Mourning and Hoping and Mourning for America

HARBINGER (OMEN, SIGN) OF GOD'S JUDGMENT AGAINST AMERICA: The Trinity Tree Root, from the Trinity Wall Street Church website. The picture below of the sculpture as seen from above is from the same site. Click to enlarge.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
After learning through Jonathan Cahn's study about the uncanny harbingers or omens of God's judgment on America yet to come I've been on a rollercoaster of hope alternating with despair.

These symbols left in the wake of the 9/11 attacks that so uncannily reflect Isaiah 9:10 are like God speaking directly to us, directly pronouncing judgment yet to come, but who is paying attention? A hunk of hewn stone at Ground Zero,* a bronze tribute to a dead uprooted tree (and bronze in the Bible is symbolic of judgment, said Cahn), on the property of the church where George Washington prayed at his inauguration to the Presidency -- these are God's calling cards. That church is now thoroughly anti-christ, and it has a Wall Street address. The whole shebang points to judgment against America as a nation, specifically against the American economy, and seems to explain it all as it were by fingering THE CHURCH, the apostate churches for sure but the church at large which has let the nation down by failing to be the spiritual protection we're supposed to be.

The harbingers, the omens, are symbols of human arrogance and defiance of God blithely unrecognized even by most supposed Bible believers. It's all been signed and sealed as it were by three of our political leaders pronouncing the vow of defiance against God in the very words of Isaiah 9:10 -- "we will rebuild" -- rather than humbling ourselves in the face of God's judgments against us.

Where do I get any hope out of this at all? I get it out of the fact that the symbolism IS so uncanny it seems that even the most obtuse unbeliever has to recognize it and if they recognize it then there is a chance for the repentance that is the only way the nation could possibly avoid what the omens portend.

But as I said, it's a rollercoaster and I soon fall into doubt. Even after it's pointed out and explained I know only too well that a determined resister of God can still deny it.

Of course the true churches could fast and pray in sackcloth and ashes, and confess the sins of the nation as Daniel did, but is that going to happen? Well, if something like that doesn't happen, then the judgment is inevitable.

I've puzzled and lamented for a long time about why God isn't sending us revival. Now I know for sure why we haven't had revival. Our doom is signed and sealed by our leaders, and by that hewn cornerstone* and that bronze tree root that God made sure got placed where they can't be ignored. Oh sure, they can and will be aggressively misinterpreted just as the scripture that describes them was unless Cahn's message gets out. They strike me as something like the seal of a notary, on the Ground Zero site, at the site of the apostate church. Or like the handwriting on the wall against the Babylonian king Belshazzar, only set in bronze and stone so it can't just disappear but will remain as a testimony against us. Even if the entire country were razed to the ground those symbols would most likely remain untouched,* because they are God's witnesses against us. Oh, and the "Tree of Hope" too, the Norway spruce which replaced the felled sycamore, which should really be called the "Tree of Judgment" or the "Tree of Doom."

Three witnesses against us in those icons, all reflecting the words of Isaiah 9:10, plus three of our leaders declaring our doom, also in the words of Isaiah 9:10. Isaiah 9:10 gave the reason God brought judgment against Israel and now He's allowed that very verse of the Bible to stand for His intention to bring judgment against America as well. It seems impossible that anyone could explain away the uncanny equivalence of terms and imagery but I have to remember that today's atheists don't have any problem denying the obvious.

Cahn even mentioned in the interview by Jonathan Bernis (link below) how we missed revival at the time of 9/11: After 9/11 the churches filled up, people were hurting and seeking an explanation. Instead of hearing the truth from the preachers, that this is God's judgment and the nation needs to repent and turn to Him, what they heard was all that mealymouthed denial that it was God's doing. As Cahn said, there was an opportunity for the revival we've been yearning for, right there as people flocked to the churches, and the CHURCHES BLEW IT.

Here's the link to the interview of Jonathan Cahn by Jonathan Bernis on Jewish Voice. And here is the link to Jonathan Bernis' website. There is to be a second part of the interview coming up this week, I think on Sunday. [Correction, Saturday the 14th]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*I have asterisked mentions of the cut stone that was placed at Ground Zero, that was intended to be the cornerstone of a new building called the "Freedom Tower," because I ran across the information that two years after it was placed there it was removed. This was because of a change in plans for the rebuilding of the area. Of course its placement in the first place and the speeches over it that maintained the theme of Isaiah 9:10 in America's defiance of God still stand against us, but I was wrong when I said that all these physical harbingers based on that scripture would no doubt outlive the nation itself.

The Harbingers of Nine Eleven and the Biggest Harbinger of them all and is there any hope of turning back God's judgment against America?

I am still studying Jonathan Cahn's revelations about 9/11 in light of Isaiah 9:10 as reported in my previous post. I've begun to study some aspects of it in detail for future posts but that's going to take some time. I also want to read his book, which I ordered yesterday.

Interestingly, the book was available the day before at Amazon but at that point I wanted to wait to order it, then yesterday it was sold out and they are having to restock! I think I know why. Rabbi Cahn --I have a problem with that title myself, he's a Christian after all, but that's what he calls himself so I'll use it -- was interviewed on a TV show called Jewish Voice with a Rabbi Jonathan Bernis, also a Messianic (Christian) Jew, which aired on the 8th (you can find it at You Tube) and Bernis encouraged his audience to get the book. It could very well be that this information is going to fly around the nation and maybe even the world very soon and they'll have to reprint the book.

