'Political Correctness' Is Totalitarian Mind Control

By David Kupelian
“PC is, strictly speaking, a totalitarian philosophy.” —Newsweek, Dec. 24, 1990, “Thought Police” cover story

A major engine for the left’s insatiable quest for power goes under the strange name of “political correctness”—an insidious frontal attack on common sense and conscience through language manipulation.

Many people mistakenly regard political correctness as just a nutty liberal fetish for not hurting people’s feelings. Words and phrases are continually decreed to be “insensitive” to various “minorities” and therefore replaced with euphemisms so as to avoid real or perceived offense.

People who are mentally retarded used to be called “idiots,” “imbeciles” and “morons”—psychological terms that correspond to different IQ ranges (0-25 for idiots, 26-50 for imbeciles, 51-70 for morons). But as those words gradually came to be considered offensive, the euphemism “retarded” came into vogue. When “retarded” came to be regarded as insensitive, new-and-nicer euphemisms like “intellectual disability” and being “intellectually challenged” emerged, culminating with “special.” It’s hard to be offended over being “special.”

In like manner, the deaf became “hearing impaired,” the blind “vision impaired” and the crippled “mobility impaired,” inspiring a new breed of cocktail-party jokes wherein the bald are “folically challenged” and so on.

More subversively, however, people’s ignoble or criminal qualities became disguised and excused with euphemisms: “Illegal aliens” became “illegal immigrants” and then “undocumented immigrants” and presto-chango, something bad was magically transformed into something good. Homosexuals became “gay,” abortion advocates became “pro-choice” and atheists became “brights,” each euphemism converting a negative association into a positive one. Today, increasing numbers of people refer to pedophilia as “intergenerational sex” and child molesters as “minor-attracted persons” or MAPs. (In Islam, the popular euphemism for pedophilia is “child marriage,” just as adultery is called “temporary marriage.” Really.)

Of course, Islam has become a major beneficiary of political correctness, reminiscent of what George Orwell called “Newspeak” in his novel “1984.” After 19 Muslim terrorists, acting in the name of Islam, murdered almost 3,000 Americans in a wanton act of war on Sept. 11, 2001, the government and media, to avoid offending Muslims, declared Islam to be a “religion of peace.” The Islamic jihad declared on America was mysteriously referred to by our leaders as a “war on terror” involving some unnamed enemy. But even that awkward and evasive expression was deemed too insensitive toward Islam, so under Obama the euphemizing turned surreal when “war on terror” morphed into “overseas contingency operations.” Likewise, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano came up with a friendly new phrase for mass-murder terror attacks. Announcing that she was deliberately avoiding the term “terrorism” in speeches because “we want to move away from the politics of fear,” she adopted the term “man-caused disasters.”

All of this is not, however, just a matter of annoyingly manipulative “word games.”

Our civilization is literally being turned upside-down through the strategic redefinition (and therefore transformation) of our society’s operating principles.

Today’s most obvious case in point: Barack Obama, a far-left radical manifestly hostile toward free-market capitalism and American exceptionalism—in fact, to just about everything American.but who campaigned using powerfully evocative words of national restoration and reconciliation. Hope, change, fairness, justice, reform and transparency would usher in a bright new era of “healing and  unifying America and the world through this charismatic young leader’s post-racial, post-partisan” presidency. What we got instead was a jarringly narcissistic, supremely demagogic and corrupt Chicago politician, lacking both in experience and wisdom, and displaying breathtaking contempt for America’s Constitution and its best-in-the-world system of government.

If the ongoing language war consisted solely of one man’s use of emotionally compelling catch-phrases—like Obama’s current re-election favorites (“Everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules”) and his ceaseless appeals to raw envy (attacks on “millionaires and billionaires,” “hedge-fund managers” and “oil-company executives”)—it wouldn’t be difficult for truth to prevail.

But the political and cultural left has hijacked virtually our entire language in the last couple of generations. It has redefined many key words, phrases and concepts, changing not only the words we use, but the way we think. Consider:

“Equality” has been utterly redefined. To previous generations, equality—as in Jefferson’s phrase in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”—referred to our being equal in our God-given rights before the law. Today’s idea of equality, however, is based on the virtual repudiation of meaning and morality and God Himself. Good and evil are basically “equal.” As I write in “The Marketing of Evil”:

Today, in the rarified but toxic air of multiculturalism and political correctness, all cultures and all values are of equal value. The most ignorant, oppressive, suffocating, women-hating kind of culture—where people’s hands and feet are amputated as punishment for petty offenses—is now worthy of equal respect to Western culture, which has provided most of the world’s knowledge, progress, food, medicine, technology, quality of life, representative government, and liberty.

This moral inversion, which proclaims that all cultures are equal, has extended to virtually every area of society.

“Love” too has been redefined. At its finest, love is a spiritual quality of selfless, sacrificial caring about others, epitomized by Jesus when He said on the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” The soldier who falls on an enemy grenade to save the lives of his fellow warriors acts out of love. But today, “love” has reached a low point—the word is used to sanctify same-sex marriage and celebrate what once were called “vile affections.” Even pedophiles creepily talk about “men and the boys they love” to justify their crimes. After all, how can love be vile? For many, our idea of “love”—basically, our feelings of attraction toward anything to which we are addicted—is now firmly in the gutter, like “equality.”

“Justice,” likewise, has been redefined. Phrases such as “social justice” and “economic justice” are euphemisms for confiscating, by threat and raw force, what belongs justly to others—in other words, injustice. Likewise, “affirmative action” is imposed and defended in the name of justice, but is inherentlyunjust: The most qualified applicant for a job is turned down in favor of another, because that other person has the right skin color. That used to be called racial discrimination (a great injustice), but now the same act is rationalized as “social justice.”

