Grace and peace, believers.
I’m sorry that I haven’t been posting lately, but I have been having problems with my internet connection. I’m not at my own computer right now, so, unfortunately, I can’t say anything of substance today.
Hopefully I will be back online before Christmas. I pray all is well with you and your families. God bless you, and I hope to talk with you soon.
The Still Man
Grace and peace, Saints, and greetings to the rest of the world.
The divinity of Jesus Christ is arguably one of the most contested doctrines of the Christian faith–and for good reason. If one accepts that Jesus Christ is God, then one would have to also accept that Jesus’s words are actually the words of the Almighty God. If one considers that a great percentage of Jesus’s words concerned judgment and eternal flames as the inheritance of all who reject Him as their Savior, then it is no wonder that many refuse to accept that Jesus Christ is God.
Not only is the deity of Jesus refuted by other faiths, such as Islam, which claims that Jesus was merely a prophet, but it is also denied by many who claim to be Christians. Many New Age Gnostic Christians, for example, claim that in the Bible Jesus never called Himself God. They argue that this doctrine was erroneously propagated by the Apostles—specifically the apostle Paul. Some contend that the Apostles simply misunderstood what Jesus meant, while others believe it was a deliberate lie.
Many gainsayers who refute the divinity of Jesus claim to be Christians and to accept the Bible as the Word of God. It is therefore possible to convince them of the divinity of Jesus by showing them that, though Jesus doesn’t call himself God in so many words, there is ample evidence in the Bible to prove that Jesus really is God Almighty. When we come across such passages, we post them here for the edification of the body of Christ. Today we have another such passage.
Now, while most passages of Scripture given to prove the divinity of Jesus are words spoken by Jesus or other men, today’s passage was spoken by God Himself. God the Father actually calls Jesus “God.” Consider the following passages from the Epistle to the Hebrews:
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers and the prophets,
“Hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds.
“Being made so much better than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
“For unto which of the angels said He (God the Father) at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee? And again, I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to me a Son?
“And again, when He (God the Father) bringeth in the Firstborn (Jesus) into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship Him.
“But unto the Son (Jesus) He (God the Father) saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
“And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands” (Hebrews 1:1-8).
Did you see that? God the Father called Jesus Christ God. Now you may wonder how this could be, since the Father is above the Son. But you must understand that, though Jesus said that the Father is “greater than all” (John 10:29), Jesus also said, “I and the Father are One” (John 10:30). They are both God. It is perfectly understandable, then, that the Father would call the Son God if both the Father and the Son are God.
Verse 6 (“Let all the angels of God worship Him”) proves that Jesus is more than just the Son of God. Scripture says that we should worship no other Gods (Exodus 34:14). To do so is idolatry. Is God telling the angels to commit idolatry? No He is not. Jesus is God, not merely the Son of God.
Notice also that God the Father calls Jesus “Lord” and declares that it was He who created the universe, having lain “the foundation of the earth.” This agrees with 1 John 1:1-3. But whereas in the Gospel account it was the apostle John declaring Jesus as Creator, here it is God Himself.
Is there a greater witness to the deity of Jesus than God the Father?
No.
Jesus Christ is God, and you can take that to the bank.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Grace and peace, Saints.
We have completed the companion podcast to our post, Though One Rose From The Dead, which discusses the claims of Angelica Zambrano. Zambrano is a young Ecuadorian girl, who claims to have died and gone to hell, where she met Jesus Christ, among other notable personages.
The podcast is available at the iTunes Store for playback on your favorite audio device. You can subscribe to our free podcast here. We pray you will be edified and encouraged by this teaching.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
“Everybody has a camera on their phone. And anything you do can be recorded. It could be something completely innocent, but it could look like you’re doing this or that.”
–Blake Griffin, in an interview with USA Today’s Jefferson Graham, Thursday, November 1, 2012, p. 8a.
God is Omnipresent and Omniscient. He is everywhere and knows everything, and there is nothing hidden from His sight.
Satan wants to be like God (Isaiah 14:14), but he is neither omnipresent nor omniscient–he can’t be everywhere and he can’t know everything. So, he has to do the next best thing: have people everywhere who watch everything. Consequently, the twenty-first century will be (and is) characterized by the most pervasive (and invasive) surveillance system in the history of the universe. Technology has made this possible, as cameras have gotten so incredibly small that they can be hidden most anywhere–especially in cell phones.
This century will also be characterized by the increasing enmity between the world and Christianity. Persecution will come, and surveillance plays a great role in that persecution. As Jesus was spied on (Luke 20:20), so shall we be spied on. As Jesus was watched, so shall we be watched. And as Jesus’ words and actions were scrutinized, so shall our actions and words be scrutinized. This is all part of the spiritual war in which we are involved.
The enemy will try to get us to do or say things that are un-Christian so that he can accuse us or even bring us before the authorities. I’m a witness. We have to meet these temptations in the power of the Holy Spirit and not in our own strength. We must always be aware that we represent the Lord Jesus, and, whenever possible, our words and actions must reflect His words and actions. Let us try to emulate Jesus Christ in everything we do and say.
The Still Man
“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
“For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty” (1 Timothy 2:1-2).
Grace and peace to the children of promise.
By all indications, President Barack Obama has secured a second term. That came as no surprise to me, as the powers that be must ensure that he finishes the work that he began. To be sure, the next four years will be intriguing, and it will be interesting to see how the United States of 2017 will compare to the United States of 2012. Whatever happens, the important thing to remember is that God is in charge.
So, whether you voted for him or not, let us not forget that we have been admonished to subject ourselves to those in authority–including the President–for they are “the ministers of God.” God has put them in authority. Therefore, it was actually God who reelected Barack Obama, and whatever the president does this term, God has ordained it.
Scripture tells us that to resist those in authority is to resist God (Romans 13:2). We must therefore support President Obama, even though we may not agree with his policies. Let us support the president and pray for him, his family, and his children.
The Still Man
Grace and peace, saints, and greetings to all who know not the Lord Jesus.
Today is the day. Today we elect the man who we want to run our country for the next four years. For many it will be a very difficult decision–especially some Christians. Both candidates claim to be Christians, but neither represents true biblical Christianity. How, then, is the Christian to vote in this election?
This is the question we discuss on our latest podcast. It is available from the iTunes Store for playback on your iPhone, iPod, or other audio device. For your convenience, it is also provided below.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Perhaps it will give you a little perspective on the subject.
The Still Man
Grace and peace to the Elect Lady, and greetings to the many women of ill repute.
A reader asked my opinion of Angelica Zambrano, an Ecuadorian girl, who claims to have died and been taken to hell. I had never heard of Miss Zambrano, and, to tell you the truth, I was hesitant to even investigate her. That’s because this was not the first time that I have heard such a testimony. My wife has told me of two similar testimonies. The first such testimony she heard as a girl growing up in Congo; the other was here in Munich a couple of years ago. Amazingly (or not) Zambrano’s testimony and those that my wife heard share the same significant elements. There is hardly any difference. I believe that this phenomenon of people dying and going to hell is a lie from the pit of hell. It is a strong delusion.
The apostle Paul said that because men took pleasure in unrighteousness, God would send them a “strong delusion” that they would believe a lie. It is not the lie that will be strong, but the delusion. The lie will be obvious to anyone of discernment, but the sinful would be unable to resist it, because God has clouded their judgment. Visitations to heaven and hell are part of that strong delusion, as I will explain, and are not intended to deceive those of understanding, but those who, because of sin, are “willingly ignorant”: they want to be deceived. And God will oblige them. Oh, how He will oblige them.
The apostle Paul warned us not to get involved with “foolish and unlearned questions” that waste our time and rarely bring anyone to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. The question, “Does God allow people to die, go to hell, come back, and testify of that experience?” is a foolish and unlearned question. Doctrinally, it is so ridiculous, that it’s a wonder anyone believes it. That many do believe it marks it as a strong delusion.
When I examined Angelica’s testimony, therefore, I wasn’t looking for credible information. If it is of Satan–and it is–then there will undoubtedly be something credible there. Satan always injects some truth into his lies to make them more palatable. For the undiscerning and those who do not know their Bible, it is that truth that makes the delusion so strong. But, as no lie is of the truth, there will always be a point where the truth and the lie divorce, clearly distinguishing one from the other, and exposing the whole thing for the lie that it is. I also didn’t examine Angelica’s testimony to look for unbiblical doctrines, for her claim to have been taken to hell is already unbiblical, as we shall see.
I examined Angelica’s testimony for one reason and one reason only: to see what lie she is trying to sell us. And I am very glad that I did investigate Angelica’s testimony, for I discovered yet another tool in Satan’s bag of tricks. Let’s talk about it. Angelica claims to have been told by an angel that she would die and afterwards be shown “great and mighty things…that she did not know” (Jeremiah 33:3). For some strange reason, she perceived that these great and mighty things had to do with the existence of heaven and hell. According to her testimony, she was right, as, after her death, an angel took her first to hell, then to heaven, to the end that she would return to the land of the living and testify of their existence to “the nations.”
Before even reading Angelica’s testimony, I knew it to be a lie. Consider that Jesus, in the Gospel of Luke, told a story that addressed the inefficacy of one coming back from the dead to testify of the existence of hell. In His story of the rich man and Lazarus, a poor diseased beggar, Jesus recounted how both of them died and went to their rewards: the rich man to hell, and Lazarus to where the righteous went before the death and resurrection of Jesus. We pick up at this point:
“And in hell [the rich man] lift up his eyes, and being in torments, he seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
“But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
“And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
“Then [the rich man] said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father’s house:
“For I have five brethren; that he may testify to them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
“Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
“And [the rich man] said, Nay father, but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
“And [Abraham] said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead” (Luke 16:19-31).
There is much that can be gleaned from this passage, but what concerns us is what Abraham said about sending one from the dead to testify about hell. He said that the living had “Moses and the prophets,” and that the rich man’s brothers should listen to them. By Moses, Jesus meant the first five books of the Old Testament known as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, respectively. These books are known in Judaism as the Torah, and were written by Moses. (Joshua finished the book of Deuteronomy after the death of Moses.) The book of Exodus contains the Ten Commandments (Chapter 20) and, together with Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, form what was known as the Law. The prophets are all the books from Isaiah to Malachi and deal with God’s punitive pronouncements upon Israel for such sins as idolatry and witchcraft. The Law is important to Judaism because it contains Gods commandments concerning sin and His punishment of sin.
Abraham was saying that in these books were all the Jews needed to know about what God hates and what God will do when we do what He hates. Abraham knew that for a person who loved God and chose to obey Him, these books contain all that he would ever need to know to avoid God’s wrath. But if a person doesn’t love God and chooses to disobey Him, even if someone were to come back from the dead to convince him that Hell is real, he would not believe. Now, if Jesus felt that way then, is there any reason to believe He feels any differently now? I think not.
At the time of Jesus’ story, only the Old Testament existed. But now we have the New Testament, which not only contains all of Jesus’ teachings on Heaven and Hell, but Paul’s testimony of being taken to the third heaven and the Revelation of Jesus Christ, wherein the apostle John wrote of his prophetic vision of Heaven and Hell. So Today, there is much more information on heaven and hell available to those who want to believe. There is no need to add anything to it. So even before hearing her testimony, I knew that Angelica Zambrano was a fraud. If God didn’t think it necessary to send someone back from the dead then, He doesn’t think it’s necessary now. Remember, God doesn’t change.
The question, then, is “Why is Satan promoting Angelica Zambrano and others like her? What is he trying to sell us?” We will answer this question by examining Angelica’s testimony, for it is very revealing. Before she even got to the meat and potatoes, I could see the first lie she was promoting. Listen to this:
I first accepted Christ when I was 12, but I told myself, “None of my friends were evangelicals and I felt strange amongst them“, so I walked away from God…”
Angelica’s use of the term “evangelicals” is very revealing. The term evangelical is not Christian, but Roman Catholic. All Bible-believing Christians (Protestants) are evangelical by default, as we were given a mandate by the Lord Jesus to evangelize. So “evangelical” is inherent in the term Christian. The Roman Catholic Church in an effort to make Roman Catholicism appear to be just another denomination of the Christian church, calls Protestants “evangelicals” to distinguish them from Roman Catholics, who do not evangelize (ostensibly).
This is important, because Angelica was born and raised in Ecuador, a Roman Catholic country. It is very likely, therefore, that she and her friends grew up Roman Catholic. By saying that none of her friends were evangelical rather than saying they were not Protestants, Angelica is implying:
If Angelica were being truthful, she would have said that none of her friends were Protestants, making it clear that Roman Catholicism is not Christianity. Instead, she uses the politically correct, Roman Catholic term, evangelical, signaling her belief that Roman Catholicism is Christianity. This told me that Angelica is a Roman Catholic Charismatic. This is evidenced by the fact that Angelica’s mother said that they are Pentecostal. The Pentecostal Church did not come from the Protestant Reformation; and is, in fact, part of the Charismatic Movement.
The Charismatic Movement promotes Roman Catholicism as an apostate Christian denomination. But if you understand what Roman Catholicism really teaches, then you know that it is not Christian at all, but merely pays lip service to Jesus Christ. Roman Catholics really worship the idol known as the Virgin Mary. Jesus wants people to leave that idolatrous system, so if Angelica were really sent of Jesus, He would have made her the Apostle to the Roman Catholics, with the primary message to “Come out of her my people, that you partake not of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues.” Though later in her testimony Angelica says that idolatry is wrong, she never calls Roman Catholicism idolatry. This was a red flag for me.
It is also important to note that Angelica doesn’t give a detailed account of her conversion experience, but simply says that she “accepted Jesus” at twelve years old. If this is true, then she likely had some other religious conviction before this. In that she was born and raised in Ecuador, that religion was probably Roman Catholicism. If Angelica had truly “accepted Jesus” as she claims, then she would have felt compelled to explain the difference between the Jesus she found and the Roman Catholic “Jesus” she grew up with. The Holy Spirit would have made certain of this.
Our testimony is important for many reasons, but Angelica’s is vitally important, not only because she makes such an incredible claim, but because of the likelihood that she was raised Roman Catholic. In this age of apostasy, it is extremely important that someone in Angelica’s position first establish her Protestant credentials through her conversion testimony. That she doesn’t do this is highly suspect.
I believe Angelica is a Roman Catholic, and proof of this can be seen in her testimony of her visit to hell and her conversation with “Jesus.” During one part of this visit, Angelica claims to have seen Pope John Paul II, about whom “Jesus” says:
“He is being tormented because he did not repent.”
