Armilus the AntiChrist Discovered in a single Torah Skip Code (by Daniel Knight)

According to an ancient translation in the Torah, “Armilus” is the name of thee AntiChrist, the worst one of them all the Bible implies in various verses.

Nehemiah chapter 4 apparently contains a “skip code” that may say, “And there is Armilius and Carmino” there also appear to be the words כף‎ (meaning “scale” or “sole of the foot”) and ארם which means “Aram”. I found it maybe two or three weeks ago as I was looking to see if Armilus could truly be the name of the AntiChrist, the one an ancient rabbi or rabbis claimed would deceive Israel and end up pretending to be God in (some future) temple meant for God, in Jerusalem. It is obvious to me that some Orthodox Jews would deny this and claim Christians made it up as they know to admit otherwise would be an admission that they are not the true religion or church, because if they were they could not be mislead into accepting Satan or Satan’s son as their Messiah, and it would also mean that their rejection of Christ (Jesus, Yeshua) was hypocrisy as Christ made very clear to the world and their judgment as to the correct understanding of Scripture was not reliable as Christ also made clear.

The chapter which says “And there is Armilius and Carmino” concerns the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem and recontinuing the sacrifices to God in it, evil opposition to it and a curse on those opposing it’s rebuilding and against those cursing the Jews.

Armilus seems to be a variation of Arminius, and Arminius means Man of War. Arminius was a parallel figure if a sort to Christ in Christ’s time on earth. Arminius was a traitor to the Roman empire who fought Rome to a stand still and was assassinated by someone of his own family according to historical records around or at the time when Jesus was crucified. Arminius is also the name of one of the worse heretics in Christian history, a heretic who taught that God was not Sovereign over man’s will. The name Armilus/Armalius seems to mean, “Northern light”, or in other way mean “Exalted war man-wolf”.

I suspect “Carmino/Carminu/Carmina”, if that is a name in this code, is the name of twin living statue image of Armilos/Armilus or is the name false prophet. It may even be the name of one who opposes Armilus. We cannot know as these codes are only hints at best as to the future and are certainly not commands. They also show the divinity of God’s word by showing impossible coincidences within it that a mere angel or man could not be have caused to be apart of Scripture.

I have no doubt there will be other skip codes around this one related to the AntiChrist, the end times/last days.

Climate Cultists: Vandalism Doesn’t Spread Truth

Climate cultists who think property vandalism promotes “awareness” of climate change are dumb. No one needs spray paint on your house to notice any weather out of the ordinary, especially if it were a sign from God. This behavior is similar to when Catholics engaged in crusades, inquisitions and witch hunts to make people “aware” of right from wrong. It shows you are wrong yourself somehow with pride, and virtue signaling or projecting your own sins to deflecting attention away from yourself.

On top of that it is China and India outputting the most CO2, Italy is nothing, and as if Greta needs these vandals to help her out? What vain vandals.

Irrefutable Proof Eternal Life Is Eternal

In the past I called the doctine of predistiny “Calvinism” (of John Calvin), but I do not like using this term as it may confuse people into thinking they worship John Calvin and that he is the only one to have realized the teachings he came up with regarding salvation. The teachings are in Scripture and the New Testament made it clear and John Calvin summarized them well. However I think a trap formed as the summary of his good teachings became so associated with his name it caused confusion and aggravation to those simply wanting to identify as saved Christians, or non-denonimational and to not to be associated with as being somehow birthed from the Catholic cult. I believe it better to simply be known as a Christian now, a follower of Christ, who is the head of thr true Church, and not John Calvin. Some may think, “Well how then to explain to someone quickly who believes their free will can defeat God’s salvation? Simply point out your doctrine is that God is God and his love is invincible, and as such, how can man’s hatred or choice to not follow Him defeat Him? It is like blasphemy to say God can be defeated.

Again: the most simple proof that God’s will is invincible is by virtue of who He is: He is love and His love is invincible. He is all powerful and all knowing and his wisdom is perfect. Further, Jesus, also called “Yeshua” by Jews and those wishing to say his name in Hebrew (which is “Joshua” in Hebrew to English), made it clear that eternal life (in spirit can be had now, by being created by God by His Spirit).

The Old Testament, Tanakh as Jews call it made it clear this way:

“Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments.” – Deuteronomy 7:9

He said,

Click here to learn the difference between the phrases “free will” and “free agency”.

Click here to read why, as Calvinism teaches, God must first “regenerate” you out of a “dead” and “fallen” state (a state in which you always reject God’s will in some way due to a love of sin and hatred for everything God is) so we will have the ability to make the correct choice to have faith in God to be saved by Him. See why God doesn’t simply “gives you a choice”/”gives us a choice” and doesn’t let anyone live however they choose and Bible verses that contradict the overgeneralization and inaccurate claim (which confused people keep repeating) that “God doesn’t send us to Hell” but that is is we who send ourselves there because we chose to.

“Free agency” simply means that when we make a choice we are the ones making it (how obvious is that?). “Free will”, in the way the average not-saved person/pagan or ignorant Christian would use it, means simply the ability to choose anything you think of choosing to do, like to believe the Bible is true AND OBEY IT’S LAWS, or even to become God or change your biological sex. It’s akin to denying what Jesus said when he said that we cannot change the natural color of our hair (we can mask the color, but at the genetic level it is what it is).

When some people say, “God gives us a choice” (sometimes they mean “choices” as in a choice between disobeying his laws or pleasing Him by repenting and submitting fully to His commands (though some incorrectly mean choosing to do “His will” rather than simply “obey His laws” because they think they can break His will with their will, which is impossible and a sign of their spiritual blindless) they are saying, “God gives us a free will so we can, without any influence, or unasked-for change of our heart or mind choose to do good or evil, which they seem to me to be confusing with “free agency”, which as I said, simply means “the ability to make a decision”.

Even if we had a free will
that alone wouldn’t be sufficient to make good choices that God desires. All it would be is just what it is, a will that cannot be influenced, or at least by anyrhing other than our own feelings. So to insist we have a free will as if that somehow causes us to be able to claim an inherent God-pleasing goodness doesn’t make sense, and if you haven’t even used your free will to please God you would be a worthless person who isn’t even worth listening to. But God wouldn’t be God if he had no ultimate control over everything including wills as He would then not be able to guarantee the outcome of anything to do with the beings He has created and will continue creating.

Before reading on, please donate to me if you find this explanation about God’s eternal will and plans, mankinds’ and angel kinds’ will and the topic of predestinstion helpful. I can receive money via PayPal or Wells Fargo bank using their Zelle phone and email payment method using my email cheetalynx@gmail.com. I am disabled and have no income and no house, and as a result my cat, 11 chickens and 5 ducks are homeless too and may die from coyote attacks. I’ve lost probably four chickens to wild animals, a duck to a stray dog, and many chicks to ants and cruel police who arrested me without caring for how the chicks would survive by themselves in a container.

Pardon the little redunacy of topics below as I used a smallish phone to write and edit this page and am in misery when I write, and very weary, so makes it hard to remember and focus well.

Now for the proof that God has predestined the future of all beings regardless of the wills of his creatures and their desires and even God’s own desires. Remember too that God’s will and what he chooses to do does not always match his desires. For example his will is that every sinner repents and asks for mercy from the punishment of God’s eternal hatred/wrath/gets his forgiveness, but as is obvious to many people it is clear that he has chosen the majority of unforgiven people and all the demons to serve as eternal examples of the consequence of unrepentance and sin and God’s free choice not to save them from Hell, so that they will be an Irrefutable example that man by his will and desires alone cannot save himself from sin and Hell apart from God’s will. Also keep in mind that obviously God’s will does match some of his desires and that of other beings, and especially his children’s will be fulfilled one day (once they are in total harmony with God’s will):

First: When does salvation (from a corrupt heart/an addiction to sinfulness/sin and forgiveness of all of them from past to future so that there will not be any punishment in Hell) happen? Is it before or after death? Notice in 2 Corinthians 6:2 below that it points out that salvation (from eternal punishment in Hell and a sin-addicted heart) comes whenever you ask for it according God. Salvation is not as a gay Catholic who suffered demon possession each night (he told me this) something completed after you die (or after suffering purgatory, which Catholics may tell you you must go through, which is an imaginary place of sin-cleansing–Jesus pointed out that all sin is paid for by Him and our behavior is straightened out on earth (John 13:10), not Heaven, and only the body is sinful anyways, not the new spirit God gives those He forgives):

“For He says, “In the time of my favor I heard you, and in the day of salvation I helped you.” I tell you, now is the time of God’s favor, now is the day of salvation.” (2 Corinthians 6:2)

Next ask yourself these questions:

1. Does God have the right to change hearts using direct action by his Spirit without a person’s permission? For example did Jesus need the permission of the demon-possessed man in Mark 5:1-20 to cast the demons out of him, the demons who had combined their minds to form a being called “Legion”? Jesus cast them out without his permission and healed his heart so he could become saved. If he has not been saved immediately after then why would Jesus have said to him,“Go home to your own people and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you.”? If all Jesus did was cast out a mighty horde of demons then why did he say, “how much… and” as in doing two distinct things? Clearly God removed these strong demons forever from him/the “much” Jesus spoke of, AND saved him/”had mercy” on him. But if as Catholic teach, salvation comes after, then the man wouldn’t have much of a story. It would only be, “God for the moment removed demons from me that no one else could, but they may be back at any time.”

2. Does God have the right to cause a person to feel something without their permission?

3. Does God have a right to convince someone of anything without their permission?

4. Does God need your permission for anything?

If the answer to each is “yes” and the last “no”, then why would anyone reply with: “But God gives us a choice and free will, he doesn’t force us to do anything”? Because literally you disagreed four times to your own reply. What the blind and unsaved don’t see is that they are overgeneralizing “gives us a choice” and ignoring God’s will cannot fail, three that the human will is not free of God’s will and therefore of his plans and four: merely because there are choices in your mind or in reality doesn’t give you the ability to control what choice you make, or, five, give you the ability or power to make the best or correct choice. Six, if God perfects a person and causes them to be in perfect harmony with His will why is it that these ignorant and confused people who treasure a “free will” above God’s will, love, Son and salvation respond with, “But God gives us a choice, He gave us free will.”? If God loves them, saved them, and they “accepted” and chose to be saved, why would their reply afterwards be what apparently is the main focus in their heart and mind rather than repentance be, “But I can reject God any time I want.”?And why do they never complete their point when saying such things? Why don’t they properly finish it with, “But we still have a choice to abandon God and be in Hell forever if we choose.”? Are they somehow forgetting or is it that that sounds so inappropriate, illogical, absurd, shallow and rebellious that they refrain from saying it lest it be obvious they never repented and are still stubborn and obstinate and evil inside, that God never changed their heart? Such Christians use nice clothing, verse copy-pasting and the phrase “born again” in ignorance as a mask and fill in for actually loving and obeying God and in place of desiring to truly understand his word, that includes the meaning of “born again”, which they seem to think is merely a metaphor meaning, “changed from bad to good” and “saved from my sins”.That’s all for now. I hope God opens the eyes of all the anti-Calvinists who are trying to understand what I’ve written here, and it’s not as if it is complicated being that I’ve made the reality very clear. Rememeber Scripture says that before we are saved we are blind, bound by Satan the strong man, enslaved to sin, hard hearted and dead inside (we have no good spirit) and that no one does good or understands (how to be saved or how to please God). So, anyone who claims, as false Christians do, that God merely “nudges” them or makes their mind clear so they can can choose to be saved from sin and Hell and understand the consequences of not being saved from Hell still have logical explanation as to how even then a person then may get saved as THEY STILL LACK A GOOD HEART. Not only that, to say or imply that, “But God sit gives us a choice (to end up in Hell and betray him forever, note they’ll never put it that way), and so we still have a free will” are showing that Satan still has them mentally bound and is removing the obvious from their memory as soon as they “accept Christ into their hearts” (that’s their shallow, insincere and repentance-avoidant phrase for fooling themselves or others into thinking they’ve repented): because they’ve agreed God may forever save them by fully agreeing to commit themselves to his eternal will just by their attempt to get saved. In other words, repenting is to stop sinning, and asking for mercy and accepting Jesus died for all your sins is agreeing to be saved and changed forever. There’s no, “And you can make an eye wink or wish to get out of this contract whenever you feel like” clause, or exception. But the way these evil people rationalize that is to think, “But we still sin, we can make bad choices because God lets us.” In other words, they ignore the contract they’ve pledged themselves too and just call it sin if they decide to reject salvation all together afterward supposedly getting saved or being in the process of being saved, and further contradict themselves as by calling it just any other sin to abandon God have admitted that Christ would cover that sin too, as it’s still a sin and not an unforgivable one. So there is no way to undo Jesus’ suffering, salvation, contract/covenant or heart-change and process of perfecting a person or predestined plan of salvation for anyone.

