Prophecies, Visions and Dreams: Empty Distractions

Our modern "prophets" who have visions and dreams don't seem to ubject them to much critical scrutiny. I suspect that most of these "prophecies" are simply irrelevant or superfluous or just plain meaningless. A dream about almost being scammed by an evil person doesn't require a dream to teach us not to trust everybody. Perhaps the individual could benefit from that kind of reminder but as a message to the body of Christ we have plenty of warning in scripture against evil seducers.

And what could possibly be the importance of the message that "God is going to save" a prominent public figure? If it were true why would it benefit us to know it in advance? If it happens Christians will certainly rejoice, but beyond that it's not a message we need to hear. And it's probably false but will we ever find out?

Many such "prophecies" are empty of meaning like this, either "messages" we don't need because we have better versions of them in the Bible, or messages we don't need because, well, we don't need them, they are utterly irrelevant to the life of the body of Christ. There are an awful lot of these "prophets" these days, prophesying empty nonsense which is at best a distraction from the Christian life we should be leading.

I just saw a video by Jonathan Cahn about a different prophecy than the one in The Harbinger. In this one he points out correspondences he's found between King Ahab and Bill Clinton. I gather there are more such correspondences than he described in this video that he'll get to in another video.

Again, even if these correspondences were true what would be the point of our knowing them? I defended Cahn's original discovery of correspondences between events in Isaiah 9 and events in New York City connected with the attack on the WTC. They were pretty uncanny corespondences and the message is clear: Israel didn't take God's warning of judgment through the destruction of their trees and bulidings and America didn't take God's warning in the attack on the WTC.

But I already knew the attack on the WTC was God's judgment, at least a warning of greater judgment to come, and it's qjuite apparent that the nation did not take it that way and did not repent, just as Israel didn't as reported in Isaiah 9. So now I'm thinking that despite the uncanniness of the correspondences they are ultimately meaningless. We know all we need to know from the scriptures and the prophetic imagery added nothing. And that earlier prophetic message was uncanny, in a way this current one probably isn't because this one has way too many variables, most of which probably show no similarities whatever. In any case, as with most of today's prophecies, this one hits me as empty, a distraction. God gave prophecies in the Bible to warn His people, or comfort them. We have the scripture which is ample warning and ample comfort in every possible situation. The prophecies, even if true, are redundant and unnecessary. That's not how God works

Cahn and other "prophets" nevertheless do often give sound biblical messages apart from their prophecies. It's a puzzle that they fall for their own visions.

The Reality of Demons

We know, he said, that there are no witches. Witches don't exist, we know they are not real. This as said by Glenn Loury, whose podcasts I enjoy. He's an intellectual, a thinker, he's good at it, I like most of what he has to say too. I suppose I might have guessed that he held this opinion, but hearing him say it provoked, oh dear, another blog post.

It's only what everybody with any claim to rationality thinks of course, so goes the conceit. I used to think it myself, before I became a Christian. What changed my mind was having actual experiences of the supernatural demonic world. This was in the couple of years leading up to my becoming a Christian, when I was dabbling in the occult and discovered its reality in some rather scary ways. The Bible mentions witches and sorcerers and describes Jesus setting people free of demons that had possessed them, so many people believe in such things on faith because they believe in the Bible. although without any personal experience. "Faith is the evidence of things unseen" says scripture, and after all, believing the gospel of salvation through Christ's death on the cross is believing in the supernatural, so believing in angels and demons naturally follows.

But sometimes I wish someone like Loury would get his arrogant certainty overtorned by the appearance of an actual demon. Would it be wrong to make that a prayer, Lord? I don't want to scare the man, I just want him to know that he's wrong. Hm, I do pray it Lord, I think the more we all know about the reality the better, especially these days when the ARapture followed by the Tribulation period seems to be about to burst upon the world any minute.

Oh yes witches exist. Witches are people who have learned something about how to manipulate supernatural power. Today's witches may be naive, think they are dealing with impersonal forces in the universe and don't know they are dealing with demons who are the source of such powers. They may think they are using such powers for good, to help humanity, and don't know that they are the tools of the demons rather than the other wayh around, and that demons are malevolent beings. There have always been witches who know what they are dealing with too, though, and some for evil rther than good, such as Alister Crowley. Also, Shamans are people who consciously work with demons.

