Translate

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

TRUMP LASHES OUT AFTER RAID OF HIS LAWYER'S OFFICE, RESIDENCE, ETC.


Congressman: Impeach Rosenstein Over Stonewalling

Last week Devin Nunes dropped hints action to be taken over DOJ refusing to provide information. Then this weekend Mark Meadows said Rosenstein may be impeached for not providing information. And, Mueller met with the same Ukrainian president at the same time as Manafort. Will Manafort put the corrupt FBI on trial?
TRUMP LASHES OUT AFTER RAID OF HIS LAWYER'S OFFICE, RESIDENCE, ETC. 
President Trump tore into special counsel Robert Mueller after the FBI raided the New York offices of his longtime personal attorney, Michael Cohen. Some of the evidence taken involves Cohen's payment of $130,000 to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who claims she had sex with Mr. Trump in 2006.

REPORT: ROD ROSENSTEIN PERSONALLY APPROVED FBI RAID ON TRUMP’S LAWYER

Deputy AG also signed off on improper FISA surveillance of Carter Page

BY ZERO HEDGE
SEE: https://www.infowars.com/report-rod-rosenstein-personally-approved-fbi-raid-on-trumps-lawyer/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
On Tuesday morning Trump made it quite clear that he was furious with the FBI and Robert Mueller for raiding both the office and house of Michael Cohen, in the process breaching the attorney-client privilege between the president and his personal lawyer.
As the NYT further noted, Trump’s advisers “spent the last 24 hours trying to convince the president not to make an impulsive decision that could put the president in more legal jeopardy and ignite a controversy that could consume his presidency.” To be sure, Trump began Tuesday morning with a pair of angry tweets, calling the raids “A TOTAL WITCH HUNT!” and venting that “attorney–client privilege is dead!”
And now, it appears that Trump can split his anger equally between Mueller and his own handpicked deputy AG, because according to the NYT citing three government officials, Rod J. Rosenstein personally signed off on Monday’s F.B.I. decision to raid the office of Michael D. Cohen.
The revelation comes at a sensitive time for Trump’s mental state, just hours after he reportedly engaged in an angry public tirade Monday evening that continued in private at the White House “as the president fumed about whether he should fire Mr. Rosenstein” according to the NYT:
“The episode has deeply unsettled White House aides, Justice Department officials and lawmakers from both parties, who believe the president may use it as a pretext to purge the team leading the investigation into Russia meddling in the 2016 election.”
There is another major concern for Trump: as the NYT adds, “Rosenstein’s personal involvement in the decision signals that the evidence seen by law enforcement officials was significant enough to persuade the Justice Department’s second-in-command that such an aggressive move was necessary.”
The revelation will not help the growing animosity between the president and the DOJ’s 2nd in command:
“Trump has long been mistrustful of Mr. Rosenstein, the Justice Department’s No. 2 official, who appointed the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and now oversees his investigation into Mr. Trump’s campaign and possible obstruction of justice by the president.”
In his remarks Monday night, the NYT notes that the president lashed out at Mr. Rosenstein for having “signed a FISA warrant,” apparently a reference to the role Mr. Rosenstein played in authorizing the wiretap of a Trump associate in the Russia inquiry.
Also, as previously reported, Rosenstein was this close: last summer Trump considered firing Rosenstein, instead, he ordered Mr. Mueller to be fired, then backed down after the White House counsel refused to carry out the order.
Trump is now again telling associates that he is frustrated with Rosenstein, according to one official familiar with the conversations.
Still, while Rosenstein must sign off on all moves that Mr. Mueller makes, that is not necessarily the case for searches that are carried out by other federal law enforcement offices. DOJ regulations require prosecutors to consult with senior criminal prosecutors in Washington – but not necessarily the deputy attorney general – before conducting a search of a lawyer’s files.
Meanwhile, as the NYT points out, Rosenstein’s involvement, including that of top New York prosecutors in the Cohen office raid, “makes it harder for Trump to argue that his legal problems are the result of a witch hunt led by Mueller.” In addition to Mr. Rosenstein, all of the top law enforcement officials involved in the raid are Republicans: Mr. Mueller, Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. Director, and Geoffrey Berman, the interim United States attorney in New York.
Separately, as ABC adds, the FBI raid was executed by the US Attorney Office in NY: the man who runs that office, Geoffrey Berman, was appointed by Trump, although as ABC also adds, Berman reportedly recused himself from the Cohen probe, yet another recusal that is certain to infuriate Trump.

SCOOP: ABC News has learned Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, is recused from the Michael Cohen investigation. He had no role in raid of Cohen's office. Another recusal that will make @realDonaldTrump unhappy.

ROBERT SPENCER: TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM AT UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI; LOSE YOUR JOB~AMONG "RADIOACTIVE WASTELANDS OF HARD LEFT INDOCTRINATION"


ROBERT SPENCER: TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM AT UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI; 
LOSE YOUR JOB 
Among Higher Learning Institutions Which Are 
"Radioactive Wastelands of Hard Left Indoctrination"
Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer discusses the University of Cincinnati's firing of Clifford Adams, a music professor who dared to tell the truth about the jihad threat.

