INDIANA TEACHER TELLS FIRST GRADERS TO KEEP “GOD, JESUS, DEVIL” OUT OF CLASSROOM CONVERSATIONS

 
INDIANA TEACHER TELLS FIRST GRADERS 
TO KEEP “GOD, JESUS, DEVIL” OUT OF 
CLASSROOM CONVERSATIONS
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 McCordsville, Ind. — An elementary school teacher in Indiana recently sent home a 
classroom update to parents that included a request to tell their children not to talk 
about “God, Jesus and [the] devil” at school.

The McCordsville Elementary School teacher, whose name has
not been made public, sent the request on Aug. 23 after hearing an
estimated five first-graders debating among themselves about the
existence of God and the devil. She said that she addressed the children
about it, but the subject matter later came up again.

“With McCordsville Elementary being a public school, we have
many different religions and beliefs, and I do not want to upset a
child/parent because of these words being used,” the teacher wrote to
parents. “If you go to church or discuss these things at home, please
have a talk with your child about there being an appropriate time and
place of talking about it.”
 However, several of those parents soon contacted the school, concerned that their child’s free speech was being curtailed.

“There were a handful of parents that contacted us,” Mt.
Vernon Schools Superintendent Shane Robbins told the Indianapolis Star.
“They were offended that we were trying to quiet their children.”

He said that the teacher is fairly new—in her second
year—and wasn’t completely educated on district policies surrounding the
religious expression of students, nor did she speak to the principal
before including the request in the classroom update for parents. The
matter is now being discussed with the teacher.

Robbins said in a statement that the district allows
students the liberty to discuss what they wish as long as it does not
disrupt the learning environment.

“Trying to limit a student’s view on religion is a violation
of a student’s First Amendment rights,” he outlined. “However, if the
discussion becomes an academic disruption, then as a district, we can
intervene to maintain the integrity of the educational process while at
the same time being sure to not violate a student’s constitutional
rights.”

“It is the position of the Mt. Vernon Community School
Corporation to respect the diversity of our students. In doing so, we
will address sensitive topics with compassion while maintaining the
integrity of our academic environment,” Robbins stated. “I believe this
was a learning experience and an opportunity for us to improve as a
school district.”

As previously reported, in 1647, the Massachusetts Bay
Colony passed “The Old Deluder Satan Act,” which required that children
be taught to read so they could learn to read the Bible.

“In being one chief project of that old deluder, Satan, to
keep men from the knowledge of the Scriptures, … and that learning may
not be buried in the graves of our forefathers in Church and
Commonwealth, the Lord assisting our endeavors, it is therefore ordered
by this court and the authority thereof, that every township in this
jurisdiction, after the Lord hath increased them to the number of fifty
householders, shall then forthwith appoint one within their town to
teach all such children as shall resort to him to write and read,” it
read in part.

The first textbook used in the American colonies even before the nation’s founding, “The New England Primer,”
was largely focused on the Scriptures, and was stated to be popular in
public and private schools alike until approximately the early 1900’s.
It used mostly the King James Bible as reference, and spoke much about
sin, salvation and proper behavior.

“Save me, O God, from evil all this day long, and let me
love and serve Thee forever, for the sake of Jesus Christ, Thy Son,” it
read.

______________________________________________________

 

 

“JESUS WAS TRANSGENDER”, LIBERAL MEDIA NOW REPORTING

“JESUS WAS TRANSGENDER”, 
LIBERAL MEDIA NOW REPORTING 
BY MARK DICE
  Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 The Liberal media, who repeatedly claim that Jesus was a homosexual, are
now saying was Transgender. The Huffington Post (Huffing Paint Post),
the biggest click bait bottom feeding scum on the Internet, continue
their blasphemy and assault on Christianity as the sickening liberal
agenda continues to sink to new lows. Media analyst Mark Dice has the
story.
 

DEFENSE SECRETARY JAMES MATTIS DEFIES TRUMP: NO MILITARY TRANSGENDER BAN UNTIL IMPLEMENTATION STUDY COMPLETED

 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1d/170322-D-PB383-001_%2833207157510%29.jpg/1024px-170322-D-PB383-001_%2833207157510%29.jpg
DEFENSE SECRETARY JAMES MATTIS DEFIES TRUMP: NO MILITARY TRANSGENDER BAN UNTIL IMPLEMENTATION STUDY COMPLETED
BY RAVEN CLABOUGH
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

Last week, President Trump signed an official directive reversing
President Obama’s plan to incorporate transgender individuals into the
military, but on Tuesday, Defense Secretary James Mattis (shown)
announced that he would be freezing the military’s transgender ban
pending the results of a study on how to seamlessly implement it.

“Our focus must always be on what is best for the military’s combat
effectiveness leading to victory on the battlefield,” Mattis said. “To
that end, I will establish a panel of experts serving within the
Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to provide advice and
recommendations on the implementation of the president’s direction.”

He added that panel members “will bring mature experience, most
notably in combat and deployed operations, and seasoned judgment to this
task.” The panel will “assemble and thoroughly analyze all pertinent
data, quantifiable and non-quantifiable.”

According to the Washington Post, only after the panel makes
recommendations and Mattis consults with the secretary of Homeland
Security will he make a final determination on the best methods to
implement the directive and offer his recommendation to President Trump.

In President Trump’s July 26 announcement of the ban, he indicated
that he reached his decision to return to the military’s previous ban on
transgender individuals openly serving in the military following
consultation with generals and military experts over the impact of
President Obama’s policy reversal.

“After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be
advised that the United States government will not accept or allow
transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. military,”
the president originally communicated in a series of Twitter posts. “Our
military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and
cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that
transgender in the military would entail.”

On Friday, President Trump issued a memorandum in which he further
clarified the ban with additional details.
It explained that the intent
is “to return to the long-standing policy and practice on military
service by transgender individuals that was in place prior to June 2016
[when President Obama overturned the ban] until such time as a
sufficient basis exists” that would prove that allowing transgender
individuals to serve would not have negative effects. As such, the the
memorandum states that Mattis has until February 2018 to present a plan
on how to implement the ban and what to do with transgender individuals
that are already currently serving in the military.

Trump’s memo added that President Obama’s reversal of the
long-standing ban on transgenders in the military authorized the use of
the Defense Department’s resources to fund sex-reassignment procedures
ultimately without providing any evidence that a reversal of the ban
would not disrupt unit cohesion and military effectiveness or overwhelm
military resources.

President Obama’s decision to reverse the military’s transgender
policy has been widely regarded by his critics as a last-ditch effort to
cripple the military and push another social-justice agenda item before
he exited his office.
Prior to its reversal, few liberals seemed to
take issue over the military’s transgender ban. It is only now that
President Trump is attempting to return to the military’s long-standing
ban that there is outrage from Democrats and others on the Left.

But while the reaction from the Left to the ban has been predictably
critical, President Trump’s directive has found support among military
generals and admirals. In an open letter sent to the president, a group
of retired military officials indicated their gratitude to the president
for his common-sense approach to the subject, The New American reported.
They praised him for “making the extremely courageous decision to
reverse President Obama’s transgender social experiment,” and added,
“There may be an enormous amount of vitriol directed at you for making
this policy correction, but please know that overturning this policy may
have done more in the long-term to save the culture and war-fighting
capacity of the U.S. military than perhaps any other military policy you
will adopt as president.”

A late June Rasmussen Poll on the topic of Obama’s transgender policy
reversal showed that just 23 percent of people surveyed viewed it as a
good thing, while 31 percent said it was bad. Thirty-eight percent said
they believed it had no impact.

But perhaps most importantly, the Washington Examiner reports that a Military Times
poll conducted last December found that 41 percent of active-duty
troops believed that President Obama’s policy reversal hurt military
readiness.

US INTERCEPTS MISSILE DURING TEST, AMID NORTH KOREA STAND OFF~PUTIN EVACUATES EAST RUSSIA AHEAD OF NEW KOREAN WAR

PUTIN EVACUATES EAST RUSSIA 
AHEAD OF NEW KOREAN WAR 
 Published on Aug 30, 2017
 Russian president Vladimir Putin is evacuating eastern Russia in
preparation for what may come if North Korea continues their suicidal
push toward complete annihilation.

 US INTERCEPTS MISSILE DURING TEST 
AMID NORTH KOREA STAND OFF
 Drill suggests US can intercept N. Korea missile
BY KIT DANIELS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

The US Navy successfully intercepted a ballistic missile during a drill only days after North Korea fired a missile over Japan.
The
USS John Paul Jones, which is based in Hawaii, tracked the projectile
on radar and destroyed it with a volley of SM-6 guided missiles,
according to the US Missile Defense Agency.

“We are working closely with the fleet to develop this important new
capability, and this was a key milestone in giving our Aegis ships an
enhanced capability to defeat ballistic missiles in their terminal
phase,” said MDA Director Lt. Gen. Sam Greaves. “We will continue
developing ballistic missile defense technologies to stay ahead of the
threat as it evolves.”
The drill suggests that a Navy destroyer in
the Sea of Japan could potentially knock down a North Korean missile,
an increasingly likely scenario after North Korea fired a KN-17 missile
over Japan on Saturday.

The missile overflew Japan and landed in the Pacific Ocean, off the east coast of Hokkaido, one of Japan’s major islands.
In
response, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered 1500 Russians near
the North Korea border to evacuate as military action against North
Korea becomes plausible.

“The surprise move comes after President
Donald Trump warned ‘all options are on the table’ in terms of a U.S.
response to the missile launch,” Newsmax reported.
“Trump said North Korea has ‘signaled its contempt for its neighbors,
for all members of the United Nations, and for minimum standards of
acceptable international behavior.’”

 

FIFTY YEARS OF ANGLICAN LIBERALISM

FIFTY YEARS OF ANGLICAN LIBERALISM 
 Enlarged August 31, 2017 (first published June 16, 2003)
David Cloud, Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061
866-295-4143,
fbns@wayoflife.org
BY DAVID CLOUD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 The worldwide
 Anglican Communion is composed of some 80 million members* in 164 
countries, including the “mother church,” the Church of England, and the
 Episcopal Church in America. (* A large percentage of Anglican members 
are “invisible” because they are church members due to the fact that 
they were baptized as infants and perhaps catechized, but they do not 
participate in the functional life of the churches.)
The Anglican Church is permeated with theological liberalism at every level. 

Consider some examples:

In 1953, Archbishop of Canterbury William Temple, in his book Nature and God
said, “... there is no such thing as revealed truth.”

In 1960, Episcopalian Bishop James Pike said the doctrine of the Trinity is 
“outdated, incomprehensible and nonessential” (The Christian Century,
 Dec. 21, 1960). (Billy Graham was a guest at Pike’s ordination on May 
15, 1958 and praised the liberal bishop in glowing terms. Nine days 
later, Graham invited Pike to sit on the platform during his 
evangelistic crusade in San Francisco and had him lead in prayer. On 
Dec. 4, 1960, Graham spoke in Pike’s pulpit at Grace Cathedral in San 
Francisco.) 

In 1961, Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey 
said, “... heaven is not a place for Christians only. ... I expect to 
see many present day atheists there” (London Daily Mail,
 Oct. 2, 1961). That same year, Bishop James Pike called the virgin 
birth of Christ a “primitive myth” and said that Joseph was probably 
Jesus’ real father (Redbook
 magazine, August 1961). He also said that Adam and Eve, the Garden of 
Eden, heaven, and hell are myths. (Billy Graham invited Ramsey to the 
platform during his 1975 crusade in Brazil and allowed him to speak to 
the crowd (Fundamental Evangelistic Association News & Views, May-June 
1975).

