Ungodly Doctrines of Man.
We are faced every day with things we don't understand. I can remember going to a conference which I thought would be Christian, in which I could exercise my faith. It was a conference for ex-cult members. They say that where two or more are gathered together, that Jesus is in our midst. I was a Free Christian; I was between churches, having left one in which I was unsatisfied, and hoping to get some good spiritual vibes at this conference. I was the only believer present; there were no Christians other than myself at that conference. I could not speak of my God to anyone, there was no encouragement of any kind there. It was at this time that I realized that everyone who leaves a cult does not come to Christ. This made me feel depressed, and I was determined to find out the reason for this situation. That was 2004; I had been out of this cult for eight years. I knew that there were many people who had joined other groups, and I knew that others had experienced different things that I had in the cult which I had come out of. But I did not expect to be censured for mentioning anything about Jesus online in a discussion group, but I said that healing cannot be accomplished without being wrapped in the arms of Jesus Christ, and the moderator emailed me privately, and told me that I could not say that. She told me that what I should have said was that FOR ME healing took place in the arms of Jesus, because not everybody was Christian and we cannot offend anyone. When I joined my next church, I was again censured for discussing Christ online, and this person was deleting me from one of my networking sites. This was in 2006, and I begged the Lord, “Please, Lord, help me to understand why this is happening to me .” In the year 2010, I found out what it was. I was given a copy of the Humanist Manifesto, which was signed in 1933, and I looked at the list of famous Humanists online, and things began to jell in my mind to understand that I have been in the midst of Humanism for a long time. My entire college education was Humanist. I was working for Humanists in the educational realm. People who are former cult members, who are sick and tired of a bad experience in religion, have been nabbed by humanists and indoctrinated in their ways of thinking.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
The Ambiguity Surrounding "Christian Psychology"
1 Corinthians 15:13 Watch ye, stand in the faith, be men, be strong. Let us use discernment in all things.
The Ambiguity Surrounding “Christian Psychology”.
Here's a question to ponder:
Have believers compromised their God-given "birthright" by accepting counterfeit solutions to emotional and spiritual issues that are common to man? . . . . The study of psychology has become the number two career choice for all college students. In fact, the popularity of this "science of the soul" is even greater among those enrolled in Christian colleges and seminaries.(thebereancall.org)
It was Norman Vincent Peale who conceived “Christian Psychology,” and the idea, according to The Berean Call.org, was rejected by the Christian Church for half a century.Peale persisted in his support of the idea, and then it was picked up by Robert Schuller, his protege, and then others followed. It has been currently and it is currently adapted into the Christian Churches. So now we have Colleges and Universities training Christian Psychologists and Counselors. An idea which was scorned for fifty years is now the norm in the Christian Church.
My main point is this: Mr. Peale was a Freemason and not a Christian. Freemasons do join Christian Churches, but it is only to infiltrate them with false teachings. Freemasonry, in its rituals, reveres a god they call Jabulon, which is supposed to be a combination of three gods: Jehovah, Baal, and Osiris the sun god. Can a man who worships in this way really successfully conceive of anything that is Christian? The teachings of Freemasonry do not in any way evangelize about Salvation or Forgiveness, or even Sin, for that matter. So how did a man who participated in Freemasonry develop anything Christian, which teaches all these things?
Consider John Mark Templeton, who funded the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, and he is the leading advocate of Mind-Science cult heresies. He was promoted by Mr. Peale and Dr. Schuller for his metaphysical delusion among evangelicals. An article in Schuller's “Possibilities” magazine quotes Templeton as saying, “Nothing exists except God” which is Pantheism, also “the Christ Spirit, dwells in every human being, whether the person knows it or not.” which is Universalism. The Mind-Science aspect of it works out this way: “God is all and God is good; therefore, all is good. If you see something that looks like evil, sickness, suffering or death, it doesn't exist. You have been deceived by your own negative thinking and need to become a Positive Thinker.” One can see why Christian Psychology was rejected for all those years, but for some reason it has become popular with the Church. This is the beginning of bad doctrine creeping into the Christian Church.
Consider the ironic statement by James Dobson, in his 1988 Focus on the Family: “Christian Psychology is a worthy profession for a young believer to pursue, provided his faith is strong enough to withstand the humanistic concepts to which he will be exposed...” Christians need to beware of false doctrines and false Prophets. The Bible tells us in 1 Corinthians 16:13; “Watch ye, stand in the faith, be men, be strong.” Therefore let us use discernment in all things.
The Ambiguity Surrounding “Christian Psychology”.
Here's a question to ponder:
Have believers compromised their God-given "birthright" by accepting counterfeit solutions to emotional and spiritual issues that are common to man? . . . . The study of psychology has become the number two career choice for all college students. In fact, the popularity of this "science of the soul" is even greater among those enrolled in Christian colleges and seminaries.(thebereancall.org)
It was Norman Vincent Peale who conceived “Christian Psychology,” and the idea, according to The Berean Call.org, was rejected by the Christian Church for half a century.Peale persisted in his support of the idea, and then it was picked up by Robert Schuller, his protege, and then others followed. It has been currently and it is currently adapted into the Christian Churches. So now we have Colleges and Universities training Christian Psychologists and Counselors. An idea which was scorned for fifty years is now the norm in the Christian Church.
My main point is this: Mr. Peale was a Freemason and not a Christian. Freemasons do join Christian Churches, but it is only to infiltrate them with false teachings. Freemasonry, in its rituals, reveres a god they call Jabulon, which is supposed to be a combination of three gods: Jehovah, Baal, and Osiris the sun god. Can a man who worships in this way really successfully conceive of anything that is Christian? The teachings of Freemasonry do not in any way evangelize about Salvation or Forgiveness, or even Sin, for that matter. So how did a man who participated in Freemasonry develop anything Christian, which teaches all these things?
Consider John Mark Templeton, who funded the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, and he is the leading advocate of Mind-Science cult heresies. He was promoted by Mr. Peale and Dr. Schuller for his metaphysical delusion among evangelicals. An article in Schuller's “Possibilities” magazine quotes Templeton as saying, “Nothing exists except God” which is Pantheism, also “the Christ Spirit, dwells in every human being, whether the person knows it or not.” which is Universalism. The Mind-Science aspect of it works out this way: “God is all and God is good; therefore, all is good. If you see something that looks like evil, sickness, suffering or death, it doesn't exist. You have been deceived by your own negative thinking and need to become a Positive Thinker.” One can see why Christian Psychology was rejected for all those years, but for some reason it has become popular with the Church. This is the beginning of bad doctrine creeping into the Christian Church.
Consider the ironic statement by James Dobson, in his 1988 Focus on the Family: “Christian Psychology is a worthy profession for a young believer to pursue, provided his faith is strong enough to withstand the humanistic concepts to which he will be exposed...” Christians need to beware of false doctrines and false Prophets. The Bible tells us in 1 Corinthians 16:13; “Watch ye, stand in the faith, be men, be strong.” Therefore let us use discernment in all things.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
A Seasonal Thought for All of You.
