Paul's Passing Thoughts

This article struck me, and is indicative of many other life improving and life saving technologies that come out of Israel. The world, out of pity after WWII, gave the Jews a plot of worthless desert which they turned into a paradise but now they are “occupiers.”

On the one hand, Islam wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, but on the other hand, few countries contribute to the world more than Israel. It begs the question: how does Islam promote quality of life? Where are the Islamic cancer research facilities? Where are the Islamic mental health research facilities?

Does Islam do anything other than invest in killing people through terror networks? Do their schools do anything to advance technologies that improve life? If they do, how does that investment compare to their investment in hate? When the Obama administration sent Billions of dollars to Iran, they had to know the bulk of the investment would be invested in terror; what else does Islam do?

And when their terror compels the world to give them things, like land, technology, or whatever, what do they make of it? Always, without exception, a bigger hot mess of poverty and death. Now, you might point to Saudi Arabia as an exception, but what life improving innovations have ever come out of them? In all cases, in regard to Islamic countries, and for that matter communist countries, improvements are imported.

And curiously, one asks why Islam is so mad at the world; what awful thing has the world done to Islam that causes them to be in full-blown revenge mode all of the time? Answer: the world refused to bow down to Mahammad. That’s it. Islam is a focus on world conquest and little else.

What has the world done to the Jews? We could understand Judaism being a revenge-driven religion in that regard, but what do we see instead? A world leader in improving life.

Hell is something I ponder a lot and struggle with. Though I love God, and totally trust Him, I wonder if hell is a little extreme. Jesus said that hating your brother can land you in eternal torment forever. Remember, historically, Islam and Judaism come from the same family. But pondering this issue seems to draw me closer to understanding; does this boil down to either loving life or hating life?

Hell is referred to as an eternal death versus eternal life. If you hate life so much, why would you have a problem with spending eternity in the belly of its enemy, that is, death? And the torment part, well, hatred for life always results in some sort of torment, no?

Maybe the most important thing to know is that there is no middle ground between heaven and hell; you are either on the side of life, or death. You must choose one side or the other.

In these musings, however, there can be no appeasement for terrorism; it has set its face against life in all quarters.

paul

I understand that until recently, church has been a safe place, or so we thought. Church was a place where you always felt welcomed and loved. However, apparently, the whole child sexual abuse thing was going on behind the scenes for a long time, even in Southern Baptist circles.

Aside from that, Church was a place where you were free to come and go, and if you hadn’t been there for awhile the folks missed you. There was some notion of a biblical new birth and church was primarily for encouraging each other to be better Christians while enjoying close friendships.

Any notion that church membership is efficacious for salvation, that the church was out to control you, and is a political party vying for societal influence, where not thought valid by any stretch of the imagination.  Asking you to sign a church covenant, and the idea of church discipline for non-attendance would have been met with dismay.

Of course, those former 20th century church ideals are a post-Revolution-America thing. Until Americanism came about, church was always married to the state and compelled people to obey its orthodoxy by force. Shortly after the Reformation, many Protestant movements had their own standing armies. Politics and church were hand-in-glove. The church was not only seen as God’s appointed authority over salvation on earth, but God’s standing army to take over the world to pave the way for Christ’s return. Church was represented almost entirely by Dominion Theology.

Presently, we are seeing a massive return to medieval church theology and the application of it. If you walk into any church, you better be all-in because church now plays for keeps. It is no longer, “Hey look! A visitor!,” but rather a sizing up and an evaluation protocol. Welcoming committees are no longer welcoming committees, they are trained individuals who evaluate visitors and report to the elders. Of course, terminology that describes their “ministry” is couched in soft terms. In these evaluations, those who can think for themselves are immediately deemed a threat to the “church family.”

Church campuses are the big thing now. These are groups of churches that are really one church and occupy a large geographical space. Unofficially, these campuses often have their own in-house police departments run by real police officers or retired police officers. At John MacArthur’s church in California, they are known as the “Temple Guard” and have been known to escort people to their cars for asking too many questions in Sunday School. They are also heavily armed.

Look, I know as Christians we care about the truth, but church is no longer a place where you stand for the truth or fight for it; they will totally destroy you. Church is now the wrong venue to stand for truth. Church has become just another political party and all of the political intrigue that goes along with it. Let the dead bury their own dead.

Based on this ministry’s firsthand experience in helping people, Susan and I can tell you how churches are now functioning as church-states in an open society. First of all, politicians and people running for office are members of these churches and actively work towards passing laws that further enable churches to function as shadow church-states. When you hear Churchians say, “God’s law is higher than man’s law,” you should be very afraid. By no means at all should churches in our day be tax exempt. Clearly, churches are now split along party lines and promote party and social platforms. Laws will subtly empower churches to get back in bed with the state. And by the way, the church could easily open a box of instant church-state by reuniting the Catholic and Protestant churches. That’s what the ecumenical movement is all about to begin with.

Also remember that IRS agents, police detectives, police chiefs, prosecutors, psychiatrists and children’s services people go to these churches. Would these people be used to bring bogus charges against people who are causing a church problems?

It’s already happening. It is totally already happening.

