Saturday, September 19, 2015

Britain plans registry of religious leaders, will require government-specific training, security checks

Imams, priests, rabbis and other religious figures in Britain will have to enrol in a “national register of faith leaders” and be subject to government-specified training and security checks in the Home Office’s latest action on extremism.

The highly controversial proposal appears in a leaked draft of the Government’s new counter-extremism strategy, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, which goes substantially further than previous versions of the document.

The strategy, due to be published this fall, says that Whitehall will “require all faiths to maintain a national register of faith leaders” and the Government will “set out the minimum level of training and checks” faith leaders must have to join the new register.

Registration will be compulsory for all faith leaders who wish to work with the public sector, including universities, the document says. In practice, most faith leaders have some dealings with the public sector and the requirement will cover the great majority.

The move marks a significant deepening of the state’s involvement in religion and is likely to be resisted by many religious representatives.

Maulana Shah Raza, an imam who is a founding member of the Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board (Minab), a self-regulatory body designed to promote best practice, warned the Government “not to meddle in religious affairs or to expand the state’s involvement in deciding on religious and theological issues.”

He said: “The Government needs to concentrate on ensuring that safeguards are in place to protect the public and treating all faith communities equally.”

Minab was launched with ministerial support under the last Labour government, but relations with Whitehall have cooled after the group refused to sever ties with extremist mosques and imams.

The new crackdown has emerged the week after the U.K. government announced that it had killed two British ISIL fighters in a drone strike.
 
It is believed Reyaad Khan, 21, from Cardiff, the main target of the drone attack, was radicalized at the Welsh city’s al-Manar mosque, which has hosted a series of extremist preachers, including Muhammad Mustafa al-Muqri, an al-Qaeda ally and former leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

Until 2013 the mosque’s in-house preacher, Ali Hammuda, who believes that music is a “sickness,” was allowed into Cathays High School, one of the schools attended by Khan, to run lunchtime sessions with students, teaching among other things that music and “free-mixing” between men and women were “not permitted in Islam”.

Another extremist preacher closely linked with a terrorist, Usman Ali, who taught one of the men who killed soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, was appointed chaplain at the area’s local hospital and was also on the management committee of a community centre. He was only sacked from his NHS role after an undercover reporter filmed him inviting a guest speaker who praised the Taliban.

For far too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens that as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. This government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.

A spokesman for the Catholic Church said it had not been consulted on the proposals. Other senior Catholic sources said any plan for state supervision of priests would be “firmly resisted.”

David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has said that the fight against Islamist extremism is the “struggle of our generation” and has to be won for the same reasons that Nazism was defeated. The leaked strategy is also sharply critical of the police and local councils for their failure to tackle scandals exposed by this and other newspapers, including the Trojan Horse plot to take over state schools in Birmingham, extremism and corruption in Tower Hamlets, and the child grooming scandal in Rotherham.

The strategy, which was supposed to be published in spring this year, has been delayed for months amid deep concern in some parts of government and most of the counter-extremism community about its most radical measure, to ban individuals whose behaviour “falls below the thresholds in counter-terrorism legislation” but which “undermines British values.”

Cameron has said: “For far too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens that as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. This government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.”

In May, Haras Rafiq, director of the counter-extremism think tank Quilliam, described this proposal as “Orwellian and totalitarian,” saying it would “play into the hands” of extremists. He added: “It is very noticeable that the main Islamist groups are not really up in arms about this. They want it, because it will feed the narrative of grievance and victimhood they love. They will be able to use it to say, ‘look, we told you so.'”

The document defines extremism as “the vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs,” or as calling for the death of members of the British Armed Forces.

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.

Friday, September 18, 2015

Is the current Pope a Communist?


Is Pope Francis preparing to set up the new socialist system that will require everyone, who wishes to buy and sell, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead?

“And he causes all people, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the slave, that they give them a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and that no one was able to buy or to sell except the one who had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of his name.” (Revelation 13:16–17)

It sure appears like Mr. Jorge Mario Bergoglio (aka Pope Francis) is a Marxist. The Pope said this about the European refugee problem:

“These poor people are fleeing war, hunger, but that is the tip of the iceberg. Because underneath that is the cause; and the cause is a bad and unjust socioeconomic system, in everything, in the world – speaking of the environmental problem –, in the socioeconomic society, in politics, the person always has to be in the centre. That is the dominant economic system nowadays, it has removed the person from the centre, placing the god money in its place, the idol of fashion. There are statistics, I don’t remember precisely, (I might have this wrong), but that 17% of the world’s population has 80% of the wealth.”  (Vatican Insider)

“The person has to be at the centre?”   …oh really? John the Baptist said,

“A man can receive not one thing unless it is granted to him from heaven!  …  The one who comes from above is over all. The one who is from the earth is from the earth and speaks from the earth; the one who comes from heaven is over all.” (John 3:31)

The pope argued the refugee problem is due to an unjust economic system and not supernatural evil (Ephesians 6:12)? Nominal Catholics with a Western education in economics know better. Robert Spencer – a vocal critic of Islam – takes Pope Francis’ socialist arguments and turns them on their ear with facts. Spencer demonstrates that the pope even contradicts his own previous statements about refugees… While Jesus was not a capitalist he was no Marxist: Jesus said,

