BOOKLET HIGHLIGHT: A JESUIT POPE? UNDERSTANDING THE JESUIT AGENDA & THE EVANGELICAL/PROTESTANT CHURCH

BOOKLET HIGHLIGHT: A JESUIT POPE? UNDERSTANDING THE JESUIT AGENDA & 

THE EVANGELICAL/PROTESTANT CHURCH

SEE: http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletters/2017/newsletter20170920.htm; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

An Understand the Times/Lighthouse Trails Special Report
(Booklet Form)
According to Bible prophecy, a one-world religion that will offer the promise of peace throughout the world is going to commence prior to Christ’s return. To most, this global body will seem like a wonderful thing and very possibly will be a pseudo-Christianity (coming in the name of “Christ”); however, contrary to how the masses will view it, it will actually help establish and set up the antichrist and his one- world government.
In order for this to happen, all religions must come together in an ecumenical plan. Today, as part of this Satanic scheme, the evangelical/Protestant church is being drawn seductively into the Roman Catholic church, largely through what we call “The Jesuit Agenda.” Incredibly, while the evidence is obvious to some, the majority of proclaiming Christians are not at all aware it is happening.
So, what should we expect if we are in the time when such a system unfolds? First, many who once were Protestant and evangelical will become ecumenical and eventually assimilate with the Roman Catholic church. Second, all religions will unite in solidarity of purpose. Understanding the Jesuit Agenda is essential if we are to understand how this worldwide deception will come about.
 Who are the Jesuits?
Since its foundation, the Catholic papacy has been zealous and often brutal in its endeavor to establish the kingdom of the Pope (of whom it is believed within the Catholic church is headed by Jesus Christ). In fact, the Pope has been referred to as the “Vicar of Christ.” This determination was witnessed during the Inquisition where countless thousands, if not millions, died cruelly for resisting Rome. Foxe’s Book of Martyrs describes many of these atrocities.
While many believers in Christ during the Reformation period attempted to spread the truth that God’s Word was truly God’s Word and could not be squandered and kept hostage by the papacy and the Catholic Church, it was not long before the Counter Reformation was founded to bring the “Separated Brethren” back to the “Mother of All Churches.”
This Counter Reformation was largely headed by Ignatius Loyola, the man who founded the Jesuit Order in the mid 1500s and launched an all-out attack against those who dared stand against the papacy and Rome. This excerpt from Foxe’s Book of Martyrs gives us an idea of the nature and determination of this Counter Reformation:

The emperor Ferdinand, whose hatred of the Bohemian Protestants was without bounds, not thinking he had sufficiently oppressed them, instituted a high court to prosecute the reformers upon the plan of the Inquisition, with this difference, that the court was to travel from place to place and always to be attended by a body of troops. This court was conducted chiefly by Jesuits and from their decision there was no appeal, by which it may be easily conjectured that it was a dreadful tribunal indeed.
This bloody court, attended by a body of troops, made the tour of Bohemia. They seldom examined or saw a prisoner, for the soldiers were permitted to murder the Protestants as they pleased and then to make a report of the matter to them afterward.1

You see, the Jesuits were commissioned by the Pope to do whatever it took to end the Protestant Reformation. The 1540 Constitution of the Jesuits states:

[L]et whoever desires to fight under the sacred banner of the Cross, and to serve only God and the Roman pontiff, His vicar on earth, after a solemn vow of perpetual chastity,- let him keep in mind that he is part of a society, instituted for the purpose of perfecting souls in life and in Christian doctrine, for the propagation of the faith . . . Let all members know, and let it be not only at the beginning of their profession, but let them think over it daily as long as they live, that the society as a whole, and each of them, owes obedience to our most holy lord, the pope, and the other Roman pontiffs, his successors, and to fight with faithful obedience for God. (Emphasis added.)

While most Christians think that the Counter Reformation is a thing of the past because we are not seeing Inquisitions today, this movement continues until today and with renewed effort through various avenues of the evangelical/Protestant church. In a way, it is more insidious than the Inquisitions, because now it has infiltrated Christianity and is being disguised as the “new” Christianity. (Rick Warren promotes it as the “new” or second reformation.) But disguised or not, it is the Jesuit Agenda, and it is bringing about ecumenism and a one-world religion. And at the same time, it is attempting to destroy the message that so many died for –  the message that Jesus Christ is not found in a wafer and a cup of juice to be re-crucified day after day but has died once and for all for the sins of man and offers a salvation that is an entirely free gift, unearned to those who believe on Him (Hebrews 7:27; 10:11-14).
 Who Was Ignatius Loyola?
After a serious injury in the military and during a lengthy rehabilitation, Ignatius Loyola (b. 1491, d. 1556) turned his focus from “military enthusiasm to ghostly fanaticism.”2  Ignatius assumed the name and office of Knight of the Virgin Mary, seeing himself as Mary’s favorite. Ignatius wanted to start a new order, The Society of Jesus (or the Jesuits) and presented the idea to the Pope. He told the Pope that the idea had been inspired by heavenly revelations. At first, the Pope hesitated, but when Ignatius added a fourth vow (in addition to the regular poverty, chastity, and obedience), “absolute subservience to the pope,” promising to do whatever the Pope wanted and go wherever he wanted, the Pope agreed and sent the new order out to “invade the world.” While other monks of other orders sought to separate themselves from the world, the Jesuits went out into the world and obeyed whatever command the Pope gave. Often this was to win the world with the sword. No violent act was withheld if the order came from their top “general.”3
In time, the Jesuits entered the education system, especially that of the Protestants. The Jesuit maxim was: “Give us the education of the children of this day – and the next generation will be ours.”4 The Reverend W. C. Brownlee, D.D. stated: “They pretended to be converted and to enter into Protestant churches.” One Jesuit even boasted that the Jesuits were successfully able to imitate the Puritan preachers. They used trickery and deception to become “all things to all men.” Within 48 years, there were eleven thousand Jesuits around the world, quite a large number for back then. 5
By 1773, the order was abolished because of their horrible reputation of bloodiness, deception, and immorality. However, they were reinstated fully in 1814 by Pope Pius VII. Even by this time, the influence and infiltration into the United States by the Jesuits was significant.
In 1857, the Reverend W.C. Brownlee, D.D. compiled a book of a translated document called Secret Instructions of the Jesuits (found on the Boston College Libraries website, for one). While Catholic sources say that the Secret Instructions of the Jesuits is an untrue document, there is enough evidence to indicate that it is true indeed. Naturally, it is so indicting against the papacy and the Jesuit Order that one can understand from a human point of view why Catholic sources would say the document isn’t true. But the facts are that the Jesuit Order was performing brutal cruel acts to bring the world to “Christ” and the Mother Church and that they were infiltrating every area of society to do so. This cannot be denied. Brownlee’s book would be a worthwhile read for those who wish to understand more of the history of the Jesuits. 

The Jesuit Oath

It is said that the ancient Jesuits took the Jesuit Oath. This has been refuted by Catholic sources as a true oath taken by Jesuits of the past; nevertheless, there is evidence enough that the oath did exist to include excerpts of it in this report. We have taken these excerpts from a book titled Political and Economic Handbook by Thomas Edward Watson published in 1916, and found in the Harvard College library:

I do declare from my heart, without mental reservation, that the Pope is Christ’s Vicar General and . . .  He hath power to depose Heretical Kings, Princes, States  . . .  that they may safely be destroyed. Therefore, to the utmost of my power I will defend this doctrine. . . . I do further declare the doctrine of the Church of England, of the Calvanists [sic], the Huguenots, and other Protestants to be damnable and those to be damned who will not forsake the same.

I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness agents in any place wherever I shall be; and to do my utmost to extirpate [exterminate] the heretical Protestant doctrine, and to destroy all their pretended power. (p. 437)

In another version of the Jesuit Oath, the Jesuit is asked to promise that he will make “relentless war” against “all heretics, Protestants” and to “hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics” (found in U.S. House Congressional Record, 1913, p. 3216).

The Jesuit Agenda Today

While we are not saying that Jesuits today are murdering Protestants if they don’t convert to Catholicism, we are saying that the determination and efforts to convert Protestants back to the Mother Church still exist. Basically, while the methods may have changed, the plan and objectives have not. The following quote from an article titled “Essay on Popery” by Rev. Ingram Cobbin M.A. (taken from one edition of Foxe’s Book of Martyrs) is insightful:

The Jesuits, though at times expelled or pretendedly so from Rome, have been its awful emissaries to augment its power.  The intrigues and deceptions of these men would fill volumes, and the conveniency of their creed to deny or affirm anything, or assume any profession as it may serve their purpose, is too well known to need recapitulating here.  These men have at times assumed so much that every papal state has alternately ejected them; and large numbers are now in this country—doubtless many under false colours —waiting the most favourable opportunities to corrupt the rising generation, and, as much as possible, restore the dark days of former ages.  The Jesuits are unchangeable.

