Wednesday, July 4, 2018


Four Progressive Steps into Apostasy
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Throughout the 2000 year history of the Church, we have seen a continual departure of people and churches from the faith of the apostles. As incredibly tragic as this has been, it should not surprise us because Paul warned: "The Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons"     (1 Tim. 4:1). Shortly after our Lord began building His Church, the apostle John records one of the first occurrences of apostasy. "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us" (1 John 2:19). Since then, many other professing Christians, churches, denominations, and seminaries, who once upheld the truth and authority of God's Word, have drifted into apostasy. One of the interesting characteristics of apostasy is that it does not happen overnight. It actually develops over a period of time through a process that can be categorized into four steps. 

First Step into Apostasy
God's word is neglected as the supreme authority for faith and practice. Man's words and wisdom become as important as God's Word. Traditions and movements of men cause confusion and divided loyalties. People start following "Christian" personalities instead of the Word of God. Pastors discard the Lord's blueprint for building His church and create their own strategy. Pastors win the approval of men for the size of their church, rather than their faithfulness and fidelity to God's Word. The power of the Gospel is weakened by compromise and made more inclusive to gain a larger following. Biblical evangelism is replaced by man's methods of conversion. Churches give people what they want instead of what they need. The pursuit of sanctification is neglected. Biblical warnings to expose false teachers are ignored. A little leaven in the form of heresy is allowed to circulate. Contenders for the faith are labeled as divisive and intolerant. Women are allowed to teach men.
Second Step into Apostasy
Scripture is twisted and distorted for self-serving agendas. Truth becomes subjective and relative. Doctrinal error and sin are tolerated by pastors who neglect their responsibility to protect the sheep. Satan sows his tares with little resistance. Pastors become more determined to build their own church rather than the Lord's church. The Gospel becomes more inclusive to attract more people. Expository preaching is replaced by topical messages. Biblical ignorance in the pew provides fertile ground for false teachers to prosper. Trials and persecution expose dead and spurious faith. The exhortation to contend earnestly for the faith is ignored. People honor God with their lips, but their hearts are far from Him. "Infallible" men claim to be successors of the apostles and are embraced as brothers-in-Christ. Ungodly men creep in and turn the grace of our God into licentiousness. Contenders for the faith are asked to leave.
Third Step into Apostasy
Entertainment, idolatry, liturgy and rituals have replaced the Lord Jesus from the central focus of worship. Pastors are more interested in entertaining the goats than feeding the sheep. Ear-tickling messages give people what they want instead of what they need. Sound doctrine and truth is suppressed for the sake of ecumenical unity. Hearts become hardened and love for God grows cold. Doctrinal error flourishes and is embraced with stubborn pride. There is no love for the truth and no discernment. People stand for nothing and fall for everything. A form of godliness exists, but it's void of power. Idolatry is practiced and encouraged. Sin and immoral lifestyles are tolerated. Women are ordained as pastors.
Fourth Step into Apostasy
Teaching is heavily influenced by doctrines of demons. Jesus has been removed from the church. Deception is full-blown. Lying signs and wonders, including apparitions, are embraced as messages from God or Mary. Idolatry and prayers to the dead are encouraged. Those who proclaim the Gospel truth are condemned with anathema or put to death. Grace is turned into a license to sin. There is no longer any evidence of the fruit of the Spirit. God's grace and forgiveness are sold for a price. The church's lampstand has been removed, and a certain terrifying judgment is now unavoidable.

Perhaps you are in a church or denomination that is drifting into apostasy. Will Jesus Christ use you to contend earnestly for the faith and protect the sanctity of His Church? In these last days of growing apostasy and deception, we all need to heed the warning of Peter and encourage others to do the same: "Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position" (2 Peter 3:17). Will you defend the glory and honor of our great God and Savor and protect the purity of His Gospel? May God's Word exhort and encourage us to fight the good fight of faith!