Published on thebereancall.org (http://www.thebereancall.org)
King of the Jews
By
Created 1999-12-01
At this time of year multitudes of people who otherwise have little or no thought of God or Christ give lip service to the idea that more than 1,900 years ago Jesus was born in Bethlehem and "there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews?" (Mat 2:1-2 [1]). Oddly, many Christians who believe Jesus was born "King of the Jews" attach no literal meaning to that title, especially one that has anything to do with Jews. Prophecies concerning Christ ruling the world from David's throne in Jerusalem are taken as metaphors referring to His present rule from heaven.
Jerusalem was founded by King David 3,000 years ago. No fewer than 40 times the Bible calls Jerusalem "the city of David." There God established David's throne forever, and on that throne the Messiah, King of the Jews, descended from David, must reign over Israel and the world (2 Chr 6:6 [2]; 33:7; 2 Sam 7:16 [3]; Ps 89:3,4,20,21,29-36 [4], etc.). Jerusalem is named more than 800 times in the Bible and is central to God's plans. He has placed His name there forever.
Knowing that only the Messiah, descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, can defeat him, Satan has inspired 3,000 years of anti-Semitism. Destroying all Jews would have prevented Messiah from being born. Satan lost that round. But if all Jews could be destroyed today, God could not fulfill His promises that Christ would reign as King of the Jews on David's throne at His second coming. God would be a liar and Satan the winner. God's integrity and eternal purposes are linked to Israel's survival!
Yasser Arafat claims that Israel has always belonged to Arabs and that Jerusalem has been an Arab city for thousands of years. In fact, it isn't even mentioned in the Koran. On July 15, 1889, the Pittsburgh Dispatch reported that of Jerusalem's 40,000 residents, 30,000 were Jews and most of the others were Christians. In 1948, when Israel declared its independence, only 3 percent of Palestine was owned by Arabs.
Israel has its Knesset in Jerusalem. But the world won't accept that, and foreign embassies are located elsewhere. In defiance of God and His King (Ps 2 [5]), the world has its own plans for Jerusalem.
Here we confront the broader aspects of anti-Semitism's war against God and the King of the Jews: the attempt to control Jerusalem and God's land (Lev 25:23 [6]). Incredibly, the United Nations Security Council has devoted nearly a third of its deliberations and resolutions to Israel, a country with less than one-thousandth of earth's population! The United Nations has never condemned the Arabs for their terrorism but has condemned Israel more than 370 times for defending itself. In March 1999, the European Union notified Israel again that it "does not recognize Israel's sovereignty" over Jerusalem. In a recent papal bull on the Year 2000 Jubilee, Pope John Paul II once again rejected Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem.
We are seeing the continuing fulfillment of Christ's remarkable prophecy that Jerusalem would be "trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Lk 21:24 [7]). The capture by Israelis of East Jerusalem in 1967 seemed to mark the end of the "times of the Gentiles." But in a surprising move, Israel turned the Temple Mount back to the custodial care of King Hussein of Jordan, leaving the very heart of Jerusalem in Gentile hands. In 1994, Yasser Arafat and his PLO took control.
Roman Catholic doctrine that the nation of Israel has been replaced by that Church is spreading increasingly among evangelicals. This replacement of Israel is a subtle form of anti-Semitism. Instead of sending Jews to ovens, their significance and even their existence is denied: by some twist in history, those now commonly called Jews are supposedly not really Jews—the real Jews are Mormons, or British Israelites, or Catholics or Christians.
The shameful horror of anti-Semitism throughout history provides a shocking exposé of the human heart. Satan found multitudes of partners (many of whom called themselves Christians) only too eager to malign, persecute and even kill God's chosen people. Hitler's "final solution to the Jewish problem" was known to Roosevelt, Churchill and other allied leaders, who did nothing. Even neutral Switzerland and Sweden turned escaping Jews back to Hitler's ovens.
Incredibly, a typical Jordanian textbook equates Zionism with Nazism. Yet Arabs applauded and aided Hitler—and Islam pursues Hitler's "solution" to this day. Hitlerian threats pour continuously from Muslim religious and political leaders on TV and over radios and loudspeakers in mosque and street. The battle between Jahweh, the God of Israel who loves Jews as His chosen people, and Allah, the god of Islam who hates them with a passion, is building to an awesome climax.
It is every Muslim's religious duty to exterminate the Jews. Muslims dream of destroying Israel. They name holidays and streets after murderers of innocent Israeli citizens and hold celebrations honoring terrorists. Islam's leaders have called for a spiritual revival as the key to Israel's destruction—and Islamic fundamentalism, which brazenly employs terrorism worldwide, is now sweeping the world.
All Islamic scholars agree it is the sacred duty of every Muslim in every age to wage jihad (holy war) whenever possible to force the entire world to submit to Islam. There are more than 100 verses in the Koran about fighting and killing in that quest. A Libyan cabinet minister explained, "Violence is the Muslim's most positive form of prayer."
In spite of his rape of Kuwait, Saddam Hussein is beloved by millions of Arabs because his scud missiles heavily damaged Israeli civilian targets and he repeatedly calls for Israel's destruction. When Kaddafi screams, "The battle with Israel will be such that...Israel will cease to exist!" he speaks for every Muslim. Islam's founding prophet, Muhammad, declared, "The last hour will not come before the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them."
Islam's desire to exterminate Israel is taught from childhood. A Syrian Minister of Education wrote, "The hatred which we indoctrinate into the minds of our children from birth is sacred." A ninth-grade Egyptian textbook declares, "Israel shall not live if the Arabs stand fast in their hatred." And a fifth-grade textbook states, "The Arabs do not cease to act for the extermination of Israel." It is suicidal for Israel to trade strategic land for "peace" with such enemies—but the world forces her.
Muhammad showed Muslims how to make "peace." In A.D. 628 he made a peace treaty with his own Kuraish tribe. Two years later, he suddenly attacked Mecca and slaughtered every male. Arafat has publicly declared, "In the name of Allah...I am not considering it [the Israeli-PLO peace accord] more than the agreement signed between our prophet Muhammad and the Kuraish tribe....Peace for us means the destruction of Israel...." No place for the King of the Jews! This is Islam—take a close look!
Muslim nations are arming themselves with missiles capable of delivering chemical, biological and nuclear warheads. Syria has manufactured thousands of chemical warheads, has huge stores of biological weapons and has tripled its military and air power since the 1973 Yom Kippur War. The whole world knows these weapons have one purpose: to destroy Israel. But Israel also has nuclear weapons (soon to be deployed in new efficient submarines) and would use them if needed. Who will bring peace?
Christ warned of such incredible destruction that if He did not intervene to stop it no flesh would be left alive on earth (Mat 24:21-22 [8]). That remarkable prophecy anticipated today's modern weapons. No wonder the God of the Bible, who twelve times calls Himself "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," promises repeatedly to defend Israel and Jerusalem in the last days! Having brought Israel to birth in 1948, God will complete His purpose. He declares, "Shall a nation be born...? Shall I bring to the birth,...saith the Lord...and shut the womb?" (Isa 66:8-9 [9]).