The Jesuits were driven in the past to bring back the lost brethren, and they are driven today with the same vision. Today, that vision is part of the pope’s Eucharistic Evangelization, drawing people to the Eucharistic Christ. The Eucharistic Evangelization is discussed at length in Another Jesus: The Evangelization of the Eucharistic Christ and in several articles on the Understand the Times website.

Jesuit (Mystical) Spirituality and the Protestant/Evangelical Church

So if the methods of converting lost or prodigal souls back to Rome have changed, what is the method to accomplish these goals today? It is largely through what is called Jesuit Spirituality. A 2002 book titled Contemplatives in Action: The Jesuit Way reveals how the Jesuit order has had and continues to have a “great influence” in people around the world. It attributes this “vitality” to “its spirituality” which has also “evoked fierce loyalty and fierce opposition.”6
What is the spirituality of the Jesuits that was so controversial? By their very roots, Jesuits are proponents of mystical prayer practices. The founder of the Jesuits, Ignatius Loyola, created “spiritual exercises” that incorporated mysticism, including lectio divina. Today, millions of people worldwide practice the “Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius Loyola.”
One Jesuit priest who resonates with the mystical spiritual outlook is Anthony De Mello (d. 1987), author of Sadhana: A Way to God. De Mello is often quoted today by contemplative and emerging authors and embraced the mysticism of Hinduism. He stated:

To silence the mind is an extremely difficult task. How hard it is to keep the mind from thinking, thinking, thinking, forever thinking, forever producing thoughts in a never ending stream. Our Hindu masters in India have a saying: one thorn is removed by another. By this they mean that you will be wise to use one thought to rid yourself of all the other thoughts that crowd into your mind. One thought, one image, one phrase or sentence or word that your mind can be made to fasten on. – Anthony de Mello, Sadhana: A Way to God (St. Louis, the Institute of Jesuit Resources, 1978), p. 28 (cited from A Time of Departing, by Ray Yungen, p. 75).

Ray Yungen explains that Sadhana “is very open in its acknowledgment of Eastern mysticism as an enrichment to Christian spirituality.”
It doesn’t take a long search to find De Mello within the evangelical/Protestant camp. In fact, Richard Foster, one of the pioneers of the evangelical spiritual formation (contemplative) movement wrote the introduction to one of De Mello’s books, The Sacrament of the Present Moment. In A Glimpse of Jesus, popular contemplative author Brennan Manning quotes De Mello. Amazon shows that De Mello’s book, The Sacrament of the Present Moment is cited in 82 books, some of which are written by some of evangelicalism’s most popular authors: John Ortberg, Richard Foster, Jan Johnson, Philip Yancey, and Calvin Miller – incidentally all these are contemplative advocates.
Another example of Jesuit influence in the evangelical/Protestant church is the Be Still DVD, where Richard Foster quotes 18th century Jesuit priest, Jean Nicholas Grou as saying: “O Divine Master, teach me this mute language which says so much.” This “mute language” Grou speaks of is the mystical “silence” practiced by contemplatives and mystics throughout all religions.
One of the key figures in the “new” progressive Christianity today is Leonard Sweet. Sweet has partnered on a number of occasions with Rick Warren and speaks at evangelical events frequently. In Sweet’s book, Quantum Spirituality, he states:

Mysticism, once cast to the sidelines of the Christian tradition, is now situated in postmodernist culture near the center. . . . In the words of one of the greatest theologians of the twentieth century, Jesuit philosopher of religion/dogmatist Karl Rahner, “The Christian of tomorrow will be a mystic, one who has experienced something, or he will be nothing.” [Mysticism] is metaphysics arrived at through mindbody experiences. (p. 76)

How fitting that Sweet would quote a Jesuit priest’s prediction about the “Christian” of the future.
Tony Campolo, another popular figure in the evangelical church, reveals something quite interesting in his book, Letters to a Young Evangelical. In the book, he explains the role mysticism had in him becoming a Christian. He explains:

I learned about this way of having a born-again experience from reading Catholic mystics, especially The Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius Loyola. (p. 30, see “Coming to Christ Through Mysticism,” Oakland )

For skeptics who may need further evidence that Jesuit Spirituality has come into the evangelical/Protestant church, consider this. In 2006, Baker Books, one of evangelicalism’s top book publishers, released a book titled Sacred Listening: Discovering the Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius Loyola written by James Wakefield. A publisher description of the book states:

Central to the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), the Spiritual Exercises is a manual used to direct a month-long spiritual retreat. Now adapting these time-honored Exercises specifically for Protestant Christians, James L. Wakefield encourages readers to integrate their secular goals with their religious beliefs and helps them reflect on the life of Jesus as a model for their own discipleship.7

Wakefield’s book, devoted to the Jesuits and Ignatian Exercises, should be proof enough that the Jesuit Agenda has entered the Christian church and that mysticism is the tool by which the Jesuit Agenda is largely being brought into the lives of countless evangelicals and Protestants. Is it any wonder Wakefield’s book found praise within the Jesuit community? Armand M. Nigro, professor emeritus at the Jesuit school, Gonzaga University, said:

As a Jesuit for 62 years, I have been formed by the Exercises of Ignatius of Loyola, our principal founder. I rejoice, then, at the long-awaited publication of Sacred Listening. It will be for its readers, I hope, a classic manual for spiritual growth in genuine mystical prayer. (on back cover of book)

Incidentally, Eugene Peterson, author of The Message wrote an endorsement of Wakefield’s book on the front cover.
These are just a few of a great many examples where the “Jesuit Spirituality” has come into the Protestant church; thus this new modern (post-modern) mystical method to accomplish the goals of the papacy is working.
If Protestants and evangelicals can be convinced to practice mysticism (i.e., contemplative), this conditions them to begin embracing Rome and even all religions. It’s important to understand that mysticism is the bridge that unites all the religions of the world. In order to unite them, there would need to be a uniting, common denominator, so to speak. That common uniting medium is mysticism. Thomas Merton recognized this. In a conversation he was having with a Sufi master, the topic of Christian atonement arose. The Sufi master said this was an area they could never agree on, to which Merton replied:

Personally, in matters where dogmatic beliefs differ, I think that controversy [atonement] is of little value because it takes us away from the spiritual realities into the realm of words and ideas . . . in words there are apt to be infinite complexities and subtleties which are beyond resolution. . . . But much more important is the sharing of the experience of divine light, . . . It is here that the area of fruitful dialogue exists between Christianity and Islam.8 (Emphasis added.)

Tilden Edwards, co-founder of the Shalem Institute (where Ruth Haley Barton was educated), would agree with Merton. He said, “This mystical stream [contemplative prayer] is the Western bridge to Far Eastern spirituality” (Spiritual Friend, p. 18). And in a New Age book titled, As Above, So Below, the author states (quoting Aldous Huxley) that “the metaphysical [mystical] that recognizes a divine reality” is the “highest common factor” that “links the world’s religious traditions.” And even evangelical-turned-emerging author Tony Campolo recognizes this commonality in mysticism when he states: “Beyond these models of reconciliation, a theology of mysticism provides some hope for common ground between Christianity and Islam” (pp 149-150).
Incidentally, when we say all the religions of the world uniting, we include the New Age movement (perhaps one of the largest “religions” in the world today). New Agers believe that in order to enter into an age of enlightenment (or Age of Aquarius), the world needs to become “vibrationally sympathetic,” meaning that a sufficient mass (critical mass) of people will need to engage in mystical prayer.9

The Counter Reformation Continues

Jesuit influence in the world today is everywhere: in the business world, in education, in government, and yes, in the evangelical/Protestant church.  According to Contemplatives in Action: The Jesuit Way, there are over one million people living in the United States alone who have graduated from Jesuit high schools, colleges, and universities (Introduction, p. 1).
While there have often been tensions between the Pope and the Jesuit Order over various issues, the current Superior General of the Jesuit Order, Adolfo Nicolas Pachon, reassured the Jesuit commitment to Rome when he stated:

The Society of Jesus was born within the Church, we live in the Church, we were approved by the Church and we serve the Church. This is our vocation…[Unity with the pope] is the symbol of our union with Christ. It also is the guarantee that our mission will not be a ‘small mission,’ a project just of the Jesuits, but that our mission is the mission of the Church.”10

Where Else in Evangelicalism is the Jesuit Evangelism Showing Up?