President Donald Trump has tweeted a military-themed, Independence Day video greeting to the nation. In a short recording, Trump said Wednesday he and first lady Melania Trump wished everyone a happy holiday. (July 4)

President Donald Trump SPEECH at White House 4th of July Picnic for Military Families - July 4, 2018


Joel Houston, band member and songwriter with Hillsong United and worship leader at Hillsong NYC, drew numerous questions among followers last week in claiming that evolution, being pursuant to God’s authority and creative Word, “is undeniable” and was “created by God.” The matter has left some confused, and some remain unsure about what Houston meant by his remarks or what he was referring to in using the word “evolution.”
In seeking to sort out his various remarks, some have raised concerns, including the biblical creation organization Answers in Genesis, which deduced from Houston’s statements that the singer is asserting that “God started the universe with the supposed Big Bang and that naturalistic evolutionary processes followed” to bring about His declared will. Houston contends that he was trying to convey that “[s]cience is just catching up with what God said”—that God spoke “Let there be light” and “bang!”
The situation began on June 24 when a follower named Brian Peterson asked Houston, the son of Hillsong founder Brian Houston, if he has ever provided an explanation of the group’s reference to evolution in the popular worship song “So Will I (100 Billion X).”
“All nature and science/Follow the sound of Your voice/And as You speak/A hundred billion creatures catch Your breath/Evolving in pursuit of what You said/If it all reveals Your nature, so will I,” the lyrics state.
“Evolution is undeniable—created by God as a reflective means of displaying nature’s pattern of renewal in pursuance of God’s Word—an ode to the nature of the creative God it reflects—and only ever in part—not the SOURCE!” Houston replied. “Science and faith aren’t at odds. God created the Big Bang.”
As his response drew controversy, Houston posted clarification that he doesn’t believe evolution is the source of all creation—God is the Creator and spoke all things into existence—but that the reference was rather in regard to his view that creation evolves and adapts to catch up with what God authoritatively called it to be. In other words, Houston believes that evolutionary events continue to take place in nature to come into obedience to the Word of God spoken at the beginning.
While he did not provide specific examples of what he believes to be evolution, he agreed with a follower who said that they wanted to keep the discussion of evolution “micro and not macro,” so as not to confuse “bad philosophy with good science.”
“Context—things evolve, they change and adapt. I DON’T believe in evolution as a theory of SOURCE; I believe it’s merely a pattern of nature—created by God, reflecting nature’s desire for renewal, survival, new life—something-SomeONE—like God,” he said.
“I think what gets lost, strangely enough, is that in any case, the Word comes before any kind of Big Bang. ‘Let there be light’!! BOOM!! And there WAS!!!” Houston stated.
He also referred to the matter in a spiritual sense, outlining God’s transformative power, that “[w]e’ve been saved and called to a embody a different nature.”
“I think adaptability is nature’s way; the Spirit calls us to adapt to a different kind of nature—either way, we’re all evolving—towards what, and WHO, is the question for all of us,” Houston stated.
“[A]ccording to the Spirit-nature renewing us, we evolve counter-naturally to that of our earthen nature—ever in response to God’s Word,” he further noted.
When asked if he believes in the Big Bang or a literal six-day creation, he responded vaguely, “It means I believe God created everything and His Word came first.” Yet, when another reader took issue with Houston’s statement that “God created the Big Bang,” he replied, “And the earth was formless and void, darkness covered the earth, and the Spirit was hovering over the surface of the deep. And God said, ‘Let there be light!’ And there was … BANG! That’s all I’m saying. Science is just catching up with what God said.”
Houston also responded to another follower who asked about where he stands on ape to man evolution, advising that he believes God made man out of the dust, as stated in Genesis.
He opined that some were jumping to conclusions about his beliefs and not understanding his words or the words of the song.
“The entire premise of ‘So Will I’ is the redemptive, creative, authority and power of God’s Word. That at the end of the day, all our best theories, ideas, dogmas and best attempts at understanding will ultimately surrender to the ‘Word at the beginning,'” Houston said.
However, he additionally suggested that it doesn’t matter whether God created the universe in a literal six days or if it evolved over time.