I consider this topic to be of paramount importance and I want to learn as much about it as I can, and it's going to take time and right now I don't have the time to write a really thorough post about it but I want to write something. I'm not even going to take the time to include links until later.

Here's the main message I want to get across: As Cahn has reported, American leaders actually quoted the verse in Isaiah that so painfully applies to the American attitude after 9/11, which was an attitude of proud reliance on human strength in defiance of God instead of repentance, after an act of God warning of judgment to come against the nation. Tom Daschle was Senate Majority Leader when he declared that we will rebuild, thinking Isaiah 9:10 a message of hope instead of recognizing it as defiance against God. He was one of the nation's leaders. Therefore he spoke for the nation in that capacity, in other words he spoke prophetically. Just as Gamaliel in his leadership position spoke prophetically of Jesus dying for the people, also without knowing the meaning of his own words.

Likewise John Edwards was in a position of leadership when he proclaimed the same message on the anniversary of 9/11 three years later. Obama himself also said essentially the same thing seven years after Daschle's speech on the subject, but without reference to the verse in Isaiah, when he vowed that "we will rebuild" the economy, after a first stage of its collapse.

As Cahn notes, especially in the Bernis interview, that's three American leaders who pronounced a vow of defiance against God, just as ancient Israel did after God brought the first wave of judgment against them, a warning blow that was a harbinger of more to come unless they repented. Cahn makes much of the fact that it was political leaders who did this, saying that is like an official pronouncement of defiance on behalf of the entire nation.

That's three American leaders who essentially PRONOUNCED A CURSE ON AMERICA and invited more of God's judgment.

As I recall, the general attitude at the time was this same defiance. I'm surprised if President Bush didn't say something along the same lines but it would take more research than I have time for to find out at the moment. He offended God enough with his statement that "Islam is a religion of peace" and with his blasphemous ecumenical service in the National Cathedral supposedly on behalf of the nation which was itself a curse on the nation. I know that on the conservative internet forums the attitude was They can't do this to us, we are the strongest and best nation blah blah blah, with a militant tone of defiance that outdoes the vow of Isaiah 9:10 in sheer emotional belligerence at least. When they were passing around a mock "plan" for the rebuilding of the towers with five towers in a row with the middle one very tall, that looked like a fist with its middle finger extended -- wonderful "joke" -- I recognized that they were "giving God the finger." I don't know where our conservative LEADERS were but the conservative rank and file was ASKING for God to smack us down.

But back to Cahn's revelations, the pronouncements by our leaders are all backed up by the other "harbingers" of further judgment from the Isaiah verse. God brought an army against Israel and they knocked down their bricks and the leaders vowed to rebuild stronger and better. God brought an attack on the World Trade Center and American leaders fell all over themselves to announce that we would rebuild, we are the strongest nation, they can't keep us down, and so on. But GOD can keep us down and He has plenty of reason to do so.

Some of our political leaders also brought in a quarried stone and placed it at Ground Zero as the cornerstone of a new tower they called the Freedom Tower, dedicating it with speeches that further affirmed our defiance of God. The Isaiah passage said the leaders of Israel vowed to rebuild with hewn stones, or quarried stones, in place of the bricks that were knocked down. Our one hewn cornerstone is enough to symbolize our defiant attitude in exactly the spirit of Isaiah 9:10, the REAL meaning of 9/11, not what blind politicians kept promising. The cornerstone's simply standing there is testimony to American defiance inviting God's further judgment against us.

Same with the "sycomores" that were also felled in ancient Israel as part of God's warning of judgment to come. It's not the same tree but we call it a sycamore nevertheless and it was an ancient sycamore in the churchyard of Trinity Wall Street Church -- really, the churchyard of St. Paul's chapel which is a separated part of Trinity Church -- that was knocked down by a piece of one of the towers, and it became a huge symbol of the event. A sculptor who likes to sculpt tree roots took it and made a memorial to it in bronze which was placed right next to the church. It's a huge creepy spidery bronze monstrosity of tree roots. Like the hewn cornerstone of the "Freedom Tower," it has become another symbol of America's defiance of God's warning of judgment. A dead tree, its roots exposed, is a fitting symbol for judgment on our nation and it stands there in stark testimony to the truth of the situation for anyone with eyes to see. God is going to uproot us completely if we don't repent, if there is even time for that.

On top of that, it was a "cedar" tree that ancient Israel vowed to put in to replace their felled sycomores, and would you believe that our blind blind sentimental fools who are doing all these things in the face of God's warning brought in a tree of the same basic type to put in the place of the dead sycamore tree? Cahn says the Hebrew word translated "cedar" actually refers to a different tree than specifically a cedar, but it's uncanny enough that Israel used an evergreen, a conifer, to replace their destroyed sycomores, and so did we!! A Norway spruce now stands where the felled sycamore once stood.

Read the signs. There they are. Our blind political leaders mean one thing by them but God means something else. God felled the towers, God felled the sycomore, God moved the fools to commemorate the event with SYMBOLS OF JUDGMENT though they had no clue that was what they were doing!