In its mad rebellion against God, the world rejects the "King of the Jews" and His promised rule of international peace from David's throne in Jerusalem, and makes its own plans. The ideal of a humanistic world government has been pursued since Babel. In 1921 the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was established. The next year its journal, Foreign Affairs, stated that there would be "no peace or prosperity for mankind...until some kind of international system is created...." In 1934 H. G. Wells declared, "There must be a common faith and law for mankind....The main battle is an educational battle." Children are being educated to reject God and embrace Antichrist. In 1973, in the Saturday Review of Education, Gloria Steinem, feminist leader, stated that by the year 2000 "we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in Human Potential, not God."
In May 1947 Winston Churchill declared, "Unless some effective world supergovernment...can be set up and begin to reign, the prospects for peace and human progress are dark and doubtful...." In 1948, in UNESCO: Its Purpose and its Philosophy, Sir Julian Huxley, its first director-general, explained that "The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background...to help the emergence of a single world culture...." UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan recently said that the "concept of national sovereignty" is being redefined and would have to be set aside. In 2000, in a step toward a world religion, "the UN will extend its peacekeeping role into spiritual territory" and call for "its first summit for world religious leaders."
No matter the form of government, rulers are selfish and oppressive. That fact has been repeatedly demonstrated worldwide. Africa threw off white colonial rule. But instead of the promised freedom, there was new bondage to black despots. Instead of peace and prosperity, there is growing chaos, poverty, unrest and tribal and ethnic wars, with blacks killing blacks, repeated coups and revolutions that gain nothing.
Communism was once the big hope. The communist revolution in Russia was financed to a large extent by some of the wealthiest and most powerful men in America. Praising its enforced atheism, John Dewey wrote in The New Republic in 1928 that communism would "counteract and transform...the influence of home and Church" and ultimately would fulfill the goals set forth in The Humanist Manifesto.
It sounded so good: equality for all. But those who enforced this "equality" were tyrants looking out for their own selfish interests, who oppressed and stole from the people under them. Corruption flourished in the Soviet Union and China and still does in every communist nation.
The same has always been true of Islam. Muhammad imposed Islam with the sword. As soon as he died, much of Arabia tried to abandon Islam, but was forced back into submission in the Wars of Apostasy in which tens of thousands were killed. Nor did that bring peace. Muhammad's closest companions and relatives fought savage wars for leadership, slaughtering one another for Allah and their dead prophet. Thousands of Muhammad's followers were butchered by one rival faction or another.
Islam hasn't changed. Between 1948 and 1973, there were 80 revolutions in the Arab world, 30 of them successful, including the murder of 22 heads of state. Sunnites, the largest Islamic sect, and Shi'ites, the next largest, still fight one another. In the eight-year war between Iran and Iraq, 1,000 tons of poison gas were used and there were more deaths than in World War I. Islam can't even bring peace among Muslims. Yet British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that Islam is synonymous with "peace, tolerance and a force for good." Incredibly, the Crystal Cathedral houses a joint "Christian and Muslim Institute for peace." Peace?
Islamic countries are dictatorships, led by ruthless murderers and international terrorists such as Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Libya's Kaddafi and Hafez Assad of Syria. In the name of Allah they imprison, torture and kill tens of thousands of their own citizens and train and finance worldwide terrorism. In PLO territories taken over from Israel, as in every Muslim country, there is no freedom of conscience, speech, religion, election or the media.
Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and she has the problems which democracy breeds. The Holy Land is plagued with drugs, pornography, prostitution, youth rebellion, rape, robbery and murder. Selfishness pits Israeli against Israeli. More than 200,000 Israeli women have been victims of domestic violence each year. The savagery in Israeli schools rivals that of the United States. Violent crime among Israeli youth more than doubled from 1993 to 1998. There is hostility between religious and secular Israelis and increasing disillusionment with Judaism, especially among youth.
If Jeremiah were alive today, he would warn Israel once again of coming judgment for its sin. Israel needs to repent to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But what if she were to do so? The rabbis have no forgiveness to offer repentant sinners. They've had neither temple nor sacrifices for sin for 1,900 years—exactly as foretold (Hos 3:4 [10]; Lk 21:20-24 [11])!
Why would God prophesy and allow this condition? Only if Jesus is the Messiah who, as the Lamb of God, died for the sins of Jew and Gentile. If His sacrifice on the cross fulfilled all the Old Testament sacrifices, they are no longer needed. That is the only explanation for God having left Israel without temple and sacrifice all these years.
The Hebrew scriptures contain more than 300 prophecies telling when and where the King of the Jews would be born, all about Him, including His rejection, crucifixion, and resurrection. All were fulfilled to the letter in Jesus Christ. If He is not the Messiah, there is no Messiah. On the very day the angel Gabriel foretold to Daniel (Dan 9:25), Jesus rode into Jerusalem, was hailed as the Messiah as Zechariah had prophesied (Zec 9:9 [12]), then was crucified for our sins and resurrected as Israel's prophets had foretold. On the cross above His head, Pilate placed this accusation: "THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Mat 27:37 [13]).
According to undisputable history and Israel's own prophets, it is 1,900 years too late to expect the first coming of the Messiah. Israel's only hope is His second coming. Tragically, it will take Armageddon for Israel to recognize her Messiah. When Jahweh personally appears to rescue Israel from destruction, every Jew alive will see that He is the man who was pierced to the death for their sins and resurrected, the very Messiah promised by their prophets, whom they have rejected. Then all Israel still alive will believe. And the King of the Jews at last "shall reign for ever and ever"! Right now He offers forgiveness, peace, eternal life and a benevolent reign on the throne of every heart that will open to Him. TBC
Source URL:
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/5801
King of the Jews
By
Created 1999-12-01
At this time of year multitudes of people who otherwise have little or no thought of God or Christ give lip service to the idea that more than 1,900 years ago Jesus was born in Bethlehem and "there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews?" (Mat 2:1-2 [1]). Oddly, many Christians who believe Jesus was born "King of the Jews" attach no literal meaning to that title, especially one that has anything to do with Jews. Prophecies concerning Christ ruling the world from David's throne in Jerusalem are taken as metaphors referring to His present rule from heaven.
Jerusalem was founded by King David 3,000 years ago. No fewer than 40 times the Bible calls Jerusalem "the city of David." There God established David's throne forever, and on that throne the Messiah, King of the Jews, descended from David, must reign over Israel and the world (2 Chr 6:6 [2]; 33:7; 2 Sam 7:16 [3]; Ps 89:3,4,20,21,29-36 [4], etc.). Jerusalem is named more than 800 times in the Bible and is central to God's plans. He has placed His name there forever.
