Saturday, February 3, 2018




Rand Paul Exposes NSA/FBI Soviet-Style Tactics
 Rand Paul explained the danger of our current surveillance state to Stephen Colbert who pretended to not understand. If Colbert were REALLY concerned about Russians, he’d pay attention to the history of KGB & Stasi & listen to whistleblowers like William Binney.
Comey & FBI/DOJ "Weasels & Liars" Exposed
 FBI "weasels & liars" have now been exposed. The building they work in is named after J Edgar Hoover in case you have trouble finding the weasels & liars.
 FISA Memo Released…Trump Says Democrats Should Be Ashamed Of Themselves!

FISA Memo Made Public, Here Is What Democrats Didn't Want American People to See 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
With President Trump’s approval, the four-page FISA memo prepared by the House Intelligence Committee has been released to the public. Democrats fought the public release of the document, which has been described by GOP members of the House as “explosive,” “shocking,” “troubling,” and “alarming” and showing actions on the part of FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials as being similar to those of the Soviet KGB. Now the American people can judge it for themselves.
The crux of the memo is that the FBI and DOJ violated basic rules and abused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) process in the investigation of allegations of Trump/Russia collusion during the 2016 election.
The memo begins by explaining its purpose and revealing that the House Intelligence Committee has been conducting an “ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle.” It then states the committee’s findings which “1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.”
In all, the four-page memo lists five major points and several parts of each of those points. All of the material in the memo relates — either directly or indirectly — to the surveillance of Carter Page. Page is an oil industry consultant who was a foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. He was targeted by the FBI and DOJ for surveillance by both the FBI and DOJ.
The memo — based on intelligence which is not publicly available, but is referenced in general terms in the memo — shows that the “FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC” and that in spite of legal obligations to “include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government” and the fact that the FBI and DOJ “had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts,” the government “omitted” certain “material and relevant information.”
So, the FBI and DOJ, in an effort to gain FISA court approval to conduct surveillance on a U.S. citizen, presented incomplete information to the court — abusing the FISA process.
But do those omissions rise to the level of being “explosive,” “shocking,” “troubling,” and “alarming” and showing actions on the part of FBI and DOJ officials as being similar to those of the Soviet KGB?
In a word, yes.
The first point listed in the committee's findings is related to the now-discredited “dossier” alleging that Trump was both the victim of blackmail by Russian agents and the recipient of Russian assistance in his electoral contest with Hillary Clinton. The memo points out that the “dossier” was compiled by Christopher Steele, who was paid more than $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign “to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.” It further states, “Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.”
No connections between those involved in the creation (perhaps “manufacture” would be a better word) of the “dossier” and the DNC/Clinton campaign were revealed to the court as part of the application process. The reason for that is apparent: That information would have been counterproductive to the argument put forward by the FBI and DOJ. After all, since the case for surveillance was built on the “dossier,” it would be considerably weakened if the court had known that the document was bought and paid for by Trump’s enemies.
The second point of the committee’s findings is similar. Steele leaked information about the “dossier” to Yahoo News and other media outlets — and later admitted doing so. The FISA application claims he did not. Steele — who had worked for the FBI at the same time he was creating the “dossier” — was later terminated for leaking to media his relationship with the FBI. The FISA court was left in the dark about all of this.
The third point also deals with Steele and his “dossier.” Steele maintained a relationship with Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, who told the FBI about Steele, saying he was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” Though this “clear evidence of Steele’s bias” was “recorded and subsequently in the FBI files,” it was never made known as part of the FISA application process. Furthermore, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS (the company that contracted with Steele to produce the “dossier”) to work on opposition research and dig up dirt on Trump. That information was also kept from the FISA court. Instead the court was led to believe that Steele was a credible source and that his “dossier” was legitimate. The court’s reliance on the “dossier” in approving the surveillance — which is obvious — was because of purposeful and deliberate dishonesty on the part of FBI and DOJ officials.
The fourth point of the committee’s findings states that the “dossier” was “unverified” and the corroboration of its claims was in its “infancy” when it was used as part of the FISA application for surveillance on Page. Furthermore, then-FBI Director James Comey called it “salacious and unverified” in his June 2017 testimony. Nonetheless, it was a crucial piece of the FISA application process with then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe stating in testimony before the committee in December 2017 that the FISA warrant would not have been approved without citing the information in the “dossier.”
