|
|
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 Middle East Flashpoint!Obviously, the Iran nuclear treaty was all a ruse! www.google.com www.washingtonpost.com |
||||||
|
dmaestro 01-May-18, 22:21 |
www.google.com There was nothing new disclosed. Russia and China support Iran. We are not going to get a batter deal. |
||||||
|
Very Which is preferable to pride, such as you like to display. feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements, the achievements of those with whom one is closely associated, or from qualities or possessions that are widely admired. Perhaps the larger point of the Israeli leader which should be weighed is how Israel and America may be drawn into the larger military conflict, with Iran's. Russian and Chinese allies? Matters certainly have not cooled down in Syria. |
||||||
|
Protesters Demonstrators call for "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" while expressing solidarity with Palestinians www.google.com "Hundreds of thousands of Iranians chanted "Death to Israel" in nationwide rallies on Friday at which they also burned flag of the Islamic State militant group which claimed responsibility for attacks in Tehran this month, state TV reported." www.google.com Since 1948 Israel has faced military threats to their sovereignty. U N also, are impotent and belligerent towards plight of Israel. |
||||||
|
With Allies Like These, Who Needs Enemies? For more than two centuries, Wahhabism has been Saudi Arabia's dominant faith. It is an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran. Strict Wahhabis believe that all those who don't practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies. Critics say that Wahhabism's rigidity has led it to misinterpret and distort Islam, pointing to extremists such as Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. Wahhabism's explosive growth began in the 1970s when Saudi charities started funding Wahhabi schools (madrassas) and mosques from Islamabad to Culver City, California. Here are excerpts from FRONTLINE's interviews with Mai Yamani, an anthropologist who studies Saudi society; Vali Nasr, an authority on Islamic fundamentalism; Maher Hathout, spokesperson for the Islamic Center of Southern California; and Ahmed Ali, a Shi'a Muslim from Saudi Arabia. Can you show me an example of what the [religious teaching is in the schools? Well, here, this is a book, hadif, for ninth grade. Hadif is a statement of Prophet Mohammed. This is a book that start for ninth graders. This is talking about the victory of Muslims over Jews. This is a hadif that I truly believe it's not true, as a Muslim: "The day of judgment will not arrive until Muslims fight Jews, and Muslim will kill Jews until the Jew hides behind a tree or a stone. Then the tree and the stone will say, 'Oh Muslim, oh, servant of God, this is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him.' Except one type of a tree, which is a Jew tree. That will not say that." This is taught for 14-year-old boys in Saudi Arabia. In middle schools... In middle schools, yes. Official middle schools. This is a book printed by Saudi government Ministry of Education. (Ed. Note: read some excerptsfrom these textbooks.) www.pbs.org www.pbs.org WAHHABISM: WHAT IS IT AND WHY DOES IT MATTER? “The Islamic movement goes back over a millennium, yet has widespread modern significance It's been called a "deadly scripture" (1), the inspiration for Islamic State and "the main source of global terrorism" (2). But what exactly is Wahhabism and why is it so controversial? A return to a "purer" form of Islam Wahhabism is a conservative movement within Islam's Sunni branch. It's named after its founder, theologian Mohamed ibn Abdul Wahhab, who was born in the 18th century in what is now Saudi Arabia.” (1)www.independent.co.uk (2)www.telegraph.co.uk www.theweek.co.uk “TEACHING HATE, INSPIRERING TERRORISM: SAUDI ARABIA'S EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM After 9/11, when it became clear that 79 percent of the terrorists who waged the murderous attacks on American soil that day, not to mention the plot’s mastermind, Osama bin Laden, were sons of Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia’s education system was brought into question. The 9/11 Commission and other thoughtful voices suggested that the kingdom’s interpretation of Islam, Wahhabism, which is taught as the core of its schools’ standardized curriculum, could bear some responsibility for inciting violence against the West. Soon after, with the help of Saudi-American journalist Ali Ahmed and several other American Muslims, who wish to remain anonymous, I began collecting, translating