There's LOTS MORE SYMBOLISM in this whole event that I've been discovering on my own and that Cahn probably also covers in his book, but these very pointed symbols in themselves ought to be enough to get across our dire situation as a result of our defiance of God.

All this makes me cry, I don't know about you. Here we are under judgment in a far more official way than I had any idea. I knew we were under judgment and that 9/11 was a warning judgment, and anxiety would overtake me from time to time thinking about it and thinking about the foolishness of Americans in our refusal to repent. It was a helpless feeling, the nation is hell bent on destroying itself. But it was a vague fear, and now I see that God Himself has very pointedly declared His judgment against America in these awful specific symbols that most don't have a clue how to read, and I keep thinking, IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO AT THIS POINT? Is that hewn cornerstone that declares our intention to rebuild what God knocked down going to go on standing there as a testimony against us without repentance? Is that bronze monstrosity of an uprooted tree going to represent God's final curse against us or is there still something we can do?

Repentance is what is needed if there is any time for that at all, if God's judgment is not yet final and He still extends grace to us at all. But where will the will come from to repent? What American leaders are there who would stand up and repent for the vows of defiance already pronounced, or fall down publicly in sackcloth and ashes on behalf of the nation in the hope God might rescind His judgment on us?

But there is one more sign that I want to pursue concerning these harbingers, and I can't really do it justice in this off-the-cuff post, but I have to point out something I think is important that I learned from pursuing Cahn's revelations:

TRINITY WALL STREET CHURCH:

This is the biggest "harbinger" of them all, Harbinger #10 perhaps?

The church to which the sycamore belonged that was killed on 9/11, the church which replaced it with a conifer and decorated it with "holiday lights" its first year, the church next to which now stands that frighteningly symbolic monstrosity of a bronze statue of an uprooted tree, the very church in which George Washington prayed, even upon his inauguration as our first President, which therefore symbolizes the founding of our nation, the church which is bounded on one side by the downed World Trade Center (whose address by the way was simply "Church Street!!") and bounded on another by Wall Street, making it a symbol of so many elements of American life and history that to miss its significance after a little thought would take invincible obtuseness -- THAT CHURCH IS AN APOSTATE CHURCH. Go read the disgusting antichrist stuff that church stands for. I'll get links up soon but I can't take the time at the moment. That church in itself represents THE REASON THE NATION WAS JUDGED.

Sure, it's all our sins, it's the officially sanctioned murder of 50 million Americans through abortion, it's the destruction of the institution of marriage which God ordained, not just by the favorable attitude to "gay marriage" but also by our easy divorce laws and the rampant disregard of marriage in the common occurrence of unmarried cohabitation, single parenting and the like, and it's our "freedom" of pornography and other twistings of the original American concept of freedom, all of which Cahn briefly mentioned, and much much more, and all the movements that have brought us to this pass, the influence of "Postmodernism" of "Secular humanism" of "Cultural Marxism" and on and on and on.

But IT'S THE APOSTASY OF THE CHURCH that is the first and foremost reason for America's fall. Among all the symbols Rabbi Cahn unearthed in his study of 9/11 this one overshadows them all. The church that should uphold God's will has rejected Him and the particular church at Ground Zero with its downed sycamore and its bronze harbinger of this nation's death OUGHT TO BE RECOGNIZED AS SYMBOLIZING THE FOUNDATIONAL EXPLANATION FOR THE WHOLE DISASTER.

Christians ought to be praying against the apostate churches more than against all our other sins. JUDGMENT BEGINS AT THE HOUSE OF GOD!!!

Instead of -- or along with -- doing prayer walks around fortune-telling parlors and abortion clinics, DO PRAYER WALKS AROUND THE LOCAL APOSTATE CHURCHES, around the cult "churches" too, the Mormon churches, the Jehovah's Witnesses and so on. Catholic churches, apostate churches like Trinity Wall Street, Joel Osteen's church. DENOUNCE THEM TO GOD. Ask God to free their captives.

There's plenty more to say about all this but I had to get this much said in the little time I have at the moment. Back later.

God's Judgment on America prophesied in 9/11: Scripture linked to 9/11 in the most amazing uncanny ways

I knew 9/11 was God's judgment on America, but I was one of few it seems. I heard a few sermons that said the same thing, notably David Wilkerson's, but they were in the extreme minority while most preachers were trying to deny that God would have had anything to do with it. I also saw symbolism in the event, the World Trade Center clearly symbolizing the wealth of the world but America's wealth in particular because the WTC is in America, so it is a clear warning that God will judge us through economic disaster; and the Pentagon symbolizing our military, being a sign that He will judge us by weakening us against our enemies. Seems to me both are clearly underway.

9/11 was a big event in that it was the first time (OK, first time in a very long time) we'd been attacked on our own land, but it was a tiny event compared to what it could have been. It was clearly a warning, God saying "repent or there will be more to come."

Did America repent? No, we sang loud choruses of "God Bless America" effectively denying that we had anything to repent of or that God was trying to tell us something. What happens when a nation ignores God's warnings of judgment? Judgment keeps coming. America has not repented and clearly we are looking at far far worse yet to come.