Earlier this year, Understand the Times released an article titled Jerry Boykin and the Calvary Chapel Connection. It was a difficult article for many to read. People do not want to think that Christian leaders and pastors they have trusted for years would be so foolish as to associate with and promote someone who is part of a group that wants to bring the “lost brethren” back to the Mother Church. But the fact is that a high officer in the Vatican’s Jesuitical, “Knights of Malta” was a featured speaker at a Calvary Chapel sponsored Preach the Word prophecy conference.
Another example, and I believe an important one, has to do with one of the most well-known and influential evangelical organizations in America. Robert Siciro is a Protestant turned Catholic Paulist priest, and he is one of the featured speakers in the very popular Truth Project by Focus on the Family. While the Paulist Order is not a Jesuit Order, it has basically the same objective as the Jesuit order with regard to winning souls for the Catholic church. According to one Catholic source , the Paulist order is “A community of priests for giving missions and doing other Apostolic works, especially for making converts to the Catholic faith.” Robert Siciro is  President of the Acton Institute, an ecumenical think tank where, incidentally, there are scores of articles  by or about those in the Catholic faith, including a number of Jesuits. Now, through the Truth Project, thousands and thousands of evangelical/Protestant Christians have been introduced, by way of proxy, to the Eucharistic Evangelization.

The Fatima Plan

For those who are not convinced that we are headed toward a one-world religion for “peace,”  take a trip some time to Fatima, Portugal where annual pilgrimages bring people from the religions of the world  to pray to “the queen of heaven,” also called “our lady of Peace.”
Pope John Paul II was dedicated to Mary and especially “Our Lady of Fatima.” He believed this entity saved him from an assassin’s bullet on May 13, 1981, on the anniversary of the so-called apparition’s appearance (to have first occurred in 1917).
People from all around the world have been coming to Fatima to pray to “Our Lady.” At a gathering for “world peace” in Fatima, Jesuit priest Jacques Dupuis  stated:

The religion of the future will be a general converging of religions in a universal Christ that will satisfy all. The other religious traditions in the world are part of God’s plan for humanity and the Holy Spirit is operating and present in Buddhist, Hindu and other sacred writings of Christian and non-Christian faiths as well. The universality of God’s kingdom permits this, and this is nothing more than a diversified form of sharing in the same mystery of salvation.11

Fatima is just another avenue through which the Jesuit Agenda is being accomplished.

In Summary

Perhaps the best way to understand the Jesuit Agenda that undermines biblical Christianity is to recognize the move toward a so-called “social gospel” that unites the religions of the world for the cause of peace. Like mysticism, this social gospel is a vehicle through which all religions will be united. Who would have believed this could have happened to the Protestant evangelical church? But we have already been warned in Scripture that Satan’s ministers are “transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (2 Corinthians 11:15).
Rick Warren has been one of the many pied pipers of this move to unite through “good works.” Called “America’s pastor,” Warren has become the evangelical/Protestant spokesperson for a one-world religion. His Purpose Driven model has become the battle cry for let just all get along and do good. We can work together as one for one common purpose – peace in the world.
Willow Creek has helped to escalate this global religious body through their Global Leadership Summits, where they are “bringing people together from all nationalities to complete our shared Kingdom assignment in the Church and beyond”12 (emphasis added). Warren and Hybel’s  global agenda is moving full force throughout the earth today.
Rick Warren and Bill Hybels – protégés of Peter Drucker, by the way – have advanced the Jesuit Agenda by leaps and bounds. Many of these “new” Christianity, new reformation leaders have ignored the prophetic warnings of Jesus Christ’s soon return based on the signs we see from Bible prophecy. Instead, they promote the establishment of the kingdom of God with all the world’s religions.
The emerging church movement, which has been widely propagated by Warren, Hybels, and a host of other Christian figures, has been used by Satan to quickly bring about this worldwide deception by introducing mystical experiences and the social gospel to an entire generation of young people. Sensual experiences that tickle the flesh of the postmodern generation are often the same ones that Rome has used in the past to convince the faithful that they have encountered the God of the Bible. History reveals that history is repeating, and the same tools of delusion are being used over and over.
Those who shine the light on the Jesuit Agenda are considered to be conspiratorial crackpots. The prophets of the past when they exposed the Babylonian worship by the leaders of Israel were also deemed to be crazy, as have been Bible-believing Christians since Christianity began. One of those was John Huss  (1372-1415). John Foxe describes what happened:

[Huss] compiled a treatise in which he maintained that reading the books of Protestants could not be absolutely forbidden. He wrote in defense of Wickliffe’s book on the Trinity; and boldly declared against the vices of the pope, the cardinals, and clergy of those corrupt times. He wrote also many other books, all of which were penned with a strength of argument that greatly facilitated the spreading of his doctrines. . . . 13

Eventually Huss was arrested, and when he was brought before the council (of the papacy), he was mocked and called “A ringleader of heretics,” to which he replied:

My Lord Jesus Christ, for my sake, did wear a crown of thorns; why should not I then, for His sake, wear this light crown, be it ever so shameful? Truly I will do it and willingly.14

At 43 years of age, John Huss was burned at the stake, singing hymns during the brutal execution. Why was he called a “ringleader of heretics”? For standing up for biblical truth against the Pope and Rome.
Discerning Christians should be asking many questions. But one question that stands out foremost is: why are so few saying anything about the Jesuit Agenda? Do they see it but are afraid to speak? Or do they see it and are part of it?
Speaking of questions, Jesus asked one: “[W]hen the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8). Will He find it in the pastors and theological professors? Will He find it in your own church? Or will He only find those who have remained silent?
Just as God raised up others to carry the torch of truth after Huss was eliminated from this earth, God will and is raising up others today who are willing to risk all to stand for the truth and speak against the lies.
To believers who are standing fast, look up, for “your redemption draweth nigh” (Luke 21:28).

Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. . . .  See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is. (Ephesians 5:6-11, 15-17)

Notes:

1. John Foxe, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (Eureka, MT: Lighthouse Trails Publishing edition), p. 169.
2. Rev. W.C. Brownlee, D.D., Secret Instructions of the Jesuits, http://www.archive.org/details/secretinstructio00brow at Boston College  Libraries archives
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. https://lists.ateneo.edu/pipermail/blueboard/2004-May/003422.html
7. From the Publisher’s description at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Sacred-Listening-Discovering-Spiritual-Exercises/dp/080106614X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1309703869&sr=8-1#_
8. Rob Baker and Gray Henry, Editors, Merton and Sufism  (Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999), p. 109, as cited in A Time of Departing, p. 60.)
9. Ken Carey, The Starseed Transmissions (A Uni-Sun Book, 1985 4th printing), p. 33.
10. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolfo_Nicol%C3%A1s and see http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0801316.htm
11. Jesuit theologian Father Jacques Dupuis, at the 2003 interfaith congress “The Future of God; http://www.understandthetimes.org/commentary/c19.shtml
12. http://www.growingleadership.com/summit/speaker_brenda_salter_mcneil.asp
13. John Foxe, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (Eureka, MT, Lighthouse Trails Publishing edition), pp.160-164.
14. Ibid.

For more information:
Understand the Times, International
Lighthouse Trails Research Project

 

 

LETTER FROM DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY TO LIGHTHOUSE TRAILS RESEARCH READER REVEALS "REQUIRED" SPIRITUAL FORMATION COURSES

LETTER FROM DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY TO LIGHTHOUSE TRAILS RESEARCH READER REVEALS "REQUIRED" SPIRITUAL FORMATION COURSES

SEE: http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletters/2017/newsletter20170920.htm

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

A Lighthouse Trails reader sent Lighthouse Trails a copy of a letter he recently received from Dallas Theological Seminary. DTS has consistently said the school does not promote the” bad” Spiritual Formation, but we have reported on a number of occasions that the Spiritual Formation taught and promoted at DTS IS contemplative spirituality (which is bad). As we have maintained since the inception of Lighthouse Trails – there is no “good” Spiritual Formation as it always leads to the mystics and puts practitioners in harm’s way. DTS is no exception. Our reader (who is a DTS alumni) told us he has been receiving update letters from DTS for years, and this is the first time he has seen them actually mention Spiritual Formation in an alumni letter. You can read an enlarged version of the letter by clicking on the letter below.
One thing to note about this letter is the following statement: “Most students are required to be part of a spiritual formation small group of six to eight students who meet weekly for two years.” This lines up with the special report Lighthouse Trails released in 2013 titled “An Epidemic of Apostasy – How Christian Seminaries Must Incorporate “Spiritual Formation” to Become Accredited,”  which shows how many, if not most, Christian colleges, seminaries, and universities must include Spiritual Formation into their students’ lives if the schools want to receive accreditation from “distinguished” accrediting organizations. Dallas Theological Seminary was mentioned in that report:

What do Abilene Christian University, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary, Bethel Seminary, Biola Seminary, Briercrest College and Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary, Eastern Mennonite Seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary, Moody Theological Seminary & Graduate School, Multnomah Biblical Seminary, Regent College, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and around 240 other seminaries and colleges throughout North America all have in common? They are all accredited or in the process of being accredited through the Association of Theological Schools (ATS).