Stay away from church unless you are ready to run with the big dogs of political intrigue. Church is not what it used to be…at all.

paul

Calvinists are clearly among the most confident people roaming the earth; but why? They pride themselves as ones who embrace the hard truth of reality; God alone chooses those who will be saved and man has no ability whatsoever to choose God. All glory belongs to God, and Calvinists disdain any notion that man has some ability within himself to choose or desire the things of God. Clearly, they look at “Pelagianists” in a demeaning way in the same way that Gnostics look at those who believe reality can be understood through the five senses.

This is why Calvinists are the most ridiculous bunch roaming the face of the earth: while they are proud of their elect standing, Calvinist doctrine holds to the idea that NOBODY knows their eternal destiny until the “final tribunal.”

Fact is, Calvin held to three classes of elect: the non-elect, the temporary elect (the called), and the final elect (those who persevere). Now, forget the whole, “those who don’t persevere were never saved” routine. That’s not what Calvin taught. He taught that there is a temporary elect who are “temporarily illumined.” And due to the fact that they are temporarily regenerated by God, and do not persevere by God’s predetermination, their eternal damnation is greater than the non-elect. If you want to argue with this, citations are available upon request, but be sure of this; you are going to lose the argument.

So, why evangelize? According to Calvinism, it brings glory to God because man’s rejection of the gospel is proof that it is all of God. And, since all of reality is a metaphysical narrative written by God, all aspects of the story gives glory to God. Susan Dohse has taught on this extensively in regard to the theology of Jonathan Edwards.

However, there is one theory that explains why Calvinists can remain confident and haughty even if they lose their appetite for the “sovereign gospel of grace.” It pertains to Calvin’s doctrine of “power of the keys.” What’s that? Well, it’s a Catholic doctrine, because, you know, Calvin was a Catholic. And you know, an avowed follower of Augustine, till the end, who was, well, a Catholic. The doctrine holds to the idea that the church is God’s authority over salvation on earth. If you think that Protestant orthodoxy rejects the idea that pastors, like priests, have the authority to forgive sin on earth, you are dead wrong. And, if you think excommunication is a Catholic thing only (the idea that being ejected from church membership is the taking away of salvation), and not a Protestant thing, you are beyond dead wrong.

So, you can be a proud Calvinist while having no way to know your future destiny by merely staying faithful to church membership and obeying those “who have the rule over you.”  It is sort of like having a get out of election free card. So, you can choose God’s election by remaining faithful to the church. Brilliant.

And, obviously, if church is the only way to heaven, you must see no evil, hear no evil, or speak any evil against the church. Besides, Calvinists are all totally depraved anyway…

…and proud of it.

paul

“It is unclear as to whether or not the families have received any actual payments, but even if they have, Obama paid Iran back with interest. Let that sink in; Obama repaid Iran for a settlement that was the only justice Americans received for the 1983 bombing.” 

The political discussion surrounding the pros and cons of assassinating Qasem Soleimani, even from former military personnel, is stunning. Vacant from all of the discussion is the fact that Iran was directly reasonable for the Marine barracks bombing that killed 241 Americans during Qasem Soleimani’s tenure. On the one hand, we bemoan “endless wars” because we put so much value on the life of our brave soldiers, but on the other hand, many, including NO ENDLESS WARS AT ALL COST advocates such as Tucker Carlson seem to be completely comfortable with no justice being executed for the cowardly murder of 241 Marines while they slept.

Granted, trying to ferment democracy in some countries is a total waste of time, money, and blood, but I understand the ideology. Since humanity is endowed by God with a need to be free, wouldn’t it make sense to save the world with democracy building? No, because here is what George Bush (both of them) totally missed: freedom requires bravery. America is the best thing that has ever happened to the world, but not only because our land is free; the land is free because the brave live here.

You see, justice is all about the value of human life. If a life is worthless, who cares about justice? America’s bravery comes from valuing life. When acts that see life as worthless happen, those who value life displace their fear with anger. You cannot build a democracy where zero-sum-life ideology rules.

In response to a lawsuit filed by families of the Marines in 2014, a federal court found Iran guilty of being responsible for the bombing. The families were awarded 920 million. I won’t go into the twenty-year-plus maze of court cases, but a case in 2016 cleared the way for the families to obtain the awarded funds through a law that had frozen 1.7 billion in Iranian assets located in U.S. banks.

Throughout the legal process, the Obama administration supported the court cases for obvious political reasons, but in the end, merely paid Iran back for the settlements. In fact, though there is much debate about how much cold cash was delivered to Iran by Obama, one delivery was 1.7 billion, the same amount that were frozen assets that the families were awarded from. It is unclear as to whether or not the families have received any actual payments, but even if they have, Obama paid Iran back with interest. Let that sink in; Obama repaid Iran for a settlement that was the only justice Americans received for the 1983 bombing.

Where is this story, and where is the discussion of the Marine barracks bombing in all of this? Furthermore, the result was America pulling out of Lebanon immediately; how did that work for us?

Iran has committed several acts of war against the U.S. One must ask what would happen if a country bombed a Chinese military barracks. What Trump has done follows: he has finally delivered some measure of justice for American families.

If Iran is not willing to take their medicine; let there be war, final justice for them is long overdue. And if you want an end to endless wars, trust me, this won’t be an endless one.

paul