Robert Spencer: University of Cincinnati Fires Dissenter

BY PAMELA GELLER
SEE: https://gellerreport.com/2018/03/university-cincinnati-fires.html/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The University of Cincinnati has just proven yet again that colleges and universities in the United States today are not centers of higher learning, but radioactive wastelands of hard-Left indoctrination. The university has fired Clifford Adams, a music professor, for touching the third rail of American public discourse today: Adams dared to offend a Muslim student.
Adams tried to stave off his fate, issuing the abject apology that totalitarian regimes require of those whom they have targeted for thought crime: “As I reconsider what I wrote from an online student’s vantage point,” Adams wrote in a letter to the Cincinnati Enquirer, “I now realize that I did come across like a religious bigot and that makes me feel horrible. I have inadvertently hurt feelings and offended many and for that I am deeply sorry.”
What terrible thing did this bigoted boor say? This was, after all, a music class, not a political one, and Adams was asking his students to give their impressions of the song “Walk on Water.” A Muslim student wrote that in an atmosphere of “Trump’s presidency and all the hate he has promoted,” the song reminded listeners that America was “built off the idea of freedom.”
Adams responded: “The U.S. President’s first sworn duty is to protect America from enemies, and the greatest threat to our freedom is not the President, it is radical Islam. Review this list of Islamic terrorist attacks and then tell me about your hurt feelings.”
That’s all: he invited her to examine and ponder some unpopular truths. Adams explained: “I wanted a lively exchange of views and ideas about closed minded bigotry and a discussion about how it is incorporated in modern music through a smart, academic, collegiate argument. Instead, I have given my students the wrong impression that I am a religious bigot.” He lamented in the wake of the controversy that “we would have enjoyed a lively, provocative, scholarly argument.”
Continuing his apology, Adams wrote: “It is, above all, important that it is understood that I do not wish to disparage anyone’s religion. My remarks were intended to amplify our ongoing discussion on the pervasive abuse and objectification of women in today’s popular music culture.”
Despite the abjectness of Adams’ self-incrimination and apology, the University of Cincinnati’s offices of Academic Personnel, Equal Opportunity & Access and Title IX opened an investigation of him. Meanwhile, university spokesman Greg Vehr hastened to contain the damage done by Adams’ venture off the politically correct reservation, assuring the public that the University of Cincinnati was “committed to excellence and diversity.”
Except, of course, diversity of thought. The investigation ended with Adams being forced to resign. What Clifford Adams wrote to the Muslim student was entirely accurate, but truth is not a factor on university campuses anymore. What matters is how much what is being said comports with Leftist dogma. Anything that contradicts that dogma is excoriated, and the person who dared to say it vilified and removed from contact with all right-thinking people.
This isn’t just happening in universities, either. It is rapidly becoming the norm in the wider society as well. Anyone who questions the Leftist dogmas that Islam is a religion of peace and that Muslims are persecuted and harassed in Donald Trump’s America is pilloried and destroyed. The freedom of speech is a despised and misunderstood concept, as it has become widely accepted that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and the slightest negative word about Islam constitutes “hate speech.”
Note also the totalitarian pattern. Adams, subject to Hillary Clinton’s recommended peer pressure and shaming, issues an abject apology. But it isn’t good enough. He must be made an example for anyone else who might dare to dissent.
The University of Cincinnati ought to be picketed and inundated with protests until Clifford Adams is reinstated. But it is unlikely that there are enough lovers of freedom there who understand the implications of this case and are willing to stick their necks out.
Meanwhile, in which Muslim country would Greg Vehr or anyone else at the University of Cincinnati venture to say that Muslim women are safer than they are in the U.S.?
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is Confessions of an Islamophobe. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