In 1963, Episcopal theologian Paul van Buren started the God-is-dead 
movement with the publication of his book The Secular Meaning of the Gospel
That same year, Anglican Bishop John Robinson said in his book Honest to God,
 “The whole scheme of a supernatural being coming down from heaven to 
‘save’ mankind from sin ... is frankly incredible to man ‘come of age.’”

In
 1967, after heresy charges were brought against Bishop James Pike, the 
Episcopal Church in America adopted a resolution declaring that all 
heresy was out of date. That year, Canon Hugh Montifiore of Cambridge 
University’s main church said, “Jesus might have been a homosexual” 
(Christianity Today, Aug. 18, 1967). (Montifiore was the advisor for the 
Cambridge Billy Graham Television Crusade.) 

In
 1968, the Church of England’s Lambeth Conference voted that Anglican 
clergy are no longer required to agree to the denomination’s 39 articles
 of faith.

In 1976, John Spong was ordained as the bishop of the 
Episcopal diocese of Newark, New Jersey, even though he denied 
practically every doctrine of the Christian faith. 

In 1977, 
Bishop Paul Moore of the Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine in 
New York City ordained lesbian Ellen Barrett as a priest. Barrett told Time 
magazine that her lesbian love affairs gave her the “strength to serve God.”

In
 1978, Anglican Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa said the Holy Spirit
 shined through Mahatma Gandhi, who is a Hindu (St. Alban’s Cathedral, 
Pretoria, South Africa, Nov. 23, 1978).

In 1980, Tutu said, “It may be that Jesus was an illegitimate son” (Cape Times,
 Oct. 24, 1980).

In 1982, Archbishop of Canterbury Robert Runcie said he was an agnostic as to 
why Jesus suffered on the cross (Sunday Times Weekly Review, London, April 
11, 1982). That same year, Episcopal Bishop John Spong, writing in the  
Christian Century (Jan.
 6-13, 1982), condemned traditional evangelistic and missionary 
endeavors and said that biblical absolutism is “a vice.” (Billy Graham 
was one of the honored guests at Runcie’s ordination in March 1980, and 
Graham spoke highly of the liberal archbishop during his evangelistic 
crusades in England in 1984 and 1989.)

In 1984, David Jenkins, 
Anglican Bishop of Durham, described Christ’s resurrection as “a 
conjuring trick with bones” (“English Bishop Calls Christ’s Resurrection
 Conjuring Trick,” AP, St. Louis Post Dispatch,
 Oct. 28, 1984). Jenkins also said, “The Christian is not bound up with 
freak biology or corpses getting up and walking around” and “You don’t 
have to believe in the virgin birth.” (On July 9, 1984, three days after
 Jenkins was consecrated bishop, lightning struck his cathedral and 
caused extensive damage. A spokesman for the fire brigade said that 
though the roof was fully wired with lightning rods, none of them worked
 that morning; the smoke detectors in the ceiling did not go off, even 
though they were tested only a month before; and there was no thunder 
accompanying the lightning. EP News Service, Dec. 21, 1984).

In
 1984, the Associated Press reported that only 20 of 31 Church of 
England bishops polled insisted that Christians must accept Jesus as 
both God and man.

In 1985, the Jesus Seminar was founded with the
 help of Episcopalians, including Marcus Borg of Oregon State 
University. The Seminar claims that Jesus spoke only about 20% of the 
things attributed to him in the New Testament and that the Jesus 
described in the Bible is largely a fiction. They claim he wasn’t born 
of a virgin, didn’t walk on the water, didn’t rise bodily from the dead,
 and had no intention of starting a new Christian religion. They also 
claim that there was no Jewish trial of Jesus before the crucifixion, 
and the Jewish crowd did not participate in his condemnation.

In 
1985 the St. Luke’s Episcopal Church in Minneapolis ran an advertising 
campaign which included this slogan: “The Episcopal Church welcomes you.
 Regardless of race, creed, color or the number of times you’ve been 
born.” Twenty Episcopal churches in the Memphis, Tennessee, area ran an 
advertisement which stated, “In an atmosphere of absolute right and 
wrongs, here’s a little room to breathe. ... the Episcopal Church is 
totally committed to the preservation of open dialogue and undogmatic 
faith. We exist to tell the world about a God who loves us regardless of
 what we’ve done or what we believe. Even if we do not believe in Him, 
He believes in us. We do not suffocate with absolutes.” This, of course,
 is not biblical Christianity; it is gross apostasy.

When Edmond 
Lee Browning was elected “presiding bishop” of the Episcopal Church in 
September 1985, he “made it clear that he disagrees with the church’s 
official opposition to the ordination of practicing homosexuals” 
(Religious News Service, Sept. 11, 1985). He stated, “I would sincerely 
hope the Episcopal Church can say that there are no outcasts, but 
embrace all people and all cultures.” He was one of 20 bishops who 
signed a 1979 statement calling the church’s position on gays “a cruel 
denial of the sexual being of homosexual persons” and a “condemnatory 
judgment” that made them second-class citizens in the church. 

In
 1986, Anglican Bishop David Jenkins got a standing ovation from the 
general synod of the Church of England when he defended his doubts about
 the virgin birth and bodily resurrection of Christ (Associated Press, 
July 7, 1986). Jenkins called the God of the Bible “a cultic idol” 
(Ecumenical Press Service, July 16-21, 1986).

In 1987, a panel of seven Episcopal bishops dismissed heresy charges against 
Bishop John Spong.

In 1988, Spong published his book Living in Sin: A Bishop Rethinks Human 
Sexuality.
 He said, “The time has surely come not just to tolerate, or even to 
accept, but to celebrate and welcome the presence among us of our gay 
and lesbian fellow human beings” (p. 199). That year Spong visited a 
Buddhist temple and said, “As the smell of incense filled the air, I 
knelt before three images of the Buddha, feeling that the smoke could 
carry my prayers heavenward. It was for me a holy moment for I was 
certain that I was kneeling on holy ground” (“A Dialogue in a Buddhist 
Temple,” John Spong, The Voice, Jan. 1989).

In
 January 1989, a committee composed of five Episcopal bishops 
unanimously dismissed a second set of heresy charges that had been 
brought against Bishop John Spong. Toward the end of that year, Spong 
ordained the first openly practicing homosexual to the Episcopal 
priesthood. The man, Robert Williams, was diagnosed with AIDS less than 
two years later. 

According to Integrity, a pro-homosexual 
Episcopal group, at least 50 practicing homosexuals had been ordained to
 the priesthood by 1991. 

In November 1991, John Spong conducted a
 seminar in Bangor, Pennsylvania, entitled “Exorcising Fundamentalism, 
Sexual Phobias and Other Demons.” 

In 1993, a survey of nearly 
20,000 Episcopalians showed that seventy percent believed “faithful 
Christians can be sexually active gays and lesbians” (Christian News, Nov. 1, 
1993). Seventy-five percent approved of living with someone of the opposite 
sex without marriage.

In 1994, it was reported by the Sunday Times (July 31) in London that at least 
100 Anglican priests are atheists who do not believe in “an external, 
supernatural God.”

In
 1996, Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey lashed out at 
fundamentalists who place the Bible “above and beyond human inquiry” (Christian News,
 Dec. 9, 1996). That same year, the doctrinal commission of the Church 
of England said hell is not a place of fire and eternal torment. And 
Episcopal Bishop John Spong wrote in his paper that the image of God in 
the Bible is “no longer operative” (ENI, Dec. 6, 1996).

In 1997, a survey found that 31% of Anglican vicars in England do not believe 
in the virgin birth (Alliance Life,
 March 12, 1997). Actually that figure would probably have been much 
higher had the survey attempted to discover the number of vicars who 
believe in the virgin birth only in a figurative manner. 

In his 1991 book Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism,
 Episcopal Bishop John Spong said the apostle Paul was “a self hating, 
repressed homosexual.” That year, Spong ordained another homosexual 
priest, Barry Stopfel. Lesbian Episcopal priest Carter Heyward delivered
 the ordination sermon. When Stopfel’s male “lover” was introduced, the 
audience applauded. 

In 1998 Episcopalian Bishop John Spong said,
 “I would choose to loathe rather than to worship a deity who required 
the sacrifice of his son” (Christianity Today,
 June 15, 1998). That same year, retiring Episcopal Presiding Bishop 
Edmond Browning said, “It is time to move past using literalistic 
readings of the Bible to create prejudices against our gay and lesbian 
brothers and sisters” (Calvary Contender, May 1, 1998).

In 2002, Richard Harries, Anglican Bishop of Oxford, said Christians should pray 
to “God the Mother” (The Times,
 Nov. 3, 2002). That same year, retired Bishop Spong proposed a “new 
Christianity,” which must be able to “incorporate all of our reality. It
 must be able to allow God and Satan to come together in each of us. ...
 It must unite Christ with Antichrist, Jesus with Judas, male with 
female, heterosexual with homosexual” (World, July 8, 2002).

In April 2003, Episcopalian bishop Charles Bennison said that Jesus Christ was 
a sinner (Worthy News, April 14, 2003).

On
 June 7, 2003, the Diocese of New Hampshire elected the first openly 
homosexual bishop in the history of the Episcopal Church USA. The 
election was confirmed on August 5 by the General Convention meeting in 
Minneapolis. Thirteen years ago the newly elected bishop, V. Gene 
Robinson, broke his marriage vows when he left his wife and two young 
daughters and moved in with his male partner, Mark Andrew. In a speech 
in April 29, 2000, the day before a homosexual march in Washington, 
D.C., Robinson said: “... we are worthy to hold our heads high as gay 
folk--NOT because we’ve merely decided we are worthy, but because God 
has proclaimed it so. That we are loved beyond our wildest imagining by a
 God who made us the way we are and proclaimed it good. We proclaim 
today that we too read our Bibles, and through the voices of its many 
witnesses, we hear God’s voice--NOT saying ‘You are an abomination,’ but
 rather, ‘You are my beloved.’ We lay an equal claim to a savior who 
loves us as we are and who died to save us from our ‘manifold sins and 
wickedness,’ which does NOT include our being gay. And we come here 
today, laying claim to our full membership--our FULL membership--in the 
Body of Christ.”

In June 2006, the national convention of the 
Episcopal Church in America voted overwhelmingly against a resolution 
stating “an unchanging commitment to Jesus Christ as the son of God, the
 only name by which any person may be saved. More than seven tenths of 
the House of Deputies rejected the motion. One of those who voted 
against the resolution, a “Rev. McDowell” of North Carolina, told 
VirtueOnline that “how one lives his life is the more important issue 
than whether one affirms Jesus as Lord” and stated his conviction that 
all men are already children of God. 

The 2006 Episcopal 
convention elected the ultra-liberal Katharine Jefferts Schori to be the
 presiding bishop for a nine-year term. In her first sermon in that 
capacity, she referred to “our mother Jesus,” claiming that he gave 
birth to a new creation on the cross and implying that all are his 
children. Later she told the Washington Post
 that those who believe that the words of the Bible have only one 
possible interpretation are guilty of idolatry. She said, “I’m 
encouraging people to look beyond their favorite understandings” 
(Douglas LeBlanc, “Two Minds in One Episcopal Body,” Christian Research 
Journal, vol. 29, no. 5, 2006). 