As you can see here, https://www.ats.edu/member-schools/member-school-list#D, DTS is included on ATS’s member school list. On the ATS website,the term “spiritual formation” shows up over 540 times on its search engine (https://www.ats.edu/search/google/%22spiritual%20formation%22). The term “Christian formation” (another term for Spiritual Formation) shows up over 440 times.
If you would like to learn more about how accreditation organizations are requiring Spiritual Formation, please read our report. 

NEW BOOK COMING: RAY YUNGEN'S "SIMPLE ANSWERS-UNDERSTANDING THE CATHOLIC FAITH"; AN EVANGELICAL PRIMER

 

NEW BOOK COMING: RAY YUNGEN'S "SIMPLE ANSWERS-UNDERSTANDING THE CATHOLIC FAITH"; AN EVANGELICAL PRIMER

SEE: http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletters/2017/newsletter20170920.htm; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

 As many of you know, Lighthouse Trails beloved author and 
co-laborer in Christ, Ray Yungen, passed away on October 16th 2016 at 
the age of 64 due to complications from a cancer treatment. Ray had just
 finished the rough draft of his book Simple Answers—Understanding the Catholic Faith: 

An Evangelical Primer a few months before he went to be with the Lord. After Ray’s 

passing, we had hoped to finish up the editing of his book by the end of 2016 but 
were unable to complete the project. We are happy to announce that we 
have finally finished the editing and end notes of the book and went to 
press on September 18th. The official release date for the book will be 
October 16th 2017 to commemorate the day Ray passed from this world and 
into the arms of the Lord.  Below is a sneak preview of the book. You 
may pre-order a copy now
 or wait until the book is released in October. Either way, we hope you 
will get a copy of this book as we believe it is going to be an 
important book that has the potential to open the eyes of many 
evangelicals and other Protestants who are on the road to Rome and may 
not even realize it. We also believe this book is written in such a way,
 with Ray’s conversational and gracious manner, that many Catholics will
 be willing to read the book as well.
              

During the preparation of this book, while Ray was still with us, he told the editors at Lighthouse Trails that he had wanted to write this book for many years and that he felt it was one of his most important works. Interestingly, he also told us he felt somehow that it was to be his final written work.
From Simple Answers by Ray Yungen:
BACK COVER:
The evangelical church is at a crucial point in its history. There are many voices crying out for a dramatic change in the way evangelicals have traditionally viewed Catholicism; these voices are taking the church in a radically different direction, one that fits in with Bible prophecy.
In 1991, an ex-Catholic pointed out that many Catholics had been leaving the Catholic Church over the previous forty years. The reason for this: Catholics were receiving simple answers from evangelicals regarding salvation.
Today, the need for simple answers has reemerged as we are witnessing a reversal where evangelicals are looking to the Catholic Church for guidance on Christian living and spirituality. Much of this is because the precepts of the Gospel are either minimized or forgotten.
It is not just a fluke or an aberration that the evangelical churches and the Catholic Church are coming into alignment with each other. The Catholic Church is taking a softer view of the evangelical church, and the evangelical church is starting to downplay the traditional and significant differences that have kept it at bay with the Roman Catholic Church.
Simple Answers is a presentation of the facts regarding salvation according to the Gospel in contrast to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
The Introduction:

In 1991, an article written by ex-Catholic Mark Christensen appeared in the Jesuit publication, America, that would be seen as highly unusual for a Catholic magazine. The article was about the consternation of Catholic bishops in the United States on the massive flood of people over the prior forty years leaving the Catholic Church and embracing the evangelical view. They attributed this to the simple answers that the evangelicals had to offer regarding salvation.1
The author was commenting on a meeting that took place by Catholic bishops on how to halt the flow of Catholics into the evangelical churches. What made this article so remarkable was the candid way in which the writer explained why he had left the Catholic Church. The reasons he expressed were basically the traditional Protestant objections to the Roman Catholic faith—not so much in specific doctrinal details but in a general sense. Paraphrasing what he said, he spoke of growing up in a Catholic culture. Throughout his life, being a Catholic was central to his personal identity, and the Church was very much a part of his life. Even after leaving, he maintained a personal resonance with friends and family members still in the Catholic Church.
Despite his feelings toward certain individuals, he explained that he didn’t want to slander the Catholic Church because he had tremendous respect for some of the people in it. But, he said, “what I hear coming from the mouths of ex-Catholics as their number-one reason for leaving the Catholic Church is that they never heard the Gospel. He explained it this way:
“Dearly loved family and friends, that is why I left and why I think most leave the Catholic Church for Evangelicalism. . . . We left because we met Jesus Christ, and He changed our lives. And He changed our lives in a way we never knew in the Catholic Church. . . . Millions of other former Catholics beside myself couldn’t hear this Gospel within the Catholic Church.”2
At the end of the article, he urged the bishops to examine the evidence regarding the charges he made and ask the question why all these once devoted members had to “go elsewhere to find their spiritual food.”
As I said, it was astounding to read this article in a Catholic magazine. There was no Church response trying to refute him. There was no defense. In essence, it was just a plain indictment as to what the Catholic Church does teach regarding salvation. Perhaps because the magazine is a Jesuit publication and the Jesuits are known for being the intellectuals of the Catholic Church, the publishers thought it was intellectually healthy to air opposition. Or maybe they were so sure of themselves that the Catholic Church is the “one true church” that nothing anyone says could dissuade them from this confidence. Perhaps they thought the article could serve as some food for remedial thought in bringing the flock back into the fold. But regardless, the controversy that was brought out is that the evangelicals were luring Catholics away with simple answers to salvation.
In this book, Simple Answers, I will attempt to bring out the spiritual dynamics of these two different systems and how they stack up with each other from a biblical point of view. Of course, there are many books written by Catholic apologists that attempt to show that the Catholic Church is rooted firmly in Scripture. I will use some of these books in the controversy we are going to examine.
The evangelical church is at a crucial point in its history, and many in that camp are at a present-day crossroad that is drawing them to the practices (and ultimately membership) of the Catholic Church. There are many voices crying out for a dramatic change in the way evangelicals have traditionally viewed Catholicism; these voices are taking the church in a radically different direction. But when we discover the simple answers to the questions being asked about salvation and the Christian walk,  it becomes clear that this paradigm shift in the evangelical church is fitting in with Bible prophecy.

Endnotes:
1. Mark Christensen, “Coming to Grips with Losses—The Migration of Catholics into Conservative Protestantism” (America: The Jesuit Review, January 26, 1991), pp. 58-59.
2. Ibid.
ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY
Table of Contents
Introduction
1/A New Openness
2/“The Work of Our Redemption”
3/Mortal Sin vs. Assurance of Salvation
4/Purgatory
5/Our Lady
6/The Papacy
7/Summing Up
8/Learning From Rome
9/Conclusion
Appendix 1: The New Evangelization from Rome or Finding the True Jesus Christ (Roger Oakland)
Appendix 2: My Journey Out of Catholicism (David Dombrowski)
Endnotes
Index
BOOK INFORMATION:
160 pages
ISBN: 978-1-942423-11-9
Retail Price: $12.95 | Quantity discounts available
ORDER YOUR COPY

ROB BELL'S NEW GOD: ONE OF HIS OWN MAKING~C.S. LEWIS HERESIES REVIVED BY BELL

 

ROB BELL'S NEW GOD

BY DAVID CLOUD

SEE: https://www.wayoflife.org/database/rob_bell_new_god.html; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Enlarged September 21, 2017 (first published July 7, 2011)

David Cloud, Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061
866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org

Rob Bell’s book Love Wins stirred up something of a hornet’s nest of controversy among “evangelicals” when it was published in 2011, which we found puzzling. The man had been denying eternal hell and teaching a universalistic faith for a long time.
In a 2005 interview with Beliefnet, Bell said “the church must stop thinking about everybody primarily in categories of in or out, saved or not, believer or nonbeliever.”

In his influential book Velvet Elvis, which is popular with a great many Southern Baptists, he described a wedding that he conducted for two pagan unbelievers who told him that “they didn’t want any Jesus or God or Bible or religion to be talked about” but thaey did want him to “make it really spiritual” (p. 76). Bell agreed with this ridiculous request and said that his pagan friends “are resonating with Jesus, whether they acknowledge it or not” (p. 92). Love Wins is just more of the same. Not only does he preach near-universalism, he preaches a false god, a false christ, a false gospel, a false heaven, a false hell, you name it. He is a master of taking Scripture out of context and shoehorning his heresies into a text.

Though Bell has denied that he believes in universalism, he certainly makes a case for it in this book, though he might have left room for some folk to wind up for awhile in some type of hell.