“If God’s creative process was an easy working week, or finely crafted over six-ages of millennia, does it make Him any more or less God?” Houston asserted. “Or us any more or less created in His image? Either way, it was an unfathomably wonderful six-day process, however you think to see it.”
Another follower stated that he found a problem with the concept of “whatever your viewpoint, God controlled it,” because if natural selection occurred before The Fall, it would contradict the Scripture that teaches, “Through one man, death entered the world…”
“Well now, we could start going DEEEP!!!! Perhaps too deep for tweets,” Houston replied. “I wasn’t there (literally), so I can’t say … but I don’t believe any of it is a problem to God, when it comes to His redemptive plan for humanity.”
Read Houston’s comments here and here, and view a video explanation of the song recorded in 2017 here.
Ken Ham’s Answers in Genesis was asked by the ministry’s supporters to comment on the matter, and he, along with Dr. Georgia Purdom, said that while “it’s hard to know exactly what Joel Houston is saying,” they concluded that “there’s enough in the tweets to convince us that Joel Houston did use the terms science and evolving in the second verse of the song to mean that God started the universe with the supposed Big Bang and that naturalistic evolutionary processes followed.”
“The terminology used here is common among those who compromise evolution with Genesis … who claim that God started everything with the Big Bang and built into that original creation the laws of nature so that by natural processes everything would unfold over billions of years to produce the universe and all living things as they are today,” Ham and Purdom outlined.
They said that the Big Bang, as it is known in scientific terms, is not biblical.
“Many Christians have argued that the way God created in Genesis could be described as God using a Big Bang as his method. However, the Big Bang model has the stars and sun coming into existence before the earth, whereas the creation account in Genesis clearly teaches that the earth was created before the sun and the stars. Many other contradictions make it clear that God did not use the supposed Big Bang to create,” Ham and Purdom stated.
They opined that if they understand Houston’s tweets correctly, they would not sing the song—especially considering his assertion that it doesn’t matter whether Creation was a literal six days or not—and are concerned about how the tune could influence others based on how he explained it.
“We think his response makes it quite clear that he’s saying a person can believe in evolution/millions of years or six days of creation, but it doesn’t matter, as long as you believe in and worship our Creator God. Now if this is so, would we sing this song? Not at all,” Ham and Purdom stated. “In fact, if our understanding is correct, then this song and what Joel has said about his composition, can, sadly, potentially influence thousands of young people with a compromised position on Scripture in Genesis.”
David Mathis, who also wrote about the matter for Desiring God, said that he wasn’t certain what the lyrics meant either, but remarked that at the very least, the use of “evolving” was a poor word choice, especially for corporate worship.
“Maybe the authors didn’t really mean ‘evolve,’ but only hoped to communicate that God’s hundred billion creatures ‘obey,’ or are ‘led by,’ or are ‘guided by’ what God says. That’s the best possible reading I can imagine, but the problem remains: ‘evolve’ does not mean ‘obey.’ ‘Evolve’ does not mean ‘guide,'” he wrote. “This ‘evolving’ line is either what many of us would view as a foolish compromise with unbelieving philosophy (masquerading as ‘science’), or it’s a very bad word choice.”
“Whatever was intended by the authors, I cannot see how a significant number of worshipers will not be distracted and confused by that word choice—which is disappointing since it’s such a good song otherwise,” Mathis said.
Answers in Genesis said that it would like to see Houston publicly denounce the Big Bang (as used by secular scientists) and evolution, and clearly state that he believes in the literal six-day creation.
“Also, I would like to publicly invite him to come visit the Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum, and I would gladly give him a personal tour,” Ham said.
Read Ham’s post in full here and Mathis’ post here.
On Monday, Houston shared a link about a young planet that is stated to still be forming, writing, “Fake news?—or the ever-expanding wonder of God’s Word still creating evolving-things from whence it first spoke ‘little lights into the vault of the sky to help govern the day and the night, and separate light from darkness’?”
Just another example of how mainstream Christianity is falling deeper and deeper into scientism. Hillsong Worship Pastor Joel Houston tweeted out: Evolution is undeniable—created by God as a reflective means of displaying nature’s pattern of renewal in pursuance of God’s Word—an ode to the nature of the creative God it reflects—and only ever in part—not the SOURCE! Science and faith aren’t at odds. God created the Big-Bang.