So perhaps it comes down to the question of the reality of demons. Below is a list off the top of my head of some exmples of demonic activity that I suppose will all be denied by the self-proclaimed Rational People, but might be helpful for some others. (I'm thinking of the people who know it's all real but have nonbibiical ideas about what it's all about, such as tghe spooky late-night radio show "Coast to Coast" where all sorts of paranormal phenomena are discussed and taken seriously, including witches, but in fanciful ways the demons themselves must be teaching them.) Anyway, here's my quick list. There may be different kinds of supernatural beings but all the Bible mentions are angels and fallen angels or demons so I stick to that.

Hamlet didn't really talk to his dead father, he was talking with a demon impersonation of his father.
Ghosts are demonic impersonationsof dad people, perhaps people they had actually possessed in life.
UFO phenomena are the work of demons
The apparitions of Mary are demonic impersonations.
High ranking demons or Satah himself may impersonate jesus Christ.
"Prophets" today who have visions of Christ are being deceived by demons.
People who don't believe in demons or wtchcraft think the Harry Potter stories are harmless fiction The demons may do as much damage through people who deny their existence as through those who believe in them because such people promote such things as the Harry Potter series that can seduce children into dabbling with the occult.

Some Recent Discussions of the Problems with the Vaccines (UPDATE, removed one)

UPDATE: When I posted this I hadnt heard the whole first discussion by Dr.T and Dr. P and now that I have I find it going off into some -- odd? -- nutty? -- territory. So I've taken it down. For all I know there's something to what they are talking about but I think there are better sources so I've taken it down. It's called Critically Thinking, on April 30, if anyone wants to go find it.

Also want to mention Tucker Carlson's discussion of the problems with the vaccines.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-how-many-americans-have-died-after-taking-the-covid-vaccine

and Chris Pinto's hour-long show on the topic from a couple weeks ago:

http://www.noiseofthunderradio.com/noise-of-thunder-radio-show/2021/4/20/notr-vaccines-world-health-organization-the-un-42021.html

Saving America Part 5: It Starts with the Church. WE NEED TO THROW OUT THE TROJAN HORSE OF THE MODERN BIBLE VERSIONS

In my opinion Chris Pinto's documentary the True Christian History of America could be used as a platform for launching some needed educaton in the historical origins of our American form of government. Through quotes from major figures in European history he shows that the concept of liberty that is embodied in our founding documents was developed over centuries of experience of the tyranny of kings and Popes and that its foundation is the Bible. It shows clearly that the right to perosnal freedom and the right to overthrow tyrants were given powerful voice by Christians down the centuries and that contrary to popular propaganda none of it comes from any nonChristian source. In quieter political times we could perhaps organize study groups to educate us ignorant Americans in principles that have been kept from us so that in a liesurely manner we could familiarize ourselves with them, principles tht have become alien to us, and perhaps think it all through to political decisions based on it and reclaim much of what has been lost.

But it comes right at the point where we may have finally completelyh lost our true America, when there is no way left to reclaim it. Sometimes we hear drastic solutions like civil war but they fizzle out rapidly under the sheer practical impossibility of it, not to mention that such an effort would be doomed to failure unless we'd truly learned what we are fighting for and I think this film makes it painfully clear how little most of us understand what we would need to understand to do it right. It's founded on solid Protestantism for one thing and few of our churches embody that Protestant spirit any more, let alone the culture at large. I happened to hear a bit of a radio talk show on the weekend in which a caller into the show spent his time reading from the Declaration of Independence, of course implying that we are at the point where we again face a tyrannical government which calls for a righteous severing of ties with it. The host of the show pointed out that since half the population voted for this tyrannical govennment the circumstances put such an undertaking out of the question.

So for many reasons we're in a hopeless position. But God is in charge and I keep being driven back to what I think is the real core of the matter, which is that we, Christians I mean, are out of favor with God and that's the reason the situation is hopeless. We could possibly push back the encroaching evils in this country if the churches first sought repentance from sins and errors, many of which aren't even suspected.