The fifth and final point is as damning as any of the rest. It states that the FISA application “also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos.” Even so, the “Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.” It goes on to say that “Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel's Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated.” That point wraps up with, “The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an 'insurance' policy against President Trump’s election.”
It seems clear in retrospect that the investigation into “Trump/Russia collusion” that morphed into the Mueller probe is at least part of that “insurance policy.” It also seems clear that the leadership of the FBI and DOJ deliberately engaged in actions that were designed to defraud the FISA court into violating Page’s privacy.
If the Soviet KGB were operating with even the miserly protections still afforded to Americans under FISA, this seems like exactly the type of illegal, underhanded behavior one would expect as it sought to bring down a president who is a thorn in its flesh.
It will be interesting to see how those Democrats who bent over backward to prevent this memo being made public will now seek to justify both that obstruction and the continuance of the Mueller probe. Every American deserved access to this memo, and now that it is available, every American needs to read it and understand what it means about the Deep State and its tactics.
 Alex Jones presents a video clip from Fox News of President Trump officially announcing the highly anticipated release of the secret, redacted 4 pages of the controversial, damning FISA memo.

 After The Release Of The Secret FISA Memo, Roger Stone Gives His Analysis


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.John 8:44
Perhaps you’ve heard of the pervasive Jezebel that is Jory Micah on social media. Perhaps you’ve seen the incessant tweets or Facebook posts from the feminist floozy that flaunts and promotes herself in the name of Christianity while pushing her fictitious and blasphemous religion which serves no purpose except to promote her father the devil’s objective – to seduce souls away from Christ into the eternal flames of Hell.
Micah has become an internet sensation for those man-hating liberal feminazi types who want to pretend like they still practice some form of piety while hating anything and everything about the God revealed in Scripture, even denying the Trinity. Spiritual prostitutes like Rachel Held Evans, Jen Hatmaker, Beth Moore, and others have latched on to her – made her their disciple. Even her husband, Luke, who apparently wears the apron in the family, has made it his personal duty to reject “so-called biblical gender roles” and be submissive to his wife. While claiming to be a minister of God, it is no secret that she is in rebellion against her creator and has taken to social media to wage war against Him.
Recently, she posted on her Facebook page that she wants Oprah to be her pastor, preacher, and eldership board. Of course, Oprah herself has spent her entire life waging war against God and advancing an ecumenical, anti-Christ spirituality that promotes liberal ideals, feminism, racial activism, and pretty much anything that smears men who refuse to put on a dress and cave to the feminist Nazi agenda. Besides the obvious fact that women are not pastors and preachers – something that is strictly forbidden in Scripture (1 Tim 2:1112) – Oprah has never once in her life ever “preached” Christ or anything remotely truthful pertaining to God.
And neither has Jory Micah.
In response to Justin Peters on Twitter regarding Jen Hatmaker exegeting Beth Moore and preaching to men, she tweets:
To which Justin Peters responded:
Biblical illiteracy just doesn’t it cut it for these sacred molls – these cows of Bashan profit off the spiritual abuse of their followers while their blind sycophancy grovels at the notion that these flesh-feeding frauds have filled the troughs full of poison. Women who refuse to acknowledge their biblical gender role and submit to the authority of Scripture by usurping the role of men in the family and in the Church have not only no grounds to call themselves Christian but are in active rebellion against the religion instituted by Christ.
Jory Micah, who calls herself a pastor, does not serve Christ – she serves her flesh. She leads people astray and serves the idols of her flesh. Sadly, professing Christianity welcomes spiritual harlots like Jory Micah with open arms and much like He had against the church of Thyatira (Revelation 2:20), God hates the tolerance of her immorality. Jory Micah should not be tramping around in the name Christ pretending to speak in His name while spewing blasphemy and deceiving people. She should be called out for who she is, a deceiver who serves her father, Satan. She should be marked and avoided.
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. Romans 1:24-25
 Jory Micah Wants Oprah to Be Her Pastor
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research 
Jory Micah first made social media headlines when she was let go from her teaching position at an Assemblies of God college. She said that it was because she was a woman (the Assemblies of God allow female preachers). She has since elevated herself as a chief proponent of weak-willed women being taken captive everywhere (2 Timothy 3:6). She is regularly known for Twitter and Facebook comments that make little to no sense, and yet, she’s still being added to feminazi women’s conferences around the country, like at the recent Nevertheless She Preached conference.