He messaged her on Facebook. She was 12. Now he's accused of a sex assault behind TJ Maxx

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Why does this keep happening?
Sexual assault occurs in all cultures, but only in Islam does it have divine sanction.
One survivor of a Muslim rape gang in the UK said that her rapists would quote Quran to her, and believed their actions justified by Islam.
The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.
In this case, Mohamed Hussein’s victim was 12 years old. This may have been because Hussein’s reverence for Muhammad led him to think of children as sexual objects. Islamic apologists in the West routinely deny that Muhammad consummated his marriage with (i.e., raped) Aisha when she was nine, and go through all sorts of contortions to deny the evidence of the texts, but the fact that child marriage is accepted in wide swaths of the Islamic world, even by the directorate of religious affairs in once-“moderate” albeit now rapidly re-Islamizing Turkey, most clearly shows their dishonesty. The Diyanet wouldn’t approve of child marriage if it weren’t Islamic, as it explains in its own defense. And child marriage has abundant attestation in Islamic tradition and law.
“Islam has no age barrier in marriage and Muslims have no apology for those who refuse to accept this” — Ishaq Akintola, professor of Islamic Eschatology and Director of Muslim Rights Concern, Nigeria
“There is no minimum marriage age for either men or women in Islamic law. The law in many countries permits girls to marry only from the age of 18. This is arbitrary legislation, not Islamic law.” — Dr. Abd Al-Hamid Al-‘Ubeidi, Iraqi expert on Islamic law
There is no minimum age for marriage and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.” — Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council
“Islam does not forbid marriage of young children.” — Pakistan’s Council of Islamic Ideology
Hadiths that Muslims consider authentic record that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage:
“The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).
Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari 5.58.234).
Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.
Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today. And so in April 2011, the Bangladesh Mufti Fazlul Haque Amini declared that those trying to pass a law banning child marriage in that country were putting Muhammad in a bad light: “Banning child marriage will cause challenging the marriage of the holy prophet of Islam, [putting] the moral character of the prophet into controversy and challenge.” He added a threat: “Islam permits child marriage and it will not be tolerated if any ruler will ever try to touch this issue in the name of giving more rights to women.” The Mufti said that 200,000 jihadists were ready to sacrifice their lives for any law restricting child marriage.
“Vermont man charged with assaulting 12-year-old girl,” Associated Press, June 30, 2018 (thanks to Creeping Sharia):
BURLINGTON, Vt. (AP) — Police in Burlington, Vermont, have charged a man with sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl.
Police say 19-year-old Mohamed Hussein drove the girl to a shopping center where the assault occurred on Friday. He faces charges of aggravated sexual assault and unlawful restraint.
Police were originally told the girl was abducted but investigators said there was no abduction….


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
An Indianapolis church has placed statues of Mary, Joseph, and baby Jesus inside a fence to protest President Trump’s immigration policy.
Christ Church Cathedral detained the Holy Family on its lawn as part of its “Every Family is Holy” campaign, meant to condemn Trump’s zero-tolerance immigration policy.
“They were a homeless family with nowhere to stay,” Steve Carlson, the church’s dean said on Tuesday. “I think our faith tells us where we need to be. The fact that it’s controversial isn’t because I want to be controversial.”
“What’s controversial is that we’re turning away from the values that should be guiding us. The point of a religious icon is to move our hearts. If at first, people are upset by it, that might just be God trying to move their hearts. I hope their hearts soften.”
View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
Christ Church Cathedral in Indianapolis has Jesus, Mary and Joseph held in detention as part of its campaign.

"Jesus, Mary and Joseph were homeless and fled danger to seek asylum...the Holy Family today calls us to stand with all families seeking safety."
But where are the soft hearts for families victimized by illegal immigrants, or by the drugs brought into the US?
Interestingly, the Bible frequently mentions the moral goodness of protecting a nation’s borders.
“Violence shall no more be heard in your land,
devastation or destruction within your borders;
you shall call your walls Salvation,
and your gates Praise.” – Isaiah 60:18
Likewise, it also laments the shame of a city without walls.
“A man without self-control is like a city broken into and left without walls.” – Proverbs 25:28
Trump lambasted Democrats’ demonization of ICE and law enforcement on Tuesday, and once again vowed to secure the borders to curb the inflow of drugs and illegal alien criminals coming into the U.S.
“How can the Democrats, who are weak on the Border and weak on Crime, do well in November. The people of our Country want and demand Safety and Security, while the Democrats are more interested in ripping apart and demeaning (and not properly funding) our great Law Enforcement!” he tweeted.
How can the Democrats, who are weak on the Border and weak on Crime, do well in November. The people of our Country want and demand Safety and Security, while the Democrats are more interested in ripping apart and demeaning (and not properly funding) our great Law Enforcement!