Yesterday I was listening to some of Chris Pinto's recent broadcasts and found one where he is discussing a book about September 11th in light of Biblical prophecy of God's judgment on Israel, a judgment echoed in uncanny ways in the 9/11 attack. This is the Chris Pinto broadcast for January 5, 2012, A Prophetic Warning about the book by Jonathan Cahn, The Harbinger.

The book is wrapped around Isaiah 9:10:

The bricks are fallen down, but we will build with hewn stones: the sycomores are cut down, but we will change [them into] cedars

He finds 9 "harbingers" of God's judgment in that passage which all apply not only to Israel at the time but to 9/11 in the most uncanny ways, but the main similarity is that both Israel and America defied God's judgment instead of repenting, vowing to replace the bricks that had been knocked down with stronger hewn stone, and the sycamores with stronger cedars, thus inviting further judgment from God.

Cahn reports on two speeches by American leaders concerning September 11th, Tom Daschle and John Edwards, in which this passage from Isaiah was quoted as supposedly an encouragement to rebuild after September 11th. David Wilkerson received this very same passage as the topic for his first post-9/11 sermon at his Times Square Church. He knew it was about God's judgment and what happens when a nation defies God's judgment, but Dasche and Edwards had no clue, both taking it to mean the very opposite of what it means. Same with most of the rest of America.

Jonathan Cahn lays out the whole scenario in all its amazing uncanniness in this presentation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXei0Zb3dxM&feature=related

Isaiah 9:8 The Lord sent a word into Jacob, and it hath lighted upon Israel. 9 And all the people shall know, [even] Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria, that say in the pride and stoutness of heart, 10 The bricks are fallen down, but we will build with hewn stones: the sycomores are cut down, but we will change [them into] cedars. 11 Therefore the LORD shall set up the adversaries of Rezin against him, and join his enemies together; 12 The Syrians before, and the Philistines behind; and they shall devour Israel with open mouth. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand [is] stretched out still.

Listen to Jonathan Cahn as he connects this passage with amazing "coincidences" that occurred in relation to September 11th at Ground Zero that perfectly reflect this passage in Isaiah. It is clearly a passage about judgment on Israel, but the people of Israel defied the judgment. God knocked down the bricks of Israel (and the twin towers of NYC) and instead of acknowledging the rightness of God's judgment and repenting the leaders of the people said "We will rebuild" and do it even better, with stronger stones and stronger trees. So God's hand "is stretched out still" in judgment, since they did not repent, and further judgments are prophesied.

Hear it to the end. Did you know that the very founding of our nation is intimately connected with the area known as Ground Zero? I didn't until I heard this.

It is hard for me to believe that anyone could hear all the amazing uncanny details Cahn unearthed in his prophetic study of 9/11 and not come to recognize that there is a God who oversees the smallest details of life on this planet and is definitely judging America and still (I hope) waiting for the nation to repent.

Isa 9:13 For the people turneth not unto him that smiteth them, neither do they seek the LORD of hosts. 14 Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day. 15 The ancient and honourable, he [is] the head; and the prophet that teacheth lies, he [is] the tail. 16 For the leaders of this people cause [them] to err; and [they that are] led of them [are] destroyed. 17 Therefore the Lord shall have no joy in their young men, neither shall have mercy on their fatherless and widows: for every one [is] an hypocrite and an evildoer, and every mouth speaketh folly. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand [is] stretched out still. 18 For wickedness burneth as the fire: it shall devour the briers and thorns, and shall kindle in the thickets of the forest, and they shall mount up [like] the lifting up of smoke. 19 Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother. 20 And he shall snatch on the right hand, and be hungry; and he shall eat on the left hand, and they shall not be satisfied: they shall eat every man the flesh of his own arm: 21 Manasseh, Ephraim; and Ephraim, Manasseh: [and] they together [shall be] against Judah. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand [is] stretched out still.

Interesting radio interview of a professor about his testimony to be repeated today at 9:30PM Pacific

Heard a wonderful interview on local Christian radio with a Welsh pastor and seminary professor about a blog piece he wrote describing his conversion to Christ forty years ago. Wonderful testimony. I identified completely. Out of nowhere, out of a completely nonChristian life, a complete ignorance of Christianity, God found him through a book sent to him by a friend -- John Stott's Basic Christianity -- and converted him through that book even before he ever met another Christian. Then when he first read the Bible some time later he immediately "knew" it was the word of God. Same as I did. That's the Holy Spirit. I love testimonies like this.

This was on Pilgrim Radio on the interview program, His People, and there will be a repeat of this broadcast later today if anyone wants to hear it, at Pilgrim Radio.com., at the link above, at 9:30 PM Pacific time (12:30 AM Eastern).

This is the program list page for today at Pilgrim.

So of course I had to find his blog piece and here it is.

Also, here is a page about him at at Reformed Theological Seminary where he is a Visiting Professor. There is a video on the page where he talks about his objectives as a teacher and pastor.

-----
By the way, if you tune in to Pilgrim Radio half an hour earlier you can hear the daily program Reader's Choice where today they are near the end of the reading of the book A Heart for Freedom by Chai Ling who was a leader of the Tienanmen uprising in China. I've missed most of the reading of this book but what I've heard has been very inspiring.