Tuesday, April 10, 2018

FOCUS ON THE FAMILY STILL DEFENDS CONTEMPLATIVE MYSTICAL PRAYER-SAYS JESUS & DISCIPLES PRACTICED IT

FOCUS ON THE FAMILY STILL DEFENDS CONTEMPLATIVE PRAYER-
SAYS JESUS & DISCIPLES PRACTICED IT 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A Lighthouse Trails reader recently asked our editors to take a look at a page on the Focus on the Family website defending the practice of contemplative prayer. Those of you who have been readers of Lighthouse Trails for a while will know that Lighthouse Trails has challenged Focus on the Family on more than one occasion for their promotion of contemplative prayer. We first issued a concern twelve years ago in the spring of 2006 in an article titled “Focus on the Family Answers Lighthouse Trails -Defends Contemplative Author.”   That article stated:
“On April 26th, Lighthouse Trails Publishing contacted Focus on the Family, via telephone, sharing concerns about FOF’s recent promotion of contemplative author Gary Thomas. On May 5th, Lighthouse Trails received a letter from Timothy Masters of Focus on the Family’s “Office of the Chairman.” Masters responded to Lighthouse Trails with the following:
[D]ue to the unusual nature of your inquiry, our phone representative has taken the liberty of forwarding your message to the staff here in Dr. Dobson’s office for special handling.
“While we are pleased that our phone call has received attention from Dr. Dobson’s personal office, statements made in the letter by Masters have left us concerned and disheartened. Masters said that the staff:
… found nothing within the pages of Sacred Parenting [by Gary Thomas] that contradicts the Christian faith or Dr. Dobson’s philosophy … we are not in a position to address the contents of Mr. Thomas’s other writings … but this much we can tell you: there is and always has been a strong tradition of contemplative prayer in the Christian church that has nothing to do with mantras and Eastern meditation. To confuse the two, as you have done, is to jump to an unwarranted conclusion based on a misunderstanding of certain features they appear to share in common.
“In light of Master’s apparent conviction that the two camps (Christian and Eastern contemplative) are distinct and unrelated, it is important to note here that Tilden Edwards, the founder of the largest and most influential contemplative school in the US, would disagree that the two are indeed different. Edwards revealed that contemplative prayer is the Western bridge to Far Eastern spirituality in his book, Spiritual Friend (of which Richard Foster endorsed, calling it an excellent spiritual book).
“While FOF states they are “not in a position to address” Gary Thomas’ other books (which clearly promote contemplative), the book that FOF does promote, Sacred Parenting, devotes an entire chapter to contemplative spirituality, calling it the “active discipline” of “true listening,” and saying it is the way we can “seize heaven and invite God’s presence into our lives” (pp. 58-59). In that chapter, Thomas names two people who had a major impact in his prayer life: contemplative/mystic Teresa of Avila and Frank Buchman, initiator of Moral Re-Armament, now called Initiatives of Change, an inter-faith organization working towards globalization. Buchman was a controversial figure, partly due to his 1930s public statements showing admiration for Adolph Hitler. And according to cult expert Dave Hunt, Buchman was involved in both mysticism and the occult:
MRA founder Frank Buchman … embraced new revelations through occult guidance [and]helped to set the stage for the New Age movement…. He inspired thousands on all continents to meditate … decades before Maharishi Mahesh Yogi left India. (Hunt, Adaptation of Occult Invasion, 1998)
“Gary Thomas devoted three entire pages to Buchman in Sacred Parenting. All things considered, this book hardly seems like it will be a “tremendous help and a great inspiration to those moms and dads who choose to take advantage of its message.” On the contrary.
“The question must be asked, when Masters states that “there is and always has been a strong tradition of contemplative prayer in the Christian church that has nothing to do with mantras and Eastern meditation,” which authors have or do teach contemplative prayer excluding the mantra and Eastern-like meditation? Richard Foster, whom Focus on the Family now promotes? Gary Thomas? Thomas Merton? Brennan Manning? Henri Nouwen? (All of whom can be found on FOF websites and all of whom teach mantra-style meditation) We must also ask, can Focus on the Family rightfully disregard the contents of Gary Thomas’ other writings, writings in which he tells readers to repeat a word or phrase for 20 minutes until the “word becomes part of you.” Did the apostle Paul, or the Psalmist or Jesus Christ ever give such instructions? Of course not. Gary Thomas’ website clearly promotes practices such as lectio divina and centering prayer all the while encouraging visitors to read the works of Thomas Merton and Basil Pennington, both of whom wholeheartedly and without reservation embraced Eastern mysticism. Incidentally, Thomas teaches Spiritual Formation at Western Seminary. By promoting one of Thomas’ books, FOF is directly promoting contemplative prayer.
“Focus on the Family has entered into an unbiblical territory that can spiritually harm many people, including children. It is our prayer that Dr. Dobson [who is no longer with FOF] and other Christian leaders will look at the facts fairly before proceeding any further down this path.” (end of 2006  article – source)
Since 2006, when we first contacted Focus on the Family, the organization has shown no interest in taking a serious and biblical look at contemplative spirituality. On the contrary, one only needs to read their current statement on their website to see that they have not lessened their stance but rather have emphasized it.
The statement is formatted as a Question and Answer with the Question reading:
Are “contemplative prayer” and other “spiritual disciplines” part of a “New Age” plot to subvert the church? Should I steer clear of these practices? My church recently launched a class in “spiritual formation.” I was excited when I learned of this opportunity because I’m hungry to know the Lord in a deeper, more personal way. But when I shared this with a Christian friend at work, she responded with dire warnings about the “eastern” influences concealed within the contemplative prayer movement. Now I’m thoroughly confused. Can you help me?
Focus on the Family answers by saying:
With all due respect for your friend, we think her fears are unnecessary. There is nothing unbiblical or anti-Christian about solitude, silence, and contemplative prayer. Not, at any rate, as they have been practiced within the context of Christian history. As a matter of fact, these disciplines are part of a time-honored tradition. They’ve been central to the church’s spiritual life for centuries. The fact that an idea looks or sounds like “New Age” mysticism at first glance doesn’t necessarily prove that it is “New Age” mysticism. You have to dig deeper to get at the heart of the matter. This is a case where the danger of jumping to unwarranted conclusions is very present and real indeed.
The Focus on the Family statement then says it will provide some “scriptural evidence” to prove contemplative prayer is biblical. Misusing both 1 Kings 19:12 and Psalm 46:10 (the two “signature” verses used by contemplatives to “prove” their point), FOF then suggest that even Jesus and the disciples practiced contemplative prayer. Their response continues:
On the basis of this biblical foundation, a strong tradition of Christian contemplation and mysticism has grown up within the church over the past 2,000 years. Many of the early church fathers of the first three centuries of the Christian era . . . were contemplatives who had mystical experiences in prayer. This tradition has nothing to do with the depersonalizing, self-abnegating, Nirvana-seeking spiritual practices of the Hindus, Buddhists, and New-Agers. . . .  In our view, it’s not the form or style of such experiences that determine their legitimacy. Neither should we place too much emphasis on the methods or techniques of prayer that precede them. What counts is their content and the degree to which they either do or do not bring glory to the Lord Jesus Christ. (emphasis added)
Clearly, Focus on the Family has groomed their response since that first response in 2006. And they are just as wrong today as they were then.
First, there is nothing in God’s Word whatsoever to indicate that Jesus or the disciples practiced a mystically induced prayer (repeating a word or phrase in order to enter a silent state to hear God).
Second, the frequent references in the statement by FOF to contemplatives of the past are without a doubt referring to mystics such as the Desert Fathers, Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, and others who practiced this “time-honored tradition.” This is easy to prove because it is these figures who every modern-day contemplative looks to for his or her contemplative “inspiration” “within the context of Christian history” “for centuries.”
Third, contrary to what FOF says, contemplative prayer is no different than the “spiritual practices of the Hindus, Buddhists, and New-Agers” as Lighthouse Trails has documented for sixteen years since the release of Ray Yungen’s book A Time of Departing (*see note below). We could provide many quotes to show that contemplative prayer is indeed one in the same as eastern-style meditation or occultic (i.e, New Age) meditation. But we’ll just provide a few right in this article. These are cited from Yungen’s booklet  “Five Things You Should Know About Contemplative Prayer.”
The meditation of advanced occultists [New Agers] is identical with the prayer of advanced mystics [contemplatives]: it is no accident that both traditions use the same word for the highest reaches of their respective activities—contemplation. Richard Kirby, The Mission of Mysticism, p. 7
It’s important to note that, throughout the history of Christianity, Christian mystics have displayed an unusual openness to the wisdom of non-Christian philosophy and religion. In other words, Christian mysticism seems, from the beginning, to have had an intuitive recognition of the way in which mysticism is a form of unity that transcends religious difference.—Carl McColman, The Big Book of Christian Mysticism, p. 63 (emphasis added)
The East does not represent a culture or a religion so much as the methodology [meditation] for a achieving a larger, liberating vision. In that sense, the “East” has existed in Western mystical traditions [i.e., contemplative prayer].—Marilyn Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p. 368
Individual religions have various names for the esoteric paths that can bring us step by step to these experiences. In Mahayana Buddhism, there are the paths of the Tibetans or the way of Zen. . . . In Hinduism, there are the different forms of yoga. In Islam, there is Sufism. In Judaism, there is the teaching of the Cabala. In Christianity, there is contemplation. All of these can lead people to the ultimate level, to cosmic consciousness.—Willigis Jäger, Searching for the Meaning of Life, p. 31 (emphasis added)
Focus on the Family leaders were wrong in 2006, and  they are wrong in 2018. Tragically, along with so many other Christian organizations today, FOF has led countless Christians down a dangerous esoteric path that is not the path that Jesus and the disciples took but rather is the path that “advanced occultists” are on.