Consider two of many quotes we could offer as evidence:

“This insistence that God will be united and reconciled with all people is a theme the writers and prophets return to again and again. ... The God that Jesus teaches us about doesn’t give up until everything that was lost is found. This God simply doesn’t give up. Ever” (Love Wins, Kindle location 1259-1287).

“The love of God will melt every hard heart, and even the most ‘depraved sinners’ will eventually give up their resistance and turn to God. And so, beginning with the early church, there is a long tradition of Christians who believe that God will ultimately restore everything and everybody” (Love Wins, location 1339-1365).

Bell even claims that Sodom and Gomorrah will be restored (location 1057-1071, 1071-1082).

Bell has nothing but ridicule for the gospel that Jesus died for man’s sins and that only those who repent and believe will be saved.

“What happens when a fifteen-year-old atheist dies? Was there a three-year window when he could have made a decision to change his eternal destiny? Did he miss his chance? ... What exactly would have had to happen in that three-year window to change his future? ... Some believe he would have had to say a specific prayer. Christians don’t agree on exactly what this prayer is, but for many the essential idea is that the only way to et into heaven is to pray at some point in your life, asking God to forgive you and telling God that you accept Jesus, you believe Jesus died on the cross to pay the price for your sins, and you want to go to heaven when you die. Some call this ‘accepting Christ,’ others all it the ‘sinner’s prayer,’ and still others call it ‘getting saved,’ being ‘born again,’ or being ‘converted” (Love Wins, location 129-143).

While ridiculing the “repent and believe” gospel, Bell is perfectly happy with a works gospel:

“How do you make sure you’ll be a part of the new thing God is going to do? How do you best become the kind of person whom God could entrust with significant responsibility in the age to come? The standard answer was: live the commandments. God has shown you how to live. Live that way. The more you become a person of peace and justice and worship and generosity, the more actively you participate now in ordering and working to bring about God’s kind of world, the more ready you will be to assume an even greater role in the age to come” (Love Wins, location 538-565).

In true heretic fashion, Bell redefines Biblical terms.

He defines heaven as a present reality:

“In Matthew 20 the mother of two of Jesus’s disciples says to Jesus, ‘Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and other at your left in your kingdom.’ ... She understood heaven to be about partnering with God to make a new and better world, one with increasingly complex and expansive expressions and dimensions of shalom, creativity, beauty, and design” (Love Wins, location 630-643).

“Jesus invites us, in this life, in this broken, beautiful world, to experience the life of heaven now” (Love Wins, location 798-822).

He defines hell as a present reality:

“God gives us what we want, and if that’s hell, we can have it. ... There are individual hells, and communal, society-wide hells, and Jesus teaches us to take both seriously” (Love Wins, location 920-932, 1008-1020).

“We need a word that refers to the big, wide, terrible evil that comes from the secrets hidden deep within our hearts all the way to the massive-society-wide collapse and chaos that comes when we fail to live in God’s world God’s way. And for that, the word ‘hell’ works quite well” (Love Wins, location 1183-1189).

He says the statements in Bible about hell being a place of fire and torment are mere poetry:

“Some agony needs agonizing language. Some destruction does make you think of fire. Some betrayal actually feels like you’ve been burned. Some injustices do cause things to heat up” (Love Wins, location 944-958).

Bell even claims that heaven and hell are “within each other, intertwined, interwoven, bumping up against each other” (Love Wins, location 2031-2045).

Bell claims that Jesus die not preach about hell in order to motivate people to be saved.

“Jesus did not use hell to try and compel ‘heathens’ and ‘pagans’ to believe in God, so they wouldn’t burn when they die” (Love Wins, location 1045-1057).

Bell defines the “everlasting punishment” of Matthew 25:46 as “‘a period of pruning” or ‘a time of trimming,’ or an intense experience of correction” (Love Wins, location 1056-1170). He says, “Jesus isn’t talking about forever as we think of forever” (location 1170-1183). 
REJECTING THE GOD OF HIS GRANDPARENTS
Emergents such as Brian McLaren and Rob Bell are boldly and brashly rejecting the God of their grandparents. They are not just rejecting some doctrines their Christian grandparents believed; they are rejecting the God that their grandparents worshiped.Bell’s God is not the thrice holy Lawgiver who hates sin.
In Love Wins there is a photo of a painting that hung on a wall in Bell’s grandmother’s house. It depicts heaven as a shining city on the far side of a dark, burning, fearsome chasm. Bridging the chasm is a cross upon which people are walking toward safety. When Bell asked his sister if she remembered the painting, she replied, “Of course, it gave us all the creeps.”

As well it should if you haven’t been saved! The painting depicts the truth of the gospel. There is a heaven and there is a hell and only through regenerating faith in Christ’s cross can hell be escaped.

Bell has plainly rejected the doctrine of heaven and hell that his grandparents held:

“Are there other ways to think about heaven, other than as that perfect floating shiny city hanging suspended there in the air above that ominous red and black realm with all that smoke and steam and hissing fire? I say yes, there are” (Love Wins, Kindle location 357-368).

But Bell has gone even further. He has rejected the God his grandparents worshipped.

Bell claims that the God who would allow multitudes to go to eternal hell is not great or mighty (Love Wins, location 1189-1229). He calls the preaching of eternal hell “misguided and toxic,” a “cheap view of God,” and “lethal” (location 47-60, 2154-2180). He implies that this God is not a true friend and protector; he says there is something wrong with this God and calls Him “terrifying and traumatizing and unbearable” (location 1273-1287, 2098-2113). He even says that if an earthly father acted like the God who sends people to hell “we could contact child protection services immediately” (location 2085-2098).

It is obvious that Bell wants nothing to do with the God worshiped by his grandparents.

Bell’s god is more akin to New Age panentheism than the God of the Bible. He describes God as “a force, an energy, a being calling out to us in many languages, using a variety of methods and events” (Love Wins, location 1710-1724).

“There is an energy in the world, a spark, an electricity that everything is plugged into. The Greeks called it zoe, the mystics call it ‘Spirit,’ and Obi-Wan called it ‘the Force’” (Love Wins, location 1749-1762).

Bell also worships a false christ. His Jesus is “supracultural ... present within all cultures ... refuses to be co-opted or owned by any one culture ... He doesn’t even state that those coming to the Father through him will even know that they are coming exclusively through him ... there is only one mountain, but many paths. ... People come to Jesus in all sorts of ways ... Sometimes people use his name; other times they don’t” (Love Wins, location 1827-1840, 1865-1878, 1918-1933).

It is not surprising, then, that Bell recommends that his readers sit at the feet of Ken Wilber, who believes in the divinity of man.

“For a mind-blowing introduction to emergence theory and divine creativity, set aside three months and read Ken Wilber’s A Brief History of Everything” (Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis, p. 192).

The god described in Love Wins is the very same god depicted in the novel The Shack by William Young. The book is all about redefining God. It is about a man whose becomes bitter at God after his daughter is murdered and has a life-changing experience with God in the very shack where the murder occurred; but the God he encounters is most definitely not the God of the Bible.

Young says the book is for those with “a longing that God is as kind and loving as we wish he was” (interview with Sherman Hu, Dec. 4, 2007). What he is referring to is the desire on the part of the natural man for a God who loves “unconditionally” and does not require obedience, does not require repentance, does not judge sin, and does not make men feel guilty for what they do.

In that same interview, Young said that a woman wrote to him and said that her 22-year-old daughter came to her after reading the book and asked, “IS IT ALRIGHT IF I DIVORCE THE OLD GOD AND MARRY THE NEW ONE?”

This is precisely what the emerging church generation is doing.

Young admits that the God of “The Shack” is different from the traditional God of Bible-believing Christianity. He says that the God who “watches from a distance and judges sin” is “a Christianized version of Zeus.” This reminds me of the modernist G. Bromley Oxnam, who called the God of the Old Testament “a dirty bully” in his 1944 book “Preaching in a Revolutionary Age.”

Young depicts the triune God as a young Asian woman named “Sarayu” * (supposedly the Holy Spirit), an oriental carpenter who loves to have a good time (supposedly Jesus), and an older black woman named “Elousia” (supposedly God the Father). God the Father is also depicted as a guy with a ponytail and a goatee. (* The name “Sarayu” is from the Hindu scriptures and represents a mythical river in India on the shores of which the Hindu god Rama was born.)

Young’s god is the god of the emerging church. He is cool, loves rock & roll, is non-judgmental, does not exercise wrath toward sin, does not send unbelievers to an eternal fiery hell, does not require repentance and the new birth, puts no obligations on people, doesn’t like traditional Bible churches, does not accept the Bible as the infallible Word of God, and does not mind if the early chapters of the Bible are interpreted as “myth.” (See “The Shack’s Cool God” at the Way of Life web site, www.wayoflife.org.)
FULLER SEMINARY PRESIDENT PRAISES ROB BELL’S BOOK

Richard Mouw, President of Fuller Theological Seminary, told USA Today that “Rob Bell’s newly-released Love Wins is a fine book and that I basically agree with his theology” (“The Orthodoxy of Rob Bell,” Christian Post, Mar. 20, 2011). This tells us just how terribly far Fuller Seminary has fallen from its roots in Charles Fuller’s “only through the blood” evangelistic ministry. Mouw agrees with Bell that it is wrong to say, “Accept Jesus right now, because if ten minutes from now you die without accepting this offer God will punish you forever in the fires of hell.” Mouw comments, “What kind of God are we presenting to the person?” The answer is the God of the Bible and the God that was preached by the founders of Fuller Theological Seminary. It is Bell and Mouw who have the new god. Mouw says that after a rabbi friend of his died, he “held out the hope that when he saw Jesus he would acknowledge that it was Him all along, and that Jesus would welcome him into the heavenly realm.” I’ve never read anything like that in the Bible, but C.S. Lewis taught this very thing. Mouw says that those who question Mother Teresa’s salvation just because she believed a false gospel should be ashamed of themselves. Mouw implies that Bell’s critics just want to keep people out of heaven, which is patently ridiculous and slanderous. Mouw would have us believe that he is more compassionate than Jesus, who stated very bluntly, “Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3, 5). Both Bell and Mouw complain about their “critics,” but they don’t draw back from lashing out pretty fiercely at the “fundamentalists.” Bell calls hellfire preaching “lethal,” “toxic,” “unloving,” “creepy,” a “cheap view of God.” No judgmental criticism there! Nothing but compassionate, tolerant dialogue! “CONSERVATIVE EVANGELICAL” HYPOCRISY

Some of the “conservative” evangelicals are criticizing Rob Bell in a pretty strong way. John Piper tweeted, “Good bye, Rob Bell.” Albert Mohler, Jr. of Southern Baptist Seminary described Bell’s view as “Velvet Hell.” I’m glad to see a bit of backbone among some evangelicals and a level of doctrinal conviction that would drive them to actually name the name of a false teacher, but it appears very hypocritical at the same time. The view that atheists and pagan religionists might be saved without submitting to Jesus Christ is not new. Billy Graham has been saying it for decades, but I don’t recall any outcry from the evangelical world, including from Graham’s own denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention. In an interview with McCall’s magazine, January 1978, entitled “I Can’t Play God Any More,” Graham said: “I used to believe that pagans in far-off countries were lost—were going to hell—if they did not have the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that. … I believe that there are other ways of recognizing the existence of God—through nature, for instance—and plenty of other opportunities, therefore, of saying ‘yes’ to God.” In 1985, Graham affirmed his belief that those outside of Christ might be saved. Los Angeles reporter David Colker asked Graham: “What about people of other faiths who live good lives but don’t profess a belief in Christ?” Graham replied, “I’m going to leave that to the Lord. He’ll decide that” (Los Angeles Herald Examiner, July 22, 1985). In 1993, Graham repeated this doctrine in an interview with David Frost. “And I think there is that hunger for God and people are living as best they know how according to the light that they have. Well, I think they’re in a separate category than people like Hitler and people who have just defied God, and shaken their fists at God. … I would say that God, being a God of mercy, we have to rest it right there, and say that God is a God of mercy and love, and how it happens, we don’t know” (The Charlotte Observer, Feb. 16, 1993). In an interview with Robert Schuller in May 1997, Graham again said that he believes people in other religions can be saved without consciously believing in Jesus Christ. “[God’s] calling people out of the world for His name, whether WHETHER THEY COME FROM THE MUSLIM WORLD, OR THE BUDDHIST WORLD, OR THE CHRISTIAN WORLD OR THE NON-BELIEVING WORLD, THEY ARE MEMBERS OF THE BODY OF CHRIST BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN CALLED BY GOD. THEY MAY NOT EVEN KNOW THE NAME OF JESUS but they know in their hearts that they need something that they don't have, and they turn to the only light that they have, and I think that they are saved, and that they're going to be with us in heaven” (television interview of Billy Graham by Robert Schuller, broadcast in southern California, Saturday, May 31, 1997). What is Rob Bell saying today that Billy Graham hasn’t been saying for more than 30 years?  
C.S. LEWIS’S INFLUENCE ON THE EVANGELICAL DOWNGRADE OF HELL

C.S. Lewis (1898-1963) has been called a “Superstar” by Christianity Today. A 1998 CT poll rated Lewis the most influential evangelical writer, and In light of the wretched spiritual-doctrinal-moral condition of “evangelicalism” today, that is a very telling statistic and certainly no praise for C.S. Lewis.

One of the ways that Lewis has influenced evangelicalism is in the fundamental issues of hell and the exclusiveness of salvation through the name of Christ. Lewis said that it would not be very wrong to pray to Apollo, because to do so would be to “address Christ sub specie Apollonius” (C.S. Lewis to Chad Walsh, May 23, 1960, cited from George Sayer, Jack: A Life of C.S. Lewis, 1994, p. 378).

Lewis claimed that sincere followers of pagan religions can be saved without personal faith in Jesus Christ (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, HarperSanFrancisco edition, 2001, pp. 64, 208, 209). In the popular Chronicles of Narnia series, which has influenced countless children, Lewis taught that those who sincerely serve the devil (called Tash) are actually serving Christ (Aslan) and will eventually be accepted by God. “But I said, ‘Alas, Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of Tash.’ He answered, ‘Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me.’ ... Therefore, if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath’s sake, it is by me that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him’” (The Last Battle, chapter 15, “Further Up and Further In”).

Lewis also denied the finality of one’s destiny at death. He taught the possibility of repentance beyond this life. This is the theme of The Great Divorce. “Is judgment not final? Is there really a way out of Hell into Heaven? ‘It depends on the way ye’re using the words. If they leave that grey town behind it will not have been Hell. To any that leaves it, it is Purgatory. And perhaps ye had better not call this country Heaven. Not Deep Heaven, ye understand’” (The Great Divorce).

In this book Lewis taught that questions such as the finality of men’s destiny and purgatory and eternal destinies cannot be understood in this present life and we should not fret about them.
“Ye can know nothing of the end of all things, or nothing expressible in those terms. It may be, as the Lord said to the Lady Julian, that all will be well, and all will be well, and all manner of things will be well. But it’s ill talking of such questions. ‘Because they are too terrible, Sir?’ ‘No. Because all answers deceive” (The Great Divorce, Kindle location 140-150).
In light of these views, it is not surprising that Lewis has been cited as a major influence by evangelicals who are soft on hell and near-universalists.

Clark Pinnock said, “When I was a young believer in the 1950s, C.S. Lewis helped me understand the relationship between Christianity and other religions in an inclusivist way” (More Than One Way? Zondervan, 1996, p. 107).

Richard Mouw says, “If I were given the assignment of writing a careful theological essay on ‘The Eschatology of Rob Bell,’ I would begin by laying out the basics of C.S. Lewis’s perspective on heaven and hell” (“The Orthodoxy of Rob Bell,” Christian Post, March 20, 2011).

In the acknowledgements section of Love Wins, Rob Bell writes, “... to my parents, Rob and Helen, for suggesting when I was in high school that I read C.S. Lewis.” Beware of C.S. Lewis. That he is loved with equal fervor by “conservative evangelicals,” hell-denying emergents, Christian rockers, Roman Catholics, Mormons, and even some atheists is a fact that speaks volumes to those who have ears to hear.
There is really nothing that Rob Bell is teaching today that was not first taught by C.S. Lewis.

IN "AMERICA FIRST" SPEECH AT U.N., TRUMP DEFENDS SOVEREIGNTY

 

IN "AMERICA FIRST" SPEECH AT U.N., 

TRUMP DEFENDS SOVEREIGNTY 

BY ALEX NEWMAN

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/26952-in-america-first-speech-at-un-trump-defends-sovereignty;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

 In a speech that attracted everything from praise and applause to horror and shock from conservatives, President Donald Trump basically told the United Nations General Assembly and its members that he was going to put America First and that sovereign nation-states should also put the interests of their own citizens first. Still, he suggested governments should cooperate within the UN to make the world better, and to deal with certain rogue regimes. Basically, Trump outlined what the administration is calling an “America First” foreign policy toward the UN and other nations guided by “Principled Realism.” It was a sharp contrast from Obama's final UNGA address demanding Americans “accept constraints” on U.S. sovereignty to bring about the UN's vision for humanity.
After demanding UN “reform” and thanking the global body's socialist secretary-general, Trump also lambasted a number of the UN's most barbarian member regimes — those ruling North Korea, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela, in particular. He highlighted the unfair burden imposed on the United States by the UN — most notably its massive share of the UN budget — and suggested that other nations would have to do more. And throughout the speech, Trump repeatedly emphasized the need for national sovereignty and independence, using the words sovereign or sovereignty almost two dozen times. In later remarks, though, Trump showered praise on the UN, sparking concerns among some of his supporters.  
Despite the stern tone of the historic speech, and repeated calls for more patriotism from people all over the world, Trump gave credence to some of the bogus narratives underpinning the UN and its globalist agenda. And he also outlined a vision of a UN that has the power to rein in governments — a potentially catastrophic mistake. Still, many of his supporters were pleased with Trump's calls to reform the UN, and with his hard line on defending the nation-state against the globalist establishment's perpetual attacks on national sovereignty. Not everyone was convinced, though, with some critics suggesting Trump had surrendered key ground to the globalist agenda.    
At the center of Trump's stated vision for the future of the UN, as he put it in his speech, are strong, sovereign nation-states — a vision that would seem to be at odds with the globalist utopia of regional governments, such as the European Union and the African Union, that are loyal to the UN and “international” law. “If this organization is to have any hope of successfully confronting the challenges before us, it will depend, as President Truman said some 70 years ago, on the independent strength of its members,” Trump told government leaders and dictators from all over the world assembled at UN headquarters.
“If we are to embrace the opportunities of the future and overcome the present dangers together, there can be no substitute for strong, sovereign, and independent nations — nations that are rooted in their histories and invested in their destinies; nations that seek allies to befriend, not enemies to conquer; and most important of all, nations that are home to patriots, to men and women who are willing to sacrifice for their countries, their fellow citizens, and for all that is best in the human spirit,” the president continued. “In remembering the great victory that led to this body's founding, we must never forget that those heroes who fought against evil also fought for the nations that they loved.”
Patriotism, Trump continued, is what led the Polish people to fight and die for Poland. It is also what motivated the French to fight for a free France, and the British to “stand strong” for Britain. Without patriotism, Trump suggested, the world will be in trouble. “Today, if we do not invest ourselves, our hearts, and our minds in our nations, if we will not build strong families, safe communities, and healthy societies for ourselves, no one can do it for us,” he said in remarks that were widely described by the establishment media as “nationalist.” Trump himself went from promoting Americanism and strongly condemning globalism on the campaign trail, to claiming he was both a nationalist and a globalist, confusing many of his supporters.
Trump went on to thank UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, a lifelong socialist leader and a globalist extremist, for supposedly “recognizing that the United Nations must reform if it is to be an effective partner in confronting threats to sovereignty, security, and prosperity.” “Too often the focus of this organization has not been on results, but on bureaucracy and process,” Trump said, noting that some states have tried to subvert the UN's supposedly “noble aims” by allegedly “hijacking” the systems that are supposed to advance them. As an example, he pointed to “governments with egregious human rights records” sitting on the discredited UN “Human Rights Council,” which Trump ridiculed as “a massive source of embarrassment.”
In remarks made later at a luncheon, Trump continued to praise Guterres and the UN, saying it was “a great honor” to have the UN in New York. “For years I've been a critic, but I've also been somebody that said that the United Nations has tremendous potential,” Trump said. “But there is no better forum; there can be no better forum. And certainly there can be no better location where everybody comes together. So, I want to congratulate you.... The potential of the United Nations is unlimited, and I really believe — I've met your representatives, and I know you well. You are going to do things that will be epic, and I certainly hope you will.”
Those remarks had Trump supporters scratching their heads — especially considering that, on the campaign trail, Trump correctly pointed out that the UN was not a friend of freedom or the United States. Indeed, both his supporters and his most rabid globalist critics from the swamp believed Trump would truly work to rein in the dictators club once in office. And while he has sought major budget cuts, and expressed interest in eventually leaving the UN's pseudo-treaty on “climate” known as the Paris Agreement, Trump has thus far lent some legitimacy to the UN itself and many of its broader objectives.
Still, he strongly emphasized the need for patriotism. “The true question for the United Nations today, for people all over the world who hope for better lives for themselves and their children, is a basic one:  Are we still patriots?” Trump asked. “Do we love our nations enough to protect their sovereignty and to take ownership of their futures? Do we revere them enough to defend their interests, preserve their cultures, and ensure a peaceful world for their citizens?” Contrary to globalist ideology, which views nations as an archaic remnant of another age, Trump also said that “the nation-state remains the best vehicle for elevating the human condition.”
While there were few specifics on what sort of reform Trump wanted, he outlined a vision of strong nation states cooperating within a UN that supposedly exists to preserve peace. “Our hope is a world of proud, independent nations that embrace their duties, seek friendship, respect others, and make common cause in the greatest shared interest of all:  a future of dignity and peace for the people of this wonderful Earth,” he said, invoking God the Creator who made everyone. “This is the true vision of the United Nations, the ancient wish of every people, and the deepest yearning that lives inside every sacred soul.”
Among his few concrete complaints, Trump did raise concerns about the price to U.S. taxpayers. “The United States is one out of 193 countries in the United Nations, and yet we pay 22 percent of the entire budget and more,” Trump explained. “In fact, we pay far more than anybody realizes. The United States bears an unfair cost burden, but, to be fair, if it could actually accomplish all of its stated goals, especially the goal of peace, this investment would easily be well worth it.” It is true that U.S. government pays an inordinate share of the UN's expenses — more than $10 billion last year, which is more than 185 other nations, combined. But the UN's stated goals include global wealth redistribution, government control of production and consumption, international taxes, a world currency, the indoctrination of children worldwide to support the UN's totalitarian “sustainable development” ideology, and much more.
There were other concerning statements in Trump's speech. “This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world wars to help shape this better future,” Trump told presidents, dictators, and others assembled in New York City for the annual UN General Assembly confab. “It was based on the vision that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their sovereignty, preserve their security, and promote their prosperity.” Doubling down, Trump even said the UN was created “to defend the sovereignty, security, and prosperity for all.”
Unfortunately, that narrative has been somewhat successfully pushed by the establishment for generations. But the true purpose of the UN was far more sinister even from the start — and this is clear not just from looking at the UN's fruits. For one, it is worth recalling that one of the key U.S. officials involved in its founding, Alger Hiss, who served as the secretary-general at the UN's founding, was later exposed and convicted in court as a spy for the mass-murdering regime enslaving the Soviet Union. Murderous Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin himself was a key figure in the UN's founding as well. And even officially non-communist officials involved in establishing the UN have offered troubling indications of its true purpose.
For instance, John Foster Dulles, a leading architect of the UN who went on to become U.S. secretary of state, outlined the agenda in his 1950 book War or Peace. “The United Nations represents not a final stage in the development of world order, but only a primitive stage,” explained Dulles, a founder of the globalist swamp known as the Council on Foreign Relations. “Therefore its primary task is to create the conditions which will make possible a more highly developed organization.” Later in the book, Dulles dropped another bombshell: “I have never seen any proposal made for collective security with teeth in it, or for world government or for world federation, which could not be carried out either by the United Nations or under the United Nations Charter.”
Truly reforming the corrupt dictators club to conform with Trump's publicly articulated “America First” vision of sovereign nations is impossible. Indeed, the UN was founded, as its own architects revealed, to slowly erode that sovereignty on the road to a totalitarian global system that leading globalists often refer to in public as the “New World Order.” Rather than reforming it, the U.S. government should withdraw from the UN and evict its spy-infested headquarters from American soil. Legislation in Congress, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act (H.R. 193), would do precisely that. But for America to truly regain its sovereignty and neutralize the globalist threat posed by the UN, Americans must get educated and active in the fight.

Related articles:
Getting US Out of the UN for Good!
In Bizarre Reversal, Trump Seeks to Empower UN
Trump Speech to Scouts Draws Ire of “Fake News” Media
Obama to UN: U.S. Must "Accept Constraints" on Sovereignty in Order to Accomplish UN Goals
Trump Seeks to Slash U.S. Funding for UN by Over Half
Is Trump Sidelining Anti-Globalists in Administration?
Next on Trump's List: Rein in the UN Dictators Club
Top CFR Globalist Warns UN Will Get “Hammered” by Trump
Bill to Get U.S. Out of UN Introduced in New Congress
Global Effort Launched to “Repeal and Replace” United Nations
Congressman Mike Rogers Introduces Bill to Get U.S. Out of UN
In Poland, Trump Cites Faith as Key to Ending “Wicked” Communism
Congress Planning to Defund UN as Critics Seek Full Withdrawal
#Brexit to #Amexit: Keep the Momentum Going!
After Equating Trump With ISIS, UN Freaks Out Over His Victory
U.S. Independence Attacked as Never Before by UN Interdependence
New UN Chief: Globalist, Socialist, Extremist
United Nations Exploits Pseudo-“Human Rights” to Attack U.S.
Some of Trump's Picks Have Troubling Links to Globalism, CFR

LIBERALISM: FIND A CURE

LIBERALISM: FIND A CURE

 

FACEBOOK, TWITTER, YOUTUBE DELETING POPULAR EX-MUSLIM'S ARABIC MATERIAL CRITICIZING ISLAM

 

FACEBOOK, TWITTER, YOUTUBE DELETING POPULAR EX-MUSLIM'S ARABIC MATERIAL CRITICIZING ISLAM 

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/09/facebook-twitter-youtube-deleting-popular-ex-muslims-material-criticizing-islam; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

 Here is still more about how the social media giants are steadily 
choking off all material that looks at Islam with a critical eye. 
Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism are all fair game, but Islam 
is off limits, as our moral superiors move to impose Sharia blasphemy 
laws upon the West.