A small tribute to the Reformation Anti-Catholic work known as Foxe's Book of Martyrs

Foxe's Book of Martyrs is a classic account of the persecutions and murders of Christian individuals and groups down the centuries starting with the first apostles of Christ. Here is an online copy of the book. The early chapters concern persecutions under the pagans, the chapter titled Papal Persecutions starts the accounts of persecutions by the Roman Church of Christians who had fled that institution.

There are those who have no knowledge whatever of the pre-Reformation Christians outside the Roman Church, such as the Waldensians and the Albigensians and many others, and continue to promote the false belief fostered by the Roman Church itself that Romanism represented Christianity and that those they persecuted were all heretics. Foxe's Book of Martyrs is one of the main sources of information to the contrary and of course the Papal Antichrist would seek to discredit it.

And yes it is quite partisan, it is thoroughly anti-Romanism and anti-papist, which reflects the perspective of the Reformation. It's perhaps more of a tract than a work of history but most of its information is nevertheless based on known sources and considered to be generally trustworthy. Some try to discredit the book on the basis of its style and partisanship, but even the Wikipedia article which acknowledges its scholarly imperfections nevertheless affirms that the material is "generally accurate" and documents its valid sources.

The following is from the Wikipedia article:

Foxe as historian
Foxe often treated his material casually, and any reader "must be prepared to meet plenty of small errors and inconsistencies."[29] The material contained in the work is generally accurate, although selectively presented. Sometimes he copied documents verbatim; sometimes he adapted them to his own use. While both he and his contemporary readers were more credulous than most moderns, Foxe presented "lifelike and vivid pictures of the manners and feelings of the day, full of details that could never have been invented by a forger."[30]

His sources
Foxe based his accounts of martyrs before the early modern period on previous writers, including Eusebius, Bede, Matthew Paris, and many others. He compiled an English martyrology from the period of the Lollards through the persecution of Mary I. Here Foxe had primary sources to draw on: episcopal registers, reports of trials, and the testimony of eyewitnesses.[5] In the work of collection Foxe had Henry Bull as collaborator.[31] The account of the Marian years is based on Robert Crowley's 1559 extension of a 1549 chronicle history by Thomas Cooper, itself an extension of a work begun by Thomas Lanquet. Cooper (who became a Church of England Bishop) strongly objected to Crowley's version of his history and soon issued two new "correct" editions.[32]

Handling of sources
The book's credibility was challenged in the early 19th century by a number of authors, most importantly Samuel Roffey Maitland.[5][25] Subsequently Foxe was considered a poor historian, in mainstream reference works. The 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica accused Foxe of "wilful falsification of evidence"; two years later in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Francis Fortescue Urquhart wrote of the value of the documentary content and eyewitness reports, but claimed that Foxe "sometimes dishonestly mutilates his documents and is quite untrustworthy in his treatment of evidence".[33]

In contrast, J. F. Mozley maintained that Foxe preserves a high standard of honesty, arguing that Foxe's method of using his sources "proclaims the honest man, the sincere seeker after truth."[34] The 2009 Encyclopædia Britannica notes that Foxe's work is "factually detailed and preserves much firsthand material on the English Reformation unobtainable elsewhere."[35]

Objectivity and advocacy
Foxe's book is in no sense an impartial account of the period. He did not hold to later notions of neutrality or objectivity, but made unambiguous side glosses on his text, such as "Mark the apish pageants of these popelings" and "This answer smelleth of forging and crafty packing."[36] David Loades has suggested that Foxe's history of the political situation, at least, is 'remarkably objective'. He makes no attempt to make martyrs out of Wyatt and his followers, or anyone else who was executed for treason, except George Eagles, who he describes as falsely accused."[37]

Sidney Lee writing in the Dictionary of National Biography called him "a passionate advocate, ready to accept any primâ facie evidence". Lee also listed some specific errors and pieces of plagiarism.[22] In developing the same metaphor, Thomas S. Freeman argues that Foxe "may be most profitably seen in the same light as a barrister pleading a case for a client he knows to be innocent and whom he is determined to save. Like the hypothetical barrister, Foxe had to deal with the evidence of what actually happened, evidence that he was rarely in a position to forge. But he would not present facts damaging to his client, and he had the skills that enabled him to arrange the evidence so as to make it conform to what he wanted it to say. Like the barrister, Foxe presents crucial evidence and tells one side of a story which must be heard. But he should never be read uncritically, and his partisan objectives should always be kept in mind."[5]

Religious perspectives
For the English Church, Foxe's book remains a fundamental witness to the sufferings of faithful Christians at the hands of the anti-Protestant Roman Catholic authorities and to the miracle of their endurance unto death, sustained and comforted by the faith to which they bore living witness as martyrs. Foxe emphasizes the right of English people to hear or read the Holy Scripture in their own language and receive its message directly rather than as mediated through a priesthood. The valour of the martyrs in the face of persecution became a component of English identity.[citation needed]

Roman Catholics consider Foxe a significant source of English anti-Catholicism, charging among other objections to the work, that the treatment of martyrdoms under Mary ignores contemporary mingling of political and religious motives — for instance, ignoring the possibility that some victims may have intrigued to remove Mary from the throne.[38]

The article above suggests that "evidence damaging to his client" exists that Foxe ignores, but does not give it. Surely we can ASSUME that there is such "evidence" and that a great deal of it is simply the viewpoint of the papacy.