“Therefore give to Caesar the things of Caesar, and to God the things of God!”(Matthew 22:21)

It is beyond question that in the context of the passage “the things of Caesar” meant more MONEY for the wealthiest man imaginable (and less for the poor) at that time Jesus spoke. Why does the alleged Vicar of Christ, contradict the words of the historical Jesus Christ?  In a different but relevant context, Jesus reminded the disciples that perfuming his body was more important than feeding the hungry:

“For this could have been sold for a large sum and given to the poor!” But Jesus, knowing this, said to them, “Why do you cause trouble for the woman? For she has done a good deed for me. For the poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me.” (Matthew 26:9–11)

Islam critic, Robert Spencer does a fine job of shredding the false prophet’s socialist apologetic: POPE KARL I The Pontiff blames the refugee crisis on…capitalism. 

It’s been assumed for centuries that a prerequisite for the coming of False Prophet and his Antichrist master would be the sudden or contrived emergence of a new world order—an umbrella under which national boundaries dissolve and ethnic groups, ideologies, religions, and economics from around the world orchestrate a single and dominant sovereignty. At the head of the utopian administration, the Antichrist will surface. At first, he will appear to be a man of distinguished character, but will ultimately become “a king of fierce countenance” (Daniel 8:23) who makes the combined depravities of Antiochus Epiphanes, Hitler, Stalin, and Genghis Khan, all of whom were types of the Antichrist, look like child’s play. With imperious decree, he will facilitate a One-World Government, universal religion, and global socialism.

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.

Alexis Tsipras: As a Greek, I’m proud to lead Europe’s Left

Alexis Tsipras tells EurActiv Greece in an exclusive interview that his candidacy for the European Commission presidency on behalf of the European Left shows the solidarity of Europe's southern people, who are suffering from the "catastrophic" social consequences of austerity policy.

Syriza, or Coalition of the Radical Left, is the second largest party in Greece and the main opposition force. At the June 2012 elections, the centre-right New Democracy (ND) led by Prime Minister Antonis Samaras won 29.66% of the votes, followed by Syriza with 26.89%. PASOK came third with only 12.28%. Alexis Tsipras, a civil engineer, is the head of the Syriza parliamentary group since 2009 and leader of the opposition since June 2012.

What is the political meaning of your candidacy for president of the European Commission on behalf of the Party of the European Left?

It is a very important candidacy because it puts forward my identity as a Greek and a European politician of the Left with a concrete and realistic political plan, an alternative to today’s Europe that has succumbed to the neoliberal hegemony; a hegemony which endeavours to reorganise Europe to the benefit of its banks and to the detriment of its peoples; to the benefit of its capital and to the detriment of its workers.

Thus, the candidacy of the European Left aims at being the answer to the policy of permanent austerity; a policy which sets off economic insecurity in tandem with the risk of unemployment, social exclusion, and poverty.

In particular, the candidacy of the leader of the main opposition in Greece symbolizes recognition of the unjust sacrifices made by the Greek people. It also symbolizes solidarity of all the peoples in Europe’s South. The people that are suffering the catastrophic social consequences of the Memoranda of austerity and recession.

The message that the European Left aspires to send with my candidacy is that the strategy of austerity can be defeated; that the alternative political plan of the Left to refound Europe and give prominence to real democracy, in contrast to the current neoliberal architecture of the European Union, could pave the way for the unity of peoples and workers and thereby block the emergence of nationalism, chauvinism and the extreme right.  At the same time that the extreme right and nazism are marching in Europe, there are political forces which pretend not to have knowledge of European history – and, in particular, of German history under Chancellor Heinrich BrĂ¼ning. They insist on the failed policies of austerity and poverty, which fuel populism and nazism. But their dangerous and myopic expediency spells the hour of the Left. When the wheel of history turns back, this is our own moment to move Europe forward.

Why did you accept to be a candidate at a time when you have increased responsibilities and commitments in Greece and the possibility of parliamentary elections in your country appears almost on a monthly basis?

Because, in essence, the two positions of the leader of opposition in Greece and candidate of the European Left for President of the European Commission are not only complementary but, also, mutually reinforcing. Problems are best tackled only at their actual level.  A Eurozone member-state’s overindebtedness and exclusion from the markets might appear on the surface to be a national issue. However, it is also a European issue. It is connected with the Eurozone’s structure and operation, because the single currency transforms the national into European. 

In that respect, the content of the solutions which might or might not be given at the European level determines the macroeconomic course and the standard of living in each member-state. So far, the management of the Eurozone debt crisis has escalated, recycled and prolonged the initial problem, keeping alive the risk that the crisis will be revived. The current policy is the policy of the crisis – it is not the policy of the solution of the crisis.

Furthermore – and this is particularly important – because the choice of my person for this candidacy is  both an honor to me and an honor to the Greek people. It is an act of political solidarity to the Greek people by the European Left.

It is, also, an act of moral, political and ideological vindication for our party – SYRIZA.

Moral, since it recognizes SYRIZA’s important contribution to developments in the European left.

Political, since it raises a point that SYRIZA has been supporting from the outset of the crisis: that the crisis  is not the result of free-riding behavior by the “lazy Greeks”, nor is it a Greek “special case”. It is a crisis which is European in nature. And, for that reason, we need to build a common front against the political forces of “Merkelism” – particularly at this point that Europe is at a crossroads.