Angelica presses “Jesus” further as to why the pope was there, to which he says:
“Daughter, no fornicator, no idolater, no one who is greedy and no liar will inherit My Kingdom.”
Angelica argues that Pope John Paul II preached to multitudes of people, to which “Jesus” replies:
“Yes, Daughter, he may have said many things, but he would never speak the truth as it is. He never said the truth and they know the truth and although he knew the truth, he preferred money over preaching about salvation. He would not offer reality…”
The problem with this statement is that although “Jesus” says the pope would not speak the truth “as it is,” he didn’t say what this truth is, and where this truth can be found. Jesus Christ says that we will be judged by His Word. When the Lord Jesus judges the pope–and He will–it will be because the pope didn’t tell or believe the truth as it is found in the Bible. That truth is that Jesus Christ is “The Way, the Truth, and the Life” (John 14:6). Angelica’s Jesus doesn’t surprise me, however, because, as you may know, for Roman Catholics, the Bible ranks dead last as a source of doctrine, coming behind Catholic tradition, the writings of the “church fathers,” and the decrees of the pope. This is yet another clue that Angelica Zambrano is a Roman Catholic.
Now Angelica’s “Jesus” tells her what “truth” Pope John Paul II failed to tell the people:
“[He] would not say that hell is real and that heaven also exists; Daughter, now he is here in this place.”
This is “the truth” that the pope withheld from the people? that heaven and hell are real? I have a huge problem with this.
During his tenure, Pope John Paul II was the head of the Roman Catholic church: and Roman Catholics, contrary to Scripture, worship an idol named the Virgin Mary, pray to dead saints, venerate relics (the body parts and personal effects of “saints”), and worship a piece of bread, which they claim is Jesus Christ. This is idolatry, and idolatry is the sin that God hates the most. Yet this girl, who claims that “Jesus” made her a “watchman,” would have us believe that the Lord Jesus Christ had nothing to say about the Roman Catholic church as an idolatrous institution. In fact, the closest she gets to this is to say:
“Humanity has been deceived believing in an assumed saint, which is not, but is a demon, working through an idol made by the hand of man.”
With this statement, Angelica implies that the worship of saints is idolatry, but the Roman Catholic worship of Mary is not, because she neither mentions Mary, nor Roman Catholicism. Though “Jesus” at least mentions Mary, he does so only cursorily:
“Mary has no knowledge of anything [happening on Earth] and the only One that they must exalt is Me, because neither Mary, nor St. Gregory nor any other saint can offer salvation.”
You will notice that “Jesus” says that only he should be exalted, but he says nothing about prayers to Mary. Understand that to the average person, the term exalt means absolutely nothing. The average Roman Catholic only knows that he prays to Mary, whom he believes pleads on his behalf to Jesus. In the average Roman Catholic’s mind, he is honoring Jesus by praying to his mother. What Roman Catholics need to hear from Angelica, therefore, is that they should not be praying to Mary at all, but to Jesus Himself.
You must understand that the idol known as the Virgin Mary, who is, in fact, a goddess that has been worshipped throughout the world since antiquity, is the most important idol in Roman Catholicism. Without the Virgin Mary, Roman Catholicism would not exist. Therefore, because Angelica never condemns the worship of the Virgin, her testimony becomes a default endorsement of Mary worship and the Roman Catholic religion by Jesus Christ.
What is perhaps most important of all is the fact that “Jesus” says nothing about the Roman Catholic “adoration,” or worship, of the Eucharist: the consecrated bread that Catholics eat during the mass. Roman Catholicism teaches that this bread is the literal, not symbolic, body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, and Roman Catholics worship this bread, believing it to be Jesus Christ Himself. So not only is Eucharist worship idolatry, which is an abomination to Jesus, but the practice blasphemes His name. This makes the Eucharist “another Jesus” according to the apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:4. Because Angelica’s “Jesus” says nothing about the worship of the Eucharist, her testimony becomes an endorsement of that practice also.
Roman Catholicism also features the crucifix, which is an idol, because it features an image of Jesus, and God forbids the making of images of anything, including things in heaven (Exodus 20:4). Jesus is in heaven (Hebrews 10:12). The crucifix is also a blasphemous object, because it still has Jesus Christ hanging on a cross. Again, Jesus is in heaven. Jesus on the cross also makes the crucifix a cursed object, because Galatians 3:13 says, “Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.” And the crucifix is also worshipped, which, again, makes it an idol (Exodus 20:5).
Lastly, the pope has made himself an object of worship, because he claims to be the Vicar, or Substitute, of Jesus Christ, and Jesus is worshipped. Exalting a mere mortal into the position of Creator of the universe is the ultimate form of idolatry and makes Roman Catholicism the most blasphemous and idolatrous religion in the world. In fact, the Roman Catholic church is the head of all idolatry. The Bible calls her “MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH” (Revelation 17:5). Because of this idolatrous system, millions—possibly even billions—of deceived people are going to hell.
The Bible says that the Roman Catholic church is responsible for the blood of all the prophets and the saints. Beginning with the murders of the prophets of God, including the beheading of John the Baptist by Herod; continuing with the Roman persecution of the Christian church under Nero and a host of Caesars, the massacre of untold millions of Christians under the Roman Catholic Inquisition, the brutal Communist dictatorships of Stalin and Lenin, the Nazi regime under Adolph Hitler (who was a faithful Roman Catholic); on up to and including the current and future massacre of Christians all over the world under Communism and Islam (both of which, according to Jack Chick, are daughters of the Roman Catholic Church) and the future massacre of the Christian church in the Great Tribulation, the Romish church has proven itself to be the greatest enemy of Jesus Christ and of Christianity and the ultimate fulfillment of God’s prophecy concerning the enmity between Satan and Israel (Genesis 3:15).
Jesus hates the Roman Catholic church. But Angelica Zambrano would have us believe that all Jesus had to say against this pope is that he failed to tell people about heaven and hell? Right. And why only this pope? What about all the other popes? Think about this.
What Angelica Zambrano is really trying to sell us with her false testimony is that the Roman Catholic church is Christian and that the popes are the problem, and not the religion. I have heard this before from other so-called Christians, including Texe Marrs[1].
Angelica Zambrano is helping to send millions of Roman Catholics to hell, when she could be leading them toward the true Savior, Jesus Christ. Devout Roman Catholics tend to be very zealous for their Mary and fearful of hellfire. If Angelica had told them that Jesus wants them to leave the Roman Catholic church, I’ve no doubt that the millions who believe her testimony would have evacuated that idolatrous system like rats from a sinking ship. But Angelica hasn’t told them anything of the kind. So, if you believe her testimony, then her failure to do so is really a default endorsement by “Jesus” of the Roman Catholic church. This, of course, is a lie. Jesus hates the Roman Catholic church and will ultimately destroy her (Revelation 17). That is why He pleads for the sincere Roman Catholic to “Come out from her.”
There are several other elements of Angelica’s testimony that are a tipoff that she is a false prophet, and we will discuss some of them very briefly. The first is her claim that demons are in hell, and that they torment the souls consigned there. Though the Bible gives many examples that demons live on the earth with man, nowhere does it say that any demons are in hell. The book of Jude, for example, says that the demons “who kept not their first estate”: that is, the demons that took on human form and mated with human women (Genesis 6:1-2), are “reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day” (Jude 6). These demons sinned twice, yet they are not in hell.
Further proof that there are no demons in hell can again be found in Jesus’ story of the rich man and Lazarus. Note that the rich man does not say he is being tormented by demons, but that he is being tormented by flame. Lastly, neither Jesus nor the apostles preached that demons torment the souls in hell. This doctrine cannot be found in the Bible. That’s because it’s not biblical. Angelica also says that the souls in hell are tormented by the same things that they did here on earth, and this has been believed by so many for so long, that it is accepted as doctrine. But nowhere in the Bible can such a doctrine be found. Both beliefs, therefore, are not biblical doctrine, but traditions of men taken as doctrine. They are Roman Catholic tradition.
I have already made reference to the Charismatic Movement, and Angelica’s claims about the Holy Spirit identify her as a charismatic, as charismatic churches exalt the Holy Spirit over the Lord Jesus. We won’t go into that here, but suffice it to say that Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would glorify Him (John 16:14), and Angelica’s account does not include any laudatory comments by the “Holy Spirit” about the Lord Jesus. In fact, the reader will note that Angelica calls the “Holy Spirit” her “best friend.” Shouldn’t that be the Lord Jesus, who sticks closer than any brother?
There is something else to consider. Have you ever noticed that in the Bible, Jesus gave His people visions of heaven, but He never gave them visions of hell? Did you ever wonder why that was? I have: I believe it is simply because heaven is our inheritance and hell is not. Jesus says that He would rather we be wise concerning good and ignorant concerning evil. Jesus would not take a saint on a tour of hell, and if He did, wouldn’t Lazarus have been the best candidate for such a journey? After Lazarus returned from the dead, I’m sure many wanted to ask him what death was like. His testimony could have been invaluable to Jesus’ ministry, had He allowed it, proving that Jesus was indeed who He said He was and that we can believe His Word. The Pharisees knew this also, because they planned to kill Lazarus for that very reason (John 12:10-12). But the Bible doesn’t record such a testimony from Lazarus. Why? because Jesus wants us to believe His Word. He wants us to have faith. The Bible says:
“Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1).
Paul wrote that if faith is based on the evidence of our eyes, it is no more of faith. To have faith, then, is to believe the unseen. Jesus wants us to have that kind of faith. After Cephas, John and Mary Magdalene testified that the tomb was empty and our Lord was risen indeed, all the apostles except Thomas believed. When Jesus later appeared to him, Thomas believed, saying, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). But Jesus said,
“Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” (v. 29).
Jesus is not in the business of always giving proof that what He says is true. He has already given us all the proof that we need. And that proof is in His Word. When the Pharisees desired a sign of Him, Jesus said:
“An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.” (Matthew 12:39).
As Jonah was three days in the fish’s belly, so was Jesus Christ three days in the heart of the earth, after which He rose and emerged from the tomb, never to die again. Jesus is not about to give us any more signs: you either believe or you don’t. And if you don’t, it’s because you don’t want to. Faith is a decision. I’ll give you proof. After Jesus restored the sight of the man that had been born blind, He asked the man a question that initiated a dialogue that stands as one of the greatest examples in the Bible that faith is a decision. Listen to this discourse:
Jesus: “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?”
Man: “Who is He, Lord, that I might believe on Him?”
Jesus: “Thou hast both seen Him, and it is He that talketh with thee.”
Man: “I believe.” (John 9:36-38.)
This man had been blind since birth and was now a grown man. Jesus restored His sight, and, because of it, this man was ready to believe. The same goes for any true believer. If Jesus has done anything for you, then you are ready to believe. You don’t need the testimony of a dead man. I’m a witness.
One thing that all of those who are clamoring for a sign have in common is that they have no testimony of what God has done in their lives. Angelica Zambrano is no exception. By her own admission, before her “vision,” there had been no change in her life, even though she claimed to be a Christian:
“I cried with all my heart, asking the Lord to change me. But, as time passed by, I felt no change. The only difference was that I began to attend church, to read the Bible and to pray. That was the only change in my life.”
There are many people who go to church, read the Bible, and pray who are not saved. What distinguishes the Christian is his testimony of change. This is not necessarily true of all believers, however. Those who accepted Jesus at a young age, for example, may not have experienced a profound change in their lives, because they have not yet descended into the depths of sin. But by Angelica’s own admission, before she rededicated her life to “Jesus,” she had been a terrible sinner. If she had really found the Risen Christ, then she would no doubt have been able to testify of the incredible changing power of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Instead, she said she felt no change. This is contrary to Scripture, which says:
“If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things have passed away, behold, all things have become new” (2 Corinthians 5:17).
If there was no change in Angelica’s life, then she was not in Christ, and the evidence of this is that she immediately abandoned the faith. Recall that in the parable of the sower, Jesus gave the example of the seed that “fell into stony places” as an example of those who receive the Word, but abandon the faith as soon as tribulation and persecution come (Matthew 13:20-21). Angelica’s Christian experience started with her trip to hell, which further identifiers her as a charismatic, which movement emphasizes the externals like tongues, miraculous healings, and coming back from the dead. By the way, Ana Mendez Ferrell, another Charismatic, claims to have brought someone back from the dead, and to have had a duel with Satan.
Perhaps the greatest evidence that Angelica’s testimony is false is what she says “Jesus” called himself:
Fear not, Daughter, for I am Jehovah, Your God, and I have come here to show you what I have promised you. Arise, for I am Jehovah, who holds you by your right hand and tells you, Fear not, I will help you.”
Angelica says that “Jesus” called Himself Jehovah. I find this strange, given that after His resurrection, the Jesus of the King James Version of the Holy Bible called Himself Jesus. When the apostle Paul, for example, encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus, he asked Him, “Who art thou?” to which Jesus replied,
“I am Jesus…” (Acts 9:5).
In the book of the Revelation, Jesus tells the apostle John:
“I Jesus have sent mine angel…” (Revelation 22:16).
The Bible says that the name of Jesus is above every other name and that every knee shall bow at this name (Philippians 2:9-10). Jesus is God Almighty (Revelation 1:8) and Jehovah is His pre-incarnation name. He called Himself both:
“And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them” (Exodus 9:3).
He is now called Jesus, which means Savior. And that’s exactly what He is. All false prophets in some fashion deny Jesus Christ, because Satan is sponsoring their ministries, and Satan hates the name of Jesus. Calling himself Jehovah and not Jesus was the first sign that the “Jesus” of Angelica Zambrano was a counterfeit.
There is much, much more that is wrong with Angelica’s account, but it would be fruitless to waste any more time with this false prophet. This child has been marvelously deceived, and if she does not repent of this grievous error, she is on a collision course with the Lake of Fire.
As we conclude, I want you to think about something very carefully: Angelica lives in Ecuador, a Roman Catholic country. Her testimony, therefore, would be intended mostly for Roman Catholics, as prophets tend to be chosen, in large part, because of where they live. Roman Catholics don’t have to be convinced that hell is real. Roman Catholic priests has used the fear of hell for centuries to frighten their devotees into doing their bidding. Catholics don’t need convincing that Hell is real. Why, then would Jesus send someone to testify to Roman Catholics of something they already know exists? I could tell you, without any reservations whatsoever, that He wouldn’t. Angelica’s testimony, therefore, is to serve another purpose; and we already know what that purpose is: to keep Roman Catholics in bondage, believing they are doing the will of God, and to convince undiscerning Christians that Roman Catholicism is Christianity. There must be some serious evangelism going on in Ecuador.