At
 the same convention, Louie Crew and some other voting representatives 
(called deputies) referred to the Holy Spirit as “she.” The homosexual 
bishop Gene Robinson said the Holy Spirit “is that part of God that 
refuses to be confined and contained in the little boxes we have for 
God” (“Two Minds in One Episcopal Body,” Christian Research Journal,
 vol. 29, no. 5, 2006). He said, further, “We don’t worship a God who is
 all locked up in the Scripture of 2,000 years ago.” He quoted John 
Fortunato, a homosexual author who claims that God visited him and 
confirmed that homosexuality is fine if it is “loving.” He said, “God 
smiled and said quietly, ‘How can loving be wrong? All love comes from 
me.’” 

On September 14, 2008, the Church of England officially 
apologized to Charles Darwin for rejecting his theory of evolution. It 
said: “Charles Darwin, 200 years from your birth, the Church of England 
owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first 
reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still” (“Church 
Makes ‘Ludicrous’ Apology,” The Daily Mail,
 Sept. 13, 2008). The statement was written by Malcolm Brown, who sits 
on the Archbishops’ Council, the Church of England’s managing body, 
headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury (Rowan Williams). Its argument 
that the theory of evolution is not incompatible with Christian teaching
 is patently ridiculous. The Bible plainly says that the world was 
created by God in six days, that the plant and animal life was made to 
reproduce after its own kind, that man was made in God’s image, that he 
sinned against God, and that the world was cast into fallen chaos. This 
fits perfectly with the condition that we see in the world today as well
 as the archaeological and geological records. If there was no divine 
creation, if man is a product of evolution, then Genesis is a myth, the 
fall is a fable, there is no purpose to life, no afterlife, and no 
salvation. If the account of Adam is a legend, then Jesus Christ’s 
apostles were deceived and the gospel they preached a delusion, because 
they mentioned Adam seven times in their writings, describing him always
 as a historical figure. 

On May 16, 2009, the bells of the 
Anglican Cathedral of Liverpool pealed out John Lennon’s atheistic song 
“Imagine” three times. A spokesperson for the cathedral said, “We feel 
this performance has inspired many people to think about their 
relationship with God in their lives” (“Imagine That,” The Daily Mail,
 May 17, 2009). Indeed, as we have seen, many members of the Anglican 
Church have no problem imagining with Lennon that there is no heaven or 
hell. John Lennon was anti-christ. His book A Spaniard in the Works
 portrayed Jesus as El Pifico, a “garlic eating, stinking little yellow,
 greasy fascist ****** Catholic Spaniard.” In this wicked book, Lennon 
further blasphemed the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In the song “I 
Found Out,” Lennon sang, “There ain’t no Jesus gonna come from the sky,”
 and in his song “God,” he said, “I don’t believe in Bible. I don’t 
believe in Jesus. I just believe in me.” In an interview with a British 
newspaper Lennon defined God in these words: “All the energy is God. 
Your own energy and their energy, whether doing god-like things or 
ungodly things” (The Daily Sketch, Oct. 9, 1967). Lennon and Yoko Ono were 
heavily involved in occultism. The books Hellhounds on Their Trail by Gary 
Patterson, Nowhere Man: The Final Days of John Lennon by Robert Rosen, and 
 Lennon in America
 by Geoffrey Giuliano describe how the Lennons purchased entire sections
 of occult literature in bookstores; consulted tarot cards, astrologers,
 and psychics;’ learned how to cast spells; sought magical power from 
Egyptian artifacts; and believed in reincarnation. 

Following a 
vote in May 2009 by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland to 
approve the appointment of a homosexual pastor, Desmond Tutu, Anglican 
Bishop Emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa, voiced his approval saying 
that churches should not be discussing “who goes to bed with whom” 
(“Desmond Tutu Endorses Homosexual Ministers,” LifeSiteNews.com, May 29,
 2009). The homosexual pastor, Scott Rennie, was ordained the pastor of 
Queen’s Cross Church in Aberdeen in 2008, but his appointment was 
protested and brought before the denomination’s ruling body. Like Vickie
 Gene Robinson, who was ordained a bishop in the Episcopal Church of 
America in 2003, Rennie divorced his wife to live carnally with a man. 
This is a double sin. First, there is the sin of breaking one’s solemn 
marriage vows before Almighty God. Second, there is the sin of sodomy. 
Yet these men are so spiritually blind that they claim to hold the moral
 high ground! (The Church of Scotland is not part of the Anglican 
communion, but Tutu is.)

At its annual convention in 2012, the 
Episcopal Church in America endorsed the blessing of “same-sex unions” 
and voted in favor of “transgender clergy” (Rob Kerby, “Why Is the 
Episcopal Church Near Collapse?” Beliefnet.com, July 13, 2012). Presiding 
Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori called God the “Big Man.” 

In
 2013, the Church of England “dropped its ban on gay clergy in civil 
partnerships becoming bishops” and a study group proposed that the 
Church “be able to recognize and celebrate same-sex marriages and 
partnerships in church services” (“Church of England Proposes 
Celebrating Gay Marriage,” Newsmax.com, Nov. 28, 2013).

In 2014, 
V. Gene Robinson, the first openly homosexual bishop in the Anglican 
church, announced that he is divorcing his “partner,” Mark Andrew. The 
two “married” in 2010 when same-sex marriage was legalized in New 
Hampshire (“First Openly Homosexual Episcopal Bishop Divorces,” OneNewsNow,
 May 4, 2014). In 1990, Robinson broke his marriage vows when he left 
his wife and two young daughters and moved in with Andrew.

A 
YouGov poll conducted in August-September 2014 found that 17% of 
Anglican clergy in England do not believe in a personal God. Only 24% 
describe themselves as conservative in theology. Only 28% say that 
Christianity is the only path to God. When asked “what you most rely on 
for guidance,” only 12% said the Bible, while 33% said conscience or 
reason. Retired Church of England clergyman David Paterson said, “I 
preach using God’s terminology, but never with the suggestion that God 
actually exists” (“Anglican Clergy Don’t Believe,” Breitbart, Oct. 28, 
2014).

In a July 2014 interview, Rowan Williams, former 
Archbishop of Canterbury, said that he practices a combination of 
Buddhist/Catholic/Orthodox meditation practices. Each morning he repeats
 the same prayer while performing breathing exercises. Called the “Jesus
 Prayer,” it consists of the vain repetition of the words, “Lord Jesus 
Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon me, a sinner.” He said that 
“exposure to and engagement with the Buddhist world in particular has 
made me aware of practices not unlike the ‘Jesus Prayer’ and introduced 
me to disciplines that further enforce the stillness and physical focus 
that the prayer entails” (“Rowan Williams: How Buddhism Helps Me Pray,”  
The Telegraph,
 London, July 2, 2014). He says the practice helps him detach himself 
from “distracted, wandering images and thoughts.” Practicing mental 
imagining techniques, he pictures the human body as a cave through which
 his breath passes. He says that practitioners of these techniques can 
achieve “advanced states” and become aware of an “unbroken inner light.”
 

Unscriptural contemplative practices such as the Jesus Prayer, 
visualizing prayer, breath prayer, and centering prayer are exceedingly 
dangerous. Many who practice these things end up believing in a pagan 
concept of God such as pantheism (God is everything) and panentheism 
(God is in everything). Through these practices people typically become 
increasingly ecumenical and interfaith in thinking. Contemplative prayer
 is a major building block of the end-time, one-world “church.” For more
 on this see the book Contemplative Mysticism, which is available in print and 
eBook editions from Way of Life Literature.

On
 November 14, 2014, the National Cathedral in Washington D.C., which is 
part of the Episcopal Church, hosted a full-fledged Islamic service. It 
was co-sponsored by Muslim groups with links to terrorism such as the 
Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of 
North America (ISNA). The Muslims were kept out of view of crosses, 
since they are not allowed to pray “in view of sacred symbols alien to 
their faith” (“National Cathedral Holds Friday Muslim Prayers,” Voice of
 America, Nov. 14, 2014). 

The liberal Episcopal Church has 
demonstrated that it views Muslims more favorably than traditional 
Episcopal congregations that hold to the inerrancy of Scripture. Larry 
Provost reported the following: “In Binghamton, New York the Church of 
the Good Shepherd broke away from the Episcopal Diocese of Central New 
York over the issues of Biblical inerrancy. The Church of the Good 
Shepherd continued to thrive despite not being able to keep the church 
property they had once worshiped on. After some time the Episcopal 
Diocese of Central New York put the church property in question up for 
sale. The Church of the Good Shepherd was interested in buying their old
 property and offered the Diocese of New York $150,000 dollars for the 
property. The Episcopal Church refused to sell the property to the 
Church of the Good Shepherd. Instead they sold it to a Muslim group. The
 Muslim group offered only $50,000 dollars for the property; $100,000 
less than the Church of the Good Shepherd offered. The Episcopal Church 
was not done; a clause was added that the property could not be sold to 
the Church of the Good Shepherd in the future. Apparently the Bible 
believing Church of the Good Shepherd is more offensive to the Episcopal
 Church than Islam. Congregations that choose to remain with the 
Episcopal Church, often tied to our national soul, tend to shun the 
whole Bible yet have a particular fondness for accommodating Islam” 
(“Islamic Services in National Cathedral,” Townhall.com, Nov. 14, 2014).

In
 July 2017, the General Synod voted in favor of “offering special 
services to welcome transgender people to the Anglican faith” (“Anglican
 Church set to offer,” The Guardian, Jul. 9, 2017). The motion passed by a 
margin of 284 to 78. Proposing the motion, Chris Newlands, from Blackburn, 
Lancashire, said: “I hope that we can make a powerful statement to say that 
we believe that trans people are cherished and loved by God, who created them,
 and is present through all the twists and turns of their lives.” The God who 
created man created him male and female, so a transgender person is rebelling 
against God’s created order. Gender is not an accident of nature. Psalm 
139 says God creates the individual in the mother’s womb according to 
His plan.

Paul Bayes, the Bishop of Liverpool, said, “LGBT
 orientation and identity is not a sickness. And LGBT orientation and 
identity is not a sin” (“Church of England votes to explore transgender 
services,” BBC News, Jul. 9, 2017). 

On the other hand, the apostle Paul described homosexuality as “vile affections”
 (Ro. 1:26), “against nature” (Ro. 1:26), “unseemly” (Ro. 1:27), “error” 
(Ro. 1:27), and “a reprobate mind” (Ro. 1:28).”
 

EUGENE PETERSON & THE MESSAGE BIBLE

 Eugene Peterson Photo
EUGENE PETERSON & THE MESSAGE BIBLE 
BY DAVID CLOUD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
The following is excerpted from CONTEMPLATIVE MYSTICISM: A POWERFUL ECUMENICAL BOND.
ISBN 978-1-58318-113-3. Contemplative mysticism, which
originated with Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox monasticism, is
permeating every branch of Christianity today, including the Southern Baptist
Convention. In
this book we document the fact that Catholic mysticism leads inevitably
to a broadminded ecumenical philosophy and to capitulation to heresies.
For many, this path has led to interfaith dialogue, Buddhism, Hinduism,
universalism, pantheism, panentheism, even goddess theology. One chapter
is dedicated to exposing the heresies of Richard
Foster:”Evangelicalism’s Mystical Sparkplug.” We describe major
contemplative practices, such as centering prayer, visualizing prayer,
the Jesus
Prayer, Lectio Divina, and the labyrinth. We look at the
history of Roman Catholic monasticism which birthed contemplative
prayer, and we examine the errors of contemplative mysticism. In the
Biographical Catalog of Contemplative Mystics we look at the lives and
beliefs of 60 of the major figures in the contemplative movement,
including Francis of Assisi, Ignatius of Loyola, John of the Cross,
Brennan Manning, Thomas Merton, Teresa of Avila, Richard Foster, and
Dallas Willard. The book
contains an extensive index. 482 pages. Available in print and eBook
editions, www.wayoflife.org

______________

Eugene Peterson (b. 1932), author of The Message,
was for many years James M. Houston Professor of Spiritual Theology at
Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia. He also served for almost
30 years as founding pastor of Christ Our King Presbyterian Church in
Bel Air, Maryland. Today he is retired and lives in Montana. 