Ideological, since, in its founding declaration, SYRIZA has set Europe as the terrain of political and class struggle.

On numerous occasions you have talked about the need to forge an alliance or even a front for Southern Europe to claim for your countries advantageous fiscal solutions from Northern Europe. How would you, then, convince the citizens of those member states in north that you can defend their interests as well, that you could equally be their own representative?

I have repeatedly and systematically supported the position that we have to urgently overcome the North-South divide that the neoliberal management of the crisis has consolidated. It rendered “creditors” the member-states of the North with a 3A credit rating, and weakened even further the countries of the South, which suffer from the austerity policies that are inscribed in the so-called “Memoranda”, by rendering them “debtors”.

Both the Party of the European Left and SYRIZA, are fighting for an anti-austerity and anti-recession European movement; a solidarity movement among the working people of the North and the South, which would inspire and impose a European political pact for democracy, development and social justice.

Our proposal for the widest possible European alliance against austerity interlaces with the quintessence of the process of European integration, as epitomized by Jean Monnet – the architect of Europe’s union: “We are not forming coalition of states – we are uniting men”.

We juxtapose the solidarity of the young, the working people, the pensioners and the unemployed to the solidarity of the capital that the current neoliberal management of the crisis materializes.  It is only this solidarity, which could break through the dichotomy North-South, “le mur de l’ argent” to use a historical phrase that has become relevant once again.  A phrase that Édouard Herriot, the leader of the “Cartel des gauches” and Prime Minister of France in the beginning of the 1920s coined to decry the hostility both of the Bank of France, which was in the hands of “200 families” at the time, and the financial capital to his government’s economic and social reforms.

We want to demolish this new “mur de l’ argent”. This is the meaning of the choice of my candidacy by the Party of the European left: to reunite Europe and refound it on a democratic and progressive basis.

However, at the time that you declare your solidarity to the wage demands and social struggles of the working people in the north, you propose a 'European Debt Conference'. The apparent goal of such a proposal is to have a “haircut” on the face value of your country’s – and perhaps of other overindebted countries’ – public debt. But this would be asking taxpayers in the eurozone north to put their hands into their pockets for your own sake. 

Nobody is asking the German or Dutch taxpayers to pay our own bill. The proposal that you mentioned does not imply loss of money. It, instead, implies cutting down on profits from the eurozone crisis. I could remind you of a recent publication by the Bertelsmann Foundation – a credible and not at all left-wing institution – which ascertains that: “Even if Germany and the other creditor countries have to write off a significant part of the loans which they have given to the highly indebted countries in southern Europe in the context of the various euro rescue measures, the advantages of the Monetary Union, at least as far as Germany is concerned, outweigh the disadvantages”. It further estimates Germany’s loss of income, without the euro, in the so-called “deutschmark scenario,” from this year to 2025 to almost €1.2 trillion or more than €14,000 per inhabitant.

Furthermore, last August, the magazine Der Spiegel made reference to data made available by the German Ministry of Finance to an SPD member of Parliament according to which “the crisis has only cost Germany a mere €599 million thus far”. Meanwhile, over the period 2010-2014, savings in interest payments from “a steep drop in yields due to strong demand from investors seeking a safe haven” will be €40.9 billion.

I would, therefore, tell you that, with our own proposal, taxpayers in Europe will not lose money. Quite to the contrary: they risk to lose – and rather a lot – if their governments defer inevitable solutions by hushing up the truth in view of a perceived gain in political time.  They will be asked to put their hands into their pockets as long as the austerity programmes fail, rendering necessary new loans, in a continuous vicious circle of austerity and recession.

Homeopathy does not work in the economy. You cannot tackle overindebtedness with more loans. That could blow us all up. We will be telling that truth all along the pre-electoral period.

Could you give us some of the basic political points of your candidacy? What electoral goal have you set?

We are optimistic that we will be the positive surprise of the May 25th 2014 election for the European Parliament. We want to imprint the Left on the conscience and preferences of the European citizens for what it actually is: the only alternative political force to neoliberalism. We are the main political force of change in Europe. We are the hope against the danger of entrapping people in the long-term recessionary austerity.

We support the immediate repeal of all Memoranda, the end of austerity and the coordinated reflation of all European economies.

We support the collective, credible and definite resolution of the Eurozone debt crisis, predicated on the 1953 London Conference for Germany’s debt.

We are working for a European economic and growth policy which would dwindle fascism and Nazism instead of dwindling democracy.

We want to be the necessary political countervailing power to a process of transforming Europe into the “dark Continent” as a result of the rise of the extreme right and fascism in the ruins of austerity, recession and poverty.

At the same time, we aim at being the political force which would alert the peoples of Europe against the danger of being entrapped in the introvert policies of national entrenchment.

We are cooperating with all the democratic and sensitive people regardless their ideology and political-party affiliation as well as with all the democratic political forces to repress xenophobia and nationalism and embolden democracy and peace.

Immigration policy is a case in point. The notorious 2003 Dublin II Regulation establishes a two-speed policy that could be encapsulated in the well-known British acronym “nimby” (“not in my own backyard”) for those EU member-states that are not points of entry of immigrants.