Such as the head covering. Repentance is a main part of Christian prayer for revival and it was highlighted at the big prayer gathering in Washington D C last year, but what good does it do if we are not repenting of what we should be repenting of? Oh I'm sure some of the concerns are rightly identified, but if for instance the abandonemnet of the head covering is a cause of much of our backsliding you can be sure nobody is praying about that. And it would be resisted if someone brought it up.

I also have to mention here that Jonathan Cahn who led that big gathering has participated in national prayer breakfasts which include nonChristians, and I'm sure he's just one of many who join in and don't call out that major affront to God. Our National Cathedral which was originally Protestant now welcomes other religions too. You think God is going to bless us when we pray with the priests of Baal and Dagon? Our illustrious Protestant Christian foundationss are mightily betrayed in our modern ecumenical mindset, there's no hope of reclaiming them unless the temple is cleansed.

Reinstate the head covering, throw out the idol worshippers and that would be a good start. The very thought implies a strengthening of the churches it's normally hard to imagine and I can hardly imagine it even as I describe it, might as well be asking for the miracujlous moving of mountains.

Another big problem that isn't seen as the problem it really is, and doesn't get included in discussions of doctrinal errors even by those who see it as a problem, is the effect of the modern Bible Versions in undermining biblical inerrancy, as well as contributing to a level of cacophony that creates confusion in the churches. We know that the Greek manuscripts Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were at least the work of heretics in the early centuries of the Church, according to J W Burgon, either that or possibly later forgeries. The acceptance of them as genuine has contributed to the denial of biblical inerrancy although some insist on inerrancy even in the teeth of their influence against it.

Since these manuscripts do not contain some passages that are familiar to us from the King James and other versions based on the manuscript tradition knosn as the Textus Receptus, their acceptance as genuine casts doubt on the revered Authorized Version and of logical necessity on biblical inerrancy despite efforts to hold onto it. Holding onto it can't logically be done. Either we recognize that the newly discovered manuscripts are not genuine or we give up on biblical inerrancy. It happens to be Chris Pinto, again, through his documentary series on the Bible, who has probably done the most to show the falseness of these manuscripts.

Yes America really was founded on Christian principles. I'm glad to see the evidence for this now , finally, even as it looks like we're in the middle of a Communist Revolution and may never be able to get back to it. Nevertheless I write in hope. God judges, He also revives. God is in charge

Saving America Part 4: Some community level helps

Alex Newman talks about how American schools degenerated from Bible-based Christian instruction to government schools without religion. He refers to a succession of influential atheist/secularists: Robert Owen of New Harmony experimental commune, Horace Mann, John Dewey. This is in the context of an interview by a couple of homeschooling mothers. These are all Christians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6erQhGDAN9s

Newman talks about the importance of phonics for teaching reading, and I just heard John McWhorter say he taught his daugher to read at the age of three and a half from a phonics book. I'd been thinking about the importance of phonics after hearing Newman, how it might be applied to the learning problems of poor kids in particular, and along came McWhorter to affirm its importance. I was taught phonics in first grade (you really want to learn the year? 1948) -- they called it "phonetics" at the time -- and as I later saw friends who had not been taught it unable to spell and stumbling over words I became an avid supporter of the method. English is a phonetic language. That is, our alphabet letters represent sounds, and learning to read is greatly enhanced by learning the rules that govern that relationship.

It's at 1;21:50 of the following discussion where McWhorter mentions the importance of phonics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5tY8vmddjs

And that is a great discussion for a lot of reasons that fit into this post. As usual McWhorter and Glenn Loury are discussing racial problems, specifically the ongoing problem of disparities between the academic performance and economic success of blacks and other populations, and how the Antiracist line is not helping them improve their situation.

Both of them offered their ideas of what might improve it. At 1:21:00 McWhorter says he thinks legalizing all drugs, aggressively promoting birth control, and improving education would turn around these communities in short order.

Loury had a list I like better. 1:17:45 -- Get the government to appropriate a small portion of the trillions they keep throwing down the garbage chute to minority communities "to boost the infrastructure of human development" through interventions that really would help. Say take ten billion ("chickenfeed" in today's budget) and give 100 million each to a hundred communities.

