Thursday, August 17, 2017

Trump Was Right: Pershing Did Talk About Using Pigs & Blood In The Philippines

Media fact checks have claimed that General John “Black Jack” Pershing would not have offended Muslims by authorizing such a course of action and that any claims of his involvement are also a legend.
General Pershing however wrote in his autobiography that, "These Juramentado attacks were materially reduced in number by a practice that the Mohamedans held in abhorrence. The bodies were publicly buried in the same grave with a dead pig. It was not pleasant to have to take such measures, but the prospect of going to hell instead of heaven sometimes deterred the would-be assassins."
We can be certain then that the practice of burying Muslim terrorists with pigs was indeed real and fairly widespread. Was pig’s blood also used on Muslim terrorists as a deterrent to prevent attacks?
The Scientific American described just such an event. In a hard look at the area, it wrote of a place where, "Polygamy is universally practiced and slavery exists very extensively. Horse stealing is punishable by death, murder by a fine of fifty dollars. The religion is Mohamedan.”
A Muslim terrorist, the magazine wrote, “will suddenly declare himself ‘Juramentado’, that is inspired by Mohammed to be a destroyer of Christians. He forthwith shaves his head and eyebrows and goes forth to fulfill his mission."
The Scientific American described how a Muslim terrorist who had disemboweled an American soldier was made an example of. "A grave was dug without the walls of the city. Into this the murderer was unceremoniously dropped. A pig was then suspended by his hind legs above the grave and the throat of the animal cut. Soon the body lay immersed in gore... a guard stood sentry over the grave until dusk when the pig was buried side by side with the Juramentado.”
“This so enraged the Moros that they besieged the city. Matters became so grave that General Wood felt called upon to disperse the mob resulting in the death of a number of Moros.”
It is clear from these accounts which encompass General Pershing’s autobiography, the New York Times and the Scientific American that the use of pig corpses and pig’s blood in the Philippines was not a legend, but fact. It was not carried out by a few rogue officers, but had the support of top generals. It was not a single isolated incident, but was a tactic that was made use of on multiple occasions.

End quote.

~Frontpage Magazine

Thursday, August 10, 2017

How Do You Perceive God?

"If a person has erroneous thoughts of Deity, then he worships a false god and renders homage to a fictitious being, the figment of his own imagination. It is not sufficient to think of God as He may be conceived of in our imagination, instead, our thoughts of Him must be formed by what He has revealed of Himself in His word. Man, unaided, cannot rightly conceive of God; all speculation concerning Him is utterly vain, yea, profane. The finite cannot comprehend the Infinite. If the "judgmnents" of God are "unsearchable" and if His "ways" are "past finding out," how much more so must God Himself be!"
~ Arthur Pink, "Spiritual Union and Communion"

Wednesday, August 09, 2017

Regeneration

"Regeneration is indispensably necessary before any soul can enter Heaven. In order to love spiritual things a man must be made spiritual. The natural man may hear about them, and have a correct idea of the doctrine of them, but he cannot love them (2 Thess. 2:10), nor find his joy in them.
None can dwell with God and be eternally happy in His presence until a radical change has been wrought in him a change from sin to holiness; and this change must take place on earth."
~ Arthur Pink, "Regeneration or The New Birth"

Monday, August 07, 2017

Really NYT?

And, of course, staggering genocide makes it easier to see all that empty land. Only the would see that as a win/win.

A Problem With Piper's View of Creation

Answers In Genesis' Simon Turpin makes a good point regarding Piper's heretical (my word) view of Creation:
Quote:
Piper recognizes that the more controversial issue is how to construe Genesis 1–2 about how God did it and how long it took. Piper states:
Piper has chosen to follow John Sailhamer’s interpretation of Genesis. Piper comments on Sailhamer’s view:
His view is that what’s going on here is that all of creation happened to prepare the land for man. In verse 1, “In the beginning he made the heavens and the earth,” he makes everything. And then you go day by day and he’s preparing the land. He’s not bringing new things into existence; he’s preparing the land and causing things to grow and separating out water and earth. And then, when it’s all set and prepared, he creates and puts man there.
Piper believes this has the advantage of saying:
That the earth is billions of years old if it wants to be—whatever science says it is, it is—but man is young, and he was good and he sinned. He was a real historical person, because Romans 5 says so, and so does the rest of the Bible.
Piper’s statement reveals the controlling factor in his interpretation of Genesis is that of “science saying that the earth is billions of years old.” It is interesting that Piper believes that “science” shows the earth to be billions of years old. However, he believes that man is young, Adam was a real historical person, and that he was good and then sinned because of what Romans 5 and the rest of the Bible say. Unfortunately, Piper is seriously inconsistent in his views here because the same “science” that he accepts when it speaks about the age of the earth is the same “science” that would disagree with his conclusions regarding Adam and the consequences of sin. Why accept science in one area and not in the others? Furthermore, Piper draws his conclusion about Adam because the “Bible says so,” but the Bible also states that God created everything in six days (Genesis 1:1–2:3Exodus 20:1131:17).
End quote. (emphasis, mine)
On another note, I find it interesting that Piper's claim that the world is "as old as it wants to be" sounds very similar to James White's  Post-Modern "self definition" claim in his promotion of a lying imam:
Time mark 17:57 "And yet people will hold me accountable for the Westboro Baptist church people and things like that. And I’m like wait a minute. That’s not my life. That’s not how I approach people. That’s not my perspective. I do not want to be painted with that brush. I demand the right of self definition of what my faith is. We all demand that right. And yet for many Christians we refuse that right to Muslims."