It confines immigrants to the EU-border member-states.

We reject the so-called “Fortress Europe” which only operates as a seeding ground for xenophobia, racism and fascism.

We are working for a Europe that will become an impregnable fortress to fascism. We are working for the necessary double European solidarity: external, with the viable support and developmental assistance to the countries of emigration and, internal, with the just allocation of immigrants across the EU.

We want to stress and make clear -- beyond the borders of Greece-- that the Left has the political vision and courage to build a wider social consensus on the programmatic goal to refound Europe on a democratic, social and ecological basis.

SYRIZA has proved in Greece that the Left can be a political force which can govern and not only a protest movement.; a political force that has the knowledge, the will and the capability to change α citizen’s everyday life. We don’t want to assume the role of outraged onlookers – we want, instead, to be decisive protagonists.

If, at the end of the day, you don’t overcome the double electoral hurdle that the Christian democratic and social democratic candidates pose, would you vote, in a possible second round, for the social democrat – your friend, Mr Schultz – using as a criterion your political proximity?

As I have told you before, the candidacy of the Left is the alternative to the multicolor neoliberal block. That block is multicolor because it includes the liberals – apart from the Christian democratic and conservative parties that are housed in the European People’s Party.

It also includes the -- strategically perplexed-- European socialdemocracy which, particularly in the aftermath of the Cold War, has played a leading part in breaking off the postwar social contract that it had undersigned. It has been fully integrated into the neoliberal hegemony; all the more, since it actually cooperates in the imposition of the policy of “internal devaluation” in Greece and the entire Eurozone South, through the successive Memoranda. 

The Social Democrats are perplexed in the wake of the catastrophic failure of that policy. They now face the clear strategic dilemma: will they continue their integration into the neoliberal strategy – a choice which, in the case of Greece resulted in completely breaking off their  bonds with the social forces  that they had traditionally represented – or will they -- at last-- decide to change strategy? Will they  seek the popular vote to govern in alliance with the right on the basis of  a neoliberal program  or will they  change political direction and work for an alliance with the radical Left?

I believe that  this is an interesting political question for all of us.

But to answer your question directly: If, at the end of the day, another candidacy prevails, I am not the proper person to decide for the position of the Party of the European Left. It is, instead, the MEPs of our Group in the European Parliament – of the GUE/NGL, who will vote. In any case, my conjecture is that a defining element of their choice would be the programmatic commitments and guarantees of a candidate – and not his/her political title.  

Today and tomorrow (25th and 26th of November) the Conference of Presidents of the political groups in the European Parliament will be held in Athens in view of the incoming Greek Presidency of the European Union. What is your opinion on the level of preparation of Greece?

On July 18, SYRIZA requested and was granted an official briefing on this  matter by the Foreign Ministry. They briefed us  “on time”. And they disappointed us “on time”.

In any case, it would have been absurd for someone to believe that a government which cannot take or influence decisions in its own country could do that for the entire Europe.

The Directorate of the lenders of the North will be deciding and the Samaras-Venizelos government will be presiding by carrying their decisions out.

This explains why, almost a month prior to the Greek presidency semester, the presiding country has failed to specify both its specific political benchmark and the concrete legislative initiatives that describe it.

The Samaras government downgrades an institutional achievement of the relatively smaller EU member-states, namely, the rotating EU Presidency, to a Presidency of “old-fashioned party-politics parochialism”, focused on photo opportunities and diplomatic amenities for domestic pre-electoral consumption.

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.

Is Pope Francis the False Prophet of Revelation?

November 30, 2014 by TruthLamp Editorial Staff
 
 
Pope Francis (born Jorge Mario Bergoglio) has been the leader of the Catholic Church for nearly two years and during that brief time, many of his actions and statements have turned heads, including those of evangelical leaders, conservative Catholics, and end-times scholars.

In the book of Revelation, the Apostle John wrote that during the last days, a False Prophet would emerge, paving the way for the Antichrist’s reign and assist him in the deception of humanity. This person would then serve as the Antichrist’s right-hand-man to form an ‘Unholy Trinity,’ comprising of himself, the Antichrist, and Satan.

Due to the recent actions and statements by Pope Francis, some, including other Catholics, are now beginning to speculate that he is indeed the False Prophet as foretold in the book of Revelation.

There is no doubt that Pope Francis has assumed a much more liberal stance on social and Biblical issues than that of his predecessors. Some eyebrow-raising statements during his brief tenure include:

Good Works By Atheists Will Grant Them Salvation. This is in direct contrast with Ephesians 2:8-9, which clearly states that we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone.

The Theories of the Big Bang and Evolution are True. With this position, Pope Francis negates the authority of Scripture, as well as the omnipotence of God. In the same dialogue where he embraced evolution, Francis went on to say, “Reading Genesis, we imagine that God is ‘a wizard with a magic wand’ capable of doing all things… But it is not so.”

Who Am I To Judge? These famous words by Pope Francis were part of an unscripted response to a question about priests and their sexual orientation. Francis then made news when he demoted Cardinal Raymond Burke, a high ranking and outspoken conservative leader who criticized Pope Francis’ stance on gay marriage, divorce and his progressive agenda. After his ousting, Burke was quoted as saying, “The pope is not free to change the church’s teachings with regard to the immorality of homosexual acts or the insolubility of marriage or any other doctrine of the faith.”