Micah has denied the Holy Trinity, started a house church explicitly for non-Christians, and in her Masters Thesis she denied that Jesus is still male in his glorified body. Generally speaking, even if she weren’t disqualified from the pastorate for being a woman, she’d be disqualified for teaching more heresies than she has fingers.
Recently (January 7), Micah said that she wanted Oprah to be her pastor, preacher, and eldership board. She hashtagged her comment, “#GoldenGlobes.”
What Micah refers to is Oprah’s #MeToo speech at the recent Hollywood Golden Globes speech, which made headlines for enthralling the Hollywood populace that helped produce the era of sexual harassment in their midst and drew ire from fly-over conservative demographics who typically respect women even when Vice magazine isn’t exposing them.

According to Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire, she had the following points:
1. Oprah Implied That Matters Are The Same For Black Women Today As They Were For Black People Generally In 1964.
2. Oprah’s Press Pandering. Yes, we all appreciate the press for doing the hard work of digging. But it’s nothing but pandering to suggest that they’re engaged in the “insatiable dedication to uncovering the absolute truth that keeps us from turning a blind eye to corruption and to injustice.” The fact is, the press clearly overlooked the Hollywood scandals for decades.
3. “Your Truth.” This one is a pet peeve. Oprah stated, “What I know for sure is that speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have.” She’d go on to praise women for telling their stories of assault and harassment, which is wonderful and positive. But the phrase “your truth” is the opposite of truth — there’s the truth, and there’s your opinion. End of story.
4. She Equated The Status Of A Raped Black Woman In Alabama In 1944 To Women In Hollywood Today. Oprah told the story of Recy Taylor, who was kidnapped and raped in Alabama by six white men. She only died ten days ago. The story is heartbreaking. But then Oprah stated, “She lived as we all have lived, too many years in a culture broken by brutally powerful men. For too long, women have not been heard or believed if they dare speak the truth to the power of those men. But their time is up. Their time is up.”
All of those details are pretty immaterial compared to the fact the Jory Micah (who now fancies herself a co-pastor with her husband) wants Oprah – who hates God – to be her pastor. Here’s Oprah denying the exclusivity of Jesus.
 Although, let’s be honest, it makes total sense that Jory Micah would want a non-Christian as a pastor. Her religion isn’t Christianity; it’s feminism.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Pope Francis, who may actually not be that Catholic, recently called Islam a “Good Religion.” Thousands of ex-Muslims have signed an open letter to the Pope, telling his comments are (essentially) idiotic and unChristian.
The comments in question by the Pope were made in his Evangelii Gaudium (paragraphs 252 and 253), when he said that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.”
The Pope’s critics write…
Here follows the text of an Open Letter to Pope Francis that you can sign if you so wish. ‬We will present it as soon as it reaches a significant number of signatories. ‬Thank you for helping to make it known. ‬We base our initiative on Canon Law: “‬According to the knowledge, ‬the competence and the prestige enjoyed by the faithful, ‬they have the right and sometimes even the duty to give the Sacred Shepherds their opinion on what concerns the good of the Church and to make it known to the other faithful, ‬keeping safe the integrity of faith and morals and the reverence due to pastors, ‬and taking into account the common utility and dignity of people.” (‬Canon ‬212 §‬ 3)‬:‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
From former Muslims who became Catholics, ‬and their friends,‬‬‬‬
to His Holiness Pope Francis,‬‬
‬ about his attitude towards Islam.‬‬
Most Holy Father,