Knowing that only the Messiah, descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, can defeat him, Satan has inspired 3,000 years of anti-Semitism. Destroying all Jews would have prevented Messiah from being born. Satan lost that round. But if all Jews could be destroyed today, God could not fulfill His promises that Christ would reign as King of the Jews on David's throne at His second coming. God would be a liar and Satan the winner. God's integrity and eternal purposes are linked to Israel's survival!
Yasser Arafat claims that Israel has always belonged to Arabs and that Jerusalem has been an Arab city for thousands of years. In fact, it isn't even mentioned in the Koran. On July 15, 1889, the Pittsburgh Dispatch reported that of Jerusalem's 40,000 residents, 30,000 were Jews and most of the others were Christians. In 1948, when Israel declared its independence, only 3 percent of Palestine was owned by Arabs.
Israel has its Knesset in Jerusalem. But the world won't accept that, and foreign embassies are located elsewhere. In defiance of God and His King (Ps 2 [5]), the world has its own plans for Jerusalem.
Here we confront the broader aspects of anti-Semitism's war against God and the King of the Jews: the attempt to control Jerusalem and God's land (Lev 25:23 [6]). Incredibly, the United Nations Security Council has devoted nearly a third of its deliberations and resolutions to Israel, a country with less than one-thousandth of earth's population! The United Nations has never condemned the Arabs for their terrorism but has condemned Israel more than 370 times for defending itself. In March 1999, the European Union notified Israel again that it "does not recognize Israel's sovereignty" over Jerusalem. In a recent papal bull on the Year 2000 Jubilee, Pope John Paul II once again rejected Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem.
We are seeing the continuing fulfillment of Christ's remarkable prophecy that Jerusalem would be "trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Lk 21:24 [7]). The capture by Israelis of East Jerusalem in 1967 seemed to mark the end of the "times of the Gentiles." But in a surprising move, Israel turned the Temple Mount back to the custodial care of King Hussein of Jordan, leaving the very heart of Jerusalem in Gentile hands. In 1994, Yasser Arafat and his PLO took control.
Roman Catholic doctrine that the nation of Israel has been replaced by that Church is spreading increasingly among evangelicals. This replacement of Israel is a subtle form of anti-Semitism. Instead of sending Jews to ovens, their significance and even their existence is denied: by some twist in history, those now commonly called Jews are supposedly not really Jews—the real Jews are Mormons, or British Israelites, or Catholics or Christians.
The shameful horror of anti-Semitism throughout history provides a shocking exposé of the human heart. Satan found multitudes of partners (many of whom called themselves Christians) only too eager to malign, persecute and even kill God's chosen people. Hitler's "final solution to the Jewish problem" was known to Roosevelt, Churchill and other allied leaders, who did nothing. Even neutral Switzerland and Sweden turned escaping Jews back to Hitler's ovens.
Incredibly, a typical Jordanian textbook equates Zionism with Nazism. Yet Arabs applauded and aided Hitler—and Islam pursues Hitler's "solution" to this day. Hitlerian threats pour continuously from Muslim religious and political leaders on TV and over radios and loudspeakers in mosque and street. The battle between Jahweh, the God of Israel who loves Jews as His chosen people, and Allah, the god of Islam who hates them with a passion, is building to an awesome climax.
It is every Muslim's religious duty to exterminate the Jews. Muslims dream of destroying Israel. They name holidays and streets after murderers of innocent Israeli citizens and hold celebrations honoring terrorists. Islam's leaders have called for a spiritual revival as the key to Israel's destruction—and Islamic fundamentalism, which brazenly employs terrorism worldwide, is now sweeping the world.
All Islamic scholars agree it is the sacred duty of every Muslim in every age to wage jihad (holy war) whenever possible to force the entire world to submit to Islam. There are more than 100 verses in the Koran about fighting and killing in that quest. A Libyan cabinet minister explained, "Violence is the Muslim's most positive form of prayer."
In spite of his rape of Kuwait, Saddam Hussein is beloved by millions of Arabs because his scud missiles heavily damaged Israeli civilian targets and he repeatedly calls for Israel's destruction. When Kaddafi screams, "The battle with Israel will be such that...Israel will cease to exist!" he speaks for every Muslim. Islam's founding prophet, Muhammad, declared, "The last hour will not come before the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them."
Islam's desire to exterminate Israel is taught from childhood. A Syrian Minister of Education wrote, "The hatred which we indoctrinate into the minds of our children from birth is sacred." A ninth-grade Egyptian textbook declares, "Israel shall not live if the Arabs stand fast in their hatred." And a fifth-grade textbook states, "The Arabs do not cease to act for the extermination of Israel." It is suicidal for Israel to trade strategic land for "peace" with such enemies—but the world forces her.
Muhammad showed Muslims how to make "peace." In A.D. 628 he made a peace treaty with his own Kuraish tribe. Two years later, he suddenly attacked Mecca and slaughtered every male. Arafat has publicly declared, "In the name of Allah...I am not considering it [the Israeli-PLO peace accord] more than the agreement signed between our prophet Muhammad and the Kuraish tribe....Peace for us means the destruction of Israel...." No place for the King of the Jews! This is Islam—take a close look!
Muslim nations are arming themselves with missiles capable of delivering chemical, biological and nuclear warheads. Syria has manufactured thousands of chemical warheads, has huge stores of biological weapons and has tripled its military and air power since the 1973 Yom Kippur War. The whole world knows these weapons have one purpose: to destroy Israel. But Israel also has nuclear weapons (soon to be deployed in new efficient submarines) and would use them if needed. Who will bring peace?
Christ warned of such incredible destruction that if He did not intervene to stop it no flesh would be left alive on earth (Mat 24:21-22 [8]). That remarkable prophecy anticipated today's modern weapons. No wonder the God of the Bible, who twelve times calls Himself "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," promises repeatedly to defend Israel and Jerusalem in the last days! Having brought Israel to birth in 1948, God will complete His purpose. He declares, "Shall a nation be born...? Shall I bring to the birth,...saith the Lord...and shut the womb?" (Isa 66:8-9 [9]).
In its mad rebellion against God, the world rejects the "King of the Jews" and His promised rule of international peace from David's throne in Jerusalem, and makes its own plans. The ideal of a humanistic world government has been pursued since Babel. In 1921 the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was established. The next year its journal, Foreign Affairs, stated that there would be "no peace or prosperity for mankind...until some kind of international system is created...." In 1934 H. G. Wells declared, "There must be a common faith and law for mankind....The main battle is an educational battle." Children are being educated to reject God and embrace Antichrist. In 1973, in the Saturday Review of Education, Gloria Steinem, feminist leader, stated that by the year 2000 "we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in Human Potential, not God."
In May 1947 Winston Churchill declared, "Unless some effective world supergovernment...can be set up and begin to reign, the prospects for peace and human progress are dark and doubtful...." In 1948, in UNESCO: Its Purpose and its Philosophy, Sir Julian Huxley, its first director-general, explained that "The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background...to help the emergence of a single world culture...." UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan recently said that the "concept of national sovereignty" is being redefined and would have to be set aside. In 2000, in a step toward a world religion, "the UN will extend its peacekeeping role into spiritual territory" and call for "its first summit for world religious leaders."