Reams can be written on what Angela Zambrano said; let us close, however, with what she didn’t say:
At the name of Jesus every knee should bow…and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” (Philippians 2:5-9).
“For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5).
“I [Jesus] am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me” (John 14:6).
You don’t need the testimony of a dead girl to believe that hell is real. I have never seen hell, yet I believe it exists. Why? ‘Cause the Bible tells me so.
This teaching is available on iTunes for playback with your favorite audio device. You can subscribe to our free podcast here. For your convenience, it is also available below.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
[1] See Texe Marrs’ Power of Prophecy episode entitled, “The Pope is Not Roman Catholic.”
“Hurry is not of the devil, Hurry is the devil.”
Carl Jung
Grace and peace, saints.
The lack of love that Paul speaks of in 2 Timothy 3 can be seen in the impatience that characterizes today’s technologically advanced world, and the fact that we lack the vocabulary to express patience, even if we were so inclined.
Today I was at the grocery store cashier’s counter standing behind an elderly woman with a walker. Seeing me behind her, she tried to hurry and put her things into her shopping basket, as she had many items. I wanted to tell her “you don’t have to hurry,” or words to that effect, but a suitable German equivalent would not come to mind. When I came before the cashier, I asked her how one says, “Don’t hurry,” or “There’s no need to hurry” in German. She speaks very good German as well as English, so I felt relatively comfortable asking her this.
Well, she seemed totally flabbergasted by this question, and even a bit annoyed. I don’t think it was the question that annoyed her, but the fact that she couldn’t answer it. In fact, I have asked this question of several people, and not one of them could give me an answer. What the cashier ended up telling me was that one could say, “Slowly” or “Not so fast.” But there was no phrase that she could think of that was a polite way of saying “There is no need to hurry.”
Isn’t it strange that so many people would not know how to tell someone that there is no need to hurry, when one so often finds oneself in this situation? Now the Langenscheidt German-English/English-German Dictionary says that the German phrase meaning, “There is no hurry” is es eilt nicht, but I have never heard this phrase used, which is why I never knew how to convey this sentiment. Now it is not so strange that I don’t know how to say this, as I’m not a native or even near-native German speaker, but it is very unusual that many with a very good command of the German language don’t know how to say this.
I asked my children how one would say this, and they instantly said, du must dich nicht beeilen: (literally, “you mustn’t hurry yourself”). But they said that they have only heard this from their schoolteachers and administrators. Like me, they had never heard it from their classmates or people on the street.
What is interesting is that Munich residents, much like the residents of New York, are known for being rude and impatient. But it struck me that this would be reflected in the language. The fact that the phrase exists means that at one time it was important to be able to express this sentiment. That almost no one knows or uses it (at least those whom I asked or with whom I come into daily contact) can be seen as evidence that it is no longer important to express this politeness.
This is proof that we are indeed living in the times which the apostle Paul called the “last days,” as men no longer care for one another and are always hurrying one another, rushing to and fro in their frenzied haste to go nowhere at all. Conservation of movement is seen as lethargy. As we have become “better,” “stronger,” faster,” and “smarter,” we have grown colder, and the little niceties that characterized our dealings with strangers are now seen as quaint, old-fashioned, and impractical. Politeness is disparaged, and evil, immoral people are exalted and idolized, while decent people are defamed and seen as fake, hypocritical, and even dangerous. Indeed we have become “haters of the good.”
It is because of Jesus Christ, dwelling in us through the Holy Spirit, that there is any peace in the world at all. Now, more than ever, we Christians have to be lights in our communities. The Bible says that the unsaved are wise to do evil, but ignorant to do good. It is we, then, who should be the resident experts on goodness, seeing as how the Lord Jesus, who is Good, lives in us. We have to counterbalance the anger, hate, rage, and violence that we see around us with the love of Jesus Christ. Christian love, understanding, politeness, and patience must characterize all our dealings with men; even our enemies.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Copyright 2011-2012 Anthony Keeton, The Still Man ®. All rights reserved.
Grace and peace to the children of promise, and greetings to the children of disobedience.
The book of 2 Chronicles chapter 30, tells about the revival that took place in Israel after the installment of King Hezekiah. By this time, Israel had long since fallen into idolatry and left off worshipping the God of Israel, abandoning the proper keeping of the Passover and the solemn feasts. For this, God allowed them to be carried away into Assyria.
A righteous and just king, Hezekiah was naturally grieved at Israel’s apostasy, and resolved in his heart to bring her back to the worship of the one true God. He therefore published a proclamation throughout all Israel that they should come to Jerusalem to keep the Passover.
So, the people came, and the Passover was kept. However, because Israel had not celebrated the Passover the right way in such a long time, they had not properly prepared themselves:
“For there were many in the congregation that were not sanctified…
“For a multitude of the people…had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the Passover otherwise than it was written.
“But Hezekiah prayed for them saying, The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God, the Lord God of his fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary.
“And the Lord hearkened to Hezekiah, and healed the people” (2 Chronicles 30:18-20).
This is yet another great example of intercessory prayer, and there are two lessons that we can learn from it. The first is that God is so willing to have a relationship with us, that even though we sometimes are not in the best spiritual standing with Him, if our hearts are towards Him, though we are “unclean,” He will hear us.
This is what Jesus meant when the Pharisees criticized His disciples for not washing their hands before they ate. Jesus told them that it wasn’t what goes into a man that makes him unclean, but what comes out of him. In other words, his words reveal his spiritual state. If his heart is clean, then will his words also be clean. Conversely, if his words are unclean, then is his heart also unclean.
So, though we may not be dotting all the ‘i’s and crossing all the ‘t’s—we may not be doing everything in the way the Lord would have us—if our earnest desire is to please the Lord, then He will accept us.
This is important, because many of us—the author included—came into a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ outside of the established church. We may have come into faith through a Gospel tract, a Christian television program, the witness of a faithful saint, or a Christian website or blog. We may never have even stepped foot into a church. Consequently, we may not know how the Lord wants us to do certain things. It may also be that the pastor of a church may love the Lord with all his heart, but not know how or even why a certain thing is done in a certain way. And if he doesn’t know the reason why a certain thing is done a certain way, then he will not know whether what he is doing is right or wrong.
Take the Lord’s Supper, for example. The best example of how it should be eaten is the way Jesus Himself ate it. One of the things for which Jesus was best known was in the breaking of bread:
“And when [Jesus] had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, He looked up to heaven, and blessed, and brake the loaves, and gave them to His disciples to set before them; and the two fishes divided He among them all” (Mark 6:41).
“And it came to pass, as He sat at meat with them, He took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them” (Luke 24:30).
This was obviously something Jesus was known for doing, for the two disciples, who encountered the resurrected Jesus on the road to Emmaus recognized Jesus by the breaking of bread:
“And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together and them that were with them,
“Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
“And they told what things were done in the way, and how He was known of them in breaking of bread” (Luke 24:33-35).
After Jesus’ resurrection and ascension into heaven, the disciples continued to break bread when they fellowshipped:
“And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread…” (Acts 20:7).
When we eat the Lord’s Supper then, we are supposed to break the bread and give to one another in honor of the Lord. Even Jesus Himself broke the bread at the Last Supper:
“And [Jesus] took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19).
Even Paul, when speaking of the Lord’s Supper, recognized that Jesus broke the bread at the Last Supper:
“For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
“And when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take eat, this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me” (1 Corinthians 11:23-24).
It is painfully obvious that the act of breaking the bread is as important as the bread itself: for the whole purpose of Jesus, the Bread of Life, coming in the flesh, was to die for the sins of mankind, which death is symbolized by the breaking of bread.
Why, then, when we eat the Lord’s Supper, do we pass around a plate filled with microscopic pieces of bread too small to be broken? In some cases, the bread is in neat little cubes. These morsels are way too small to break, and the breaking of the bread, again, is as important as the bread itself, for the breaking of bread symbolizes the death of our Savior.
Do you understand that when we neglect to break the bread we are actually denying the death of Jesus Christ? And if we deny His death, then we deny His resurrection: for if He did not die, then He could not have been resurrected:
“For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
“And if Christ be not raised, our faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins” (1 Corinthians 15:16-17).
We have come to believe that when Jesus said, “This do in remembrance of me,” He was referring only to eating the bread. But, if this were true, He would have said, “Eat this bread in remembrance of me.” But Jesus didn’t say that. He said, “This do,” referring to everything He did to the bread. And the first thing He did to the bread was break it.
Understand that the Lord’s Supper is to the Christian what the Passover is to the Jew: it is a solemn celebration of our salvation. For just as Jesus passed over and, therefore, saved the Jews who believed Moses, so has He “passed over” the Christian who believes. But just like the Jews of Hezekiah’s day, we have forgotten to cleanse ourselves and have forgotten why we do what we do. But Jesus is not angry with us. If we who know and believe pray for those who prepare their hearts to seek God, though they be not cleansed, the Good Lord will “pardon every one.”
This brings me to the second point. God always reserves unto Himself a few faithful who have a zeal for His righteousness, and understand His ways. Because their hearts are toward God, He will listen to them, when they intercede on the behalf of others. And, as we see in the case of Hezekiah, God will extend this mercy even to an entire church congregation.
This is good news, saints, because in this present age of apostasy, most churches have long left off from the true worship of Jesus Christ. This is especially true for charismatic churches, which “make the Word of God of non effect, substituting for doctrine the traditions of men.” There may very well be only one true believer in a church congregation, who truly understands the ways of God. And this one can intercede for all who have their hearts toward God.
Remember that some of the seven churches of the Book of the Revelation were preaching heresy, but, even then, there were a few, such as in the church in Sardis, “which [had] not defiled their garments” (Revelation 3:4). The Lord always reserves (and preserves) unto Himself a remnant.
Now, as 1 John 5:16 tells us that we should not pray for forgiveness for a brother who commits blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, likewise should we not pray for a church that preaches the same. We should leave it. But, generally, as every other sin is pardonable, even so, then, are our churches pardonable, even though they may be preaching a clear heresy, such as the Rapture.
Jesus told us to love one another (John 15:17), and one of the greatest acts of love one can do is to pray for another. Let us, therefore, pray for our congregations. The church desperately needs it.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
“Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” (Galations 4:16).
Grace and peace to my friends and enemies alike.
Yesterday I posted to my Facebook page a link to our article on the Virgin Mary entitled, A Goddess By Any Other Name… This morning I went back to the page and clicked on the link to make sure it worked. Well, imagine my surprise when I was greeted with this security warning:
Facebook’s Security Page seems to be dedicated primarily to security from malicious software, hacking, and identity theft. But this site is a Christian information site, and we neither solicit information from our readers, nor make available software for download. Why, then, does Facebook consider this site a security threat? And why does Norton, the antivirus company, consider this site “potentially unsafe?”
And why does Facebook consider this site “potentially abusive?” Just what is Facebook’s definition of abuse? Is stating one’s opinion considered abusive, even when there is ample evidence to back up that opinion? If there were not ample evidence to back up one’s opinion, would that opinion still be considered abusive? Just who was the “Facebook Partner” who classified this site as potentially abusive? If it was Norton, why do they use the words “potentially unsafe,” while Facebook uses the words “potentially abusive?” If they mean the same thing, why change the wording?
If you haven’t noticed, the internet is becoming less the forum of free expression that it was a decade ago, as the government’s efforts against “cyber-bullying,” the internet version of bullying, is resulting in an increasing number of Americans having their freedom of speech–and freedom to move about–curtailed.
A few months ago, U.S. Marine veteran, Brandon Raub, was unlawfully arrested and detained by government agents and committed to the psychiatric ward of the Salem, North Carolina, Veterans Administration hospital. On August 16, 2012, agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Secret Service removed Raub from his home in Virginia and took him into custody, reportedly neither reading him his rights, nor presenting him with an arrest warrant.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOn94EfzX0o
The government’s actions were in response to comments Raub made on his private Facebook page, which were determined to be “terrorist in nature.” In a recent court case, Facebook comments were cited as evidence by a U.S. federal court as information that can be lawfully obtained by the police to be used against a defendant.
Raub was also classified by psychiatric authorities as psychotic, and this was the pretext under which he was remanded to the Veterans Administration psychiatric ward. No further information on that aspect was available. Reportedly, the psychiatric manual, DSM-IV-TR classifies a mental order known as Oppositional Defiant Disorder, which it defines as “a recurrent pattern of negativistic, defiant, disobedient, and hostile behavior toward authority figures that persists for at least six months.” Psychiatrists are said to refer to it as “Mentality III.”
Circuit Court Judge Allan Sherrett dismissed the case against Raub, citing that the original petition was “devoid of any factual allegations.” Raub was represented by attorney Tony Troy.
The government routinely monitors social networking sites including Facebook for terrorist activity. The problem is that because of the government’s nuanced definition of terrorism, much of what was formerly protected speech can now be considered terrorist speech–a matter of national security. Understand that the government has classified certain actions–such as criticizing the government–terrorism, and is also classifying certain types of speech–such as criticism of the homosexual lifestyle–bullying.
That’s why the Tyler Clementi case was given so much attention. Clementi was an 18-year old student at Rutgers University who jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge on September 22, 2010, reportedly after discovering that his roommate had posted video of Clementi kissing a man. As a result of the media coverage of the Clementi suicide, federal legislation was introduced to combat bullying. In March 2011, the “Tyler Clementi Higher Education Anti-Harassment Act” was introduced, to “require schools that wish to receive federal funding to establish anti-bullying procedures and codes of conduct.” That means that most all public schools will have to introduce some anti-bullying measures.
The Tyler Clementi case brought the national spotlight on “cyber-bullying,” and was the impetus for the government’s monitoring of the internet and social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. Because the definition of terrorism now includes acts that “involve acts dangerous to human life,” bullying can now be considered terrorism and hate speech, and bullies can now be considered terrorists. It is important to understand that because the Bible condemns homosexuality, its language, too, can be considered bullying and hate speech. That means that Bible-believing Christians (at least those who witness to homosexuals) can be considered terrorists. And that’s the end game.
Satan has managed to eliminate almost any truthful discussion of the Bible, Salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, and biblical prophesy from school, the work place, and even church. The Internet is truly the “final frontier”: the only place one can still find the truth, though it may take some digging. Satan has to shut us down, and classifying the truth as terrorism is one way he is working to do this.