The Bible makes this clear:

There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the Yahweh. (Proverbs 21:30)

“Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades? Can you loosen Orion’s belt?” (Job 38:31)

Consider what God has done: Who can straighten what he has made crooked? (Ecclesiastes 7:13)

“I know that You can do all things and that no plan of Yours can be thwarted.” (Job 42:2)

Therefore if anyone claims to have lost their salvation or gotten it back: they were never saved in the first place. Instead, the Bible says of such a person:”They are like unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like animals they too will perish. … It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.” – 2 Peter 2:12, 21

“these people slander whatever they do not understand, and the very things they do understand by instinct—as irrational animals do—will destroy them.” – Jude

“If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” – Hebrews 10:26-31

More evidence that the will of all creatures is under God’s passive and active control is that Scripture implies that it is by God’s initial and ultimate pre-planning, His free choice, and not because of actions by any creature apart from His control or in response to it, that a creature will stay good, has become evil and becomes good, including forever. For example, no animal has been observed to do anything outside of what God made them for. And no angel has ever switched sides after their first decision to stay or rebel. For example there is no evidence that any angel which became a demon or an evil spirit rather has ever repented and become saved, including among the so called “Watcher” type. Likewise angels that didn’t sin are not known to ever sin. So, if there is such thing as a free will as in a will that is free from not just God’s influence and control but ANY influence or control, including Satan’s, then there should be chaos. There should not be any consistency in the behavior of anyone who is saved by God or not as there wouldn’t be anything causing them to be one way or the other. It is because of that fact that God’s control is a necessity for everything to have any order, consistency and predictability. Without God’s control there would be no reason to put trust in anyone or anything for consistent behavior. Why would I trust a person who is saved if the next moment they could and eventually would, being unhinged/unglued/not bound to God’s goodnesses, be a liar, thief and murderer? Is there any evidence that Satan loves God at one moment and the next hates Him? This is why Jesus said,

“to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.” (John 1:12-13) and

“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him [giving him the desire to come to Me]; and I will raise him up [from the dead] on the last day.” (John 6:44) and

“No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. … You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last”.

More evidence of a non-works-based and non-man’s-choice-to-obey-God destiny-based eternal salvation, (besides that Scripture outright says so and isn’t based on man’s uninfluenced choice that He be with God forever, or some “innate goodness”) is Jesus’ explanation of his sower and the seeds parable, in which he explains the spiritual state of all mankind and future mankind. In his explanation there is no mention of anyone getting a second chance to be saved or who loses their salvation. There instead are only two kinds of people among the types he describes: those who don’t obtain salvation and never produce a single good work, and those who do, and they never stop doing good deeds as a result of this gift of salvation:

“18 Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19 When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in their heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20 The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 22 The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful. 23 But the seed falling on good soil refers to someone who hears the word and understands it. This is the one who produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.”

As for those who claim God saved certain people due to a “kernel of goodness”, that is a baseless claim. Nothing in Scripture teaches this, in fact it repeatedly says, “2 The Lord looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God. 3 All have turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.” (Psalm 14:2-3) and “Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior.” (Colossians 1:21). Besides that, Scripture says that faith without works is dead and vice versa, so why would God care about some magical speck of goodness in anyone? It also says “10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.” So it is not, “This is love: not that we had a speck of goodness in us…” but that God was good to us who were evil to Him and not fully paying attention to His goodness or recognizing it fully, or totally ignoring Him. Again, “I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me; I was found by those who did not seek me. To a nation that did not call on my name, I said, ‘Here am I, here am I.’” (Isaiah 65:1).

Did Yeshuah triumph prematurely if as those who deny salvation is eternal if it can be negated at any time due to the potential for man’s so called “free will” as they call it to do so? No. And notice the finally of this passage which doesn’t speak of anyone becoming dead and unforgiven again: “11 Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism… 13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.” (Colossians 2:11-15)

And so there can be no doubt that God forgave whoever it is He felt like forgiving if there is still doubt, the apostle Paul made it very clear God didn’t forgive anyone because, “He saw they would choose salvation” as an Assembly of God pastor named Galen Woodward once told me. His claim was nonsensical because a “free will” wouldn’t be predictable and if “free will” leads to rejecting salvation why would God ignore the eventual rejection to come after they are saved and have eternal life? Free will believers even say God will reject the person that rejects Him! It’s also a contradiction because if God ignores the rejections that the “free will” cultists claim are hiding in the bushes ready to pounce at any moment to negate God’s convenant, then why do they deny: “once (we are) saved (we are) always saved” if eternal life is a permanent state of salvation? It also contradicts in a third way: If there exists some sort of goodness in a sinner apart from God’s goodness, and it causes them to choose to be saved when they hear the gospel, then of what need doed such a person have if they have such an invincible goodness in them that they can use it to save themselves, and even without needing Jesus to save them via his sacrifice? It also contradicts this teaching Jesus gave:

“It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” (Luke 5:31-32)

So the very doctrine of a salvation that hinges on a “free will” (as in what a confused or blind person means, and that is a will that God has no influence or ultimate control over so that the will chooses what His will wants it to) is a contradiction by the way those who hold it teach it, besides it also being a futile teaching leading to eternal sadness and no hope of permanent peace and joy with God. Some heretics say it like this (as I point out elsewhere here),

Some falsely claim that “God destines us based on the choices He sees we will make, and doesn’t send us to Hell (because we choose to go there).”, but first, notice you’ll never hear them say “God doesn’t send us to Heaven against our will”, as in “force us in while hate for Him is in our hearts. They don’t understand that God first changes/unhardens a person’s heart, as in regenerates it.

Second, what verses support this claim that God merely accomadates our choices? Some may say, “God is love” and that is why. But that doesn’t explain anything specificly. It’s out of context to simpy say, “God is love”.

Some accept Hell exists and will go there, but to keep their delusion of sovereignty they say, “We choose to go to Hell, so we send ourselves there,” as if they controlled their destiny and can simply becomd good apart from God. That is not true as many other Christians have shown and as I do here. God It’s almost exactly a line I heard from an inmate in jail decades ago. Obviously it is an overgeneralization and an attempt at making a metaphor a truth, like saying, “Criminals accept they may be caught breaking a law and end up punished for it”, but that is not the same as ” Crimimals accept Hell and God exist and will walk politely into a burning lake of fire when God politely asks them to.” Since when does everyone believe in God and Hell? Further, even acceptance something like that earthly judgment may occur from human judges isn’t the same as “choosing” to be punished let alone to walk into Hell. It’s obviously then very delusonal thinking and a gross denial of reality or gross assumption and a gross show of pride to claim God won’t send anyone to Hell Even to claim that “we send ourselves to Hell by sinning” is a proof that God doesn’t have the right to send us to Hell or plays no part in destining our life so that there’s no way we can not be sent there is clearly wrong.
“From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.” (Acts 17:26).

Paul said in Romans 9 that the potential for goodness and good deeds or even doing such deeds (if it were possible to do then apart from God’s goodness don’t determine who God decides to save

“8 …it is not the children by physical descent [from Abraham] who are God’s children, but it is [based on] the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.”

10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 Just as it is written:
“Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us?For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to Go? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?””

37 Even after Jesus had performed so many signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. 38 This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet:

“Lord, who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

39 For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:

40 “He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their hearts,
so they can neither see with their eyes,
nor understand with their hearts,
nor turn—and I would heal them.”” (John 12:37-40)

So, we have an impaired will (not a totally free will) under God’s direction, not a free will that can choose whatever it wants to. The only choices we can make are that which God allows, whether he allows it passively, or actively causes it by His Spirit. This is how it is with all things, from the smallest particle to the heart. And when we who are saved attain freedom from the flesh’s desires to sin, our will will no longer have any desire to disobey God, not because of innate goodness, but because of God’s innate goodness and His unchanging will and plans.

The covenant of salvation is also sealed by God’s Spirit:

“In him, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and in him, when you also believed, you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.” (Ephesians 1:13)

“Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the Lord your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.” (Deuteronomy 31:6)

“For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.” (1 Peter 1:23)

“No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God.” (1 John 3:9)

For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world: your faith. (1 John 5:4)

“11 As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”
12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile–the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”” (Romans 10:11-13)

“Whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life!” (John 5:24)

“38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God (that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 8:38-39)

“for though the righteous fall seven times, they rise again” (Proverbs 24:16)

“For those (who belong to God as good children forever) God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son” (Romans 8:29)

No one can cleanse themselves of their own sins by water their own suffering or money:

1 Hear this, all you peoples;
listen, all who live in this world,
2 both low and high,
rich and poor alike:
3 My mouth will speak words of wisdom;
the meditation of my heart will give you understanding.
4 I will turn my ear to a proverb;
with the harp I will expound my riddle:
5 Why should I fear when evil days come,
when wicked deceivers surround me—
6 those who trust in their wealth
and boast of their great riches?
7 No one can redeem the life of another
or give to God a ransom for them—the ransom for a life is costly,
no payment is ever enough—so that they should live on forever
and not see decay.
10 For all can see that the wise die,
that the foolish and the senseless also perish,
leaving their wealth to others.
11 Their tombs will remain their houses forever,
their dwellings for endless generations,
though they had named lands after themselves.
12 People, despite their wealth, do not endure;
they are like the beasts that perish.
13 This is the fate of those who trust in themselves,
and of their followers, who approve their sayings.
14 They are like sheep and are destined to die;
death will be their shepherd
(but the upright will prevail over them in the morning).
Their forms will decay in the grave,
far from their princely mansions.
15 But God will redeem me from the realm of the dead;
he will surely take me to himself.
16 Do not be overawed when others grow rich,
when the splendor of their houses increases;
17 for they will take nothing with them when they die,
their splendor will not descend with them.
18 Though while they live they count themselves blessed—and people praise you when you prosper—they will join those who have gone before them,
who will never again see the light of life.
20 People who have wealth but lack understanding are like the beasts that perish. (Psalm 49)

Even the Roman Catholic religion acknowledges that predestination is true: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12378a.htm

Finally there’s the ancient confirmation and agreement of what I’ve said by great English theologians in the 1600s who decided to make it an official publicly stated belief in human words of what the true Church should believe regarding whether or not anyone can save themselves by their own will and power apart from God. They said,

“Man by his fall into a of sin hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereto.” Westminster Confession of Faith, by the Westminster Assembly, Chapter IX, section 3, recorded in the year 1646.

If you are not yet saved but are now convinced the Bible is consistent and God’s word no matter what correct version it has been translated to, consider repenting and asking God to save you now, lest Satan prevent it from ever happening and you spend the rest of eternity suffering unimaginable pain with him and the worst criminals. This is how: How to get saved (page link).

Whitley Strieber and Demons

Shortlink to this page: tiny.cc/communion

These are quotes of Whitley Strieber’s comments on the Coast to Coast AM Radio Show on August 5, 2022 with my comments on various parts of what he said:

Whitley: “(During my first abduction…”) A gentle voice asked me what they could do to calm me down… weird… of course it didn’t work. They assaulted me, they raped me with a machine… I was beat up…. The experience was absolutely devastating. …I also remembered being in the woods. …I thought, ‘My God I was the victim of a crime… I have been physically abused,; there’s no question of that.”

My comment: Why would someone come here, across the vastness of space and just (seemingly) fly around the vastness of space. …It’s about us.”

My comment: It’s because they aren’t “alien explorers”, they’re demons, angels who rejected God and ended up sinners (emotionally and mentally corrupt) and devising ways to torture and corrupt humans.

Whitley: “…There’s a consistent message among the (alien) abduction their concerns have to do with overpopulation, …so it’s not about politics, it’s about nature”

My comment: You didn’t notice Marxist atheists used Malthusianism with  Eugenics to cause worldwide slavery, racial division (Holocaust, mass baby-murders) AND extreme political division and attacks on Christians?!

Whitley: “They (the western mainstream media) never offer solutions,”

My comment: Yes they do, their elitist globalist bribers like Klaus Schwab, George Soros and Bill Gates used/uses the MSM to sow chaos, and these elites tried forcing on the world (non-westerners rejected them) false and deadly vaccines and (not Gates) electric, solar and arbitrarily shutting down coal and nuclear power plants under the pretense of population reduction to improve everyone’s life while reducing pollution (Gates wanted to corner the market with his own nuclear power plants). It’s a pretense since increasing carbon dioxide increases plant growth and prevents desertification and starvation and therefore animal extinctions, but demons prefer “dry places” as the Bible says.

Whitley: “They make their money off scaring people”,

My comment: In part Whitley, but to push their bribers’ business agendas, of elitists (super rich and often homosexual) narcissist globalists who monetarily compete with world leaders like Putin, Xi, Maduro and Cuban and North Korean leaders who, using the pretense of beneficial communism steal from their country.

Whitley: “the people (he means ‘the citizens of the world’) have no respect for the (their) government… (governments)”

My comment: Why should they respect liars? “Russia has no respect for the environment, neither does India (you forgot China?).

Whitley: “…we don’t have time… to reduce carbon in the atmosphere…” monoxide or dioxide? Why don’t we have time? You, like the MSM are using fear mongering to make money as you yourself said no one will use your “environmental” solutions, you said, “It’s not gonna happen.” So you’re offering futility.