No matter the form of government, rulers are selfish and oppressive. That fact has been repeatedly demonstrated worldwide. Africa threw off white colonial rule. But instead of the promised freedom, there was new bondage to black despots. Instead of peace and prosperity, there is growing chaos, poverty, unrest and tribal and ethnic wars, with blacks killing blacks, repeated coups and revolutions that gain nothing.
Communism was once the big hope. The communist revolution in Russia was financed to a large extent by some of the wealthiest and most powerful men in America. Praising its enforced atheism, John Dewey wrote in The New Republic in 1928 that communism would "counteract and transform...the influence of home and Church" and ultimately would fulfill the goals set forth in The Humanist Manifesto.
It sounded so good: equality for all. But those who enforced this "equality" were tyrants looking out for their own selfish interests, who oppressed and stole from the people under them. Corruption flourished in the Soviet Union and China and still does in every communist nation.
The same has always been true of Islam. Muhammad imposed Islam with the sword. As soon as he died, much of Arabia tried to abandon Islam, but was forced back into submission in the Wars of Apostasy in which tens of thousands were killed. Nor did that bring peace. Muhammad's closest companions and relatives fought savage wars for leadership, slaughtering one another for Allah and their dead prophet. Thousands of Muhammad's followers were butchered by one rival faction or another.
Islam hasn't changed. Between 1948 and 1973, there were 80 revolutions in the Arab world, 30 of them successful, including the murder of 22 heads of state. Sunnites, the largest Islamic sect, and Shi'ites, the next largest, still fight one another. In the eight-year war between Iran and Iraq, 1,000 tons of poison gas were used and there were more deaths than in World War I. Islam can't even bring peace among Muslims. Yet British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that Islam is synonymous with "peace, tolerance and a force for good." Incredibly, the Crystal Cathedral houses a joint "Christian and Muslim Institute for peace." Peace?
Islamic countries are dictatorships, led by ruthless murderers and international terrorists such as Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Libya's Kaddafi and Hafez Assad of Syria. In the name of Allah they imprison, torture and kill tens of thousands of their own citizens and train and finance worldwide terrorism. In PLO territories taken over from Israel, as in every Muslim country, there is no freedom of conscience, speech, religion, election or the media.
Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and she has the problems which democracy breeds. The Holy Land is plagued with drugs, pornography, prostitution, youth rebellion, rape, robbery and murder. Selfishness pits Israeli against Israeli. More than 200,000 Israeli women have been victims of domestic violence each year. The savagery in Israeli schools rivals that of the United States. Violent crime among Israeli youth more than doubled from 1993 to 1998. There is hostility between religious and secular Israelis and increasing disillusionment with Judaism, especially among youth.
If Jeremiah were alive today, he would warn Israel once again of coming judgment for its sin. Israel needs to repent to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But what if she were to do so? The rabbis have no forgiveness to offer repentant sinners. They've had neither temple nor sacrifices for sin for 1,900 years—exactly as foretold (Hos 3:4 [10]; Lk 21:20-24 [11])!
Why would God prophesy and allow this condition? Only if Jesus is the Messiah who, as the Lamb of God, died for the sins of Jew and Gentile. If His sacrifice on the cross fulfilled all the Old Testament sacrifices, they are no longer needed. That is the only explanation for God having left Israel without temple and sacrifice all these years.
The Hebrew scriptures contain more than 300 prophecies telling when and where the King of the Jews would be born, all about Him, including His rejection, crucifixion, and resurrection. All were fulfilled to the letter in Jesus Christ. If He is not the Messiah, there is no Messiah. On the very day the angel Gabriel foretold to Daniel (Dan 9:25), Jesus rode into Jerusalem, was hailed as the Messiah as Zechariah had prophesied (Zec 9:9 [12]), then was crucified for our sins and resurrected as Israel's prophets had foretold. On the cross above His head, Pilate placed this accusation: "THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Mat 27:37 [13]).
According to undisputable history and Israel's own prophets, it is 1,900 years too late to expect the first coming of the Messiah. Israel's only hope is His second coming. Tragically, it will take Armageddon for Israel to recognize her Messiah. When Jahweh personally appears to rescue Israel from destruction, every Jew alive will see that He is the man who was pierced to the death for their sins and resurrected, the very Messiah promised by their prophets, whom they have rejected. Then all Israel still alive will believe. And the King of the Jews at last "shall reign for ever and ever"! Right now He offers forgiveness, peace, eternal life and a benevolent reign on the throne of every heart that will open to Him. TBC
Source URL:
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/5801
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Legalism
Legalism: A Problem in Christianity Today.
There is a state of influence today which is causing rebellion in churches, and there are all kinds of theoretical arguments about it, etc.; it is called legalism. When people are told they have to “jump through hoops” in becoming a Christian, they don't develop spiritually. They are trying to please men instead of God. Legalism is following the Law as a means to Salvation. But when God sent His Son to do His sacrificial work in the Cross, the 600 + laws were wiped clean. Jesus, in the 22nd chapter of Matthew, verses 38-40, gave us these two commandments:
Jesus said to them, “You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart, and with all of your soul, and with all of your mind. This is the first great commandment, and the second one is like it; You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments, hang all the law and the prophets.” Matthew 22:37-40
In Romans 6, the Apostle Paul discusses this also. He says “What do we say now? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid! How can we who are dead to sin, live any longer in it?” Never let it be so! Keep in the love of God being Born again in the Spirit. When one is baptized by immersion in water, it signifies dying to sin, and when one comes up, he is clean of sin. But he still needs to show his appreciation to God and Jesus for what they have done, and thus the commandment to love the Lord his God. When he shows this love for God and for his neighbor, then he is keeping the law, because he will not want to steal or kill, or covet, etc.
So actually, what was eliminated was the ceremonial law and the political law, which taught them how to live in society. The real issue, according to Pastor James R. Hines, is the question as to whether we should teach “do's and don'ts” in Christian living or should we preach that there are standards which ought to be maintained and deeds which should not be done. A large crowd would say that we should not be negative, and not be legalistic. However, when we come to a question like this, we should look to the Scriptures for the answer. It is realistic to say that every page of Scripture lists things we are not to do. The first page of the Bible tells Adam “Thou shalt not” and the last page of Scripture warns not to take away or add to the words of the Book. All of Scripture has rules of what to do and what not to do. Every page is replete with “thou shalt” and “thou shalt not”. To say that the rules of conduct are only found as part of the Mosaic law is certainly a misrepresentation of the truth.