Proselytism is solemn nonsense. It makes no sense. Once again, the pope’s remarks are in direct contrast to Biblical teaching and The Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Additionally, with these comments, Francis diminishes the importance of missionaries and missions work.

Seeking Jesus Outside the Church is ‘Dangerous and Harmful’. This past June in front of a crowd of 35,000 at St. Peter’s Square, the Pope was quoted as saying: “Some think they can have a personal, direct, immediate relationship with Jesus Christ outside of the communion and the mediation of the Church. Such temptations are dangerous and harmful.” This shocking statement, first reported by AsiaNews, is in direct conflict with what Jesus says in John 14:6 — I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Here is a video of that statement:

While such statements and actions in-and-of-themselves would not necessarily qualify someone to be the False Prophet of Revelation, world events and other influencing factors also need to be taken into consideration.

The Bible states that the last days will be marked by, among other things, mass deception and a large-scale ecumenical movement (consolidation of all the world’s religions). Most would agree that such a broad consolidation of faiths would only be possible by a leading religious figure, not a political one.

Pope Francis’ desire for ecumenism has been well documented, with experts predicting that he will be a ‘boon’ to the movement.

Indeed, just this past week, Pope Francis again raised eyebrows when he prayed alongside an influential Islamic cleric at a Turkish mosque.

There is little doubt by most Biblical scholars that the world is on the cusp of fulfilling many of the end-times prophecies as foretold throughout the Bible. If true, then all current political and religious leaders would need to be considered potential candidates to fill key roles during this time.

So is Pope Francis the False Prophet? While many indicators point in that direction, only time will tell…

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.

Is This Man the Antichrist?

February 14, 2015 by TruthLamp Editorial Staff

 
Faith-based blogs and message boards have been abuzz within the last several months over the recent and rapid ascent of Alexis Tsipras onto the world stage. Tsipras is the newly-elected Prime Minister of Greece who appeared virtually out of nowhere, and many are speculating that this handsome and charismatic 40-year-old leader meets all the criteria of the Bible’s prophesied Antichrist.

It’s important to note that speculation about the Antichrist’s identity has persisted throughout the ages, and there have been no shortage of failed attempts to identify him. And as some have rightly pointed out, believers should have their eyes fixed on Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, not the destroyer of it.

With that said, for many end-times scholars closely following world events, Tsipras’s rock star status, coupled with his stated ambitions as the new leader of troubled Greece, make him (at the very least) an archetype of the Antichrist to come.

Alexis Tsipras was elected as the 186th Prime Minister of Greece on January 25, 2015. He is a former communist and leader of the SYRIZA party (Coalition of the Radical Left). He is a self-professed atheist and unmarried, although he currently lives with his long-time girlfriend. They have two sons together, one with the middle name of Ernesto, which is a tribute to radical leftist Che Guevara.

Upon assuming power, Tsipras took a civil oath rather than a religious one, making him the first leader of Greece to refuse a Biblical oath of office. He has been hailed for his telegenic good looks and “unrivaled communication skills.”

Tsipras takes the helm of Greece at a fractured time for that country. As the 10th member to join the European Union in 1981, the nation has suffered massive economic chaos, requiring multiple bailouts from other nations. The economic woes have forced Greek leaders to implement harsh austerity measures, angering citizens, even causing riots and unrest. Tsipras has promised to rescue the country and its citizens from that ongoing turmoil.

On September 17, 2014, Tsipras met with Pope Francis at the Vatican. Immediately following their meeting, his office issued the following statements in a press release:

“In our meeting with Pope Francis today, we had the opportunity to discuss the economic crisis, as well as the crisis in human values…we asked [Pope Francis] to take an international initiative for the termination of conflicts in the Middle East…we agreed that the dialogue between the Left and the Christian Church must go on. We may have different ideological starting points; however, we converge on common values, like solidarity, love for the fellow Human being, social justice, and our concern regarding world peace.”

What makes this meeting and those remarks so interesting is the fact that Pope Francis has been widely speculated to be the False Prophet, as foretold by the Book of Revelation. A meeting between these two leaders and the subsequent disclosure of topics discussed have certainly raised some eyebrows.

Lastly, based on the Book of Daniel and its numerous prophecies regarding end time events, it has been a widely-held assumption that the Antichrist would eventually emerge out of Greece.

So is Alexis Tsipras the Antichrist? It’s impossible to say for sure and there’s also the strong potential for his name to join the ranks of other failed Antichrist predictions over the years (joining Napoleon, Hitler, Ronald Reagan and countless others).

However, as world events continue to unfold in spectacular fashion, particularly in the Middle East, Tsipras is a leader definitely worth keeping an eye on in the coming months and years ahead.

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.

Saturday, September 12, 2015

Israel’s Refugee Paranoia

 Netanyahu: We’ll not allow Israel ‘to be submerged by a wave of illegal migrants, terrorist activists’

Syrian refugees need not look to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for help as he seems to be the only world leader with an actual perspective on what’s happening.

At a weekly cabinet meeting Sunday, Netanyahu said he wouldn’t allow Israel “to be submerged by a wave of illegal migrants and terrorist activists.”

The Israeli prime minister said he felt for the true migrants fleeing violence and death but his country simply cannot and won’t allow the migrants within its borders, Yahoo News reported.