Glory Glory Glory in Immanuel's Land -- that's what Christmas foreshadows

So again this year I've had to object to those who reduce Christmas to a pagan holiday with no value for Christians. Then a few posts down I found myself remembering my experience of hearing Christmas carols in a church for the first time after becoming a believer, carols I'd heard all my life but without really hearing them until that time. Now they emerged from the dimness of rote repetition into a clarity that dissolved me in tears.

The carols heard in all their truth lift the heart to realms of glory that otherwise have no excuse for existing at all in this benighted earth, and I've come to the conclusion that Christmas exists for that very purpose, to lift our thoughts to the heavenly realms in a more focused way than we usually have opportunity. No, it's not the true birthday of Christ, we don't know when that is but it's certainly not in December, and yes it has had both worthy defenders and worthy opponents down the centuries so you are free to take it or leave it as the Lord leads. But I've finally settled it for myself: it's a dedicated time to remind us of the glorious birth of Christ as scripture describes it, the angel announcing it to Mary, the angels heralding it to the shepherds, God Himself taking on human flesh for our sake. Immanuel or God With Us. There is no other specific opportunity for celebrating this on the calendar. I think God has given us Christmas for this purpose.

The glory is not exclusive to Christmas of course, it's the core of the Christian expectation in a sense --Christ in you, the hope of glory, as the scripture says -- but we don't always have an awareness of it. That experience in church lifted me up to it, the Reality that I'd denied for most of my life until that point.

But I even think the ordinary "secular" Christmas contains the seeds of such a recognition. There is even a sort of common apprehension of Christmas as representing such a special time that we might say "it was like Christmas" to describe some extraordinarily happy or fulfilling experience. Even the poorest and most secular Christmas aims to dazzle and delight by the closest approach to something glorious that humanity can concoct with mere light bulbs and shiny things and wrapped presents and special treats.

For the most part it's not clear to those engaged in it exactly why it's being done at all, or it seems to be just something one does at a particular time of year, just because family does it, or "just because," or sometimes for the sheer pleasure of it in itself, that's how far it is from worship of God or gods. Certainly there can be an idolatry of the pleasure itself, or an idolatry of greed, all the usual idolatries of humanity, but while most may not celebrate the God of the Bible they are NOT celebrating some pagan god, no they are not. Even in the most "secular" of Christmas celebrations in what remains of "Christendom" there is still a tinge of recognition that "Jesus is the Reason for the Season."

Yes, I think Christmas is a yearly staging of something that can draw us to at least a vague sense of higher things, celestial things. All the paraphernalia we muster for its celebration seems to be trying to evoke something otherworldly, something heavenly, glorious, hopeful. Even the most ordinary tinsel-draped glittering Christmas tree glowing in a darkened room always suggested something heavenly to me long before I was a Christian, an otherworldly glory.

Oh but then when I became a believer the Real Glory that all the trappings of Christmas only dimly imitate became mine and that's what had me sobbing through my first church experience of the Christmas carols after becoming a believer.

Angels We Have Heard on High
Angels From the Realms of Glory
Oh Holy Night
Come All Ye Faithful
Joy to the World, the Lord is come, let Earth receive her King
God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen,
The First Noel
Silent Night
Hark, the Herald Angels Sing, Glory to the Newborn King
Come Thou Long-Expected Jesus

If the words of these songs are taken to heart in genuine faith, they can definitely take you to a glimmer of the glory in which the true God dwells.

God Himself stooped to become a man and dwelt among us, came to live the perfectly blameless life that none of us fallen creatures could live for ourselves, then to die in our place to save us from our just punishment. His coming was anticipated from all the way back in Eden. Angels heralded His birth, and angels were there at His death and resurrection and ascension. Angels from the realms of glory, God's servants who watch over us. Glorious beings from God's own glorious presence. Christmas recognizes them as no other event does.

While I was thinking about all this I kept remembering Blaise Pascal's "memorial," his description of an experience he had of the Reality of God that he described on a piece of paper and kept sewn inside his clothes until it was found at his death. It's one man's experience of the glory of God. It's about the glory though it's not about Christmas.

FEU!

Dieu d'Abraham, Dieu d'Isaac, Dieu de Jacob,

non des philosophes et des savants.

Certitude. Certitude. Sentiment, Joie, Paix.

Dieu de Jésus-Christ ...

Blaise Pascal: This day of Grace (November 23, 1654) "Fire...Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy." This link includes a commentary by Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Pascal's meditation in which he says we all should have something of such an experience in our Christian lives. There are also links to Pascal's writings but I'm just going to copy out Pascal's "memorial" here:

This day of Grace 1654; From about half past ten at night, to about half after midnight, Fire.

God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob,

Not of the philosophers and the wise.

Security, security. Feeling, joy, peace.
God of Jesus Christ
Thy God shall be my God.
Forgetfulness of the world and of all save God.

He can be found only in the ways taught in the Gospel.

Greatness of the human soul.

O righteous Father the world hath not known Thee,but I have known Thee

Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy.

I have separated myself from Him.

My God, why hast Thou forsaken me? . . .That I be not separated from Thee eternally.

This is life eternal: That they might know Thee the only true God, and
Him whom Thou hast sent, Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ.