That is why I believe Facebook classified this blog as “potentially abusive.” I tell the truth according to the King James Bible, the infallible, inerrant Word of the Living God. God condemns the worship of idols. He calls idolatry an abomination, and He says that anyone who practices idolatry will burn forever in the Lake of Fire.
“And the smoke of their torment riseth up forever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image…” (Revelation 14:11).
Thus saith the Lord.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Grace and peace, Saints.
Today I was reading from Marching Through Mark, a book by J. Vernon McGee, which is used as a textbook for one of my Bible classes. McGee was discussing Mark 11:25-26 in particular, which stresses the importance of forgiveness when going to God in prayer:
“And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have aught against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.
“But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”
It is clear that forgiveness is important to God, and is an essential element of prayer. We are sinners, and have obtained grace only through the blood of Jesus Christ. Because of His sacrifice, and God’s mercy, grace, and forgiveness, God answers and grants our petitions even though we are sinful creatures. And if God can forgive us our sinfulness and rebellion against Him, we should be forgiving of others who have done evil against us. Jesus says that if we do not forgive others, God will not forgive us. And if God doesn’t forgive us, He will not answer our prayers.
In that a Christian’s prayer life is vitally important, especially in the area of spiritual warfare, this teaching is crucial, which is why Jesus went to the trouble to bring it to us. J. Vernon McGee seems to understand this, as, in regard to verse 26, he says, “An unforgiving spirit will short circuit the power of prayer” (p. 54). But he follows this with the following enigmatic statement:
“(This verse is omitted from some of the better manuscripts.”) (Boldface mine.)
I was blown away by this statement. McGee had just emphasized the importance of forgiveness as a crucial component of the believer’s prayer life, yet he goes on to say that “the better manuscripts” omit this verse. This is problematic for me.
You see, “better” is a subjective word. One person may consider something better, while another may consider it worse. Better is totally dependent on the individual, and is actually a useless term, unless one knows the criteria by which a thing is considered better.
Of course, there are instances when one thing is clearly better than something else. A hammer, for example, is better than an eraser for driving nails, as is a car than a horse for cross-country travel. But note that in both comparisons, the least favored thing is not altogether unsuitable: one is just “better” than the other for the stated purpose.
And that’s the key: in order to determine why one thing is considered better than another, it must be clear why that thing is “better.” Some concrete criteria must be given that clearly and unequivocally demonstrates that Thing A is better than Thing B. This is especially important in the Christian world, where absolutes (good and evil (Genesis 3:5), hot and cold (Revelation 3:15), etc.) are everything, and make the difference between “Thus saith the Lord” and “Yea, hath God said?”
So what does J. Vernon McGee mean by “the better manuscripts?” Since we are talking about the manuscripts on which the various bible versions, including the King James Bible, are based, and we say that the Bible is the “infallible, inerrant Word of the Living God,” wouldn’t accurate be the “better” term? Shouldn’t the accuracy of the translations be the primary criteria in deciding which manuscripts are actually the precious Word of God?
Because I know that J. Vernon McGee doesn’t believe that we have the true words of God, and because I know that most theologians who feel this way prefer the New International Version (NIV) over the King James, I decided to go to the NIV to see if Mark 11:26 is there; because if it is not, then I know that, according to J. Vernon McGee, I am holding a bible based on one of the “better” manuscripts, even though it omits this crucial teaching.
Well, as I suspected, Mark 11:26 is not in the NIV. So, even though a passage of Scripture amounting to one of the most crucial teachings in the Bible—words that came from the very mouth of our Lord Jesus Christ—is missing from the NIV—and believe, me, there is much more missing from the NIV than Mark 11:26—we have the assurance of one of America’s “best loved” and highest regarded Bible theologians that the NIV is based on one of the “better” manuscripts.
Why are those manuscripts better? Why, because J. Vernon McGee says they are. And that’s good enough for us, isn’t it?
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
“What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? But I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God.”
1 Corinthians 10:19-20
Grace and peace to the children of light, and greetings to the children of darkness.
This morning, I followed a link on a particular website discussing the biblical Diana of Ephesus. Unbeknownst to me, the link was to a website called The Catholic Word of the Day, which gave a definition of Diana from the Modern Catholic Dictionary. I was instantly surprised; for you see, this dictionary’s definition of Diana of Ephesus marvelously proves my contention that the idol whom Roman Catholics call the Virgin Mary, is not the mother of Jesus, but the goddess Semiramis, who, since antiquity, has gone by many names.
For those of you who may not be familiar with Diana of Ephesus, let us turn to Chapter 19 of the Book of Acts, which gives a brief discussion of her. To set this up for you, the Apostle Paul is in Ephesus preaching the Gospel and against idolatry. This prompts certain of the townspeople who have made a lucrative living from the industry of idolatry to hold a meeting to decide what they will do about Paul. We pick up at this point:
“For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsman; Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth. Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands: So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at naught; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth. And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.”
Acts 19:24-28
As one can plainly see, the biblical Diana of Ephesus was (and is) an idol, which was worshipped in “all Asia and the world.” Now, if Diana of Ephesus was worshipped all over the world, it is logical to assume that she was worshipped under different names depending on the language of the country where she was worshipped. Understand that unlike today, people were not just given names arbitrarily. A name meant something, and people were named for a variety of reasons, including personal qualities, skin color, physical attributes, and even significant events. The tenth chapter of the book of Genesis, for example, gives an excellent example of the latter:
“And Arphaxad begat Salah; and Salah begat Eber. And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.”
Genesis 10:24-25
The son of Eber was named Peleg because “in his days the earth was divided.” Now, the Bible mentions only one such global division, and that can be found in Genesis 11:9, where we are told that after God confused the people’s speech at the Tower of Babel, the Lord “scattered them abroad upon the face of all the earth.” The name Peleg literally means “division.” For the first time in history, the world was divided: not only geographically, but culturally and linguistically. Peleg was named for this monumental event.
An example of someone named based on a personal attribute would be Nabal, the husband of Abigail, who later became one of King David’s wives. Nabal means, “foolish,” and Abigail even went so far as to say that Nabal’s name matched his personality (1 Samuel 25:25). And an example of someone named after his skin color was Esau, who was named Edom, because he was “red.” Edom means red. There are many biblical examples of people whom God Himself renamed or surnamed, including Abram, whom God renamed Abraham; Saul of Tarsus, whom Jesus renamed Paul (the Apostle to the Gentiles); and the Apostle Simon, whom Jesus surnamed Peter or Cephas, which means “a stone.”
So, it was not at all unusual for a person to be known by different names, all having different meanings. Now, if this was true for people, it certainly must have also been true for gods and goddesses, as they were, and are, merely different manifestations of the same two people: Nimrod and Semiramis. The different names are merely based on their many qualities and attributes–whether real or invented–and are determined by the attribute and the language.
Athena, for example, is the Greek goddess of wisdom, but she is known to the Romans as Minerva. She is also called Sophia, the Greek word for wisdom: same attribute, but different languages and, hence, different names. Keep this in mind as we continue our discussion of Diana of Ephesus, for she is, in fact, Athena, Minerva, and Sophia, and also goes by many other names, including Mary.
Now, according to the Catholic Word of the Day, the Modern Catholic Dictionary gives this definition of Diana of Ephesus:
“Roman goddess of the moon, identified with Artemis among the Greeks who worshiped her as a virgin huntress. The Diana of the Ephesians was a combination of Artemis and the Semitic goddess Ashtoreth, patroness of the sexual instinct…”
The first sentence alone contains ample information to prove my contention that Diana of Ephesus is merely another name for the goddess whom Roman Catholics worship as the Virgin Mary. First, note that Diana is said to be a Roman goddess, yet she is identified with the Greek goddess, Artemis. “Identified with” is merely a clever way to say “also called,” for you see, those who know the true identity of the goddess they worship don’t want the general population or the less informed devotees to know that all the different goddesses are the same person. Moreover, is it merely a coincidence that both the goddess Diana and the Roman Catholic Mary are Roman? I submit that it is not.
Next, the Modern Catholic Dictionary says that Diana was the Roman goddess of the moon. It is interesting to note that the Virgin Mary is also identified with the moon as the following images demonstrate:
The above photo is very telling as the artist includes, in left bottom background, a replica of the Temple of Diana, further identifying the Virgin Mary with Diana. It should be noted that the Egyptian goddess, Isis, was also known as the goddess of the moon. Could this be another coincidence?
The Modern Catholic Dictionary says that the Greeks worshipped Artemis as a virgin, though it doesn’t say that Diana was worshipped as such. Alexander Hislop, however, in The Two Babylons, says that Diana was also worshipped as a virgin (p. 30). And everyone knows that the Roman Catholic Mary is called The Virgin. All three goddesses share this significant trait. Yet another coincidence?
A goddess by any other name…
This next series of photos concerns a manifestation of the Virgin Mary in Mexico called “Our Lady of Guadalupe.”
The reader will notice that, again, the Virgin is standing on a crescent moon, which, again, identifies her as Diana, the moon goddess. By the way, the Guadalupe manifestation of the goddess tells us much about the Roman Catholic exaltation of the Virgin Mary, and proves that though Roman Catholics claim to love Jesus Christ, they actually exalt Mary above Him.
The name Guadalupe is very interesting indeed. The Catholic Word of the Day’s featured term for August 22, 2009 was “Luminous Rays,” and a reader posted a response, which included a picture of “Our Lady of Guadalupe” and featured the following prayer:
“Dearest Lady of Guadalupe, fruitful Mother of Holiness, teach me your ways of gentleness and strength. Hear my prayer, offered with deep-felt confidence to beg this favor…
“O Mary, conceived without sin, I come to your throne of grace to share the fervent devotion of your faithful Mexican children who call to thee under the glorious Aztec title of “Guadalupe”–the Virgin who crushed the serpent.
“Queen of Martyrs, whose Immaculate Heart was pierced by seven swords of grief, help me to walk valiantly amid the sharp thorns strewn across my pathway.
“Invoke the Holy Spirit of Wisdom to fortify my will to frequent the Sacraments so that, thus enlightened and strengthened, I may prefer God to all creatures and shun every occasion of sin.
“Help me, as a living branch of the vine that is Jesus Christ, to exemplify His Divine charity always seeking the good of others. Queen of Apostles, aid me to win souls for the Sacred Heart of my Savior.
“Keep my apostolate fearless, dynamic and articulate, to proclaim the loving solicitude of Our Father in Heaven so that the wayward may heed His pleading and obtain pardon, through the merits of your merciful Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.”
What an incredibly revealing prayer! Understand that Roman Catholics claim to pray to Mary as an intermediary between them and “Jesus.” They believe that Jesus sits on His throne a stern, angry, judgmental God, ready to destroy mankind at any moment for our sinfulness and disobedience. They therefore petition Mary, who they believe intercedes on their behalf, because Jesus “cannot deny His mother.” But, as one can plainly see, Mary is not the intermediary here. These petitions are to Mary herself.
But notice that, according to the prayer, the name Guadalupe means, “The Virgin who crushed the serpent.” This is an obvious reference to Genesis 3:15. After Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, God cursed the serpent and made the following decree:
“I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy (the serpent’s) head, and thou (the serpent) shalt bruise his (Jesus’) heel.”
Genesis 3:16
The serpent, of course, is the devil. The identity of the seed, however, is interesting, because God does not say “He shall bruise thy head” which would imply that the seed is Jesus Christ. Instead, the third person singular neuter pronoun “it” is used. Now, “it” could refer to the “seed,” but it could also refer to something else.
There is only one other reference I know of to Satan’s head being bruised, and it can be found in Romans Chapter 16:
“And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.”
Romans 16:20
The God of peace, of course, is Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 13:11). So, it is Jesus who shall bruise the serpent’s head, and He will do it through the Christian Church. Roman Catholics, however, believe that it is Mary who will bruise the serpent’s head. They believe that “the woman” spoken of in Genesis 3:15 is Mary, and “the seed” is Jesus Christ. But the Bible teaches that the woman is Israel (Revelation 12:1-17). The enmity between Satan and the woman, therefore, is the enmity between Satan and the Jews.
As for the seed, think about this for a minute: Satan is a spirit, so he cannot have seed: that is, children. God is not only talking about physical seed, then, but also spiritual seed. Israel, the woman, has two types of seed: physical seed (the Jews), and spiritual seed (the Christian church):
“Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ...And if ye be in Christ, then are you Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:16,29
This is why Paul said that Jesus would bruise Satan’s head under the Church’s feet. It is Christ Jesus, through the Church, that will crush Satan’s head, not the Virgin Mary. If God had meant that Mary would crush the serpent’s head, He would have said, “She shall bruise thy head.” But He didn’t say that.
The most troubling element of this prayer is that the petitioner desires to approach Mary’s “throne of grace.” Nowhere in the Bible is Mary declared a queen, and nowhere in the Bible is Mary said to have a throne. This is Catholic tradition, not biblical doctrine. Moreover, not only is Mary declared to have a throne, but it is a “throne of grace.” According to the Bible, only one person has a throne of grace: the Lord Jesus Christ:
“Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed on into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:14-16).
Hebrews 4:14-15
As stated, the Roman Catholic church exalts Mary into the place of our Savior, the Lord Jesus. This can again be proven by the fact that this prayer declares that Mary was “conceived without sin.” This is the blasphemous doctrine of the Immaculate Conception: a doctrine that does not come from the Authorized Version of the Bible, the King James, but was actually decided by a Vatican council and can be found in one of the Apocryphal books:
“Thou art all fair, O Mary, and there is in thee no stain of original sin.”
Judith 13
The Apocrypha was never accepted as Holy Writ, as it was not part of the Masoretic or Received Text, but was part of the corrupted texts that came from the Gnostic schools of Alexandria, Egypt. The Holy Bible teaches that Mary, after giving birth to our Savior, went to Jerusalem and offered a sin sacrifice (Luke 2:24).
The only person born without sin was Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4:15, 1 John 3:5, 2 Corinthians 5:21).
And think about this for a minute: If Mary was “conceived without sin,” then why wasn’t she worthy to die for the sins of mankind? Hmmm? For the answer to this question, and more, about the Virgin Mary, we strongly suggest that you read the article, Two Marys. It will open your eyes.
If the reader still doubts that Roman Catholicism exalts Mary above Jesus, I invite him to examine the following photos of “Our Lady of Guadalupe”:
Please direct your attention to the angel at the bottom of the photos. Notice his hands. Can you see that they are grabbing the hem of Mary’s dress and cloak? Now prayerfully read the following biblical Gospel account:
“While [Jesus] spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped Him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live. And Jesus arose, and followed him, and so did His disciples.
And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind Him, and touched the hem of His garment: For she said within herself, If I may but touch His garment, I shall be whole. But Jesus turned Him about, and when He saw her, He said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.”
Matthew 9:18-21
Did you get that? The woman touched the hem of Jesus’ garment and was made whole.
Now someone reading this will believe that the placement of the angel’s hands was purely coincidental. But what they do not understand is that in the world of the occult (and make no mistake, the Roman Catholic church is an occult organization) nothing is coincidental. Everything in the occult, even down to the minutest detail in a painting, is done deliberately and intentionally. The Roman Catholic church is appropriating the qualities of Jesus, including His mercy, grace, power to heal, and, yes, even His divinity, and attributing them to the Virgin Mary. Make no mistake about that.
The message of these paintings of “Our Lady of Guadalupe” is that Mary can make you whole. And listen to this very carefully: if Mary can make you whole, then Mary can save you. And that is what the Roman Catholic church really believes and teaches, but will not outright say. They are calling Mary the Saviour.
If you have a problem digesting this, consider that only God is sinless, as the Bible clearly teaches that since Adam’s fall, all mankind is sinful (Romans 5:12). Only Jesus was sinless, and Jesus Christ is God Almighty (Revelation 1:8). For Mary to be sinless, as the Roman Catholic church teaches, she would have to be God. And they know this. The Roman Catholic church is calling Mary a goddess, because they know full well that she is, in fact, the goddess Semiramis, who, by the way, was also called Myrianimous: the goddess of many names. Mary is Semiramis.
If you cannot get your head around this, check out this video below of Pope Francis, speaking in code, calling the Virgin Mary Semiramis.
Now, read this article, so you can understand the pope’s cryptic remarks. Now, please ponder these revelations.
Returning to our comparison of Diana and the Virgin Mary, there is one last thing that I want you to consider very, very carefully. But first, let us take one final look at the Modern Catholic Dictionary’s definition of Diana of Ephesus:
“Roman goddess of the moon, identified with Artemis among the Greeks who worshiped her as a virgin huntress. The Diana of the Ephesians was a combination of Artemis and the Semitic goddess Ashtoreth, patroness of the sexual instinct…”
Note that Diana was not only identified with Artemis, but she was also identified with Ashtoreth, patroness of the sexual instinct. This aspect of sexuality identifies Diana with Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of sexual love.
Now, I want you to consider something. Did you ever notice that almost every image of the Virgin Mary shows her standing with one knee bent? Almost without exception, she is shown in this position. Have you ever wondered why the Virgin Mary stands in this curious position? I had, and it always puzzled me. I knew it had to have a meaning, but for the life of me, I couldn’t understand what.
Then the Spirit showed me. Did you ever consider that in this position, Mary’s legs are actually slightly apart or, if you will, slightly open? If you think about it, this is not a very flattering position for a woman, especially a purported virgin. In the old days, paintings, drawings, and photos of women of good report always depicted them with their legs closed to symbolize their chastity. But Mary’s legs are not closed.
If we consider that nothing–absolutely nothing–in the world of the occult is coincidental, then we must consider that this has been done intentionally and for a very specific purpose. I submit that it has been done to identify the Virgin Mary with Aphrodite, the goddess of sexual love. And if Mary is Aphrodite, then she is also Diana, Artemis, Cebele, Demeter, Ceres, Ashtoreth, and a host of other goddesses, because, somewhere along the line, they all share a common attribute, and that attribute always has something to do with sex: either sexual promiscuity as in the case of Aphrodite and Ashtoreth, or, in the case of Artemis and the Virgin Mary, sexual abstinence.
Tradition has it that Semiramis, the wife of Nimrod, who was deified and worshipped, was a very promiscuous and sexually immoral woman. Incidentally, though the Ephesian Diana was said to have been a virgin, the Roman Diana was also the goddess of sexual love.
To further prove this point, I submit to you one more piece of information. According to historian, Alexander Hislop, in his book, The Two Babylons, Semiramis was also known as Columbia, The Dove. That is why so many things in not just America, but the world, are called Columbia or a derivative of that name. Now, with this in mind, examine this photo of the “icon” of Columbia Pictures:
Notice that “The Lady” pictured is standing exactly how the Virgin Mary is almost always depicted. And notice how the nice, moral people at Columbia Pictures were kind enough to “illuminate” her leg so we can get a good look! And they were so intent on doing this that they defied the laws of light, for the torch that Columbia (or Liberty) is holding is so bright that there is no way her leg could be backlit in this manner. They are telling us that this is Aphrodite, the goddess of love.
By the way, notice the pyramid-shaped cloud behind Columbia. Now notice that there are actually three such clouds, side-by-side, though the other two are not shown in their entirety. I’ve seen many clouds in my day, but I’ve never seen one shaped quite like a pyramid. And I’ve definately never seen three in a row. Notice also that the three quasi pyramid shaped clouds are somewhat staggered: the left is slightly behind the center, which is slightly behind the right. Now, where have we seen something like that?
Uh-huh. These clouds are symbols for the Egyptian pyramids at Giza. And if you think I’m reaching for straws, notice that the center pyramid, called the Great Pyramid of Chiops, has a capstone. Now notice that the light from Columbia’s torch is placed exactly where the capstone of the Great Pyramid would be. Now take a look at this:
Saints, this is no coincidence. This pyramid symbolism suggests that Columbia is also Isis, the Egyptian goddess of the moon and of sexual love.
The placement of the torch also suggests that the torch is a symbol for the Egyptian God, Horus, who is really the great rebel, Nimrod. But that’s another story.
Further proof that Mary is Aphrodite can be found in the prayer to “Our Lady of Guadalupe,” where, in the first line, Mary is called “fruitful.” With respect to women, this word has always been used to mean bountiful in childbirth. Recall that in the second chapter of Genesis, God tells Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and multiply.” Now let me ask you a question: can a virgin be fruitful?
Now you may ask how the goddess came to be known as Mary. Well, perhaps you have seen images of a naked goddess standing in a sea shell:
That goddess is Venus, the goddess of the sea. Later, the sea came to be known as The Mare (latin: mari or mare), and so, the goddess became known as Mary. Find this unbelievable? Well, notice that Venus is standing in a sea shell. Now consider the following photo:
Notice the sea shell and stylized waves of the sea on the back of the pope’s chair? Now consider this photo:
And this:
The Virgin Mary is not only called Aphrodite, but also Ashtoreth, the same goddess that King Solomon and the apostate Jews worshipped and symbolized with a star. Read more about it here, and here. Those who worship the goddess use secret hand signs to identify themselves to one another. Read more about the Cult of Mary here.
The podcast of this teaching is available at the iTunes Store for playback on your favorite audio device. You can subscribe to our podcast for free here.
Think.
The Still Man
P.S. The idol Mary is called the Abomination of Desolation in the Bible. In the New World Order kingdom of Antichrist, the world will be required to worship this goddess or perish. You may want to read more about it here.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
“The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light” (Romans 13:12).
Dark days are coming saints, and, truth be told, they are already upon us. But we are not to be moved by the things that are coming upon this world. We are the children of light and we must so walk. Jesus is in the process of separating the sheep from the goats, and who we serve will be obvious by what we say, what we do, where we go, and with whom we run. We must therefore cast off the works of the flesh and sanctify ourselves to the Lord. It’s high time. The night is spent.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption drawers nigh.
The Still Man
Grace and peace to my fellow strangers and pilgrims, and greetings to those who love the world.
For some reason, the song “The Greatest Love of All” kept coming to my mind yesterday. I don’t know why that was. It’s possible that I heard it somewhere without realizing it or perhaps it was subliminally piped into my subconscious. However it happened, the song kept playing in my mind and, before long, I found myself trying to see how much of the song I could remember. It turned out that I remembered the whole song, as it is fairly short.
For sure, it is a beautiful song. I first heard it sung by George Benson, but the Whitney Houston rendition is by far the most beautiful. As I sung it to myself aloud, recalling the lyrics, I was surprised at the antichrist message they conveyed. In fact, “The Greatest Love Of All” is really New Age. You may find this hard to believe, but a close examination of the lyrics under the lens of Holy writ will bear this out. Let us closely examine them:
“I believe the children are our future
“Teach them well and let them lead the way…”
The song starts out with a theme that has been repeated time and again in the media for decades: The children are our future, and, yes, we must teach them well. The song does well up to this point. However it takes a nosedive when it tells us that we must ‘let [the children] lead the way.’ This is the point where the song starts to go south. Children cannot lead the way, because they don’t know themselves where they are going, but must be lead by a competent adult, preferably their parents. The idea that children must lead the way runs counter to the Bible, which says,
“Train up a child in the way that he must go” (Proverbs 22:6).
According to the Bible, a child must be taught the way that he must go, which implies that he has no idea where he is going. How then, can he “lead the way?” But it doesn’t end there. The song continues:
“Show them all the beauty they possess inside.”
The concept that we are all beautiful inside may be beautiful, but it is actually untrue according to the Bible, which teaches:
“The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9).
and…
“There is none good, no not one” (Romans 3:10).
The Bible teaches that there is no good thing within us, as we are sinful and evil by nature. This is not only true according to the Bible. Even a cursory glance at current events reported in the news media as well as the evidence of our own eyes would demonstrate to even the most naïve person that human beings are nothing if not evil. It may be very encouraging to a child that has been made to feel worthless, inferior, or unlovely to hear that he or she is beautiful, but to stress this to a child is not only unbiblical, but it may be setting the child up for failure by focusing his attention too much on himself. This may lead to self-absorption, selfishness, and pride. Speaking of the latter:
“Give them a sense of pride to make it easier…”
Again, this goes counter to the Word of God. The Bible teaches that “pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18). 2 Timothy 3:1 lists pride among the attributes that characterize the apostasy of the last days. Pride led to the fall of the great angel Lucifer, who, as Satan, deceived Eve into committing the first sin: a sin for which the world is now paying.
Pride doesn’t make anything “easier.” Pride leads to destruction, because a prideful person will not admit that he is a sinner in need of salvation. And, even if he will admit this, he will often think he can save himself through good works of some sort, and the Bible teaches that good works cannot save. It is only through the precious blood of Jesus that we can be saved. Pride, therefore, is a hindrance to salvation.
When I reflect on this line, I am left wondering what the “it” is that could be made easier by being prideful. Could it be going to hell?
“Let the children’s laughter remind us how we used to be.”
The way we used to be was innocent and naive, like all children. Is the writer suggesting we become as children again?
“Everybody’s searching for a hero,
“People need someone to look up to.”
The writer makes a good point here. It’s true that everybody is searching for a hero, and therein lies the problem. Did you every wonder why everybody is searching for a hero? The answer to that question can be gotten by answering two other questions: what is a hero, and what do we do with our heroes? A hero, for lack of a better definition, is a role model: someone to “look up” to—someone to pattern oneself after. One usually qualifies to be a hero by accomplishing some feat of courage, bravery, or physical excellence.
There was a time when our heroes were policemen and firemen, because these put themselves in harm’s way almost on a daily basis for people they don’t even know. This is no longer true, however, as most people now idolize sports stars and entertainers as their heroes.
And what do we do with our heroes? Why, we idolize them. We worship them. We buy, sell, trade, and collect action figures of them, cards with pictures (images) of them, and t-shirts or photos with their autographs. Many follow their heroes around the country and even travel overseas just to get a glimpse of them. And, in doing all of this, many spend exorbitant amounts of money. Would you not say that this is a form of worship? It sure sounds like it to me.
A hero, then, is an idol, and idolatry is the sin that God hates most. In fact, according to Romans 1:21-32, once men begin to practice idolatry, they open the door for a bevy of other sins to come in, including homosexuality.
Clearly, then, hero worship is not a good thing. Why then do we worship heroes? Because God created us for worship, and if we won’t worship God, then we have to replace Him with something or someone else. One problem with this is that most, if not all, of our heroes are immoral people, who do not make suitable role models for our young ones.
“I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs.”
“A lonely place to be,
“And so I learned to depend on me.”
This is a puzzling statement. Just what needs did the writer have that absolutely no one could fill? When one considers that the only one who could fulfill his needs was himself, it becomes clear that his need was to do whatever he wanted to do. He is self-ish.
This line actually reveals the antichrist New Age character of this song, for the New Age emphasizes self (self-reliance, self-healing, self-improvement, etc.) It also emphasizes “personal responsibility,” or the idea that a person should be responsible for himself in all areas of life, including his salvation. At its core, personal responsibility is merely a code word for self-redemption: the idea that we do not need a Savior. And if we can redeem ourselves, then we must be gods: another theme of the New Age.
Again, this is a fulfillment of prophecy, because 2 Timothy 3:2 says that men in the last days would be “unthankful,” and one way that men are being unthankful is not being grateful for Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross for their sins. They prefer to find their own path to heaven. They will, of course, fail miserably, because Jesus is the only way.
“I decided long ago, never to walk in anyone’s shadows.”
Whether we like it or not, we all walk in someone else’s shadow. Be it our father, mother, brother, sister, or some other person, very few of us have ever done anything that someone else hasn’t already done. To decide never to walk in anyone’s shadow essentially means, therefore, to decide not to accept what others have done before us. But even more importantly, it could mean deciding not to accept what others have done for us, especially Jesus Christ. The Bible says,
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
Jesus came into this world to save sinners by dying on the cross and shedding His blood for your sins and mine. Those who accept Jesus’ sacrifice not only have eternal life in the world to come, but peace, blessings, and perhaps more importantly, security and safety in the present world. The Bible says,
“He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High, shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty” (Psalm 91:1).
Jesus Christ is God Almighty (Revelation 1:8). To decide “never to walk in anyone’s shadow” is to refuse the protection of the Most High God. In these increasingly perilous times, if there is anywhere we need to walk, it is under the shadow of Jesus Christ.
“If I fail, if I succeed, at least I live as I believe.”
This is the epitome of pride, and translates to “Do your own thing.” Frank Sinatra echoed this mantra when he sang, “I Did It My Way.” This is further proof of the New Age character of this song. The idea of doing it one’s own way is actually a major tenet of Humanism called Values Clarification, which basically holds that there are no moral absolutes, or right and wrong. Whatever is right for you is right, and if whatever you thought was right turns out to be wrong, it was merely a learning experience. No harm, no foul.