“Israel is not indifferent to the human tragedy of Syrian and African refugees… but Israel is a small country — very small — without demographic or geographic depth. That is why we must control our borders,” he said.

The man Netanyahu defeated in this year’s election to retain his position as Prime Minister, Isaac Herzog, joined Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas in demanding Israel take in the Muslim refugees.

Perhaps they forgot that Israel has been the subject of attacks from violent Muslim extremists since its inception but Netanyahu has not, and he’s slamming the door.

He took it a step further and talked about a fence Israel will build along its border with Jordan to keep more illegal immigrants out. End of Quote

It looks to me, and the rest of the world, that God has had the final laugh when it comes to the location that he had chosen to return the Jews back to their promised land. Right next door, and surrounded by their sworn enemies on every side. The result of that of course is the Jews now must live in a constant state of readiness and paranoia that they could be attacked by Iran, or any other nation at all in the region, at any time...

Just as Christ lived and walked here on the earth, knowing full well that he was going to be surrendered to and crucified by the Jews, the Jews in turn must now live like every day could be their last. How ironical is that for a twist of fate. Netanyahu is so frightened of the consequences of letting legitimate refugees into his country, just in case there are a few bad eggs amongst them that he is not going to let any in at all.

What an absolute joke Israel must now appear to the rest of the free world. Because even though the Jews have been returned to their homeland (just as the word of God said would be the instance) the Jews who inhabit Israel are hardly free at all. On the contrary, the majority are living in absolute and total fear of being annihilated at any time by any one of the Arab nations in the region.

That is so, particularly now that the US has financed Iran so that the can complete the nuclear program to build a missile with which to attack Israel. God in his ultimate wisdom has gathered as many of them as he can in the one place so that when the time is rife the hordes of the Russian army will come down and wipe millions and millions of them off the face of the earth.

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.

Tuesday, September 8, 2015

The Counterfeit Culture & the Fall of the US Empire

 
By REG LITTLE
“The Counterfeit Culture” is the title of an article on 2 September 2011 by Mike Adams in his widely distributed daily health email newsletter NaturalNews. He used it to express a dismay that is increasingly widespread, essentially as a result of the corporate takeover and corruption of America.

Amongst his protests were the following:
The Federal Reserve is in the business of counterfeiting money.
The mainstream media is in the business of counterfeiting news.
The pharmaceutical industry is in the business of counterfeiting medicine.
The medical schools are in the business of counterfeiting medical degrees.
Doctors are in the business of counterfeiting false medical authority.
The mega-sized food corporations are in the business of counterfeiting food.
The global consumer product companies counterfeit consumer products (“baby oil” from petroleum).
Social networks like Facebook are in the business of counterfeiting friends.
Home builders construct counterfeit homes (that won’t stand in 20 years).
Public schools counterfeit school diplomas. (Who needs to learn to write?)
The Pentagon counterfeits war. (Bomb the World Trade Centre & blame someone!)
Mainstream historians counterfeit history.

Apart from his initial noting of counterfeit money and counterfeit news, understandably Adams focuses mostly on healthcare counterfeits. His inclusion of the September 11, 2001 atrocity as “The Pentagon counterfeits war,” almost as an afterthought, captures something perverse about the contemporary American psyche. After all, this event transformed America more than any other nation in the following ten years, rarely for the better. Adams identifies it as a counterfeit but allows it to be hidden amongst a number of even more troublesome counterfeits.

There are many more iatrogenic deaths each year than the 9/11 deaths in 2001, but they do not normally serve as a cause for public outrage (iatrogenic refers to complications caused by medical errors). Certainly, they are far from being a credible justification for bankrupting the nation with foreign invasions and unwinnable small wars. Indeed, a commentator of the insight, knowledge and judgement of Mike Adams is so overwhelmed by the corruptions and counterfeits pervading healthcare that he seems to be exhausted by simply recounting his grievances and unable to do much more than list the abundance of counterfeits.

An article by Gary Null PhD et al reveals something of the extent of the medical counterfeits that preoccupy Adams.

“A definitive review and close reading of medical peer-review journals, and government health statistics shows that American medicine frequently causes more harm than good. The number of people having in-hospital, adverse drug reactions (ADR) to prescribed medicine is 2.2 million. Dr. Richard Besser, of the CDC, in 1995, said the number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections was 20 million. Dr. Besser, in 2003, now refers to tens of millions of unnecessary antibiotics.

“The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalisation annually is 8.9 million. The total number of iatrogenic [induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by medical treatment or diagnostic procedures] deaths is 783,936.

“The 2001 heart disease annual death rate is 699,697; the annual cancer death rate is 553,251. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States.”1

Shocking as it sounds initially, the immediate death toll from 9/11 of close to 3,000 was nothing in comparison. Moreover, annual expenditure per person on American health care is more than double that in most comparable nations, dwarfing the comparable impact and cost of 9/11 and highlighting the pervasive nature of American counterfeits. The subsequent reactions and wars that followed 9/11 incurred costs to rival those of the American medical system.

Related to the above, but still poorly understood, American deficit finance (the Fed’s counterfeit money), is beginning to threaten the viability of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency. This casts dark clouds over the future authority of a nation that would have to reduce its spending (much of it medical and military) each year by at least $1.5 trillion were it not able to continue printing at whim the global currency.