The New Testament portion of The
Message
was published in 1993 and the complete Bible in 2002. It is
called a”translational-paraphrase” and is said to”unfold like a
gripping novel.” In fact, it IS a novel! 

It
was”translated” by Peterson and reviewed by
21″consultants” from the following schools: Denver Seminary (Robert
Alden), Dallas Theological Seminary (Darrell Bock and Donald Glenn),
Fuller Theological Seminary (Donald Hagner), Gordon-Conwell Theological
Seminary, Trinity Episcopal School, North Park Theological Seminary,
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Richard Averbeck). Columbia Bible
College, Criswell College (Lamar Cooper), Westminster Theological
Seminary (Peter Enns), Bethel Seminary (Duane Garrett), Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary (Paul R. House), Covenant Theological Seminary,
Westmont College, Wesley Biblical Seminary, Reformed Theological
Seminary, Moody Bible Institute (John H. Walton), Austin Presbyterian
Theological Seminary, and Gordon College (Marvin Wilson). 

The Message
is widely recommended by well-known Christian
leaders. In keeping with his love for every new translation and
paraphrase to appear since the Revised Standard Version, Billy Graham
printed his own edition of”The Message: New Testament.” Warren Wiersbe
says,”The Message is the boldest and most provocative rendering of the
New Testament I’ve ever read.” Jack Hayford says,”The Message is
certainly destined to become a devotional classic — not to mention a
powerful pastoral tool.” Rick Warren loves The Message
and quotes it frequently, five times in the first chapter of The Purpose-Driven Life.
J.I. Packer says,”In this crowded world of Bible versions Eugene
Peterson’s blend of accurate scholarship and vivid idiom make this
rendering both distinctive and distinguished. The Message catches the
logical flow, personal energy, and imaginative overtones of the original
very well indeed.” CCM artist Michael Card says,”Peterson’s translation
transforms the eye into an ear,
opening the door of the New Testament wider than perhaps it has ever
been opened.” Leighton Ford says,”The Message will help many to transfer
God’s eternal truths to their contemporary lives.” Joni Earckson Tada
says,”WOW! What a treasure The Message is. I am going to carry it with
me. This is a treasure that I will want to use wherever I am.” The
Message is also recommended by Amy Grant, Benny Hinn, Bill Hybels, Bill
and Gloria Gaither, Chuck Swindoll, Toby of DC
Talk, Gary Smalley, Gordon Fee, Gordon MacDonald, Jerry Jenkins, John
Maxwell, Joyce Meyer, Kenneth Copeland, Max Lucado, Michael W. Smith,
Newsboys, Phil Driscoll, Rebecca St. James, Rod Parsley, Stuart and Jill
Briscoe, Tony Campolo, Bono of U2, Vernon Grounds, to name a few. (This
information was gathered from the NAVPress web site.). 

Peterson told Christianity Today that a
major turning point in his ministry was a lecture by Paul Tournier sponsored by the liberal Christian Century
magazine and held at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore (“Books &
Culture Corner: The Contemplative Christian,” by Nathan Bierma, Christianity Today web site, Sept. 29, 2003). In a 1973 masters thesis entitled”Paul Tournier’s Universalism,” Daniel Musick warned: 

“Paul
Tournier was an unrestricted universalist. His writings,
personal correspondence with him, and interviews with many who knew him
support this conclusion. An analysis of his soteriology over 35 years of
writing reveals a transition from reformed roots to an unbiblical,
neo-orthodox perspective influenced by Emil Brunner and Karl Barth.” 

Peterson has recommended The Shack.
Though fictional, this book’s objective is the redefinition of God. It
is about a man who becomes bitter at God after his daughter is murdered
and has a life-changing experience in the very shack where the murder
occurred; but the God he encounters is most definitely not the God of
the Bible. Young’s depicts God the Father as a black woman who loves
rock & roll, and well as a man with gray hair and a pony tail.
Young’s male/female god/goddess is the god of the emerging church. He
is cool, loves rock & roll, is non-judgmental, does not exercise
wrath toward sin, does not send unbelievers to an eternal fiery hell,
does not require repentance and the new birth, and puts no obligations
on people. (For documentation see”The Shack’s Cool God” at the Way of
Life web site, www.wayoflife.org.)

Peterson has also recommended Rob Bell’s
universalistic book Love Wins. Bell says hell is in this life
and most men will eventually be saved. He writes:”This insistence that
God will be united and reconciled with all people is a theme the writers
and prophets return to again and again. … The God that Jesus teaches
us about doesn’t give up until everything that was lost is found. This
God simply doesn’t give up. Ever” (Love Wins, Kindle location
1259-1287). Bell calls the preaching of eternal
hell”misguided and toxic,” a”cheap view of God,” and”lethal” (location
47-60, 2154-2180). He says there is something wrong with this God and
calls Him”terrifying and traumatizing and unbearable” (location
1273-1287,  2098-2113). 

That kind of talk apparently resonates deeply
with Peterson. No wonder he loves the non-judgmental god/goddess of The Shack.

Peterson
is a big promoter of Catholic
contemplative mysticism. He is on the Board of Reference for the
international ecumenical contemplative organization Renovaré (pronounced
Ren-o-var-ay, which is Latin, meaning”to make new spiritually”),
founded by Richard Foster. At the October 1991 Renovaré meeting in
Pasadena, Foster praised Pope John Paul II and called for unity in the
Body of Christ through the”five streams of Christianity: the
contemplative, holiness, charismatic, social justice and
evangelical” (CIB Bulletin, December 1991). Foster advocates
the practices of Catholic mystics and”the integration of psychology and
theology.” In his book entitled Prayer Foster draws material from Julian
of Norwich, Thomas Merton, Bernard of Clairvaux, Madame Guyon, Teresa
of Avila, even St. Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuits.
Renovaré promotes guided imagery, visualization, centering prayer,
astral projection, Zen meditation, and Jungian psychology
(Calvary Contender, Feb. 15, 1998).

Along
the same line, notice the heroes of the
faith that Peterson quotes in the article”Spirit Quest” (which is a
Native American term for seeking intimacy with and revelation from pagan
spirits): 

“Single-minded,
persevering faithfulness confirms the
authenticity of our spirituality. The ancestors we look to for
encouragement in this business — Augustine of Hippo and Julian of
Norwich, … Teresa of Avila — didn’t flit. They stayed” (Christianity Today, Nov. 8, 1993). 

Augustine,
Julian, and Teresa had authentic
spirituality? Not when tested by Scripture. Julian of Norwich said,”God
showed me that sin need be no shame to man but can even be worthwhile”
(quoted by Kenneth Leech, Soul Friend, p. 146). She also
said,”God is really our Mother as he is our Father” and called
Christ”Mother Jesus.” Augustine taught that the sacraments are the means
of saving grace, was one of the fathers of infant baptism, claiming
that baptism takes away the child’s sin, taught that
Mary did not commit sin and promoted prayers to her, believed in
purgatory and the veneration of relics, accepted the doctrine of
celibacy for”priests,” and laid the foundation for the inquisition, to
name a few of his heresies. Teresa of Avila was probably demon
possessed; she levitated and made strange noises deep in her throat,
experienced terrifying visions and voices, and held to Rome’s
sacramental gospel that works are required for salvation.

Peterson
was Professor of Spiritual Theology at
Regent College, and it is obvious that he has been influenced deeply by
the Catholic and modernistic Protestant”spirituality” in which he has
immersed himself for so many decades. Regent College’s bookstore
features many works by Catholic mystics, such as those already named,
and by theological modernists. I have visited this bookstore many times,
and there is no warning whatsoever in regard to these books. 

The
mystical”spirituality” that is so popular in
evangelical and charismatic circles today is a yearning for an
experiential relationship with God that downplays the role of faith and
Scripture and that exalts”transcendental” experiences that lift the
individual from the earthly mundane into a higher”spiritual” plane.
Biblical prayer is talking with God; mystical prayer is silent
meditation and”centering” and other such things. Biblical Christianity
is a patient walk of faith; mystical spirituality is a flight of
fancy. Biblical study is analyzing and meditating upon the literal truth
of the Scripture; mystical spirituality focuses on a”deeper meaning”;
it is more allegorical and”transcendental” than literal. 

It
is not surprising that Peterson’s Bible
translation has a New Agey flavor to it. He even uses the term”as above,
so below,” which is a New Age expression for the unity of God and man,
heaven and earth. In the book As Above, So Below, the editors of the New Age Journal
say:”This maxim implies that the transcendent God beyond the physical
universe and the immanent God within ourselves are one. Heaven and
Earth, spirit and matter, the invisible and the visible worlds form a
unity to which we are
intimately linked” (quoted from Warren Smith, Deceived on Purpose: The New Age Implications of the Purpose-Driven Church, Ravenna, Ohio: Conscience Press, 2004). 

The Message is an environmental Bible,
as well. In Romans 15:13, The Message
says,”May the God of green hope fill you up with joy…” and in 1
Corinthians 6:9-10, it says that those who”use and abuse the earth and
everything in it, don’t quality as citizens in God’s kingdom.” 

The Message
is also pro-homosexual,
playing right into the hands of those who teach that homosexuality is a
natural condition that God can bless instead of a sin that needs to be
repented of. Every passage that condemns homosexuality is tampered with
in The Message. For example, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 in the KJV
warns that”effeminate, nor abusers themselves with mankind” will not
inherit the kingdom of God without being born again. In The Message this becomes the vapid and almost meaningless”those
who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex.” In 1 Timothy 1:10,”them
that defile themselves with mankind” is changed to”the irresponsible,
who defy all authority, riding roughshod over God, life, sex, truth,
whatever.”

It is not surprising that Peterson told Religion
News Service on July 12, 2017, that he does not believe that homosexuality is sinful. He said,”
I
know a lot of people who are gay and lesbian and they seem to have as
good a spiritual life as I do. I think that kind of debate about
lesbians and gays might be over. People who disapprove of it, they’ll
probably just go to another church.

So we’re in a
transition and I think it’s a transition for the best, for the good.”
Peterson told the RNS that the church he pastored hired a homosexual
minister of music. He said that in churches where he served as associate
pastor,”There were several women who were lesbians.”

APOSTATE COMPLEMENTARIANS ISSUE NEW MANIFESTO ON GENDER IDENTITY~CENTRIST POSITION ASSAILED

 Complementarians Issue New Manifesto on Gender Identity
ABOVE: Image: ERLC


Russell Moore, Sam Allberry, Rosaria Butterfield, and Christopher Yuan have endorsed the Nashville Statement.
COMPLEMENTARIANS ISSUE NEW MANIFESTO 
ON GENDER IDENTITY 
 CBMW’s Nashville Statement addresses shifting notions of sex and sexuality.
BY KATE SHELLNUTT
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 America’s top complementarian leaders have 
shifted their focus from gender roles to gender 
identity.
 
On Tuesday, the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) released
a new declaration that reasserts the significance of biological sex and
traditional marriage over society’s growing LGBT acceptance.


“We are persuaded that faithfulness in our generation
means declaring once again the true story of the world and of our place
in it—particularly as male and female,” according to the group’s Nashville Statement.


