Today as I came to prepare my blog about the new pope, I re-opened a note I’d made a week or so previously, and had never finished. Now, it seems even more relevant, so I will start off with what I wrote then:
Remarks by the President
Washington Hilton Hotel
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) Good evening, everybody. Good evening. I could not be more thrilled to be here tonight — (laughter) — at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. This is a great crowd. They’re already laughing. It’s terrific.
Now, if I do win a second term as President, let me just say something to all the — (applause) — let me just say something to all my conspiracy-oriented friends on the right who think I’m planning to unleash some secret agenda: You’re absolutely right. (Laughter.) So allow me to close with a quick preview of the secret agenda you can expect in a second Obama administration.
In my first term, I sang Al Green; in my second term, I’m going with Young Jeezy. (Laughter.)
MRS. OBAMA: Yeah.
THE PRESIDENT: Michelle said, yeah. (Laughter.) I sing that to her sometimes. (Laughter.)
He sings THAT to her??? Read the lyrics if you can stand to – they are very explicit – but find them here:
THE PRESIDENT: In my first term, we ended the war in Iraq; in my second term, I will win the war on Christmas. (Laughter.)
HUH? Win the WAR ON CHRISTMAS? Did you know there was such a thing? Well, it’s becoming more and more apparent that Christmas is detested by almost everyone for its supposed Christian overtones, and they have been de-christianising it for years. It’s not politically correct to have a religious festival that is so blatantly Christian. So it’s becoming a “winter festival” instead.
“In the past, Christmas-related controversy was mainly restricted to concerns of a public focus on secular Christmas themes such as Santa Claus and gift-giving, rather than what is sometimes expressed by Christians as the real “reason for the season” – the birth of Jesus.
Modern-day controversy occurs mainly in western countries such as the United States, Canada, and to a lesser extent the United Kingdom and Ireland, and usually stems from a contrast between the holiday’s significant social and economic role in these countries and its strong association with Christianity in an increasingly multiculturally sensitive and religiously diversifying society.
In recent decades, public, corporate, and government mention of the term “Christmas” during the Christmas and holiday season has declined and been replaced with a generic term, usually “holiday(s)”, to avoid referring to Christmas by name.
Also, many retailers are asked to greet their customers with “Happy Holidays” or “Season’s Greetings” than with the traditional “Merry Christmas”.
It has also been further argued that as western society continues to diversify culturally and religiously, public recognition of a potentially sectarian holiday, such as Christmas, may be seen as non-inclusive or offensive to non-Christians or non-celebrants in general.”
However, do you want to vote for a man who openly (even in jest) aims to “win the war against Christmas”? – presumably, to completely overturn any religious connection to that time of the year. It’s disturbing to say the least that these are the principles of a man whose words and actions affect many if not most of the nations round the world.
THE PRESIDENT: In my first term, we repealed the policy known as “don’t ask, don’t tell” — (applause) — wait, though; in my second term, we will replace it with a policy known as, it’s raining men. (Laughter.)
July 22, 2011 President Obama formally certified on Friday that the American military is ready for the repeal of the don’t ask, don’t tell policy as Pentagon officials said that nearly two million service members had been trained in preparation for gay men and women serving openly in their ranks. Enactment of the repeal will come in 60 days, on Sept. 20. The two-month waiting period is called for in the legislation passed late last year that ended don’t ask, don’t tell, the 17-year-old law that banned openly gay men, lesbians and bisexuals from military service. As of Sept. 20, service members will no longer be forced to hide who they are in order to serve our country, Mr. Obama said in a statement. Pentagon officials said they would be looking in the next two months at gray areas that might allow them to extend some benefits to same-sex married couples in the military. (Source)
IT’S RAINING MEN
What’s Obama referring to? He’s aiming to push the gay agenda even further!
There’s an ongoing conspiracy theory that says Obama is gay, and was even “married” during his college years and is seen in photographs wearing a wedding ring on his ring finger at that time. A spoof profile that he wrote for college lists one of his accomplishments as “deflecting persistent questions about the ring on my left hand.”