*Note: If you have not read A Time of Departing and would sincerely like to or would like to give a copy to your pastor, please e-mail us at editors@lighthousetrails.com, and we will send you a free copy. We will keep your name and address confidential. If your pastor or your church leadership is talking about “Spiritual Formation,” “contemplative prayer,” “spiritual directors,” or “the spiritual disciplines,” then it is time you found out what they are really talking about.

TREVECCA NAZARENE UNIVERSITY CONTINUES TO PROMOTE MYSTICAL SILENCE INSTEAD OF BIBLICAL PRAYER

Trevecca Nazarene University
TREVECCA NAZARENE UNIVERSITY CONTINUES TO PROMOTE MYSTICAL SILENCE 
INSTEAD OF BIBLICAL PRAYER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

By Manny Silva of Concerned Nazarenes
“I am deepening in the mystical forms of prayer.” (Dan Boone)
Thanks to the undiscerning “leadership” of President Dan Boone, Trevecca Nazarene students will have the opportunity to go on a mystical ride. Once again, it time for the “Spiritual Formation” retreat at the Gethsemani monastery in Kentucky, spiritual home to the famed Roman Catholic mystic, universalist, and Buddhist sympathizer Thomas Merton. (https://www.trevecca.edu/community-life/faith-service/spiritual-formation-retreat) Merton, who is dead, is a rising star amongst many undiscerning, confused or deceived Nazarene pastors of today. Along with his spiritual brother, Henri Nouwen, and other modern day proponents such as Richard Foster, they have risen to a prominence equaling and perhaps surpassing that old out of style book called the Bible.
Contemplative prayer uses the same meditative exercises used in Eastern religions and New Age cults. Practicing the silence has absolutely no basis in scripture, yet Dan Boone has deceived many students at Trevecca by sending them on yearly retreats alongside Roman Catholic nuns and monks. Dr. Boone also promotes the use of prayer labyrinths, and has had one there for years at Trevecca. After I exposed this more fully, he made excuses about it, and later re-named the labyrinth and called it something else.
Practicing the silence is simply another form of contemplative mysticism (or contemplative spirituality), which is often excused for by Boone and others by abusing the meaning of Psalm 46:10. Dr. Boone once said on his profile page at Nazarene Theological Seminary, “…I am deepening in the mystical forms of prayer.” (It is no longer there). Well, this is exactly where the Church of the Nazarene is going, and even more boldly than nine years ago when I first saw this coming. Click here to continue reading.
Related Articles From the Past:
2013 – A Plea to the General Assembly 2013: Death of the Church of the Nazarene or Repentance?
2013 – Conflicting Reports: Nazarene Superintendent Says Nazarene Church Not Emergent versus Olivet Nazarene University Welcomes Emergent Mystic
2010 – Buddhist/Universalist Sympathizer Woos Nazarene Students at NNU
2009 – Trevecca Nazarene University Promoting Contemplative Spirituality in No Small Way
2008 – Nazarene Universities Welcome Brian McLaren
2007 – Nazarene Superintendent Praises “A Time of Departing” – But Denomination’s Schools Sinking into Contemplative