and analyzing Saudi textbooks for grades 1 through 12 of the Saudi religious curriculum. I published my findings in 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2011. In 2011, as a Commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, I visited Saudi Arabia and discussed its textbooks directly with the Minister of Education, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Islamic Affairs. In subsequent years, I have studied and written about the global spread of Saudi Wahhabi education, including here in the academy operated by the Saudi embassy under the name Islamic Saudi Academy (for the academic year just concluded, its name was changed to King Abdullah Academy). My findings were generally validated by later reporting by the State Department and others.” www.hudson.org |
||||||
|
Which Begs the Now who is being naive? |
||||||
|
What Will Iran Do? . . . Chairman Kerry, Ranking Member Lugar, members of this distinguished Committee, and Committee staff, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. Iran has long been one of the most important and dangerous sponsors of terrorism in the world. Although the Islamic Republic’s motivations have varied over the years, its leaders have consistently viewed ties to and support for a range of terrorist groups as an important instrument of national power. Disturbingly, Iran’s support for terrorism has become more aggressive in recent years, motivated by a mix of fear and opportunism. Iran could become even more aggressive in the years to come, exploiting the perceived protection it would gain if it developed a nuclear weapon or, if thwarted through military force or other means, using terrorists to vent its anger and take revenge. However, under current circumstances Tehran still remains unlikely to carry out the most extreme forms of terrorism, such as a mass-casualty attack similar to 9/11 or a strike involving a chemical, biological, or nuclear weapon. The United States should work with its allies to continue and expand an aggressive intelligence campaign to thwart Iran and its terrorist surrogates. After 9/11, the United States engaged in a comprehensive campaign against al-Qa’ida: a similar global approach is needed to combat Iranian-backed terrorism. However, as the United States is already exerting tremendous pressure on Tehran via sanctions and diplomatic isolation because of Iran’s nuclear program, there are few arrows left in America’s quiver and thus the United States will find it hard to place additional pressure on Iran due to terrorism. In this statement I first lay out Iran’s motivations for supporting an array of terrorist groups. I then offer explanations for how, and why, Iran is becoming more aggressive in its use of terrorism in response to a rapidly changing region. I then detail the dilemma regarding terrorism and Iran’s nuclear program: allowing Iran to get the bomb is dangerous in and of itself and may make Tehran more aggressive in supporting terrorists, but a military strike to destroy the program is likely to lead Iran to use terrorism to take revenge. I conclude by presenting implications and recommendations for U.S. policy. www.brookings.edu Proxy Power: Understanding Iran's Use of Terrorism Iran and Syria, Hezbollah’s foreign sponsors, may hold the key to resolving the violence in Lebanon, or they may play a part in the escalation of the conflict. Syria has received the lion’s share of international attention, but Tehran’s role in supporting Hezbollah and other terrorist groups is also crucial. Even though Iran is hundreds of miles away from Lebanon, it helped nurture Hezbollah in its early years and even today exercises considerable ideological and operational influence. The Lebanese terrorist organization is the most deadly creation of the clerical regime in Tehran, but it is only one of the many groups that Iran supports. Confusing this picture further, Tehran’s backing of terrorist groups has changed considerably in the last decade. After the 1979 Islamic revolution, Tehran used a wide range of terrorist organizations to export its revolution and to assassinate Iranian dissidents around the globe. Tehran played a major role in forming Hezbollah and helping it conduct attacks in Lebanon, including such devastating strikes as the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Marine barracks and embassy, which together killed more than 300 people. Indeed, before 9/11, Hezbollah had killed more Americans than any other international terrorist organization. Iranian-backed groups also regularly attacked dissidents in Europe, countries that backed Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war, and