He mentioned having nurses visit new mothers to teach them how to care for their infants, pre-kindergarten education, and he said he'd even consider midnight basketball if it would stop the young men from killing each other by giving them something to do.

I appreciate that focus on practical suggestions. I tend to think in terms of volunteer work and the involvement of the churches, but with such practical ends in mind as well as bringing the gospel and the biblical perspective into the situation. The teenage gangs need men in their lives to mentor them in other interests as well as encourage personal responsibility. I gather literacy is probably a big problem so I picture volunteers spending time with people as they are welcome, to teach phonics and reading, and encourage reading to their children in particular. That's just a couple of thoughts out of many I could muse about. Ideally the people who offer the help should live in the community, whether they are already there, perhaps part of the local church, or decide to move there, perhaps open their homes to the neighborhood to get to know the people and their own view of what problems need addressing. Also, sure, focus on minorities, but I think poor white neighborhoods could benefit from the same sort of attention, working mainly from the residents' own ideas of what is needed.

Christians should have the lead in this sort of thing esepcially since it can be felt as a calling from God. Sure, government aid might be helpful but ordinary people who set their minds to it can accomplish a lot without government making rules about what should be done and how to do it or else. On the other hand, of course, not everybody can afford to put in effective time without extra means of support.

So much for my daydreams for now.

Saving America Part 3: It starts with the Church. WE'VE GOT TO GO BACK TO THE HEAD COVERING!

Saw the headline and had to listen. I like Todd Friel, I've watched quite a few of his Wretched Radio talks recently, and the headline to this one mentions the woman's head covering, one of my big topics. Well, I knew there was no point in expecting him to contradict the viewpoint of his own theological frame of reference. John MacArthur employs the usual false arguments against the literal head covering, so does Alistair Begg, so I know Friel isn't going to say anything different. It's going to be the same old totally misguided argument from culture. I might have wanted to be pleasantly surprised but I knew better than to expect it.

And sadly I was right. Always this sophistry about the head covering. Golly gosh, yeah sure it's God- ordained but it's shaped by culture. WAHAT is shaped by culture? Masculine and feminine expressions. Ay yi yi yi yi.

Why is this so difficult> Why why why? 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is not about masculinity and femininity for starters, IT'S ABOUT HEADSHIP. HEADSHIP. HEADSHIP. It's about the HEAD, it's about authority, it is not about mjasculinity and femininity. It is about the headship of the man over the woman, and Christ over the man. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

He starts from Paul's observation that women tend to wear their hair longer than men do. Why start there?: In the context of the passage it's one of what, four or five? arguments Paul makes FOR the head covering. This one is the least persuasive in my opinion, and when it is so frequently misread as prescriptive instead of merely descriptive, as in this case, I want to tear all my own hair out.

Some Pentecostals make the passage entirely about the long hair. In a discussion about this passage I had with some Pentecostals a woman told me her hair is so long she can sit on it, and she had grown it out to such a length because that is how she understands that passage.

But all Paul is saying is that we can see that women tend to wear their hair longer than men do. And from that observed fack he draws the conclusion that it is a sign that women know they are to have their heads covered. No, the hair is not the covering, if it were the fact that women do tend to wear it longer would suffice as the covering and Paul would not have had to write about the covering at all.

The logic of Paul's argument here is hard to follow but in the context of the whole passage it has to be understood to be another reason women need to wear a covering on their heads in the assembly. It makes no sense that he'd have written so much about headship only to answer it with the custom of long hair. The logic must be that since women naturally wear their hair long as a covering, it is one of the reasons for the additional head covering. In any case the rest of the passage makes it clear if this one argument isn't so clear.

The main argument in the passage is that because of the God-ordained order of headship women need to cover our heads as a recognition of that headship order. (Again if women normally wear their hair long that cannot be what he is advocating, there would be no reason to mention it at all).

No it is not about temple prostitution. Yes there were temple prostitutes in Corinth. If it's about wearing your hair long and women normally wore their hair long then again there would be no reason to exhort them to cover their heads so as not to be mistake for a temple prostitute. Any woman growing up in that culture would have known such a thing without needing to be told anyway. Good grief this is so ridiculous. Todd Friel, why didn't you just STOP AND THINK?