‬Many of us ‬have tried to contact you, ‬on many occasions ‬and for several years, ‬and we have never received the slightest acknowledgement of our letters or requests for meetings. ‬You do not like to beat around the bush, ‬and neither do we, so allow us to say frankly that we do not understand your teaching about Islam, ‬as we read in paragraphs ‬252 ‬and ‬253 of‭ ‬Evangelii Gaudium,‭ ‬because it does not account for the fact‭ ‬that Islam came AFTER Christ,‭ and so ‬is, ‬and can only be, ‬‬an Antichrist‭ (‬see‭ ‬1‭ ‬Jn‭ ‬2.22‭)‬,‭ and one of the most dangerous because it presents itself as the fulfillment of Revelation (‬of which Jesus would have been only a prophet)‬. ‬If ‬Islam is a good religion in itself, ‬as you seem to teach, ‬why did we become Catholic? ‬Do not your words question the soundness of the choice we made ‬at the risk of our lives? ‬Islam prescribes death for apostates (‬Quran ‬4.89, ‬8.7-11)‬, ‬do you know? ‬How is it possible to ‬compare Islamic violence with so-called Christian violence‭?‬  “What is the relationship between Christ and Satan? ‬What union is there between light and darkness? ‬What association between the faithful and the unfaithful?”‬ (2 ‬Cor ‬6: ‬14-17) ‬In ‬accordance with His teaching (‬Lk ‬14:26)‬, ‬we preferred Him, ‬the Christ, ‬to our own life. ‬Are we not in a good position to talk to you about Islam?‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
In fact, ‬as long as Islam wants us to be its enemy, ‬we are, ‬and all our ‬protestations of friendship cannot change anything. ‬As a proper Antichrist, ‬Islam exists only as an enemy of all: “‬Between us and you there is enmity and hatred forever, until you believe in Allah alone!”‬ (Qur’an ‬60.4) ‬For the Qur’an, ‬Christians “‬are only impurity” (‬Quran ‬9.28)‬,” “‬the worst of Creation” (‬Qur’an ‬98.6)‬, ‬all condemned to Hell (‬Qur’an ‬4.48)‬, ‬so Allah must exterminate them (‬Quran ‬9.30)‬. ‬We must not be deceived by the Quranic verses deemed tolerant, ‬because they have all been repealed by the verse of the Sword (‬Quran ‬9.5)‬. ‬Where the Gospel proclaims the good news of Jesus’ death and resurrection for the salvation of all, and ‬the fulfillment of the Covenant initiated with the Hebrews, ‬Allah has nothing to offer but war and murder of the “‬infidels” in exchange for his paradise: “‬They fight on the way of Allah, ‬they kill and are killed.” (‬Quran ‬9:11) We do not confuse Islam with Muslims, ‬but if for you “‬dialogue” ‬means the voice of peace, ‬for Islam it’s only another way to make war. ‬Also, ‬as it was in the face of Nazism and communism, ‬naiveté in the face of Islam is suicidal and very dangerous. ‬How can you speak of peace and endorse Islam, ‬as you seem to do:  “‬To wring from our hearts the disease that‭ ‬plagues our lives‭ (‬…‭) ‬Let those who are Christians do it with the Bible and those who are Muslims do it with the Quran.‭ “(‬Rome,‭ ‬January‭ ‬20,‭ ‬2014‭)‬? That the Pope seems to propose the Quran as a way of salvation,‭ is that not cause for worry? ‬Should we return to Islam‭?
We beg you not to seek in Islam an ally in your fight against the powers that want to dominate and enslave the world, ‬since they share the same totalitarian logic based on the rejection of the kingship of Christ (‬Lk ‬4.7). ‬We know that the Beast of ‬the Apocalypse, ‬seeking to devour the Woman and her Child, ‬has many heads. ‬Allah defends such alliances by the way (‬Quran ‬5.51)! ‬Moreover, the prophets have always reproached Israel for its willingness to ally with foreign powers, ‬to the detriment of the complete confidence they should’ve had in God. ‬Certainly, ‬the temptation is strong to think that speaking in an Islamophilic tone will prevent more suffering for Christians in those countries that have become Muslim, ‬but apart from the fact that Jesus has never indicated any other way than that of the Cross, ‬so that we must find our joy therein ‬and not flee with all the damned, ‬we do not doubt that only the proclamation of the Truth brings with it not only salvation, ‬but freedom as well (‬John ‬8.32)‬. ‬Our duty is to bear witness to the truth “‬in season and out of season” (‬2 ‬Timothy ‬4.‬2)‬, ‬and ‬our glory is to be able to say with St. ‬Paul: “‬I did not want to know anything among you except Jesus Christ, ‬and Him crucified.” (‬1 ‬Corinthians ‬2.2)
As to Your Holiness’s stance on Islam: even as President Erdogan, ‬among others, ‬asks his countrymen not to integrate into their host countries, ‬and while Saudi Arabia and all the petrol monarchies do not welcome any refugee, ‬expressions (among others) of the project‭ ‬of conquest and Islamization of Europe,‭ ‬officially proclaimed by the OIC and other Islamic organizations for decades;‬ ‬you, Most Holy Father, preach the welcoming of migrants regardless of the fact that they are Muslims, ‬something forbidden by Apostolic command: “‬If anyone comes to you but refuses this Gospel, ‬do not receive him among you nor greet him. ‬Whoever greets him participates in his evil works.” (‬2 ‬John ‬1.10-11); “‬If anyone preaches to you a different Gospel, ‬let him be accursed!” ‬(Galatians ‬1.8-9)