the governments of pro-Western Arab states. Ten years ago, on June 26, 1996, Iranian-backed terrorists exploded a massive truck bomb outside the Khobar Towers military housing project in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 Americans and one Saudi and wounding almost 400. On the surface, not much seems to have changed with regard to Iran and terrorism in the last 10 years. The U.S. State Department still lists Iran as the world’s “most active” state sponsor of terrorism, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly fulminates against Israel and sings the praises of groups like Hamas. Today, as the latest round of violence suggests, Israel is the biggest target of Iranian-backed terrorism, with Tehran supporting several Palestinian groups as well as Lebanese Hezbollah. These groups’ attacks against Israel serve three purposes: They support Iranian leaders’ opposition to the existence of the Jewish state; they give Iran prestige in the Muslim world; and by keeping violence alive, they undermine the peace process (admittedly, an easy task these days), which in turn reduces the chances that Iran will be isolated in the Middle East. Although evidence is lacking, past behavior suggests that Hezbollah wouldn’t conduct an operation as significant as the July 12 kidnappings without Tehran’s approval. Indeed, the close ties between Hezbollah and Iran’s theocrats have probably emboldened the former. Even if Israel manages to destroy much of Hezbollah’s missiles and facilities, Iran will replenish its stocks. But Hezbollah is more than an instrument of Iranian foreign policy. Its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, enjoys far more prestige in the Arab world than any of Iran’s current leaders. What’s more, the organization’s increased strength in Lebanon since the Syrian withdrawal has boosted its confidence. While Iran’s backing of anti-Israel violence has grown in recent years, it has cut back its interference in other parts of the world. Attacks on dissidents have decreased significantly since the mid-’90s, and Iran appears to have tempered its enthusiasm for exporting revolution. Most important, Tehran has not struck at the United States directly in the last decade. Iran has a healthy respect for U.S. military power, and after 1996 its leaders appeared to realize that the United States might be able to use additional Iranian terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities to gain international support for comprehensive sanctions on the regime. Sky-high oil prices and a new set of Iranian leaders who are less interested in international investment have lessened U.S. economic clout, but Tehran has remained cautious about direct attacks on the United States. Iran instead uses terrorism as a way to deter Washington. Terrorists give Tehran a way to strike at the United States in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere. Iran has cased U.S. embassies around the world and has off-the-shelf options for striking American targets. Washington recognizes that if it pushes Iran’s leaders, they can push back. Terrorism thus complicates U.S. planning for stopping Iran’s nuclear program and other top priorities. The extent and nature of Iran’s contacts with Sunni jihadist groups linked to al-Qaida is unclear. Immediately after 9/11, Iran appeared to be cooperating with the United States and its allies, transferring many jihadists to their home countries to face justice. After the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and U.S. refusal to turn over anti-Iranian terrorists of the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization—a terrorist group that mixes Marxism and Islam and fought on the side of Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war—Tehran became more recalcitrant. Several senior al-Qaida figures, including Osama Bin Laden’s son Saad, are in Iran, and some reports linked them to May 2003 attacks in Saudi Arabia. Iran claims to have the Sunni extremists under close watch, but the refusal to turn them in suggests that Tehran at least wants to use them as a bargaining chip and at most wants the option of a partnership should tension with Washington grow. (continuted at www.brookings.edu ) |
||||||
|
dmaestro 10-May-18, 09:25 |
|
||||||
|