The man who caused all this confusion was a highly regarded Christian, but what he wrote about the head covering should be denounced effusively. I've written about it on the blog Hidden Glory, I'll only say here that the overall problrm with his essay is that he assumes from the beginning what he finally concludes. That plus thje fact that he's making up the whole cultural interpretation and the bigger fact that Paul is never ever talking about culture, he argues the whole point from God's Laws.

Here are a few of the best arguments for the head covering in my opinionj:

1. The fact that historically ALL Christians understood until the 20th Century that the passage rqejuires women to cover our heads, and it was not restricted to the assembly but women covered their heads most of the time TAKING IT FROM THIS PASSAGE.
2. The fact that we require men to remove their hats in the assembly, and the passage requires that of men, therefore it makes no sense NOT to require women to do the opposite and to cover our heads.
3. The passage is about THE HEAD, it is NOT about femininity and masculinity.

Good grief.

And I think the fact that this brief little piece of scri8pture is so mishandled to the effect that we disobey it has to mean the devil considers it a pretty important passage. If we disregard the Creation Ordinance to cover our heads we are very likely spiritually opening the door to all the other violations of God's ordinances which we see in the world and even in the churches today. Divorce, Gender Confusion, and every other abuse of sexuality that is bringing down wester civilixzation.

The conclusion being that if the churches saw this error and set out to correct it, requiring women to cover our heads in church just as we require men to uncover theirs, WE MIGHT MAKE SOME HEADWAY TO RECOVERING THE CULTURE.

GOOD GRIEF, CHURCH!!!!!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHpTlKN25Kg -- Friel's coments on the head covering start at about 3:45 and run for about two minutes.

Saving America Part 2

Here's John MacArthur laying out the end times scenario in a recent sermon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW_EQV0BCws&t=7s

MacArthur has said it's all over for America, we're never going back to normal, and I've had that view myself for many years. However, I'm so impressed with Chris Pinto's latest documentary, The True Christian HIstory of America that I want to throw myself into doing whatever I can to get us back to the original Christian vision for the nation.

Although we hear that America was founded as a Christian nation, the idea is compromised by the fact that the five main founders, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin and Paine, were not genuine Christians, which Pinto himself has made clear in other films. Even if you argue that those men were steeped in Christian principles it is hard to make much of a case out of that. Then you are shown, by Pinto again, all the pagan influences in the design of our governmental buildings and the layout of the city of Washington D.C. among other antiChristian elements of American culture and it's easy to give up on the idea altogether, at least relegate the Christian influence to the pre-Constitutional era.

But in this latest film Pinto traces the intellectual framework of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution back through centuries of European, principally English, history, and shows how it all came from a biblical mindset. Yes we were founded as a Christian nation, and in the early years the population itself was also Christian.

A lack of vigilance plus the aggressive work of enemies have torn all that down. Our institutions no longer function as they wree originally designed to function. We have people in office who are actively opposed to true American principles. It's been looking like we might as well give up, we're doomed to destruction. And since the very last days do feel like they are breathing down our necks it's easy to think, well OK that's what prophecy says is going to happen. And we feel our helplessness, at least AI feel my own helplessness.

But now I think this documentary is providing us some real ammunition to fight our way back to the true America. Understanding our true origins really could be powerful ammunition. Whether there is anything we can actually do at this late date I don't know, but since I now feel less helpless because I can appreciate the case for the Christian conception of the nation I want to fight for it however that might be possible. As Pinto says we have to pray and I'm praying. I want to go on praying. I'm even fasting from time to time, what I think of as a Simple-Foods fast, not giving up food, just giving up foods I particularly like for the simplest kinds of food, cutting out sauces and most seasonings and that sort of thing. I think fasting is important when you are praying for something important, in this case for God's guidance in these perilous times with the hope of restoring the true America. Fasting opens us spiritually to hear from God. No I don't mean literally audibly, I mean understanding in our spirit

So it may well be that the Rapture is going to happen any minute and we will not be able to do anything anyway, but since we don't know when it is going to happen and it could be years, what would be more important to do with that time than this?