Monday, October 2, 2017


 Pope Francis unveils an idol of Martin Luther, who he has embraced as a leader of the church. This has, in part, led to Roman Catholic leaders charging the Pope with heresy, as you will see in this article.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A letter twenty-five pages long laid out the perceived heresies committed, taught or espoused by Pope Francis, was signed by 40 Roman Catholic Leaders and delivered to him to consider. Nearly two weeks later, the Pope has not responded and those Roman Catholic leaders have made their letter public, conjoining it with the “Feast of Our Lady of Ransom.” The letter accuses the Pope of seven different heresies, most dealing with human sexuality and receiving the sacraments.
Entitled, “Correctio Fillialis de Haeresibus Propogatus,” the document has three main parts. The first part of the document specifies that the clergy signing the letter are not arguing with papal infallibility, because “the Church teaches that a pope must meet strict criteria before his utterances can be considered infallible.” The letter specifies that the Pope hasn’t said that his heretical viewpoints are officially the dogmatic teaching of the church, and so the writers specify they’re not challenging his papal infallibility.
The second part of Correctio Fillialis de Haeresibus Propogatus specifies which heresies are taught by Pope Francis in his Amoris laetitia, a “post-synodal apostolic exhortation” (position paper) published by him in 2016. The Roman Catholic leaders allege that the Pope expressed or implied these heresies in the Amoris laetitia. These particularly deal with Francis’ departure from Romish orthodoxy by his lighter views on adultery and fornication.
The third part of Correctio Fillialis de Haeresibus Propogatus accuses the Pope of falling for the encroachments of “modernism” and [drum-roll please], the influence of Martin Luther on Pope Francis. No, not Karl Marx…Martin Luther.
You can find the document, here.
Accusing Francis of being influenced by Luther, the document says…
In the second place, we feel compelled by conscience to advert to Your Holiness’s unprecedented sympathy for Martin Luther, and to the affinity between Luther’s ideas on law, justification, and marriage, and those taught or favoured by Your Holiness in Amoris laetitia and elsewhere necessary in order that our protest against the seven heretical propositions listed in this document may be complete; we wish to show, albeit in summary form, that these are not unrelated errors, but rather form part of a heretical system. Catholics need to be warned not only against these seven errors, but also against this heretical system as such, not least by reason of Your Holiness’s praise of the man who originated it [emphasis ours].
The document then lists specific homilies given by Pope Francis in which he spoke sympathetically of Luther, as evidence that he had been influenced by the Reformer.
This development really is fascinating. First, the letter accuses Francis of heresy, while still clinging to the dogma of papal infallibility through a loophole in interpretation that is altogether unclear. Secondly, it is worth noting that Protestants are not the only ones seeing Francis being a leftist, and these Romanists are very politely – but very clearly – calling out their own Pope for his positions on social issues. Third, in typical Romish fashion, these Papists blame Martin Luther for Francis’ drift left.
There is no word about how the letter was delivered to the Pope, as to whether it was the Vatican postal service or it was nailed to his door.

[Update: The Vatican has blocked its internet servers from accessing the website collecting signatures for Correctio Fillialis de Haeresibus Propogatus so that it cannot be accessed by anyone in the Vatican City]

Contend for the Truth About Grace  by John Fallahee

One indispensable truth arising out of the Reformation was the rediscovery that salvation is a gift solely of God's grace and is not earned or merited. This is one of the Five Solas of the Reformation, Sola Gratia or "grace alone." If you were living during or even before the Reformation, most likely you would have been deceived about the truth of God's grace because of the false teachings of the Catholic Church. You would have been taught that works, keeping the law, and the sacraments were necessary for salvation. To complicate matters, the Catholic Church forbade personal ownership of the Bible in 1229 at the Council of Toulouse. This continued for hundreds of years. William Tyndale in 1536 was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. As a result of these egregious laws, many would remain in spiritual darkness, not knowing the truth of God's amazing grace. But then the Reformers, equipped with the supreme authority of the Scriptures, confronted the Catholic Church's authority and their deceptive teachings, God began to set souls free. To comprehend the great doctrinal divide between the Bible and Roman Catholic's teaching on grace, we have provided four key areas to equip you in your evangelistic encounters and future discussions on grace. It should be noted, that those who reject Rome's teaching on grace will be eternally condemned through multiple anathemas declared at the Council of Trent.