“My dilemma with Facebook and YouTube in Arabic,” Brother Rachid, September 18, 2017:

As a former Muslim hosting a live TV show for over a decade, I’ve come to rely on social media platforms to connect with my audience now more than ever before. My show, “DaringQuestions,” is watched via satellite TV (through Alhayat TV) by millions of viewers around the world (mainly in Arabic speaking communities). My show is popular among Muslims because it is highly controversial. I raise many bold questions about the Islamic faith and I expose the danger of some Islamic doctrine. I also present testimonies of ex-Muslims who have left Islam and allow them to share their experiences in order to empower others and encourage them to do the same. To engage further with audiences and the wider, global, Muslim community, these questions and testimonies are also posted on my two main websites, “BrotherRachid.com” and “IslamExplained.com,” as well as on social media platforms such as Facebook and YouTube. However, Muslim governments impose restrictions and heavy censorship and my websites are often inaccessible in many Muslim countries due to material I present which uses critical thinking to address Islamic doctrines. As a result, social media platforms are an increasingly crucial way for me to reach out to the Muslim world and surpass the censorship that Muslim countries place on the material I present.
However, I face a dilemma that needs to be addressed and exposed to the whole world. The Arabic content for giant social media platforms like Facebook and YouTube is overseen predominantly by Muslims (since the majority of those who speak Arabic are Muslims). These companies have offices in the United Arab Emirates and give their Arabic speaking staff the authority to delete and block any material that does not fit their guidelines. However, this authority is abused when any channel or page that criticizes Islam or presents opposing views to Islam is blocked, deleted or removed. For example, my Facebook page (which has over 1.5 million likes) was once deleted, while the Facebook page of Alhayat – the channel that broadcasts my show – was also deleted without any explanation, causing the channel to lose all the money they had spent on advertising, among other damages. My YouTube channel (which has also garnered millions of views) was once removed for ‘breaking guidelines.’ Thank God, I appealed the removal and explained the details to those in charge in the US and have since been able to gain my channel back. My Facebook posts are removed on many occasions and I am frequently blocked from posting because a post allegedly “does not follow Facebook guidelines!” No further explanation is provided. Sometimes, even my own picture is reported and removed because it violates copyrights! Recently, I posted a cover of my book in French; the post was removed for breaking “Facebook guidelines” and yet nobody could explain to me how a book that is published legally and sold on Amazon can break Facebook guidelines.
I think Facebook and Twitter need to revise how Arabic content is handled – there is no balance here. Muslims criticize Christianity right and left and their Facebook pages and YouTube channels face no problems whatsoever, yet Christians, Atheists, and ex-Muslims as myself face huge challenges in criticizing Islam on social media in Arabic. Our pages are unfairly deleted, our posts are wrongfully removed, and our accounts are blocked and removed. We had thought that social media was about freedom of speech, but unfortunately it appears that Muslim censorship is prevalent even on social media. We are unable to express ourselves even on platforms like Facebook and YouTube.
N.B: My show and my posts never promote hatred or violence against Muslims; I always emphasize critiquing Islam as a doctrine but on loving Muslims as all other human beings.

DENMARK: THOUSANDS OF CASES OF "LOW TECH JIHAD"-WORST SITUATION SINCE WORLD WAR II

DENMARK: THOUSANDS OF CASES OF "LOW TECH JIHAD"-WORST SITUATION SINCE WORLD WAR II 

BY SELWYN DUKE

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/26937-denmark-thousands-of-cases-of-low-tech-jihad-worst-situation-since-wwii;

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

In Denmark, once one of the world’s safest countries, the army now has been deployed domestically. It’s part of an effort to combat “low-tech jihad,” thousands of “incidents involving loosened wheel bolts on cars, large rocks or cinder blocks thrown from highway overpasses, and thin steel wires strung across bicycle paths meant to decapitate unsuspecting cyclists, reports Dr. Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist and writer.
Moreover, despite Denmark’s ultra-strict gun-control laws, gangs of immigrants from the MENAP countries (Middle East, North Africa, and Pakistan) are randomly shooting people in the capital city of Copenhagen, Sennels further informs.
Sennels, who spent years working with Muslim youth in prison, claims that his nation itself is beginning to resemble a prison, with the rule of law breaking down and migrant gangs controlling some streets.

For example, after citing the shootings of three young men used for, as he puts it, “target practice,” Sennels reports that police warned 17- to 25-year-old men to avoid public spaces in Copenhagen. He quotes Preben Bang Henriksen, spokesman for Denmark’s majority government party, as being horrified and stating, “We have not had such warnings from the police since the 2nd World War. It is totally unacceptable.”
But wholly predictable, many would say. In Western Europe, crime has exploded and terrorism become frequent as the Mideast migrant population has risen, prompting nations such as Hungary and Poland to take a hard line against Muslim migration. Even liberal Denmark is waking up to, and warning of, the gathering storm. As 10 News wrote in July:

Danish police warn that the excessively liberal refugee policies of Germany and Sweden endanger lives in neighbouring countries.

Intelligence services in Europe and the US have long warned that Islamic jihadis are among refugees coming to the West. Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) is now criticizing Merkel’s and Sweden’s refugee policies, with direct warnings that they destabilize security in the region.

They have reason to worry, too, as these migrants cannot be reliably vetted. After all, Third World countries such as war-torn Syria, Afghanistan, and Sudan simply don’t have comprehensive Western-style databases providing accurate information on citizens. Yet it wouldn’t matter if they did because in places such as Syria, you can pay a bribe and get official government documents saying you’re whoever you want to be.
Thus, it’s no surprise that an intelligence warning last year indicated that Islamic State hit squads were hiding among migrants in Germany.
In a similar vein, self-described orthodox Muslim Dr. Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian Palestinian academic and political leader currently living in the United Kingdom, warned in a 2015 interview that many of the migrants are not Syrian, but claim to be so, to get refugee status. Moreover, he avers that 75 percent of the Syrians come from safe areas and that the imperiled Syrians cannot even get out of the country. In other words, Zahran stated, most of the migrants are unknown quantities entering the West for economic reasons — or something darker.
As to the latter, Zahran said at the time, “I can authoritively [sic] confirm — I have photos, I have images, I have pictures, I have names of terrorists who actually are already in Europe posting their photos in Europe on Facebook.” He also warned about the migration that if “you read Arab magazines and Arab newspapers, they are talking about, ‘Good job! Now we’re going to conquest [sic] Europe.’ So it’s not even a secret.” Zahran called this “the soft Islamic conquest of the West.”
As for Sennels, he delves into these problems’ root causes. Apparently drawing upon his experiences working with Muslim teens, he writes that we “must not underestimate how strongly the Qur'an's message of holy war affects Muslim youth.”
Yet it’s not just the Koran. As I reported in February, “The Islamic canon — the Koran, Hadith, and Sira — has literally 9.6 times as many words devoted to political violence as does the Old Testament: 327,547 vs. 34,039. (The New Testament has zero.)” Moreover, these violent injunctions aren’t limited but apply in every time and place.
Sennels explained the result, writing,

80 percent of young Turks in Holland see “nothing wrong” in jihad against non-Muslims. The very high number must be seen in the light of the fact that Turks are considered to be among the more Western Muslims. 27 percent of all young French and 14 percent of all young brits [sic] under 25 sympathize with the jihad movement Islamic State. This probably includes a very large majority of young Muslims in the two countries. The figures closely match that 75 percent of Muslims in Europe believe that the Quran — a book that hundreds of places preaches violence against non-Muslims — must be literally interpreted.

The above helps to explain a comprehensive German study of 45,000 youths that was reported in 2010. It found that while increasing religiosity among Christian youths made them less violent, increasing religiosity among Muslim youths actually made them more violent. 
What seems certain is that Denmark, and the rest of Europe, are also getting more violent. But, hey, having the violent, and not just the non-violent, increases diversity, too.