Like the other counterfeits, this attracts surprisingly little reflective analysis. The direct link between the problems of the Fed’s counterfeit money, the waste inherent in the American counterfeit medical system, and the never-ending War on Terror forever maintained by the counterfeit commemoration of 9/11, is rarely remarked. This reflects the pervasiveness of Adams’ “counterfeit culture.”

The Cost of the US Response to 9/11
Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate, notes in an article for Al Jazeera that:
“The September 11, 2001, attacks by al-Qaeda were meant to harm the United States, and they did, but in ways that Osama bin Laden probably never imagined. President George W Bush’s response to the attacks compromised the United States’ basic principles, undermined its economy, and weakened its security.

“The attack on Afghanistan that followed the 9/11 attacks was understandable, but the subsequent invasion of Iraq was entirely unconnected to al-Qaeda – as much as Bush tried to establish a link. That war of choice quickly became very expensive – orders of magnitude beyond the $60bn [billion] claimed at the beginning – as colossal incompetence met dishonest misrepresentation.
 
“Indeed, when Linda Bilmes and I calculated the United States’ war costs three years ago, the conservative tally was $3-5tn [trillion]. Since then, the costs have mounted further. With almost 50 per cent of returning troops eligible to receive some level of disability payment, and more than 600,000 treated so far in veterans’ medical facilities, we now estimate that future disability payments and health-care costs will total $600-900bn. But the social costs, reflected in veteran suicides (which have topped 18 per day in recent years) and family breakups, are incalculable.”2

Stiglitz captures succinctly the manner in which America often harms itself more than its “enemies.” Whether al-Qaeda was responsible or not for 9/11, and there are many who question the official story, the response has profoundly damaged US military, political, moral and financial credibility and authority. Moreover, the evolving situations in Libya and Syria could threaten to expose another counterfeit – increasing reports suggest that the US-led NATO alliance is relying on al-Qaeda identities, possibly originally part of some Saudi mercenary group, to advance rebellion in states that fall into disfavour.

It is the counterfeiting in news, education and history however, that ensures that all these other counterfeits go largely unremarked in serious political, administrative and public debate and comment. This has created a major anomaly in the present global environment where the world is being precipitated into a new order by the ineptness and incomprehension of American and other Western elites. These are trapped in narrow, short-term frameworks of information and thought. They have become defined by rigid ideologies that make them subservient to a chaotic collection of corporate interests. Corporate profit seekers have captured control of critical political, legal, academic and other processes in the major English speaking powers, and through them they cling with self-destructive desperation to the power to dominate and define much international interaction.

The Internal Decay of Corporate Power
The attempt to shore up corporate privileges, often related to access to energy in less developed nations, has led to seemingly endless entanglement and draining of resources in small unwinnable wars. In this process, the Pentagon has been given unlimited license to plunge the US budget ever deeper into deficit and its own activities ever further into dependence on foreign, and not necessarily friendly, financiers.

Moreover, the readiness of American corporations to become ever more dependent on cheaper and more efficient foreign production ensures both the increasing depletion of their own productive capacity and the growing vulnerability of their financial institutions. It is extremely difficult to identify anyone who has strategic responsibility for what seem to be a confusion of disjointed policies that plunge America ever further into a morass of crises.

Policies are overseen by those who win a few minutes in the political spotlight. Yet they are forever distracted and preoccupied by trying to win favour and approval by servicing the corporate lobbies that fund and endorse their campaigns. They have no time left to even reflect on echoes of more productive strategies from a dimly recalled past.

As the “counterfeit culture” suggests, the lack of coherent strategic thought has wreaked havoc within the United States. Although a multi-cultural community, America’s academia, media, corporate and political cultures display no capacity to generate meaningful policy discussion that allows for other than very narrow and stereotyped cultural assumptions. This cripples the capacity to comprehend the increasingly complex dynamics of the global community.

Corporate America has brainwashed a priesthood of trained economists to rehearse endless counterproductive economic theory. This has been successful in deceiving domestic populations but has been disastrous by leaving the nation totally vulnerable and defenceless before other cultures that have mastered American corporate dogma and identified and exploited its weaknesses.

The fragmented, short term and narrow corporate domination of the political process gives the highest priority to a cacophony of disputing corporate interests over any coherent recognition of community priorities and strategies. It makes it easy for external interests to associate closely with and achieve their goals through domestic corporate lobbies. In the midst of this self-serving and self-destructive corporate confusion, is it any wonder that medical and military systems have strayed far from the businesses of health care and national defence.

An End of Empire Moment
It is highly questionable that the events of 9/11 could have produced the outcome they did in any other than such a community as contemporary America. There is in the United States an almost total breakdown of culture, whether political, strategic, financial or military. In a sense the task for rivals is now simply a matter of feeding these weaknesses and being patient. Yet, the frenetic character of American society makes this seem unbelievable, only making it more inevitable and ever closer.