Be that as it may, it’s certain that Obama today does support gay marriage. In addition, his choice of song “Raining Men” is now hailed as a GAY ANTHEM, like “YMCA” by The Village People, and the gay community helped popularize it.
The song was written by Paul Jabara and Paul Shaffer in 1979 originally for Dave Balfour’s album ‘Stars’ (it was eventually discarded),and originally recorded by The Weather Girls in 1982. It was covered by Martha Wash (of The Weather Girls) as a duet with RuPaul in 1997, Geri Halliwell in 2001 and by Young Divas in 2006. The song is hailed as a camp classic and more recently as a dance anthem, gay anthem, and as a classic feminist anthem.
There is a gay blog called “It’s Raining Men” to which I won’t give the link but if you are that interested you can find it yourself on Google, and the strap line reads: “Breaking barriers and giving expression to the gay community” – therefore we have to ask ourselves why, of all songs, Obama would choose this one as his theme and anthem for his second term!
THE PRESIDENT: In my first term, we passed health care reform; in my second term, I guess I’ll pass it again. (Applause.)
I’m not qualified to comment on the Health Care Reforms, but I know they are hotly debated in the States – nonetheless, Obama chose to throw this comment in as another part of his supposed conspiracy agenda. Draw whatever conclusion you like from that!
Todd Bentley Kicks and Punches the Sick at God’s Command, British MP Seeks to Ban Him
If a little voice in the back of your head told you to kick a woman in the face, most of us would quickly suppress the idea. But for Todd Bentley of Fresh Fire Ministries, who is also a televangelist covered with body tattoos and facial piercings, that voice is none other than the voice of God.
He has used these shock-cure methods under what he calls holy inspiration, in a manner that is more evocative of ancient Zen Buddhism, in which teachers would slap, punch, or slice a student into enlightenment, than anything found in traditional Christianity. For this reason many UK citizens are pressuring leaders to ban his intended visit to their country this month.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “liar” in remarks to US President Barack Obama overheard by journalists.
“I can’t stand him any more, he’s a liar,” Mr Sarkozy said in French.
“You may be sick of him, but me, I have to deal with him every day,” Mr Obama replied.
The exchange at the G20 summit was quoted by a French website, Arret sur Images, and confirmed by other media. The remarks – during a private conversation – were overheard by a few journalists last week but were not initially reported, the BBC’s Christian Fraser in Paris says.
Journalists at the bilateral press conference had been handed translation boxes but had been told not to plug in their headphones until the backroom conversation had finished. But those who did heard the revealing comments.
For several days there was media silence in France about the exchange – a decision had apparently been taken not to embarrass the French president. A correspondent for Le Monde newspaper referred to the conversation without the quotes.
But Israeli newspapers have reported it in full. It is said Mr Obama was taking Mr Sarkozy to task for voting in favour of the Palestinian bid for full membership of the UN cultural organisation, Unesco, a bid that was approved despite American opposition.
The remarks indicate a breakdown of trust with the Israeli leader which could have wider implications for the Middle East peace process, our correspondent says.
From other news sites
- MSNBC Sarkozy to Obama: I can’t bear ‘liar’ Netanyahu 1 hr ago
- Asian Age Israel silent on Sarkozy ‘outburst’ over Netanyahu 1 hr ago
- New Statesman Sarkozy: “I cannot stand Netenyahu. He is a liar.” 1 hr ago
- Irish Times Sarkozy brands Netanyahu ‘a liar’ 2 hrs ago
- Yahoo! UK and Ireland Sarkozy told Obama he is fed up with Israeli PM 3 hrs ago
The popular author’s controversial book “Love Wins” celebrates God’s love but drifts dangerously into Universalism.