dmeastro . . . << You know nothing of why Iran has legitimate grievances against the West and Israel for its support of the overthrow of the the government and the imposition of the Shah. You know nothing of how the British reneged on the promises of Arab independence and enabled the wahabbists to sack Mecca and take over. Rest assured the sins of the fathers will be visited on this arrogant and cursed USA which deliberately ignorant people like you deserve. For those us who don’t may God have mercy on us. >> You are making a lot of assertions here without ANY documentation. You seem to be obviously miffed by certain accusation which you are leveling against America and Israel. The worst of this seems to be that you are apparently presuming that God is displeased that America and Israel have not dealt judiciously with Iran. In making such a presumptuous statement are you also suggesting that God (of the Hebraic/ Christian faith) will not honor America and Israel with His favor? It seems historically obvious that so far in recent history God has honored/ favored America and Israel. Hasn't He? Why would God suddenly stop? Consider carefully your answer, sir. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 10-May-18, 11:29 |
So Iran should be grateful to the United States? . markcurtis.info Let him without sin cast the first stone... |
||||||
|
Throughout history God has always displaced/ annihilated or judged certain nations, and throughout history God has shown favor/ prospered and honored other nations. Notable among those God has favored/prospered and honored are Israel and America. Apparanrly, God has not chosen to favor/ prosper and honor Iran. Bet you a dollar to a donut it has something to do with their waging war / terrorism on Israel and America. What do you think about that? |
||||||
|
dmaestro 10-May-18, 12:43 |
The final chapter is not written yet. Israel built up Hezbollah to undermine the PLO and kept Iran well armed to reinforce divides. That backfired. Now it’s allied with Saudi Arabia against Iran. We shall see. |
||||||
|
Side stepping . . . Globalists have for many years dreamed of "uniting all nations" under an utopian vision which would necessarily require a universal tolerance and acceptance of some quasi "brotherhood" of mankind. The problem arises for Jews and Christians because we would have to compromise certain convictions of our faith. That ideological debate has been taking place for years right here in America. Globalist like to paint Israel and America as "road blocks" on this Globalist agenda. |
||||||
|
Address How has Israel been able to survive, what, three united Arab attacks to over run Israel? Or how Israel has turned a desert into an agricultural oasis? The fulfillment of ancient prophecies of Israel returning to their ancient homeland? To name a few . . . |
||||||
|
Regardless . . . of the Lord". Generally speaking, most scholars believe this will include a world wide mobilization against Israel. www.openbible.info |
||||||
|
dmaestro 11-May-18, 12:40 |
No miracles at all. But you would have to quit believing fake history which won’t happen. Outside of the USA and Israel nobody believes that fake history. |
||||||
|
Let us leave the ELEMENTARY Hebrews 6:1 Address the point, sir, about how the Scriptures have taught that God has been using the Hebrew/ Israeli people through history as an example to the rest of the world of His power and faithfulness. Regardless how the rest of the world interprets history (as godless or idolatrous people), God has demonstrated that His Word is true. |
||||||
|
Prophecies Fulfilled JERUSALEM, Israel – Nearly 3,000 years ago, Hebrew prophets wrote of how the land of Israel would be transformed. Now, a new book shows remarkable and even prophetic changes in the 70 years since the rebirth of Israel as a modern nation-state. www.google.com 5 Biblical Prophecies Fulfilled in 2017 And 5 More Expected in 2018 1. Jerusalem As A Place Of Assembly For Non-Jews “All who survive of all those nations that came up against Jerusalem shall make a pilgrimage year by year to bow to the King Lord of Hosts and to observe Sukkot” (Zechariah 14: 2 Eclipse Signifies Storms and Trouble For “King of the East” “Yea, you shall leave in joy and be led home secure. Before you, mount and hill shall shout aloud, And all the trees of the field shall clap their hands (Isaiah 55:12) 3 Trump Visits Western Wall “Thus said Hashem to Cyrus, His anointed one— Whose right hand He has grasped, treading down nations before him, ungirding the loins of kings, opening doors before him and letting no gate stay shut” ( 4 UN Jerusalem Vote “Behold, I will make Yerushalayim a bowl of reeling for the peoples all around. Yehuda shall be caught up in the siege upon Yerushalayim” (Zechariah 12:2). 5 Ingathering of Exiles “They shall know that I Hashem am their God when, having exiled them among the nations, I gather them back into their land and leave none of them behind” (Ezekiel 39:28). www.google.com |
||||||
|
