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

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.