1) Proclaim God alone is the exclusive source of grace. When saving grace is discussed in the Bible, it references God alone as the sole source and never references any other mediator, person, rite or ritual (Romans 3:24-26; 5:15, Acts 11:23, Hebrews 10:29). Below are several examples of Roman Catholic teachings that are contrary to Scriptures on grace. The numbers in parenthesis are paragraph numbers from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
A. Rome teaches a different source and medium for grace: RCC teaches that the sacraments confer the grace of God and are necessary for salvation (1127-1129, 1131). RCC condemns anyone who denies the necessity of the sacraments (Trent, Session 7, Canon 4).
B. Rome teaches grace is dependent on man: The "ordained priesthood" is needed to guarantee grace is dispensed through the sacraments (1120). RCC condemns anyone who denies the priesthood (Trent, Session 23, Canon 1-8).
C. Rome teaches grace is received through a rite: It says saving grace comes through the medium of water in the rite of infant baptism and through the faith of others, not the infant (1263, 1266, 1279, 1253-1255). Rome condemns anyone who denies infant baptism (Trent, Session 7, Canon 13).
D. Rome teaches grace is received through a ritual: Eucharistic grace and the forgiveness of sin is dispensed and received through the repeated ritual of the Eucharistic Sacrifice (1325, 1367, 1371, 1390, 1402, 1407). Rome condemns anyone who denies the Eucharist remits sins (Trent, Session 13, Canon 5).
2) Proclaim God's grace is a gift through the Instrument of faith alone. Saving grace (same as justifying grace) is given directly to the individual and can only be received through genuine faith in Christ alone (Ephesians 2:4-9, Romans 3:21-28; 4:16-25; 5:1-2). The Bible teaches that grace cannot be merited or earned by our works (2 Timothy 1:8-11, Titus 3:5-7, Galatians 2:16). Rome teaches the exact opposite as seen below.
A. Rome claims one can merit grace for themselves and for others to attain eternal life (2010, 2017).
B. Rome teaches grace is not by faith alone, but through obedience to the Sacramental Economy (1076,1113-1126). 
3) Share how God justifies by His grace alone (Romans 4-5). Rome claims those being baptized (usually infants) receive "baptismal grace" and the "grace of justification." Rome also teaches that those who receive the sacrament of baptism are made righteous (1446, 1992, 2020). It condemns anyone who believes that saving grace and God's righteousness are received through faith alone (Trent, Session 6, Canon 9, 12, 14, 15).
4) Reveal how God's saving grace is an irrevocable gift. Saving grace can never be lost (Romans 8:28-39; 11:29, John 6:39; 10:27-30, 2 Corinthians 1:21-22, Jude 1:24). Since it is not a work of man, but solely a work of God, it follows that you can not lose what you did not earn. We must remember the basis of saving grace is Christ's cross-work, which is perfect, and permanently enduring (Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 10:10, 10:14). Rome denies this.
A. Rome teaches that mortal sin can destroy justifying grace (1446, 1855, 1861). It says justifying grace can only be restored through the sacrament of penance and reconciliation (1422, 1440, 1446). Rome condemns anyone who believes their salvation is secure (Trent, Session 6, Canon 16).

Praise God for His amazing grace! I would be negligent if I did not mention saving grace also instructs us to "deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age" (Titus 2:11-12). We also need to shine the light of the Gospel more than ever because the darkness of apostasy is spreading through the ecumenical movement. Many are trying to reverse the Reformation and undermine the exclusivity of the Gospel. They need to be less focused on signing unity accords with Catholics to save a dying culture and more concerned with proclaiming the Gospel to save dying souls. 
The Reformation Recovered The Doctrine of Justification By Faith  by Mike Gendron
When Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the Castle Church door in Wittenburg 500 years ago this month, he ignited a theological firestorm that would burn throughout Europe. As a Roman Catholic monk, Luther's greatest desire was to become right with God, yet his religion offered no peace or assurance. This led him to begin a diligent study of God's Word and it was there that he discovered the only way a condemned sinner could be justified by a holy and righteous God. Luther's study of Scripture revealed the glorious doctrine of justification that had been concealed and corrupted by religious traditions for over 1000 years. The Bible declares the justification of sinners can only be accomplished by a divine exchange - the imputing of man's sins to Christ, and the imputing of Christ's righteousness to sinners (2 Cor. 5:21). The only way condemned sinners can be justified is through the sin-bearing, substitutionary death of Christ who satisfied divine justice.
The doctrine of Justification is said to be the hinge upon which the gates of heaven open and close. Those who get justification wrong also get the Gospel wrong, and those who die embracing a false gospel will pay for that mistake forever. The doctrine of Justification declares the inflexible righteousness of God as a Judge who must punish every sin, that has ever been committed, by everyone who has ever lived. It also declares His love, mercy, and grace in providing His only Son to be crucified as a substitute for sinners.
Many Christians are unaware of how the Catholic Church has twisted and distorted the biblical doctrine of Justification and condemned those who believe it. Yes, they have pronounced 33 anathemas from the Council of Trent on anyone who believes that they are justified by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Since this has eternal consequences, we have provided 10 contrasts between the biblical Doctrine of Justification and the corrupted doctrine that continues to be taught by Rome. To print a copy of these 10 contrasts click hereThe numbers in parenthesis are paragraph numbers from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
1) Justification is by faith in what God accomplished in Christ (Rom. 5:1). Rome says initial justification is by water baptism (1992).
2) Justification changes one's legal status before God whereby a condemned sinner has been acquitted and declared righteous (Rom. 5:12-21). Rome says justification changes the inner man, not his legal status (2019).
3) Justification is an instantaneous act of God which immediately declares a sinner righteous (Rom. 4:3). Rome says justification is an ongoing process, the ongoing renewal of interior man (2019).
4) Justification is permanent and is never lost by sin. The legal status of a justified man is as unchangeable as the righteousness of Christ (Heb. 10:14). Rome says justification is temporal. It is lost by sin and regained through the sacrament of penance and good works (1446, 1861).
5) Justification is by grace apart from works (Titus 3:7; Rom. 11:6). God justifies those who do not work (Rom. 4:5; Gal. 2:16). Those justified receive the gracious gift of Christ's righteousness (Rom. 5:17). Rome says justification must include good works (2010). "If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, let him be anathema" (Trent, Canon 9). Rome says re-justification must be merited by making satisfaction for sins through works of mercy, prayer, service to neighbors, etc. (1459, 1460, 2027).