I have separated myself from Him; I have fled, renounced, crucified Him.

May I never be separated from Him.

He maintains Himself in me only in the way taught in the Gospel.
Renunciation total and sweet.

I go from this meditation on the glory of God and our life in God to a sad recognition of what the unbelieving world makes of glory. Nothing much. They try to make it fit their paltry earth-bound sense of things. It IS the tinsel on the tree, with no more reality than that. They try to exalt mere worldly aspirations or ideals or good deeds but they always fall flat as far as glory goes. What the false religions and the occult do with glory is imitate Christianity, but they usually come up with something cold and spooky.

On a couple of occasions before I was a believer, just listening to a Mozart symphony made me sad because there is nothing in this world that deserves that exalted feeling. The same thing happened even more so when I listened to Handel's Messiah. It should make you aware that there IS a reality to which such music corresponds, but if you've bought the lie that this is all there is then such exalted expressions are just a cheat.

I think of Darwin's famous line about how there is "grandeur" in the evolutionistic view of things. A cheat, a cheat. Bloody death-dealing nature as conceived by evolution? A cheat, the biggest of cheats. Oh what REAL grandeur Darwin missed out on, and the aggressive atheists Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. I think of Peter Hitchens' description of embracing the marriage ceremony of the Anglican church as a coming into his inheritance as a Christian Englishman, and think how Darwin, Dawkins, and Peter's brother Christopher all chose to repudiate that heritage and will never know its glory.

So all this is my Christmas meditation this year. God might have allowed me an exalted experience such as I had with the Christmas carols without the holiday of Christmas, and He has allowed me others, but I have to think that such a concentration of expressions of Glory to God in the Highest that Christmas brings us was intended by Him, and I refuse to accept the debunkery of those who put it all down to a cheap Christianized version of paganism.

Let the heathen and the dedicated atheists and the Bible-denying "Christians" scoff at angels and the virgin birth of God Himself as a man, reduce it to a fiction and so destroy their own opportunity to touch celestial realms. They've been invited to join us innumerable times but sometimes we believers just have to leave them behind in their own chosen fate.

The pagan origins of Christmas again -- Chris Pinto nails it!

FINALLY, a SENSIBLE study of the history of Christmas!

Chris Pinto to my mind does THE best study of Christmas, correcting many wrong notions about how it came about, and giving the most sensible reasonable guidelines for how a Christian believer should respond to the holiday:

This is the page where you can download Parts I and II of his radio discussion of Christmas, The Origins of Christmas on Dec. 20 and 21.

One thing he argues is that the Roman Catholic Church as such did not exist until 606 AD, contrary to the kneejerk screamings of some who claim it started with Constantine. It did NOT. Most of the early Church belongs to the TRUE CHURCH -- including the Council of Nicaea which was convened by the leaders of all the true churches of the day and was NOT led by Constantine, whose role was mostly observer. The Roman Church started with the claim in 606 AD that the Bishop of Rome was to be the head* of the entire Church, not just Rome but head over all the other Bishops of all the other churches as well. The Roman Church LATER CLAIMED TO THEMSELVES all the pre-Roman-Catholic history of the Church. Why should we believe THEM?

So the Roman Church can't be particularly blamed for inaugurating the holiday of Christmas. In fact Pinto said something else that suggests the Roman Church didn't even acknowledge the holiday until the 1800s.

{Later: Also go on and listen to the first half of Pinto's broadcast of December 22, Christmas trees and Catholics Come Home to find out that "mass" as in Christ-mas does NOT necessarily refer to the institution of the Catholic Mass -- the word has older/original connotations that are perfectly acceptable to a Christian, it only later came to refer to the Catholic ritual, just as much else from the early Church was later co-opted into the Roman context. (also go on and listen to the second half of that broadcast for his answer to a very misleading Catholic ad). Pinto is a much more trustworthy investigator of history than many who seek to educate the Church. If you are going to try to make your case from history you have to recognize that history goes through changes, the truth isn't necessarily the first thing that hits you in the face.}

Also Pinto makes the point that the pagans themselves rewrite Christian history for us and Christians who don't read enough in true Christian history believe this stuff written by enemies of the true Church. They would claim the holiday themselves even if the Church did it.

One point he presents that I was not familiar with is that there was a theologian of the early church who argued that December 25 really was the birthdate of Christ, completely independent of its connection with any pagan holiday around that time of year. His argument doesn't really hold up but apparently it was meant seriously and taken seriously. So although there was a definite sense in which Christ's birthday was an excuse to replace a popular pagan holiday with Christian content, it turns out that wasn't the ONLY reason for the date chosen. History is always more complicated than the conspiracy thinkers try to make it out to be.

Another point he makes which really ought to make the case all by itself is to compare the substitution of Christ's birthday for a pagan holiday with the practice of many churches today in substituting a harvest-oriented celebration for the pagan Halloween, with bobbing for apples and that sort of thing. Some do a Reformation Day Party, since that date is also the date on which Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the Wittenberg church, which began the Reformation. If you want to distract Christians from the good time the pagans are having with Halloween then give them something Christian or at least innocent to party about instead. Distract them from the pagan debaucheries of Saturnalia the same way, what's wrong with that?