Whitley: “it’s not political,”

My comment: Why does it matter if it’s “political” or not? What do you mean? And perhaps it’s not for you, but carbon dioxide reduction is an anti-Christian/religious, anti-conservative/political and a business weapon. The Bible is clear the greatest threats are supernatural and damnation in Hell, but climate change believers keep talking as if they don’t care, don’t know, or blind to the prophecies and signs of the times in the Bible, and only focus on material well-being with at best vague contradictory babble about spiritual things, or things they say are spiritual, and what they teach contradicts God’s word, like as some say, “it’s not about good or evil” or “there is no death, death is an illusion” and other baseless demonic claims.

Whitley: “most of those powerplants are in countries that would welcome the help”.

My comment: You just said Russia, India (China and Venezuala too) don’t care about the environment, so have contradicted yourself. It’s an over generalization. They have most corrupt political, religious and business leadership. Their political eaders steal and meddle with businesses, greedy elitist, gang problems and Satan’s corrupting influence.

Notice the careful and logical wording of the Chinese government on their environmental improvement efforts: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/upshot/china-pollution-environment-longer-lives.amp.html

They say “air pollution”, and it’s true coal plants pollute, but they don’t say “carbon dioxide” which is Satanic nonsense spread by western liberals who pretend they’re scientifically astute. But China welcomes the westerners spreading chaos-producing nonsense propaganda to reduce carbon dioxide and other such nonsense like LGBTQ+ propaganda as it gives them a greater advantage in politics, business and military, and it helps their religious propaganda as they may boast they are morally superior to the westerners who spread sexual immorality and suicide-causing nonsense like that little kids can know they are a wrong gender or neither and therefore should be homosexual, get genital surgery and take puberty-blocking hormones or hormones to make them appear as the opposite of their natural biological gender.

Other notes: Whitley said his (now deceased) wife Anne had said to him while she seemed awake and yet was not (as if were implying she were demon-possessed but from his teachings implies she was being influenced by, quoting him, “aliens, or whatever they are”), “don’t name the book, ‘Body Terror’, call it Communion.” He then implied Anne didn’t remember telling him this, and that he was going to name his book on his alien abduction experience “Body Terror” because, he said (I’m quoting as best I can remember for now), “because this experience I had caused a terror in me unlike anything I’d ever experienced, it was absolutely terrible.”

Now consider that demons are evil, and hate God and some mock God in twisted, blasphemous ways (as opposed to others which maybe keep to themselves mostly or lightly haunt some place): after how Whitley described the torment and rape he went through, and planned to tell the world about it in a book, why would the demon/s who tormented him want it to be called, “Communion”? On Google’s first search result (for a non-Catholic definition) is this,

“Communion is a time to remember the love and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Eucharist, another term for Holy Communion, literally means “thanksgiving” in a reference to the fact that Jesus gave thanks before receiving the Last Supper. In 1 Corinthians 11:24, believers are told to have communion with the text, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” Protestant communion is a declaration and celebration of faith. The bread and wine used in the ceremony are a significant part of this tradition.”

We know soon after “the Last Supper” Jesus experienced the beginnings of God’s wrath so he could bear the punishment certain people deserved and eventually suffering it in full, and later the Bible said to remember this supper and his “sacrifice” that is represented before he went through it. So, Anne, under strong demonic influence, wanted to mock this tradition, this “communion” of God and man (and in a way also angels and man as angels interacted with man during Jesus’ life on the earth), a spiritual memorial, tradition, by equating it with Satan’s supernatural “rape” and “absolutely terrible”, “terror within” that Whitley (and surely perhaps other abductees the world would read about or remember reading and hearing about, like the Betty and Barney Hill abduction) described. In short Sat wanted to mock God and get people to think of these supernatural kidnappings (some ending is horrible and bizarre deaths of humans and animals, many never seen again) demon possessions, mental and physical attacks, flesh scarrings and rapes and the “poltergeist” activity often associated with it, including UFOs (which should include balls of lights/”orbs”, which are just demonic illusions or the demon/s making themselves partly visible) as the “communion” Christians speak of. In way one could say Satan is implying he’s giving last meals to the world and causing the world intense suffering, terror and then death afterwards. That’s Satan’s “communion”/intimate communication with mankind (and animals).

Have you heard of and seen “cow mutilations” and other apparent deadly supernatural attacks on  animals, including humans, cats, dogs, horses, sheep, and seal even References below:

“Alien” Abduction and Encounter Accounts:

Dorothy Izatt’s Encounter With Demons Many Claim Are Aliens, As Documented by Unsolved Mysteries: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qjhfhySLzcs

Warning, this site has false or demonic teachings about “Light Beings”: https://ourfamilyofthestars.blogspot.com/2013/10/dorothy-izatt-capturing-light.html?

https://www.theufochronicles.com/2007/11/antonio-villas-boas-total-abduction.html

https://www.wlox.com/story/7936092/gautier-man-shares-story-of-1973-alien-abduction/

https://www.clarionledger.com/story/magnolia/2018/08/16/look-back-charles-hickson-tells-his-abduction-ufo-miss/1006116002/

https://www.clarionledger.com/story/magnolia/2019/03/14/ufo-pascagoula-mississippi-calvin-parker-charles-hickson-other-witnesses/3129121002/

https://www.wlox.com/2019/03/15/pascagoula-ufo-new-witness-comes-forward/

https://www.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-news/2011/09/charles_hickson_ufo_abductee_w.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.sunherald.com/news/local/counties/jackson-county/article259619899.html

https://countryroadsmagazine.com/art-and-culture/people-places/the-pascagoula-abduction/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/countryroadsmagazine.com/api/amp/art-and-culture/people-places/the-pascagoula-abduction/

https://www.clarionledger.com/videos/news/2020/07/13/charles-hickson-calvin-parker-recorded-talking-alien-abduction-pascagoula-river/5409533002/

The Pascagoula River Aliens

https://www.google.com/amp/s/osr.org/blog/kids/pascagoula-ufo-encounter/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/5517215/secret-police-audio-files-prove-men-who-claim-they-were-abducted-by-alien-creatures-with-lobster-like-claws-in-craziest-ufo-sighting-ever-recorded-were-telling-the-truth-researcher-claims/amp/

https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/features/60-years-later-the-alien-abduction-of-betty-and-barney-hill/97-ae2cf39f-f89c-4ba2-bde0-5cd69c9ae518

https://www.wmicentral.com/news/arizona_news/40-years-later-most-documented-ufo-sighting-abduction-still-draw-interest/article_f10689c2-8982-11e5-82e2-d3306821f49b.html

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4121639

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/little-green-men-origins-aliens-hopkinsville-kelly

https://www.grunge.com/299546/the-terrifying-true-story-of-the-cash-landrum-ufo-incident/

https://thejolt.net/2021/08/24/the-greatest-encounter-ever-told/

“Alien” Human and Animal Mutilations and Killings

POTOSI SHEEP SLAYER: (BOLIVIA)

https://allthatsinteresting.com/dyatlov-pass-photos

http://www.coral-hull.com/testimony/fallenangelsexposed/dyatlovpass/injuries-mutilation.html

https://dyatlovpass.com/death

https://sanperdidotradingco.blogspot.com/2017/08/the-dyatlov-pass-incident.html

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/05/17/has-an-old-soviet-mystery-at-last-been-solved

https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28u0026amp;v=MNMsWhx8j8cu0026amp

https://badaliens.info/animal-mutilations

ALIENS = DEMONIC & EVIL | Human Mutilation by Aliens: What Are Aliens Doing on Earth?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2454624/Sheep-mutilations-Texas-linked-ALIENS-SATANIC-WORSHIP.html

Highly Strange Dog Death in Arkansas; 2000-Pound Bull Dropped On Log Pile and Calf Skinned

Animal Mutilations Reported in Switzerland, Hollywood and Kansas

https://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/news/headline_news/2014/07/10/8527-aliens-linked-to-dog-mutilation.html

https://english.pravda.ru/society/110783-cattle_mutilation/

https://www.phantomsandmonsters.com/2022/02/abductee-witnessed-cattle-mutilation-on.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20130723181149/

http://ufos.about.com/od/uforeportsjuly2013/a/Ufo-Abducts-Elk-In-Washington-State.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20150227100807/

http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=197u0026amp;part=1

https://web.archive.org/web/20150227100807/

http://www.richplanet.net/starship_main.php?ref=197&part=1

https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2021/03/the-mystery-of-the-black-helicopters-ufos-and-cattle-mutilations/

https://www.biographic.com/mystery-of-the-corkscrew-seals/

https://www.mensjournal.com/adventure/mysterious-gray-whale-scars-baffle-experts/

https://apnews.com/article/dan-jenkins-us-news-ap-top-news-wa-state-wire-id-state-wire-3db8829a222e45b08ed93834f792e9c5

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1376533/8-000-cow-abductions-reported-southern-U-S-sent-White-House-panic.html

http://www.mnmufon.org/chup1.htm

How to Be Saved From Direct Demonic Attacks and Possession:

“Alien” (Demon) Abductions/Harassment When Humans Call On Christ For Help

Jesus’ Name Stops “Alien” Abductions

How to be saved from Satan and Hell, ultimately: https://eternian.wordpress.com/life

Conclusion: Whitley is obviously being deceived by Satan, but in my opinion he’s taking advantage of his fame to climb the Marxist-environmentalist social ladder to make more money from those people, by trying to appeal to their environmental cult beliefs, but I think he’s also trying to meaning jn what he went through by trying to appease the demons’ will in a lazy way, that being by selling fear of environmental doom. The message is contradictory and hypocritical as Whitley claims the abduction phenomenon is about humans (a vague way of saying “aliens” are around to do something or other with humans), but he’s wrong as it’s about Satan wanting to war against everything good, perhaps not just out of hate, but what he considers fun, which is to bring torment and death to whatever is not a demon as he is.

Scripture:

“the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.” – Revelation

The Truth About Destiny

In reply to the Baptist traditionalist at of the Southern Baptist Convention, who spoke against the doctrine of predestiny (or just “destiny”) and speaking as if its teachers/believers of such are being unfair by not promoting anti-destiny belief at the blog post

https://soteriology101.com/2015/06/22/calvinism-in-the-southern-baptist-convention/

What do you mean by “doctrinal bias”? It isn’t their bias, it is based on Scripture. God is sovereign. We have a will but it is not able to be in compliance with God unless He wills it so. A free will is one in perfect harmony with God’s, but till the body of a forgiven person is perfected only the spirit of the saved person is completely free from sin.

But ultimately isn’t what matters is that God is going to free us permanently from evil and a sinful heart and mind? So why are you focused on the teaching of “free will”? Free will to go to Hell? Please, let God not let us think this way.

New Ceres Data Defies Big Bang and Evolution Theories, Supports Genesis Creationism

Source: New Ceres Data Defies 4.5 Billion Years

‘Fossil Fuels’ Discovered In Space, Again | Evolutionists Faced With Reality Again

Complex organic matter discovered throughout the Universe
00:42 October 28, 2011
By Darren Quick

A spectrum from the Infrared Space Observatory superimposed on an image of the Orion Nebula where the complex organics are found

Researchers at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) claim to have solved the mystery of “Unidentified Infrared Emission features” that have been detected in stars, interstellar space, and galaxies. For over two decades, the most commonly accepted theory regarding this phenomenon was that these signatures come from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) molecules – simple organic molecules made of carbon and hydrogen atoms. Now HKU researchers say the substances generating these signatures are actually complex organic compounds that are made naturally by stars and ejected into interstellar space.

The team of Prof. Sun Kwok and Dr. Yong Zhang used observations taken by the Infrared Space Observatory and the Spitzer Space Telescope of stardust formed in exploding stars called novae to show that the astronomical spectra contain a mixture of aromatic (ring-like) and aliphatic (chain-like) components that cannot be explained by PAH molecules.

The researchers say the substances generating these infrared emissions actually have chemical structures that are so complex that their structure resembles those of coal and petroleum. Since coal and petroleum are remnants of ancient life (does Darren even realize what he’s saying? Look at that, Darren, an evolutionist, in denial, even though he’s reporting on astronomy that is only supposed to support evolution but yet clearly isn’t) and this type of organic matter was only thought to arise from living organisms, the researchers say this suggests that complex organic compounds can be synthesized in space even when no life forms are present. (That sentence didn’t make any grammatical sense. Darren just said that these researchers are saying that stars can make petroleum because it’s believe that it came from [dead remains] of ancient life and because it was only thought to “arise”, wow “arise” nice flowery big word), from living organisms. No Darren, that’s not why they think they found oil in space, unless they are kook scientists and crazed hacks at science pretending to know what they are talking about like you are. And no sane scientist has said they come from living lifeforms let alone ancient living ones as you nonsensically implied with your poor superfluous wording. All you had to say was “SOME scientists claim that oil comes from millions of years old dead remains” and if you had an ounce of honesty in that mind would also have said that some scientists say it is continually being produced by the grinding up rock under great heat and pressure and perhaps also processed by thermophile bacteria to produce petroleum.)