6) Justification is by imputation or crediting of Christ's completed righteousness to the one justified (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 4:5). Rome says justification is by infusion of God's righteousness which renews the interior man (1989).
7) God justifies the ungodly (Rom. 4:5). Rome teaches final justification is only for those who have become righteousness (2016, 2020).
8) After justification all sins are no longer taken into account or punished (Rom. 4:5; 2 Cor. 5:19-21). Rome says that sins committed after justification will be punished either in purgatory or in hell (1030, 1861).
9) God promises to glorify everyone He justifies because those justified can never be condemned (Rom. 8:1, 8:30). Rome says that God will condemn to hell anyone who was justified (by water baptism) but who dies in mortal sin (1861).

10) Justification precedes sanctification (Rom. 6-8). Rome says justification is an integral part of sanctification (1995).
The righteousness that justifies the ungodly sinner is an alien righteousness that was accomplished outside of and apart from man. It is the completed righteousness of Jesus Christ and is given as a gift from God apart from any merit or work of man. His perfect righteousness is imputed at the moment the redeemed is united with Christ by faith. The righteousness of Christ is our passport into heaven! No one will enter into glory without it (2 Peter 3:13).


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
WARNING: This post contains citations of both coarse language and blasphemy.

Pulpit & Pen wrote about SBC trained-and-ordained minister, Jeff Hood, in June of 2014. In that post, we explained that the Southern Seminary graduate spoke at a pro-gay event and delivered the message, “Embracing the Power of Queer.” In fact, in that message, he called God “queer.” He’s now affirming polyamory, and using his SBC credentials to do so.
Hood is a graduate of Southern Seminary, Auburn University, Emory University, the University of Alabama, Creighton University (that’s a lot of learnin’) and is currently pursuing a ‘Doctorate of Ministry in Practical Theology with an emphasis in Queer Theology’ from Brite Divinity School at Texas Christian University. Hood’s bio says that his “ordination is held by the Southern Baptist Convention.” A word to the wise, the SBC does not “hold ordinations” as other denominations do, and most likely means that he was ordained in a Southern Baptist Church (which should openly rebuke him along with his ordination council).
Hood has written three books, including The Queer: An Interaction with The Gospel of John, The Queering of an American Evangelical and The Sociopathic Jesus. Although married to a woman, Hood describes himself as “a southerner, queer, and Christian.”
At the aptly-named site, Hippie Heretic, Jeff Hood explains his approval of polyamory (the practice of engaging in multiple sexual relationships, with the full knowledge and approval of all partners engaged; think of it as an approved “love triangle”).
Looking around, I saw a great cloud of polyamorous witnesses shouting, “Holy! Holy! Holy, is the polyamorous love of God!” 
Hood was asked, “From your Southern Baptist background, I’m sure you haven’t always affirmed polyamory. Could you share how your views have shifted on this matter? What led to your change of mind?