At the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and
Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) national conference in Nashville
last week, it was endorsed by about 150 conservative Christian
leaders—many of them male, Baptist, and Reformed.
(The mayor of
Nashville, though, was not happy about the name.)
Initial signatories include many CBMW and ERLC leaders;
pastors like J. I. Packer, Francis Chan, John MacArthur, and James
MacDonald; and authors Rosaria Butterfield and Christopher Yuan.
At its founding by theologian Wayne Grudem 30 years ago,
CBMW issued the Danvers Statement, which affirmed the complementary
differences between the genders. It came in response to an increasingly
feminist society (and church), where conservative leaders feared men and
women were losing their biblical distinctions.
That foundational document, often seen as the textbook
definition of complementarian convictions, critiques “feminist
egalitarianism” and women rising in church leadership, and upholds
“vocational homemaking” and wives’ submission in marriage.
The 2017 Nashville Statement, instead of outlining how
the genders should live in relation to one another, makes several points
defending the existence of two genders in the first place. CBMW upholds
“God’s design for self-conception as male or female” in the face of new
conversations over transgender identity, gender fluidity, and
homosexual relationships.
John Piper called the document—which contains 14 points, each affirming and denying a belief about sex and sexuality—“a Christian manifesto concerning issues of human sexuality.”
“There is no effort to equivocate for the sake of wider,
but muddled, acceptance,” he said. “It touches the most fundamental and
urgent questions of the hour, without presuming to be a blueprint for
political action.”
The new statement affirms that people with same-sex
attraction can have “a rich and fruitful life pleasing to God through
faith in Jesus Christ, as they, like all Christians, walk in purity of
life.” But in another point, it critiques those who would self-identify
as gay.
Christians who affirm same-sex relationships have pushed
back against the statement—particularly a line that says approving of
homosexuality and transgenderism “constitutes an essential departure
from Christian faithfulness and witness.”
(In the words of Baptist Press,
no more “agreeing to disagree” on LGBT issues.) The Liturgists, founded
by musician Michael Gungor and podcaster “Science Mike” McHargue, released a counter-statement in solidarity with LGBT Christians.
The Nashvile Statement also suggests that people who
identify as transgender can and should accept the “God-ordained link
between one’s biological sex and one’s self-conception as male or
female,” while acknowledging the dignity of those who are born with
physical conditions related to their sex.
It’s hard to capture the complexities of transgenderism
in a concise declaration, but CBMW has approached the issue from a
theological, biblical standpoint, relying on what researcher Mark
Yarhouse calls an “integrity lens,” or concern for the integrity of sex
and gender as created by God.
“It makes sense that faithful Christians would start there,” said Yarhouse, author of Understanding Gender Dysphoria: Navigating Transgender Issues in a Changing Culture
and director of the Institute for the Study of Sexual Identity at
Regent University. “It’s trying to signal what’s going to be within the
bounds of evangelicalism, and it will be interesting to see how
evangelicals respond to that.” (For more on his research, see Yarhouse’s
2015 CT feature, Understanding the Transgender Phenomenon.)
Some conservative Christians criticized the CBMW’s
narrow focus on homosexuality and transgenderism, rather than the
underlying gospel issues that have led to a distorted view of “bodily
and sexual life” among Christians.
“The spectacles and obvious disputes this statement
responds to are the sideshow, not the main action,” wrote Matthew Lee
Anderson, in a Mere Orthodoxy post
about why his name would not appear among the signatories. “Those
obvious manifestations of the ‘spirit of our age’ are not the ones we
should worry about; it is those that are not obvious, the subtle
temptations that lure us in without us realizing their deadly force.”
The Nashville Statement, with its clear stances on such
topics, explicitly expands the CBMW’s central concerns beyond what it
had long been known for addressing: women’s roles in the home and the
church.
“They seem to have won the battle on women’s ordination,
at least in the Southern Baptist and Presbyterian church,” said Wendy
Alsup, who was among the female complementarian bloggers who spoke out
against CBMW’s theological emphases during last summer’s Trinity debate.
“This may be a new iteration of CBMW, but I don’t think it will define
them” in the same way as the Danvers Statement did, she said.
Though she had significant concerns about some points in the new declaration, Alsup, author of the new book Is the Bible Good For Women?, said that overall, “This is not a knee-jerk reaction to liberal ideas; this is a thoughtful and biblical statement.”
Aimee Byrd, who raised the issue of the Eternal Subordination of the Son
as it relates to complementrian theology, took issue with what the
Nashville Statement left out. Not only did it not clarify that
particular debate, she wrote,
but it doesn’t address her questions on authority and submission;
feminine and masculine stereotypes; and the relationships between men
and women outside of marriage.
The new statement comes about a year after Denny Burk, a professor at Boyce College, replaced Owen Strachan as CBMW president.
“The spirit of our age does not delight in God’s good
design of male and female. Consequently, confusion reigns over some of
the most basic questions of our humanity,” said Burk. “The aim of the
Nashville Statement is to shine a light into the darkness—to declare the
goodness of God’s design in our sexuality and in creating us as male
and female.”
 
 

NORTH CAROLINA: “JACOB’S NEW DRESS”; “GENDER EXPANSIVE” AGENDA PUSHED IN SCHOOLS TO COUNTER ALLEGED BULLYING

 http://cdn.amreading.com/wp-content/uploads/JacobsDress.jpg 
THE “WELCOMING SCHOOLS” PROGRAM 
TO COUNTER “BULLYING”
EXCEPT THE GOVERNMENT IS DOING THE BULLYING
 VIDEO:

 North Carolina School Pulls First Grade Book About Dress Wearing Boy, Called “Jacob’s New Dress”

 
NORTH CAROLINA: “JACOB’S NEW DRESS”; 

“GENDER EXPANSIVE” AGENDA PUSHED IN SCHOOLS
 Published on Aug 29, 2017

It’s
not just California pushing a transgender agenda on kindergartners.
North Carolina has a transgender agenda as well. Do you know WHAT your
child is being taught? Do you know WHY they are doing this?

EMERGENCY!: PURGE OF CONSERVATIVE SITES & PLATFORMS HAS BEGUN~SOME CENSORING TO PLEASE IRAN

EMERGENCY!: PURGE OF CONSERVATIVE SITES & PLATFORMS HAS BEGUN
 Published on Aug 29, 2017

The masters of social media are doing their best to stop the growth of the new conservative media.

 
YouTube, Twitter, Instagram censoring content 
to suit Iran’s Islamic authorities

BY ROBERT SPENCER

AIR FORCE VET SLAMS CATHOLIC PAUL RYAN FOR DEFENDING ANTIFA

 Air Force Vet Slams Paul Ryan For Defending Antifa

Air Force Vet Slams Paul Ryan For Defending Antifa

“How can you call them anything but what they are – domestic terrorists?”

BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/air-force-vet-slams-paul-ryan-for-defending-antifa/; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
An Air Force veteran has
slammed Speaker of the House Paul Ryan for defending Antifa, the violent
Alt-Left group that has been responsible for innumerable violent
assaults on Trump supporters.
Two
days after the violence in Charlottesville, Ryan posted a Facebook
update in which he lashed out at Donald Trump for saying that both sides
were responsible for violent unrest.
“There are no sides,” wrote Ryan. “There is no other argument. We will not tolerate this hateful ideology in our society.”
Ryan has failed to condemn Antifa despite the group’s many violent attacks on Trump supporters, the vast majority of whom are not neo-nazis or white supremacists.
An
anonymous Air Force veteran has responded with a powerful letter which
warned Ryan that Trump supporters were perfectly willing to vote him out
of office.
“After
all the times you’ve seen Antifa attack people who were peacefully
demonstrating, how can you call them anything but what they are –
domestic terrorists?” asked the vet.
“This
weekend in Berkeley is a classic example of the MANY times Antifa has
attacked conservatives. Why do you legitimize domestic terrorism by not
calling it what it is?” the letter continues.
The
veteran goes on to assert that Trump supporters will abandon the
Republican Party en masse if the GOP continues to undermine the MAGA
agenda.
“We are here sir, and we
are watching you. Don’t think for a moment that we the people will
continue to allow you and your ilk to lie, cheat, and steal from us.
We’re tired of it. We won’t take Antifa’s and the Alt-Left’s path and
resort to violence. No. We’ll stop opening our wallets for your
campaigns, and we’ll cast our votes elsewhere. That’s what will really
get our point across.”
“MAGA is
indeed bigger than the president, but we still love him and stand behind
him 100%. Donald Trump has become the champion of the people, people
like me. And there are tens of millions of us. Tread carefully, Mr.
Speaker,” the letter concludes.
Meanwhile,
Paul Nehlen, who is challenging Ryan in the Republican primary, called
the Speaker of the House a “coward” for failing to condemn Alt-Left
violence.
“What he is doing is
working to further divide the country so that he can keep his hands on
the levers of power. People aren’t buying what Ryan is selling in terms
of this fake narrative that there is only one side to the violence,” said Nehlen.
As we reported yesterday,
even the mainstream media is now being forced to go back on the
narrative that Antifa has the moral high ground, with both the
Washington Post and MSNBC’s Joe Scaborough denouncing the group.
 

THOSE STYLISH, BUT DEADLY “MRAPS”!: TRUMP RE-AUTHORIZES MILITARY EQUIPMENT FOR POLICE

 http://www.military-today.com/apc/maxxpro_mrap.jpg
ABOVE: THE “MRAP”
 Militarized Police & Equipment: 
Instruments Of Tyranny
by David Knight of Real News
 “The means of defense abroad have always become instruments of tyranny
at home” – James Madison. A warning unheeded as Trump resumes
militarily equipping police. Rand Paul tells us why and David Knight
gives you the background and where you can find how your police are
being militarized.
 

 TRUMP RE-AUTHORIZES MILITARY EQUIPMENT 

FOR POLICE 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

By executive order
issued under “the authority vested in [him] by the Constitution,”
Donald Trump restored the federal program whereby local and state law
enforcement can apply to receive surplus military equipment from the
U.S. Department of Defense.


In a speech delivered Monday, August 28 at the national convention of
the Fraternal Order of Police being held in Nashville, Tennessee, U.S.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed the president’s plan “to a
cheering crowd,” according to the Washington Post’s report on the attorney general’s announcement.


The pipeline of materiel from Pentagon to police precinct is known as
Department of Defense Program 1033, and it has been a fruitful bough
from which local law enforcement has eaten eagerly.

Robots, facial recognition, and drones: These are the technologically
advanced tools that used to belong to the military, but are now
commonplace in local police departments thanks to grants authorized
decades ago by the Defense Department’s 1033 program and now
reauthorized by President Trump’s latest executive order.
The current president had to use his pen to power up the program
after the previous president used his to curtail it after the protests
following the events in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2015.
Why did President Trump find it necessary to open what President
Obama had closed? There was no official declaration from the White
House, unless one counts the title of the executive order: “Presidential
Executive Order on Restoring State, Tribal, and Local Law Enforcement’s
Access to Life-Saving Equipment and Resources.”