Legalism in itself is not totally incorrect; however, when one says it is required for Salvation, there is where the fault lies. The Mosaic law was given to the Israelites to show them their sin, and when Christ died on the cross, this took care of the guilt of sin, but the law is encompassed in two commandments, to love the Lord with all one's heart, soul, mind, and strength, and secondly to love one's neighbor as oneself. In other words, if we love God, we are not going to want to take His name in vain, we are going to want to show Him that we love Him in worship, and we are not going to put anything before Him as an object of our love, respect, and reverence. Secondly, if we love our neighbor, we are not going to want to steal from him, hurt him physically or kill him, lie to or about him, covet anything he has, or behave in an impure manner in relation to him. We are going to practice this same love with our parents, giving them the honor that God commanded us to give them in return for their giving us care at birth and throughout our childhood. As a result of the suffering, Crucifixion, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ, all we have to do is accept His efforts on our behalf, and we can live with Him for eternity. We don't have to observe the Mosaic Law to gain salvation. However, we do so out of love and appreciation for what He did for us.
In the counseling field, we are faced with all kinds of legal dilemmas, for example, when someone has conceived a child and may not know what to do because of being unprepared. The following is a partial discussion from Pastor Michael Belzman's handbook:
WHEN THE LAW AND THE WORD OF GOD DISAGREE
Some human services workers and counselors find employment in medical facilities and health clinics that do prenatal and perinatal counseling. It is important that those who find themselves in this field be well versed on certain landmark Supreme Court decisions including Roe v. Wade, which is without doubt the most controversial decision of the 20th century. Dr. Frank Beckwith, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Culture and Law at Trinity International University Graduate School, gives us his insight as to the current legal status of abortion in America: He says that Roe V. Wade only permits abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, when in actuality the current law permits it up until the end of the nine months. I would say that if there is that much disagreement as far as the law is concerned, we would be going against an ambiguous administration, so our emphasis should be an encouragement toward the biblical view. This would be the commandment that Jesus gave about loving our neighbor; when we love this human being within us, we do not want to take its life.
Another thing we do out of love is set standards for our own conduct. For example, if one of our friends has a problem with alcohol, we would abstain from our own use of it out of love for this friend. This is not legalism, it is the practice of love. We are loving our neighbor as we would love ourselves. There is also the Golden Rule, which says that the way we want others to treat us, that is the way we should treat them. Such common sense things are right there in the Bible, so plain and simple, so what is there to argue about?
Now let's look at the origin of legalism, and see how it connects to our interests today. Legalism is a term that was first used in the Chinese culture during the Warring States Period of their society. The group of philosophers and administrators known as Legalists were first largely considered the great Satans of Chinese History.
The basic starting point of the early Confucians was that humans were fundamentally good, born with te, which was Moral Virtue, but the third great Confucianist of antiquity believed exactly the opposite. They taught that all human beings were born fundamentally depraved, selfish, greedy, and lustful. Hsun Tzu believed that they could be made good through acculturation and education. This also goes along with the European and American philosophy from the Eighteenth to the Twentieth Century. Hsun Tzu had a student, Han Fei Tzu, who began with basically the same premise, but he taught that people could be made good through the creation of state laws. He taught that the only way to check human depravity was to establish laws that bountifully rewarded actions that benefited others and the state, and ruthlessly punish all actions that hurt others or the state. This type of government did not last long, but it left a lasting impression on the world. It would profoundly affect later governments. Later, the state laws promoted utilitarianism as a better social unifier than education. Utilitarianism was the emphasis on agriculture.
Legalism in the Western sense is in both civil and common law tradition is an approach to the analysis of legal questions characterized by abstract legal reasoning focusing on the applicable legal text, such as a constitution, legislation, or case law, rather than on the social economies or political context. Legalism has occurred in both civil and common law tradition. In its narrower versions legalism may endorse the notion that the pre-existing body of authorities legal materials already contains a uniquely predetermined right answer to any legal problem that may arise. Legalism typically also claims that the talk of the judge is to ascertain the answer to a legal question by an essentially mechanical process.
There are a few forms of legalism that have found their way into our body of knowledge. I will discuss them here. The first is legal positivism, which was influenced by the seminal work of John Austin, who lived from 1790 to 1859. It does not accept internationally defined human rights as fundamentally moral or just. It separates the law from morality; it does not recognize human customs or conventions, does not endorse laws of particular content, and does not suppose that laws are to be obeyed. The second one is legal realism, and that considers the indeterminacy of the law, it recognizes an interdisciplinary approach to the law, and it employs legal determination to achieve social purpose, and balance competing societal interests. A third form, natural law, is set by nature and is valid everywhere. A fourth, Interpretivism, is a school of thought in Jurisprudence, and it is a study of what people think about on the anthropological front, and when research is done using this approach, it becomes a qualitative approach.
All these approaches to legalism are approaches that employ humanistic thinking, with no consideration of the God that originated mankind and its order. When seeking a semblance of order in a church, if we are thinking in these carnal ways, this is how legalism gets started. God is not looking to legislate our hearts. When we are loving our neighbor, and loving God with all our hearts, we will not want to legislate people into these categories of reward and punishment, but we will encourage one another to operate in love in all things.
There is a state of influence today which is causing rebellion in churches, and there are all kinds of theoretical arguments about it, etc.; it is called legalism. When people are told they have to “jump through hoops” in becoming a Christian, they don't develop spiritually. They are trying to please men instead of God. Legalism is following the Law as a means to Salvation. But when God sent His Son to do His sacrificial work in the Cross, the 600 + laws were wiped clean. Jesus, in the 22nd chapter of Matthew, verses 38-40, gave us these two commandments:
Jesus said to them, “You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart, and with all of your soul, and with all of your mind. This is the first great commandment, and the second one is like it; You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments, hang all the law and the prophets.” Matthew 22:37-40
In Romans 6, the Apostle Paul discusses this also. He says “What do we say now? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid! How can we who are dead to sin, live any longer in it?” Never let it be so! Keep in the love of God being Born again in the Spirit. When one is baptized by immersion in water, it signifies dying to sin, and when one comes up, he is clean of sin. But he still needs to show his appreciation to God and Jesus for what they have done, and thus the commandment to love the Lord his God. When he shows this love for God and for his neighbor, then he is keeping the law, because he will not want to steal or kill, or covet, etc.
So actually, what was eliminated was the ceremonial law and the political law, which taught them how to live in society. The real issue, according to Pastor James R. Hines, is the question as to whether we should teach “do's and don'ts” in Christian living or should we preach that there are standards which ought to be maintained and deeds which should not be done. A large crowd would say that we should not be negative, and not be legalistic. However, when we come to a question like this, we should look to the Scriptures for the answer. It is realistic to say that every page of Scripture lists things we are not to do. The first page of the Bible tells Adam “Thou shalt not” and the last page of Scripture warns not to take away or add to the words of the Book. All of Scripture has rules of what to do and what not to do. Every page is replete with “thou shalt” and “thou shalt not”. To say that the rules of conduct are only found as part of the Mosaic law is certainly a misrepresentation of the truth.