I’m usually quick to speak my mind. But in the case of Rob Bell’s controversial book Love Wins, I’ve withheld comment until now because (1) I don’t think Christians should judge books before reading them; (2) the theological issues addressed require careful analysis; and (3) I have many young friends who are fans of Bell’s books, and they may write me off if I don’t treat him fairly.
So I’ll begin with a compliment. Bell is a masterful writer whose prose is poetic. As pastor of the 7,000-member Mars Hill Bible Church in Michigan, Bell has gained a following because of his casual style, his ultra-cool Nooma videos and the previous books he’s released with Christian publisher Zondervan (especially Velvet Elvis).
“Bell’s core theme is that Christians have been too narrow in their view of God and His mercy. He argues that God loves people too much to banish them to hell. In the end, he says, after this life is over, everybody will find ultimate reconciliation in Christ.”
With Love Wins, he’s taking his message mainstream. HarperCollins published it, and Time magazine featured a cover story in April about the firestorm Bell has triggered among conservative Christian leaders who have accused him of heresy. So what’s all the fuss about?
Bell’s core theme is that Christians have been too narrow in their view of God and His mercy. He argues that God loves people too much to banish them to hell. In the end, he says, after this life is over, everybody will find ultimate reconciliation in Christ. Bell claims this is what the Bible teaches, and he suggests that Christian theologians have promoted the idea for centuries.
He writes: “At the center of the Christian tradition … have been a number who insist that history is not tragic, hell is not forever and love, in the end, wins and all will be reconciled to God.”
That sounds a lot like Universalism, the idea that all spiritual paths ultimately lead to heaven. But pinning the Universalist label on Bell isn’t easy because he doesn’t write authoritatively. He muses, hints, speculates and suggests his views, so not to offend. Rather than preach with conviction, he invites his readers to a “conversation.” It feels friendly and non-confrontational.
Near the end of the book Bell sounds solidly evangelical when he emphasizes that people must receive the grace God has offered to us. But he sounds more like Oprah when he asks: “Has God created millions of people over tens of thousands of years who are going to spend eternity in anguish? Can God do this, or even allow this, and claim to be a loving God?”
I can appreciate Bell’s desire to distance himself from the mean-spirited side of American fundamentalism. Young people today are horrified (so am I) by self-righteous, Bible-toting believers who burn Qurans or spew hatred toward immigrants or homosexuals. Bell despises the “turn or burn” attitude that has made Christians look judgmental. He also believes we’ve trivialized salvation by turning conversion into a formulaic prayer, and by focusing the Christian life on the idea of “getting into heaven.” I agree with him on those points.
But Bell is also guilty of trivializing salvation. He writes about an ooey-gooey God of love but leaves out God’s justice and holiness. His gospel, at times, sounds squishy and spineless. You can’t correct the abuses of fundamentalism by disregarding the severe side of God’s nature. You can’t bring balance by swinging the pendulum too far the other way.
Because of Bell’s popularity, Love Wins could steer the American church into dangerous waters. You can ignore the book if you want, but you can’t ignore the fact that younger Christians are turned off by certain attitudes in the church, and they need solid answers. We must address the key doctrinal issues that Bell raises:
1. The reality of hell. Bell downplays Scriptural support for the existence of hell while admitting that Jesus talked about it more than anyone in the New Testament. At times he suggests that hell is just a state of mind, or maybe a manifestation of evil on earth. He also questions whether God would send anyone to hell since He’s so forgiving.
Yet when the apostle Paul preached the gospel he warned of “the judgment to come” (Acts 24:25, NASB). The essence of the gospel is that Jesus came to save us from eternal separation from God. Don’t we still believe this?
2. The exclusivity of Christianity. Bell makes a strong case that Jesus died to reconcile all people to God, but then he suggests that not everyone will realize it was Jesus they were praying to. The inference is that Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists will show up in heaven since they were responding to a divine impulse they didn’t understand.
If that’s true, why did Jesus Himself say the road to salvation was exclusively narrow and the road to destruction was wide? (see Matt. 7:13-14). Why did He command us to take the message of salvation to the nations? Why did the early apostles preach that salvation was only in His name? Were they narrow-minded fundamentalists too?