Hood responded, “The old wooden doors were intimidating. Pushing hard, I got one of them open. Since everything had already started, I sat on the back pew. I heard a message of love that pulled at me stronger than anything I’d ever felt. Before I knew it, I was out in the aisle. Along the way, I heard the voices of the polyamorous repeatedly whispering, “Why are you persecuting us?” Unable to contain myself, I shouted out, “Forgive me!” At that moment, I collapsed. Before I perished, I felt the pull. Divine polyamory found me a sinner and lifted me up by grace. The Holy Trinity ushered me to love. Looking around, I saw a great cloud of polyamorous witnesses shouting, “Holy! Holy! Holy, is the polyamorous love of God!” The waters of a wild grace washed away all my sin; I was forever changed. In the midst of a great resistance, polyamory saved my soul [emphasis ours].
When asked to explain further, Hood explained that he found a defense for polyamory in the type of love God has for people.
“There is no more intimate love than the love we share with God. In the beginning, God created us in God’s image…we exist to share intimacy with God. The relationship encompasses all types of intimacy. The fact that God seeks such passionate intimacy with all of us…certainly makes God a lover of more than one person at the same time. I have often pondered that polyamorous individuals might be more like God than all the rest us…because they are living out the wildly multidirectional intimacy of God.”
What Hood is describing is the heresy of theoerosism, which confuses the love of God for something erotic, sexual, sensual, or romantic. He goes on to say “The Holy Spirit is in a polyamorous relationship.”
When asked how people have responded to his promotion of polyamory, Hood responded, “The only people who have responded negatively are church assholes that have no knowledge of God. Let me tell you though…there have been some nasty ones. People have stalked me. People have called me a heretic. People have called me disgusting. People have threatened my life. I could go on and on. Do these people sound like they know anything about love? Hell no. I ain’t listening to a damn word they say. I know who I’m listening to. I hear the voice of God, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life…no one can can love me and condemn polyamory…for I am polyamorous.”
Until the SBC churches and institutions that have ordained or trained Hood officially and publicly disfellowship from him, there is no reason he cannot continue to call himself a Southern Baptist and flaunt his SBC credentials to continue doing the work of Satan.
The White Reverend Who Organized the Deadly 
Dallas Black Lives Matter Protest
EXCERPT:  "The Reverend Dr. Jeff Hood was the lead organizer behind the Dallas rally where five police officers were shot and killed. Many accused him of provoking the violence. Now some black activists wonder what place a white man has in the spotlight of their movement in the first place, while others enthusiastically support him. Here, a look inside the mind of a complicated man."
                            POLYAMORY: REV. TONY JONES WITH WIVES
That noted, the philosophy of relativism does happen to be a perfect fit for fools like Dr. Tony Jones who wish to argue in favor of practices of sexual immorality. In Christianity 21 To Attack Christian Sexuality I brought to your attention a July 11th blog post by Jones where he quotes the homosexual writer Dan Savage, whom he calls “America’s premier sex advice columnist.”
Jones lets us know that Savage opines “monogamy is right for many couples” but some:
people need more than one partner, [Savage] writes, just as some people need flirting, others need to be whipped, others need lovers of both sexes. (Online source)
Keep in mind here that I’m having to cover these kinds of delicate sexual issues now because people like Tony Jones, with their spiritually deviant desires, are considered mainstream evangelicals. Now that we noted this, the people who would need “lovers of both sexes,” and thus multiple sexual partners, would be the bisexuals of the LGBT community. 
Jones then, at the very least, hints of a belief in the fairy tale for adults that is the theory of evolution when he says:
"Savage’s sexual ethic is primarily one of realism: human beings are animals who, until very recently, procreated like animals. It is evolutionarily dishonest to demand monogamy of a species predisposed against it. It’s not impossible to be monogamous, he says, but it is super difficult,…" (Online source, bold his)
 "I do know a few things: 1) [Savage is] a h**luva lot more realistic about sex than most Christians I’ve talked to about sex; 2) based on my experience on this blog and at the Wild Goose Festival, a lot of Christians really want to talk about sexuality; and 3) many Christians are ready for our conversations about sexuality to expand beyond “what to do with the gays,” and instead have a more fully-orbed dialogue about sexuality and human identity.
I also know that, for the first time in my life I’ve met Christians who are in “open” marriages or are practicing polyamory — and I’m committed that my theological/ethical response to them be both Christian and pragmatic/realistic. "(Online source)
Here you have a professor of Christian spirituality with a well known ostensibly evangelical seminary arguing against monogamy.