Supporting an earlier idea by Kwok that old stars are molecular factories capable of manufacturing organic compounds, they say that not only are stars producing this complex matter on extremely short time scales of weeks, but they are also ejecting it into the general interstellar space in between stars.

“Our work has shown that stars have no problem making complex organic compounds under near-vacuum conditions,” says Kwok. “Theoretically, this is impossible, but observationally we can see it happening.” – more here

And when did the “fossil fuel” blind guide “judgmental” hypocrites already find this out only to keep repeating their fossil fuel mind-numbing, blissfully ignorant, children’s fantasy propaganda? (more like miserable zombie brain nonsense):

New data: Maybe oil isn’t from dead dinos
Saturn moon has more hydrocarbons than all of Earth’s known reserves
215\2008\6:52 PM Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi

Saturn’s moon Titan has hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth, according to a team of Johns Hopkins University scientists, adding to evidence that oil is not biological in origin.

The scientists at the Laurel, Md., institution were reporting this week on data collected from NASA’s Cassini probe.

“Several hundred lakes or seas have been discovered, of which dozens are estimated to contain more hydrocarbon liquid than the entire known oil and gas reserves on Earth,” wrote lead scientist Ralph Lorenz of the university’s Applied Physics Laboratory in the Jan. 29 issue of the Geophysical Research Letters. – more here

Unfortunately Jerome Corsi is a Catholic, which is worse than an atheist, because Jerome confesses the Bible to be true, and God’s word, and even gives out evidence for it, like the Shroud of Turin, yet leads people down the wrong path, down to Hell with his suffer-for-your-own-sins and do good deeds gospel, which is no good news at all. It’s a contradictory impossible path, as God demonstrated on Israel and their endless failure to obey God’s Law, and despite that some boast about knowing how many laws there are in the “first half” of the Bible.

Also interesting is that the Mainstream Science cult is hiding these discoveries (guess why). Is it on Sciencedaily, which shows off stories even from many years ago? No. Though right now they are declaring the fantasy evolutionary tree of Mollusks has just been completed lol. Delusional! Propaganda! Stupid! Waste of time and money that could be used on space exploration and COLONIZATION and exofuel mining, and advanced in medicine (not vaccines or “cures” for sexually transmitted diseases for kids – sounds like a child molester’s fantasy), transportation, computer power, artificial intelligence, software, agriculture, mining, fireproofing, oceanic exploration and colonization, housing, optics, sensors, communications, sanitation and recycling. Not, “Look I discovered all there is about mollusks over billions of years, trust me and waste your time reading this story to become a confused delusional zombie who will only listen to other evolutionists and stupidly laugh whenever you just hear the word creationist or creationism or intelligent design, or Christian or religious scientist.” Nor does Sciencedaily’s sister anti-Christian propaganda site Phys.org carry this story (these sites are almost identical except phys.org has a forum and seems to lack the videos of Sciencedaily).

The Ancient Astronaut ”Theory” of Giorgio Tsoukalos

Tonight, on the Kevin Trudeau show, ancient astronaut “theorist” Giorgio Tsoukalos was a guest. Concerning buildings like the pyramids and the ones at Tiahuanaco, Giorgio said, “I defy anyone to tell me how it’s done.” Sure, I’ll tell you without any payment? If someone truly knew does he truly expect them to just explain, freely? That’s what he sounded like. He also said, “real life stone masons that I’ve talked to today… they say to me… he… that not for any amount of time or money” would he volunteer to do this. So, because some stone mason or masons expressed doubt about building giant buildings of stone, and that, as Tsoukalos says “ancient texts” say that the “teachers from the sky” came down and helped them, that therefore nothing as impressive could be built, nowl? 1) What ancient texts does he mean? 2) Aliens gave what help? 3) Therefore we shouldn’t try to figure out how to do so EVEN IF we had had help from aliens building them, despite not knowing WHAT KIND of help? 4) The Bible makes it clear some sort of beings did abandon their assigned dwellings and created Nephilim humans, but what about it? Even if they made the Tower of Babel, what does it matter? Now if they had given us a book on how to make flying saucers, that would be truly impressive.

He kept repeating that “we would have difficulty” building them with modern technology. And?

Tsoukalos is the type, by the way to only hone in on the less than one percent of the Bible that mentions the “flying chariots” and wheels within wheels, as if none of the rest of the 99% is anything but useless or bad filler to control your mind. Arbitrary. Therefore to him, lthe only part of the Bible that matters is the “sci-fi” part. But, which is more important: Ezekiel talking about difficult to understand beings that had a small role in visions he had concerning the downfall and later supremecy of Israel, or being shown how to be good: doing to others as you would have them do to you? What matters more: The star of Bethlehem hovering over Jesus, or learning why not to lie, steal, cheat, bep impatient, murder, hate anyone, blaspheme, throw fits or assume things? Tsoukalos would have you believe it’s seeing a spaceship and dwelling on the question of how stones weighing over 12 tons could be moved for miles, and then uphill and stacked on other such stones, not getting the answer as to how exactly, but just marvelling that “aliens” helped us and forever wondering how it was done. Or maybe he thinks that if we all admit aliens helped us they will come down and tell us how to do it again, and then? So forget self-control and morals, just marvel, wonder and wait on information on how to cut and stack big blocks of rock.

There are a few other good theories as to how these stones were cut and moved, perfectly reasonable with evidence to back them up, but if we all follow Tsoukalos, we’d all be stupid, primitive ignorants doting on such buildings, getting no where, and losing time and money.

Though he claims to be an expert on the ancient astronaut theory, what he says is rehash of what has been said before in many books and shows. He’s just good at rehashing it and making a show of it and is “expertise” is “this looks aliens” and “we can’t build this”.

He also said on the show, “They weren’t stupid they weren’t dumb there were as smart as us we are today.” But no one among them was smarter then “the average person”? No one among them could have discovered some clever way to cut and lift giant rock? Are we all of “average intelligence” today?

Kevin asked Tsoukalos about Roswell, and poised a nonsensical questions, that if aliens have come from tens of thousands of miles, they must be pretty poor pilots because they crash a lot.” Where is the evidence they crash a lot? Where is the evidence that only a few come and a lot crash out of the few? So it’s a question based on assumptions and misinformation. Tsoukalos then went off on a tangent and said he was happy to talk to Kevin and then started talking about Chariots of the Gods and the Nazca lines and then finally go to Roswell, to say, “I don’t know what happened… I live it to my modern experts and researchers”. So he really can’t learn about something so significant, because he too busy looking at ancient buildings to tell us, “We were too stupid to build those, too weak, not clever enough, aliens had to help us!”

Here are questions for Tsoukalos and his fellow freethinkers to freely think about if they can:

Does no one make any astounding discoveries or are their no prodigies or people who are highly skilled and learned? Do you know anything about Edward Leedskalnin or the ancient Egyptian model plane found in a tomb? Are you aware of books like Forbidden Archeology, which show that mankind rather than being simple and boring as Tsoukalos implies: were primitive and boring and stayed that way till aliens came down to help us them megaliths? Are you aware of the Flood account, not just from the Bible but dozens of surviving tribes from all over the world? Tsoukalos is aware of an ancient plane found in Mexico, or was it South America. He talked about it with Kevin, and Kevin said they didn’t have electricity and didn’t fly and only maybe invented the wheel, but Tsoukalos said that that is what mainstream scientists claimed. Tsoukalos gave evidence that he thought they did make a wheel because they had a game with a hoop and that they should have thought about some other usage for such a circle. By that logic everyone seeing anything round, like the sun, should have made a wheel. That’s a good example of Tsukoloses very shallow, very weak, very arbitrary. It’s the same kind of logic that evolutionists use, “Oh these ancient bones look similar, and the smaller creatures turned into the big ones, and then the big ones got little again because we got hit with an asteroid. Oh wait, new theory: the giant lizards turned into feathered birds. Wait, another new theory: there was crazy evolution of all kinds going on. Let’s watch a Discovery Channel cartoon and Jurassic Park again, it will help take your mind off those stupid “fundies” and their claims that there is all kinds of easily found evidence to verify the historical records of the Bible, and help brainwash you into thinking we actually have evidence for our theories. We can watch South Park after that and then pass out drunk and spend another five billion dollars on a 10 mile long machine to mash some particles together. Cool right? And those “fundies” will just waste their lives reading the Bible and trying to control you by hitting your head with it.”

Though Tsoukalos makes his theory to be in and of itself astounding and useful, it falls for short of reality, and reality that is far more amazing then he makes it out to be, so much more, that the Bible says it can’t be imagined till seen.

Update 10-26-2012:

Tsoukalous said on Coast to Coast AM tonight (25th) that creationists who believed the world is 6,000 years old (it’s actually about 6,500) are wrong about the fossil record, because “why don’t mainstream scientists and geologists in universities (this is literally how this guy talks, in a simpleton’s way of thinking that is) believe this, are they all crazy? I don’t think so.” Yet this is a guy who goes against mainstream scientists AND ARCHEOLOGISTS, INCLUDING BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGISTS (which includes ATHEISTS) and MAINSTREAM GEOLOGISTS every moment with his “ancient aliens theory”! And not long before that, in that same hour, said that his show and website was all about ASKING QUESTIONS, not affirming what is true and what isn’t! What an extreme oblivious hypocrite. And after he said, “ALL WE DO IS ASK QUESTIONS”. This is a confused person who states such and such is true but at the same time uses double speak, by saying nothing can be believed since you have to keep asking questions about the same things he implies. He doesn’t understand the importance of believing what is clearly true, but arbitrarily believes whatever he feels like. This is a truly confused and confusing person. He also, I noted, when referring to GEOLOGISTS, did not say MAINSTREAM and spoke as if there WERE NO SUCH THING AS CREATIONIST GEOLOGISTS, OR CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS? Oh and did I mention that after saying we should accept the right of creationists to believe what they want, and “Who am I to say they are wrong” said that their beliefs, in a pretty sly way, was crazy, by saying, “That’s the crazy world we live in”, he said that right after saying we have to accept what they believe. And just minutes before he was done with his interview ended, said, “Nothing is too wild, because we should always leave open the possibility… nothing has been solved. … We should stop to be arrogant (sic), and (accept that nothing has been solved).” LIAR! IF NOTHING HAS BEEN SOLVED WHY DOES HE SAID IT IS CRAZY TO BELIEVE THAT THE UNIVERSE IS 6,000 YEARS OLD AND THAT MAINSTREAM SCIENTISTS CAN BE WRONG?! Why does he conveniently ignore that not all scientists are mainstream scientists when it comes to assessing if Christians are telling the truth or not? Why doesn’t he take into account the obvious: PRIDE AND MONEY?! DID HE NOT JUST SAY BEFORE HIS INTERVIEW ENDED, “STOP THE ARROGANCE (UNJUSTIFIED PRIDE)”?! Don’t all scholars know one of the most basic most influential verses in the Bible: THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL!?

Conclusion: Tsoukalos not someone to listen to for spiritual guidance, or building design, or Biblical interpretation or guidance.

Freethinkers – Do You Know What You Mean by ”Free”?

Being free isn’t, “doing whatever I feel like”, being a slave to your passions, the feelings of your heart, and calling that “free thinking (with my mind)”. Thinking with your heart and allowing it to do whatever it wants to do and restricting it with your mind just enough to stay out of jail (if you have the mental control even for that), isn’t being “free”. You can’t even be totally free anyways: there are always constraints on us, our emotional and physical limitations also prevent us from thinking however we want to. People can influence how others think easily, by insulting or telling the truth, by helping or not or giving pleasure or causing pain. Few people can keep themselves totally unbiased at all times. And why should a goal in life be being as free as you can in your thoughts? Is it healthy to dwell on evil continuously, to make that your main focus? Or to always think about what is sad when you eat? Is it healthy to desire revenge till you get it? Is it healthy to lust after anyone? No. Rather, restraining yourself helps you to have and preserve a a life of freedom thinking logically and being emotionally controlled so that you can have comfort even when being sad, which appropriate sadness brings.

Nor is it “humanism” being that that is a set of rules meant to restrict immoral and unhelpful thinking, like the Bible is, nor is it merely “freedom from religion.” According to one definition, it is, “inclined to forms one’s own opinions rather than depend upon authority, especially about social and religious issues; exhibiting boldness of speculation; skeptical of authority.”