Just as “For I was hungry, and you gave me no food.” (Mt 25:42) cannot mean that Jesus would have liked to be a parasite, so “I was a stranger and you welcomed Me” cannot mean “I was an invader and you welcomed Me”, but rather “I needed your hospitality for a while, and you granted it to me”. The word ξένος (xenos) in the New Testament does not only have the meaning of stranger but of guest as well (Rm 16.23; 1 Co 16.5-6, Col 4.10; 3 Jn 1.5). And when YHWH in the Old Testament commands to treat foreigners well because the Hebrews have themselves been foreigners in Egypt, ‬it is on the condition that the foreigner assimilates so well to the chosen people that he accepts their religion and practices their cult‬… ‬Never is there mention of welcoming a foreigner who would keep his religion and its customs! ‬Also, ‬we do not understand that you are pleading for Muslims to practice their religion in Europe. ‬The meaning of Scripture should not be supplied by the proponents of globalism, ‬but ‬in fidelity to Tradition. ‬The Good Shepherd hunts the wolf, ‬He does not let it enter the sheepfold.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
‬‬The pro-Islam speech of Your Holiness leads us to deplore the fact that Muslims are not invited to leave Islam, and ‬that many ex-Muslims, ‬such as Magdi Allam,‭ ‬are even leaving the Church, ‬disgusted by her cowardice, ‬wounded by equivocal gestures, ‬confused by the lack of evangelization, ‬scandalized by the praise given to Islam ‬… ‬Thus ignorant souls are misled, ‬and Christians are not preparing for a confrontation with Islam, ‬to ‬which St. ‬John Paul II has called them (‬Ecclesia in Europa,‭ ‬No.‭ ‬57‭)‬.‭ ‬We are under the impression that you do not take your brother Bishop Nona Amel, ‬ Chaldean-Catholic Archbishop of Mosul in exile, ‬seriously, ‬when he tells us: “‬Our present sufferings are the prelude to those that you, ‬Europeans and Western Christians, ‬will suffer in the near future. ‬I have lost my diocese. ‬The headquarters of my archdiocese and my apostolate have been occupied by radical Islamists who want us to convert or die. (‬…) ‬You are welcoming into your ‬country an ever increasing number of Muslims. ‬You are in danger as well. ‬You must make strong and courageous decisions (‬…)‬. ‬You think that all men are equal, ‬but Islam does not say that all men are equal. (‬…) ‬If you do not understand this very quickly, ‬you will become the victims of the enemy that you have invited into your home.” (‬August‭ ‬9,‭ ‬2014‭) “‬.‭ This is a matter of life and death,‭ ‬and any complacency towards Islam is treasonous. ‬We do not wish the West to continue with Islamization, ‬nor that your actions contribute to it. ‬Where then would we go to seek refuge?‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
Allow us to ask Your Holiness to quickly convene a synod on the dangers of Islam. What remains of the Church where Islam has installed itself? If she still has civil rights, it is in dhimmitude, on the condition that she does not evangelize, thus denying her very essence. ‬In the interest of justice and truth, ‬the Church must bring to light why the arguments put forward by Islam to blaspheme the Christian ‬faith are false. ‬If the Church had the courage to do that, ‬we do not doubt that millions, ‬Muslims as well as other men and women seeking the true God, ‬would convert. ‬As you said: “He who does not pray to Christ, prays to the Devil.”(14.03.13) If people knew they were going to Hell, ‬they would give their lives to Christ. (‬cf. Quran ‬3.55)‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
‬‬‬With the deepest love for Christ who, ‬through you, ‬leads His Church, ‬we, ‬converts from Islam, ‬supported by many of our brothers in the Faith, ‬especially the Christians of the East, ‬and by our friends, ask Your Holiness to confirm our conversion to Jesus Christ, ‬true God and true man, ‬the only Savior, ‬with a frank and right discourse on Islam, ‬and, ‬assuring you of our prayers in the heart of the Immaculate, ‬we ask your apostolic blessing.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
Currently, there are just shy of 4k who have signed the statement. You can read the statement at its original host here. There is no word on whether or not the Pope finds any clerics or Imams to have a “kindred spirit.” 

