed in the documents of the Council, therefore, like we were supposed to go there.
But there is a significant factor for the modern church life. The Greeks seemed to still do not know that Constantinople fell. And we have phantom pain over the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the Greeks have phantom pains of the disappearance of the Byzantine Empire.
They want to see it in the virtual incarnation of the church life. Patriarch of Constantinople called himself Universal.
We insisted that all decisions were made by pan-Orthodox community.
It seems to be agreed with this. But suddenly Constantinople after the failure of a number of churches from participating says no, still hold Cathedral and assume his Pan-Orthodox. Therefore, our Synod and decided: no, do not go, not to throw into the furnace of the universal vainglory.

Vakhtang Kikshidze, deputy chairman of the Synodal Department for Church and Society Relations with the media: Pan-Orthodox Council requires the participation of all local Orthodox Churches. ROC actively participated in the preparation of this Council, offering documents and so on.
However, problems arose with the participation of a number of local churches that have declared their unwillingness to participate in the Cathedral of Crete. ROC on 3 June offered to assemble an emergency meeting of the representatives of the local churches, to resolve the contradictions.

Vsevolod Chaplin, Archpriest: Many Orthodox Christians (bishops, priests, religious) believe that in the draft documents prepared for the council, too much pertains to ecumenism (ie an offer to strive to unify various Christian denominations).
This criticism has arisen around the world. This criticism is not heard.
Plus - the Patriarchate of Constantinople powerfully behaves. Five churches have refused to participate in the Council, as Constantinople is trying to hold it at any cost. I'm afraid that this is connected with the ambition to organize a pan-Orthodox structure that would replace the decision-making in some Orthodox churches. But in Orthodoxy is not the papacy and Constantinople the papal ambitions are unlikely to be accepted. I think that the Council, which will take place even without the participation of one of the churches, there will be illegitimate. I do not know how in these conditions, they can pretend that decisions of this Council were binding.

Bi-bi-si: Why have the different local Orthodox churches refused to participate in the Council?
Andrew Kuraev: All the reasons are different (nice joke). At the church of Antioch conflict with Jerusalem, the church classic conflict over territory. Plus, it is important for them to adopt a new style in the calendar. Council refuses to do it - then what we sense to go, they say in the church of Antioch.
In the Serbian church conflict with the Patriarchate of Romania, who opened his diocese in Serbia - as if to ethnic Romanians. But without agreement. And conflict, Constantinople does not help and the Cathedral, this issue is not imposed.
Plus part of the monks saw the shadow of ecumenism in the possible draft decisions, and also presses.

Vakhtang Kikshidze: Each of the local Orthodox Church has its own pressing issues to be addressed.
Patriarchate of Antioch is in dispute with the canonical Orthodox Church in Jerusalem because Jerusalem has organized the diocese in Qatar, which the Patriarchate of Antioch considers its canonical territory.
Some church feel ignored. Someone did not sign documents. All this has created barriers to participation in the Council. Church asked to postpone the date of the Council, but the Patriarchate of Constantinople did not agree.

Chaplin: The expression of criticism. It is obvious that an attempt to have Constantinople over the tight control of everything that happens in the Orthodox world, is not supported.
This criticism is justified - because it is obvious that every living religious community seeks to draw in their faith all over the world, and we try to offer integrated in another project by inertia.
The future belongs to those religious communities that offer the world his faith and vision for the future.
Constantinople missed the train of history, he is trying to solve religious issues through bureaucratic procedures. But the world has changed.

BBC BBC: What could be the consequences of any contentions?

Kuraev Andrew: And we do not know how to behave is now meeting in Crete. Maybe they call themselves Pan-Orthodox Council, and perhaps meeting. We will see.
And the second. If they gather and gather doubtless will they not say - but let's not deal with these Orthodox barbarians - [and instead have] a purely Greek meeting and take a decision? And they can then make decisions that will vex our churches.
And we believe that they dont have such authority. And they believe that there is. This is also a spirit of popery. But it does not accept in the Orthodox Church.
And further. We are disgraced before the whole world. This event advertised. We talked for so long - the spirit of catholicity in Orthodoxy, no earthly oracle. And suddenly it became clear: lose the gift to gather at the  council and solved together.

Chaplin: I do not rule out that the churches which refused to participate in the Council, will sooner or later decide to gather their own Orthodox council.
It would be useful to give a voice to this informal meeting of the Orthodox authorities: theologians and priests, the elders, and publicists.
If these churches have the courage and the energy to create its own system of interaction between the Orthodox, it will bring together most of the Orthodox Christian world and will probably be more effective.