3. The necessity of evangelism. Bell comes close to ridiculing Christians who share their faith, and he wonders if it’s really necessary for missionaries to share the gospel abroad. He asks: “If our salvation … is dependent on others bringing the message to us–teaching us, showing us–what happens if they don’t do their part? What if the missionary gets a flat tire?”
I’m sure Bell gets laughs when he repeats that line in a sermon. But it’s really not funny. He’s suggesting that there’s no urgency about preaching the gospel, and that lives aren’t at stake when we ignore our responsibility to evangelize. Tell that to the apostle Paul, who wasn’t laughing when he said he felt an overwhelming obligation to preach so he could save sinners (see Rom. 1:14).
Bell says he asked Jesus into his heart when he was a child, so I’m treating him as a brother in Christ. I’m not picking a fight with him. But I can’t endorse Love Wins. The doctrines of heaven, hell, salvation and damnation are too serious to be treated haphazardly. May the Lord help us to reclaim a truly New Testament gospel in an hour of spiritual compromise.
Subscribe to this newsletter here.
Andrew Strom, respected Christian blogger and minister, has contracted malaria while travelling abroad. Please pray for his recovery from this life-threatening disease. This report was given by his wife Jaqui:
Andrew recently visited Papua New Guinea where he had a wonderful and encouraging time. God was moving and many were baptised and received the Holy Spirit. Milne Bay Province, where Andrew was ministering, is the seat of witchcraft in PNG.
Less than two weeks after his return to Melbourne, Andrew began to experience fevers and chills. This continued for about six days. Although we had visited the Doctor and been advised to wait a while, it began to increasingly trouble us that Andrew was not recovering, as he is hardly ever sick.
As the situation worsened, we felt he should have blood tests done at the hospital. Sadly, it was discovered that Andrew has Malaria which, as you probably know, is a serious illness. Andrew will remain in hospital for a number of days.
We would greatly appreciate your prayers for a speedy recovery!
God bless you,
See our website and discussion board-
To believe when all means fail is exceedingly pleasing to God and is most acceptable. Jesus said to Thomas, “You have believed because you have seen, but blessed are those that do believe and have not seen” (John 20:29).
Blessed are those who believe when there is no evidence of an answer to prayer—who trust beyond hope when all means have failed. Someone has come to the place of hopelessness—the end of hope—the end of all means.
A loved one is facing death and doctors give no hope. Death seems inevitable. Hope is gone. The miracle prayed for is not happening. That is when Satan’s hordes come to attack your mind with fear, anger, overwhelming questions: “Where is your God now? You prayed until you had no tears left. You fasted. You stood on promises. You trusted.”
Blasphemous thoughts will be injected into your mind: “Prayer failed. Faith failed. Don’t quit on God—just do not trust him anymore. It doesn’t pay!” Even questioning God’s existence will be injected into your mind. These have been the devices of Satan for centuries.
Some of the godliest men and women who ever lived were under such demonic attacks.
It started with Serene Branson and a stream of ‘gibberish’ as she appeared live at the Grammys ceremony in February. Since then, and almost inexplicably, more and more presenters are succumbing to ‘gibberish’ before their live audiences. What is going on?
In Branson’s case, armchair medics were quick to assert that she was possibly suffering a stroke on Live TV – something later ruled out by hospital medics. A rare form of migraine was cited as the most likely cause and at that point, the news hungry internet archived the incident as ‘one of those rare events’. Only now is it clear that it’s not so rare at all.
Alarmingly five differing presenters have now launched into ‘gibberish’ mode whilst presenting live.
It’s clearly not that they are forgetting their lines, it’s clearly not that they are simply ‘flunking things’- something is going on which makes them continue with poise and composure, yet the words coming from their mouths make no sense whatsoever.
Judge Judy became the latest victim just 48 hours ago. Recording of her popular TV show had to be ceased while she sought medical attention after speaking ‘gibberish’. Mark McAllister of Global Toronto News suffered the same fate before a third and fourth presenter found themselves making no sense whatsoever when trying to speak live on air.
See the videos for yourself HERE and determine whether this is indeed a ‘medical’ issue which is afflicting these poor reporters – or is there something more sinister going on?
Ever since I heard about the forthcoming wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton I have been saying this: not long after the wedding the Queen will step down in favour of her grandson and his wife.
The current state visit to New Zealand and Australia by Prince William, on behalf of the Queen – plus some very popular walkabouts by the couple recently – have all added to my conviction about this.
In order to crown William as king, the Royal Family would have to find a way round one seemingly unsurmountable obstacle, Prince Charles, who is next in line for the throne.
But it does seem to me that the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh have picked up on both the public feeling about Camilla (Charles’s wife) and Charles’s own reluctance to rule. After all he is aged 63 and has settled into a contented and subdued lifestyle after the trauma of Diana’s turbulent life and death. That is to say nothing about public and insider worries over Charles’s new-age and interfaith beliefs.
The British public adored Diana, rightly or wrongly, and were never that keen on having a divorced second-best as Queen. Also, the malcontents fussed over her being divorced. Plus, what hope would there be of royal children from a pair in their sixties?
However, the brightest star to rise recently has been loveable, accessible William who is in touch with the 21st Century. The couple have definitely got the AWWWW factor judging by recent news footage. It’s as if they are being groomed for greater things and their popularity is being tested in advance.
I would guess that after the royal wedding there will be a pause to make sure a child is on the way swiftly followed by the Queen’s announcement. She and the Duke have visibly aged – she will be 85 this April – and surely she cannot want to go on with her tiring public agenda for much longer.
So, if we have a new king by the end of the year remember…YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST! 🙂
Atheism dressed up as “theology”: the God haters are clamouring to applaud tonight’s ripping up of biblical truth in the form of the BBC’s new series presented by the atheist senior lecturer at the University of Exeter, Francesca Stavrakopoulou.
The first episode (Tuesday 15th from 9-10 on BBC2) is all about rubbishing David and his kingdom. Doubtless the same kind of sensationalised “archeology” and “new evidence” that we are used to seeing in such documentaries will support the conclusion she’s already reached, that the God of the bible only exists in the blinded eyes of those who worship him.
But who is this woman? One supporter praises her “excellent” work on “cultic child sacrifice to Yahweh” which sounds to me startlingly close to the age-old blood libel. But maybe the world is ready for another heavy dose of anti-semitic lies to spark off the next round of pogroms? And as for the Christians, they are about to appear as foolish numbskulls who need pagans and atheists to correct their theological understanding.
Stavrakopoulou first appeared on television last year in Channel 4’s “The Bible: A History”, saying that Moses did not exist. (I remember trying to watch this series and recall how conceited she sounded.)
“The Bible’s Buried Secrets”, which begins tonight, is her first prime time series. Her published books include include “Baal and Asherah: Image, Sex, Power, and the Other” and “King Manasseh and Child Sacrifice: Biblical Distortions of Historical Realities”.
Her book “Blood ritual in the Hebrew Bible” again raises the spectre of the Blood Libel. Will it become the new “Protocols of Zion”?
She is “Secretary of the Society for Old Testament Study and a member of the European Association of Biblical Studies and the Society of Biblical Literature” so is clearly a voice of influence for those who need to denounce all that is holy and true. In one short biography it is revealed it took her to the age of eleven to realise that Jesus was Jewish. One wonders what would have happened if she’d actually paid attention at school like the rest of us.
Ms Stavrakopoulou’s big drum which she is bound to beat throughout this TV series is pluralism. That is, the God of the bible is about to be presented as simply one of a host of cultic gods worshipped in ancient Judea. Again, according to some “the fact that Yahweh once shared a bed with Mrs Yahweh (“Asherah”) is widely accepted by mainstream scholars as a part of orthodox religious belief”. Perhaps it is amongst the “religious” but not for those who know God. Let us pray the outcry will be loud and long against this destructive heresy!
Titus 1:15-16 – To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled. They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.
BBC’s latest religious “expert” is a self-proclaimed atheist who claims God had a wife and Eve suffered from sexism. Dr Francesca Stavrakopoulou makes a number of staggering statements in forthcoming BBC2 series “The Bible’s Buried Secrets.”
The presenter, who has a doctorate in theology from the University of Oxford, argues that Eve was not the first woman in the Bible, as the story of the Garden of Eden does not belong in the first Book of the Old Testament.
She said: ‘Eve has been unfairly maligned as the troublesome wife who brought about the fall. Don’t forget that the biblical writers were male and it’s a very male-dominated world. Women were second-class citizens.’
And Dr Stavrakopoulou, a senior lecturer in the department of theology and religion at Exeter University, does not believe in God. She said: ‘I’m an atheist with a huge respect for religion’. [however, not with enough respect to get the facts right.]
Dr Stavrakopoulou’s claims that God had a wife appeared to be backed up by her own
research speculation into the subject. In a recent article she wrote: ‘Archaeological evidence including inscriptions, figurines and ancient texts as well as details in the Bible, indicate not just that he was one of several worshipped in ancient Israel, but that he was also coupled with a goddess. She was worshipped alongside him in his temple in Jerusalem.
‘…Yahweh… had to see off a number of competitors to achieve his position as the one and only god of the ancient Israelites. The biblical texts name many of them: El, Baal, Molek, Asherah. ‘
‘Far more significant is the Bible’s admission that the goddess Asherah was worshipped in Yahweh’s temple in Jerusalem. In the Book Of Kings, we’re told that a statue of Asherah was housed in the temple… goddess worship was a thriving feature of high-status religion in Jerusalem. ‘
”But perhaps most significant of all, Asherah was also the wife of El, the high god at Ugarit – a god who shares much in common with Yahweh. Given the evidence within the Bible that she was worshipped in the temple in Jerusalem, might she have played the role of a divine wife in ancient Israel too?’
Errrr – NO!!! Read the bible, dummy!
It’s no mystery that these days a liberal feminist atheist can get a degree in theology, in fact you’d probably struggle to get one if you were a genuine Christian. And it’s no surprise that it’s open season on Christians and the Bible again just in time for Easter. We expect nothing more from the BBC.
Benny Hinn Curses His Opponents (and a lot more besides)
If you didn’t believe that Benny Hinn’s wife ever told the audience they needed a “holy ghost enema right up their rear end” or that Benny Hinn himself curses anybody who opposed his ministry and that if you attacked him “your children will pay for it” then this is the video for you:
Todd Bentley’s Female Angel
Sept 10 2008
If you have been keeping abreast of recent developments, you will already have heard the story of Todd Bentley at the Lakeland “Revival” – his claims of resurrections, healings and angelic visitation, and then the exposure of his drunkenness and adultery, as well as his lies and manipulations.
Perhaps at this late stage it’s not necessary to add more, but I will attach here my video, created in the days when Bentley was the next best hope for mankind, according to those who supported him.
Bob Jones, the once disgraced “prophet” who has been aching to revive his dead Kansas City revival of the 80’s (which also looked back to the now notorious 1947 Latter Rain revival of North Battleford, Canada) introduced Bentley to the “Emma” angel who supposedly birthed that revival, and she became quite a regular feature of Bentley’s pronouncements – that is, until the opposition to a female angel became too strong, whereupon he turned tail and denounced her, in favour of other male entities like the “Winds of Change”.
I produced this cynical video which does make a point, in a humorous way. I felt that the level of hype was such that we were all in danger of taking ourselves too seriously, or at least, the devil and his works. I felt it was time to bring him down with a little comedy.
Todd Bentley Rejects His Emma Angel