 Church Offers a 90-Day Money-Back Guarantee to Tithers if ...
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The Bible speaks of tithing. This is true. The Bible does not speak of tithing as an “adventure” and neither does it promise a return on your money. This is the problem.
The Menlo Church is a multi-site congregation across the San Francisco “Bay Area.” It is pastored by John Ortberg, who is a graduate of Wheaton and Fuller Seminary with degrees in psychology (which he seems to be putting to use). He is also a protege of Bill Hybels, having served on staff at seeker-friendly flagship, Willow Creek Church in the Chicago area. Ortberg is currently on the Board of Trustees at Fuller and is on the board for the Dallas Willard Center for Spiritual Formation.
Menlo Church and Ortberg have launched a new propaganda campaign for their congregants, challenging them to the “adventure” of tithing and promising them a “money back guarantee” that it will work.
The “Tithe Challenge” campaign reads – as an agreement between the church and its givers”
  • I would like to test God’s faithfulness by accepting the three-month Tithe Challenge. I agree that for the three-month period I will give to God, through Menlo Church general offering, an offering of 10% of my income. At the end of the three months, if I am not convinced of God’s faithfulness to bless my life as a result of my obedience to his Word, then I will be able to request a return of the full amount of my offerings given to Menlo Church during the three-month period of my Tithe Challenge.
This notion is derived from Malachi 3:10, which is posted prominently on the challenge website:
10 Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. And thereby put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need. 
In order to take up the challenge, givers need to agree to the following terms, according to the church website:
  • I understand that my three-month Tithe Challenge (Challenge) start date will start after this form is received by Menlo Church’s accounting team. Therefore, my Challenge start date must be today or a future date by August 31, 2018.
  • I understand my household qualifies for participation in the Challenge because we have not been tithing for the past six months.
  • I understand I cannot request a return of my offerings until the end date of my three-month Tithe Challenge period.
  • I understand I cannot request a return of my offerings for any contributions made before or after the effective dates of my three-month Tithe Challenge period.
  • I understand I must request a return of my offerings to Menlo Church’s accounting team within 30 days of the end of my Challenge period using the online form or in writing.
  • I understand that any offerings not made online during the Challenge toward my tithe must be paid by check or in a completed offering envelope for tracking purposes.
  • I understand that I must log in to my online account prior to paying my tithe online so that my tithe can be credited for tracking.
You can find the legal agreement HERE, which members can finalize by logging into the church website.
While this is an ingenious way to manipulate givers into contributing a tenth of their income to the church, it’s not Biblically supported. To be very clear, the Old Testament tithe did require multiple tithes, the New Testament requires cheerful, regular, sacrificial and proportional giving. While some are quick to say, “the tithe isn’t for the New Testament era,” I see no reason that the principle of ten percent given in the Levitical tithe (for spiritual purposes) can’t guide or inform us in deciding what proportion of income we give to the Lord.
While calling New Testament giving a “tithe” might require a number of asterisks for clarity, what should really be taken exception with is the notion that God is promising a return on money (either a financial return or any other kind – even spiritual – return). While the Malachi passage certainly contains a promise from God to those to whom Micah prophesied (concerning the tithes required by Moses), translating that to the New Testament church age requires real hermeneutical and exegetical gymnastics.
In the meantime, the whole thing is manipulative at face value. Who wants to be the guy who asks for his money back? Nobody wants to be that guy. And might I suggest that if he gave in order to receive, God doesn’t want his money anyway. But, I bet the church still does. Asking that people give under a guarantee of return is precisely the opposite of the worshipful, selfless offering that God desires of us in the New Testament.
We as believers are indeed required to give in the New Testament era, but never according to unbiblical “seed faith” principles like the guarantees offered by Menlo Church.
2nd Corinthians 9:6-8
6-Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. 7-Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. 8-And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that always having all sufficiency in everything, you may have an abundance for every good deed;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Russell Moore has been not-so-slowly and not-so quietly turning the wheel of the Southern Baptist Convention a hard-left on social issues. He claims that animal rights are a spiritual issue. Russell Moore claims that protecting illegal immigrants from prosecution or extradition is a Gospel issue. Russell Moore claims that environmentalism “creation care” is a Gospel issue.  Russell Moore says that “racial justice” is a Gospel issue. In fact, it’s hard to find a single political issue that Russell Moore hasn’t taken the left-of-center position on, making it into a Gospel – or at least a Biblical – issue. Moore has refused to take a stance on the Biblical right to self-defense. Moore works for George Soros’ Evangelical Immigration Table and uses the ERLC twitter account to tweet out George Soros propaganda. Moore isn’t even shy of using the term “social justice” in talking about the goal of the ERLC. All the while Southern Baptists have largely celebrated the hard-left turns or, at best, been silent.