 This is “Bishop” Oliveto, holding up a “We are All Muslims” sign. Okaaay.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A United Methodist church impastor, Karen Oliveto, is a practicing lesbian. She is also accusing Jesus – that is, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity – of having been a bigot.
Currently, the United Methodist church is in a 75-week period dedicated to praying about whether or not the denomination should fully embrace sodomy (link). If the fact Karen Oliveto is a pastor doesn’t indicate the UMC already has embraced sodomy as a valid lifestyle choice, probably nothing will. Oliveto has not only embraced a sexual sin which indicates her unsaved depravity, but accuses Jesus of sin.
Oliveto is the UMC ‘bishop’ currently presiding over the “Big Sky Region” of the UMC, which includes the states of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and Utah, and parts of Idaho.
On a Facebook post of the Yellowstone Conference of the United Methodist Church, Oliveto said the following:
Praying for the clergy and laity of the Mountain Sky Area as we prepare to come together for worship.
I love the Gospel text of this week’s lectionary–Matthew 15:21-28. You know the story:
A Canaanite woman came down from the hills and pleaded with Jesus to heal her sick daughter. Jesus ignored her. The disciples get involved, “Jesus, can’t you do something? She’s driving us crazy.” Jesus tells them no.
Then the woman came back to Jesus, went to her knees, and begged. “Master, help me.” He said, “It’s not right to take bread out of children’s mouths and throw it to dogs.” She was quick: “You’re right, Master, but beggar dogs do get scraps from the master’s table.” Jesus gave in and the woman’s daughter is healed.
Jesus, Jesus, what is up with you? Where is the gentle Jesus, meek and mild, the one who said, “Let the children come to me”? What happened to Jesus, the one who said, “Consider the lilies”. Where did his compassion and love go?
But as I ponder the story, as I look at the verbal jousting between Jesus and this female who is considered less than human because of her gender and ethnicity, I can’t help but note how Jesus comes around.
Too many folks want to box Jesus in, carve him in stone, create an idol out of him. But this story cracks the pedestal we’ve put him on. The wonderful counselor, mighty God, everlasting one, prince of peace, was as human as you and me. Like you and me, he didn’t have his life figured out. He was still growing, maturing, putting the pieces together about who he was and what he was supposed to do. We might think of him as the Rock of Ages, but he was more like a hunk of clay, forming and reforming himself in relation to God.
As one person put it: “Jesus wasn’t a know-it-all, he was also learning God’s will like any human being and finally he changed his mind…if Jesus didn’t have to know it all innately, but rather could grow into new and deeper understanding through an openness to God’s people [even those he formerly discounted], maybe if Jesus could change his mind then maybe so can we!
As he encountered this one who was a stranger, he comes to a fuller sense of the people he is to be in relationship with. He is meant to be a boundary crosser, and in the
crossing over, reveals bigotry and oppression for what they are: human constructs that keep all of us from being whole. He learns that no one, no one, including the outsider, the foreigner, the hated, the misunderstood, the feared, no one is outside of the heart of God and the care of God.
In his conversion, by changing his mind and acting outside of tradition, by treating the woman as a person and responding to her needs, Jesus is willing to stand against culture and social norms and risk his status and power. It is this action of giving up that Jesus gains the most: because of his willingness to be in relationship with one so different, Jesus finds greater intimacy with God. The two go hand in hand.
This is the heart of the story. This is what offers us hope. If Jesus can change, if he can give up his bigotries and prejudices, if he can realize that he had made his life too small, and if, in this realization, he grew closer to others and closer to God, than so can we.
Bishop Karen
The list of heresies committed in this Facebook post may be too numerous to mention. It denies the omniscience of God. It promotes Docetism. It denies the immutability of God. It asserts what amounts to Open Theism. And beyond that, the point of the lesbian impastor’s post to excuse sodomites of their sin and instead, impugn the Son of God with the sin of bigotry.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Switzerland’s legislature has voted to ban the foreign funding of mosques, including from Saudi Arabia, as well as to force mosques to use local languages instead of Arabic or other foreign tongues.
This significant move by the Swiss legislature is to be widely applauded and followed by all Western governments that are interested in the preservation of democracy and human rights for all. Yet predictably, the ban is being deemed “Islamophobic”:
The legislation is not backed by the federal government, however, which claims it unfairly discriminates against Muslims by placing them under suspicion and fuels extremism.
Any action taken against Islamic supremacism (not Muslims who genuinely seek to assimilate and accept Western values and mores) is deemed “Islamophobic.” It is a strategy of stealth jihadists who are adept at fooling Westerners by manipulating diversity programs, guilt for past colonialist wrongs and political correctness. The biggest phobia in the West is to be called “racist.” This is so ingrained that authorities stood by and did nothing while Muslim grooming gangs were abusing young British girls by the tens of thousands, and possibly up to a million.
“Swiss Parliament Votes to Ban Foreign-Funded Mosques and Arabic Preaching” Liam Deacon, Breitbart, September 29, 2017:
Switzerland’s legislature has voted to ban the foreign funding of mosques, including from Saudi Arabia, as well as to force mosques to use local languages instead of Arabic or other foreign tongues.
The Swiss National Council, the parliament’s lower house, voted by a narrow majority to ban the financing of mosques from abroad and for generally increasing the transparency of how mosques are funded.
If the law passes the Senate, individual mosques will need to declare who they are backed by as well as preach in one of Switzerland’s official languages, namely German, French, Italian, or Romansch, Neue Zuercher Zeitung reports.
The vote took place on Tuesday, and according to the Federal Assembly’s website, 94 members of the parliament voted in favour, and 89 voted against.
The new law is said to be inspired by a similar law enacted in Austria in 2015, which was designed to encourage a distinctly “European Islam” and to deter radicalisation and foreign influence on the nation’s Muslims.
The legislation is not backed by the federal government, however, which claims it unfairly discriminates against Muslims by placing them under suspicion and fuels extremism.
They also oppose making mosques use local languages, insisting that it is an issue of freedom of language.
Last year, the federal government managed to block a law voted for by the Council, proposing the banning of the full-face Islamic face veil.
However, a ban on Islamic minarets was voted for in a referendum in 2009 and was approved by nearly 58 per cent of the population.
Saudi Arabia is well known for funding the spread of its radical, Wahhabist interpretation of Islam in Europe, including financing the construction of Finsbury Park Mosque in London. The mosque was notorious for its links to hate preacher Abu Hamza, shoe-bomber Richard Reid, and 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui before it was reformed and reopened in 2005…..


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 SALEM, Mass. — The Massachusetts-based Satanic 
Temple, out of its dissatisfaction with Christian-owned bakeries that 
decline to make cakes celebrating same-sex “weddings,” is now asking its
 followers to force bakers to make a cake for Satan.
The group says that it came up with the idea in light of the Masterpiece Cakeshop case soon to be considered by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“[B]ecause sexual orientation is not a protected class under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, (whereas race and religion are), there is a good chance that the right to discriminate against gay couples will be affirmed as a constitutional liberty,” it wrote.
Out of the Satanic Temple’s fears that the court will likely rule in favor of the cakeshop, it has asked that those “who feel alienated or oppressed by the privileged status that religion holds over sexual orientation” contact religious bakers and order a cake to “honor Satan.”

