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

11:11, Synchronicities and Evidence of Intelligent Design

About two weeks ago I think, while looking up more information on Srinivasa Ramanujan, a super mathematical genius who shamed atheists and Hinduism by his belief in some sort of God and gods etc., and because by obeying the Hindu religion his life was cut short, probably the greatest Indian who ever lived next to Christian ones (which shames Hinduism in that they lost their best man). Well, I found some British radio show on him, and downloaded it, and learned of a mathematical law, which is that the number one shows up the most frequently out of all other numbers. Those with a large amount of understanding and a brain might think, “Shouldn’t all numbers how up equally as much as the other since the universe is just random?” But the answer, is, NO. First of all, the universe isn’t random, it always follows laws that God put in place, always follows them unless he intervenes or changes them. To say otherwise is to make a Randomness of the Gaps, and to claim that “randomness did it” (for those of you who don’t know what I mean, I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of those who believe in randomness who also mock Christians by pretending that they merely explain why anything is by claiming merely that, “God did it” and claim such a God is a God of the gaps (gaps meaning “gaps in Christian knowledge” implying that Christians are very ignorant in the context these idiots use it in).

ANYWAYS, concerning George Noory’s claim that people are always seeing 11:11 when they look at a clock, I don’t know if he is right, since people look at clocks all the time and don’t see that number. George is probably imagining this because it’s four ones in a row, which he thinks is weirder than other number patters. It’s as silly as attributing something special to the number 100 or the year 1111 or 2000 or 2111 or 2222. However, you would see the number 1 more often then other numbers, so, if you see it more often on clocks when you do look, that isn’t out of the ordinary. To me it’s another indication that God exists. The number one being the most common number reminds me of Fibonacci numbers and the  chirality phenomenon, which is a name for the right-sided characteristic which all molecules in the human body have (and God made it that way).

And the reason I made this post (had finished most of it yesterday) was because a Buddhist or fan of Buddha put 11:11 in the subject of his email to me, which, in a way, was perpetuating the natural frequency of the number, which ironically, got me to write about it.

After I was done with this post, which didn’t include the above sentence, or this one, I glanced at my viewership stats, and was astonished a little when I saw the stats for the most viewed “page”, and then looked farther down, and was astonished again. This is what I saw some minutes ago… (I just looked at the clock and it’s 11:16 PM):

Update 3/23/2011:

I forgot to show this pic yesterday, which I took after I woke up and looked at my stove clock for the first time that day:

The clock was an hour behind.

Jews With Heart-Walls Turn to Dead False Prophet

At about 11:40 P.M. yesterday, on Coast to Coast AM, the following exchange was made between George Noory and conartist Dr. Bradley Nelson (a moron who claims that there are more than nine emotions, and had trouble getting the number straight when asked and who claimed you can inherit emotional problems called heart-walls composed of more than 20 emotions):

Dr. Bradley Nelson: When someone in high school or college tells you to follow your heart, that is the best advice they can give you.

George: Absolutely.

Since when is following your heart, let alone of all times when you are teen or in college, the best advice, let alone the best advice? How many more divorces, yelling arguments, physical fights, crushed feelings leading to suicide and baby-murders does there need to be before people like the self-proclaimed emo-doctor, doctor Bradley, realize that he and heart-followers like him are the ones creating so called heart-walls, not curing them? And this conartist, when asked by a caller how she could find out how to remove her heart-wall, advised her merely to go to his website, watch his videos and buy his books, and that that would make her certified to remove them. How convenient that he, having the cure for all of humanities emotional problems, can’t give a basic explanation as to how to cure the world, and can only do so through profit. To my disgust the caller flattered him greatly and praised him for his advice – what advice? Here’s simple free advice for getting rid of “pent up” emotions, so called heart-walls: find out from the Bible what you should feel and why and why you feel the way you do. The short answer: because God gave us the ability to feel, and allowed us to to sense things which we would desire or dislike, be happy, sad, angry, afraid, curious, worried, amazed or surprised over, and because of man’s inability to be logical apart from God’s love and help, they chose to feel things that they should not in certain situations. And how can this Bradley Nelson be a doctor of emotions and not know there are at a maximum, no more than nine core emotions? Imagine someone calling themselves a doctor of the body and first claiming there was an extreme of 180, and then a few seconds later, 18. Would you call such a person a doctor or think him qualified to heal you of anything, or even sane? Would you trust him with your life?