Matters have certainly not chilled in Israel, either, over escalating violence brought about by the ridiculous and needlessly provocative move of changing the US embassy fro Tel Aviv, where it belongs, to Jerusalem, where it does not. Tel Aviv is on the coast and sports an International Airport. It is the major hub of business activity in Israel. Jerusalem is just outside the west bank. It has historical interest, being east of Jericho, which is largely occupied by Palestinians. But moving the embassy there is completely stupid and wasteful. Our embassy in Tel Aviv is perfectly fine where it is. I have been to both of these cities. Got my visa to visit Jordan from the embassy in Tel Aviv. Other countries are not going to move their embassies--especially not Jordan, so the US doing so will only create hardship for Americans visiting the country, increasing their expense. This move serves one purpose only--to slap Muslims in the face. I am curious, IHS, what your sister in Amman thinks of this move. Would live to hear her input. |
||||||
|
Prophesies Fulfilled Look at the prophesies of Nostradamus. Every year over the past four hundred years people find fifty to sixty hits. 50 x 400 is twenty thousand successful prophesies, which is quite remarkable for a collection of 950 pieces of poetry. One of my favorite examples was a Penn & Teller piece on prophesy using a popular nursery rhyme. It beautifully foretold so many different calamities and events. People can and do torture scripture to suit their needs, which is why there is more than one Christian faith. Episcopalians, Methodists, Presbyterians, Pentacostals, Lutherans, Catholics, Unitarians, Calvary Baptists, First Baptists, Church of God, Church of Christ, Crystal Cathedral, Snake Handlers--this all just off the top of my head. Every one equally wrong. |
||||||
|
Dmaestro Beat Me to It But yeah, isn't it amazing what even a paltry $3.1 billion a year in US foreign aid can accomplish? |
||||||
|
dmeastro . . . Since the "circle" which I frequent for interpreting the Biblical narrative concerning Israel hold that current events mirror ancient prophecies, pray tell (no pun) how do you interpret these Biblical prophecies? |
||||||
|
Hundreds Why are your events now the correct ones? |
||||||
|
lord_shiva. . . Of course, you are welcome to join in - except you provided NO EVIDENCE (AGAIN!) of your assertions. This habit is beginning to weary me! |
||||||
|
Bible Prophesies Fulfilled Glaser, Zhava. "Almah: Virgin or Young Maiden?" Issues—A Messianic Jewish Perspective. July 30, 2009. I hope this citation meets with your approval--I don't have an on line link for it. The "Little Apocalypse" recorded in the Olivet Discourse of the Gospel of Mark predicts the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Jewish Temple at the hands of the Romans in 70 AD. Most Biblical scholars agree that Mark was the earliest gospel, penned sometime in the decade of the 70s--therefore after the event "prophesied." Ezekiel predicts that the ancient city of Tyre will be utterly destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar and "made a bare rock" that will "never be rebuilt" Ezekiel 26:1 and chapter 26. Ezekiel itself describes Nebuchadnezzar as a "king of kings," hence the leader of a "multinational force" which laid siege to the City of Tyre for more than a decade without making it fall. The city remains an industrial place today. Alexander the Great laid siege to Tyre in 332 BC, and it to failed to capture it. 117,000 people live there today, North of Israel a little ways. I have not visited Lebanon, though I did try to get there back in 2010. You cannot simply cross the border from Israel, you have to fly in by plane--or cross from another border. I would have liked to come in by way of Syria, but that was as problematic then as it is now. Anyway, Tyre is a bustling, happy little place and Ezekiel is wrong. Or maybe just not yet fulfilled. Who am I to say? Genesis 15: When the sun had gone down and it was dark, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces. 18 On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, 19 the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.” I'm quoting the NRSV here, maybe it is a bad translation or something, because yeah. That never happened. Syria and Iraq are along the southern side of the Euphrates. Egypt has always occupied the Red Sea side of the Nile. Saudi Arabia has owned the desert immemorial. The Jews never held Jordan. They hugged the eastern coast of the Mediterranean for awhile, until the Romans took it over. For the next couple thousand years there was no Jewish state. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 20-May-18, 00:17 |