It asserts that the bakeries will not be able to say no since religion is considered a federally-protected class.
“Because religion is a protected class, a baker may refuse service to LGBTQ people, but they may not refuse service based upon someone’s religion. If they aren’t willing to make a cake for same-sex unions, let’s have them make a cake to honor Satan instead,” spokesperson Doug Messner, who goes by the name Lucien Greaves, said in a statement on Thursday.
However, as previously reported, while the Satanic Temple contends that it is a religious group, it also notes on its website that it is “non-theistic” and does not believe in Satan or the supernatural at all, but only views the devil as a metaphor and a “symbol of the eternal rebel.”

“[W]e do not promote a belief in a personal Satan,” its FAQ section explains. “To embrace the name Satan is to embrace rational inquiry removed from supernaturalism and archaic tradition-based superstitions.”
Some, therefore, consider the group as essentially an atheist effort to make a point about religion.
The Satanic Temple acknowledged to the Daily Caller this week that it is particularly upset that Christian bakers have declined to create baked goods for same-sex ceremonies because many members of the devilish group identify as homosexual.
“A lot of our membership is also homosexual as well, and I feel like there’s obvious reasons for that,” Messner said. “You know, we’re very into that kind of thing. There’s no issue of tolerance with us. And a lot of people who have grown up gay feel very alienated from traditional religion. So we have a very high population of LGBTQ community also as membership of the Satanic Temple.”
As previously reported, in 2015, during the unveiling of its Baphomet statue in Detroit, attendees shouted “Hail Satan” as two shirtless men pulled off the cloth that covered the figure and then embraced and kissed each other in front of the statue.
The group wrote in Thursday’s press release that if the U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of religious bakeries, the Satanic Temple will host a party for Satan in “honor” of every unsuccessful attempt to order a same-sex “wedding” cake from a Christian baker.
“If you can’t get a cake for your same-sex union, we’ll host a party in your honor at The Satanic Temple headquarters in Salem and order a cake that praises Satan from your offending discriminatory ‘religious liberty’ enthusiast,” Greaves said.
Photo Credit: Billy Alexander
According to the Scriptures, one of the signs of the last days is that mockers and scoffers will arise, living in accordance with their own fleshly lusts.
“But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts,” verse 17 reads. “These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.”
The Matthew Henry Commentary on this passage describes such persons as “sensual men separate from Christ and His Church, [who] join themselves to the devil, the world and the flesh by ungodly and sinful practices.”
“We must watch over one another faithfully, yet prudently reprove each other, and set a good example to all about us. This must be done with compassion, making a difference between the weak and the willful. Some we must treat with tenderness. Others save with fear; urging the terrors of the Lord,” he continues. “All endeavors must be joined with decided abhorrence of crimes, and care [must] be taken to avoid whatever led to, or was connected with fellowship with them—in works of darkness—keeping far from what is or appears to be evil.”


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 (Fox News) President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan
 suggested Turkey could free an imprisoned American pastor if the Trump 
administration extradites a Muslim cleric living in Pennsylvania—but the
 State Department says that won’t happen.
American Pastor Andrew Brunson says he was jailed on bogus terrorism charges since his arrest last October. Erdoğan wants to put the cleric, Fetullah Gulen, on trial for allegedly masterminding last year’s failed coup, and has now made clear Brunson has become a bargaining chip in that effort.
Erdoğan said Thursday that Washington was pressing Turkey to return one “cleric” while refusing to hand over another “cleric.”
 Continue reading this story >>


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a statement of interest in favor of a Christian college student who was told last year that he couldn’t preach in a campus free speech zone after officials received complaints that his speaking was “disturbing people’s peace and tranquility.”
“[A] public college that restricts speech simply because it might offend some listeners violates the tenet of content neutrality by codifying a ‘heckler’s veto,'” wrote Acting Assistant Attorney General John Gore. “GGC’s sole stated justification for shutting down Mr. Uzuegbunam’s religious expression in the speech zone fails for precisely the same reason: it rests on ‘a listener’s reaction to speech,’ not the speech itself.”
Chike Uzuegbunam, a student at Georgia Gwinnett College (GGC), sought in July 2016 to distribute tracts and engage in one-on-one conversations with other students outside of the school library. However, he was soon approached by college officials and informed that he could only engage in expressive activity in one of two free speech zones, and only with a permit.
Uzuegbunam then went through the proper channels and proceeded with his evangelistic endeavors in a designated free speech zone weeks later, but this time, also preaching to passersby. He says that he did not use any amplification, nor were his words inflammatory, but he rather simply presented the gospel to students.