At the end of Part I Pinto quotes Romans 14:4+ as his understanding of how we should regard the celebration of Christmas:

Rom 14:4-8 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.

How we celebrate a holiday is all about our own personal relation to the Lord, there is really very little in the holiday of itself that is the problem.

In Part II Chris Pinto gets into the history of the Christmas tree. This is because many object to the tree as pagan, and many quote Jeremiah 10:2-4 as supposedly directly describing the Christmas tree as a pagan practice to be shunned. I didn't comment on this myself but it is clearly NOT talking about the Christmas tree as we use it today. We do not bow down to it and worship it for starters, which is the main teaching of scripture about idolatry, specifically the heathen practices of carving their idols out of wood and decorating them with gold and silver which is what this passage is also about.

It does not refer to the Christmas tree.

Jer 10:1-5 Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel: Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people [are] vain: for [one] cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. They [are] upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also [is it] in them to do good.

But they speak not, they must be borne, they can't walk. Be not afraid of them. Cannot do evil nor good. THIS IS A REFERENCE TO IDOLS, to objects of worship CARVED OUT OF THE TREES, not to Christmas trees and this is the point Chris Pinto makes. (I'm only touching on his main points here, you have to listen to the radio talk to appreciate the many examples he gives to support his points).

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH CHRISTMAS TREES AS SUCH, they are NOT the idolatry God was condemning in Jeremiah. For us they are nothing more than a pretty object that defines the season. Some Christian traditions have developed a whole Christian symbology referring to the tree, some treat it as a symbol of the Tree of Life which Christ opens to believers. But at bottom, for a Christian the ONLY thing we need to be aware of is the condition of our own heart in any celebration, and, I should add, a respectful awareness of the conscience of our brethren.

Surely we can simply ignore the pagan silliness of Santa Claus in our celebrations and avoid the overindulgence of the season and that sort of thing without getting all indignant about what the unbelievers do.

In the second half of his Part II Pinto gets into the big flap about the culture's pulling away from the focus on Christmas in saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" and the offense taken by some Christians. Of course this is all about the "Culture Wars" and the rise of the politics of "multiculturalism" over the last few decades, but it should also be noted that the greeting "Happy Holidays" goes back before all that without the political onus that is now attached to it. At the very least it included the New Year with Christmas.

Now it has become a sign of the fact that the culture no longer regards itself as Christian, has begun to appropriate the American First Amendment to validate all religions, even in some sense every religion BUT Christianity, and that's what the churches are objecting to. We are no longer "Christendom" we are headed as a culture back to the paganism Christianity had slowly displaced over the centuries.

Pinto says it's silly to try to make the pagan culture acknowledge Christmas since they don't believe in Christ anyway. It's a good point but I think he's missing the bigger context of the culture wars and why this upsets Christians these days. [Later: I should acknowledge here, however, that Chris Pinto also did the most convincing study I've ever run across demonstrating the NON-Christian foundations of America, which I'm sure I covered somewhere in this blog or another of my blogs. It's at You Tube I'm sure. So in his mind there really hasn't been a Christian culture to lose.]

It IS a good point though. I think he's right overall, we should just give up our insistence on a Christian culture which hasn't existed for decades anyway. It's good for the church that we separate ourselves from the culture, why should we expect anything of unbelievers? We are told we are not of this world and we should embrace this opportunity for a clearer separation.

At the end of Part II he makes some very good points about how just about everything has a pagan meaning anyway, including the rainbow, including just about every number, defined by pagans or satanists or whatnot, things whose TRUE origin is God. He makes the point that it's superstition to get exercised over the satanic meanings that were imposed on the things that were made by God. This world IS ruled by Satan, this IS a fallen world until the Lord recreates it at the very end, but as for TRUE origins, it BELONGS TO God -- the rainbow belongs to God, numbers belong to God, the days of the calendar belong to God, etc. etc. etc. -- while Satan's rule is going to come to an end thanks to the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ.

THESE TWO RADIO DISCUSSIONS ARE WELL WORTH LISTENING TO. CHRIS PINTO HAS NAILED IT.{The one following them is also recommended}

==========================

*"Head of the Church": I just feel like adding the personal information here that when I was first learning about Christianity -- in the mid-80s -- I was strongly drawn to some Catholic writers, especially the "mystics" like Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross and Brother Lawrence and Madame Guyon. (Just for the record I still love them, especially the latter two, though I've learned to separate out their specifically Catholic errors from their genuine love of Christ). I was sure I was going to become a Catholic but I made no move toward any church for quite some time, content for the time being just to read and read and read and learn everything I could about the history of the Church and Christendom.

After I'd encountered some Protestant writers I was not so sure I was going to become a Catholic but I had yet to learn about the Reformation. (I did not like Martin Luther. He struck me as a rude heathen by contrast with the genuine followers of Christ melted in adoration of Him that I'd found the "mystics" to be, so it took me a while to get around to Reformation writings).

At one point in that period I ran across a description of the Pope as "Head of the Church" and it really bothered me. The next time I opened the Bible the Lord guided me to one of the passages where it says flatly, "Christ is the Head of the Church" (Ephesians 5:23 and Colossians 1:18).

That abruptly ended my leanings toward Catholicism. After that I began to learn about the Antichrist nature of the Roman Church.