The corporate adventurism that built the British Empire has become the corporate self-indulgence and corruption that devastates the contemporary American Empire. All the elite groups that exercise real power and influence in the United States – such as politicians, financiers, Pentagon strategists, corporate managers, pharmaceutical executives, food scientists and agricultural entrepreneurs – have assumed a type of unchallenged authority in their areas and a variety of alliances of convenience with the other groups. This ensures that little reform is imaginable, let alone possible. All politically correct information is designed to reinforce the interests of the very groups that have brought the country to its present plight. Deviation from such information signals the end of any personal professional aspirations. Even successful presidential candidates have no option but to negotiate a modus vivendi with such groups and, in the process, abandon any aspiration to dealing with the real challenges at the end of an empire. This shows some surprising similarities with those at the end of other empires, even including the Chinese Qing Dynasty.

America’s end of empire moment is unique in an important respect. Even Britain was still controlled by a type of inherited aristocracy when it entered into decline. All previous empire collapses tended to be associated with aristocracies that had become ineffective. Apart from a few inter-generational banking families, America’s fate has been guided and dictated by privileged professional groups who have a monopoly on “expert knowledge.” They have become accustomed to a type of indolent privilege based on this “expert knowledge,” which, unfortunately for them, is no longer competitive, or even relevant, in a rapidly changing world. Consequently, they have become the guardians of little more than their own illusions, indulgent privilege and the nation’s decline. This is the source of dismay about the counterfeit culture, whether in medical, military of other areas.

Disintegration of the Existing Global Order
There is a growing body of observation, particularly but not exclusively in financial commentary, on the imminent collapse of a global system based on American pre-eminence. This takes on particular importance because it signals not just a decline in American power and authority but also the end of a period of what might be called loosely Anglo-American global order.

Marc Faber, Mr. Doom and Gloom himself, who is well respected in the financial world, spells it out: “I think we are all doomed. I think what will happen is that we are in the midst of a kind of a crack-up boom that is not sustainable, that eventually the economy will deteriorate, that there will be more money-printing, and then you have inflation, and a poor economy, an extreme form of stagflation, and, eventually, in that situation, countries go to war, and, as a whole, derivatives, the market, and everything will collapse, and like a computer when it crashes, you will have to reboot it.”3

Irish journalist Eamonn Fingleton recalled a pertinent observation by the late American historian Chalmers Johnson: “The United States today is like a cruise ship on the Niagara River upstream of the most spectacular falls in North America. A few people on board have begun to pick up a slight hiss in the background, to observe a faint haze of mist in the air on their glasses, to note that the river current seems to be running slightly faster. But no one yet seems to have realised that it is almost too late to head for shore.”4

They foreshadow the end of an Anglo-American order that can be traced back more than four centuries to the founding of the British East India Company. This gave birth to a new form of dynamic human organisation, the corporation, largely independent of government oversight. This led to a freewheeling corporate form of foreign adventurism that built the foundations of the British Empire.

Anglo-American power and authority, largely based on the discreet but ruthless use of corporate initiative, has established a global pre-eminence over the past two centuries. In the process it established forms and norms of modern life that have until recently assumed the character of certainties, largely beyond meaningful questioning or criticism.

Mounting and varied American difficulties and uncertainties have, however, intensified serious doubts about the continued viability of this order. Indeed, many of the international organisations founded in 1945 after World War II, whether the United Nations itself, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the GATT and later the World Trade Organisation, or other less prominent organisations like the World Health Organisation and CODEX, seem to be approaching a use-by date.

The reason for this is simple. These were all defined by the leading victorious powers in 1945 to serve discreetly their own, particularly corporate, interests. Accordingly they have many built in privileges for the United States, the United Kingdom and their close allies. These are rapidly becoming anachronisms, and unacceptable burdens on newly empowered emerging states that can insist on fundamental reform.

It is unlikely, however, that such reform will prove acceptable to the United States and its developed allies and it seems inevitable the existing international institutional system will become dysfunctional and marginal to important international activity. Already, the establishment of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) offers an indication of likely future developments. The rise of other important states like Turkey, Indonesia and Iran will likely advance this process as none of these communities has any interest in preserving Anglo-American privileges.

The situation might be redeemable were America and its close allies not widely understood to be bankrupt, propped up only by the continued tolerance of creditors. Were that withdrawn, the US dollar would cease to be the global reserve currency, the Pentagon budget would collapse, American troops could not be maintained offshore, the impoverishment of large numbers of Americans could raise questions of civil unrest and the poor productivity and competitiveness of the “counterfeit” American economy would be exposed and leave little prospect of recovery.

It is not surprising there is an increased body of English language commentary that implies a situation where global order and activity as it is known can no longer continue. Little effort is made, however, to explore the likely character of a new order with new opportunities. Why is there not more strategic realism and flexibility in the English language world that seemed dominant and assured for so long?

The events of 9/11 have provided a great distraction from the deteriorating situation outlined above. Many of the aspects of counterfeit culture mentioned by Mike Adams predate 9/11 by decades and have long been corroding and undermining the foundations of the Anglo-American global order.
The hyping of the 9/11 atrocity and the lust for crude vengeance met little resistance in a counterfeit culture where not only media but also academia had long been accustomed to serving causes backed by powerful corporate, political or other interests.

The 9/11 psyche is a symptom and a symbol of a counterfeit culture. Vast resources are squandered on the preservation and promotion of a simplistic, misguided, popular sense of righteousness as Anglo-American corporate power and privilege declines and disintegrates.

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.