George Noory also interviewed a heretic Moshe Yess, a so called “rabbi” and Judaic (people often mistakenly refer to Judaics as “Jews”, as if there is no Jewish race) who was a heretic. He believed in a ridiculously named “Messiah” who was, get this: dead. How corrupt can Judaism get? So now instead of waiting for a living Messiah, instead of worshiping a living man, now there is a sect that worships a DEAD messiah! Talk about hating God! Instead of worshiping the true Messiah who died for the sins of the world, who has come back to life, whose demonstrated his all-surpassing love and power before many witnesses, a section of the Judaic group has become so twisted that they not only reject that one, but instead accept some obscure demonic Judaic who died in the 90’s, and expect him to return! How convenient that after the New Testament already came up with the concept of a Messiah who could die and who would return does now, these Judaics, come up with one 2000 years later and act like they have something original to give the world, and so original, as to be ridiculous. The Rabbi Schneerson cult also claims not to be a “team” that is above other teams, but that this Rabbi Schneerson will save everyone. The rabbi also claimed that there will be nothing “negative” when Rabbi Schneerson returns to change the universe, which is a comment that makes it a New Age cult: New Agers smear everything that they personally dislike (including fundamentalist Christians) as “negative” or evil, in place of the word immoral or wicked because those words remind people of the Bible and it’s laws. The word evil is also a Biblical word, but was a word that was used for hundreds of years, unlike “negative”, as a term for what was generally considered “immoral” by everyone, though it was also used like the word “negative” in that a good/righteous or decent person or group would be called “evil” by someone or some group that personally disliked them. The word “negative” however, unlike “evil” is used much more vaguely and more often used.

You can always hear many false Christians and non-Christians, including atheists, calling other groups, including true Christians, “negative”, but less so “evil”, because that word evil, as I said, is a biblical word, further, true Christians use it often to describe some non-Christians who repeatedly reject Christ after he is explained to them (I don’t mean that true Christians will say to anyone’s face that they are evil after first seeing what they are like, but to others so as not to get into a physical fight or embarrass the evil person or group they met). And so, the non-Christians who were condemned as evil will avoid using the word evil so as not to be reminded of the condemnation from Christians. So, this Schneerson cult is “universalist”, meaning that ultimately, or indirectly, it approves of any and every belief, including evil ones, with the exception of the true religion (the one given by God), because the true religion (which promotes only the truth and is accepted fully only by those who are honest), directly opposes universalism, which accepts lies and liars.

I’ve already been given eternal life, and don’t need a dead “rabbi Schneerson”, who comes on not just 2000 years late on the seen, but who even when he died was late in letting the world know he existed, let alone died, to give me life.

At 12:46 A.M., George asked this “rabbi” Moshe Yess: Is there anything to our free will? …can we change them [future events]?

This question once again demonstrates the misconception the world has over the meaning of “free” and “will” and no surprise then the term “free will”. The Mormons and every false Christian (that includes Catholics like George Noory), misunderstand “free will” to mean “free physical actions” as in freedom to do ANYTHING you want to do. George asked if free will could change physical events, because he was confused, or, was completely deceived into thinking his will could affect physical events (and he does believe literally in wishful thinking, that willing something to happen with enough will power can change the physical environment (just like many insane Pentecostals believe, who believe they can wish money into their purses and wallets with faith). He may have been asking the rabbi that question to see if the rabbi was on his side, his side that precious “free will” (a subconscious code for “Man’s sovereignty) was sacred, and above God’s will.

At 1:51 A.M., the false rabbi reminded me of something George Noory says now and then, which is that he doesn’t believe in coincidence, and I immediately realized that by saying that, Noory was contradicting himself in his belief that the future can be changed. For George, who is a believer in a thinking God who designed and created the universe, who still interacts in the world at least indirectly – for him to say that there is no coincidence, is to say that there is no randomness, no chaos, but that everything happens based on someone’s will, and due to “natural laws” which God created, and which God sets aside at times to accomplish something according to his will.

I also noticed that a few minutes later, near the end of the show, that the false rabbi went against the statement of the final caller, which was that the world was not controlled by an illuminati, but that we were all under the control of God. This was deceptive statement, and unwise to say, because as I often point out, the world doesn’t understand “free will” and God’s control correctly, and so when someone simply says God control’s everything to the masses, it doesn’t advance their understand but ends up creating more contention, in general. His reply was also deceptive, because the Bible itself says that Satan is the god of this world, figuratively, but that literally there are demons who rule certain sections of this planet, who, like human rulers, fight against the good (however the demons also fight against angels, which demons once were).

I’m curious if Noory, being someone who confuses “free will” with being able to do whatever you want to do, took the claim of the rabbi that God is in control to be true or false, and if he understood it to mean a general control (as in spiritual to a limited degree, and also fully environmental) or if he took it to mean in control of even the will of others (which wouldn’t make sense by the way since a will by definition has to be free to choose otherwise it’s not a will). l also wonder what the false rabbi meant by saying “control”: if he meant complete control or a general overall control so that his plans are always fulfilled without failure of any kind.

There was one good thing that Moshe Yess said, which was that he distinguished Jews from Judaism, indirectly acknowledging/implying that a Jew was still one racially, and not only a person who practiced Judaism.

What is the Best Evidence for Reincarnation and Karma If Any?

On Coast to Coast AM tonight, George Noory was once again allowing the reincarnation and karma deception to be spread, this time by Barbara Martin and Dimitri Moraitis. These false teachings, which besides having no evidence for them, contradict God’s word, and God said that we only have one life, and that after an unforgiven person dies, they sleep and await condemnation and permanent imprisonment in Hell, and that when an forgiven person dies, their spirit goes to Heaven immediately and their physical body will one day be resurrected in perfect health and transformed into an immortal one that can withstand the glory of God and be in its presence without harm.

Teaching that reincarnation and karma are real, is dangerous. It’s dangerous because they make God out to be a liar, but God is the truth, and gives the true and only way to eternal peace, and who warns us with an eternity of non-stop suffering in Hell if we are not forgiven by Him, and His forgiveness comes with his Son’s salvation from sin, temporary pain and imprisonment in Hell (how to be saved is explained here).

Many people say that the best evidence for reincarnation comes from little kids who say things that they only could have known if they had been another person (as in “had a previous body”) and could only have certain behaviors that are similar or the same to that previous body if it had been theirs, and that another evidence is having a birthmark similar to some wound or fatal wound of the other body from which they have memories from. But there is no logical connection as to why they must have had that previous body merely because they have some of the memories of that body and some similar or some of the same behaviors of it. And, because of other possibilities as to how those memories and behaviors can be acquired, and with no proof that it is from reincarnation only, it cannot be proven that reincarnation would be the only mechanism by which those memories and behaviors were acquired. For example, demons (former angels that God has permanently shunned for rebelling against him) possess people, and are able to take over their bodies, including brain, and being that they have demonstrated the ability to manipulate flesh in supernatural ways, for example making it impervious or highly resistant to damage, causing it to change shape without damaging it, restoring it after changing its shape, and levitating it. So it is not a stretch to think that a demon could read the memories of a person it possesses and have done so, or that they memorize the events that have happened in the lives of various people, and later implant those memories into someone else after that person dies, and that some go so far as to manipulate the flesh of a baby in the womb so that it has some birthmark similar to the person whose memories it is implanting into the baby’s brain. Some demons may have targeted certain babies for confusion because the demon saw that the baby had a birthmark that reminded the demon of some non-fatal or fatal wound that it saw had been inflicted on some human that it had memories of. According to Scripture, demons in general try to lead people away from the truth about God, especially trying to prevent them from learning the truth about how to be saved. They use subtle ways to lead people astray all the way to trying to force them to reject Christ by having non-Christians persecute them, or by causing fights between Christians in various ways, like by getting some false or non-Christian to turn them against each other using false information or some unkind acts to provoke them to unkind against each other. Scripture makes it clear that demons can memorize things, can have great power and intelligence (like Satan), and can be extremely hateful (Satan tried many ways to get Jesus to fall, and fooled “the world” into murdering Him, but for all his scheming, God’s perfect wisdom caused Satan’s wisdom in evil, to backfire).

The claims of those in the reincarnation-believing group refute their own claim that reincarnation exists or can be said to be true in some case, this is because some say that demons exist and can possess people, some believe in “walk-ins” (which is when a spirit from a dead human possesses a living human’s body), some say that after a person dies they go to Heaven (with other human spirits) and choose the life they won’t live next, some say that aliens can possess a person’s body and many believe in psychic powers and that knowledge can be gained from reading the minds of others or seeing into the past or future supernaturally, and some believe a person can leave their body and learn things outside of their body, and even learn any past event from a spiritual place where it is recorded. If these seven things can happen according to many of them, why do they claim with certainty that when anyone has “past memories” that they didn’t go through in their current body, that it must have been because they once had another body, that they must have been reincarnated? And should Buddhists who don’t believe in any of the other seven possiblities claim with certaintity that reincarnation is the only reason why someone would have memories from another person when Buddhists claim that reality is an illusion or that they are deluded until they reach a state of perfection? And even if a person who believes in reincarnation doesn’t believe in any of the other seven possibilities, but unlike Buddhists believes reality to be a definite thing and that reality is not even subjective, how can they state with certainty that “past memories”, behaviors from another person’s body, and a birthmark similar to some wound they had, is due to reincarnation if they can’t see how the “past memories” are gained and when they can’t show any evidence that demons don’t manipulate people anymore than anyone can show evidence that God doesn’t exist and that the most of the Bible isn’t his word, or that his word hasn’t been effective in persuading people to do good, like not hating others but loving them, and not lying, stealing, murdering, but helping people to live well, or survive and to be at peace (except to those who refuse such help and even attack Christians who try to give it)?

As for the birthmark “evidence”, why would a baby have a birthmark similar to a wound from a previous body it had? What would cause such a wound? It would require intelligence for such a wound to be imitated on its new body, but what would make more sense, that the baby, in its stupid ignorant state decided to replicate the wound, or that another being did, one which obsesses on violence and is murderous (demons), or that the birthmark is natural and a demon targeted the baby when it saw the mark? An argument I can think of against the targeting argument, is that the demon would have to have to go far and wide looking for someone who had a wound in the same spot that lead to their death or was some area where they had cancer, or some traumatic relation like that, but such an argument ignores that demons talk with each other, can share memories (at least 1000 according to the Bible possessed one person), and aren’t all physically limited to slowly reading and understanding information like us, and aren’t all limited to certain languages, but could read information from a hard drive without needing a monitor or printer to read what is on it, and even when the hard drive is not powered on, and so, could scan through billions of hospital, police and obituary records and learn about various wounds or skin diseases or skin infections certain people had, and find someone who had such a problem on their skin that matched the birthmark of the baby they want to confuse (and those who get to know the baby), and then the demon could look for other personal information on the deceased people they chose for their scheme, asking other demons if they know anything much about those people it chose, and if one or more does, then transmitting the memories it has of that person into the little child all at once or over time or repeatedly putting the memories into the child. Some children have reported having nightmares of certain memories, supposedly from “a past life”, which I believe is from a demon somehow causing the child to focus on that memory or memories while that child is dreaming.

Concerning karma, the concept doesn’t make sense because it for people to “get back what they put out” or as said, to have negative or positive consequences for a financial act, and for everything they do, karma would have to be alive and have a mind and be intelligent and know right from wrong, and have the desire to judge and punish or reward or give consequences. Even if karma were not that specific, it would still have to have intelligence in order to do such things. How can a non-living thing, like a rock, tell the difference between a good or bad act, or good or bad speech? Further, it would have to coordinate all of the “positive or negative” things it did to people so that each one got what it deserved, otherwise it would be chaotic and nonsensical. On top of that, karma would also have to deal with giving positive or negative things to non-human things, even aliens if they existed. How could a non-living thing, unless it was programmed with future events, know how to respond in every situation? And how is it able to manipulate every single thing in such a way that everyone “gets what they deserve” or “gets What they put out”? It would have to be a computer far more advanced that we can comprehend, and the one who programmed it even more advanced since it would have to know how to program such complex tasks and would have to have the power to give the computer such power to manipulate the countless things in this universe so that everything came out as the programmer wanted it to. Karma then wouldn’t be karma as Buddhists, Hindus or New Agers claim it is, but a tool of a being who would be best described as God, and who has destined all things already since this karma machine would always achieve its goals. And no Buddhist, Hindu or New Ager has ever even hinted that karma fails, so they cannot argue without showing that they simply being contentious, argumentative, that karma doesn’t always work out. And even if it didn’t always work out, what would their point be? It would be self-defeating to argue that since they would be admitting that karma isn’t just, but unfair, and it wouldn’t explain how karma knows what to do to a person for their actions, how it knows a good thing from an evil thing.

Another problem with karma is that it justifies any evil act committed against another person, because according to the doctrine on karma, whatever bad thing happens to you, you deserve. So if a baby or little kid or anyone is abused in some way, sexually or not, or murdered, it was because they deserved it. Is that true? According to the Bible even a person who is suffering or who is in need or handicapped, isn’t always suffering or in need or handicapped because God is punishing them, but to test them (as evidence for or against something, like if they are patient or impatient, good or bad), or to show his love through them, like when Jesus healed various people who were handicapped.

Another problem with karma is that it justifies (according to the doctrine or personal belief of many who believe in karma) someone giving things to the rich who don’t need what they give them and which rich people have no intention of giving what they received from that person to the poor or little or anything of the things they already have and even things they most likely don’t or won’t need in the future. And the personal beliefs of many who believe in karma, even justify giving such things to the rich even if those rich people are stingy and hoard their wealth, even if they are giving to such rich people out of kindness or love for them. But according to the doctrine or personal belief of others, those things, including gifts, should be given to the poor who need them, or at least the poor who are decent, especially to ones who are righteous or good, and to such poor who even share with others who are poor. So who does karma consider to be in the right? And according to the simplistic doctrine that most have on karma (I’ve never heard them debating this and only bring up their thoughts about it if any when I bring it up to them), if an evil person who mostly does evil, but to whom mostly good is done, deserves that goodness. So for example, when Hitler was murdering the Jews and was having good things done to him and when many were doing almost whatever he asked them to do, it was because he deserved it. Or if someone was hoarding their wealth all throughout their life and using it for little good or only using it to make a profit and doing it oppressively in general (there have been many people like that all throughout history), and those people had many good things done to them, more than the evil things, it was because they deserved it.

The doctrine of karma reminds me of the false tithing doctrine that many false Christians (and sadly some true Christians) teach, because both are vague and the proof for both is arbitrary. Promotors of tithing (especially Pentecostals) claim that if something bad happens to you, it was because you were robbing God of money, of 10% of your weekly income, and that if you were giving it, you’d get 100 times back sometime in the future, unless you “didn’t have enough faith” (when you gave the money?). Isn’t that vague to say, “sometime in the future” or “didn’t have enough faith”? How much faith do you need to get the 100 times back of the money you gave, and how long must you have faith? Ironically such Christians refer to a passage in Malachi as evidence that you must tithe your money to God, however that verse indicates that God was asking them to test him, to see if he would reward them for tithing (something other than their money) and taking into account their lack of faith so that they would have faith after seeing Him pass their test. And how much faith would they have if God said, “I’ll reward you later, sometime, just wait.” Who would have faith after 60-80 years and believe God after waiting for so long? How would they know after having waited so long that the reward, the “reaction” wasn’t just “chance”? And how is karma any different? When is it working? When is it taking place? Does it take place right after an evil or good act or is there a delay? And how long is the delay? It matters because since there is no Laws of Karma, unlike in the Law in the Bible, the many commandments in the Bible, so it’s impossible to know when you are breaking the laws of karma. By the way, I’ve also noticed that those who strongly believe in the tithe-for-profit doctrine treat people cruelly, coldly or with unkindness. They justify their treatment of others this way because of their, “You reap what you sow” belief which they take out of context in the Bible to make it seem that because God is punishing you then they then have the right to hate you and also have the right to punish you. They might as well say, “You get what you put out.” In fact, a Pastor Galen of First Family Assemblies of God Church in Albuquerque, who is the father of the younger and unmarried one who is also a pastor in his church, told me that I was the most negative person he ever met (after reading a short critique of his son’s misteachings). And by ignoring God’s law and replacing it with their “Be positive whenever you talk to me or else I have the right to treat you negative and will do so” doctrine, they might as well be teaching the vague doctrine of karma, which can suit whoever believes in it.

Another problem with karma, is how to know how to comply with it so that what you want to happen to you, happens, but the problem is, how can I know what it considers good or evil being that it doesn’t show it in any way and can’t be found or accessed? Does it consider it a good thing to kill a person who is mostly destructive or bent on destroying things, or does it consider it an evil eating certain food in front of another person considers immoral to eat? Does it consider saying, “Allah doesn’t exist”, “Buddha doesn’t exist”, or “Moses didn’t exist” evil things to say? Does it consider that one person’s conscience isn’t the same as someone else’s, and that some people have no conscience, like psychopaths? Does it consider any lying to be evil, even a lie that doesn’t harm anyone but instead saves a life or lives? Does it consider stealing a weapon or what someone intends to use as a weapon to commit murder a good thing or a bad thing? Where is the rule book or commandments of karma? Some might argue that karma judges you by your own standard, but if that is true, and my standard is to do whatever I feel like: steal, lie, commit adultery, hate people for no good reason, dishonor my parents even when they do good to me, abuse animals, endanger the lives of others, including by polluting in such a way that it is a certain danger to others, or murdering people whenever I feel like it, and I do those things, then shouldn’t karma “reward” me? Some might argue that no one is like that, but that isn’t the point, the point is that that can be a standard, and besides that, there are people like that, and hundreds of millions if not billions of people have died because of people who made it their standard, at least for a moment, to speak and act in those wrong ways.

Almost every race and culture believes in demons, with the exception of most Buddhists, and even many atheists believe in “negative spirits (without a body)”, so to claim that reincarnation must be the reason for anyone having past memories of being in another body, and having a birthmark related to that other body, and having certain behaviors of that other body, is either assuming things or ignoring other evidence or both.

Update 10/29/2010:

References:

The Buddhist and Hindu View of Reincarnation and Karma: http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/karma.html

The Hindu Caste System and Their Teaching On Reincarnation and Karma: http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/caste.html

Odors of Sanctity, Visions and Healings by ‘Mary’ and Bleeding Saints

Last night and into the early morning George Noory, the main host of the Coast to Coast AM radio show, interviewed Kevin Cook author of Marian Apparitions, talking about visions of Mary and other various miracles that his guest no doubt wanted to use as evidence that the Catholic Church was a legitimate religion. George did a good job interviewing this time, and so made the show interesting.

Kevin claimed that he had had an inner calling in him while he was a Methodist pastor to become a Catholic (not that the Bible taught that Catholicism was the true religion) and so he became one because of that he implied. He said that he knew George Noory was a Catholic, and George immediately acknoweledged that he was right, in some way that I forget. Ironically George showed his anger at one caller who tried to raise fervor for the Catholic Church, telling him the show was about visions of Mary, not the Catholic Church.

Kevin brought up various miracles and Catholic prophets, and I knew that the usual would happen, which is that people would here this who were not saved and think that these were signs that the Catholic Church is or might the “true religion”. The problem with these miracles Kevin brought up, is that he himself acknoweldged that these Mary ghosts showed no concern for a true religion, but that she accepted anyone (which refutes Catholicism as being the true religion and shows the demonic nature of these Mary ghosts) and that the “miracle” of the smell of roses from no known source does’t just happen at Catholic churches or when Catholics are around, which eliminates the notion that it’s a Catholic only miracle. As for those who wonder if demons can heal, like I have for many years, they clearly can from what Revelation says, which is that the anti-Christ will receive a deadly head wound, but that it would be healed. So any healings that Catholics are able to perform or that seem to come from objects or places used in the Catholic religion should not cause anyone to wonder if Catholicism is the true religion. On top of that, the Bible said that the coming of the anti-Christ would come with demonic deceptions:

The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds miracles, signs and lying wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. – 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10

Notice the Bible there doesn’t say, “fake miracles, signs and wonders” meaning “man-made miracles or mistaken for miracles or demon-made but having no effect,” but instead says that they are “lying” as in they give people false information, for example the false implication that any religion except ones which are good in God’s eyes or that those who do as they please won’t be punished, except of course those who go against such a message (which would be the people of the true religion, the loved children of God).

The Bible also teaches in the Old Testament that God allows for the possiblity of prophecies that come true but which were falsely claimed to have come from Him or from a false god, and that he does this to test people (to condemn or justify them in other words), to reveal if they are faithful to him or merely following their own heart ultimately. So, no one should be afraid when a Catholic makes a successful prophecy, especially not a vague one.

Another warning sign that these miracles are of Satan, is that the Catholic Church won’t reveal what this so called final (third) secret of Fatima is, which apparently is that it will be a perpetrator of child abuse: http://catholicism.about.com/b/2010/05/14/the-third-secret-of-fatima-and-clerical-sexual-abuse.htm. Ironically that page, which is propaganda, which attempts to legitamize the Catholic Church though showing that the Pope danced around the issue of the third “secret” deceptively, refutes Catholicism by implying that the forgiveness of priests does not atone for anyone’s sins, that justice has not been satisfied.

Before that show, Art Bell did a show, and said, “It’s okay to attack someone’s beliefs… to attack their data… but when you attack their character, that’s another story.” That is a deceptive and immoral statement because it is obvious that attacking a belief or data (as if it were a lie and not good) without evidence, is considered to be a crime of harassment, and in a way it is an attack against the character of the one who has the beliefs being attacked, and, Art’s statement implies that you may not rebuke a person for being thief, liar, adulterer, fornicator, idolator, rebel or murderer, which would mean we should all allow people commit repeat crimes to get away with their crimes without justice.

Ramblin’ Steve: a Giant False Christian

See also: Steve Quayle, False Christian

Sweeet money: gimme ur money so I can buy more cool stuff for myself oh flock!
I like Texas a lot, yessum, I do indeed. Yee, yee, yee, yee, yee, yes iiiin DEED!

If anyone has been listening to Steve Quayle tonight on Coast to Coast AM, it’s another good example of what a liar this person is. He rambles (amazingly George Noory is skilled enough to be able to get a word in without it sounding like either is talking over each other) and floods, as if to avoid having to answer any hard questions. When George asked him if he had any scientific evidence for his claims (for example giants having the ability to kill people with electromagnetic waves produced from their skulls), Steve replied, “Of course there is” but gave none and continued to ramble. Very weasely. He cites the Bible as if it were evidence for his claims, yet if you read the Bible you can see that it doesn’t even hint at giants having the ability to hurt anyone from a distance with EM waves. He also, to my disgust, cited that fraud Tom Bearden, and cited the usual nonsense Bearden is known for pretending to be an expert on: scalar waves and perpetual motion. Bearden is a liar who incredibly, managed to dupe some mainstream (evolutionist) scientists into letting him ramble about “his” free energy MEG in their science journals. His mathematical rants have been exposed as hoaxes years ago. Incredibly, it took me to get Wikipedia to put an article up on this con, and despite me citing the evidence that he was a con, Wikipedia deleted the page in jealousy, knowing I was a creationist, but then later added a page on him, a page that didn’t even mention criticisms against him till long after, and even when it cited some of the same evidence I pointed out against his fake science, were merely put as foot notes at the bottom. Why were they protecting this idiot?

During the show George played a song from Steve’s daughter, some country song, part of which was, “I ain’t no housewife”. Is it humble or “Christian” to make housewives appear to be something bad or shameful? Obviously not, but Steve raised that woman.

Steve Quayle is a greatly damaging heretic because he promotes pseudo-science and gives a false impression of what a true Christian is.

Update 2:41 P.M.: What a surprise: Just now Steve said he wasn’t always for turning the other cheek and “I’m not a pacifist”. That makes it pretty clear where his daughter got her arrogant, “I ain’t no housewife” attitude. Hypocritically, after saying this, he kept asking what was wrong with saying, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” So love equals shooting at “giants” and government agents or those who offend you or trespass against you? Jesus also said, “Love your enemies”, “bless those who persecute you” and “not to resist an evil man”, not “resist and shoot your enemies”.

2:47 P.M. A caller just reminded me, indirectly, that spirits are not material beings, yet Steve claims that they can turn into giant beings of flesh and “an appropriate size”. Steve also teaches the false claim that the “Sons of God” mentioned in Genesis were evil angels who had sex with humans and made demonic giant children as a result. “Sons of God” however implies something good, Christians. The Bible doesn’t call evil angels “sons”, it does repeatedly call Christians “sons” however. Only once does the Bible refer to all humans as “children” of God. In Genesis, when it says that the Sons of God took wives from among men, it’s talking about Christians marrying and having children non-Christians.

At about this time Steve said that he believed some book he was selling was going to sell out (in other words to get it now so that others who want it won’t be able to get it, nice), but wasn’t boasting when he said that and wasn’t trying to pitch his book; I don’t think so.

2:55 P.M. Steve is telling everyone that you can see giants who are pretending to be ordinary humans with sound waves. Ridiculous. So everyone is going to go out buying sonar vision now to see who might be preparing to attack them with their EM power and eat them (Steve claims all giants are cannibals).

While listening to this show, Steve, besides sounding like a classic “bullshitter”, reminded me of that false Christian, con pastor televangelist Robert Tilton. Steve’s babble is even like Tilton’s fake speaking-in-tongues routine.

Just imagine givin’ me all your money sweet flock.
Just visualize, then give. That’s right: God wants you to fork it
all over to me. Oh bibili babili babalah babiboh, rahdi tih tah TAH!

I smells me some bread, n’ it smells like, muh muh muh muh munay.
Tithe to Tilton, and ur’ tithin’ to the Lord. 1-800-GIVE-2-GET-RICH
Have faith my friends, have faith. Mmm mmm mmm.

Related articles:

The Resurrection of Robert Tilton

Tilton still swindling in 2009

Other prominent false teachers, starting with Tilton

www.stevenquayle.tk

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Tilton_Robert_9194140.aspx

An Interesting Coast to Coast AM Show This Early Morning

George Noory had Linda Moulton Howe on, and they were at odds with each other on the true danger and origin of the H1N1 virus. Linda was baffled as to why George and his listeners were so suspicious and fearful of any vaccine, and yet she claimed that the paranoia was from speculation of baseless information on the Internet, which George politely and indirectly pointed out was also from some doctors that he’s had on. George was baffled as to why she trusted doctors so much though knowing that governments in general were not trustworthy. Linda’s reasons earlier for explaining her trust of the vaccines was because she had taken many and was ok (which is an ignorant argument since many were clearly harmed by vaccines, even admitted by the Washington Post concerning the Polio Vaccine, and that’s just one of hundreds of examples) and because she had a deep respect for doctors (apparently because of her safe experiences with them). Her reasoning is bizarre, and reminds me of a teen I once met years ago, who told me that cops were good, because they protected people, and an atheist who years ago told me that scientists believed in evolution because it was their job to learn the truth. That reasoning is clearly flawed since merely having a certain kind of job doesn’t make you moral or competent, as is demonstrated every day, ever hour, ever minute, and many people, including police and scientists are fired for not doing their job right, not wanting to do their job right, and also sued for causing monetary, emotional and physical damage. It’s also known that myths, including harmful ones, can be and still are perpetuated by cultures, people of various organizations, and of various kinds of groups, like scientists and police. One example of a years long perpetuated myth among police , including the FBI and CIA, and in the forensic community, was that it could be determined if a bullet came from a certain gun if the bullet had certain markings on it. Among scientists in general was the myth that evolution occurred in pregnant animals including humans (not that I believe animals are humans), which some Darwinist scientists said was a deliberate lie that came from a scientist named Haeckel (and it says a lot about the intelligence of Darwinists that they would believe something so stupid and nonsensical – why would evolution be repeated in the stomach by a baby? Stupid.) Another myth is that there are geological columns (layers of dirt) that show a gradual pattern of evolution over millions of years showing simple lifeforms becoming more complex ones over millions of years, and with the baseless belief that bigger = more complex. Many people still believe those things because of stupid propaganda from stubborn deliberately ignorant Darwinists in leadership positions, who use clever distraction tactics, pretty pictures and videos to persuade the ignorant and reinforce their claims. Another myth commonly used by Darwinists to support macro-evolution (which is when one animal is said to turn into another) is that birds on the Galapagos Islands were proof that Darwin was right (about one animal being able to turn into another), but rarely will an evolutionist be bold enough to directly make that claim, which is why I used brackets. Instead, in their delusion or on purpose, they lieve out “about one animal being able to turn into another” because they know that no one ever found evidence that one animal turned into another on the Galapagos Islands, or anywhere else. What they claim is that o the Galapagos Islands, are various birds with different shaped beaks which were once the same kind of bird, and that their beaks are very different now because they turned into other kinds of birds. That is clearly stupid because anyone can see that there are all kinds of cats and dogs, from lions to little cats and wolves to little dogs, and that despite their great differences, they are all the same kinds of animals and their different features just give them different advantages, rather than making them different animals. But Darwinists are so stupid they think that merely different beak shapes among the birds of the Galapagos Islands is enough evidence to say that the birds are so different from each other than that means dogs can turn into cats and cats can turn into dogs if you wait long enough. One Darwinist museum creator was so deluded that he thought just putting two cats on an island without any other cats was (macro-)evolution! It always amazes me how such stupid people can get prestigious positions and jobs and high pay, yet I know it’s not a big surprise to me because many people hate God and are happy to help and promote others who are good at getting others to hate God, especially if they can even get people to stop believing in him.