IHS represents kind of an “old school” evangelism based on a period in history. During this period the creation of Israel being seen as a sign the end is near. But as we pass the 70th anniversary of Israel those raised on it being a sign imminent rapture are aged and fading away and new generations are more focused on a different emphasis. Which is more how I see it. |
||||||
|
Out With the Old Guess we'll know for sure come Judgment Day, won't we? See you there. Hope (really!), we'll all "pass muster"! |
||||||
|
Last Days Come, dmeastro, give us a run down, please? Of what Jesus meant to convey to the disciples regarding the teaching given in the first four books of the NT? |
||||||
|
Explanation! I'm a little upset here. You need to provide some clarification! |
||||||
|
God Said What He Meant, and He Meant What He Said! (dmeastro has frequently called into question certain doctrinal assertions which I have posted or copied from other sources. He has called into question my “old school” way of thinking, as if there is a “new school” or new revelation given to Christians whereby we Christians are to adjust our lives. Several times I have asked dmeastro to clarify specifically by using exegesis of Biblical passages. He has yet to come through on that point. Throughout Church history there have been attacks on the teachings which the Apostles and the Lord Jesus himself gave to the Church through Scriptures. False teachings are called heresies. The Apostles, especially Saint Paul warned about these false teachings. My purpose in bring up this subject is to confirm that Biblical doctrines do not change over time or because they become unpopular. “Bible Verses About False Teachers” Ezekiel 13:9; Jeremiah 23:16; Luke 6:26; Matthew 24:24; Matthew 16:11-12; 2 Timothy 4:3-4; Acts 20:28-30: 2 Peter 3:14-18; 1 John 4:1-6; Matthew 7:15-20; 2 Peter 1:12-21; Titus 1:6-16; 2 Peter 2; Matthew 23:1-29; www.biblestudytools.com “Heresy in the Early Church: Christian History Timeline” GNOSTICISM c. 140 Valentinus begins teaching Gnostic views in Rome 144 Marcion is excommunicated for Gnostic-like views c. 175 Basilides espouses Gnostic teachings in Alexandria c. 180 Irenaeus writes Against the Heresies, opposing Gnosticism c. 450 Gnostic sects diminish Forms of Gnosticism return with Paulicians (800s) and Albigensians (1200s) QUARTODECIMANISM c. 155 Polycarp and others from Asia Minor advocate Nisan 14 as date of Easter c. 190 Pope Victor insists on Sunday observance and tries to stamp out Quartodecimanism (“14th-ism”), though Irenaeus advocates tolerance 325 Council of Nicea accepts Alexandrian method of determining Easter 400 Rome begins using Alexandrian method In the Middle Ages, the Celtic church (in 625) and the church in Gaul (in the 800s) join the West in adopting the Alexandrian method MONTANISM c. 157 Montanus begins prophesying that the Heavenly Jerusalem will soon descend in Phrygia, in Asia Minor 170s Montanism develops ecstatic and ascetic practices c. 190 Montanism condemned by church councils in Asia Minor c. 207 Tertullian converts to Montanism c. 400 Montanism wanes but survives in pockets Though severly persecuted by Justinian I (483–565), Montanism survives into the 800s MONARCHIANISM c. 190s Monarchianism (emphasizing God’s monarchia, “unity”—not the three persons) spreads c. 200 Noetus condemned at Rome for Patripassianism (“the father suffers-ism”), the teaching that the Father suffered as the Son 268 Council of Antioch deposes Paul of Samosata and condemns Sabellianism (i.e., modalism: Father, Son, and Spirit are temporary manifestations of the same being) By the early 300s, most Monarchianists become Arians “PURITANISM” 249–250 Decian persecution causes many Christians to “lapse,” i.e., deny the faith 251 .. www.christianitytoday.com “The Emerging Church Movement – The New Face of Heresy” Last June a Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey found rampant doctrinal ignorance among American Christians. Fifty-seven percent of evangelicals believed people who follow religions other than their own can enjoy eternal life. The results were so unexpected that Pew repeated the survey, asking more specific questions. The answers were virtually unchanged. Astonishingly, about half believed that everyone, atheists included, was going to end up in heaven. Heaven for the godless? That’s the old heresy of universalism (2009). The thinking of many who profess an identification with some form of “Christianity” has become mushy indeed. Here is a typical comment from a student of the so-called neo-evangelical community. It is not now, nor was it at the time of the reformation, the correct