On two issues, generally speaking, Southern Baptists have been stalwart. The first is the issue of homosexuality, and Moore has “softened his tone” on this issue as well and he’s helping to normalize the “homosexual desires aren’t sinful” agenda of progressive Christians. The other issue is abortion, but Russell Moore has chosen to use Sanctity of Life weekend to redefine “Pro-Life” and make the sanctity of life about…big surprise…immigration.
According to CBN, Russell Moore is “casting a new vision” for what it means to be pro-life.
In his keynote address to the 2018 gathering of Evangelicals for Life, Southern Baptist spokesman Russell Moore made the case that caring for the “invisible” includes refugees, the elderly, orphans and trafficked women and children.
“Caring for women in crisis is worth it, caring for the orphans, the elderly….is worth it,” he admonished. “In all these cases it’s difficult. You have to sacrifice your life.”
Moore told CBN News that many at the grassroots level have been practicing this holistic pro-life approach for years. But he and other leaders are well aware that pro-life opponents routinely attack the movement for a perceived narrow focus that’s inconsistent with the view that all lives are made in the image of God.
Moore thinks the Pro-Life movement needs to be “more holistic” because its focus has been too “narrow.” So then, Moore plans to lay down the battle on murder in the womb (as he has surrendered the cultural battle on gay marriage) and be more “holistic.”
It’s here I have to ask, “What kind of hippy garbage is this?” How about this. How about we stop ripping babies limb from limb and suck their brains out of vacuums from with the womb and then we talk about why chain-migration is somehow a human right? Mercy.
It’s almost like Russell Moore is being paid by George Soros or someth…oh. Wait. He is.
[Contributed by JD Hall…oh, and just for the extra facepalm, he was really excited about having theoerotic “making love with God” Anne Voskamp at his recent event. I’d show you his tweet, but you know, I’m blocked and everything. So, gross.]

Melissa Moore was previously known as Melissa Fitzpatrick. She is divorced, which Melissa initiated because of a “personality conflict” (according to divorce documents). Nonetheless, Melissa continues to write and contribute to her mother’s publications and help’s produce Living Proof Ministies.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Melissa Moore is the daughter of Beth Moore, who we have written about many, many times. The Southern Baptist Popetress, the Evangelical Bishop of Women, the wild-eyed prophetess, has virtual altars built to her at Lifeway Christian Stores and gaggles of millions gather for her (probably ghost written) Bible studies. Hundreds of thousands attend her conferences, hundreds of thousands more attend her live-stream events, and she is – without a doubt – the most popular female preacher in America.
And, without a doubt, Beth Moore is a really, really bad Bible teacher. While the material that is put through the sieve (and probably written by) Lifeway from women’s Bible studies isn’t atrocious, her preaching usually is. There is a severe and systemic Scripture-twisting, a disregard for hermeneutics, a proclivity for narcigesis, and the regular recalling of direct, divine revelation (whatever thought she claims God personally beamed into her head).
Moore has grown increasingly charismatic, and with it, increasingly egalitarian. Although Moore began her career as a Southern Baptist who “taught” (read that, “preached”) only to women, Moore makes absolutely no effort whatsoever now to limit her teaching to women. John Piper – with whom she speaks annually at the Passion Conference – infamously encouraged men to listen to her teaching as well.
The major concern with Moore leading women is what she is leading them to. As the women in your church gather around their kitchen table with a Beth Moore Lifeway study or to watching Living Proof on TBN, are they being taught the doctrine of your church, is it undermining solid teaching? One need look no further than Moore’s daughter, Melissa Moore.
Melissa Moore was previously known as Melissa Fitzpatrick. She is divorced, which Melissa initiated because of a “personality conflict” (according to divorce documents). Nonetheless, Melissa continues to write and contribute to her mother’s publications and help’s produce Living Proof Ministies.
Of course, seminaries may offer classes to pastor’s wives on – I don’t know – hospitality or something practical for women to learn. And, even some “conservative” seminaries like the Southern Baptists’ New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary will graduate women with degrees in pastoral leadership (source link). While it makes no sense to graduate women with degrees that they should never Biblically use, it also makes no sense to allow women to teach in seminary what they should not be teaching in the church. Doctrine is taught authoritatively, and that is not the role of women.