A local Nashville television station, however, reported a partial transcript of Attorney General Sessions’ remarks, and they cast further light on the likely reasons for the restoration:

Helping law enforcement do their jobs,
helping the police get better, and celebrating the noble, honorable,
essential and challenging work of our law enforcement communities will
always be a top priority of President Trump and this Department of
Justice. We will always seek to affirm the critical role of police
officers in our society and we will not participate in anything that
would give comfort to radicals who promote agendas that preach hostility
rather than respect for police.
President Trump is serious about this
mission. He is doing all he can to restore law and order and support our
police across America. And that is why, today, I am here to announce
that President Trump is issuing an executive order that will make it
easier to protect yourselves and your communities. He is rescinding
restrictions from the prior administration that limited your agencies’
ability to get equipment through federal programs, including life saving
gear like Kevlar vests and helmets and first responder and rescue
equipment like what they’re using in Texas right now.
Some of these programs, like the
Department of Defense’s 1033 program that Congress signed into law more
than 25 years ago, have recycled more than $5.4 billion in used gear and
equipment that taxpayers had already purchased, and made it available
for your agencies to repurpose it in the fight against terrorism, crime,
and disaster relief. Equipment like helicopters and armored vehicles
are also vitally important to emergency and disaster response efforts. 
One sheriff told me earlier this year
about how, due to the prior administration’s restrictions, the federal
government made his department return an armored vehicle that can change
the dynamics of an active shooter situation. These are the types of
helmets and gear that stopped a bullet and saved the life of an officer
during the Orlando nightclub shooting. This is the type of equipment
officers needed when they pursued and ultimately killed terrorists in
San Bernardino. Studies have shown this equipment reduces crime rates,
reduces the number of assaults against police officers, and reduces the
number of complaints against police officers.
Those restrictions went too far. We will
not put superficial concerns above public safety. All you need to do is
turn on a TV right now to see that for Houstonians this isn’t about
appearances, its about getting the job done and getting everyone to
safety.

There it is in the words of the attorney general. The reasons local
law enforcement needs leftover military war fighting equipment is to
keep you safe. Safety.
The arguably oldest exchange ever conducted between the governed and
the governors: The latter promise safety if the former will purchase it
with liberty.
One federal lawmaker mentioned that dangerous and often deadly deal
(liberty for safety) in a statement issued just minutes after AG
Sessions revealed the restoration of the 1033 program.
In a press release announcing legislation aimed in limiting the scope
of the Pentagon-to-police distribution deal, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
said:

Americans must never sacrifice their
liberty for an illusive and dangerous —or false — security. I disagree
with Attorney General Sessions on the Department of Defense’s 1033
program. The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an
unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. 
It is one thing for federal officials to
work with local authorities to reduce or solve crime, but it is another
for them to subsidize militarization. 
I will oppose this move by the Attorney
General and the administration, and I will continue to fight for civil
liberties and criminal justice reform, which will all be major issues
this fall. 

Defense Department grants of military materiel to police departments
are the opposite of the movement sponsored for decades now by The John
Birch Society to “Support Your Local Police.” Police who receive
vehicles, surveillance equipment, weapons, training, and tear gas from
the Pentagon are hardly local, and when there is a conflict of interest
between those being served (the community) and those providing the
powerful weapons, the people are all too likely to be ignored in favor
of the givers of the free stuff: the federal government.
Jim Fitzgerald worked for eight years as a vice and narcotics squad
detective in Newark, New Jersey, before joining the staff of The John
Birch Society, and he is currently the point man for the organization’s
“Support Your Local Police” initiative.
In an interview with The New American conducted in 2014,
Fitzgerald said of the military-grade equipment being bought by local
law enforcement with DHS grant money, “The only reason to have this
equipment is to use it,” and it is likely it would be used against local
citizens who have risen up and created some sort of civil disorder.
Paradoxically, the police’s push to be prepared and trained to quell
civil unrest is fomenting the feelings that could create such an
uprising. Americans are tired of reading reports of law enforcement
behaving less like the police and more like the gestapo, less like
servants of the law and more like servants of the state, deployed with
the training, technology, tactics, and weapons capable of enforcing the
increasingly unconstitutional edicts of the ruling regime.
On January 20, 2017, Donald J. Trump placed his hand on a Bible and
swore to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United
States.” Where in that document is the president granted — as he claims
he is in the first sentence of his executive order — the power to, as
Sessions worded it, “restore law and order and support police across
America”?

WILL JOEL OSTEEN OFFER HELP TO HOUSTON FLOOD VICTIMS OR KEEP HIS LAKEWOOD MEGA-CHURCH DOORS SHUT?

 FALSE PREACHER SHOWS NO MERCY!
WILL JOEL OSTEEN OFFER HELP TO HOUSTON FLOOD VICTIMS OR KEEP HIS CHURCH DOORS SHUT? 
 Published on Aug 28, 2017

Joel Osteen in lieu of opening to doors to his church to help those in need, he took to Twitter.

 Megachurch Pastor Responds To Criticism For Not Opening Doors To Harvey Victims
Published on Aug 29, 2017

Joel
Osteen, the owner of a Houston megachurch, has responded to an
onslaught of criticism after the pastor allegedly refused to open his
massive Lakewood Church to those seeking shelter from Hurricane Harvey.
Late Monday, Osteen said in a statement that he never shut his doors to
those in need. He also shared pictures that appear to show that the
church’s parking garage and surrounding area had experienced flooding,
in an attempt to back up claims that the church was “inaccessible.”
However, several videos posted on Twitter seem to show the location,
which seats thousands, unscathed by flooding.

 PROOF LAKEWOOD CHURCH NOT FLOODED:
Lakewood church rests on the highest elevation in the city so I don’t buy the lie that it was flooded.
 HURRICANE HARVEY : Joel Osteen Won’t Open Mega Church To Help Flood Victims in Houston, Texas! 
Published on Aug 29, 2017

One
of the most well known, and wealthiest church leaders in the world,
Joel Osteen, is not openning his Houston, Texas based Mega Church,
LakeWood Church, towards helping displaced flood victims in Hurricane
Harvey.

Update: They are getting ready to finally taking people in. YAY Internet and putting pressure on places where it belongs!

 

WHY DID DEMOCRAT MAYOR ORDER HOUSTON, TEXAS STAND DOWN DURING HURRICANE CATASTROPHE, DEFYING TRUMP & GOVERNOR ABBOTT?

 Why Did Democrat Mayor Order Houston Stand Down During Hurricane Catastrophe?
 http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/47/52/05/10396023/3/premium_landscape.jpg
 Americans Are Dying After Trump Hating Houston Mayor Defies President’s Hurricane Warnings 
 Published on Aug 28, 2017

Americans Are Dying After Trump-Hating Houston Mayor Defies President’s Hurricane Warnings

Houston
Mayor Sylvester Turner is under heavy fire after he decided to use
Hurricane Harvey as a political weapon to make President Donald Trump
look bad. Turner, a hardcore liberal Democrat, reacted to the
president’s dire hurricane warnings, telling Southeast Texans to
evacuate, by making his own hurricane statement, and now, Americans are
dying. You’ll be completely shocked by what this idiot mayor told the
citizens of Houston, proving Democrats can never agree with Trump, even
if lives are on the line.
Houston Mayor Sam Turner hates
President Donald Trump so much he threw caution to the wind and tweeted
out statements about Hurricane Harvey to downplay what the president had
previously advised. On August 25th, it was quite evident that what
faced Southeast Texas was a wall of water of biblical proportions,
coming straight for them.

Trump immediately engaged his
administration to start emergency procedures. The president tweeted at
8:46 am on August 25th, “I have spoken w/ @GovAbbott of Texas and
@LouisianaGov Edwards. Closely monitoring #HurricaneHarvey developments & here to assist as needed,” followed by this tweet, “I encourage everyone in the path of #HurricaneHarvey to heed the advice & orders of their local and state officials.”

The
GOP Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, was crystal clear in his message on
August 25th, “I would urge everybody who has the possibility to
consider evacuating as soon as possible.” Seeing the “Republican
response” by Trump and Abbott, Mayor Turner played Russian roulette with
the citizens of Houston, tweeting, “Ignore unfounded, unsourced weather
predictions that are frightening Houstonians, Get info from trusted
outlets.”
At that point, everyone who had listened to the news knew a
hurricane worse than Katrina was headed straight for Houston, but it
mattered little to Turner, who found an opportunity to bash the
president more important than the safety of his citizens. Unfortunately,
that’s not all.

At the request of the Governor of Texas, I have
signed the Disaster Proclamation, which unleashes the full force of
government help!
While Trump was signing a national disaster
proclamation, Turner doubled down and tweeted, “Please think twice
before trying to leave Houston en masse. No evacuation orders have been
issued for the city. #Harvey.”
Turner himself was responsible for issuing the order of evacuation for
Houston, but instead of doing that, he tweeted out a politicized
message, and you guessed it, he never ordered evacuations. By the time
Harvey hit Houston, it was too late.
Thanks to Turner’s political
game playing, American citizens who could have gotten out remained
trapped. This includes the most vulnerable; namely, the disabled, the
elderly, and the kids. Even the local media could not ignore what Turner
did, or rather, what he refused to do. In a Texas Tribune article
titled, “Ahead of Hurricane Harvey, officials send Texans mixed messages
on evacuations,” they report, “Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner told
people living in the state’s largest city not to leave, citing ‘chaotic’
traffic from the 2005 evacuations ahead of Hurricane Rita.”

So,
the question becomes, was Turner’s blatant politicized reaction to
Hurricane Harvey something he did on his own or was this a larger
narrative that the leftists are plotting against Trump? There’s no doubt
Turner got his marching orders from the Democrats, who are hoping to
blame American deaths from a natural disaster on Trump. They’re hoping
for mass casualties like Hurricane Katrina, and they will then build a
bogus narrative to make it appear like Trump caused the whole thing.

So
far, the New York Times is reporting five are dead in Houston. That
number will only grow. There were adequate warnings to mobilize
emergency efforts to evacuate those most at risk, and Turner decided to
ignore them. Since Hurricane Katrina, emergency services have trained
for such a disaster as Harvey. But, when Democrats are more concerned
with politicizing events in a “gotcha game” with Trump, American lives
are expendable. This is how the globalists roll, but they are in for a
big surprise. Americans won’t be fooled by this game playing. We demand
answers from Turner and his Democratic masters. Blood is on their hands.
They must be held accountable for their crimes.

 WHY DID DEMOCRAT MAYOR ORDER HOUSTON, TEXAS STAND DOWN DURING HURRICANE CATASTROPHE?
 Despite governor’s recommendations, 
Democrat officials ignored him
BY ADAN SALAZAR
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

Democrat Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner refused to issue
evacuation orders for the city’s 2.3 million residents, even after
Governor Greg Abbott had advised Texans to do so.

Despite Governor Abbott issuing a state of disaster
declaration last Wednesday for Harris and 29 other Texas counties,
Mayor Turner did not warn, inform or urge citizens to leave the area,
parts of which have now been catastrophically devastated by over 30
inches of rain.

On Friday, Governor Greg Abbott advised,
“Even if an evacuation order hasn’t been issued by your local official,
if you’re in an area between Corpus Christi and Houston, you need to
strongly consider evacuating.”
“If I were living in the Houston region, as I once did, I would decide to head to areas north of there,” he added.

On the other hand, “Mr. Turner, a Democrat, and other local officials
urged residents to stay in their homes as Hurricane Harvey, which has
since downgraded to a tropical storm, approached Houston on Friday,”
reported The Wall Street Journal.
On Friday afternoon, Mayor Turner reiterated that no evacuation order had been issued for Houston.

Photos
from Houston, the fourth most populous U.S. city, show the destructive
aftermath of days of rain, daring water rescues, entire highways
underwater and flooded out neighborhood streets.