Opinions are statements that are not necessarily based on clear facts, but guided in part by feelings and sometimes debatable evidence. Remember that, “feelings.” Note also “one’s own rather than depend on authority”, which (though is nonsensical since opinions can only be formed by the person forming them, not another, as nonsensical as literally saying that a Christian isn’t thinking for themselves – they wouldn’t be responsible for their thoughts then), which implies a reject of listening to others and instead an inclination to make judgments based on little information, which suggests a hatred of obeying rules, restrictions, those who may be wiser and those who may have a right to command, and in directly shows an illogical bias in what the free thinker is willing to learn or who to take advice from, biased because authorities are not necessarily less wise than a non-authority. Then it says, “exhibiting boldness of speculation”, which is something that is not limited to “free thinkers”. If theists were not that way, we’d be “primitive”, probably only living under trees, in caves and holes in the ground, and with a very low population. Then it says, “skeptical of authority”, meaning doubting that those in authority are best to lead or that authorities are needed. And from that it can be logically concluded that some free thinkers then are likely to be anarchists and others simply hateful of anyone with power over them (including God) and will therefore be more likely to resist anyone supposedly or who is, at least in by decree, their leader. What the definition does not say, is why this way of living or mindset is or is not logical, though I’ve said a little as to why it isn’t logical. That was a dictionary definition, but others take it to mean something more simple (because they themselves are simple), like “thinking as one pleases rather than according to a religion or set of rules or any rule”. There is a contradiction in that: To say you don’t think by any rule would contradict that you live by the rule of not thinking according to any rule. It’s similar to saying, “There is no absolute truth” which is a self-refuting statement (because then not even that statement that there is no absolute truth would be true, which would then mean that there are absolute truths, not “none”). The correct definition is, “Someone who is against the belief in and worship of gods or God and who doubts that authorities are superior to non-authorities or beneficial to themselves anymore than a non-authority.” Now that hones in on what freethinking is really about: resistance of authority based on personal doubt that any authority is better than themselves or helpful to themselves. And really, they want to be king of themselves as much as they can be. This is understandable to a degree, because like Scripture says, “The [human] heart is desperately wicked; who can know [how evil] it [is]?” And, “There is none good, no not one.”

Others say that freethinker, skeptic and atheist are synonymous, or some may think that only skeptic and freethinker are. But skepticism as a lifestyle, is an illogical mindset, because it is illogical to start out doubting something before having the facts. Or if you define skepticism as doubting supernatural events, UFOs, and the usual (except that the law of conservation can be broken), it is still illogical since there is plenty of evidence of supernatural events UFOs and aliens. If you don’t bother studying UFOs and aliens much you may not be aware that an small alien was captured in Mexico, and it’s dedicated body available for study.

To be as free as possible, in a way that doesn’t lead to your destruction, to an eternity in Hell, is to get right with God, the Creator, our Father. You can get it by seeking his forgiveness with all your heart, and he will free your mind and body from being a slave to your passions of your heart. Sadly, merely reading my words won’t cause that to happen, anymore than reading, “I’m against homophobia, and you should be too” can free a person from illogical thoughts, which freethinkers don’t realize. Rather, God has to change a person’s heart and guide their mind and cut off Satan’s influence over their heart and mind. And God won’t do this for whoever I want him to, ultimately it’s up to him to forgive a person, or allow them to continue being “free” from his life-saving eternal love.

Remember the idea of the atheist Gene Roddenberry, who came up with Vulcans, who realized that they were slaves to their emotions? Though his idea doesn’t work (deadening your emotions leads to depression, because we are emotional beings). But by being forgiven, and so free from eternal punishment, and obeying. By obeying you will be free from eternal punishment of the continuous kind, and temporary kind on Earth. By ceasing to strive against the Truth, Yahweh, he will cease to strive against you, to withhold from you “the desires of your heart” so long as they are not self-centered desires, meaning, desires made without perfect concern for others, that includes perfect concern for the feelings of God, who is not a rock, but a living being with emotions and concerns like us. He will not show himself to just anyone or whenever they want him to, and why should he to such corrupt people, people so corrupt that even some of the most corrupt of them see their extreme evil as “progress” and “good” and “moral”? Is he a God that has to come out of his house whenever we want him to? No, he is what his title says, “God”, a god, the only god, more than a god: all powerful, all knowing, invincible, only able to imprisoned if he allows it, and he only allowed it to happen once.

So between theists and atheists: I choose the group that ratio-wise, is much less destructive, who contributes far more to society due to their superior logic and patience. But atheists, they are so intolerant, they end up killing hundreds of millions in only 100 years, and if they continued that way, will kill all humans in less than 2000 years. And if you fear global warming, or think morals matter, than how can you be apart of the most murderous most destructive group on earth? In a way, “freethinker” is an appropriate term for what you and other atheists are, because you make up for yourselves arbitrary morality, convenient morality, morality that suits your emotional whims, rather than based on logic and truth, on what is evidence, rather than debatable. “Freeradicals” is a better term. Or simply, “wild”. But as you know, a wild animal isn’t “free”, it is still bounded by nature, limited by the other wild animals around it. But those who live in a civilized way, who bind their emotions and thoughts so that they don’t stray “whenever their heart feels like” – they are far more free, far more likely to live long. You may think back to atheist China, and forget about their forced abortions, and their murdering their female babies in favor of males (you do know about that don’t you “feminist for the freedom of females which atheists prevent because Jesus hated females and treated them like they are inferior and said they can’t get into Heaven and won’t be equal to the angels”? Oh, right, Jesus didn’t say that did he?), and think, “But China is civilized, they may have a problem with sexism and oppressing the poor and brutality and arbitrary violation of the rights of their citizens and intolerance of free speech, and slave-like laborers and forced evacuations and cover ups of government and police abuse and on and on and on…” oh, not very civilized are the atheists of China are they? How about Cuba, are those atheist “free”? But it’s those bad theists’ fault, all their fault, oh damn them for building up civilization, especially those reformed Christians when they went to America and didn’t obey that crazy king, they should have stayed and became atheists or established an atheist country and told people religion is just stupid, which is how they ended up in America in the first place, because religion is just so dumb. It was atheism that got them to America. So it comes down to this: how long are you going to ignore the evidence that the Bible is not just “some book” that “is oppressive”, no wait, “that says anything you want it to” (which is freethinking atheists? can’t make up your free unbound wild minds?), but rather is obviously written by a being that made this universe, didn’t abandoned it, but cared enough to allow people to have some freedom from him ever being in their face and repeating his commands and word over and over and calling them to repentance audibly every day, from morning to night, cared enough to let them “be freethinkers”, to see how far they could get without him. Well like the Bible says, the last days will be worse than any other time, logically then, things should be getting worse, degrading from false religions, to an even worse state: atheism and the deliberate denial that idols are not representations of or containers of the spirits of gods, and worshiping them?

Yet despite God not being in your face every day, telling you that you are wrong, never letting you escape from him, you still fault him, still say you are anti-God. What must he do, come out of his house in full glory, and bow before you? Will that be enough? Or must he be a genie in a bottle for you? Go when you want him to do what you want him to? “Then I’ll believe you’re God oh God, when you do this too! Oh you won’t? Oh you can’t be God then : ), no, you have to do this last thing. Oh great you did it, so I’ll believe you’re God for one more day, oh, I want you to do this for me too God: give me your place, then I’ll know you are truly loving and trust that you are God forever (never mind that contradiction God). So what are you waiting for Mr. Real God, give me all your powers and knowledge, the knowledge of how to get when I want and when to do it, not all that “truth” stuff, like about your word, keep that oppressive boring stuff to yourself, God.”

I think that is the real you, who like everyone else who realizes God exists, but hates him for not being what they want him to be, provokes him by denying his existence, merely because they can’t see him with their eyes, or feel them with their hands, or hear them with their ears, or grasp how a being can be of one mind yet have three minds simultaneously. Or, more honorably, rather, delude themselves that God can’t possibly exist, because no all powerful being could possibly exist that doesn’t give them whatever they want whenever they want, or that would let painful things happen to them, even if they were far from perfect.

Unlike you, and I know you can’t make this claim, I have carefully, very carefully, and patiently, gone over every argument against religion, theism and Christianity, painstakingly gone through all of them, listed them, categorized them. I was able to see flaws in all of them, before I had learned about “logical fallacies”. And I found many of those arguments contradicted themselves and other arguments (big surprise that if God were the embodiment of truth that arguments against him would turn out to be self-defeating lies). And many years later when I learned about logical fallacies, I was able to see more errors.

The whole idea of “freethinking” is contradictory too, as I’ve pointed out, but I’ll do so more clearly for you: if you believe it makes you a robot or unable to think logically / freely by believing that Christ was right about their being absolute truth, and that miracles by God are possible, then how are you free by absolutely denying those things, or either? If you say, “YOU MUST think this way, that Jesus wasn’t God, didn’t do any miracles” or whatever you say, how is that “freedom”? So only thinking YOUR WAY is freedom? Wasn’t the whole point of you calling yourself “free” to point out that you think as you please and that theism prevents that? Yet see, that’s not the end of the story, that’s not all there was to your ideology of freethinking, it was about you letting theists know that they shouldn’t believe in gods or God or even the possibility of it, but by thinking in your narrow minded intolerant biased way, which is a way based on your personal feelings and shallow evidence you arbitrarily use as evidence to make it seem as if it’s not really about you just pleasing your feelings, not really about you hating truths that go against your feelings, your lusts. Your free isn’t really freedom anymore than being in jail is freedom, it’s the opposite. You’ve simply renamed “sin” and “rebellion” to “free”. The mask is off, I can see through your makeup and smile. Though you may be happy, very happy, high, in bliss, it’s covering an endless craving inside that can never be satisfied so long as you keep refusing to obey your Father in Heaven.

The Bible teaches that truth is absolute, that there are also definite morals as a result. But you freethinkers forget that, and think you can part God from his word, as if God was just an arbitrary lie to get people to either be moral or be slaves to those who preached (which is an argument easily proven false). But if the Bible is wrong, the most tried and true book for peace (if you obey it unhypocritically), especially peace for the one who obeys it rather than attacking it’s message of eternal peace and warning of eternal punishment for those who refuse the only possible way to eternal peace), then why even if a freethinker claimed to believe in absolute truth, and had all the commandments except not blaspheming God, and worshiping Him alone, even then, why should anyone trust in them? Are freethinkers perfect, free of hypocrisy? How have they demonstrated that they are better than reformed Christians, who go about being charitable even while poor, who give even if there’s no Bible or pamphlet to give along with their money, homes, churches, clothing, food, seeds or livestock? And some give and rarely preach (and will be rewarded likewise by God for that lack of leading anyone to Christ or correcting a Christian doing wrong). How are you better? Where are you commandments? Where is your good news? Your message of hope? This is it: “accept homosexual activity because I Felicia am cool, I am a photographer, beautiful, I’ve had a sexual partner that I won’t pledge myself too not even after 8 years, whom I refer to as a “boy”. I say, without explanation, that I’m a feminist, against the fear of homosexuals (against people who are against homosexuality), and because I’m a freethinker (able to think logically unlike people who merely believe in a god, gods or God).” So that defeats all theists? Wait, it’s also because you posted pictures of yourself acting cute and wearing trendy and custom clothing and jewelry. That’s why we stupid, robot theists should obey you, and that’s how we can “snap out of it”, but just reading those few words and looking at your pictures. Lusting after you and admiring you will free us! Isn’t that shallow? I can call that kind of thinking of yours all kinds of other names.

So it comes down to this: What kind of freedom do you want: freedom from God’s love and the freedom from eternal pain and eternal pleasures that comes with it? The eternal peace and happiness that comes with it? Or freedom while being bound forever in chains, feeling like burning salt and wind is hitting you, in total or near total darkness, a worm (maggot) always eating away at you, surrounded by continuous screams of sorrow and pain, feeling extreme sorrow, always screaming out in pain? And how well will you be able to enjoy your memories of your past life, especially after having gone through God’s judgment in front of millions or even millions of people, both humans and angels and perhaps even your friends and enemies? Will that be “freedom” and “life”?

For those of you who argue, “Oh you have to threaten with Hell to get people to listen!” What is your point? Parents threaten children who won’t listen to them, to correction of commands. The Bible itself says that mere words will not get a servant to listen. That doesn’t mean that you must threaten or inflict pain, but that the servant, to be one that is obedient, must be familiar with pain, must be familiar with unpleasant consequences for not doing their job, just like a child if that child is to grow up self-controlled and productive, not rebellious and wild. And, you are ignoring the rest of this letter in which I explained that in another way, I didn’t, nor does God, simply threaten pain.

The atheist version of “freethinking” is not logical and leads to a chaotic life, one that can’t achieve healthy freedom/living. And for those who claim they are not obeying their heart over logic, where is the evidence? As I’ve shown in this letter, the logic is not there, but is wrong logic. I show all throughout my journal the result of “free thinking” or “freedom from religion” of “freedom from guilt by giving up religion”: it leads to extreme sorrow, pain and often death for those who don’t have the health, money and power to shield themselves against people who live as they please. Criminals live “free” in the way that atheists advise, or command, and ultimately will pay for it unless God saves them from themselves. Christians live like tamed animals, and note in a mental cage or box like atheists pretend or mock them as living like (and ironically many atheists, not just pagans or Catholics, have kidnapped, imprisoned and murdered millions of Christians). So again, it comes down to the temporary freedom you might get by disobeying God (and look at the condition of the world: in general, are people who disobey the Bible filled with hope that they will continue on peacefully into Heaven, or distressed, obsessed with material things, suffering from contradicting themselves all the time and other things that wear a person down?) or the promise of eternal freedom, freedom from any pain, from confusion, chaotic thinking, eternal bliss without ignorance or shame.