APOSTATE FRANCIS CHAN WARNS THOSE WHO CRITICIZE CHRISTIAN LEADERS: :GOD WILL DESTROY YOU"

APOSTATE FRANCIS CHAN WARNS THOSE WHO CRITICIZE CHRISTIAN LEADERS: 
"GOD WILL DESTROY YOU" 
SEE: https://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletters/2018/newsletter20180409.htm; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Francis Chan with Mike Bickle
Photo: Francis Chan in 2016 being prayed for by IHOP’s Mike Bickle (used in accordance with the US Fair Use Act for the purpose of critique and review)
A recent YouTube video that has been viewed over 50,000 times thus far* of highly prolific and popular Christian author and speaker Francis Chan creates a very disturbing scenario of how the Body of Christ should operate. Speaking to a group at Bethel Church, he strongly implied that God will destroy (kill) anyone who questions or opposes the teachings of Christian leaders. Using fear to motivate his audience, he used for his basic text: “If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are” (1 Corinthians 3:17).
Without giving specific names, Chan spoke of those who present any negative criticism of leaders (naming Rick Warren, Mark Driscoll, and John Piper as examples of leaders who should not be criticized). Chan took it a step further and described incidents in the Bible where God took people’s lives as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:10) to predict that God will take the lives of those who have negative things to say about the teachings of today’s spiritual leaders.
We found his reasoning both very troubling and perplexing. And the question that came to our minds is this: The discernment ministries, and even those who question confusing theologies, are clearly under attack here, but how is it that God would want to slay us? We thought further: Doesn’t Scripture say, “the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet I have no need of you” (1 Corinthians 12:21)? But Chan is saying that God has no need of people like us (who are a part of God’s temple) and will destroy us.
One of the sad things about all of this is that years ago, when we first started our publishing ministry, we sent a copy of our first book (A Time of Departing)  to Rick Warren because we naively saw him as a Christian leader who would see the apostasy the book describes and share our concerns. Warren even sent us a personal reply that sounded very affirming. But in time, we came to realize that Rick Warren had joined the ranks of those who opposed our exposure of the error and dangers of contemplative prayer and the emerging church.
We have, as a ministry, always tried to share the truth in love (even though at times that was a challenge because of the anger coming at us). And in all these years, we have never suggested or even hinted that God wanted to kill or destroy those whom we have critiqued or of those who opposed our ministry (and in some cases attempted to destroy it).
But here, Francis Chan is prescribing a death sentence on ministries like ours (and of the people in them). In addition, he is conditioning believers who are following him to not question things they are being taught or “try the spirits” to see whether they are from God. A pastor or teacher should always encourage his congregation to “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). While, of course, idle gossip and cruel slander have no place in the life of a Christian and should always be discouraged and corrected, this is much different than testing all things with Scripture to see “whether those things were [are] so” (Acts 17:11).
For the Body of Christ to be healthy, it must operate in genuine repentance—but that can not happen where serious doctrinal error is covered up and apostasy runs wild. It is irresponsible, self-serving, and highly manipulative for a public figure to suggest that God is going to kill anyone who challenges or criticizes a Christian leader.
Please take the time to read the passage below from Roger Oakland’s book, The Good Shepherd Calls. It further expresses our concern for churches and ministries that are not willing to test all things with Scripture. Much of what is happening in the church at large today does not stand up to the test of Scripture, and it is not right to pretend that it does; nor is it right to threaten those who are challenging leaders and to liken them to branches that God will prune and destroy.
“Test the Spirits”
By Roger Oakland
[T]here is a . . . scenario where church members are led to believe that if they follow the leader, then they are under an umbrella of protection where God is pleased when the congregation shows strict obedience to the shepherd. Oftentimes, this cultish mentality is compounded by the idea that the members of the church should trust the pastor’s discernment more than their own because the pastor is more mature and in tune with the things of God. Again, the reality is that we should be like the citizens of Berea who “searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11). Jesus never taught unquestioning obedience to a pastor or leader but rather said, “[I]f the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matthew 15:14). In other words, we are all accountable for our own actions, and the pastor was never meant to be a “covering” where we are permitted to do things that violate our own conscience.
This is not to say that we should challenge a good pastor on every decision he makes, but if we are under a pastor who is a false teacher, Jesus’ instruction is to “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind” (Matthew 15:14).
Sometimes, if not usually, the above scenario [causes] havoc, all in a single church. This is a very sour formula for discernment as few have the courage to speak up, and those who do are usually exited from the church.
It is very possible for genuine sincere Christians who follow this kind of teaching to be led astray. If we are not willing to be consistent about what we believe, then we will be inconsistent in practice. Inconsistency can easily lead to apostasy. And as Paul warned, apostasy is a key factor in preparing the way for the Antichrist.
A spiritual delusion is presently underway in the name of Christ, and the church is being prepared to embrace it. The apostle Paul stated this would happen, and the current trend indicates this is exactly what is happening. And according to the Bible, if Christians are being deluded now, we can expect the delusion to intensify.
Bible doctrine is based on the idea that a tenet of faith must be established by the support of the whole counsel of God. Scripture must always provide the basis for biblical doctrine. The Bible teaches that all Scripture has been given by the inspiration of God.
Today, a growing number of church leaders are saying Bible doctrine is not as important as it was once thought to be. Holding firm to biblical doctrine can divide the body and hold back revival, some are saying. (From chapter 12 of The Good Shepherd Calls)
Related Material:
Link to Chan’s YouTube talk titled “Are You Destroying the Church?”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHuue9ZXzmM&t=126s
How to Know if You Are Being Spiritually Abused or Deceived—A Spiritual Abuse Questionnaire by Chris Lawson
*This video is posted on various YouTube channels. In just three channels we looked at, the total views was over 50,000.