On Friday ahead of the heavy rains, Harris County Judge Ed Emmett said, “The safest thing is to stay where you are and ride out the storm… We don’t anticipate any kind of massive evacuation.”
Emmett,
a Republican top emergency official, later called criticism of the
decision not to evacuate “outrageous,” and claimed residents would have
laughed if they’d have issued the order.
“To suggest we should
have evacuated two million people is an outrageous statement,” Emmett
said. “What we’re facing now is an effort to respond to a tragedy… We’ve
never seen water like this before.”
The judge went on to say an evacuation would have been “totally nonsensical.”
“If
we had gone out three days before and said, ‘we want four million
people to leave Harris County,’ that would have been a totally
nonsensical thing to do,” he stated.
Hurricane
Harvey has now been blamed for five deaths in the Houston area, and is
the most major test the Trump administration has faced.
On Monday, city officials finally ordered mandatory and voluntary evacuations from certain areas.
Considering
the Democrat playbook admittedly calls for “not letting a serious
crisis go to waste,” some speculate Houstonians were sacrificed to make
Trump look bad.

Was the mayor just negligent, or was this a stunt designed to embarrass Trump?

 

NETANYAHU TELLS UN TOP DOG THAT IRAN IS BUILDING MISSILE SITES IN SYRIA, LEBANON TO STRIKE ISRAEL

NETANYAHU TELLS UN TOP DOG THAT IRAN IS BUILDING MISSILE SITES IN SYRIA, LEBANON 
TO STRIKE ISRAEL
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

Given the UN’s track record regarding Israel, upon hearing this news, Guterres could probably scarcely contain his glee.

“Netanyahu tells UN chief Iran building missile production sites in Syria, Lebanon,” by Itamar Eichner, Ynet News, August 28, 2017:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told United Nations
Secretary-General António Guterres Monday that Iran is building sites to produce precision-guided missiles in Syria and Lebanon, with the aim of
using them against Israel.

At the start of a meeting in Jerusalem, Netanyahu accused Iran of
turning Syria into a “base of military entrenchment as part of its
declared goal to eradicate Israel.”

“It is also building sites to produce precision-guided missiles
towards that end, in both Syria and in Lebanon. This is something Israel
cannot accept. This is something the UN should not accept,” Netanyahu
said as the two spoke during a joint press conference.

Iran, Israel’s arch-enemy, has been Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad’s staunchest backer and has provided militia fighters and
terror groups such as Hezbollah to help him in Syria’s civil war.

The prime minister lamented its “troubled relationship” with the UN,
decrying what he described as an “absurd obsession with Israel,” which
uses “flagrantly discriminatory tactics. You don’t have to be the
Israeli prime minister to understand that, and I think people of good
faith and common sense understand that.”

Netanyahu criticized the UN, saying that it fails to check
Palestinian hate speech, “absurdly denies” Jewish connections to
Jerusalem and has not stopped arms from reaching Hezbollah in Lebanon.

He was referring to a recent UN cultural agency resolution about
Jerusalem that angered Israel after it failed to acknowledge Jewish ties
with the city and recently denied Israeli sovereignty over the city.

Israel also criticized the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon, or
UNIFIL, for being too soft on Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces in the
border area. The US recently backed Israel in its claims and suggested
that more responsibilities be demanded of the group to curb Hezbollah’s
activities….

AFTER CHARLOTTESVILLE, UN DEMANDS U.S. QUASH FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION

 http://bptnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/first2.jpg
AFTER CHARLOTTESVILLE, UN DEMANDS U.S. QUASH FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION
BY ALEX NEWMAN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

While some of its leading member regimes behead Christians and chop body organs out of political prisoners,
the United Nations issued an “early warning” to the United States and
demanded illegal restrictions on free speech. As part of its decision,
the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), a
body that includes communists and Islamists, lambasted the United States
and President Donald Trump without actually mentioning his name. But
critics were quick to ridicule the UN outfit amid growing calls for the
U.S. government to withdraw from the widely criticized “dictators club.”
   

In a press release
blasting the United States for its alleged “failure to unequivocally
reject racist violent events,” the UN CERD provided concrete evidence
that it has either been watching too much “fake news,” or that it is
willing to lie in order to advance its fanatical anti-American,
anti-freedom agenda. Not that it should matter to the UN, which has a
charter specifically prohibiting involvement in nations’ domestic
affairs, but President Trump repeatedly condemned the Ku Klux Klan,
neo-Nazis, white supremacists, racists, and others, along with the
violent and terroristic communist forces that reportedly clashed with
them in Virginia this month.

“Racism is evil,” Trump declared after the violence in
Charlottesville. “And those who cause violence in its name are criminals
and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other
hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.”
Trump also denounced the violent “Antifa” extremists on the other side
of the confrontation who, ironically, share much in common with their totalitarian-minded National Socialist nemeses.

Perhaps the UN never got the memo about Trump, though. “We are
alarmed by the racist demonstrations, with overtly racist slogans,
chants and salutes by white nationalists, neo-Nazis, and the Ku Klux
Klan, promoting white supremacy and inciting racial discrimination and
hatred,” complained radical left-wing activist Anastasia Crickley, the
chairperson of UN CERD, in a widely publicized statement. “We call on
the U.S. Government to investigate thoroughly the phenomenon of racial
discrimination targeting, in particular, people of African descent,
ethnic or ethno-religious minorities, and migrants.”

Beyond simply condemning speech, the UN also believes the U.S.
government must wage a propaganda campaign to promote “tolerance” and
“diversity,” two terms that globalists and leftists have weaponized to
undermine liberty and promote open borders, globalism, perversion, and
hate. According to the UN document, U.S. authorities must not only 
“unequivocally and unconditionally reject and condemn racist hate speech
and racist crimes in Charlottesville and throughout the country,” they
must also “actively contribute to the promotion of understanding,
tolerance, and diversity between ethnic groups, and acknowledge their
contribution to the history and diversity of the United States of
America.”

Perhaps even more alarming than the dictators club’s brazen meddling
in U.S. affairs, though, was the UN’s hostile assault on the
constitutionally protected, God-given rights of free speech, free
expression, freedom of thought, and freedom of assembly. In multiple
statements plastered across the UN’s websites, the global outfit —
dominated by unfree regimes and even mass-murdering tyrants — attacked
the First Amendment head on. The statements demanded that the U.S.
government restrict free speech and association, saying it called on
authorities “to provide the necessary guarantees so that such rights are
not misused to promote racist hate speech.”

As the UN knows, or should know, the U.S. Constitution that
authorizes the U.S. government to exist in the first place specifically
prohibits any compliance with the UN’s outrageous demand. The First
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.” In other words, the UN is
calling on U.S. authorities to violate the supreme law of the land to
enforce an illegitimate and unconstitutional UN “convention.”  

Even the increasingly rogue U.S. Supreme Court has consistently
ruled, including as recently as this summer, that even the most vile
forms of speech are protected under the Constitution. “Speech that
demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age,
disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest
boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to
express the thought that we hate,” wrote Justice Samuel Alito in Matal v. Tam, a case dealing with the Washington Redskins, another target of UN hatred and illegal meddling by a coalition including numerous mass murderers and tyrants.  

Free speech is so universally accepted in America that even rogue
radicals on the high court who pay virtually no attention to the
Constitution have concluded the same thing. “A law found to discriminate
based on viewpoint is an egregious form of content discrimination,
which is presumptively unconstitutional,” wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy,
the same official who helped invent a “right” to a “homosexual
marriage” without any basis in law. “The First Amendment does not
entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our
reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open
discussion in a democratic society.”

Ironically, while the UN council demands the shredding of the U.S.
Constitution that has protected the God-given rights of Americans
relatively well for more than two centuries, the members of the UN CERD
mostly come from poor, unfree nations where corruption, crime, violence,
hatred, racism, intolerance, oppression, tyranny, and other social ills
are endemic and always have been. For instance, the kangaroo committee purporting to sit in judgment over the United States
consists of, among others, Communists and Islamists, along with a
Soviet-trained Russian agent as its “rapporteur.” Seriously. That such
forces would seek to undermine American freedom is no surprise.

The 18-member UN committee even includes a Yemhelhe Mohamed from
Mauritania, an Islamist African country where mostly blacks were (and
still are) openly enslaved mostly by Muslim Arabs and Berbers — a
practice that was not even criminalized until a mere 10 years ago. Other
nations represented include Communist China, where the brutal
dictatorship has murdered more people than any other in human history,
and where the ongoing cultural genocide of Tibet is well underway. Also
on the list: Algeria, Burkina-Faso, Togo, Pakistan, Turkey, Brazil,
Mauritius, and Guatemala. 

According to the UN’s bombastic statements condemning and warning the
United States, the UN outfit was acting under what is known as the
“early warning and urgent action procedure.” Citing the largely
engineered violence in Charlottesville, the UN outfit claimed its
warning was “aimed at preventing existing situations escalating into
conflicts and urgent procedures to respond to problems requiring
immediate attention to prevent or limit the scale or number of serious
violations of the Convention.”

Other nations scolded under the mechanism in recent years include
war-ravaged Burundi, Iraq, Nigeria, and Sudan. Also on the list was the
Ivory Coast, where
jihadists backed by UN military power overthrew the elected Christian
president, butchered thousands of Christians with machetes, and
installed a globalist Muslim central banker in the presidency
.
Neither Russia nor China, where ethnic minorities often face fierce
government persecution, were on the UN’s list. Nor were the Sunni Arab
regimes that consider converting to Christianity a capital offense.
Nothing has been said by the panel about UN schools caught brainwashing Muslim children to wage violent jihad against Jews, either; or on the escalating crisis of UN troops raping mostly black children around the world with total impunity.

The latest UN screed demonizing the United States and demanding
unconstitutional attacks on constitutionally guaranteed human rights is
merely one example among many. During the Obama administration, the
dictators club became increasingly bold, loudly demanding everything from the nationalization of police and propaganda in school textbooks to unconstitutional “robust gun control” and even a federal ban on spanking children. More recently, the UN even claimed repealing ObamaCare was a violation of “international law.” Of course, all of the UN’s demands represent flagrant violations of the U.S. Constitution.

Much of the UN’s extremism in attacking the United States and its
constitutionally limited form of government has been justified by citing
various UN schemes and agreements that globalists like to refer to as
“international law.” Especially prominent is the UN “Universal
Declaration of Human Rights,” a list of revocable privileges that is essentially the opposite of the God-given rights enshrined in America’s founding documents.
For perspective, simply consider Article 29 of the UDHR, which states,
among other ludicrous claims, that the UN-approved “rights and freedoms”
may “in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of
the United Nations.”

It is becoming increasingly clear to Americans that the dictators club has a totalitarian agenda for humanity, and that it must be stopped.
Trump has proposed drastic cuts to the UN’s budget. But unfortunately,
that will not be nearly enough. As prominent conservative pundit Glenn
Beck declared this week on his program, “it’s time to shutter the United Nations, close it up … stop paying for it.” Numerous other prominent Americans have made similar calls. And with the dictators club viciously maligning Trump and the nation that elected him to the presidency, critics of the UN hope the time has finally come to get the United States out of the UN, and the UN out of the United States.

Legislation to do just that, the American Sovereignty Restoration
Act, or H.R. 193, has already been introduced in Congress. It is
currently sitting in the House Foreign Affairs Committee. All that is
needed to destroy the dictators club and its lawless attacks against
America is sufficient public pressure on the American people’s elected
representatives. If there is one thing virtually all Americans remain
united on, it is the cherished value of free speech. Perhaps the UN’s
shameful attack on this fundamental human right will be enough to get
Congress and Trump to finally act against the lawless dictators club.

Related articles:

United Nations Exploits Pseudo-“Human Rights” to Attack U.S.