Values Clarification says that anything—even murder—is right, as long as you believe it is right. Do you know that there are many (including a former friend of mine) who believe that Hitler was right for murdering millions of Jews because he believed he was doing the right thing? (Those were my friend’s actual words.) Values Clarification is dangerous, and it is being taught in almost every grade school, high school, and university in America. Values Clarification is having a devastating effect on America’s youth, and Columbine is proof.
The idea that “If it is right to you, it is right” is encapsulated in the saying, “’Do as thou wilt’ shall be the whole of the law,” a saying made popular by Satanist Aleister Crowley in the early twentieth century. This sentiment was later promulgated by “hippies” in the sixties as “Do your own thing,” and is now being promoted by New Agers in this century as “If it feels good, do it.” The concept of doing one’s own thing, or one’s own will, is purely satanic, for we are supposed to be doing the will of God.
“No matter what they take from me,
“They can’t take away my dignity.”
This is just foolish. There are many ways to take away someone’s dignity. Ask any prison inmate, concentration camp survivor, or prisoner of war. Again, this is just raw pride.
“Because the greatest love of all is happening to me,
“I found the greatest love of all inside of me.
“The greatest love of all is easy to achieve,
“Learning to love yourself it is the greatest love of all.”
Four times this stanza talks of “the greatest love of all.” And what is this love? “Learning to love yourself.” Once more, this is unscriptural, for the Bible says,
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
This is the greatest love of all. Jesus said that there was no greater love than that one should lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13). The Apostle Paul said that we should esteem others more than ourselves (Philippians 2:3). But the New Age makes it all about us. This, again, is satanic, and is a fulfillment of 2 Timothy 3:1, which says that in the latter days, “men shall be lovers of their own selves.”
When men begin to love themselves, they become prideful and self-centered. They no longer see themselves as sinful creatures in need of salvation. Ultimately, their hearts harden against God and they fail to even believe that there is such a thing as sin. Nowhere in the Bible are we admonished to love ourselves, but Jesus said that we are to “love the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our soul, and with all our mind” (Matthew 22:37).
The last stanza of the song reveals its antichrist character:
“And if by chance that special place,
“That you’ve been dreaming of,
“Leads you to a lonely place,
“Find your strength in love.”
I propose that the “special place” spoken of here is Heaven, and that the writer believes that looking for it will lead one to a lonely place, in the same way as the writer searched for a hero, and, not finding one, found himself in a lonely place. He is saying that Jesus Christ did not live up to his expectations and probably won’t live up to ours either. He suggests that if we find ourselves in this predicament, we should find our strength in “love,” which he says is in ourselves. In effect, the writer is telling us to look inward and not outward for God, because God is within us. This is a recurring motif in the New Age and is the actual theme of this song.
“The Greatest Love Of All” is New Age all day and all night. Though beautiful, it stresses dependency on self, rather than on the Lord Jesus. It tells us to look inward rather than outward; to look down rather than up; to do our own thing—to do our will—rather than the Lord’s. (“Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”) When we consider that Satan, in his rebellion against God, five times said, “I will” (Isaiah 14:13-14), it is clear from whence comes this teaching. To do our own thing is rebellion, and rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.
Though a beautiful song, “The Greatest Love Of All,” is New Age, in that it suggests that we trust in ourselves and not in God. This is an antichrist message.
“Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5).
The Still Man
Grace and peace, Saints, and greetings to the unsaved.
Well, this title is about as self-serving as they come, but all the same, I am back, after spending nearly six months in Germany. And what an interesting trip it was. Indeed, friends, Satan has been very very busy. But I rejoice in that, when the enemy comes in like a flood, I can seek help from up above, for I know that my God will lift up a standard against him.
As our regular readers know; that is, if there remain any, our last post was August 4th. And again, as always, “I apologize for the lack of regular posting.” I want you to understand that I don’t regard not writing regularly to you a light thing. The Lord Jesus gave me this ministry primarily for the purpose of educating, informing, and edifying the body of Christ, so when I fail to fulfill this calling, it is to the Lord that I am ultimately responsible, and I feel worse for not fulfilling my responsibility to Him than I do for not fulfilling my responsibility to you.
But, let’s face it: I’m a lousy blogger, and I don’t think that will change in the foreseeable future. Therefore, I will not venture to make any promises other than to say that I will do my best to get better. But I’m also lousy at journaling; so, in that blogging is merely the electronic version of that activity, I don’t expect any miracles.
But what I will do is this: I will assure you that here you will continue to get scripturally sound, relevant, timely, and edifying teaching, admonition, and information that will sharpen your discernment skills, challenge your worldview, and stretch the limits of your credulity. We will edify and inform the body of Christ and lift up the name of Jesus as we admonish you to fulfill the Great Commission by preaching the gospel to every creature and witness to a lost and dying world.
We will grow together as we accompany you on this spiritual journey of Christian growth and discovery. As the Lord shows me I will show you, and together we will grow and mature in wisdom and understanding of the mystery of godliness. And with the help of the Lord Jesus Christ, we will eventually defeat the Great Adversary, that old serpent called the devil and Satan, when the Lord Jesus returns in great power and majesty. Amen.
So stay tuned, stay patient, and stay encouraged, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Copyright © 2011-2012 Anthony Keeton, The Still Man. All rights reserved.
Grace and peace, Saints.
Satan hates marriage. So, in that we, the Body of Christ, are the enemies of Satan, then we can look for him to do all that he can to destroy our marriages. To this end, Satan has an arsenal of weapons at his disposal. But the weapon that would appear to have given him the greatest success is the Feminist Movement. This movement was designed to usurp the authority of a husband in the home by causing women to feel that being in submission to their husbands is being subservient to them and thus robs them of their “independence” and “self-identity.”
The Feminist Movement has been very effective in destroying the man’s place as head of the household by making women ashamed of their role as mothers and homemakers–a role that has been demonized for decades in the media. The media translates the role of wife/mother/homemaker as being “barefoot and pregnant” and ignorant and portrays the woman who fills this role as being co-dependent, having low self-esteem, and having no identity of her own.
Feminists constantly parrot about the line that the traditional role of women as wives and homemakers robs women of their own identity and self worth. Consequently, many women seek to forge for themselves an identity completely separate from that of their husbands. For this reason, women are increasingly choosing to keep their maiden name when they marry rather than adopt their husband’s family name. Others are opting for the middle ground: tagging their husbands’ name to their maiden name as an addendum.
All this runs counter to the Bible, which teaches that once they marry, the man and the woman “become one flesh.” They no longer have a separate identity, though they are clearly separate people.
Sadly, this movement has even swept through the Christian church, which now caters largely to women and even promotes them as the spiritual heads of the household. Though church attendance in general has been declining in recent years, church attendance among women–especially black women–is on the increase. This may seem like a good thing, but if one looks carefully, one may see that many of these women seem hostile to men. I believe this to be largely due to the influence of mega church pastors like T.D. Jakes, Juanita Bynum, and so-called Christian celebrities like Steve Harvey, all of whom preach an essentially feminist gospel.
The Hollywood motion picture and music industries have played no small part in the feminization of the Christian church, evidenced most conspicuously by the popularity of actor/film maker Tyler Perry and his signature character of Medea: a loud-mouthed, gun-toting, offensive “Christian” matriarch apparently based on the stereotypical strong-willed and deeply spiritual grandmother who was the anchor and bulwark of many black families (including the author’s). Perry’s character, however, is only nominally Christian.
Make no mistake: feminism and the anarchy it has spawned will be here until Jesus returns. What then, is the Christian husband to do, whose household has been touched by this Satanic menace? The answer may be in a little-quoted verse of the first epistle of the apostle Peter:
“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.”
1 Peter 3:7
What means the phrase “according to knowledge?” I believe it means that we should bear in mind that our wives are not only the physical descendants of Eve, but also the spiritual descendants of Eve. As all Christians should know, the Bible teaches that Eve was deceived by Satan in the garden of Eden into eating of the forbidden fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. This disobedience was the first sin, and because of this sin, all mankind has inherited the sin nature. But what few realize is that, although the responsibility for this sin fell upon Adam (for he was responsible for his woman), he himself was not deceived:
“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”
1 Timothy 2:14
This is why the Bible refers to the woman as “the weaker vessel.” If mankind inherited his nature from Adam and Eve, and Eve’s nature led to her being deceived, then all women have inherited Eve’s nature. It is important to this discussion to determine the exact nature that women have inherited from the first woman, and we can do so by examining what the Bible teaches us about Eve’s rationale that led to her sin:
“And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat…”
Genesis 3:6
This verse teaches us some very important things about the way many women think. Let us, therefore, dissect it.
“The woman saw…
1. “That the tree was good for food.”
This is how Eve justified eating of the fruit. God had told them not to eat of the fruit of this tree, however, Eve attempted to justify disobeying God’s commandment by noting that the fruit of the tree of knowledge was edible. In other words, Eve was saying that God should not have forbidden them to eat from a perfectly good tree. She was, in effect, accusing God of being impractical. We can see this reasoning in women of the present day. If a woman wants to do something that she knows she ought not to do, she will attempt to justify it using logic, when often the motive for doing the thing was anything but logical.
2. “That [the tree] was pleasant to the eyes.”
This is how Satan lures women. There is an old saying that “the best way to a man’s heart is through his stomach.” Men are usually more practical than women. A man must take care of his family. In order to take care of his family, he must work, and to work, he must eat. The logic, therefore, is that if you want to keep a man, know how to cook. Women, on the other hand, are creatures who are attracted to things that touch them on a sensory level. This is reflected even in the language that women use. While a man may say, “I think,” women most often respond, “I feel.” At the moment of temptation, the allure of the tree was stronger to Eve than God’s commandment.
This is no less true today. Satan knows that in order to make sin look good to women, he must appeal to their senses. And just as Eve was powerless to resist Satan then, many women are just as susceptible to his machinations now.
3. “[That it was] a tree to make one wise.”
This is what lies at the heart of the feminist movement. You see, Eve did not need to be wise, because she lived in the garden with an All-Wise God, and the first man, Adam, who, being created in the image of God, and having not yet been touched by the curse of sin, was likely intelligent beyond anything modern man can or will achieve. Eve had everything she needed, so there was no need for her to desire to be wise. It is also important to understand that Satan told Eve that she could “be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5). So, when the Bible tells us that she saw that the tree was able to make one wise, it is not discernment that is meant here. Eve aspired to be as wise as God. And if it were possible for her to do so, then she would no longer have needed Him.
And therein lies the key. The feminist movement attempts to make men obsolete, by promoting the lie that women are just as strong, just as smart, and just as capable of “success” as a man. A woman who aspires to be as wise as her husband attempts to usurp the authority of her husband by making him of no further use to her.
Now many women do not appreciate that the Bible refers to them as the weaker vessel. But when they express their disdain of the term, they seem to understand “weaker” to mean “weak.” But the Bible does not say that women are the “weak vessel,” but the “weaker vessel.” There is a difference.
Though not physically as strong as the average man, woman are not weak. It takes a great deal of strength to have a baby. Men were not made to have children, and so God did not program men to handle the pain of childbirth. A woman, though, being created to bear children, is able to handle much more pain than a man. Again, there are exceptions, but for the most part, women seem to be able to handle a great deal more pain than a man.
Women are not stupid. Some of the smartest people I have known have been women. Women are naturally good multi-taskers. Women are great prioritizers. And they are great at details. They can not only see the forest AND the trees, but the critters and all the insects. And everyone knows that women have that famous built in compass. They always know where they are and when they are. I have driven across America many times by myself and gotten lost, but I have never been loss when there was a woman in the car. Never.
What, then, does the Bible mean by “the weaker vessel?” I don’t believe it is talking about carnal things, but spiritual things. Women have inherited Eve’s nature and a great part of that nature is a predisposition to be deceived by Satan. She is generally spiritually weaker than the man. Weaker, I say, than the man; not inferior to the man. She also has a tendency to attempt to usurp authority.
So in order to dwell with our wives “according to knowledge” as the Bible teaches, we need to be cognizant that women are naturally prone to deception and we need to recognize in what ways our wives are vulnerable and how they could be taken advantage of, and we should take steps to minimize their exposure to potential problems.
If, for example, your spouse is weak in the area of financial stewardship, she should not have unfettered access to the family’s finances. It may not be prudent, therefore, for a man in such a situation to have a joint checking account or credit card with his wife. It may also not be a good idea to cosign on any loans with her.
If your wife is recovering from substance abuse such as alcoholism, it would not be a good idea to keep alcoholic substances in the house. It may also be necessary to monitor your wife’s comings and goings to an extent to be aware of opportunities that Satan could use to tempt your wife to fall back into her old ways. And it may be beneficial to monitor where and with whom she goes as well as how she spends her money.
If your wife is weak in the faith, an unbeliever, or a convert from a religious cult or false religion, you may need to be especially vigilant, as many of these groups will go to great lengths to get a person back. Moreover, if your spouse does not have a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, she will likely lack discernment in many areas and may not have the ability to distinguish between good and bad or prudent and foolish.
Never forget that many live by the old adage, “keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer.“ They will attempt to befriend the unwitting spouse and plant the seed of discontent or discord in her marriage. This happens more often than many of us are aware and is the reason why the apostle Paul warned that false prophets will “creep into houses and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with diverse lusts” (2 Timothy 3:6).
I have personal experience with this phenomenon. A few years ago, a young couple moved into our apartment building in Germany, and within a few short months had befriended both my then teenage daughter and my wife without my knowledge. My only inkling that something was wrong was that both my wife and daughter had suddenly begun to rebel. When I began to pray about it and slowly put the pieces together, the Lord showed me that it was the young couple–specifically the wife–that was the cause of the rebellion. She had befriended my wife one day by giving her a ride home from dropping my child off at school where (coincidentally) her own daughter attended. I don’t know how she managed to gain my daughter’s confidence, but I was to later learn that my daughter would stop by the woman’s house on occasion on her way back from school.
Now don’t think for one minute that the woman befriending both my wife and daughter was a coincidence. This was planned well in advance, as was, I believe, her coming to that apartment building in the first place. She was sent there for the express purpose of winning the confidence of the women in my house so that she could later destroy the sanctity of our home by influencing them to rebel against my authority. And rebel they did.