A Demon-fooled Mormon and Noory’s Evil Jester ”JC”

On the “NDEs and Open Lines” September 2, 2011 edition of Coast to Coast AM, after Noory interviewed Kathy Baker, he had open lines and spoke with a Mormon grandmother(?) who told him a detailed story. Her story added to the evidence for my claim that demons pretend to be angels and dead humans to fool people into thinking that the Bible (and the religion of fundamentalist Christians that is based on it) are wrong, in other words that you can get to Heaven without needing forgiveness. She told a story about a 5 year old boy whom she took care of who had a mom he hated. I think it was his grandmother. She said one day he said to her that he wanted to die and to make a long story short missed Jesus and wanted to be with him. And the next day said he could travel through time and space and one day found him in a perfect lotus position, and said that angels taught him how to do that. She said that amazed her because she was a Mormon and thought that only her religion was true. That was a stupid statement because simply sitting in a lotus position doesn’t mean there is more than one true religion, it’s just a way of sitting. It’s ironic too since logically she should have seen it as verification of her religion since unlike traditional Christianity, her false version (Mormonism) teaches we are with Jesus before we are born. But Mormons are stupid when it comes to evidence and logic, so no surprise there. It’s also not surprising she was duped into believing whatever it is those demons bothering the kid wanted them to believe, because the Mormon religion is based on a narcissist named Joseph Smith who supposedly received a revelation/having a vision from an angel or angels (and Joseph Smith kept changing his “first vision” story by the way, despite what most Mormon’s claim) or instead God and Jesus who gave Joseph a new gospel, that being that “none of [the churches] are true.” Gospel means “good news” if you don’t know. Great gospel huh? Instead of, “Good news, Jesus suffered and died for sinners making possible their ability to live in peace forever if they repent,” it’s, “You’re all wrong cuz I had a vision no one else saw, and I’ll not tell you why till nine years have gone by while I make my own more exciting Bible to show why you’re all wrong.” So, from the day the the 5 year old said he wanted to die, he got hit by a car 2 weeks later and died in a car “accident”. I suspect rather it was a demon or demons that caused it, he had been trying ever since he said that to kill the boy and possibly get the grandmother, mom and 16 year old guy who hit him, to all commit suicide.

George also let on a silly person called J.C. I think after the Mormon woman was on.

“J.C.” is an annoying person who has been on more than four times, and each time pretends to be a fundamentalist southern Baptist Christian as best I can tell. George said of him that he “cracks me up”. He decided to let J.C. give his usual rants and to do something “different” this time, and let him speak to other guests. The first caller that comes on at that point is a man who wanted to talk about his dead sister and clearly didn’t want to talk to J.C. So what does George do after J.C. trounces on the other caller? Allowed J.C. to move on to another caller while putting the other caller on hold… How about put J.C. on hold till that caller got to tell his story? Two other calls also didn’t want to talk to J.C. out of three and George finally got rid of J.C.

Ironically George had asked J.C. if he believed in ghosts and J.C. said of course and that they were bad spirits. Interestingly he didn’t say they were demons, but implied that they were dead humans who didn’t qualify to get to Heaven. He also seemed to indicate that he had a conscience without saying it when he pointed out that he would seem like a jerk to people listening when the first caller was someone who wanted to talk about his dead sister, which J.C. didn’t realize when joking with him. A person without a conscience wouldn’t have shown concern. So, I don’t think J.C. was “anti-social”. But, that comment about ghosts not being demons, that is unlike a fundamentalist Christian, since F.C.’s believe ghosts are demons pretending to be humans. On top of his usual poor imitation of them, that comment about ghosts he made is evidence to me that he has little knowledge of F.C.s, even if he used to attend some F.C. church. If he did, he must not have paid much attention. His stereotype is very narrow and seems outdated. For example he was saying that he was rescuing some woman from “rock n’ roll” music, which is something unheard of to me. At best a parent will just try and prevent their kid from listening to it, not try to “rescue” them from it. And not many Christians in my experience are against it. The only ones I knew of who were are the ones who follow the narcissist pseudo-Christian Bill Gothard and “orthodox” Presbyterians, not all of whom are against it, but who just have a problem with the lyrics or it not being a style of music that fits their usual moods, just like most people don’t listen to death metal, because it doesn’t fit their usual moods either.

I noticed that George seemed about to say that the angels the 5 year old had seen, might be demons, but him not being the type to offend, especially since the 5 year old died and the grandmother distraught, didn’t say that, but just, with a contrived tone, pretended they were angels coming to take him away. What was interesting is that when J.C. came on, my perception seemed right, since it seemed he was hinting at what he was actually thinking concerning the previous call, was that those angels were demons, because he asked J.C. what he thought of ghosts. That may seem like a stretch, but the grandmother had just gotten off and might have been listening, and if he said, “What do you think of those angels the five year old saw actually being demons trying to send him to Hell?” might have gotten the grandmother to cry more and upset a large number of listeners.

I wonder if George, who claims to be a Catholic, but who is more like a pseudo-Catholic, ever thinks about this verses in the Bible:

“God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.” – Paul

“Man shall not live by bread alone, by by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.” – Jesus

My Reply to Claudius the Catholic | Why Catholics are Heretics

After writing a grammatical exposition of the controversial passage in Matthew which Catholics claim shows Peter is their Pope, Claudius the Catholic said,

“Now that I have all that grammar out of the way we need to all sit and think about what this all means.”

Sure, now let’s look at your second statement after that one:

“We have the prophecy from Daniel that the Catholic Church fulfills”

So then rather than sticking with that passage you jump thousands of years back to Daniel, well if you can do that I can also refer to other Scriptures on whether or not the Catholic Church is the true Church or not. I’m guessing you’re talking about Daniel 2, being that this is the only speech I could find on the net from a Catholic claiming that D2 supported Catholicism,

“It refutes the Protestant and Mormon notion of a “Great Apostasy.” Believers in a Great Apostasy believe that at some point, either Catholicism replaced the True Church, or overran it. Yet Daniel 2’s prophesy says that during the days of the Roman Empire, Christ will set up a Kingdom, and it’ll never “be left to another people.” There’s no room for a New Church or New Kingdom in a post-Roman age (in either sense of “Roman,” there). No need to hypothesize about who the first pope was, or when the Church was formed. Daniel 2 lays the foundation you need, and the New Testament clears up the gray areas.”

The problem with this part of the Catholic’s rant are obvious:

1) The Bible says there will be an apostasy in the New Testament, more than once. So this Catholic like so many others just doesn’t know, forgets or deliberately avoids certain Scripture.
2) He’s forgetting yet another Scripture in which Jesus said that his kingdom should not be awaited, but that it was already here. OBVIOUSLY, there was no Catholic Church at that time, and if Peter was the first pope, he sure wasn’t at that time. So out goes that massive stretch.
3) The Roman Catholic church is not a kingdom. And Revelation does say the Catholic church whores about with them (“seven mountains”, don’t forget).
4) That line about the church not being left to another people as evidence is utterly stupid and infantile and nonsensical: A protestant could easily make that claim as evidence, what does it prove? “Hi, Bible says my church won’t be left to another people, so you Catholics aren’t the true church.” WOW EXCELLENT PROOF! NOT. Really how stupid can you get Catholics? Why not say, “Bible says Jesus is the Christ, that’s means our Christ, so you’re not the real Christians.” Wow, awesome, proved sooo much. Might as well say, “Nanny nanny boo boo we are true not you.”

Yet, if I and other Christians don’t read Catholic arguments like that, we face replies like, “Nanny nanny boo boo I can’t hear you.” (referring to us). But no: we don’t have to endlessly read Catholic claims and defenses, once you read their some of their common replies and claims as to why they are the true Church, whether it has an official stamp of of approval from their Pope or not, and review their TRUE history, whether it has the official seal of approval from their Pope or not, and see the flaws in them, whether their Pope acknowledges them or not, that is enough ignore the Nanny Boo Booers who just want to torment you more for not following them.

What makes the other people claim so ultra stupid, is that it makes no point and the Catholic using it is implying that it’s true just because he says it is (based on his claim that Kingdom = Catholic Church). How is that better than the Mormon babble that he claims is false? Better than their “oh Jesus said he has ‘other sheep’ and ‘other sheep’ is the Indians, bcuz the Book of Mormon said so. Just trust your good heart we’re right, and pray too so you can trust more, and if you don’t trust, well then you must be wrong, because we can see the truth no matter what you say, and truth is our hearts tell us we’re right, and the Book of Mormon too.” Vain, stretched, contrived, absurd, circles.

Moving on, what about Revelation? Why do Catholics keep avoiding that Book? The Catholic Church is CLEARLY being referred to in Revelation, CLEARLY fulfills the prophecy of the whore that rides the beast and the reference to the seven mountains makes it almost plain. No other entity fits that prophecy, despite the repeated fallacy made by Catholics when they refer to Protestants as a single entity, even though they contract themselves by trumping up the divisions between them! You can’t have it both ways Arbitrary Church.

Concerning the grammar? As usual, we only need to refer to other passages of Scripture. Over and over God and Jesus are called the Rock of eternity, and Jesus the foundation. ALL the apostles are referred to as the foundation, not just Peter, and obviously God does not mean bedrock it’s on or whatever is holding the foundation together (obviously that would be God, not Peter or the apostles). And anyone who has studied Protestant arguments on this matter, if they aren’t a newbie, knows the argument that Peter does not nearly contribute as much as Paul did, and it would make more sense to call Paul the foundation of the church. Peter supplemented Paul, not the other way around. So then it’s not unreasonable just based on that fact that Jesus wasn’t calling Peter a cornerstone or secondary foundation and the apostles playing inferior roles. Another Protestant argument is that Jesus pointed to himself, which some Catholics think absurd or unrealistic. BUT IT ISN’T, because Jesus gave a riddle to the Pharisees in which it clearly states he was referring to himself, rather than what they thought he, to them, appeared to LITERALLY mean, and so Catholics are being arbitrary with how they are literally interpreting the “and on this rock” passage. Further, NOTHING in that verse says anything about Peter being a Pope, or that the Catholic Church is the true Church. Any idiot can proclaim, “Peter was our pope, here’s proof: other members of the Catholic Church agree” or “Oh these Christians said so” and NOT bring up the CHARACTER of those people they use as witnesses, something clearly not Biblical to do. You don’t just trust anyone, that is ARBITRARY, it’s “picking and choosing”. It’s evil. And Catholics hate to hear this:

“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?”

Do I even need to start pointing out the severe corruption in your Church? Do I need to point out the hypocrisy of your church in venerating Mother Teresa, or electing one corrupt Pope after another? The abortion rates? The rapes? And that other evil you all know is a problem?

But the arbitrary Catholic defense to that is, “Everybody sins dupe de dupe.” Oh yes, you’re right, “no biggie”, “everyone does it,” “But Dad, Johnny Calvin also put his hands in the cookie jars, so look at him not us, and just keep letting us sin.” And you sure can’t speak of Protestants as a single entity, because as you yourselves say of us, “Oh you Protestants are evil terrible horrible, ur the evil doers!” Because as you yourselves say, “They are divided into so many Churches! They can’t all have the Holy Spirit!” Yes, you’re right, they can’t all, and you are included among the division, or did you forget the Protestants DIVIDED from you? Once again: Arbitrary Arguing. And so, answer your own question, judge for yourselves, if not all can have the Holy Spirit, then who does? Maybe instead of repeatedly looking in the mirror and make vain repetitions to convince yourselves that it’s you who have it, like narcissists, maybe examine the deeds of other churches, maybe consider the true Church doesn’t go by a single name, like a business corporation, some magic name that makes you saved, some magical club name, but that they can be KNOWN BY THEIR FRUITS, their deeds, not “A NAME.”

I’ve read Robert Sungenis’ argument on the “Petra/Petros” argument too, and found his argument nonsensical and contradictory. James White does too: http://vintage.aomin.org/Epitetaute.html

And one last thing, the Bible forbids logomachy (arguing over words), which is what you Catholics are doing when you strive over petra and petros, and put into question the trustworthiness of Scripture like Muslims and Mormons do, when you pretend there is another translation that justifies you. “Trust me,” said Joseph Smith, “Put you’re trust in me when I tell you that God chose me and that I speak his will and that these golden plates I translated and am hiding under this cloth really are under this cloth. And look at me, am I not beautiful, loving, and well spoken? And therefore I tell you the Bible has been corrupted and would support me if we had the originals and if those prophets weren’t so sinful and rebellious, unlike me. Trust my revision and divine interpretations of it, or else, you can’t be apart of the true church and you are going to Hell and you will never have the Spirit. Keep my covenants.” “Trust us,” said the Muslims, “Trust that Christianity is wrong because you’re Bible has been altered. It doesn’t preserve God’s word accurately, our Quran is superior, it’s better than the original. The original Bible would have supported what we say if there was a perfect copy. Those Jewish prophets couldn’t be trusted with the pen the Bible says. The real prophets were Muslims, Abraham wasn’t even Jewish.” And like them, you beg the world to believe in your invisible contradictory evidence too. You too are a cult, whose religion centers around mere men, and like Mormons, gods, gods you pretend to merely venerate. Like the Pharisees, the leaders of the Catholics withhold the knowledge of the keys to the kingdom of Heaven and give them false keys instead, your tradition, tradition that negates the word of God.