Eschatology Is Essential

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,
Tit 2:12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age,
Tit 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,
Tit 2:14 who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.
Tit 2:15 These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

The sound doctrines of soteriology, sanctification, and eschatology are inseparably bound to each other and they are bound to God.

Living godly, righteous lives and looking for the return of Christ is to be done now--in this "present age", as well as be taught authoritatively in the context of the local church--again, in this "present age". There are no justifiable excuses of "who's perfect" or "there's no perfect church", in order to justify sin and compromise. The standard on how to live and when to do it is dogmatically taught in Scripture.

As taught at church yesterday on Titus 2:11-5, when leaders do not teach eschatology, they cheat the Christian of his sanctification. To say that eschatology is a lesser doctrine, or as Mark Dever says, to teach on it is a sin, is to violate Scripture AND is to keep the Christian from maturity and sanctification. It also keeps his eyes on the temporal, immediate things around him (such as celebrity false teachers like Dever) instead of Christ.

This came up in my study:

1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.
1Jn 3:3 And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.
1Jn 3:4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.
1Jn 3:5 You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin.
1Jn 3:6 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him.
1Jn 3:7 Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;

It says the same thing. Also this:

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
2Pe 3:11 Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!
2Pe 3:13 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
2Pe 3:14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless,

Sunday, August 06, 2017

The British National Trust Demanded All Volunteers To Wear Sodomite Badges Or Move Out of Sight

National Trust members are threatening to cancel their membership after it was revealed that volunteers were banished to the back room, out of sight of visitors, for refusing to wear a gay pride badge...

Ten volunteers at Felbrigg Hall refused to wear the rainbow lanyards and badges, to mark 50 years since the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality, in protest at the Trust’s decision to ‘out’ the Hall’s former owner, poet and historian Robert Wyndham Ketton-Cremer, who bequeathed the estate to the Trust after his death in 1969.
As a result, volunteers who refused were asked “not to be on duty in a visitor-facing role” during the summer’s ‘Prejudice and Pride’ campaign, according to emails seen by The Telegraph.

~Breitbart
According to the BBC, the National Trust has reversed itself and has made wearing the badge "optional".

This is nothing more than homofascism. Only through the public outcry did the National Trust reverse itself. Ironically, these Western liberals are also the ones that  promote Islamofascism--the very government religion that throws sodomites off of buildings and shows hatred toward women. The Orlando jihad was an example of just how tolerant true Islam is regarding Western liberalism.
The disgusting thing is that the rainbow was God's promise to man to never flood the world again because of their sin and debauchery. To take that symbol and use it to promote that very wickedness is nothing less than blasphemy. Let is remember that God will not be mocked.
Gen 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years."
Gen 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Gen 6:5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Gen 6:6 The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

Gen 18:20  And the LORD said, "The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave
Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Is The Burka Really About Freedom And Choice?

Stop normalizing regressive belief systems in the name of progressivism and diversity. - Paul Watson

https://www.facebook.com/PaulJosephWatson/?pnref=story.unseen-section

I am not advocating feminism, but showing the folly of Western feminists trying to convince us (and themselves) that wearing the burka is a sign of freedom of choice....and well, feminism.

Saturday, August 05, 2017

Mistaken Identity

"Some of the biggest cases of mistaken identity are among intellectuals who have trouble remembering that they are not God."

-Thomas Sowell

Applies to those inside the Evangelical Machine too. Especially them.

Thursday, August 03, 2017

John The Baptist: his preaching and King Herod

Mar 6:17 For Herod himself had sent and had John arrested and bound in prison on account of Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, because he had married her.
Mar 6:18 For John had been saying to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife."
Mar 6:19 Herodias had a grudge against him and wanted to put him to death and could not do so;
Mar 6:20 for Herod was afraid of John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was very perplexed; but he used to enjoy listening to him.

John held King Herod to the biblical standard of marriage and definition of sin.
John didn't ignore Herod's sin because, after all, he was only doing what unbelievers do.
John didn't ignore Herod's sin because, after all, he was only doing what unbelievers do.
John didn't appeal to Herod's "felt needs" (the flesh)
John didn't seek Herod's approval.
John didn't use pragmatism (ignore Herod's personal sin) in order to save his own life so that he could continue evangelizing.