teaching or doctrine which brought the reformation. It was being willing to challenge the Church with living out the doctrine which mattered most. Today we need a reformation of less teaching and more living (emphasis added). This statement is senseless. How about more teaching and better living? How can there be correct living without proper teaching? If we may borrow an expression from Solomon, “there is no new thing under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9); the same old heresies just undergo superficial theological cosmetic surgery—or to use another metaphor, they are recycled. Let us reflect upon several old ideas with new faces. Universalism Universalism asserts that there will be the final and complete salvation of all beings. The dogma was taught by some of the early church writers, e.g., Clement and Origen of Alexandria, who lived in the mid-second to mid-third centuries A.D. There is no biblical basis for this dogma (see The Growing Trend Toward Universalism). Yet most folks seem to be inclining to the notion that almost everyone—if not literally everyone—will be saved ultimately. Postmodernism The expression “postmodernism” is not found in Van Harvey’s book, A Handbook of Theological Terms, published in 1968. It is a relatively new designation. Postmodernism denies universal truth. Supposedly, truth is how each individual feels about things, not how they really are. Hence, supposedly there is no exclusive, true gospel. The facts of Christianity must be redefined by a new vocabulary in preaching, writing, and worship. This is a wrong-headed ideology. The Emerging Church The so-called “emerging church” is the stepchild of postmodernism. This ideology contends it is arrogant to believe that one knows the truth; instead the “truth” is that truth is only determined subjectively, being fashioned by culture, not Scripture. Is this concept even remotely associated with a logical thought process? It is contended that each person must find his own way to God, and not be addicted to “bibliolatry.” This sounds like the philosophy of those rebels who lived in the dark ages of Israel’s history (Judges 21:25). The “emergist” believes all are arrogant who do not subscribe to his elastic view of truth. He absolutely knows one cannot know absolute truth. Several of these aberrant ideas have found their way into churches that once were conservative. For example, it is argued by an increasing number that we cannot declare as gospel truth that those are wrong who disagree with our “traditional” teaching. All teaching is now declared to be mere tradition. What difference does it make whether one believes that baptism is “for [unto, to obtain] the remission of sins,” or whether it is “because of remission of sins.” It is alleged that gospel preachers of bygone years who debated with the sectarians on the design of baptism were misguided. Some are contending that the mode of baptism is irrelevant; sprinkling is as valid as immersion, and those baptized as infants must not be excluded from Christian fellowship. To speak of a “non-immersion baptism” is an oxymoron, because “baptize” by definition signifies “to immerse.” “Emerging” churches are restructuring the worship format. The Lord’s supper is being offered in conjunction with special events, e.g., weddings. The communion memorial is not restricted to the Lord’s day; instead groups step beyond the biblical pattern and provide it on weekdays, ignoring a New Testament that is undergirded with historical truth, namely the Lord’s resurrection on Sunday. The music issue is wide open among a growing number of churches. A prominent church in Dallas (that once hosted a respected school of preaching) recently advertised for a “minister of music.” One of the stipulations was that he must be able to play the guitar or the electronic keyboard. Choirs, praise teams, clapping to accompany singing, etc., are becoming standard fare in a number of churches. Performance is rapidly supplementing congregational worship. Biblical authority yields to emotionalism. It is the new “will-worship” (Colossians 2:23). These are trying times for the body of Christ. But it is not a time for despair. Instead, courageous men and women must keep the ship of Zion on a straight (and strait) course within the boundaries of divine truth. Truth will prevail in spite of the winds of change—and irrelevant statistics. SCRIPTURE REFERENCES Ecclesiastes 1:9; Judges 21:25; Colossians 2:23 CITE THIS ARTICLE Jackson, Wayne. "The Emerging Church Movement--The New Face of Heresy." ChristianCourier.com. Access date: May 20, 2018. www.christiancourier.com www.christiancourier.com |
||||||
| |||||||