THEY ARE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS & YOU JUST LIE THERE~DEERFIELD, ILLINOIS SUED FOR THEIR GUN BAN & CONFISCATION

THEY ARE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS & 
YOU JUST LIE THERE 
BY CLARK RAMSEY
SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/04/they-are-coming-for-your-guns/#axzz5CGnszIJ4; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- It is time for an offensive full court press. We need to start chipping away at all the local and state laws that make it impossible to exercise our rights. Despite their claims, tyrants are not scared enough of the current armed populous.
If this effort gains traction the same chorus of statists will be paraded out. “You don’t need that kind of gun” or “you don’t need any guns in this building,” they say. Last I checked, what I own and where I take it is none of anyone’s business.

The real reason gun grabbers never let up is because they know they can’t assert total control over citizens, so long as the populous remains armed.

It’s no contradiction to them to Monday-morning-quarterback police and tell them they shouldn’t have shot a particular person, and in the same breath claim that only the police should be armed. The police are agents of the government. They can be controlled, so they think.
The Chicago suburb of Deerfield, Illinois is a glaring example of such a power grab. This week they passed an extensive gun ban. The ordinance’s preliminary language cites Deerfield’s “power to regulate for the protection of the public health, safety, morals, and Welfare.” This is the usual tact employed by statists. They all hold the belief that it is appropriate to trample on your rights when they cite “health, safety and welfare.“ They don’t bat an eye at the fact that such actions completely deny the principles of individual rights. Individual rights do not belong to the collective and they should not yield to the collective.
Statists often claim that the Second Amendment is rooted in racism. This is a completely false narrative and anyone who propagates that lie doesn't know their history and the chronology of it. Just the opposite is true of course. Gun control laws have everything to do with slavery.
Slavery and Jim Crow laws were based on the belief that the minority individual was merely property, a thing to be possessed and controlled. Most segregation laws and ordinances were premised on “morals, safety, and welfare.” Segregation was a backdoor way to limit freedom and control public opinion. The bastardization of the Second Amendment is no different.

The Supreme Court has failed us.

They are supposed to protect our civil rights. They are not supposed to allow ordinances like Deerfield’s to stand. Yet, all around the country, bureaucrats at every level [and whole states, like NJ] have moved to restrict and bastardize the right “to keep and bear arms.” If only Deerfield was a singular example…
The District of Columbia has refused to follow court orders to loosen their gun laws over and over again. Virginia’s former governor, Terry McAuliffe barred guns from all executive offices because he couldn’t pass anti-gun laws. His democrat successor has broadened the reach of that order. The People’s Republic of California continues its crusade against gun owners in every possible way – from copper bullets-only laws to assault weapons bans. Even the great state of Texas has created a de facto concealed carry ban by giving private businesses and property owners the ability to ban guns on their premises. Such a law has made it impossible for a Texan to know if he’ll have to go back home to secure his firearm or if he’ll be allowed to enter a business or church. Many states are may-issue, meaning that no one has a right to carry unless some bureaucrat decides they do on a case-by-case basis. I could go on for a thousand pages detailing the asinine list of infringements we’ve permitted.

All of this leads me to question why the powers that be ever attempt such infringements?