I’m chosen by grace, not by works, and the faith I have that saved me wasn’t of me, but of God. And remember: God’s will be done, on Earth, AS IT ALWAYS IS, in Heaven.

Related Information:

Was the New Testament Originally Written in Greek or Aramaic? Aramaic Primacy Refuted

Rocks and Stones

Is the Church Built on Petra or Petros?

On What “rock”?

A Letter Concerning the Sacred Name Movement

Problems Facing Aramaic Primacy Claims

Exploding the Aramaic Myth: An Investigation of Aramaic Primacy and the real language of Messiah

Myths About the Original Language of the New Testament

Easter, Materialism and Atheism

Found an interesting article just now, less than three months old, in a place I didn’t expect:

How Easter and Christianity undermine atheism
By Anthony DeStefano
4/26/2011 3:09 PM

This Easter it seems that atheists have a lot to rejoice about. According to the latest data in the American Religious Identification Survey, the number of self-proclaimed atheists in America has nearly doubled since 2001 — from 900,000 to 1.6 million.

In a nation that once prided itself on its Judeo-Christian heritage, one out of every five Americans now claims no religious identity whatsoever; and the number of self-proclaimed Christians has declined by a whopping 15%.

Yes, those who believe in nothing seem to be winning more and more converts every year.

The superstition of atheism

Of course, it’s not quite fair to say that atheists believe in nothing. They do believe in something — the philosophical theory known as Materialism, which states that the only thing that exists is matter; that all substances and all phenomena in the universe are purely physical.

The problem is that this really isn’t a theory at all. It’s a superstition; a myth that basically says that everything in life — our thoughts, our emotions, our hopes, our ambitions, our passions, our memories, our philosophies, our politics, our beliefs in God and salvation and damnation — that all of this is merely the result of biochemical reactions and the movement of molecules in our brain.

What nonsense. – More here

I remembered a few minutes before posting this article, that I had discovered an evidence that God is not a being that needed to be created. It was an evidence I had discovered about a week ago. Maybe I’ll talk about it later.

Related Information:

Scientific contradictions in materialism (alternate post here.

Materialism of the Gaps

Is Intelligent Design Compatible With Darwinian Evolution Theory?

On 6/20/2010 on Coast to Coast AM, radio show host George Noory interviewed “Dr. Bernard Haisch” who the C2C AM website describes as “an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications. He served as a scientific editor of the Astrophysical Journal for ten years, and was Principal Investigator on several NASA research projects. His professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory and Deputy Director of the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley. In addition, he was also Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.” George almost right away brought up Stephen Hawking asking what was going on with him, and Bernie made it seem as if Hawking had had a change of mind after having written a book (his latest) called The Grand Design and might believe in an intelligent designer who designed the universe, saying that it seemed to Hawking that the laws of the universe were “finely tuned” (designed) for life (an old evidence for God or someone or someones like him having created the universe), but actually Hawking hadn’t changed his mind since writing his book, and was simply stating what seemed true to him, yet is in denial about it as his book The Grand Design shows. Bernie then said that he believed that humans had been created with a purpose and that’s “It’s more likely that the universe is a finely tuned place for life.” Bernie also brought up how astrophysicist George Ellis said that “life would not be possible if there were very small changes”. What Ellis said actually said was, “What is clear is that life, as we know it, would not be possible if there were very small changes to either physics or the expanding universe that we see around us.

However he said that he believed we were created through evolution, and “to learn” and that God didn’t create us in the way the Bible says and doesn’t “interfere” , because that would be “like [the] Santa Claus [story being true]” He also said that “the purpose behind all this is for God to evolve himself”. He said that he went to the “Latin school of Indianapolis” and to a Catholic seminary for one semester in an attempt to become a (Catholic) priest. He also posed the question “was the universe was made in a way that was conducive for life” and answered himself, saying “yes it was.”

Bernie’s misdescribes what it is when God acts within the universe, calling it “interference”. Why so? When a human does something is it automatically “interference”? Obviously not. Further, he compares the claim that God directly created humans instantly as being like the Santa Clause story, but does not explain why, or how such a comparison is evidence against the Genesis record. Further, his claim that God acting within the universe would go against “us” (humans) learning anything is without evidence. He doesn’t explain how that would prevent us from learning anything. And it goes against common sense: why if God gave us information would that PREVENT any human from learning anything? It would be just the opposite: they would learn about God (some way in which he does or can communicate) and learn the information he gave them if he allowed them to understand what he said. Also, why if God was able to create the laws of the universe (which is nothing simple, and which no creature has apparently mastered, not even aliens being that they can crash and die, must travel in vehicles to get to Earth and use created tools to examine us further than what they can learn simply by their senses), why if God could do that, and create a universe itself, would he NOT be able to see the future perfectly as the Bible claims, or alter it in anyway without preventing us or himself from learning or evolving as Bernie implied? Why would God NOT learn anything by altering what he made? Would God NOT learn something he spoke to a human or any of his creatures and observed how they reacted? I also noticed that part of Bernie’s illogical beliefs about reality was due to his belief in randomness, a thing which doesn’t exist being that everything, as he himself acknolwedges, goes by finely tuned laws, and that there is a purpose behind everything, not a “random non-purposed experimental universe by a God who failed at his experiment”. So, he contradicted himself. And because of his belief in randomness (a thing which allows for things to happen for no logical reason, apart from the laws of the universe and therefore unable to be purposed/directed), he also believes in Darwinian evolution. Bernie also believes in the “Big Bang”, a thing which has much evidence against it.

After, George said to Bernie that he didn’t believe that God sent floods and Bernie agreed saying that there were verses in the Bible that were “simply awful” like a verse in Deuteronomy in which if a man discovered his bride wasn’t a virgin, that he must stone her to death on her father’s doorstep, and saying that that was man’s evil projection onto God, and so revealing his ignorance about God’s authority, the symbolism in the Bible and his laws, and projecting his evil mind onto God’s, which is obviously a hypocritical thing and which contradicts his self-righteous “spirituality” which he said he had on the show. George asked Bernie if he believed that there was a purpose behind everything, and Bernie said that he believed there was. Bernie then said he believed we had spirits that continued to exist after we died.

After that, but not immediately after, George allowed a caller to correct him and Bernie, but they both rejected the correction. Among other things the caller said that there was no evidence for evolution, and said that the claim that God loving everyone would prevent him from harming anyone was false. George challenged the caller a little asking illogically how God could flood the world (and be loving), which is nonseniscal because the caller didn’t say that God WOULDN’T do that, but was saying the opposite of that, and that probably confused the caller a little, because the caller made the mistake of at first denying that God directly caused the flood, but then said it was necessary to get rid of the corruption in the world, the corrupt people being like a poisoned leg that needed to be removed lest the whole body dies. The caller also believed wrongly that the “Nephilim” were all evil (which he implied were of the corrupt people that needed to be killed), which isn’t something you can know being that that word means “giants” and is debatable as to whether or not it also means “bully” which is another way it can be used. When the caller met George’s challenge George seemed a littled annoyed, and Bernie failed to refute the caller, and in part of Bernie’s reply to the caller, claimed that he was wrong to say that there was no evidence for evolution and that it was “well laid out”, even though the caller made it clear that he was talking about two different types of evolution: micro evolution and macro, but again, Bernie ignored that and simply said “evolution”, ignoring the two types, and so committed the logical fallacy of bait and switch (equating two things which are not equal).

It’s also notable that George is a Catholic and pro-Catholic and anti-fundamentalist Christian, yet by denying “awful” verses in the Bible is committing heresy against Catholicism, and he’s been doing this for many years, in the ears of many millions of people, including Catholics, and yet his Pope has not excommunicated George for this nor rebuked him for it. So, George is a hypocrite, and it is strong evidence that Catholics are poorly unified. Unity is supposedly one of the evidences that Catholicism is the true religion according to various Catholics, including the Popes who has lead them. On about June 6th I had been in a Catholic church and observed Catholics doing mass for the first time, and the priest gave a sermon, and in it said that Catholics had a problem with unity, so, at least one Catholic of standing is in agreement with me (but he didn’t know that that is what I believed).

For those who might argue, “Evolutionists who say that evolution is random don’t understand what they are talking about since evolution really isn’t random but follows the laws of the universe. So really there is no problem with evolution science it’s just one of the laws of the universe.” Still, such a statement doesn’t give any evidence that molecules can by the laws of the universe turn into living things, like the simplist living thing to humans or aliens as intelligent as or more intelligent than humans. And for those who simply argue that it’s a myth that evolution is random, like Cameron McPherson Smith and Charles Sullivan, two evolutionists, they give no evidence for this being a myth, but use this stupid time-wasting insulting argument: “But we know that a glance at a flower or moose or meadow isn’t enough to appreciate all of nature, just as a glance at a book isn’t enough to appreciate a whole story. A glance at a living thing sees the here and now, but is blind to the billions of years of life recorded in the fossil record,” as if anyone has been around to see billions of years go by. And from the rant I took that quote from, they don’t say why it’s a myth, but end their insultingly stupid time-wasting rant with, “Both supporters and critics of evolution use the same phrase–“evolution is random”–to support their claims. To really understand the phrase we need to distinguish between how it’s used to support these opposing viewpoints.” I wish I could punch them for deceiving me into reading their Internet pollution, their misleading search engine dung. Why did these idiots claim that “evolution is random” is a myth and why do they claim to be scientific and scientists and yet use non-scientific ranting like that? It’s digusting and sickening to me. And that I still take a chance and read supposed “why creationist is wrong and evolution is right” evidence refutes the moron evolutionists who claim I ignore the evidence and don’t listen and am deluded and close-minded etc. No morons: I have read your “evidence” very carefully as the many articles in my journal and elsewhere shows, and everytime I take a chance to read some new evidence, it turns out to be a disgustingly time-wasting rant or dumb false cult-minded claims, not evidence. And I think that that is the last time I am going to use my time to read anymore supposed evidence for evolution. I am utterly sickened by being told such and such is evidence for evolution and against creationism, only to read an illogical claim. I see now it’s all a shell game and time-wasting game and show-off “look at me and what I feel” game and spam the net to force it down the throats of non-liberals game. Doesn’t the world refer to people who do this as “trolls”? And yet the world calls true Christians “trolls” in their hypocrisy instead. That is what is truly “hypocrisy” and “blind”.

For those who don’t believe in an intelligently designed universe, or designed laws at least, and yet claim that evolution is not random – they are confused or being contentious, because IF THE LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE WERE NOT DESIGNED, THEN THEY WERE WITHOUT PURPOSE AND LAWS DON’T CREATE THEMSELVES, therefore they would have to be produced by the opposite of something with a purpose, a RANDOM act, and randomness is WITHOUT ANY PURPOSE. Purpose is only something a thing with a mind would have, not a law that came into existence by randomness. And for those who would argue that it’s more likely then that the laws that produced the universe were always in existence or that the universe and the laws of it always existed, then a Creator: such people have no evidence for that claim, it’s just their ignorant opinion, even if they call it a fact.

God didn’t use man-to-molecules evolution because it is a pointless process: God taught man both directly and indirectly what right from wrong was within a few days, and gave further insight over thousands of years to learn about it. To spend billions of years waiting to teach HUMANS that is nonsensical, since humans didn’t exist for billions of years in Darwinian Evolution Theory, but only for at the most, hundreds of thousands of years, and maybe a few million, and so God would have waited billions of years just to say, “It’s wrong to disobey me”. Bernie’s version of learning right from wrong is also nonsensical, since if God doesn’t teach what right from wrong is, then no one would ever learn what it was, since right and wrong would never be known: Darwinian Evolution Theory has nothing to do with right from wrong and there is no evidence that it would cause any living things to think, “This is good and this is bad” or “This is the right way to do something and this is the wrong way”. DE Theory is an UNINTELLIGENT MINDLESS supposed law, but mindless doesn’t produce minds. Further, there is no evidence for Bernie’s claim that we’re all here to learn and then go on as spirits. Yet Bernie insists that his belief is true without evidence, like a cultist would do, an idiot.

People like Bernie who have the contradictory belief that there is such thing as randomness and simultaneously unchangeable laws are confused and say contradictory things.