Mine was not an isolated incident. The divorce rate among Christians is approaching that of the unsaved. This too, is no coincidence. I truly believe that, as it was this woman’s assignment to infiltrate and destroy my family, there are others whose mission it is to destroy other Christian families–especially those of pastors, elders, evangelists, and other men of God. And one way they are accomplishing this is by identifying, targeting, and influencing the women in these families, in particular those women who are spiritually weak. Watch out for this.
Dwelling with our wives according to knowledge also helps us to pray effectively for them, asking God to give them a measure of discernment in the areas where they are lacking. This is in keeping with the apostle Peter’s admonition to be sober and vigilant (1 Peter 5:8). This is extremely important. Satan knows all of our weaknesses because it was he who gave them to us. In this spiritual warfare, we don’t have the luxury of time to get to know ourselves and our wives. It took at least a generation for us to develop into the person we are, so it would normally take at least half as long for us to learn ourselves and at least as long for us to learn our spouses. And all the while we are in school, Satan is busy exploiting our weaknesses. We must, therefore, enlist the aid of the Holy Spirit to show us not only what our own issues are, but what our wives’ issues are as well. To do that we have to stay in prayer.
Lastly, Peter tells us that we must give honor to our wives remembering that though they are weaker than we, they are still heirs together with us of “the grace of life.” We may be slightly ahead of them while we run this race (because God has ordained it so, according to His idea of order), but God’s plan is for us to finish together. We are all sinners and partakers of the same grace. We should, therefore, treat our wives as joint heirs–sisters.
It should be especially noted that in so doing, Scripture says that our prayers will not be hindered, which implies that not following this commandment would hinder our prayers. This demonstrates just how important this is to God. Though the man is the head of the household, he is by no means to lord it over his wife. The man and his wife are partners–joint heirs of the grace of God, and the wife is by no means insignificant. That said, the husband is responsible for his wife as Adam was responsible for Eve, and the wife is responsible to her husband.
That to disregard this commandment could be a hindrance to our prayer life means that to not dwell with our wives according to knowledge is a sin, because we are failing, as husbands, in our responsibility to be good stewards of our marriages and priests of our families, constantly interceding on behalf of our wives and children (James 5:16, Job 1:4-5). We ought not to fail in this responsibility.
Let us, therefore, not only love, cherish, and protect our wives, but let us dwell with them according to knowledge and honor them as joint heirs of God’s grace.
Our podcast on this teaching is available at the iTunes Store. Subscribe to our free podcast today. For your convenience, it is also provided below.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
“And he causesth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number the beast: for it the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.”
Revelation 13:16-18
Grace and peace, Saints.
Most of us are familiar with the mark of the beast associated with the Antichrist and the “cashless society” mentioned in the thirteenth chapter of the Book of the Revelation.
I believe that much of the concern over the mark—in and out of the Christian community—is the result of fear, since the Bible teaches that anyone who accepts the mark will be damned. Christians need not be concerned, however, as the Bible clearly teaches that everyone EXCEPT those whose names are written in the Book of Life will accept the mark. But though we need not be concerned, we all need to know what the Lord Jesus has to say about the mark of the beast, especially since He took the time to tell us about it. This is particularly true considering the consequences of accepting or rejecting the mark are eternal and will affect every living human being.
Moreover, it behooves us as Christians to discover what this mark will be to help us to better witness to the unsaved. Recall that Jesus often told His disciples about things before they happened, to the end that when those things came to pass according to His word, they would believe that He was the Christ. I believe He is doing the same thing with regard to the mark of the beast. Just about everyone has heard at least something about it, and I truly believe that many, who will not believe the Bible now, will believe later when they see this prophecy fulfilled.
We will, therefore, attempt to discover what the mark of the beast will be.
Because there are so many theories about it, many of which only engender fear, let us first dispel any myths about the mark.
Let us revisit Revelation 13:17:
“And he causesth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads…”
Revelation 13:17
The passage states that the False Prophet will cause all to receive the mark, not force all to receive it. What this says to me is that he will orchestrate events in such a way that people will feel compelled to receive the mark to survive. It will not be mandatory. Proof of this is the fact that Christians will not accept the mark:
“And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship [the Antichrist] whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb…” (Revelation 13:8).
Everyone whose name is not written in the book of life will worship the beast. And everyone who worships the beast will receive the mark. Christians, however, whose names are written in the book, will not worship the beast, and will not accept his mark (Revelation 20:4). Furthermore, Revelation 20:4 says that Christians will be beheaded for their witness of Jesus (soul-winning) and for the Word of God (owning a Bible). They will also be put to death for not worshiping the goddess, the Virgin Mary. But I don’t read in the Word of God that people will be put to death for refusing to accept the mark. That doesn’t mean, of course, that it can’t happen.
I believe that the reason a great portion of humanity has been deceived into believing that they will be forced to accept the mark of the beast is due to the corrupted translation of Scripture found in the New International Version (NIV). The NIV translates Revelation 13:16-17 thus:
“He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.”
The reader will see that the meaning conveyed here is entirely different from that of the King James. There are two lies being promulgated here: 1. that everyone will be forced to wear the mark, and 2. that the mark is “the name of the beast or the number of his name.” We will discuss the second lie later. As for the first lie, that everyone will be forced to accept the mark, we saw in the King James Version, everyone will be caused to wear it. There is a difference.
If I arrived late to my job because I could not find my keys, it would be correct for me to say that the lost keys caused me to be late, but it would be incorrect for me to say that the keys forced me to be late. When one says that he is forced to do something, he usually means that he was made to do the thing against his will. And this usually implies violence or the threat of violence. To cause someone to do something, however, generally means that someone or something made it necessary for another to do something or react in a certain way. Though we often use the two interchangeably, there is a difference.
This is a great example of why Satan hates the Authorized Version of the Bible, the King James. Satan doesn’t want you to know the truth, because the truth will set you free. So, he prints thousands of Bible versions under the pretense that they are easier to understand because they use colloquial language or some other hogwash. But what is actually going on is that Satan manipulates the language of those versions to hide the truth about what’s coming.
The NIV’s translation of Revelation 13:16-17 more than likely is responsible for the proliferation of two other myths. The first is the second most common myth: that without the mark, “no man might buy or sell.” But, this too is false. Scripture does not say that the mark of the beast will be the only way one will be able to buy or sell. Close examination of Revelation 13:18 in the KJV will reveal that there will be two other means: by using the name of the beast, or by using the number of his name:
“That no man might buy or sell save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”
Let us carefully dissect this verse to better grasp its true meaning.
“No man might buy or sell save (except):
1. “He that had the mark [of the beast], or
2. “[He that had] the name of the beast, or
3. “[He that had] the number of [the beast’s] name.”
As one can plainly see, there will be three options for people to buy and sell. The mark will only be one of them. The NIV promotes this lie by rewording Revelation 13:16-17 in such a way as to make the mark appear to be the only way one might buy or sell. Here is the relevant passage again from the NIV:
“[N]o one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.”
As one can see, the NIV accomplishes this by hiding “the name of the beast” and “the number of his name” in a relative clause modifying mark. In other words, the NIV makes it appear that the mark of the beast, the name of the beast, and the number of his name are all the same thing. But as we have seen, they are not.
The NIV’s false interpretation of Revelation 13:16-17 is also responsible for the third most common myth: that 666, or, “the number of the beast,” will be the mark of the beast. Again, the NIV implies this by saying that “the mark…is the name of the beast or the number of his name.” But the King James, the perfect Word of the Living God, proves this also to be a lie:
“And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name” (Revelation 14:11).
As the reader can plainly see, the mark of the beast represents his name, but it is not his name. This totally bogus translation in the NIV has caused much confusion in the Christian community, because it says that the mark is both a name and a number. And this has turned what is a fairly simple explanation of the mark into a Rubik’s Cube. As Revelation 14:11 tells us, the mark of the beast will not be a name or a number. It will be a mark that represents a name.
This is an important distinction, because besides believing that the mark will be the number 666, many also believe that the mark will be a bar code, an RFID chip, or an implant. But in that all these are digital (based on 1s and 0s), they are numbers-based, and so could not be the mark of the beast, which is the mark of the Antichrist’s name. They could, however, be in some way used to represent “the number of his name,” and we will discuss this later. We can, therefore, safely eliminate the “number of the beast” or 666, from the list of possible marks, as well as the bar code, RFID chip, or implant, for that matter.
The fact that the mark of the beast will be based on his name dispels yet another myth: that it will not be a physical mark. Former witch turned Christian evangelist, John Todd, said that when the Bible speaks of a mark, it is speaking in prophetic language, in much the same way that the beast will not really be a beast, but a person. However, in that the mark will be based on the Antichrist’s name, and he does have a real name, then the mark will be an actual physical mark. When I explain its significance, the reader will understand why the mark of the beast will be, and, in fact, has to be an actual physical mark.
To help us to understand the significance of the mark of the beast as “the mark of his name,” let us consider that names are very important in the Book of the Revelation. In fact, the word name shows up no fewer than twenty-nine times. This is because the Book of the Revelation is the culmination of the great battle of the ages: the war between Satan and the Lord Jesus Christ. You see, Satan wants to make a name for himself:
“I will ascend into Heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit also in the mount of the congregation in the sides of the north, I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:13-14).
Satan wants to be like God. He wants the worship that God enjoys. And he wants to exalt his name above that of the Lord Jesus Christ. But the Bible says that the name of Jesus is above every other name (Philippians 2:9). Satan knows this, but it doesn’t stop him from trying. So, the Antichrist, who is Satan’s man, will not only try to exalt his name above the name of Jesus, but will also exalt the name of Satan (Lucifer).
It is in this way that Satan will eventually get the worship of man that he so desires, for the Bible says that the world will not only worship the beast, but “the dragon which gave power unto the beast” (Revelation 13:4). That dragon is Satan. Now the Bible tells us that God will put his seal on His followers who are left on the earth before He brings His judgment upon this world:
“And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice…saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads” (Revelation 7:2-3).
Likewise, Satan will put his seal on his people:
“And [the False Prophet] causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads…” (Revelation 13:16).
We have already seen in Revelation 14:11 that the mark of the beast is actually “the mark of his name”:
“And they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name” (Revelation 14:11).
While God’s seal is His name:
“And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having His Father’s name written in their foreheads” (Revelation 14:1).
This is a start contrast, the significance of which we will discuss shortly. But first, we should understand that, in this instance, the mark of the beast and the seal of God serve the same purpose: they signify ownership of a servant. The act of marking one’s servant with one’s name represents a very old principle: He who names a thing owns a thing.
It has always been the practice for one to name those things that one owns. Slave masters, for instance, would put their name on their slaves, and cattle owners would brand their cattle. In the case of slavery, the master would select and buy his slave and was given a bill of sale, making him the slave’s new owner. He could then do what he would with the slave, including marking or branding him. In fact, branding slaves was a common practice among many slave owners. As he was the slave’s legal owner, the slave master could, and, in fact, often did then give the slave a new name of the slave master’s choosing. He could do this because he had bought the slave for a price, and the slave was now his personal property.
This principle can also be seen in the Bible. In the Old Testament, God renames Abram Abraham. In the New Testament, He surnames Simon Peter (Cephas), and Saul he later renames Paul. And we are told in the Book of the Revelation that Jesus will one day give us a white stone with a new name written upon it (Revelation 2:17). God can do this because He is God, and everything and everyone belongs to Him. But, more importantly, Jesus paid the blood for our sins at Calvary, and so all who believe on Him have been “bought for a price”: the blood of Jesus. We now belong to Jesus and are no longer our own.
There is a major difference, however, between the master/slave relationship in the temporal world and in the spiritual. In the temporal world, the master chooses his servant. In the spiritual realm, however, it is the servant that chooses his master. Once the servant has chosen whom he will serve, it is then the master’s prerogative to give the servant another name and/or put his mark upon him.
This is the principle behind the mark of the beast. It will be a seal of ownership and not merely a means to buy and sell. Inasmuch as we have determined that ownership in spiritual matters is determined by the servant–as each must choose whom he will worship–then it must be understood that by choosing to accept the mark, one will be choosing whom he will serve. And as the mark of the beast is the seal of Satan, then the one who accepts this mark will, in fact, be serving Satan. It is for this reason that all who accept the mark will be damned to eternal flames.
So, the mark of the beast is a brand of sorts, designating the owner of the wearer. This designation will help us to understand the true nature of the mark. Now, as we discussed before, a major difference between the mark of the beast and the seal of God is that the Antichrist’s mark, or seal, is “the mark of his name,” while the seal of God is, in fact, His name. This is of major importance. God’s seal is His name because all power is His. He cannot be promoted, as He is the Most High, and He cannot be demoted, because He was before all authority, and, in fact, sets up and deposes rulers at His leisure. The name of God therefore, suffices as His seal, because His authority lies in WHO HE IS. He is the great I AM (Exodus 3:14).
The Antichrist’s seal, however, cannot be his name, because his name has no intrinsic value. It has no power. The Antichrist was elected by other men into his place. His power, therefore, rests not in his given name; that is, in who he is, but in his office; that is, in what he is. Pontius Pilate, for instance, ordered a seal be placed on the stone that covered the entrance to Jesus’ tomb. The seal was the mark of Pontius Pilate, and was a sign to all that the stone was placed over the tomb by his authority and should not be moved. The authority of the seal, however, was not derived from the name of Pontius Pilate. It was derived from the office of Pontius Pilate, who was the governor of Jerusalem.
Thus, the mark of the Antichrist’s name is really the seal of his office. And if the seal of Antichrist represents his office, as the phrase, “mark of his name” would seem to imply, then the name in question would not be the Antichrist’s given name, but the name of an office: a title.
Pope Benedict XVI, who I believe is the Antichrist, has many titles, among which are Bishop of Rome, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, and Servant of the Servants of God. To discover which title the mark of the beast will represent, then, it will be necessary to examine what else the Bible says about the name of the beast. Recall that the Apostle John saw a beast rise out of the sea. The Bible says this about it:
“And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy” (Revelation 13:1).
The beast that rose out of the sea, of course, is the Antichrist, and he wears a blasphemous name on his head. The Bible says that the Antichrist will “open his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven” (Revelation 13:6). The specific way that he will blaspheme the name of God is illustrated in the following passage:
“[He] opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God” (2 Thessalonians 2:4).
No single word better describes the Antichrist than the word blasphemy. The Antichrist will blaspheme the name of Jesus Christ by exalting himself in Jesus’ place. For a mere man to exalt himself into the position of God is blasphemy of the highest order. When Jesus said, “I and my Father are One,” the Jews charged Him with blasphemy saying, “Thou being a man maketh thyself God” (John 10:30-33). The Antichrist will do the same thing.