“Mr. Uzuegbunam began by discussing the brevity of life and how all men and women have fallen short of God’s commands,” Uzuegbunam’s legal challenge reads. “He continued by explaining how Jesus Christ had come to earth to die on the cross and rise again from the dead in order to provide men and women the only means of obtaining salvation and eternal life. He also explained how this gift of eternal life is available to all by God’s grace and that it is the only way to avoid the penalty for our sins.”
However, approximately 20 minutes later, he was again approached by college officials, who this time told him that complaints had been received that he was disturbing students’ “peace and tranquility,” and that he must therefore stop preaching. Failure to do so would constitute disorderly conduct, Uzuegbunam was warned.
He visited the Office of Student Integrity to speak further with officials, but was advised that it is a violation of school policy to express a “fire and brimstone message” in any form, including in the free speech zones.

However, according to his lawsuit, GGC officials have allowed other students to engage in loud and offensive speech without interference simply because no one complained.
“Defendants have allowed students to engage in offensive forms of speech, including the broadcasting of vulgar, lewd, and obscene music, but stopped Plaintiff from speaking publicly, claiming that someone’s complaint converted his expression into ‘disorderly conduct,’” the lawsuit reads.
Uzuegbunam has not since engaged in open-air preaching on campus as students could complain again.
He is seeking a declaratory judgment from the courts that the college violated his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, as well as an injunction against the school’s free speech policy as it pertains to his religious expression.
The U.S. Department of Justice, in filing its statement of interest this week, contended that dissatisfaction of the hearers is insufficient reasoning for the silencing of free speech.
“GGC officials branded Mr. Uzuegbunam’s speech as ‘disorderly conduct’ under the Student Code of Conduct because it ‘disturb[ed] the peace and/or comfort of person(s).’ This ‘mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness’ among listeners is not a compelling government interest, let alone sufficient to justify the content-based restriction of Mr. Uzuegbunam’s religious speech,” it wrote.
“Instead, GGC applied a ‘heckler’s veto’ that allowed every listener to become a regulator unto himself and to shut down expression simply because the listener found it ‘uncomfortable,'” the filing continued. “For this reason alone, GGC’s content-based restriction fails strict scrutiny, and Plaintiffs have adequately pleaded claims under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.”


 House Majority Whip Steve Scalise returns to Capitol Hill to roaring ovation, where he is welcomed back by House Speaker Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi. 9/29/2017


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
This is wildly unlikely. The Islamic State is a global network of terrorists; white nationalists aren’t. The Islamic State has issued numerous calls for the murder of civilians inside the U.S.; white nationalists haven’t. The Islamic State has inspired many terror plots and attacks in the U.S. already; white nationalists, far fewer.
This bogus analysis from the FBI looks to be an attempt to justify the politically correct diversion of resources away from dealing with the jihad threat, so as to appease Muslim groups in the U.S.
“White Nationalism Is as Much of a Threat to U.S. as ISIS, FBI’s Open Investigations Show,” by Harriet Sinclair, Newsweek, September 27, 2017:
The threat of white nationalist violence in the U.S. is at least as big a threat as that posed by the Islamic State (ISIS) and similar groups, the FBI revealed Wednesday.
Director Chris Wray told the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee that there are currently 1,000 open investigations into domestic terrorist groups and another 1,000 probes into groups with radical Islamist ideology.
But the similar numbers did not satisfy some members of the panel, with several complaining of a double standard in how attacks from white supremacists were investigated compared with those carried out by people who identified as having radical Islamist ideology.
The number of attacks carried out by white supremacists were “almost triple” those of those carried out by people who identified with groups such as ISIS, said Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri. And government data obtained by The Hill suggests the number of white supremacist attacks compared to those from radical Islamist groups was as many as two to one.
“We have had zero hearings on the threat of domestic terrorists and the threat they pose and our response to it,” McCaskill said, explaining there had been a number of hearings about ISIS, but none about white supremacists.
But said white nationalism is no more or less of a priority for the FBI that threats from terrorist organizations.
“We take both of them very, very seriously,” The Hill reported Wray as saying. “Our focus is on violence and threats of violence against the people of this country. That’s our concern; it’s not ideology.”….


 Librarian Rejects 'Racist' Dr. Seuss Books Donated by Melania Trump
 ‘People are unaware…that Dr. Seuss’s illustrations are steeped in racist propaganda’
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A Cambridge, Massachusetts, librarian refused several Dr. Seuss children’s books donated by First Lady Melania Trump, claiming the content is “steeped in racist propaganda.”
The First Lady donated ten Dr. Seuss titles to schools across the country in honor of National Read a Book Day, including, “Oh, the Places You’ll Go,” which Melania indicated she’d read to her son Barron “over and over.”
 Cambridge Public Schools librarian Liz Phipps Soeiro thanked Melania for the “wonderful gesture,” but ultimately labeled Seuss works “a bit of a cliche” and said her library “would not be keeping the titles for our collection” due to their racist nature.
One “fact that many people are unaware of is that Dr. Seuss’s illustrations are steeped in racist propaganda, caricatures, and harmful stereotypes,“ Soeiro wrote in response to the First Lady.
“Open one of his books (If I Ran a Zoo or And to Think That I Saw It On Mulberry Street, for example), and you’ll see the racist mockery in his art,“ Soeiro explained.