UN “Human Rights” Council Now Officially Controlled by Dictators

After Equating Trump With ISIS, UN Freaks Out Over His Victory

Bill to Get U.S. Out of UN Introduced in New Congress

After Charlottesville, Globalist Rice Smears Patriots as Racists

UN Demands “Robust Gun Control” After Orlando Terror

UN: Jail Parents Who Spank Their Children

UN Announces Support for Obama’s Nationalization of Police

After Dallas Cop Killings, UN Touts “Black Lives Matter”

After Garner Death, UN Fomenting Racial Strife in America

UN-backed Forces Slaughter Christians in Ivory Coast

UN Speaks Out Against School Textbooks in America

UN LGBT Czar on Indoctrinating Children: “The Younger the Better”

UN Human Rights Council: Is Washington “Redskins” Appropriate?

U.S. Independence Attacked as Never Before by UN Interdependence

PRAISE GOD!: SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR CUTS ALL FUNDING OF STATE ABORTION CLINICS

 https://www.fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/henry-mcmaster.jpg
 http://img.theepochtimes.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2017/08/25/2017-08-25T203753Z_1_LYNXNPED7O1NR_RTROPTP_4_SOUTH-CAROLINA-ABORTION.jpg
 https://www.stripes.com/polopoly_fs/1.450901.1485423738!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_900/image.jpg
SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR CUTS ALL FUNDING 
OF STATE ABORTION CLINICS
BY DAVE BOHON
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster (shown) issued an executive order
August 25 directing state agencies to cut off all funding to abortion
clinics in the state. The order directs the agencies to cease providing
both state and federal dollars via grants, contracts, state-administered
federal funds, or “any other form,” to all clinics performing the
murderous procedure.


Additionally, McMaster directed South Carolina’s Department of Health
and Human Services to seek waivers from the federal government allowing
the state to exclude abortion clinics from its Medicaid provider
network.


“There are a variety of agencies, clinics, and medical entities in
South Carolina that receive taxpayer funding to offer important women’s
health and family planning services without performing abortions,” Gov.
McMaster said in a statement. “Taxpayer dollars must not directly or
indirectly subsidize abortion providers like Planned Parenthood.”

Charleston, South Carolina’s Post and Courier newspaper
reported that three clinics in the state “offer elective abortions in
South Carolina, but only one of them is a Planned Parenthood clinic, in
Columbia.” The newspaper added that “federal law already prohibits
Medicaid money from being used to pay for abortions, with exceptions for
cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.”

Planned Parenthood responded to the directive with postured outrage.
“Today’s executive order issued by Governor McMaster hurts South
Carolinians in the name of politics,” said Jenny Black, a spokesperson
for Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, which administers the abortion
giant’s South Carolina franchise. “While he throws women under the bus
to score political points, Planned Parenthood South Atlantic will
continue
to focus on providing the wide-range of accessible, affordable
health care services that our patients, and his constituents, rely on.
We will not stop fighting to protect our patients’ access to health
care.”

Similarly, Ann Warner of Columbia, South Carolina’s Women’s Rights
and Empowerment Network issued a statement declaring that “we cannot sit
quietly and allow this to happen.
We need to speak out. We need to look
beyond political debates and remember that real people in our
communities are going to get hurt if this executive order is allowed to
stand.”

On the pro-life side, Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony
List thanked Gov. McMaster “for acting to ensure taxpayers fund
comprehensive primary and preventative care for women and families, not
abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood.”

___________________________________________________

 Governor’s order says funds won’t go to 
abortion providers
 

“THEY DON’T SPEAK ENGLISH”: FIVE YEAR OLD CHRISTIAN GIRL IN UK PLACED IN FOSTER CARE WITH NIQAB WEARING MUSLIMS~FORCED TO SPEAK ARABIC, OBSERVE MUSLIM DIET RESTRICTIONS, SHAMED ABOUT CHRISTIAN BELIEFS

“THEY DON’T SPEAK ENGLISH”: FIVE YEAR OLD CHRISTIAN GIRL IN UK PLACED IN FOSTER CARE 
WITH NIQAB WEARING MUSLIMS 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 

“And more recently the girl told her that ‘Christmas and Easter are
stupid’ and that ‘European women are stupid and alcoholic’…the child was
‘very distressed’ and claimed the foster carer had removed her
Christian cross and encouraged her to learn Arabic.”

Imagine what the outcry would be if a Muslim child were placed in a
Christian family that denigrated her Muslim beliefs. And that would
never happen in Britain or anywhere else in the West. But this incident
is all in a day’s work in shattered, staggering, dhimmi Britain, in
which the May government is so bent on appeasing Islamic supremacists
and jihadis that it is willingly sacrificing non-Muslim children to the
chimera of a harmonious multicultural future, a vision that will
dissolve in blood.

“Christian girl, 5, is forced into foster care with Burka-wearing
Muslim carers who ‘took away her crucifix and stopped her eating
bacon,’” by Fiona Parker and Martin Robinson, Mailonline, August 28, 2017 (thanks to Blah):

A white five-year-old girl was forced to live in Muslim
foster homes where nobody spoke English and her carers took away her
Christian cross and encouraged her to learn Arabic, it emerged today.

The child, who is a native English speaker, spent the past six months
in two Muslim households after being placed into foster care in Tower
Hamlets, east London.

Local authority reports describe how the little girl sobbed and
begged not to be returned to her niqab-wearing carer’s home, telling a
social worker: ‘They don’t speak English.’

Her mother offered to send her back from a home visit with her
favourite meal – spaghetti carbonara – but the girl said it was banned
because it contained bacon – which Muslims do not eat.

And more recently the girl told her that ‘Christmas and Easter are
stupid’ and that ‘European women are stupid and alcoholic’, according to
The Times.

The reports detail how the child was ‘very distressed’ and claimed
the foster carer had removed her Christian cross and encouraged her to
learn Arabic.

The two placements were made by the scandal-hit Tower Hamlets borough council against the wishes of the girl’s family.

Local authorities are required to give due consideration to a child’s
religion, racial origin and cultural and linguistic background’ when
placing them into a foster home.

The girl’s mother is said to be horrified by the circumstances her daughter has been placed in.

A friend told the newspaper: ‘This is a five-year-old white girl. She
was born in this country, speaks English as her first language, loves
football, holds a British passport and was christened in a church.

‘She’s already suffered the huge trauma of being forcibly separated
from her family. She needs surroundings in which she’ll feel secure.
Instead, she’s trapped in a world where everything feels foreign and
unfamiliar. That’s really scary for a young child.’

The girl lived with her first carer, who is believed to have worn a
niqab outside the family home, for four months. Her current carer wears a
burka, which covers her face entirely, when she is out in public with
the child….

_______________________________________________________

 Christian Child Forced Into Muslim Foster Care
 Published on Aug 28, 2017

Christian
children in the UK are now being forced into Muslim foster care homes
under the guise of “diversity” with the true intent being destruction of
the West and free society.

 MPs’ anger as Christian girl is forced into Muslim foster care: Demands for inquiry over five-year old girl
Published on Aug 28, 2017

MPs’ anger as Christian girl is forced into Muslim foster care: Demands for inquiry over five-year-old’s plight.
MPs
demanded an urgent review last night after it emerged a ‘distressed’
Christian five-year-old had been forced to live with Muslim foster
carers.
The Government was urged to examine the case, which has seen a
scandal-hit council place the girl in two Muslim households in the past
six months, against the wishes of her family.
Social workers said
the child sobbed and begged not to be returned to one foster mother –
who wore a face veil in public – as the household spoke no English.
She
also claimed her foster carer had said she should learn Arabic and had
taken away her Christian cross necklace, The Times reported.
The
child – who is white, was born in Britain and has a UK passport – was
allegedly not allowed to eat a spaghetti carbonara prepared by her birth
mother because it contained bacon.
She was said to have told her
biological mother ‘European women are stupid and alcoholic’ and
‘Christmas and Easter are stupid’, prompting questions over cultural
attitudes in her foster homes.
Her current foster mother wears a
burka in public which completely hides her face. The placements were
arranged by Tower Hamlets council in east London, where children’s
services were criticised by Ofsted earlier this year.
Inspectors
rated the council’s children’s services ‘inadequate’ and said there was
an ‘entrenched culture of non-compliance with basic social work
standards’.
Last night, MPs said the five-year-old’s apparent
distress over her foster homes raised disturbing questions over the
council’s decision to place an English-speaking Christian child in
Muslim households.
Robert Halfon, chairman of the Commons education
committee, urged the Government to examine the case and establish
whether the issue was widespread within the foster care system.
He said the child should ‘have the right to be placed with people who reflect her heritage and background’.
Philip
Hollobone, Tory MP for Kettering, said: ‘What if it were a Muslim girl
being looked after by a Christian couple and they insisted she deny her
Muslim upbringing and become a Christian – how would the Muslim
community feel about that?
‘It seems to me the original heritage of
the child ought to be respected by the foster family, whatever their own
faith happens to be. The council needs to review this case urgently …
All religions should be treated equally and respected in the same way.’
Andrew
Bridgen, Tory MP for North West Leicestershire, added: ‘This just feels
wrong. This is the wrong decision for the long-term welfare of the
child.
‘My constituents will wonder what world they are living in, in
Tower Hamlets … Someone needs to take a look at this. Imagine the
outcry from the Muslim community if this had been a Muslim child adopted
by a white Christian family.’
Former justice minister Shailesh Vara,
Tory MP for North West Cambridgeshire, said the decision was
‘completely wrong’, adding: ‘The local authority should have ensured
that in placing the child in a foster home her religion and cultural
background would be totally respected.
Tower Hamlets council was
criticised only months ago by inspectors who found children were left in
‘situations of harm’ for too long.
Its children’s services
department was branded ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted in April. In their report,
inspectors warned there were ‘widespread and serious failures’ which
had left children in ‘neglectful and abusive situations’ for too long.
They
said chief executive Will Tuckley and the department director Debbie
Jones had ‘insufficient scrutiny’, meaning they ‘did not know about the
extent of the failures to protect children’. The watchdog’s findings
were so concerning that following its investigation in January,
immediate action was needed in many cases to ensure children were safe.
Inspectors were also forced to order an urgent review into a number of areas, including private fostering arrangements.
They found superficial assessments failed to consider whether children had been trafficked or abandoned, and basic safeguard

 
Christian 5 Year-Old Girl Forced into Muslim Foster Care Has Cross Removed, Told to Learn Arabic 
Published on Aug 29, 2017
The
child, who is a native English speaker, spent the past six months in
two Muslim households after being placed into foster care in Tower
Hamlets, east London. She was forced to live in Muslim foster
homes where nobody spoke English and her carers took away her Christian
cross and encouraged her to learn Arabic, according to The Times. Local
authority reports describe how the little girl sobbed and begged not to
be returned to her niqab-wearing carer’s home, telling a social worker:
‘They don’t speak English.’ The reports detail how
the child was ‘very distressed’ and claimed the foster carer had removed
her Christian cross and encouraged her to learn Arabic. The girl told
her mother Christmas and Easter are ‘stupid’ and European women are
alcoholics. The child, who is a native English speaker, also
refused to take back her favourite meal – spaghetti carbonara – because
it contained bacon – which Muslims do not eat. The girl’s mother is said to be horrified by the circumstances her daughter has been placed in. A
friend told the newspaper: ‘This is a five-year-old girl. She was born
in this country, speaks English as her first language, loves football,
holds a British passport and was christened in a church. ‘She’s
already suffered the huge trauma of being forcibly separated from her
family. She needs surroundings in which she’ll feel secure. Instead,
she’s trapped in a world where everything feels foreign and unfamiliar.
That’s really scary for a young child.’
1 2 3 7