Coast to Coast Reincarnation Guest Says The Bible Is 100% True

If it’s something that someone made up it would have lasted an hour and a half. – Hypnotherapist, author, and reincarnation believer, Dr. Bruce Goldberg, Coast to Coast AM Radio Show, 10:26 P.M., 6/22/2009.

Well thanks Dr, Golderg for telling everyone that the Bible is 100% true. George Noory, who was hosting the show, didn’t even hint that Dr. Goldberg was wrong. Just one problem George and Dr. Bruce:

The Bible teaches the opposite of reincarnation:

[Christ] entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting…
Hebrews 9:24-28

Later Dr. Bruce said we could "control and customize our destiny".

Dr. Bruce repeated that a new idea would be gone quickly if it was false. The teaching that doing wrong, Dr. Karma-Believing Bruce, to get your way in life, and that there is no karma or Hell or Heaven or universal right or wrong has been taught for thousands of years. Yet he and would have us believe then that’s it’s a true teaching.

Dr. Bruce emphatically called himself a scientist at 10:43 P.M., a few minutes later implied that all major religions were dogmatic when a Christian woman implied past memories from another life were from Satan, unlike what he was teaching about reincarnation and the soul, yet he repeatedly referred to scientists proving him right. Yet another false teacher who repeatedly forgets the differences between evidence, proof, facts, opinions, doctrine, and dogma.

Then he said, at 10:57 P,.M., "Any kind of gift is a terrible thing to waste." when George asked him how an allegedly eleven-year-old reincarnated boy should proceed in life. George Noory replied, "Good advice Bruce." What gift? The boy knows some things about certain aircraft, so what?

Then at about 12:50 A.M., according to the mother of the supposedly reincarnated child – when she asked him what she always wanted to know, if God was a man or a woman, he replied, "he isn’t a man or a woman, he’s whoever you want him to be at the moment." That’s a contradiction (it would mean he could be a man or a woman if you wanted him to be), and according to that answer God can also be prostitute approving of whatever you want to do, a pimp or Satan (and George’s reply, no surprise, was "Right answer.") How is it the mother and father could be bothered to check out the child’s false memories to see if reincarnation was true, yet couldn’t be bothered to read the Bible for the answer she always wanted to know nor check to see if their child’s answer was in accordance with God’s own word? So the question she always wanted to know wasn’t, "Does God love me," or "Where will I end up when I die," "Is the Bible true," or "Can God help me to understand what his word truly says and to get me to love it even if it displeases my body’s desire to do wrong?", but instead, a question of sex-pride? What an evil shallow careless attitude! What nonsense, disgusting, hateful. And George, though saying to Dr. Bruce and the rest of the world that "Western religion is far behind the other religions" (uh George, Christianity is the oldest religion, and it’s not a European creation, duh), he then when talking to the parents about how reincarnation affected their Christian beliefs, pandered to them when they said it strengthened their faith, by saying, it was compatible with it. What spineless leaf in the wind he is. All the contradictions and lies reminded me of something God said thousands of years ago to Israel:

"these also stagger from wine and reel from beer: Priests and prophets stagger from beer and are befuddled with wine; they reel from beer, they stagger when seeing visions, they stumble when rendering decisions. All the tables are covered with vomit and there is not a spot without filth. Who is it he is trying to teach? To whom is he explaining his message? To children weaned from their milk, to those just taken from the breast? For it is: "Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there." Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people, to whom he said, ‘This is the resting place, let the weary rest’; and, ‘This is the place of repose’—but they would not listen. So then, the word of Yahweh to them will become:

Do and do, do and do,
rule on rule, rule on rule;
a little here, a little there—
so that they will go and fall backward,
be injured and snared and captured.

Therefore hear the word of Yahweh, you scoffers who rule this people in Jerusalem. You boast, ‘We have entered into a covenant with death, with the grave we have made an agreement. When an overwhelming scourge sweeps by, it cannot touch us, for we have made a lie our refuge and falsehood our hiding place. So this is what the Sovereign Yahweh says:

‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation;
the one who trusts in him will never be dismayed.’"