Now, as the mark of the beast is “the mark of [Antichrist’s] name,” and that name is blasphemous, then the title that gives the mark, or seal, of the Antichrist his authority would also have to be blasphemous. That means that the name of the beast would have to blaspheme Jesus by exalting Antichrist into the place of the Lord Jesus.
The titles that we have mentioned thus far are not blasphemous, but there are a couple more titles that we have not looked at. One of those titles is Vicar, or Substitute of Jesus Christ. Is there anything blasphemous about that title? You bet there is. You see there can be no substitute for Jesus Christ. He is One of a kind. Jesus was Himself a substitute—our Substitute. He shed the blood you and I should have shed, and He died the death that you and I should have died. There never was nor shall there ever be anyone else qualified to die for the sins of man. Only Jesus was sinless. No one, therefore, could ever serve as a substitute for the Lord Jesus Christ. No one.
There are many examples in the Bible which prove this, but I think the most poignant can be found in the Book of the Revelation Chapter 5:
“And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
“And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
“And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
“And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
“And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
“And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain…
“And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne…
“And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation” (Revelation 5:1-9).
As we can see, only the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David, was found worthy to open the book. Who is this Root of David?
“I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the offspring of David, and the bright and Morning Star” (Revelation 22:16).
The Lord Jesus Christ was the only one in Heaven, in earth, and under the earth who was found worthy to open the book with the seven seals, which book contained the judgments of God upon sinful man. Why? Because God the Father has given Jesus the full right to judge (John 5:22). Why? Because Jesus “was slain, and has redeemed us to God by His blood.” Only Jesus’ sacrifice satisfied God’s requirement for atonement and only the Lord Jesus could, would, and did offer His life for the sins of mankind. Only Jesus rose from the dead, thus showing his supremacy over sin, over death, and over Satan, and only Jesus ascended into Heaven, showing that He is God. There can be no substitute for Jesus Christ. This is why the title, Vicar of Jesus Christ is blasphemous. It purports to substitute a mere man for Someone for whom there can be no substitute: the One and Only Jesus Christ.
There is another name by which the pope goes, and that name is Vicarius Filii Dei, or the Vicar of the Son of God, and this is important. For one, it is said to have been inscribed upon the tiara of the pope, though this is disputed by some who consider it no more than “anti-Catholic” propaganda. Additionally, many, such as the Seventh Day Adventists, claim that the numerical equivalent of this title is 666, or the number of the beast, a claim that Rome also disputes.
Most of the attention given to the title Vicarius Filii Dei has been centered on the contention that its numerical equivalent is 666. But little, if any, attention has been paid to the fact that it is a blasphemous title. Vicar of the Son of God means exactly the same as Vicar of Jesus Christ. Both titles are blasphemous, attempting, as they do, to exalt a man into the place of our Savior, and both of these names have caused much controversy.
But even if neither of these titles is the “name of blasphemy,” there is yet another name that the pope goes by, the existence of which, cannot be denied. Neither can it be denied that this name is blasphemous. That name is “Holy Father.”
Because Jesus said that we should call no man our father, this name is clearly blasphemous. But did you know that Holy Father is one of the titles of God? Well, it is. In Chapter 17 of the Book of John, commonly known as Jesus’ Great Priestly Prayer, Jesus says the following while praying to God the Father. Listen to this very carefully:
“And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are” (v. 11).
That’s right: the title of Holy Father is a title of God the Father, the Almighty God. You must understand why this is important. Jesus Christ, who is Himself God Almighty, called God the Father “Holy Father.” He placed the Father above Himself. Therefore, to call the Roman Catholic pope “Holy Father” is to blaspheme the name of God the Father.
Understand the importance of this. Most every other title that God the Father has, Jesus also has, including I Am, Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the Ending. But Jesus never called Himself “Holy Father.” Jesus reserved this title for God the Father alone: for Jesus said,
“My Father…is greater than all (including Himself)” (John 1o:29)
This makes the Roman Catholic pope’s title of “Holy Father” a “name of blasphemy” and a fulfillment of biblical prophecy. So, while the Roman Catholic church may argue that the pope is the substitute for Jesus Christ, there is no way on earth that he, being a created being, could be a substitute for the Creator. And there is no way on earth that he, being a sinful man, should call himself Holy Father; for the Bible says that God only is Holy (Revelation 15:4).
If the pope were really a God-fearing man, there is no way he would use that title. So, why is he using it? Because he is not a God-fearing man.
But what is most important is that all of these titles, including “Holy Father,” belong to one office: that of the Roman Catholic pope. And inasmuch as the mark of the beast is the seal of his authority and that authority is derived from his office, then it behooves us to look at the seal of the Roman Catholic pope; for that seal is a likely candidate for the mark of the beast.
Below are several coats of arms of the Roman Catholic church.
The reader will notice that these coats of arms all have one thing in common: the gold and silver keys, which the Roman Catholic church calls the keys of Simon Peter. Wikipedia describes them thus:
“The crossed keys symbolise the keys of Simon Peter. The keys are gold and silver to represent the power of loosing and binding. The triple crown (the tiara) represents the pope’s three functions as “supreme pastor”, “supreme teacher” and “supreme priest”. The gold cross on a monde (globe) surmounting the tiara symbolizes the sovereignty of Jesus.”
This is apparently borrowed from Matthew 16:18, where after Simon Peter declares Jesus to be “the Christ, the son of the living God” (v. 16), Jesus goes on to tell Simon that He would give to him the keys of heaven, and that whatsoever he loosed or bound on earth would also be loosed or bound in heaven.
Notice that the pope claims to be the “supreme pastor,” “supreme teacher,” and the “supreme priest.” Supreme literally means “highest” or “most high.” This, again, is blasphemy, because, again, Jesus Christ said that God the Father is “greater than all” (John 10:29). He then is The Most High.
You must understand that whatever his pretense to piety, by using these titles, the pope is not only claiming to be the substitute of Jesus Christ, but he is actually claiming to be Jesus Christ. And not only is he claiming to be Jesus Christ, but he is also claiming to be God the Father. Can anything be more blasphemous?
For its part, the Vatican says this about the Keys of Simon Peter:
“The symbolism is drawn from the Gospel and is represented by the keys given to the Apostle Peter by Christ.
The insignia is red with the two keys crossed as the Cross of St. Andrew, one gold and one silver, with the cotter pointed upwards and towards the sides of the shield. Two cords hang from the grips of the keys, usually red or blue.
The shield is surmounted by the tiara or triregnum.
Two ribbons hang from the tiara, each with a patent cross.
Ordinarily the keys have the mechanical part placed up, facing to the right and the left and usually in the form of a cross, not for the mechanisms of a lock, but as a religious symbol. The grips vary according to artistic taste, from the Gothic to the Baroque.
Since the XIV Century, the two crossed keys have been the official insignia of the Holy See. The gold one, on the right, alludes to the power in the kingdom of the heavens, the silver one, on the left, indicates the spiritual authority of the papacy on earth. The mechanisms are turned up towards the heaven and the grips turned down, in other words into the hands of the Vicar of Christ. The cord with the bows that unites the grips alludes to the bond between the two powers.”
(Holy See Press Office http://www.vatican.va/news_services/press/documentazione/documents/sp_ss_scv/insigne/sp_ss_scv_stemma-bandiera-sigillo_en.html)
Interestingly, the Bible mentions two other keys:
“I (Jesus) am He that liveth, and was dead: and, behold, I am alive for evermore. Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death” (Revelation 1:18).
Could the “keys of Saint Peter” actually be the keys of hell and of death? Given what the Roman Catholic religion believes and teaches, and that the Bible declares that the very first residents of the Lake of Fire will be the Antichrist and his False Prophet (Revelation 20:10), the chances are very good that this is the case. But you must decide that for yourselves. Another thing to consider is that since the pope considers himself the substitute for Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ has the keys of hell and of death, then the pope, too, must make this claim.
Saints, I truly believe that Pope Benedict XVI is the Antichrist, and that his mark will be the emblem of the Holy See, the so-called keys of Saint Peter.
Now, some last thoughts about the mark of the beast. First, if everyone will be required to wear the mark on his forehead or right hand, why the necessity for “the name of the beast and the number of his name? Would not the mark of the beast suffice? Second, if neither the name nor number of the beast will be a mark, then how will one “have” the name and number of the beast? And third, why will the mark of the beast be on the forehead or right hand?
The first question is the easiest to answer. As stated before, the mark will not be used solely for commercial transactions, nor will it be used simply to make financial transactions more convenient or safe, as many have come to think. It will be a way to distinguish God’s people from Satan’s. The Bible tells us that Jesus will separate the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25:32-33). In other words, He is going to make a clear distinction between the servants of God Almighty and the servants of Satan. As before stated, the mark of the beast will not be mandatory. The mark will be offered to those who want it, and I believe that the incentive to take it will be some material benefit.
Throughout history, the enemies of Christ have always persecuted Christians by confiscating their property and by denying them jobs and state benefits, while the pagans were always given preferential treatment by the state. I believe that the mark will be offered to all those who are loyal to the Antichrist and accept the one-world religion by worshipping the Antichrist and his idol. All those who accept the mark, therefore, will be given access to free health care, housing, government assistance, and the like, while those who refuse the mark (Christians, for example) will have to fend for themselves. The pagans will depend on Big Brother Antichrist, while the Christians will depend on Jesus Christ, their God.
The purpose of the mark will be to distinguish God’s people from Satan’s.
Regarding the necessity for the name of the beast and the number of his name, I believe the phrase “save he that had…the name of the beast” in Revelation 13:18 refers to those who worship the Antichrist and accept him as their lord and master. Roman Catholics will be at the top of the list, for they already revere the pope. Christians are said to “name the name of Christ” (2 Timothy 2:19). Likewise, those who accept the mark will name the name of Antichrist, for the mark is “the mark of his name.”
The Roman Catholic pope declares himself the head of the “universal” church (catholic means universal), as the title, “Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church suggests. The one world church will consist of all religions (except biblical Christianity) under the headship of the Vatican. Those, therefore, who bow down to the pope—have his mark, his name, or his number—will be able to buy and sell, while those who do not recognize the pope as their leader will not.
There has been talk for years of a universal identity card that all citizens could wear. In that the New World Order will be a “global village” complete with global citizens indistinguishable from one another, then the universal identity card would be truly universal. Such a card could become a reality and, if so, may even state whether the holder is a member of the universal church. If he is not, then he will not be able to buy or sell.
As for the number of the beast, as we have discussed, the bar code, the RFID chip, and the implant are digital or numbers based, so they could be used in some way to conduct financial transactions. By this I mean that they could be used to buy and sell, not that they will be the mark of the beast. It is said that every bar code has three lines that correspond to 666. If this is true, then the bar code could very well be used as the number of the beast.
As for why everyone will be required to wear the mark of the beast on his forehead or right hand, let us consider that the choice of the right hand is not arbitrary: it has tremendous significance, and this significance can best be seen by way of comparison:
As one can plainly see, though the mark of the beast and the seal of God share some characteristics, there is one very important distinction: the mark of the beast has both spiritual and material significance, while the seal of God is purely spiritual.
Some believe that the forehead represents the mind and the hand represents a person’s works. If this is true, then the right hand may represent the law. In other words, the mark on the right hand may signify that the person has rejected the law of grace through Jesus Christ in favor of the law of works. And we know from the Word of God that the law is death (Romans 8:2). This is why the servants of God shall only receive the seal of God in their foreheads: they are saved by faith in Jesus, not works, and “follow the Lamb withersoever He goeth” (Revelation 14:4).
But there is something more. The right hand may not only represent works, because, according to the Bible, the right hand is a symbol of power and authority. This is why Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father (Hebrews 10:12): He sits at the right hand of power. Recall also that the Apostle John saw God the Father sitting on His throne holding the book with the seven seals in His right hand (Revelation 5:1), which Jesus took from Him. This act was very significant, not only because it symbolizes God giving Jesus the right to judge (John 5:22), but also because it symbolizes God handing His power and authority over to Jesus. Additionally, The name Benjamin (the youngest son of Jacob) means “son of my right hand,” in other words, “son of my strength.” The right hand symbolizes power and authority.
The Antichrist will attempt to have total control over every person on earth. He wants to control what a person says, where a person goes, what a person does, and even what a person thinks (mind control). By accepting the mark on his forehead, a person will be declaring that the Antichrist is the master of his will, and, by accepting the mark on his right hand, a person will be declaring that the Antichrist is the master of his actions. In short, the person is ceding total control of his being to the Antichrist. He is making the Antichrist his lord and master. And that’s the key.
The mark of the beast will be the seal of the Roman Catholic pope: Benedict XVI, the Antichrist. “He who hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.”
The audio version of this teaching is available at the iTunes store for free download. You can subscribe to our free podcast here. For your convenience, it is also available below.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download Subscribe: RSS
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Grace and peace, believers.
This week’s memory verse comes from Galatians 5:16:
“Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.”
Temptation is a daily challenge for the Christian. Satan is always dangling some carrot in front of us to get us to bite, and his goal is to bring us back under bondage, because he knows he cannot have our soul. In order to effectively resist Satan’s efforts, we have to always walk in the Spirit and to not give place to the flesh. In order to walk in the Spirit, we have to sanctify ourselves; that is, separate ourselves from the world and its worldly cares and desires. They who are of the world speak of the world, but we who are of God speak of the things of the world to come. Our conversation is in Heaven, not of earth.
Therefore, let us walk in the Spirit.
The Still Man
Copyright © 2011-2012 Anthony Keeton, The Still Man ®. All rights reserved.
Grace and peace, Saints.
We have completed the companion podcast to our popular article on Steve Harvey entitled, Is Steve Harvey A Christian? It is available at the iTunes Store for download to your favorite audio device. Subscribe to our free podcast today to access it.
We pray that this teaching causes you to pause and think.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Copyright © 2011-2012 Anthony Keeton, The Still Man ®. All rights reserved.
Grace and peace to the brethren in the Lord, and greetings to those who are still in darkness.
Saints, we have completed the second part of our series on prayer called Confidence in Prayer, based on our article of the same name. It is available for immediate download at the iTunes Store for use with your favorite audio device. You can subscribe to our free podcast here.
We pray that this teaching will edify and encourage you.
Be encouraged and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
The Still Man
Copyright © 2011-2012 Anthony Keeton, The Still Man ®. All rights reserved.