Legalism in itself is not totally incorrect; however, when one says it is required for Salvation, there is where the fault lies. The Mosaic law was given to the Israelites to show them their sin, and when Christ died on the cross, this took care of the guilt of sin, but the law is encompassed in two commandments, to love the Lord with all one's heart, soul, mind, and strength, and secondly to love one's neighbor as oneself. In other words, if we love God, we are not going to want to take His name in vain, we are going to want to show Him that we love Him in worship, and we are not going to put anything before Him as an object of our love, respect, and reverence. Secondly, if we love our neighbor, we are not going to want to steal from him, hurt him physically or kill him, lie to or about him, covet anything he has, or behave in an impure manner in relation to him. We are going to practice this same love with our parents, giving them the honor that God commanded us to give them in return for their giving us care at birth and throughout our childhood. As a result of the suffering, Crucifixion, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ, all we have to do is accept His efforts on our behalf, and we can live with Him for eternity. We don't have to observe the Mosaic Law to gain salvation. However, we do so out of love and appreciation for what He did for us.
In the counseling field, we are faced with all kinds of legal dilemmas, for example, when someone has conceived a child and may not know what to do because of being unprepared. The following is a partial discussion from Pastor Michael Belzman's handbook:
WHEN THE LAW AND THE WORD OF GOD DISAGREE
Some human services workers and counselors find employment in medical facilities and health clinics that do prenatal and perinatal counseling. It is important that those who find themselves in this field be well versed on certain landmark Supreme Court decisions including Roe v. Wade, which is without doubt the most controversial decision of the 20th century. Dr. Frank Beckwith, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Culture and Law at Trinity International University Graduate School, gives us his insight as to the current legal status of abortion in America: He says that Roe V. Wade only permits abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, when in actuality the current law permits it up until the end of the nine months. I would say that if there is that much disagreement as far as the law is concerned, we would be going against an ambiguous administration, so our emphasis should be an encouragement toward the biblical view. This would be the commandment that Jesus gave about loving our neighbor; when we love this human being within us, we do not want to take its life.
Another thing we do out of love is set standards for our own conduct. For example, if one of our friends has a problem with alcohol, we would abstain from our own use of it out of love for this friend. This is not legalism, it is the practice of love. We are loving our neighbor as we would love ourselves. There is also the Golden Rule, which says that the way we want others to treat us, that is the way we should treat them. Such common sense things are right there in the Bible, so plain and simple, so what is there to argue about?
Now let's look at the origin of legalism, and see how it connects to our interests today. Legalism is a term that was first used in the Chinese culture during the Warring States Period of their society. The group of philosophers and administrators known as Legalists were first largely considered the great Satans of Chinese History.
The basic starting point of the early Confucians was that humans were fundamentally good, born with te, which was Moral Virtue, but the third great Confucianist of antiquity believed exactly the opposite. They taught that all human beings were born fundamentally depraved, selfish, greedy, and lustful. Hsun Tzu believed that they could be made good through acculturation and education. This also goes along with the European and American philosophy from the Eighteenth to the Twentieth Century. Hsun Tzu had a student, Han Fei Tzu, who began with basically the same premise, but he taught that people could be made good through the creation of state laws. He taught that the only way to check human depravity was to establish laws that bountifully rewarded actions that benefited others and the state, and ruthlessly punish all actions that hurt others or the state. This type of government did not last long, but it left a lasting impression on the world. It would profoundly affect later governments. Later, the state laws promoted utilitarianism as a better social unifier than education. Utilitarianism was the emphasis on agriculture.
Legalism in the Western sense is in both civil and common law tradition is an approach to the analysis of legal questions characterized by abstract legal reasoning focusing on the applicable legal text, such as a constitution, legislation, or case law, rather than on the social economies or political context. Legalism has occurred in both civil and common law tradition. In its narrower versions legalism may endorse the notion that the pre-existing body of authorities legal materials already contains a uniquely predetermined right answer to any legal problem that may arise. Legalism typically also claims that the talk of the judge is to ascertain the answer to a legal question by an essentially mechanical process.
There are a few forms of legalism that have found their way into our body of knowledge. I will discuss them here. The first is legal positivism, which was influenced by the seminal work of John Austin, who lived from 1790 to 1859. It does not accept internationally defined human rights as fundamentally moral or just. It separates the law from morality; it does not recognize human customs or conventions, does not endorse laws of particular content, and does not suppose that laws are to be obeyed. The second one is legal realism, and that considers the indeterminacy of the law, it recognizes an interdisciplinary approach to the law, and it employs legal determination to achieve social purpose, and balance competing societal interests. A third form, natural law, is set by nature and is valid everywhere. A fourth, Interpretivism, is a school of thought in Jurisprudence, and it is a study of what people think about on the anthropological front, and when research is done using this approach, it becomes a qualitative approach.
All these approaches to legalism are approaches that employ humanistic thinking, with no consideration of the God that originated mankind and its order. When seeking a semblance of order in a church, if we are thinking in these carnal ways, this is how legalism gets started. God is not looking to legislate our hearts. When we are loving our neighbor, and loving God with all our hearts, we will not want to legislate people into these categories of reward and punishment, but we will encourage one another to operate in love in all things.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Humanism--A Dangerous Journey.
Humanism: A Revolutionary Danger.
In today's society, in which each person's unique opinion is their ultimate truth, there has emerged areas of study like psychology to add to the already confusing study of philosophy, which clutters the mind with conflicting ideas about life and how to live it. A comparison of the theories of psychology reveals the conflicting ideas of human nature and the inability to come to a concensus about what could heal man's mental and emotional problems.
Over the years, we have heard from many theorists, who have attempted to explain the various things which plague us in life. Freud tried to tell us about psychoanalysis, being preoccupied with sex at the stage of infancy, which to me is entirely ridiculous; Adler was concerned with the first 6 years, and his was a feel-good theory which eliminated the work ethic, by saying that man can overcome his own sense of inferiority by mastery and achievement, with goals of trying to outdo others, but not anything about supporting the family or anything practical; Jung was an analyzer of dreams, advocated the unity of the unconscious with the conscious, exploring spectral nature of human beings in depth being preoccupied with the occult, which conflicts with Scripture in Deuteronomy 18, where God says you must not do these things; Rodgers leaned toward the undisciplined, do anything you want with no consequences , implying that there is no God to direct us; Glasser's whole idea was being responsible for one's self, meeting one's own needs, saying that one needs to be free and happy and then making changes to his environment if those needs are not met, and having the therapist offer suggestions to him for these changes, as if man can do it all, but to leave God out of the picture completely; Bandura had ideas of making behavior changes, completely de-emphasizing God; existentialists Frankl and May advocated creating meaning in a world without intrinsic meaning, as if the world had no meaning, but does the Bible say that God created the world without meaning ? The Bible says that God told Adam and Eve to take care of the earth, which gave everything meaning, so this is wrong thinking as well. All this has resulted in a confused worldview—so confused, in fact, that students in Christian schools are no longer grounded in their faith.