Related Information:

An M.I.T. trained scientist takes a look at Darwin, the fossil record, and the likelihood of random evolution

Evolutionist Fantasies – Logical Fallacies Made by Evolutionists

Yesterday, on Coast to Coast AM, “Ian Punnett was joined by psychology professor Douglas Kenrick for a discussion on how the primitive, animalistic underside of human nature, with its sexual fantasies and homicidal tendencies, has actually given rise to the most positive features of our race.” I listened to this show and found it interesting that this professor said that those who were exclusively homosexual were “a puzzle” to evolutionists, because it didn’t help to spread their genes. He made a one or two other nonsensical statements like this, which evolutionists often repeat, which is that “genes want to spread” / “copy themselves”. They do this so often without explaining further what they mean, that no one can tell if such crazy-talk is literal or not. Evolutionists literally believe that animals “desire to spread their genes”, as if that that is what they are thinking when they are “in heat” or trying to mate, and are literally “looking for a mate with good genes” or “the best genes”. It’s absolutely stupid to say such things. Animals obviously are not intelligent to think such things, and how much less would genes have thoughts and desires? And back to the homosexuality “puzzle” which he seemed to imply must have some usefulness; says who? Why would it have usefulness in evolution? Why can’t something be a non-useful trait in evolution? Douglas said himself that exclusive homosexuality is an irrational choice, and yet he insisted that it must have some usefulness that couldn’t be seen (a clear contradiction). Is he biased? Is he double-minded because he is pandering to the homosexuals “community” and the liberals that determine his pay or whether he gets paid or not? Why doesn’t he just say, “It’s an aberration that repeatedly gets eliminated like evolution, like a harmful genetic mutation”. He also said that, “It’s not like homosexuality is a choice”, which was evidence of his bias. Who says it’s not a choice and where is the evidence? There are homosexuals who have said that it is a choice. There are also former homosexuals. Sexual attraction is also something that develops over time; people’s tastes change. And who would argue that babies are born being sexually attracted to anything? Are babies also born in the act of theft? This claim that babies can be born gay and is why they are gay or bisexual seems to be tied in to the illogical belief and excuse that God made sinners. For example, it’s common for ignorant and confused people to blame God for themselves being corrupt, asking, “Why did God make people sinful?” or “Why did God make me gay?” That’s as nonsensical as asking, “Why did God ecreat me in the act of stealing a car?”; no one is created in the act of stealing, lying, murdering, having sexual thoughts or committing adultery, married to anyone, or born a “Jew” (“Jew” and “Jewish” are racial words which are often incorrectly used in place of “Judaism”) or Christian. And a side note: The “Free Will” Christians who often make these claims of God making them the way they are (in the act of doing something including lusting to do certain evil things) are contradicting their claim that they have a completely free will which God isn’t allowed to and doesn’t “mess with”.

Also, does evolution also have desires and want to perpetuate itself? Yet so called “scientists” like Professor Douglas and others who believe in evolution, especially evolution-scientists, keep making the clear logical fallacy of giving emotions to dna and genes, and another fallacy, which is giving animals (and they consider humans to also be animals) false motives. It’s also bizarre that they give animals and their “genes” and dna the same motives, as if the dna and genes that exist in the animal they are in have separate minds of their own and are not apart of one being (creature). Even if they are speaking figuratively, it is a bad form of teaching to repeatedly do this (as bad as the nonsensical cliches “science tells us” and “science says”) and not explain what you mean, and to keep doing that leads to the ones you saying it to, believing such fallacies and to their own hurt, leading them to Hell because of believing such stupid and illogical things. It may be that certain evolution-scientists used this stupid talk to make it easier for kids and “stupid people” to understand, and got into the bad habit of repeatedly explaining things this way, and/or that certain ones with bad intent, noticed that by saying “dna is programmed to replicate”, which some evolutionists will admit, gives the correct implication that it was intelligently programmed (because mindless things like evolution and so called “nature” do not program things, and obviously DNA didn’t create or program itself), and in their hatred of God and the Bible, didn’t and don’t want anyone to know or believe the truth, which is that we were created by God and that the laws of universe, including our biology, were made by him.

Demons Pretending to Be Angels and the Free Will Heresy

On Coast to Coast AM last night, George Noory had on “Doreen Virtue” which C2CAM says, “is a spiritual doctor of psychology and a fourth-generation metaphysician who works with the angelic, elemental, and ascended-master realms.” In other words, truthfully, “she communicates with demons which she has deluded herself into thinking are angels and so called ‘nature spirits'”. Doreen herself on the show acknowledged that demons can pretend to be angels and that people should not romance them for pleasure.

On the show, Doreen claimed that we must ask angels for help to get help from them, which reminded me of Mormons and other Free Will Christians, and suspected that that is why she said that, and then no surprise to me she confirmed it by saying that that was necessary or it would be a violation of our free will, however, she contradicted herself afterwards by saying that the only time they could help without our asking for it was “if it isn’t your time” (to die). It’s a contradiction because it implies that GOD’S WILL supersedes our own, and that isn’t compatible with the heretical “free will” nonsense teaching that I’ve been observing and learning about as I keep hearing the world talk about it. Basically, the world’s free will doctrine is that human free will is a sacred thing that must not be violated and that God won’t violate it (and many non-Christians believe that Earth aka Gaea and/or ‘Mother Nature’ also has a will of its/her own), yet, it’s a lie, and like so many lies, contradicts itself. Here is how it contradicts:

1) Wills are always in conflict everywhere, generally speaking, and depending on the personality of the ones who are not getting there way, it can lead to sin, crime, hateful arguing, rather than one side peacefully giving in to the other. So, to act like human’s wills can’t be violated as if it’s some physical law, is nonsense. It’s clearly observably wrong to claim our wills cannot be gone against successfully. Clearly not everyone’s will can be done as they want it to be done and there will always be unfilled will until there is perfect peace (which God says he will bring about, except in Hell). For the Free Will Christians who believe the Bible, who claim that God can’t go against our will, they are clearly wrong, since the Bible repeatedly claims God does that all the time. Some Christians try to brush that off with the ridiculous explanation that God isn’t really going against anyone’s will (how ridiculous!) when he punishes them, because they want to be punished. That is dumb, absolutely dumb. Sure, some people in bitterness say, “bring it on” or “I don’t care” but that’s because THEY DON’T KNOW THE WRATH in store for them. Like one proverb in the Bible says, “A servant cannot be corrected by mere words.” That (rebellious) servant can’t be corrected by mere talk because they aren’t feeling any pain and will especially dismiss warnings if they are feeling pleasure. It’s the same with a rebellious child or any person with a bad habit and who is having “a good time”: unless there is a painful negative consequence, emotionally or physically, they won’t stop. Further, why do so many people, when committing a crime, try to hide that they are committing a crime, or run when they think they are in danger of getting caught for that crime, or lie in court over whether they committed one or not? OBVIOUSLY, it’s because they don’t want to feel pain for what they did, not “BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE PUNISHED”. But in order to defend their backwards doctrine, that is how absurd and childish heretics must think: backwards, backwards to the point of embarrassing absurdity that even kids who aren’t brainwashed can recognize is obviously stupid and illogical reasoning that goes against what even stupid people know is stupid.

2) If God’s will is also sacred and cannot be violated, then how can everyone else’s will also be sacred and forbidden from being violated being that God’s will is often not the will of man or anything else? That is a clear contradiction. And it is obvious that if anyone’s will is going to always be done, it’s going to be the all-knowing all-powerful eternal Creator’s, not the created things that like ants compared to him. The Bible even says that God’s will is always done in Heaven, and has us pray that it will always be done on Earth, and even Jesus said to God, “…but your will (be done), not mine.” Doreen tried to dismiss the Bible and untrustworthy because, “it’s been rewritten many times,” the cliche attack of an ignoramus who doesn’t know or refuses to acknowledge that the Bible is backed up by many old copies of itself showing that it has been copied very accurately in all the places that matter most, and that there is no evidence of loss of text. Her logic is also wrong in what she implied, which was that many copies necessarily lead to errors. She also stupidly implied that God can’t preserve his own word. With such an unreliable God why does Doreen pretend to love and honor him and that he’s in control? If he can’t preserve his own word, his laws, his commands to love, then how can we? And why follow him if he can’t keep track of what he says or if we can’t? Again: contradictions. That is the lot of liars: lies and contradictions.

3) Why would there be an exception like Doreen claims, that “unless it’s “not your time” angels can’t help you”? Is it just because she said so? Because some angel supposedly told her so. And so what if one did? Can demons pretend to be angels? She herself said so, so then she cannot simply claim, “angels never lie.” And being that humans can repeatedly make the same mistakes and be deceived till death, for years, she can’t claim, especially as a religion-ignorant, which she clearly is, that she is undecievable, immune to be fooled, tricked. Further, some demons, not merely staying in one place and keeping to themselves, go out of there way to lie to humans and deceive them, and having lived for thousands of years, have mastered deception and know how humans react to all kinds of situations and suggestions. And how long has Doreen lived in comparison to such demons? She sure has not lived long enough to become a master of the truth, nor has she studied well enough as was indicated by her evil broadside attacks against Christians, like that they “blackmail” people into believing there religion and her illogical vague statement that “preaching fear” is negative energy (a meaningless statement) with the implication that that is bad. And guess what Doreen is doing by making those claims? According to her vague nonsense, she’s also “preaching fear”. It’s also a clear lie to claim as she did, that all Christians do is talk about fear. Truly she’s a lying ignoramus. Who doesn’t know that millions of Christians have said and still do, “God is love” or “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him will not perish, but have everlasting life” or “love your neighbor as yourself” or “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” or “love your enemies” and “bless those who curse you” and the most famous of all, “Do unto others as you would have them do to you,” all of which are verses from the Bible. Yet she slanders all Christians, including the children, as “preach”ers “of fear” and negativity. Clearly it’s Doreen who is the preacher of fear and negativity by mainly focusing on what she perceives are “negative” things about Christians and mainly finding fault with them, when clearly they have done much good and continue to do so (I’m talking about true Christians, but even Free Will ones do some good, though at the expense of the truth about how to get saved and to lead people away from true salvation, though not all realize they are misleading people).

4) Doreen Virtue also made clearly wrong claims, which is that angels can’t help you unless you ask for it: but as she herself would know, angels are always helping people without them asking for it, and some don’t even believe in angels when they are helped by them. Many people also don’t pray for the help of angels, but ask for God’s help, knowing that he uses angels to do things for him, yet Doreen says to pray to the angels. Why would you pray to the angels rather than God who is in control of them? If you want a coworker to be friendly to you or to help you who is in a different state, do you pray to the coworker or to God? But Doreen hates God, so refuses to go to him for help, but instead wants to worship what he created.

5) Concerning again Doreen’s claim that angels need our permission to help us, how can she say that when surely she hears stories all the time of people being helped by angels and not knowing they were angels or being helped without asking? That could be seen a deliberate deception or insanity for her to ignore what she repeatedly sees contradicts her “free will” belief, which is really about pride and a childish attitude of rebellion towards God. And if angels need our permission, then doesn’t God? Does God need our permission for anything? Obviously to say he does is stupid. That’s lying say that I need the permission of a toy I made, even a living one with a mind, to do anything to it, or that a parent needs the permission of the child to move it somewhere, teach it something, feed it something, give it a gift, love it or even talk to it (which leads to a paradox: how can you ask for permission to talk without first talking if not given permission to talk?) And if a parent doesn’t need its the permission of its children for anything but a few exceptions, how much less does God the creator and sustainer of all things need it? And consider the evil consequences of this free will logic, at least Doreen’s: Humans must ask each other for permission to help each other in all circumstances, including to save each others lives. Consider how many more people in the world would be ignorant, sad, injured and dead from such a law. But many people realize the evil of such bad logic, and have made “good Samaritan” type laws as are mentioned on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law. It’s noteworthy that Wikipedia however, doesn’t point out the origin of such laws: God’s word.

“Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions.” – Colossians 2:18

“the devil took [Yeshua] to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’” – Matthew 4:8-10

“I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.” – 2 Corinthians 11:12-14

“who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?” – Romans 9:20-21

Update: 6-16-2011

Yesterday, after having written the above (except Romans 9:20-21 which I added while adding this note), I finally realized the solution to what was a long and great mystery to me: “Is the human will and all wills “random” (because random would seem to be the result of ‘not controlled’, in other words, not a machine that is just programming or being moved around by God directly or indirectly), and is randomness necessary, and if random, how could God predict what would happen in the future correctly? And is a random will necessary for self-awareness and responsibility for the actions of the person who makes choices using their will?” God’s word had the answer all along. First of all, it makes it clear that God predestines everything (and the claim that God doesn’t predestine anyone to Hell is stupid). God doesn’t destine some things and others allow to be loose, random and free to do whatever. Second, there is no evidence that a will must be random in order for a person to be aware of themselves and that their choices and to be responsible for them.

“To humans belong the plans of the heart” – Proverbs 16:1

“A person’s steps are directed by Yahweh” – Proverbs 20:24

“In Yahweh’s hand the king’s heart is a stream of water that he channels toward all who please him.” – Proverbs 21:1