Let me answer this by way of analogy. Remember when you were a kid and you were dating? Some girl’s dads would make an obviously idle threat, “have her home by 10, or else.” Other dads would make their intentions a little more clear, “have her home by 10 or I’m going to get in my truck with the devil and we’re going to find you.” The latter was a man you knew was capable of harming you. You knew he took his duty to protect his daughter seriously. You might’ve stolen a kiss from that girl, but you sure as hell didn’t push the limit and she was home by 9:45.
Gun owners have become an idle threat with an increasingly undefined limit. Government officials don’t take gun owners seriously anymore than we took the “have her home, or else” dad. I’m not suggesting we start a civil war, yet. However, I am asserting that we take a much more aggressive stand to protect our rights.
A Second Amendment that can be reduced to only certain guns in certain places is no civil right at all. Agents of the government at every level are wildly out of control. I’m so tired of it in my hometown that I voted for a democrat for the first time in my life because she was the only person opposing the Republican incumbent. The incumbent might as well have been a democrat with his feckless spending and an ever-expanding massive local government.
Do you really think there isn’t a power reason that bureaucrats on all sides have passed laws barring the possession of firearms in their offices? They don’t want to face the reality of our power. They do everything they can to reduce our power and increase theirs.
The NRA is not focused on local issues. It is long passed time we go on the offensive and exercise our rights wherever and whenever possible. Work to repeal all of it, not just some of it. Organize your fellow like-minded citizens. If you need some help with how to organize I highly recommend you contact Virginia Citizen’s Defense League. In the alternative, I’m always available at clarkramsey.org


Clark Ramsey
Clark Ramsey

About the Author Clark Ramsey
Clark Ramsey is the host of “The Ramsey Revival” on YouTube. He is a former Infantry Marine and a service-connected disabled veteran. Clark holds a Juris Doctor from Michigan State University College of Law and a Bachelor's degree in Homeland Security & Emergency Preparedness. He has thousands of hours in a variety of shooting related disciplines from hunting to tactical fieldwork. If he could, he'd spend all of his time hunting and fishing with his wife and three kids.







_____________________________________
Lawsuit Challenges Gun Ban 
In Chicago Suburb Of Deerfield
BY ALAN GOTTLIEB
SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/04/lawsuit-challenges-gun-ban-in-chicago-suburb-of-deerfield/#axzz5CGoXcdG7; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:


BELLEVUE, WA – -(Ammoland.com)-The Second Amendment Foundation filed a lawsuit against the Chicago suburb of Deerfield, Illinois seeking an injunction against enforcement of the ban on so-called “assault weapons” and “large capacity magazines” adopted by the Village Board of Trustees earlier last week.
Joining the Second Amendment Foundation in the legal challenge is the Illinois State Rifle Association and a private citizen, Daniel Easterday, who resides in the village and is a gun owner. The lawsuit was filed in the 19th Judicial Circuit Court in Lake County. Plaintiffs are represented by Glen Ellyn attorney David Sigale.
The lawsuit challenges the village ban under a 2013 amended state statute that declared “the regulation of the possession or ownership of assault weapons are exclusive powers and functions of this State. Any ordinance or regulation, or portion of that ordinance or regulation, that purports to regulate the possession or ownership of assault weapons in a manner that is inconsistent with this Act, shall be invalid…”
“We moved swiftly to challenge this gun ban because it flies in the face of state law,” said Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “While the village is trying to disguise this as an amendment to an existing ordinance, it is, in fact, a new law that entirely bans possession of legally-owned semi-auto firearms, with no exception for guns previously owned, or any provision for self-defense.
“The new ordinance also provides for confiscation and destruction of such firearms and their original capacity magazines,” he added. “What is particularly outrageous about this new law is that it levies fines of up to $1,000 a day against anyone who refuses to turn in their gun and magazines or move them out of the village by the time the ordinance takes effect in June.”

“This certainly puts the lie to claims by anti-gunners that ‘nobody is coming to take your guns.’”


Second Amendment Foundation
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

GLAZOV GANG: SPLC'S WAR ON EX-FBI AGENT JOHN GUANDOLO

GLAZOV GANG: SPLC'S WAR ON EX-FBI AGENT JOHN GUANDOLO 
This new edition of The Glazov Gang features John Guandolo, a former FBI agent, combat veteran Marine, and now the president of Understanding the Threat.
John exposed The SPLC’s War on Truth-Tellers about the Threat, shedding a disturbing light on how the hate group is trying to silence him, his group and all freedom-fighters.
Don’t miss it!
Subscribe to the Glazov Gang‘s YouTube Channel and follow us on Twitter: @JamieGlazov.
Please donate through our new Unified-4-People Campaign or via our Pay Pal account.

HUNGARY: VIKTOR ORBAN WINS SWEEPING MAJORITY; VOWS "A BIG FIGHT AHEAD" TO PROTECT HUNGARY

HUNGARY: VIKTOR ORBAN WINS SWEEPING MAJORITY; VOWS "A BIG FIGHT AHEAD" 
TO PROTECT HUNGARY 
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Prime Minister Viktor Orban won a third straight term in power in Sunday elections….The rightwing nationalist prime minister projected himself as a savior of Hungary’s Christian culture against Muslim migration into Europe, an image which resonated with millions of voters, especially in rural areas.
Orban did not “project himself” as any “savior of Hungary’s Christian culture.” He instead stood up as a responsible leader to block the Islamization of Hungary, while other European countries grappled — and continue to grapple — with mass chaos, escalating crime, jihad attacks, no-go zones, sex attacks and violent antisemitism tearing apart their countries as a result of their suicidal immigration policies. Unfortunately, anyone who opposes reckless immigration is deemed to be “Islamophobic” and “racist.”
Orban’s victory has now put an end to ongoing fears that  “George Soros would use his organisation, now the second largest political activist charity in the world, to influence Hungary’s 2018 general election” and “remove Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party from power, tear down the border fence, and implement the ‘Soros Plan’ to flood Europe” with a million migrants annually.
Orban declared upon winning:
We created the opportunity for ourselves to defend Hungary…A great battle is behind us. We have achieved a decisive victory.
He also vowed “a big fight ahead” to protect Hungary.
Orban’s sweeping victory has broader implications for Europe, given his indomitable stand and leadership role in resisting EU’s bullying of Hungary and other members of the Visegrad group over refusals to take in the EU’s imposed quotas of migrants. Austria has stated that it “could serve as a go-between in the European Union for the West and the Visegrad group of eastern states.” Last October, Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz led his coalition of the conservative People’s Party to an election win and has pledged to work with Viktor Orban.
“Hungary’s strongman Viktor Orban wins third term in power,” by Krisztina Than and Gergely Szakacs, Reuters, April 8, 2018:
BUDAPEST, Hungary (Reuters) – Prime Minister Viktor Orban won a third straight term in power in Sunday elections after his anti-immigration campaign message secured a strong majority for his party in parliament, granting him two-thirds of seats based on preliminary results.
The rightwing nationalist prime minister projected himself as a savior of Hungary’s Christian culture against Muslim migration into Europe, an image which resonated with millions of voters, especially in rural areas.
“We have won, Hungary has won a great victory,” a jubilant Orban told a large crowd of cheering supporters near the Danube river in Budapest.
“There is a big battle behind us, we have won a crucial victory, giving ourself a chance to defend Hungary.”
According to preliminary results with 93 percent of votes counted, National Election Office data projected Fidesz to win 133 seats, a tight two-thirds majority in the 199-seat parliament. Nationalist Jobbik was projected to win 26 seats, while the Socialists were projected as third with 20 lawmakers.
Two smaller leftist parties, DK and LMP, won nine and eight seats respectively.
That means Orban could have a two-thirds majority for a third time, and powers to change constitutional laws. The EU has struggled to respond as Orban’s government has, in the view of its critics, used its two landslide victories in 2010 and 2014 to erode democratic checks and balances.
The victory could embolden Orban to put more muscle into a Central European alliance against the European Union’s migration policies. Orban, Hungary’s longest-serving post-communist premier, opposes deeper integration of the bloc and – teaming up with Poland – has been a fierce critique of Brussels’ policies.
He expressed gratitude to Poland’s leaders for their backing ahead of the vote……

FACEBOOK CENSORS, SUSPENDS & THREATENS VOICE OF EUROPE FOR CRITICIZING MIGRATION~POLITICIANS "INVESTIGATING" ZUCKERBERG PAID THOUSANDS BY FACEBOOK

FACEBOOK CENSORS, SUSPENDS & THREATENS VOICE OF EUROPE 
FOR CRITICIZING MIGRATION
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/facebook-censors-suspends-and-threatens-voice-of-europe-for-criticizing-migration;  republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The freedom of speech is not only threatened; it is despised. Those who are working to destroy it have the support of massive numbers of young people who have been indoctrinated into believing that dissent from the Leftist agenda constitutes “hate speech” and must be forcibly silenced. And so it is happening, quickly. The freedom of speech will have disappeared entirely before most people even notice it is gone.
“Facebook threatens Voice of Europe for criticising migration,” Voice of Europe, April 8, 2018:
We were one of the fastest growing European news sites on Facebook with at least 30,000 people joining us every month. On some days 5,000 people joined us, but those days are gone after Facebook decided to censor us, suspend us and threaten us.
While we’ve changed nothing in our postings, Facebook’s behaviour towards us changed. Several innocent postings were a reason for Facebook to suspend our moderators.
Our page statistics – Source: Facebook
For example posting a picture of Poles protesting behind a banner with ‘Mohammed not welcome’ was a reason to suspend one of our moderators for 24 hours and we had to delete content as well. But it would become much worse..
This week we were even banned for posting our own news and our moderator received a suspension for 30 days! While we understand news can be ‘hate speech’ as well, we don’t think this was the case here.
We’ve posted book review of a former Czech president who said: “The migrant influx is comparable to the barbarian invasions of Europe.”
While the article heavily criticises migration, it is news, like any other article on our site. But not according to Facebook: The article was removed, we received a 30-day suspension and Facebook threatened to remove our page over it. But something even more strange happened.
That day we saw a somewhat similar article was posted by Russia Today on Facebook (see below). They didn’t receive a suspension over it, because that would be all over the media.
We’ve now decided we will not post all our news on Facebook anymore, because we don’t want to lose our page. While Facebook blames us for posting ‘hate speech’ we think the real reason is our site was becoming too successful with between 30,000 and 40,000 followers every month this year….
_______________________________________________________
Facebook Lines The Pockets Of The Politicians Questioning Zuckerberg
Owen Shroyer reveals how the politicians chosen to question Mark Zuckerberg on the controversial data mining and selling behind Facebook have been paid thousands by the social media platform.