Obviously, the course catalog for a seminary may include a course for something other than doctrine, for which women may be qualified (such as a liberal art discipline). But, the Scripture is pretty clear on male leadership in spiritual matters.
Regardless of whether or not there could be a history, language or sewing class taught by a female at a seminary, what we really take issue with is Melissa Moore’s comment, “For the love of God, we do not need any more people serving in the church who have only been taught by men.”
Keep in mind, that the Scripture doesn’t “foresee” a place like a seminary, which is halfway in the church and halfway out. The Scripture only ordains or promotes explicitly that which is in the church. And in the church, women may not teach men (and, historic Christianity would argue, may not teach in any authoritative – especially doctrinal – matter, even to other women).
What kind of generational crop of feminists is Beth Moore creating? Look no further than her ministry partner and daughter, Melissa. Are you sure you don’t want to break free of Beth Moore?

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 WASHINGTON — The Episcopal Diocese of Washington, D.C. voted on Saturday 
to stop using “gendered pronouns” for God in future revisions of its Book of 
Common Prayer and to “remove all obstacles” for “transgender” participation 
in church life by making all gender-specific facilities and activities accessible to 
those who identify as the opposite sex.
“Resolved … that the 79th General Convention direct the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, if revision of the Book of Common Prayer is authorized, to utilize expansive language for God from the rich sources of feminine, masculine, and non-binary imagery for God found in Scripture and tradition and, when possible, to avoid the use of gendered pronouns for God,” the resolution read.
It was passed by a show of hands during the 123rd Convention of the Washington Diocese with only a few opposed, according to Strategic Communications Director Richard Wosson Weinberg.
“While other Christian denominations have embraced more comprehensive language for God, The Episcopal Church has chosen to use masculine pronouns when referring to the first and third person of the Trinity. This choice has had a profound impact on our understanding of God. Our current gender roles shape and limit our understanding of God,” the diocese said in an explanation of the resolution.

“By expanding our language for God, we will expand our image of God and the nature of God,” it continued. “Our new Book of Common Prayer needs to reflect the language of the people and our society. This resolution assumes that the authors of our new Book of Common Prayer will continue in the long tradition of beautiful poetic language. However, this beautiful language should not be limited by gendered pronouns when avoidable.”
According to reports, delegate Linda Calkins of St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church in Laytonsville, Maryland wanted the diocese to go a step further as she held a copy of “The Inclusive Bible: The First Egalitarian Translation” and asked when the version would be utilized.
She read from Genesis 17, in which the “Inclusive Bible” referred to God as “El Shaddai.”

“[I]f we are going to be true to what El Shaddai means, it means God with breasts,” Calkins claimed.
The diocese also stated that its resolution surrounding those with gender dysphoria was to ensure that those who live as the opposite sex feel welcomed as fellow Christians.
“Transgender Christians are searching for a connection with God within a loving community where they can worship and work for equality and justice. Unfortunately, many transgender people are too often left without a place to worship because congregations are not ready to welcome them as their Christian companions,” it asserted. “Fixed boundaries of gender identity are being challenged and churches need to respond.”
The resolution, in addition to decrying violence against “transgender” persons, also urged “all parishes to remove all obstacles to full participation in congregational life by making all gender-specific facilities and activities fully accessible, regardless of gender identity and expression.”
The measure was stated to have passed without dissent.
As previously reported, in 2015, when a group of women known as WATCH moved for the Church of England to start referring to God as a “she” during the weekly liturgy, stating that to make mention of God solely in the male pronoun is sexist, some expressed strong opposition.
“Referring to God as ‘mother’ drives a horse and cart through Scripture. Such an innovation is guaranteed to split the C of E as never before,” wrote Damian Thompson in the Daily Mail.
“Lord Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury, has warned us that the church could be extinct in 25 years’ time unless services become more spiritually fulfilling. Calling God ‘she’ will not achieve that fulfillment,” he stated. “The proposed twist of language will do nothing to stop the decline of Christian faith in this country. On the contrary, it will make worshippers squirm. And nothing empties pews faster than that.”
1 John 4:14 reads, “And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.”
Jesus also said in John 15:26, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me.”
 The Gospel Coalition Says Church Should Be 
“Safe Space” for Homosexuals