Freedom Is Slavery
In Orwell’s “1984,” the outside walls of the “Ministry of Truth” (headquarters for propaganda and revisionist history) are adorned with three “Newspeak” phrases—slogans of the political party ruling the total surveillance state of Oceania. They are: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

America today is rapidly becoming Oceania, where many key political and cultural concepts actually amount to the opposite of what their labels profess: MHow about these? THEFT IS JUSTICE. MORALITY IS HATE. FAITH IS IGNORANCE. Or maybe these: ENVY IS RIGHTEOUSNESS. SIN IS LOVE. CHARITY IS ENTITLEMENT.

A 180-degree inversion of reality has been codified within our political and cultural vernacular. Whereas the poor and disadvantaged once were the grateful recipients of charity, thanks to the generosity of individuals, churches and organizations, today what used to be charity is an “entitlement.” The idea that charity—whether through private-sector generosity or governmental “safety-net” programs—is something to which the recipient is “entitled” is bizarrely presumptuous and discordant to all right-thinking people. It’s almost as though the government intends to program recipients of charity to become arrogant and ungrateful; after all, why would you be grateful for receiving something to which you were already entitled?

Likewise, “tolerance” today often amounts to not only acceptance, but virtual celebration of sexual immorality—or at the very least, an agreement not to utter or write a word of disapproval over immoral, corrupt or self-destructive behavior. However, homosexual activists condemning the “intolerance” of others are notoriously intolerant of all who hold to the millennia-old moral code of the Western world.

Why are the most perverse, immoral and confusing programs imaginable being instituted so easily throughout our nation’s public schools under the banner of “anti-bullying”? Because “gay” activists figured out that the best way to intimidate everyone into embracing their agenda was to package it that way. This is pure conditioning. For most people, the very thought of opposing any “anti-bullying” program is chilling, because we fear being condemned as haters of children.

The emotional programming inherent in words and phrases is so compelling that it affects our behavior in many areas of life. So, for instance, many conservatives automatically conclude that “environmentalism,” “conservation,” “hybrid” vehicles, “recycling” and “organic” foods are things to avoid, just because they associate them with liberals.

The Hidden Power of Political Correctness
The whole idea of political correctness is an assault on the freedom of the human mind.

The operating principle behind political correctness is raw intimidation: In a politically correct culture, if you dare use certain words—and by logical extension, even think a certain way—you are ignorant, insensitive, intolerant, bigoted or hateful.

If you criticize the president of the United States as a “socialist” or “Marxist,” for instance, you will likely be accused of “McCarthyism.” Regardless of the real history of the “McCarthy era”—yes, there really were Soviet agents honeycombed throughout the U.S. government—the phrase has become a verbal weapon with which the left attacks conservatives.

(Personal story: As a guest on Sean Hannity’s “Great American Panel,” I used the words “socialist” and “Marxist” to describe Obama,and rattled off highlights of far-left associations and exploits from his teen years to his presidency. Liberal panelist Bob Beckel, taking offense at my use of the word “Marxist,” turned to me and angrily accused me of being “worse than Joe McCarthy,” insisting I should “apologize to the president.” Apologize for what? Telling the truth? For the record, I like Beckel, he’s a very nice man off-camera.)

The point is, the weaponization of a word like “McCarthyism” has nothing to do with history or reality; it is the intimidation factor that’s programmed into the word—almost like a post-hypnotic suggestion—that we automatically associate with fears of being ostracized, diminished, marginalized and ridiculed. Remember Saul Alinsky’s famous Rule No. 5 from “Rules for Radicals”: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

Nobody wants to be scorned and mocked, and therefore many of us, consciously or unconsciously, avoid intimidating situations by refraining from standing up for what we really believe.

At its core, then, political correctness is nothing more nor less than the unjust intimidation of others into thinking and speaking a certain way. As such, it is pure totalitarian mind control.

[The preceding was excerpted from a much more comprehensive report—titled “Magic Words: The left’s secret weapon for transforming traditional America” by David Kupelian—in the May issue of Whistleblower magazine.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

Were the Angels in the Bible just Lucid Dreams, when the word of God says Old Men shall dream, dreams and Young Men shall have visions?

By Richard Schiffman (Huntington Post)

The headline "Biblical Angels Were Just 'Lucid Dreams'" intrigued me. The Internet article cited a recent study by the Los Angeles based Out-of-Body Experience Research Center that instructed its participants to try to visualize angels during states of lucid dreaming. In some cases, they succeeded in having experiences which seemed to parallel the encounters of Elijah and other Old Testament prophets with angelic messengers which are recorded in the Bible.

Still, I was put off by the dismissiveness of the phrase "just lucid dreams" in the headline, and also by the suggestion that the visions of mystics and prophets reported in the Bible and elsewhere are merely imaginary events that can be reproduced at will.

In my own experience, lucid dreams, while clearly owing a lot to the imagination, often contain a spiritual element which is not merely "imaginary." In other words, the imagination in this instance is not just a faculty for creating fictions and illusion, but equally a portal into another realm of experience, a realm of heightened awareness and intense spiritual aliveness which challenges our very notions of what is real and what it means to be awake.

The music that we hear during lucid dreams is rapturous and drenched in feeling; the colors are more subtle and vibrant than the ones we see in the "real world"; the aromas and tastes are more real than real, and may linger even after awakening; sex is explosive and ecstatic; and the insights we receive in lucid dreams are profound, if frequently difficult to put into words. A lucid dream, in other words, can be an intoxicating glimpse of what life might be like if we lived, as the Zen masters recommend, fully in the now -- alert, fiercely present and with wide open hearts.

In 1902, the British writer and occultist, Hugh Calloway, wrote of his first lucid dream: "Instantly the vividness of life increased a hundred fold. Never had the sea and the sky and trees shone with such glamorous beauty; even the commonplace houses seem alive and mystically beautiful. Never had I felt so absolutely well, so clear-brained, and so inexpressibly free!"

The intensity of experience in lucid dreams is one reason so many people today are pursuing them. Books have been written and workshops are offered on how to cultivate these visionary experiences. Lucid dreams, which typically occur just after the onset of sleep, or during the process of awakening, are episodes in which we remain aware that we are dreaming and can exercise a certain degree of control over the imagery and action of the dream.

While they are relative newcomers to the world of science, which only started studying lucid dreams in recent decades, references to them can be found as early as the writings of the fifth century Catholic saint, Augustine of Hippo. The12th-century Sufi philosopher and mystic, Ibn El-Arabi, instructed his students to take control of the imagery in their dreams. They also figure in a Tibetan tradition called Dzogchen, in which meditators practice mastery of lucid dreaming as a training for navigating the Bardo, the after death state that Buddhist believe helps to determine ones future incarnation.

The indigenous Senoi people, who live in the mountain jungles of central Malaysia, believe that by confronting and overcoming dangers -- like fire, flood and tigers -- in lucid dreams, and by consciously guiding those dreams to good endings, we can master our fears and have a positive impact on the events in waking life. More recently, Australian psychologist Milan Colic developed a method which employs lucid dreaming to help control nightmares and treat depression.

Working with dreams to gain psychological insight is a cornerstone of psychoanalysis, whose founder Sigmund Freud believed that dreams reveal in the symbolic language of the subconscious aspects of the personality of the dreamer and offer keys to understanding their emotional complexes. He argued in his pioneering work "The Interpretation of Dreams" that most dreams are a form of wish fulfillment in which the psyche attempts to resolve suppressed conflicts often originating in childhood or early adolescence and frequently of a sexual nature.

Freud's protege Carl Jung broke with his mentor in asserting that dreams were not just the byproducts of inner conflicts and psychopathology, but offered guidance for achieving psychic wholeness. Jung wrote that a dream is like "a small hidden door to the most deep hidden and secret corners of the psyche ... In our dreams we take the form of a more universal, true and eternal man..." One of the function of dreams, according to Jung, is to provide an entree to what he called "the collective unconscious," a repository of the wisdom of the human race which is often cloaked behind the more superficial layers of the mind.

Both Jung and Freud were aware of the existence of lucid dreams. Freud wrote in the second edition of "The Interpretation of Dreams," "There are people who are quite clearly aware during the night that they are asleep and dreaming and who thus seem to possess the faculty of consciously directing their dreams." The founder of psychoanalysis was reportedly disturbed by the sexual content of one of his own lucid dreams. Traditional Jungians, on the other hand, sometimes object to the conscious element in guiding lucid dreams. In their view, dreams belongs exclusively to the subconscious mind and should not be meddled with.

Yet I suspect that Jung himself was not as upset as some of his orthodox followers appear to be at the unconventional nature of lucid dreams. The great analyst had experienced lucid visionary states, both in sleep and in waking, and he understood that, while one can indeed remain conscious during visions, they are not merely products of the conscious mind. On the contrary, such experiences, for Jung, involve contact with an awareness which is more than merely personal. He reportedly had premonitions and received messages during these states.

Lucid visionary states have been sought by a wide variety of cultures, not just for the sense of euphoria, freedom and radiant aliveness which they convey, but because they were believed capable of transforming and uplifting the individual to a divine level. Native Americans went on spirit quests in remote places to seek visions which would result in positive new directions in life both for the individual and the tribe. In ancient Greece, sick people journeyed to temples dedicated to Aesculapius, the God of medicine, to engage in incubation, a ritual designed to produce lucid dreams, which they hoped would provide healing, or the answer to a troubling question.

This ancient practice of incubation was the topic of a recent study conducted by Dr. Deirdre Barrett at Harvard Medical School in which the participating students were instructed to focus on a problem of a personal, or academic nature just prior to falling asleep. Of those who remembered their dreams when they woke up, more than half reported that they contained solutions to the problem.

This research dramatically confirms the validity of the oft-repeated recommendation to "sleep on it." It also supports the age-old intuition that dreams are sometimes not just dreams, as we may dismiss them, but keys that unlock a deeper wisdom within ourselves. Lucid dreams, in particular, offer a rare bridge between the state of waking and sleep, which may provide clues to the nature of consciousness itself. Science is just now beginning to demonstrate that they are also invaluable tools for cultivating creativity, self understanding and personal growth.

So perhaps we should amend that reductive and condescending headline explaining away biblical prophecy -- "Biblical Angels Were Just 'Lucid Dreams'" -- to the far richer and more intriguing statement, "The Potential For Lucid Dreaming Makes All of Us Prophets!"

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

When referring to the mess the EU is in now, the article reads the Eve of Destruction, which may be a lot truer than what most ever imagined once the Antichrist takes control?

Eve of destruction
By Andy Carling

Last week, on Europe Day, when the eurocrats and the hangers on mark the glory of our eternal, precious union, Herman Van Rompuy announced that the financial crisis was essentially over and everyone would be back in growth by the end of the year.

I said at the time that history has not been kind to European leaders who say ‘it’ll all be over by Christmas’. It only took a few days for history to slap the Council President in the face, although there is no sign that reality has in any way impacted on our Chief Monk.

Under the leadership of the current EU heads, and I use the word in the same sense that Enron had leadership, the EU is facing destruction, being slowly strangled, not by the euro sceptics, who are in reality no real threat, but by those who say they love Europe the most. I have been saying this for years.

Our leaders have, on left and right, pushed for an unregulated financial market, not realizing that if you let a bunch of psychopathic coke fiends loose with everybody’s money, it will end in tears.

The problems in Greece, Spain and the rest is a consequence of the financial crisis and, more pointedly, a consequence of the EU response, which was to create a vacuum of leadership, allowing Germany and France to dictate a policy of brutal austerity over 500 million people.

This is why the crisis in the EU is far greater than the economic failure. Pushing austerity and savage budget cuts has led the citizens to feel that they are the ones being punished – and it does feel like punishment – for the sins of the bankers and the political establishment.

You can’t build a lasting union if the poor and powerless are the ones who pay for the incompetence and worse, of the rich and powerful.

Instead of facing up to their responsibilities, the EU heads have surrendered to magical thinking, spending the last couple of years telling everybody that it was all under control and we would be living in the land of milk and honey very soon. Only a fool would believe them.

The European Parliament is about to destroy the last element that connects people to the political system. Their discredited parties no longer represent actual real people, no longer inspire people, for if they did people would join them, donate to them, vote for them.

Instead of trying to reconnect with the electorate, they’ve decided to go the other route, pan-european parties. These parties are generously funded by the taxpayers, who weren’t ever asked if they wanted their cash to be spent this way. The pan-european parties will further disconnect the public from the politicians, but they get millions from the taxpayers without having to work for it or justify it.

Indeed, the parliament was so eager to share the loot that they also handed out taxpayers money to some of the most revolting political parties in the continent, including those that spread hatred and racial discrimination, even some that praised Norwegian killer, Anders Breivik.

That they did this, shows the moral vacuum at the heart of the parliament. They didn’t even think it was in any way wrong until the media found out, then they were suddenly outraged by their own actions.

This is the scale of the problem we face in trying to reform every aspect of the EU, to make a union that cares more for the citizen than the smarmy big business lobbyist.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

The continuing mystery of the Shroud of Turin and Alexis Tsipras

There are those who are now coming out of the woodwork and announcing that as they do not think the Shroud of Turin is genuine, my analogies regarding the likeness of Alexis Tsipras to the image on the shroud is neither here nor there.

However, there are always going to those who are going to dispute the authenticity of the Shroud as representing a true image of Christ.

On the other hand, the intent of that article was not to prove, or otherwise disprove, the actuality of the shroud as a true representation of the likeness on the Shroud to how Christ would have looked as he walked here on the earth amongst men.

As that is the case, whether or not the Shroud is authentic is not in dispute here as all that I was pointing out was the likeness of the computer-based image taken from the Shroud to Alexis Tsipras.

If it matters at all, my belief is that I think the Shroud is the actual image of Christ.

It is all right for someone to say the Shroud is a fake, but unless those who make such proclamations are able to prove just how the Shroud came into being then that argument holds no water at all.

The bottom line still being that was not the intention of that article at all, and as of this date there is no one who has yet proven just how the Shroud was made if it is a fake as so many seem to allege.

The Shroud of Turin or Turin Shroud (Italian: Sindone di Torino, Sacra Sindone)

is a linen cloth bearing the image of a man who appears to have suffered physical trauma in a manner consistent with crucifixion. It is kept in the royal chapel of the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, northern Italy.

The image on the shroud is commonly associated with Jesus Christ, his crucifixion and burial. It is much clearer in black-and-white negative than in its natural sepia color. The negative image was first observed in 1898, on the reverse photographic plate of amateur photographer Secondo Pia, who was allowed to photograph it while it was being exhibited in the Turin Cathedral.

The origins of the shroud and its image are the subject of intense debate among scientists, theologians, historians and researchers. Scientific and popular publications have presented diverse arguments for both authenticity and possible methods of forgery. A variety of scientific theories regarding the shroud have since been proposed, based on disciplines ranging from chemistry to biology and medical forensics to optical image analysis. The Catholic Church has neither formally endorsed nor rejected the shroud, but in 1958 Pope Pius XII approved of the image in association with the Roman Catholic devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus Christ.

In 1978 a detailed examination was carried out by a team of American scientists called STURP. They found no reliable evidence of forgery, and called the question of how the image was formed "a mystery". In 1988 a radiocarbon dating test was performed on small samples of the shroud. The laboratories at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, concurred that the samples they tested dated from the Middle Ages, between 1260AD and 1390AD. In 2008, a former STURP member stated that sample was representative of the whole shroud. Since 2005, at least four articles have been published in scholarly sources stating that the samples used for the dating test may not have been representative of the whole Shroud.

According to former Nature editor Philip Ball, "it's fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in 1988, the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever. Not least, the nature of the image and how it was fixed on the cloth remain deeply puzzling". The shroud is one of the most studied artifacts in human history, and one of the most controversial.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

It is no wonder Christians and Christianity has become the laughing stock of the world when they see the various groups fighting and bickering amongst each other - here is one prime example.

Chrislam, Wycliffe and Brother Andrew

This entry posted by MORIELCAROL

As Isaiah wrote:
“Line Upon Line and Precept upon precept, here a little – there a little”
(Isaiah 28:10).

Brother Andrew of OPEN DOORS, the bible smuggler who reinvented himself after the collapse of communism by joining the kick Israel club with his biased book “Light Force”, demands that prophecy about Israel be dropped from preaching because it is an obstacle to the gospel to Moslems.

A more serious obstacle is the deity of Christ and divine sonship of Jesus.

Therefore, following Brother Andrew’s logic, this should go too.

In the trend toward supposedly making Christianity more digestible to Moslems, a UK affiliate of Wycliffe Translators are putting out a scripture translation downplaying the Father – Son relationship, despite 1 John calling denial of those relationship “anti christ”.

In actual fact the areas of the Moslem world where the most Moslems are being saved such as in Africa and Indonesia see a keen interest in Israel and prophecy and compromise nothing.

By stripping away the aspects of God’s Word Moslems dislike you only wind up with a diluted faith not worth leaving Islam for anyway. Wycliffe UK – get a bible. Brother Andrew – get a life.

We urge our readers to no longer support OPEN DOORS which supports Brother Andrew.

We no longer can endorse Wycliffe UK.

Thank God there are better ministries who remain scriptural doing a fine work in these areas such as Barnabas Trust who do deserve our prayers and support.

There we are, how was that little piece as a good example of love and brothership between Christian groups. Of course, I am being quite sarcastic in this instance

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

The computer-generated image lifted off the face on the Shroud of Turin bears an uncanny resemblance to Greek socialist party leader Alexis Tsipras.

Short-lived: Greece's Coalition of the Radical Left party leader Alexis Tsipras (second right) and former Prime Minister George Papandreou (right) are sworn-in at the Greek Parliament today.

Using cutting-edge technology on the famed Shroud of Turin, a team of computer artists has uncovered what they say may be a portrait of the true face of Jesus.

The results achieved through the convergence of science and religion doesn't resemble the popularized images of Jesus.

It's impossible to know how close the computer-generated images come to reality, but they'll likely be of tremendous interest, both to believers and to the curious.

"There's a long tradition in Christian theology and Christian history of seeking the face of Christ -- of wanting to know what he was like as a man.

Finding Jesus' Face
The artists worked to pull impressions from the Shroud of Turin, the famed blood-stained linen that many believe was the burial cloth of the crucified Christ.

A team of computer artists, using cutting-edge technology, has uncovered what they say could be a portrait of the true face of Jesus from the Shroud of Turin.

"If you want to re-create the face of Jesus and you want to get the actual face of Jesus, you have only one object and that's the shroud," said computer artist Ray Downing of Studio Macbeth.

The ancient shroud contains a faint impression of the front and back of a human body, along with blood, dirt and water stains from its age.

Cutting-edge modern skills were required to pull an accurate flesh and blood face from a piece of fabric so old.

The yearlong project culminated with a team of graphic artists using the newest technology to create a computer-generated image.

"I have a lot of information about that face and my estimation is we're pretty darn close to what this man looked like," Downing, the lead artist, said.
Ancient Shroud Provides Clues

One of the main problems -- the condition of the shroud -- provided key clues. The team realized there were distortions in the image on the shroud because the fabric had been wrapped around the body.

"The solution was to realize that the shroud wasn't hanging on the wall – it was wrapping a corpse. That's the crux of the problem -- the face is hidden in there," said Downing, who has also used computers to create images of Abraham Lincoln.

"By imitating those distortions we could take the image and put it back into that shape and figure out what the face looked like … it gave us a blueprint," he added.

One the blueprint was formed, the computer artists started the recreation. Of course, there were limitations to what they could do with what they had.

"Inevitably, you do run out of information," Downing said. "You can't see the pores in a linen fabric. There are no eyebrows. It doesn't take a lot of guesswork to assign pores and skin texture to a model, to know that the man did have eyebrows and to provide them. At some point, you do have to leave the realm of actual information and use experience."

There have been a few cases over the years where some have suggested that the counterpart to Christ, the counterfeit Christ, the Antichrist, would be a dead ringer of the original.

That makes a lot of sense
After all, if the Antichrist comes forth as the saviour of the world he would have to some resemblance to the one that he is impersonating, Christ.

It may have been a little bit of a stretch to suggest Alexis Tsipras bears an uncanny resemblance to Elvis Presley as closer examination reveals that is not the case.

However, (you can try this yourself) type the face lifted off the Shroud of Turin into your search engine and you may find much to your amazement, just as I have, that the computer image lifted off the Shroud is so close to resembling Tsipras that it really is quite surreal.

Note well the similarity of the shape of the ears and the shape of the nose between the attached photograph Tsipras and the computer enhanced image, they are quite similar, if not the almost the same.

That fact alone does not prove Tsipras is the Antichrist, and I am not suggesting he is the Antichrist, but that only my observation is quite out of the ordinary, or maybe interesting is a better word to use in this instance.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

Grant Jeffrey has gone home to be with the Lord.

Well known Bible Prophecy scholar Grant Jeffrey passed away over the weekend and has gone on to be with the Lord:

Grant, unlike me was a dispensationalist, which means that is he held a firm belief in the Rapture of the Church.

However, side issues such as the Rapture are irrelevant and what really counts at the end of the day is the salvation of the individual concerned.

A belief or otherwise in the Rapture of the Church is not, nor has it ever been a prerequisite to salvation. In the instance of Grant, I am sure that he received his salvation.

I are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8 KJV).

Grant had written several books, (Countdown to the Apocalypse, Shadow Government, The Global Warming Deception, and several others). As well, he produced several videos in addition to hosting a half hour T.V. program where he taught bible prophecy.

I have learned a great deal from Grant's teachings and from his study materials. He will be missed, but he is now in a much better place.

Our heartfelt prayers go out to his family that remains behind, and waits that day when they can be reunited with him again.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical and thoroughly evil.

Greece on the Verge of Total Economic Collapse and Civil War - enter one Antichrist...

Greece is on the verge of economic collapse and civil war, according to top leaders inside Greece and the European Union.

Decisions made by Greek leaders and the Greek public in the coming days and weeks could lead to catastrophic results.

What's more, experts are worried the economic and social contagion unleashed by a Greek implosion could spread throughout the European Union, the U.S., and around the world in our interdependent global economy.

Greece is staggering under a crushing amount of public debt.

The politicians and the public is addicted to runaway government spending.

However, the Greek public is resisting the massive budget cuts and other reforms needed to avoid an implosion. It is resisting the reforms the EU leadership is requiring in order for Greece to receive new infusions of EU emergency funding and access to emergency loans.

Greek leaders are considering quitting the Eurozone system in order to avoid the austerity measures the EU leaders -- led by German Chancellor Angela Merkel -- are insisting upon it.

Nevertheless, leaving the Eurozone would likely make things far worse, cutting off or severely limiting Greek access to the capital markets and possibly leading to sky high interest rates, hyperinflation, massive business failures and soaring unemployment.

If Greece leaves the Euro system, it would also severely affect the rest of Europe.

Banks that have large investments in Greece fear they might never be repaid, which would threaten the health of those banks.

Bank officials around the world would jack up interest rates for other struggling European countries -- including Spain, Italy and Portugal, among others -- fearing they, too, might bail on the legal and financial agreements that are part of the E.U. treaty and making them higher risks of defaulting on their loans.

Businesses throughout Europe could then struggle to get access to capital, potentially leading to a horrific cycle of further business failures and skyrocketing unemployment.

Given that Europe is the largest trading partner with the United States, and the fact that many American banks have European exposure, the American economy and financial could also be severely impacted.

Consider the latest developments:
"An outgoing Greek minister warned that the country could descend into 'civil war' amid the chaos of a euro exit," reports the London Telegraph.

"'If Greece cannot meet its obligations and serve its debt the pain will be great,' Michalis Chrysohoidis was quoted as telling a local radio station.

'What will prevail are armed gangs with Kalashnikovs and which one has the greatest number of Kalashnikovs will count … we will end up in civil war.'"

European leaders and financial markets braced for Greece exit from euro: Return to drachma nears amid political impasse in Athens and open discussion in Brussels of possible end of single currency --

Headline in The (UK) Guardian
Greece races against time to form government -- headline in Agence France Presse
"There can be little doubt about the seriousness of the situation both for Greece, if it has to leave the eurozone, and for its partners who might lose billions in its disorderly withdrawal from the bloc," reports Agence France Presse.

"France would face a bill of 50 billion euros if Greece were forced to quit, outgoing French Finance Minister Francois Baroin warned Tuesday.

'If Greece leaves the euro, if its economic model collapses and there's no more banking system, that would cost us 50 billion euros net, plus the assets that the banks and insurers have on their books,' he said.

Charles Dallara, who as head of the Institute of International Finance helped negotiate the private creditor write-down, warned that the cost of failure would be too high to bear.

'I believe that the cost to Greece, the cost to Europe and the cost to the entire global economy may still be enough to cause Greek politicians and European politicians to pause before they pull the trigger on a Greek exit.'"

If this were not all serious enough, the Greek crisis offers a warning to American policymakers who are also addicted to overspending and massive debt.

The U.S. is already $15 trillion-plus in debt, with another $65 trillion in unfunded liabilities coming due.

If we do not make dramatic course corrections quickly, we may find ourselves on the financial equivalent of the Titanic, unable to avoid hitting the debt iceberg straight ahead of us before it is too late.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical and thoroughly evil.

The Holocaust, where 6 million Jews allegedly died at the hands of their German captors during World War II, is an immensely successful hoax!

Jews are pretty good liars most of the time, but they tell so many lies they are bound to trip themselves up sometimes. Their exaggerations, half-truths, and outright inventions about the so- called "Holocaust," easily the most lied-about topic ever, are a good example.

Unfortunately, many patriots fail to counter the Jews' "Holocaust" lies effectively; instead they let themselves be lured into the semantic trap of "Holocaust denial." That is, they tacitly accept the Jews' rules of debate. The first of those rules is that one must either accept or reject the "Holocaust" mythology as a whole: no quibbling over details permitted.

If one does not accept without question or quibble the magical number of "six million" Jews who were led into gas chambers disguised as shower houses and given a faceful of Zyklon-B instead of hot water when they turned on the faucet, for example, one is a "Holocaust denier," who believes that the "Holocaust" is entirely fictitious, and the German government treated Jews just like everyone else during the Second World War. That, of course, is an impossible position to defend.

The "Holocaust" myth, as mentioned above, is a structure built of lies, exaggerations, and half- truths, and the way to discredit it is to subject these individual building blocks -- the details -- to critical scrutiny.

To be specific, the August 10, 1994, issue of The Christian Science Monitor carried an article (page 12) by Jewess Linda Joffee about growing anti-Semitism in Germany and the efforts of the Jews and their collaborators to combat it. Under the heading "Growing Anti-Semitism Concerns German Jews," Ms. Joffee writes:

"About 560,000 Jews lived in Germany when the Nazis came to power in 1933. Almost all died in the Holocaust. There are about 50,000 Jews in Germany today."

The first sentence in Ms. Joffee's statement is true. The second sentence is a bald-faced lie. Fortunately, it can easily be shown as such by anyone with access to a library which carries books with world demographic data for the last 60 years or so.

The truth of the matter is that as soon as a National Socialist government was elected in Germany in 1933, the Germans began working hard to persuade Jews to emigrate. They did this by enacting legislation which progressively excluded Jews from one sector of German life after another. Jews were not permitted to teach in Germany, except in Jewish schools; they were not permitted to publish newspapers, magazines, or books, except those published specifically for Jews; they were banned from the practice of medicine (except the treating of Jewish patients) and law; and they were excluded from many areas of trade and industry, especially from those businesses requiring a government license.

This legislation was not motivated by petty spite or by economic considerations, but by a determination to free Germany from Jewish influence. When the National Socialists came to power in 1933, Jews were vastly over-represented in the media, in teaching, and in the legal and medical professions. For example, 42 per cent of the physicians practicing in Berlin in 1933 were Jews, as were 48 per cent of the attorneys. To the National Socialists this was an intolerable situation, and they set about remedying it in a typically thorough and efficient manner.

The Jews screamed bloody murder about the National Socialist campaign to take Germany away from them and give it back to the German people. As early as 1934 Jews around the world declared an economic boycott of Germany in retaliation. As it became apparent to them, however, that Adolf Hitler was the most popular leader Germany had ever had, that the National Socialists could neither be bought off nor voted out of office, and that there really was no future for Jews in Germany, they began to look for easier pickings elsewhere. The great majority of them eventually emigrated.

By the time the Second World War began in September 1939 there were only about 200,000 Jews left in Germany, and a number of them succeeded in leaving after that.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical and thoroughly evil.

It now seems the Syrians are in fear of a Russian Invasion?

Although Russia has joined the chorus of nations condemning the Syrian regime's brutal crackdown on its people and rebel forces. But behind the scenes, Moscow remains one of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad's closest allies, and the reported arrival of Russian troops in Syria this week may have been orchestrated to drive home that point.

ABC News first broke the report citing an unnamed UN Security Council official who was upset that Russia had made such a move at such a delicate time.

It later turned out that only a single unit of Russian counter-terrorism commandoes was in Syria, but the deployment remains symbolically significant, especially to Arab observers.

"This is the first time in modern history that Russia directly intervenes on the ground in the Middle East, stated Abdul Rahman, manager of the Al-Arabiya news channel. With its forces, Russia truly threatens security and stability in the region.

 This could be the start of a Russian invasion."
Tariq Homayed, editor of the London-based Arabic daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat, added, "Something is happening in Syria, but no one knows how serious it is."

Meanwhile, there have been scattered reports that the Syrian rebels, and in particular the Free Syrian Army (FSA), are turning to Israel for assistance.

In a secretive interview with the Hebrew newspaper Israel Hayom earlier this month, a key figure in the FSA appealed to Israel to convince the rest of the West to help topple Assad.

"I believe Assad is still in power because Western powers are not convinced that Israel really wants to see a Syria without Assad. You are afraid of what will be the day after Assad falls," the man who identified himself as "Kamal" stated.

Kamal added that while most Syrians are not yet ready to normalize ties with Israel, helping to topple Assad is a gesture that "the Syrian people would not forget."

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical and thoroughly evil.

As opposed to Dispensationalism -"What is Reformed Theology?"

The history of the Reformed Church in America can be traced back to the early 1500s when groups of Christians separated themselves from the Roman Catholic church on the ground that biblical authority supercedes ecclesiastical (church and tradition) authority. When Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the door of the Church in Wittenburg Germany in 1517, the beginning of one the most dramatic shifts in the history of Christianity began. The Reformation spread across northern and central Europe and then across the ocean into the New World. Protestant churches such as Lutheran, Reformed, Presbyterian, and Congregationalist emerged as each sought a more biblical approach to worship and community. The Pilgrims were Reformed Christians who came to the New World looking for freedom to practice a more biblical Christian faith. The first Reformed Dutch Church was established to serve the people of a small community located at the mouth of the Hudson River in 1620 called the New Netherlands. The Reformed Church in America (then called the Reformed Dutch Church) was formed as a denomination in the early 1700s to bring unity to scattered churches founded among fledgling settlements in the 1620s. The RCA is one of the oldest denominations in North America.

Why is the Reformed Church in America called "reformed"?
The churches were seeking to reform themselves back to Biblical teaching, and away from influences that corrupted the Gospel. To be ever-reforming means to be ever-adjusting, always refining the church back toward God's purposes. Reforming according to worldy influences, false teachings, and the whims of individuals are not the criteria for reformation, rather, are we being true to the Word of God? A reformed church is a church that ought to be faithful to the truth as revealed in Scripture.

Reformed theology is a systematic study of God’s special revelation given to us in the Bible. Because the Bible is God’s inspired Word, it is meant to be interpreted without the influence of man-made rules or traditions, and is therefore our only reliable source of truth and authority in all matters of faith and life. Reformed theology is centered on God, and therefore is dependent on God’s Word alone. This principle is called “sola Scriptura” or “Scripture alone”, and is one of the five “solas” of Reformation theology.

The main theme of God’s relationship with mankind is that of redemption. As people born in sin, we suffer from the effects of the curse God sanctioned upon all humanity and creation as a consequence of the disobedience (sin) of Adam and Eve. This sin nature became part of natural humanity, and has so deeply affected our minds, hearts, and wills that we refuse even to acknowledge this without the help of God! God deals with our sin by providing a way of escape in the person and work of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus’ life was unusual in every way you can possibly imagine. His life brought such a change to the course of history that we even divide time according to His time on earth (BC and AD). But more than any other aspect of His life, His life of perfect obedience to the will of God and holy righteousness set Him apart as a very unique human being. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of virgin woman named Mary. He was fully divine and fully human. The divine and human natures were not separate, nor blended, but are as much a mystery of the Being of Jesus Christ, as in the Trinitarian nature of God Himself. And so, Jesus was the first Man since Adam that was born with no sin nature!

We, however, live lives of disobedience and unrighteousness continually. We can do no else. It’s who we are. It’s all we know. This sin nature is as real and significant as if we had been in the Garden of Eden and committed the first act of disobedience ourselves. We cannot save ourselves. We cannot overcome the sin that indwells our nature no matter how hard we try, no matter how “good” we think we are, or how many good things we try to do.

How then do we find justification? How can we be acquitted of this crime against our Creator? Just as Adam and Eve’s sin cursed us, Jesus’ righteousness justifies us, but this is accomplished only through faith. Jesus was condemned to die a criminal’s death by the cruelest, most agonizing death that Rome could execute, crucifixion. He received the divine punishment that we deserved.

In theology, this is called double imputation: our sin is imputed to Jesus, and His righteousness is imputed to us.

Our ability to “do well” is not biblically correct! All of our attempts to be good people cannot save us from eternal damnation. Without faith, the bible says, all our righteousness is as filthy rags. We must be able to admit that we are helplessly stuck in sin, then recognize our need for God’s help to save us, and finally come to Jesus Christ for salvation. This is the Gospel, the Good News.

Prior to the Reformation, the preaching of the Gospel had undergone serious corruption. Rather than believing that humanity is utterly helpless without the complete and continual saving work of the triune God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), people were taught that they could earn their way to heaven by doing good deeds or even by purchasing indulgences which freed souls from purgatory in exchange for monetary gifts to the Church. In order to clearly define the biblical message of the Gospel, the Reformers outlined five principles known as the five “solas” of the Reformation. The first of these was already mentioned as “sola scriptura” or Scripture alone. After establishing Scripture as the sole authority, the Gospel was clearly understood from Scripture to be accomplished solely through grace (sola gratia), by faith alone (sola fide), and in Christ alone (soli Christo) for the glory of God alone (soli deo Gloria). To this day, disagreement over the Gospel as pertaining to the five Solas remains the point of division between the Protestant and Roman Catholic Church, even if many people are theologically ignorant of this fact. As long as sinful man refuses to acknowledge God’s Word as holy, inerrant, and completely authoritative, corruption of the Gospel will continue to occur, even in Protestant churches, where post-modern influences and liberal theology have supplanted Biblical integrity.

Reformed theology is sometimes called covenant theology because of the covenantal structure found throughout the biblical record. This structure was commonly used in treaties between kings and their subjects in ancient near east nations, and is similar to the covenants made between God and His people, Israel. Recognition and understanding of this covenantal structure leads to a better interpretation of Scripture than other frameworks such as Dispensationalism, which instead divides the biblical record into seven testing periods. The three main covenants in reformed theology are the covenant of redemption, the covenant of works, and the covenant of grace.

The Covenant of Redemption was agreed upon in eternity by God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. This covenant assured that mankind would be redeemed by the cooperative work of the triune God. Before creation and before the fall of man, God had already designed the plan that demonstrates the harmony and the unity of purpose between the triune God and His creation.

The Covenant of Works was made between God and Adam. Adam and Eve were created in the image of God, and as such were meant to reflect God’s holy character. The covenant, therefore stipulated that mankind was required to obey God. The sanction attached to this contract was death. When God told Adam not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, He was clear: “when you eat of it, you will surely die.” Adam and Eve had the ability to obey God, but made the decision not to. Human beings born after the fall of Adam and Eve are utterly incapable of obedience. Humanity was thus no longer able to fulfill the covenant of works.

The Covenant of Grace is made between God and sinners. Because Adam and Eve disobeyed God, mankind has suffered the consequences of disobedience ever since. Although God mercifully allowed Adam and Eve to remain physically alive, they experienced spiritual death. No human being since then (except One) has ever been born with the ability to respond positively to God. The Bible tells us we are dead in our trespasses and sin (Ephesians 2:1-3). God, however, sent Jesus as the second Adam who was able to respond to the will of the Father. This second Adam fulfilled the agreements of the first and second covenants. This second Adam was God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ: fully God and fully man.

C.S. Lewis described the need for this God-Man (the second Adam) in his book, Mere Christianity, in this way:

“Only a bad person needs to repent: only a good person can repent perfectly. The worse you are the more you need it and the less you can do it. The only person who could do it perfectly would be a perfect person ---and he would not need it.”

“But supposing God became a man — suppose our human nature which can suffer and die was amalgamated with God’s nature in one person — then that person could help us. He could surrender His will, and suffer and die, because He was man; and He could do it perfectly because He was God.”

The doctrines of grace are also commonly known as the five points of Calvinism. We are careful to emphasize that John Calvin did not invent these doctrines although they were outlined by Calvin in his work, The Institutes of the Christian Religion. The doctrines of grace have stood the test of time ever since the apostle Paul first explained them in his epistles and on through the course of church history from Augustine to Luther to Calvin to the present day. Modern-day evangelical churches have departed from these doctrines for the most part and tended instead to embrace Arminian theology and dispensationalism.

The five points of Calvinism are easily remembered with the well-known acrostic TULIP:

T - stands for “Total depravity” (humanity’s radical corruption),

U - stands for “Unconditional election” (God’s sovereign choice),

L - stands for “Limited atonement” (Christ’s purposeful atonement),

I - stands for “Irresistible grace” (the Spirit’s effective call), and

P - stands for the “Perseverance of the saints” (God’s preservation of the saints).

These five points address the problem of sin, its impact on the relationship of human beings to God, and how God has ensured that humanity would not be utterly lost. These five points are essential to an understanding of the Gospel because they teach us about the sovereignty and power of a holy God and the helplessness and complete dependence of human beings upon God for life.

[This information was obtained and summarized from the book “Grace Unknown: The Heart of Reformed Theology” by R.C. Sproul.]

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical and thoroughly evil.