What is happening in schools today to make our children and grandchildren have such a confused worldview? In 1961, in a court case called Torcaso versus Watkins, Atheistic Humanism was established in the US as a state church. Humanism is related to cultism, occultism, atheism, and liberal theology. In 1969, actress Jane Fonda spoke to Massachusetts University and said if they would study Communism, that they would hope and pray that they would soon become Communists. Another Humanist, Karl Marx, was a professed Christian who turned atheist and formed Communism.
A key technique used in the field of Special Education is the person-centered therapy, which says that the core of the human being is good and if provided with appropriate conditions, will automatically grow in a positive way. The emphasis is upon creating a non-judgmental, non-threatening, non-directive growth producing climate. The problem with this idea is that it teaches the student that there is no sin and that the highest expectation from the whole educational experience is to see who the student really is and accept whatever he sees. This only serves to teach the student that there are no consequences to wrongdoing; therefore the student is free to do anything he/she wants to do without repercussion.
Statistically, it looks bad when our schools will teach Hinduism and Islam, but forbid the mention of Jesus Christ. When a large percentage of Christian students don't know how to defend their faith, something is drastically wrong. According to the Humanist Manifesto I, the original one, which was written and signed in 1933, and later revised to make it more “palatable” to the masses, it is a product of many minds. It was designed to represent a “Developing point of view”, and “not a new creed”, although it has become a creed to politics, the schools and some churches.
Humanism denies creation and that man is in the image of God. It refers to man’s development according to a process, which probably means that they advocate the theory of evolution. They hold an organic view of life and reject that the mind has a spiritual side to it at all. Humanism leans toward anthropology, which considers religion as a means of explaining the origin of things and nothing more. Thus, they render unacceptable anything cosmic or supernatural. Humanism therefore insists that the way to determine the existence and value of realities is by means of “intelligent inquiry” and by their assessment of their relation to human minds.
Do we wonder why people in education and other realms are so confused? Parents are bringing up their kids, and teachers have to teach, according to this stuff. Humanists deny theism, deism, modernism, and all the varieties of new thought. They justify the removal of prayer and even the mention of God or Christ in the schools by eliminating the emotional aspects of reverence to the supernatural.
The ultimate, most destructive aspect of Humanism is the idea that the religious forms and ideas of our forefathers are “no longer adequate,” as if God has suddenly left the picture completely. I experienced some of this in a cult that God brought me out of; also I attended a public university, which made it worse, and this is why I want the rest of the world to know about this, so that they don't get trapped in it. Thirteen years as a student in public colleges and twelve years of affiliation in public education, both in community colleges and Grades K through Twelve school districts has made me painfully aware of both the dangers of the false things that are taught and the need for truth tellers.
In today's society, in which each person's unique opinion is their ultimate truth, there has emerged areas of study like psychology to add to the already confusing study of philosophy, which clutters the mind with conflicting ideas about life and how to live it. A comparison of the theories of psychology reveals the conflicting ideas of human nature and the inability to come to a concensus about what could heal man's mental and emotional problems.
Over the years, we have heard from many theorists, who have attempted to explain the various things which plague us in life. Freud tried to tell us about psychoanalysis, being preoccupied with sex at the stage of infancy, which to me is entirely ridiculous; Adler was concerned with the first 6 years, and his was a feel-good theory which eliminated the work ethic, by saying that man can overcome his own sense of inferiority by mastery and achievement, with goals of trying to outdo others, but not anything about supporting the family or anything practical; Jung was an analyzer of dreams, advocated the unity of the unconscious with the conscious, exploring spectral nature of human beings in depth being preoccupied with the occult, which conflicts with Scripture in Deuteronomy 18, where God says you must not do these things; Rodgers leaned toward the undisciplined, do anything you want with no consequences , implying that there is no God to direct us; Glasser's whole idea was being responsible for one's self, meeting one's own needs, saying that one needs to be free and happy and then making changes to his environment if those needs are not met, and having the therapist offer suggestions to him for these changes, as if man can do it all, but to leave God out of the picture completely; Bandura had ideas of making behavior changes, completely de-emphasizing God; existentialists Frankl and May advocated creating meaning in a world without intrinsic meaning, as if the world had no meaning, but does the Bible say that God created the world without meaning ? The Bible says that God told Adam and Eve to take care of the earth, which gave everything meaning, so this is wrong thinking as well. All this has resulted in a confused worldview—so confused, in fact, that students in Christian schools are no longer grounded in their faith.
What is happening in schools today to make our children and grandchildren have such a confused worldview? In 1961, in a court case called Torcaso versus Watkins, Atheistic Humanism was established in the US as a state church. Humanism is related to cultism, occultism, atheism, and liberal theology. In 1969, actress Jane Fonda spoke to Massachusetts University and said if they would study Communism, that they would hope and pray that they would soon become Communists. Another Humanist, Karl Marx, was a professed Christian who turned atheist and formed Communism.
A key technique used in the field of Special Education is the person-centered therapy, which says that the core of the human being is good and if provided with appropriate conditions, will automatically grow in a positive way. The emphasis is upon creating a non-judgmental, non-threatening, non-directive growth producing climate. The problem with this idea is that it teaches the student that there is no sin and that the highest expectation from the whole educational experience is to see who the student really is and accept whatever he sees. This only serves to teach the student that there are no consequences to wrongdoing; therefore the student is free to do anything he/she wants to do without repercussion.
Statistically, it looks bad when our schools will teach Hinduism and Islam, but forbid the mention of Jesus Christ. When a large percentage of Christian students don't know how to defend their faith, something is drastically wrong. According to the Humanist Manifesto I, the original one, which was written and signed in 1933, and later revised to make it more “palatable” to the masses, it is a product of many minds. It was designed to represent a “Developing point of view”, and “not a new creed”, although it has become a creed to politics, the schools and some churches.
Humanism denies creation and that man is in the image of God. It refers to man’s development according to a process, which probably means that they advocate the theory of evolution. They hold an organic view of life and reject that the mind has a spiritual side to it at all. Humanism leans toward anthropology, which considers religion as a means of explaining the origin of things and nothing more. Thus, they render unacceptable anything cosmic or supernatural. Humanism therefore insists that the way to determine the existence and value of realities is by means of “intelligent inquiry” and by their assessment of their relation to human minds.
Do we wonder why people in education and other realms are so confused? Parents are bringing up their kids, and teachers have to teach, according to this stuff. Humanists deny theism, deism, modernism, and all the varieties of new thought. They justify the removal of prayer and even the mention of God or Christ in the schools by eliminating the emotional aspects of reverence to the supernatural.
The ultimate, most destructive aspect of Humanism is the idea that the religious forms and ideas of our forefathers are “no longer adequate,” as if God has suddenly left the picture completely. I experienced some of this in a cult that God brought me out of; also I attended a public university, which made it worse, and this is why I want the rest of the world to know about this, so that they don't get trapped in it. Thirteen years as a student in public colleges and twelve years of affiliation in public education, both in community colleges and Grades K through Twelve school districts has made me painfully aware of both the dangers of the false things that are taught and the need for truth tellers.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)