The triggered librarian also pointed to a School Library Journal article entitled, “Is the Cat in the Hat Racist? Read Across America Shifts Away from Dr. Seuss and Toward Diverse Books,” which analyzed the “minstrel characteristics and trope nature of Seuss’s characters,” as an example of why Seuss books are racist.
Soeiro also referenced a book by Philip Nel, Was the Cat in the Hat Black? The Hidden Racism of Children’s Literature, and the Need for Diverse Books, as proof the beloved children’s author embraced a racist ideology.
“I am honored that you recognized my students and our school. I can think of no better gift for children than books; it was a wonderful gesture, if one that could have been better thought out,” Soeiro said in an blog post.
The First Lady’s communication director, Stephanie Grisham, called the librarian’s rejection “unfortunate,” and said the Melania just wants “to help as many children as she can.”
“She has demonstrated this in both actions and words since her husband took office, and sending books to children across the country is but one example,” Grisham said in a statement to Fox News. “To turn the gesture of sending young students some books into something divisive is unfortunate, but the First Lady remains committed to her efforts on behalf of children everywhere.”
Seuss’s grandnephew, Ted Owens, also took issue with the librarians’ representation of his great uncle’s works, defending the books and their numerous make-believe characters.
“I know one thing for sure — I never saw one ounce of racism in anything he said, or how he lived his life, or what his stories were about,” Owens told the Boston Herald, adding the charges were “preposterous.”
“When you have grinches and sneetches and all his other characters, how can you say that’s racist? His characters are based on made-up characters,” Owens said, according to the Herald. “They’re Sam-I-Am, they’re elephants, ‘Horton Hears a Who.’”
The mayor of Springfield, Massachusetts, also slammed Soeiro for proposing Seuss had a hidden racist agenda.
“‘One fish — two fish — red fish — blue fish’ — I think her comments ‘stink’ and are ridiculous towards our beloved Dr. Seuss. We’re extremely proud to be home to the one and only Dr. Seuss Museum in the world. By the way, attendance has been through the roof, too!” Mayor Domenic J. Sarno stated.
“Her comments that this is ‘racist propaganda and that Dr. Seuss is a bit of a cliche and a tired and worn ambassador for children’s literature’ is ‘political correctness’ at its worst. …By the way, kudos to First Lady Melania Trump for her generous offer to donate Dr. Seuss books to that Cambridge school library — they don’t want them — we’ll take them and would be honored to have the First Lady and President Trump… visit.”
As pointed out by The Gateway Pundit, librarians didn’t seem to mind when Obama read, Green Eggs and Ham, at the 2010 White House Easter Egg Roll.!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/was3006480.jpg
Update: Internet sleuths found a picture of Liz Phipps Soeiro dressed in a “Cat in the Hat” outfit from March 2015.

 School Librarian Faces Backlash for Rejecting 
First Lady's Gift of Dr. Seuss Books 


 New Swedish Children's Book: 'Grandpa Has Four Wives'
 Normalization of Sharia law accelerates
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A new book aimed at children in Sweden is entitled Grandpa Has Four Wives in another example of how Sharia law is being normalized as the country takes in thousands of Muslim migrants.
The book, named Farfar har fyra fruar in Swedish, has been published in both Swedish and Somali and is aimed at 3-6 year olds.
“Asli has never been to Somalia, but now she finally gets to go there with her dad, to meet grandfather and all her grandmothers,” states the blurb for the book, which is written by Oscar Trimbel and published by Adlibris.
Under Sharia law, Muslim men are allowed to practice polygamy and have up to four wives. A woman is not permitted to have more than one husband.
Another book by the same author entitled Mormor är inget spöke (Grandma is no ghost) serves to normalize the burka.
“Omar greets his grandmother who comes from Somalia. When it’s Halloween, Omar wants to dress up like a ghost like any other child. He wants his grandmother to come along because it can be scary,” states the blurb for the book.
Despite many countries in Europe handing out fines and prison sentences for polygamy, Sweden recognizes polygamous marriages performed abroad and allows up to four wives to be registered as spouses.
Around 30 per cent of people living in Sweden have a foreign background, with native Swedes set to become an ethnic minority in their own countrywithin 25 years.
Illustrating the rapid demographic change sweeping the country, the photo below recently caused controversy. It shows a class photo of a single blonde white girl surrounded by children who are all from a migrant background, with three of the other girls wearing hijabs.
Norwegian news outlet Ekte Nyheter published the photo along with the inscription, “A picture says more than a thousand words.”
Meanwhile, over in nearby Finland, a book entitled How to Marry a Finnish Girl features a cover which some have complained looks like a black man groping a white woman in a wedding dress.
“They’re not even trying to hide it any more,” commented conservative firebrand Milo Yiannopoulos.


 Dr. Duke Pesta and Alex Newman talk about a disturbed 5th grade teacher in Florida who sparked a parental outcry and national scandal after demanding students refer to her by gender-neutral pronouns like “Mx”, instead of Ms. 
Full Article: