The Biblical Examiner
An Examination of Biblical Precepts Involved in Issues at Hand

June, 2012

Witchcraft & Magic
Valentine’s Day
Our Next President?
The Federal Vision
Wind Farms & “Local” Warming
Mass Exodus US Oil Refineries
Lies, lies and more lies
“Civil War”?
Christian Identity, Salvation?
200-Year Oil Supply
GM now China Motors
Quote from a Confederate Chaplain

Witchcraft & Magic

We are being inundated with praises glorifying magic and witchcraft. However, God pronounces the very harshest words possible against magic and witchcraft, Exodus 22:18; Leviticus 19:31. He contrasts witchcraft with the perfection of the revealed will of God, Deuteronomy 18:9-14. James 1:25, identifies the law of God as the standard of perfection which the Lord commands and for which He provides the grace. (Cf. Romans 12:2; 2 Timothy 3:17; James 2:22.)

The enemy of our soul is no fool! He seeks to convince God’s people that magic and witchcraft are simply supernatural manifestations which can easily be avoided. However, witchcraft and magic must be seen as any effort to control (take dominion over) any part of God’s creation apart from being hearers and doers of the Word of God. The method which God has ordained to acquire dominion over His creation is His Word studied, developed and applied (including its preaching) by the power of the grace of God. It is through the applied Word the Spirit of God works to subdue creation, including people, to Himself, 1 Corinthians 2:4, 5; 15:34.

This method of dominion through the applied law-word of God is not restricted to people. We are given an extensive list of other areas godly dominion applies to in Deuteronomy 28: the city (the city will be in anarchy without this control), v. 3; field, v. 4; birth of children, v. 4; fruit of the ground, v. 4; livestock, v. 5; food supply, v. 5; traveling, v. 6; warfare with the enemy, v. 7; weather or environment, v. 12; economy, v. 12; among nations, vv. 1, 13; and every action of the hand, v. 8.

Exodus 23:25, includes physical health. In addition, the positive aspects of godly dominion found in Leviticus 26 are: promises of peace, security, freedom and safety, v. 6; victory over wild beasts, v. 6; the respect of the Lord, v. 9; prosperity in the storage of food, v. 10; the presence and fellowship of the Lord, v. 11 (this is mentioned two more times, vv. 22, 23 & vv. 27, 28. 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21); emotional health, v. 16; a good profit for the farmer, v. 16. The negative side of v. 16 is that our prosperity will be consumed by the state, our enemies, the banker and tax man. (Sound familiar?)

It is interesting that the promises of Leviticus 26 are not conditioned upon sinless perfection, but upon a willingness to be corrected by the law-word of God, v. 23. (Jer. 5:3.) Furthermore, we are told that the Lord desires obedience, not sacrifice, v. 31. (V. 19, the iron heavens are heavens which do not hear prayer. The brass earth is an earth with no rain, the purpose of which is to break the pride of sinful man.)

In other words, all areas of life and thought are to be controlled by the study, development and application of the law of God in each and every area of life and thought. As the new man in Christ applies the law, he accomplishes what Adam failed to do ?exercise control, or dominion, over every area (but God is the One who does the actual controlling of them). Adam believed that obedience was not necessary to exercise control. Thus Adam abhorred the Lord, Leviticus 26:15.

Example 1: control of the weather -- Find out what kind of action is required by God’s law to bring the rain in due season, then do it, Leviticus 26:3, 4. Example 2: desire for animals to be healthier and stronger -- Find out what the law of God teaches concerning animal husbandry and develop this within His established bounds. Example 3: better plants and fruit trees--Study what God has revealed concerning botany and develop within these limits. Example 4: civil government -- Study God’s word concerning the actions of men, the restrictions and requirements, then civil law is to reflect this. What kind of men are to rule? Search it out and place these kinds of men in authority (which within our system we do by voting for godly and God-talented men who run for office). Example 5: physical and emotional health -- Physical, find where we have departed from the law of the Lord (Lev. 26:40), then search for God’s ordained principles of medicine, work within those principles and apply the results. Emotional, find where the conscience has violated the word of God, then make restitution to God and man.

It is obvious that all these areas are to be developed according to the law-word of God, then applied. Fallen man believes he can take control and have God’s blessings in every area of life and thought apart from obedience to God’s word. (Give me a pill!)

Magic and Witchcraft or Occultism:

For every thinking man life consists of knowing the secrets of nature, understanding their meaning and raising the veil of Isis. Those who under the guidance of different influences have deciphered the unknown, form links in a chain. The power that churchmen call ‘God’, philosophers ‘laws’, moralists ‘precepts’ and scientists ‘nature’, is described by occultist as ‘intuition’ or ‘understanding’. For all those who search for the answer within themselves, the principle is always the same; study the microcosm, man, in order to understand the secrets of the macrocosm, the universe. Occultist proceed in the same way: by examining man they try to discover, by analogy, the laws which control the universe.

Everything that is not yet known or accepted is regarded as occult or concealed. As proof of what it postulates official science admits only experiments which can be made repeatedly to an unlimited extent, in conditions which are always the same. The scientists maintain that everything touched with magic does not fit in with criteria which are identical at all times and in all places. Even if their experiments are sometimes based on erroneous facts, they still regard them as ‘positive’, until they are proved otherwise.

Knowledge and ‘intuition’ or ‘understanding’ are not therefore synonymous. Occultists and magicians are concerned not only with penetration into the unknown, but with producing evidence of it. However, after centuries of effort, about which we know very little, the alchemists reached a decisive stage, passing from the oratory to the laboratory, and bringing initiation close to inspiration. (Introduction to “A PICTORIAL HISTORY OF MAGIC AND THE SUPERNATURAL.” The Hamlyn Publishing Group, Hamlyn House, Feltham, Middlesex, England. 1964.)

Observe what is said: First, life consists of learning, knowing and understanding the secrets of nature, especially man. Through applying what is learned from this study of man, the secrets of nature can be known and controlled. Today we identify the one who studies man, not as the occultist which he is, but as a psychologist and psychiatrist. Second, it is not facts which are searched out, but ‘intuition.’ “This is the way I think it ought to be (we might add, ‘I’ll find Scripture to support this intuition’).” Third, though science at one time only admitted the validity of experiments which could be reproduced many times with identical circumstances, this is no longer the case. Science will use ‘intuition’ and even erroneous conclusions as truth until proved otherwise. Fourth, science has now taken over this task from the occultists and alchemists.

(The author says this at the close of his book, pp. 316, 317: “SCIENCE TAKES OVER FROM MAGIC. Science, the substitute for insight, is now producing an infinite number of miracles..”)

The purpose of occultism

Magical rites (including ritual murder, sexual sadism and perversions of all kinds), astrology, meditation and false religion (including devil worship, necromancy and various false religions under the name of Christ), is to allow man to exercise dominion over the whole earth. This dominion is sought over the environment, weather, crops, fish of the sea, beast of the field, illness, death and life, and other people, including one’s enemies. Also involved are efforts to approach deity, understand the unknown, understand the future and the hereafter, all outside the limits of God’s word. (This word dominion is readily used by the occult, yet Christians are fearful of it. Why?)

Another branch of the Occult was/is the Alchemists. Alchemy, developed after A.D. 1000, preeminently proposed the use of the proper natural elements to transmute baser metals into gold. Thus, the alchemist believes that a proper mixture of certain natural elements can be used to exercise dominion over nature. But the purpose of this dominion is to make nature subject to the will of man, or to subdue nature; it is to fulfill man’s intuition or ideals. In other words, man dreams of what he would like the world to be, then attempts to use the sciences (chemistry in this case, the proper mixture of the elements), to fulfill his will. With this idea of dominion in mind, fallen man makes himself and his will the center of all creation through his scientific research.

On the other hand, godly chemistry finds what God desires for the world from His word, how God ordained creation (the elements) to work together, then it develops ideas within God’s framework to accomplish the sought after goal. Chemistry outside of God’s plan and purpose for man is no more than occultism and alchemy. Occultism and alchemy, witchcraft, reigns in the modern day genetic engineering with plants, animals and humans.

An interesting note: “Amongst the Egyptians, poverty was regarded as a disease.” (Ibid, pg. 85.) This definition permits seeking a scientific cure for poverty, all supported with an abundance of fiat or borrowed “dollars”. Webster (1828) also ties in the search for a universal remedy for disease with alchemy. Does this differ from modern medicine? Obviously, alchemy reigns in the laboratory today as science is used to escape from the principles of God’s law, e.g., AIDS and all kinds of STDs.

When men, even in the name of doing God’s work, depart from following the revealed word of God to accomplish their goals, to exercise dominion in their area of skill, occupation and responsibility, they have moved into the realm of magic and witchcraft. Witchcraft is identified as any rebellion against the Lord. It is man’s activity outside of the limits established by God’s word, 1 Samuel 15:23.


MUSIC: Is it any wonder that we are seeing such proliferation of music which openly glorifies Satan? This satanic music is not the problem; rather, it is a natural result. The root of the problem was that first ‘soft’ song which violated Romans 1:21; 1 Corinthians 10:31.

ART: The same principle applies. The satanic art is only the result of art that separated from God generations ago.

EDUCATION: The proliferation of Satan worship and death education is only a result of removing the education process from the principles of God’s word.

ENTERTAINMENT: Movies and TV shows are a major source of glorifying witchcraft and magic.

SCIENCE: Falsely so called, as well as research in every area, is being used to take dominion over creation; to make creation subject to the will of man.

When the above are being done apart from God’s established order as revealed in His word, those things are simply exercises in magic and witchcraft; this fact applies to civil government, mental and physical health, welfare, religious activity and numerous other things

The end results are all around us. Multitudes of children are being presented with graduation diplomas they cannot read, being unable to read past a sixth grade level. Sodomy and abortion are openly paraded, practiced and condoned by the public. Perversions of the wors sort, mutilation, murders, cannibalism (Since the Florida attack,, there have been at least three more cannibalism attacks mentioned on Drudge), and corruptions in all areas are all openly practiced with little public reaction. Why is there no action taken? Because witchcraft and magic are the religion of our day. Any hope in an answer for the ills of mankind apart from making Christ King and His Word law, is a belief in magic.

The State as magician.

The state’s effort to control every area, including the future, through political action and law apart from doing the revealed word of God, is magic and witchcraft. Included would be any effort to bring about peace, freedom, safety and security apart from the Prince of Peace.

When freedom (which is also identified with liberty and salvation) is made an end in itself, only despotism can result as unholy men attempt to define and legislate freedom. Freedom must be seen as the end result of the application of the law of Freedom, Christ, the law-word of God, John 8:31-40. Freedom from guilt and the eternal punishment for sin comes from applying the truth of the law of the substitutionary sacrifice ?the finished work of Christ. Freedom in every realm of life and thought (including civil government) must come from applying the truth of the law of God as given to Moses.

Any attempt to use political means to do what only the Lord is able do through the application of His law, is an attempt in magic and witchcraft. The word from God about witchcraft is quick, sharp, and to the point. Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, Exodus 22:18. (I understand that astrologers and soothsayers have a thriving business around D.C. Even former First Lady, Nancy Regan regularly called on astrologers and soothsayers.) The state desires to control the present and know the future apart from God.

But, clearly, attempts to control apart from the applied law of God, is not restricted to the state. Many professed Christians believe that political action will solve social problems. They may not seek the astrologer or soothsayer, but their attitude is the same. Political action is a Christian responsibility in the society in which we find ourselves. However, if we entertain the idea that such action will solve our social problems, we have fallen into the same error as the state. All problems stem from Adam’s sin of believing that he could take dominion apart from GodÐthat he could be as god, able to determine for himself what is good and evil. The evils and problems around us can only be lastingly dealt with by applying God’s answers to the sin problems.

The call to the Godly.

The Lord is in total control of history, from the beginning to the end, Isaiah 46:9, 10. All of history reflects the counsel of His good pleasure, for He is King over all the earth, Psalms 47:2; Acts 2:23. A denial of God’s truth is a denial of the Lord God. Even the evil works of man and nations are no more than outworkings of His divine plan, Psalms 76:10 (note that He only permits the actions of evil man to go so far).

Moses’ warnings against seeking to know things which are not clearly revealed to us (the unknown and unknowable on the human level, Deut. 29:29), prohibits seeking to know and/or control the present or future apart from what has been clearly revealed to us. His word gives us promises for the future, either good or bad, Galatians 6:7-9. His word is to be searched and applied that the future may be controlled, even to a thousand generations, Deuteronomy 7:9. We can certainly know the future in these terms.

This also prohibits emphasizing the study of conspiracies. We know there is a conspiracy, yet even that conspiracy is working for the pleasure of our Lord, Psalms 2. Our primary responsibility is to study and apply the word of God which alone will counter conspiracies. If there were as much interest in developing the word of God as there is in studying about conspiracies, we would see revival in our churches. In addition, the rewriting of history is a magical attempt to change the past to conform to the way fallen man wishes it had been.

Deuteronomy 29:29 condemns such things as astrology and all attempted ‘supernatural’ seeking of the unknown. (Deut.18:9-12.) Leviticus 19:26 identifies the eating of blood with enchantments and observing times. V. 31 condemns those who have familiar spirits and who seek after wizards. In Leviticus 19, we are told twice to love our neighbor as our self. Thus, the Lord condemns the use of the world’s means to try to influence or control our neighbor, or situations in general, which is contrasted with obeying God’s law toward our neighbor. As we love him as our self, the result will be God working in his heart, Matthew 5:16. (Love is identified as fulfilling the law of God toward him, not as an emotion.)

Some time ago, I saw a very colorful sign promoting a study in the Book of the Revelation. It said in big bold letters, “Know The Future.” It promoted a god for man’s benefit, a god to satisfy man’s curiosity, bordering on the occult and witchcraft. This desire to satisfy curiosity about the future is seeking after another god, not the God of the Commandments, Deuteronomy 29:29. It is sad that one of the first books new Christians want to study is the Revelation, and they can easily find teachers who will satisfy that occult interest to know the future. However, the Revelation is past history.

Note the godly purpose of the study of all Scripture, 2 Timothy 3:16. It is for doctrine, for reproof, for correction and for instruction in righteousness, so any motive other than this is contrary to godliness. Paul gives instructions to godly parents and teachers of the word of God.

Thou shalt have no other gods before me. All of the commandments are based on this first commandment. There can be no other authority higher than the word of God. There can be no other motive above God’s glory, Romans 1:21; 1 Corinthians 10:31.

Valentine’s Day

“Every Feb. 14, we celebrate Valentine’s Day but few know it was started to commemorate the beheading of St. Valentine. His crime? Performing wedding ceremonies after Emperor Claudius II had outlawed marriage. During the last week of Valentinus’ life, the jailer asked him to educate his blind daughter Julia. He agreed and taught her history, arithmetic and all about God. (P) ‘Valentinus, does God really hear our prayers?’ Julia asked one day. ‘Yes, my child, he hears each one,’ he replied. ‘I pray every day that God will heal my eye sight so that I can see,’ she said. ‘Would you pray with me?” She knelt down and grasped his hand and they prayed together. Suddenly there was a brilliant light in the prison cell. Radiant Julia cried, Valentinus, I can see! I can see! ‘Praise the Lord, he exclaimed.” Bob & Geri Boyd, Issues in Education (From Hite’s Home Mission Outreach.)

How Should We Relate to Our Next President?

By Thomas Williamson

Sooner or later, we will have a new President. This may take place as soon as January 20, 2013 when the current President’s term expires, or perhaps it will happen at a later date. Unless the Republican Party collapses, we will probably have a Republican President again, sooner or later.

It is not too early to start thinking about how we, as Bible-believing Christians, should relate to our next President. What should we expect of him, or her? What should he expect of us as Christians?

Should the Doctrine of Divine Right of Kings Be Applied to Our Next President?

A classic statement of the principle of Divine Right of Kings was expressed by Jacques Bossuet, Roman Catholic Bishop of Meaux, in 1670: “It appears from all this that the person of the king is sacred, and that to attack him in any way is sacrilege. God has the kings anointed by his prophets with the holy unction in like manner as he has bishops and altars anointed. But even without the external application in thus being anointed, they are by their very office the representatives of the divine majesty deputed by Providence for the execution of His purposes. . . . The royal power is absolute.... The prince need render account of his acts to no one.”

In recent years there has been a tendency, on the part of certain elements of the Christian Right, to apply this principle to some (not all) of our modem Presidents. Should we feel that way about our next President?

Many political commentators have observed, in recent decades, the growth of what is called the “Imperial Presidency.” Presidents have had an increasing tendency to regard themselves as above the law and above the Constitution. Is this a good thing and something that we should support?

First of all, it should be noted that the notion of Divine Right of Kings was already going out of style even at the time that Bossuet wrote. The English people rejected that principle in a stunningly decisive way when they beheaded their King, Charles I, in 1649. In 1688 they overthrew King James II in the Glorious Revolution, and from that time the kings of England exercised less and less authority as time went on. Meanwhile, the French sent their King, Louis XVI, to the guillotine in 1793, and by 1918 most of the ancient hereditary monarchs of Europe had been overthrown.

The Madness of King George

By the time of the reign of King George III (1760-1820), most of the political power in England was invested in Parliament, not the king. The English people openly displayed their contempt for the King in 1795 when a mob attacked a coach that was carrying the King..

In 1819, poet Percy Bysshe Shelley sneered at the royal family, describing them as “An old, mad, blind, despised, and dying king / Princes, the dregs of their dull race, who flow / Through public scorn - mud from a muddy spring / Rulers who neither see, nor feel, nor know, But leech-like to their fainting country cling / Till they drop, blind in blood, without a blow.”

I am not advocating that we behead our Presidents or attack their limousines. We should realize, however, that the idea of Divine Right of Kings is out of step with the spirit of modem times, as we have seen in the last few years, as numerous dictatorial Arab strongman leaders have been uprooted from their posts by people seeking more self-determination.

To apply the doctrine of Divine Right of Kings to our next President would be unconstitutional and un-American. Our Constitution clearly limits the powers of the President, and prescribes a separation of powers between 3 branches of government, the legislative, executive and judicial. Our Founding Fathers consciously repudiated the imperial tyranny of the 18th Century European kings, and attempted to set up a government that would set limits on the Chief Executive.

The Founding Fathers were well aware of how European kings had bankrupted their countries, impoverished their people and sent multitudes of men to their deaths in endless “wars of choice” that solved nothing while laying the continent waste. To prevent the President from having that power, they specified in the Constitution that Congress, and only Congress, would have the power to take our nation into a war. (Not the President, the UN or NATO).

The next President should recognize that, after a decade of intense fighting and “nation-building” in Afghanistan, we are not winning, and that victory is not in sight there. In fact, we cannot even glimpse the proverbial “light at the end of the tunnel” there. The next President should do in Afghanistan what Eisenhower did in Korea, what Nixon did in Vietnam, what Reagan did in Lebanon, what Clinton did in Somalia, and what Obama did in Iraq: “Declare victory, and get out!” The old saying applies: “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”

Preserve America’s Liberty - Stop Borrowing Money

In recent months we have seen a long-running “Greek Tragedy” unfold, as rioters have set Athens and other Greek cities on fire, to protest the loss of Greek independence to other European nations, to whom they owe money they cannot repay.

If America continues to borrow money from other nations, to fund our lavish welfare programs, pork-barrel spending and “wars of choice,” we are going to go the way of Greece. We will lose our independence as a nation, and others will rule over us, according to the divine warning of Proverbs 22:7, “The borrower is servant to the lender.”

The next President should realize that America can no longer continue to borrow money at the rate that we are now doing. He should not follow the example of our government during the administration of the President immediately prior to Obama, during which time the federal debt was increased by an amount greater than the tab that was run up by all the previous Presidents from George Washington to Bill Clinton, put together.

Domestic programs and spending are going to have to be cut. The next President should realize that we cannot afford to pay for everyone’s medical bills or birth control pills, that we cannot send every teenage kid to college, we cannot waste money on expensive public works programs such as bridges to nowhere or “bullet trains” that no one wants to ride.

No More “Shock and Oil”

It is a fact of life that we cannot balance our budget without also cutting the military budget. There is no need for America to spend as much on defense as all the other countries of the world put together.

The next President should repudiate the current policy of suppressing oil drilling, exploration and pipeline construction in our own country, while we simultaneously invade oil-rich countries on the other side of the world under the pretext of “nation-building” and women’s rights.

As we debate whether or not to invade Iran, we should keep in mind that we cannot afford such a war and do not need it. Our intelligence agencies say there is no evidence that Iran has nuclear weapons, or a program to develop nuclear weapons, or even that they have decided to embark on such a program. At this time of financial crisis, it makes no sense to start a disastrous, expensive war with a nation such as Iran which poses no military threat to us.

Some Senators are now proposing war with Syria, in order to come to the aid of the rebels there. These radical Islamic rebels are persecuting and killing Syrian Christians, and do not appear to be the slightest bit worthy of our getting into yet another endless quagmire on their behalf.

The next President should realize that America no longer has the economic strength and ability to maintain a worldwide American empire, if we ever did. Most of the bases we have in over 100 countries of the world should be closed down, and the troops should be brought home.

We could save a lot of money, and stop making enemies around the world, if we stop meddling in the internal affairs of other countries, and drop our belligerent threats of “regime change” whenever some foreign leader refuses to take orders from us. In the last century, America has overthrown over 100 governments, often replacing them with cruel tyrants. And then we wonder, “Why do they hate us?”

A Kinder, Gender Ruler

The year was 632 AD, and Abu Bakr had just been chosen by acclamation by the people of Medina, Arabia to serve as the leader of what became known as the Caliphate. Abu Bala, who is known to history as the First Caliph, made this pledge to the people at his inauguration:

“I have been given the authority over you, although I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me; and if I do wrong, set me right. Truth consists in loyalty and disregard for truth is treachery. The weak among you shall be strong in my eyes until I have secured his rights, if God wills it: and the strong among you shall be weak with me until I have wrested from him the rights of others. Obey me for so long as I obey God and His messenger. But if I disobey God and His messenger, you owe me no obedience.”

This inauguration speech would (with some editing to delete the reference to Mohammed) make a worthy platform for our next President, as opposed to the arrogance of the Imperial Presidency that has led to sordid sex scandals, massive deficit spending, an endless series of “Gate” scandals, and proud declarations that the President need not obey the law nor the Constitution.

The next President should ask Congress to repeal the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 that empower the President to imprison American citizens for life without trial. We have been trusting in the Republicans to save us, but this bill was passed with massive Republican support. Only two Republican Senators, Mark Kirk of Illinois and Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted in favor of the Udall Amendment that would have removed from this bill the authorization to suspend habeas corpus and imprison Americans for life.

Times certainly have changed. When the War of 1812 broke out, British General Isaac Brock proposed to suspend habeas corpus in Upper Canada (now called Ontario) and to empower jailing British subjects there for a period not to exceed 18 months. He was threatened by a rebellion of outraged Upper Canadians and had to back down on that proposal.

Two hundred years later, Democrats and Republicans in Washington have agreed to suspend habeas corpus not for 18 months but forever, and there is hardly a whimper of complaint from anyone. I suppose if we don’t give the President such tyrannical powers, then the terrorists win, huh?

The next President should pledge to obey our laws against torture. He should repudiate the signing statement of a previous President who said that he reserved the right to flout the law and use torture if he felt the need to do so.

The next President should show his concern for the value of human life by opposing the ongoing slaughter of unborn children in our country and eliminating funding to Planned Parenthood. This is a bigger priority than to send troops overseas to overthrow dictators who are “killing their own people.”

Most dictators do kill their own people, and that includes the dictators who we subsidize and prop up because they are on “our side,” such as the dictator of Uzbekistan who kills dissidents by boiling them alive.

The only difference between “good” dictators who kill their own people, and “bad” dictators who kill their own people, is that the “good” dictators are taking orders from us and the “bad” dictators have stopped taking orders from us.

Maybe we should stop our massive and expensive interference in the affairs of other nations, instead of deluding ourselves into thinking that we have a divine mandate to prop up and subsidize the “good” dictators and overthrow the “bad” ones, all of which costs money which we simply do not have.

The Bible Does Not Teach Divine Right of Kings

Some Christians will perhaps say that it does not matter what is in the Constitution, or what is the spirit of our times - we have to obey the Bible. Does the Bible teach that our President should exercise absolute power, and that it is a sin to express disagreement with him?

If any chief executives were entitled to exercise absolute power, it would be the kings of Judah in the Old Testament. King David and his descendants had been chosen and anointed by God to rule over His people in a divine theocracy, and yet they did not possess absolute power.

God’s prophets and priests challenged King David when he sent Uriah the Hittite to his death and took his wife Bathsheba. They challenged King Uzziah when he violated the ancient principle of separation of powers, by intruding into the office of priesthood.

They did not blindly support all the wars of the kings - Rehoboam, Jehoshaphat and other kings were rebuked by God’s prophets for proposing unwise and unnecessary wars. The Old Testament is full of examples of prophets under the inspiration of God who denounced the foreign policy, civil rights violations and “wars of choice” of the kings of Judah.

Christ did not teach His disciples to render blind obedience to King Herod. He warned them that they should beware of the leaven of the Herodians.

The Apostles taught that we should be obedient to our rulers and pay our taxes, but they did not teach that we must slavishly support all the policies of the Roman Emperors without question. The Apostle Paul protested against the tyranny of the Roman authorities on various occasions, which is contrary to the notion of Divine Right of Kings.

Whoever is elected our next President, we as Christians should not have Messianic expectations for him, or expect him to bring in the New Millennium (not even figuratively speaking). We have had such high expectations in the past when “our man” was elected, and we have always been disappointed.

We should honor our next President (1 Peter 2:17) but we should not make a deity out of him or demand total, unquestioning support for all of his policies as a test of fellowship.

“Remind them of their Baptism”

The Federal Vision

The following will be far too short, but I do not want to weary the reader. I am taking this examination of The Federal Vision from Calvin Beisner’s book, The Auburn Avenue Theology, Pros & Cons. Debating the Federal Vision. Knox Theological Seminary, Fort Lauderdale, FL. 2004. The new and strange Auburn Avenue Theology was developed at a 2002 meeting at the Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Monroe, LA.

Beisner’s book contains a record of a series of pro and con debates on Federal Vision, which took place in 2003. On the Federal Vision side were Douglas Wilson, Steve Schlissel, Steve Wilkins, John Barach, Rich Lusk, Peter Leithart, and Tom Trouwborst. On the anti-Federal Vision side were Chris Hutchinson, George Knight, Richard Phillips, Joseph Pipa, Carl Robbins, Morton Smith and Fowler White.

Beisner’s book offers original papers and responses as presented at the 2003 conference he put together to sort out the confusion that had arisen. He moderated the conference, and reread the papers many times to put his book together. Beisner summed up the total of the “arguments” in his final chapter, from which we will quote. As we read through Beisner’s comments, it seems that a key identifying phrase of the Visionists is “Remind them of their Baptism”, upon which a large portion of their theology is built.

Several times, Bettie and I attended Wilkin’s Southern Heritage Conference in Monroe LA, where we would meet her youngest daughter’s family. It was the half way point when they lived in TX. Four of the Federal Visionists are familiar names to me, but Bettie knows more of the men, particularly the author of the book, Calvin Beisner. Bettie’s parents were Presbyterian missionaries in Brazil, so she attended the Presbyterian King College in Bristol TN, from where she graduated. (She went to school with Joe Morecraft, among others who are well known in Presbyterian circles.)

I heard of the controversy some years ago, and was quite surprised as to who was involved. But, being a Baptist, I paid little attention to it.

I am sure the Baptists who read this will say, “It does not affect me, so why waste ink on the conflict?” Reasons: First, we need to know what is going on in other parts of the Body of Christ. (Don’t we try to keep up with the Charismatic branch?) Second, I have had several Baptists contact me over the years about where to attend church because all the Baptist churches within driving distance were compromised with contemporary “worship” and/or are “fly-away” churches. I have recommened they check out Presbyterian churches, and some have found good Bible teaching in OPC churches. This is a warning to them to watch for the term, “Remind them of their Baptism”. However, I know some Presbyterian churches I would gladly attend, such as Joe Moorecraft’s church in Atlanta.

Over the years, Bible believing Baptists and Bible believing Presbyterians have had much in common since the Reformation, differing mainly in credo vs paedo baptism. The 1689 London Baptist Confession is quite similar to the Westminster Confession, except in the paedo-baptism area. Over the years, we have fought the same battles, and our sound theology as well as our nation owes a great debt to Presbyterian pastors and theologians of the past.

I hope this overview of the Federal Vision controversy will be of use to those Baptist’s who have sought my advice on where to place their Christian associations, as well as maybe some Presbyterians on our mailing list.

I claim no knowledge of the controversy, other than what I mentioned above. So rather than spend multiplied hours of research into the matter to reinvent the wheel, I will rely upon Beisner, and encourage those who want the original notes and more information to get his book, and do their own research. There certainly are other sources, but Beisner’s seems to cut through the great amount of smoke and mirrors, and goes right to the heart of the matter.

I will pull key thoughts out of Beisner’s critique of the Auburn Avenue Theology, Federal Vision, but the context will not be changed. To help prevent confusion in this very confusing article, Beisner’s statements will be enclosed with brackets [text], and inside those brackets, I will leave his quote marks as he quotes others. (Confused yet??)

This is not a review of paedo vs credo Baptism. (See Paedobaptism, by this author. Download at Though I can “understand” and even “tolerate” paedo baptism as practiced by the old Southern Presbyterians, the Federal Visionists’ view is “over the top”, and must be considered heretical, for it is totally unsupportable by Scripture.

I must admit that as I examined the controversy a little closer, I have been shocked that such ideas could come from those who profess to be converted to new life in Christ, and are regarded as serious Bible Scholars.

To me, the basic problem seems to be trying to use human reasoning and church traditions to assure people of salvation. The Auburn Avenue Theology reeks of Rome, and many who have followed the theology have “gone home to Rome”.

“Nontraditional Use of Traditional Terms” is a problem encountered with all false teachers who seek to depart from what the Scriptures clearly say, e.g., Christian Identity.

Beisner: [One thing that became clear through the colloquium papers and discussions is that the Federal Visionists are using some traditional terms in nontraditional ways, and that this has caused some misunderstanding. Although some of the responsibility for the misunderstanding rests with their critics, who often have failed to notice this, some undoubtedly rests with the Federal Visionists for not making their distinct, nontraditional definitions explicit in the contexts in which they use them. Consider just two examples. If in Reformed circles one is going to speak of election and mean by it not God’s choice from eternity past that Robert is going to go to heaven but His choice that Robert is going to be joined to the outward, objective, covenant community-from which he might through apostasy be separated and wind up in hell-one really ought to make that unmistakably clear. Likewise, if one is going to claim that in the very act of baptism one is regenerated and mean by it not that Patricia is going to be translated from spiritual death to spiritual life, given saving faith and repentance, and savingly united to Christ, but (among other possible notions) that Patricia is going to be transferred from outside the objective covenant community to inside it, again, one ought to make that clear.]

Comment: This seems to be the root of the matter, the Covenant. Under the Old Covenant (Testament), physical circumcision made one a member of the physical congregation of the Lord, or national Israel, but heart circumcision was (and still is) required to make one a member of the spiritual people of God. Under the New, there are also two aspects of the covenant; that is, membership in the physical congregation of the Lord, i.e., a particular Baptist or Presbyterian church, &c, and membership in the spiritual people of God, the Body of Christ.

Example: As a Baptist, I hold to two covenants, a physical covenant, such as the one found in Keach’s version of the London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689, “The Family Covenant”, which deals with church membership, and the New Covenant which must be entered through the New Birth. Scripture is clear that membership in a local covenant assembly does not make one a member of the heavenly body of Christ.

From my limited understanding of the Southern Presbyterians, infant baptism makes one a member of the physical congregation, that Presbyterian Church, but the New Birth is still required for membership in the New Covenant.

Both of us, Baptist and Presbyterians, will agree that the New Birth does not take place at baptism, but at conversion. Conversion only takes place after one has heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, Ephesians 1:13, James 1:18:

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. 1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Beisner points out that the Visionists confuse the two, the physical, i.e., church membership, and the Spiritual, i.e., New Birth, leaving those who try to follow them as confused as the Visionists are.

When I tried to read one of Douglas Wilson’s books, and his use and misuse of the same terms, it was complete confusion. I found that he contradicted himself on every other page. He never defined the words he used, and continually jumped back and forth between the traditional use and his new use of the words. I could not finish the book.


Beisner: [One of the Federal Visionists’ driving motivations is clearly to give badly needed comfort and assurance to Christians plagued by unnecessary fears about their salvation. That is laudable. It is also laudable to point these troubled souls away from excessive subjectivism that so often expresses itself in morbid introspection. Like them, I have counseled dear souls who, despite their clearly expressing trust in Christ alone for their salvation, and despite their lives’ showing the fruits of salvation, have struggled grievously with doubts about their salvation....]

Comment: In Louisiana, my pastor and I discussed this problem of professed, baptized Christians having great difficulty with assurance. We decided that we would not again give “assurance”, but deal with the troubled “Christian” souls as lost individuals. We found that far more often than not, the problem was that they simply were not saved. They had gone through the ritual that was offered at the time, but there had been no genuine conversion. Starting from the middle 1970s to the present, I have dealt with doubting souls as simply being unsaved. The result has been consistent ?though they may have gone through an accepted ritual for salvation, and baptism, they were not saved. After taking proper time and effort with them, they were born again, and never doubted their salvation again. (John 3:3, 7, 1 Peter 1:23. See my booklet, The Other jesus...)

The Federal Visionists try to deal with the assurance problem thusly:

Beisner: [“Don’t get all tangled up trying to see whether you have sincere faith in Christ. Look to your baptism!” Thus Wilkins said, “when we say . . . ‘Look to your baptism,’ we’re talking about looking to Christ in the covenant, and realizing what you can know for certain. You cannot know if you were ever sincere. You cannot know if you really meant it when you asked Jesus into your heart and threw the pine cone into the fire. You can’t know those. Those questions are unanswerable. Were you really given a new heart? Well, you can’t answer that question. God knows. You don’t know. What you can know is that you have been baptized and you have the Lord’s Supper.”]

Comment: What saith the Scripture?

1 John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

Paul is clear:

Romans 10:6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) 7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) 8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Never is the troubled soul encouraged to look to any membership, spiritual ritual nor sacrament (Rome’s term), such as baptism, &c. His answer is close at hand, nigh thee, even in thy mouth. Did he confess Christ unto his salvation?

Look to your baptism.

Beisner: [Now, this only helps the troubled Christian if somehow being baptized (or partaking of the Lord’s Supper-but Wilkins focused on baptism, so I shall do likewise) and being saved can be equated. Just that seems to be Wilkins’s point, for he went on to say that this view helps pastorally in that “It makes our standing before God and that of our children plain, and yet it prevents presumption. . . . We belong to Christ. Baptism is the infallible sign and seal of this . . . . And in regard to our assurance, we are pointed away from ourselves and what we think we perceive to be true of us inwardly, which no one can know, and pointed to Christ, the only ground of our assurance.” More conclusively, Wilkins wrote in his paper for the colloquium, “If [someone] has been baptized, he is in covenant with God” (chapter 19 above, line 535[in Beisner’s book]); “covenant is union with Christ. Thus, being in covenant gives all the blessings of being united to Christ. . . . Because being in covenant with God means being in Christ, those who are in covenant have all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places” (lines 305-306, 309-310).

It follows necessarily from these two statements that if someone has been baptized, he has all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places. But what is it to have “all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places”? The phrase originated in Ephesians and in that context Paul includes among such “spiritual blessings” election to holiness and blamelessness before God, predestination for adoption and to be to the praise of God’s glory, redemption through Christ’s blood, forgiveness of trespasses, an inheritance in Christ, and reception of the Holy Spirit as seal and guarantee of inheritance “until we acquire the possession of if” (Ephesians 1:3-14). These blessings are certainly salvific, and they reach all the way from election before creation to final salvation at the end of history. That Wilkins had such in mind in his own use of the phrase “all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places” is clear from his list drawn from Corinthians ?a list that includes sanctification, calling, the grace of God, being confirmed blameless to the end, redemption, possession of the Holy Spirit, new birth, Christ’s sacrifice on one’s behalf, justification, being purchased by Christ, and communion with the body and blood of Christ and thin being one body with Him (lines 313-347).

According to Wilkins, the apostles viewed “the covenant . .. as salvation, because it means fellowship and communion with the triune God. It is [emphasis added] union with Christ in His obedient life, sacrificial, substitutionary death, triumphant resurrection, and glorious ascension and session at the right hand of the Father.” In short, “All in covenant are given all that is true of Christ” (lines 361-365). It is difficult ?nay, impossible ?to see how “all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places” can be understood to mean anything less than the whole of what Reformed theology tends to call the ordo salutis: foreknowledge, election, effectual calling (regeneration and conversion [conversion = faith and repentance]), justification, sanctification, perseverance, and final glorification. Certainly none of these is a blessing to be found apart from Christ. But if this is so, then it is impossible to avoid the inference, from Wilkins’s statements, that no baptized person will wind up in hell.]

Comment: Charles Hodges wrote in 1835, in his commentary on Romans:

It is obvious that the Jews regarded circumcision as in some way securing their salvation. That they did so regard it, may be proved not only from such passages of the New Testament where the sentiment is implied, but also by the direct assertion of their own writers. Such assertions have been gathered in abundance from their works by Eisenmenger, Schoettgen, and others. For example, the Rabbi Menachem, in his Commentary on the Books of Moses, Fol. 43, col. 3, says, “Our Rabbins have said, that no circumcised man will see hell.” In the Jalkut Rubeni, num, 1. it is taught, “Circumcision saves from hell.” In the Medrasch Tillim, fol. 7, col 2, it is said, “God swore to Abraham, that no one who was circumcised should be sent to hell.” In the book Akedath Jizehak, fol. 54, col. 2, it is taught that “Abraham sits before the gate of hell, and does not allow that any circumcised Israelite should enter there.” (pg.63.)

Apparently, the Visionists simply replaced spiritual circumcision of the heart with physical baptism. Can we justify Scripturally that all the spiritual blessings in heavenly places as promised in conversion are given to all who are water baptized, regardless of their age?

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

When one teaches that water baptism brings about the covenant promise of a new creature, as implied by the Visionists, then is it any wonder the baptized have assurance problems, and the Visionists must say, “look to your baptism” for assurance. Are they not teaching that converting faith is not necessary for one to be born again, as is required for membership in the New Covenant?

Can such thinking be anything except Baptismal Regeneration? Yet in their inconsistency they deny Baptismal Regeneration.

Beisner further quotes Barach’s 2002 AAPC lecture “Covenant and History,” in which he equated being baptized into the “covenant” as having new life, being glorified with Christ and with being united with Christ in heavenly places.

Beisner: [Further, being in covenant means being “in Christ,” i.e., “united with Christ,” and that means being raised from the dead with Him, justified, sanctified, and glorified. So apparently every person in covenant is united with Christ, raised from the dead, justified, sanctified, and glorified. Finally, “Every baptized person is in covenant with God and is in union then with Christ” and therefore raised from the dead with Him, justified, sanctified, and glorified. Every baptized person. If that is so, then either the Reformed world has been quite mistaken in thinking that those raised from the dead, justified, sanctified, and glorified all wind up in heaven, or else every baptized person winds up in heaven.]

Comment: The problem I had with Wilkins’s book was that on one page he said that the bapized infant was in the everlasting covenant, converted, and on the next page, he said baptism had nothing to do with conversion. Inconsistences and confusion reigns in the Federal Vision camp. And if they really believe what they are saying about water baptism producing membership in the New, Everlasting Covenant in Christ, then they are not saved.

Barach continues:

Beisner: [. . . we need to be able to tell our congregations ... and tell individual members . . ., “Jesus died for you personally,” and we mean it, to them, head for head, every one of them. How do we know that? Because they are in covenant with God and we view them as brothers and sisters because that’s who they really are. But we look around the congregation and . . . we do not give them a judgment of charity that says, “Well, I don’t know. Maybe he is a Christian, maybe he isn’t, so I will be charitable. I will regard him as a Christian.” . . . Instead we go by God’s promise. He has said that this person is in Christ and, therefore, believing God’s promise, we treat that person as who he really is, someone who is in Christ.]

Comment: The inference by the Visionists is that by seeing others baptized and taking the sacraments, one can be assured that person, child or adult, is saved.

Though the Visionists insist that water baptism brings one into the covenant, “To their credit, both Wilkins and Barach reject the conclusion that no baptized person will wind up in hell.” But adding to their confusing inconsistencies, they say that though the baptized, regardless of age, were made part of the covenant and all that includes, the baptized can apostatize from the faith.

It is impossible to follow Visionists’ inconsistencies to a logical conclusion, for there is none; any such an attempt brings more confusion.

Beisner referring to Barach, [In speaking extensively about election in Ephesians 1, he insisted that the things Paul affirmed there about the “elect” applied “to the entire church, head for head, men, women, and little children at Ephesus,” and he pointed out that Paul used similar language in addressing other churches. Still, he acknowledged that Paul “warns these people . . . about the genuine possibility that they could be excluded from God’s kingdom” and that, according to Acts 20:30, “Paul even knows that not everybody in Ephesus [presumably he means the church there] is going to persevere.” He then explained that it is Christ who is preeminently the elect one and that anyone else’s election is in Him. Then he added,

But then who is in Christ? Those who have been incorporated into Christ, brought into Christ, those who have been baptized into Christ. . . . Covenantal election and individual election aren’t actually all that far apart. We can distinguish them perhaps, but we cannot and may not divide them completely.” What is the connection? The connection has to do with God’s promise, God’s speech to us. God has promised every covenant member that he or she is elect in Christ. . . . When God speaks to his people and calls them elect, he is not simply predicting that this will happen, he is making a pledge to them. . . . His promise is that he administers his salvation to us by speaking to us . . . . And God in the gospel and through baptism promises us that he unites us to Christ . . . . What’s missing in Jesus? In him you have redemption, righteousness, justification, sanctification, the Holy Spirit, glorification, and election. The whole package of salvation . . . is found in Christ.

As if to remove all doubt about what he was asserting, he added, “you don’t need a special, dramatic, revivalistic conversion to let you know that you are elect. You had the special experience that God gives you. It was called baptism.”]

Beisner: [The Federal Visionists’ passion for viewing election through the lens of the covenant rather than, vice versa robs believers of the very assurance they intend to provide for them. The great benefit of embracing Wilkins’s view of covenant and baptism is purported to be delivering people from morbid introspection and giving them an objective, outward sign that assures them of their,: salvation.” But what the Federal Visionists give with one hand they take away with the other,’ Wilkins wrote, “We cannot judge men based upon the secret decrees of God or the hidden operations of the Spirit’s” ? as if traditional Reformed theology said otherwise. But no Reformed theologian has said that we are to “judge men based upon the secret decrees of God.” Reformed theologians, with, Jesus, have insisted that we know men by their fruits (Matthew 7:15-20; John 15:1-11). With James they have said, “I will show you my faith by my works” (James 2:18). Fruits ?works ?are the revealed effects of the secret causes that are God’s elective decree and effectual call (regeneration; enlightenment, the gifts of faith and repentance). Wilkins’s insistence that a baptized covenant [note: not born again covenant member, ed] member can apostatize and go to hell ?about which he is absolutely right ?demolishes the assurance any baptized covenant member can have of his salvation from his baptism and covenant membership in isolation from answering the very kinds of questions he says cannot be answered: “Questions like, `Have you truly believed?’; ‘Have you sincerely repented?’; ‘Do you have a new heart?’; ‘Have been truly converted?’; etc.” If being a branch in the vine ?i.e., being objectively in the covenant ?does not guarantee final salvation (and it certainly does not), it is no proper basis of assurance. The “objectivity of the covenant” on which the Federal Visionists so adamantly insists does not serve their intended purpose. Wilson acknowledges that one cannot infer “individual election” from “covenantal election” and says that the “elect” (in context, the individually elect) cannot lose their salvation. But he offers no way for one to tell whether he is individually elect (and so assured of salvation) or only covenantally elect (and so in danger of apostasy and winding up in hell). Rather, he says, “You can be on the tree, [referring to John 15, ed.] someone can be on the tree right next to you, and be is as much on the tree as you are, he’s as much a partaker of Christ as you are, he is as much a member of Christ as you are, and he is cut away and you are not . .” Ironically, the assurance the Federal Visionists lose while seeking to gain it by turning from election to covenant the Westminster Divines preserved precisely by their focus on election and its fruits.]

[... it is simply impossible to tell, from the context of Barach’s own words, whether election denotes election to eternal glory or election simply to membership in the covenant people. That is, equivocation vitiates the whole of Barach’s treatment of the relationship between covenant and election, because he fails to use election in the same sense [at every point]. More significantly, Barach loses track of the problem he set out to solve: how do we know who are elect to eternal glory? If God does not tell us who they are, he has already said, the doctrine of election is useless. But when all is said and done, he himself never can tell us who are the elect to eternal glory ?except to say that they are the faithful remnant. But how are they to be identified? By their membership in the covenant? No, for some in covenant, he says, are not elect to eternal glory ?even though the whole covenant people is elect in some sense.

It appears, in short, that Barach wants to identify the elect to eternal glory as those who are in covenant, but he cannot. The result is that those elect to eternal glory remain unidentified, even on Barach’s scheme. But according to him, if that is so, the doctrine of election becomes useless.]

[In contrast, as we have seen, the Westminster Confession identifies the elect by reference not to their covenant membership but to the fruit of the Spirit in their lives, saying “that men, attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election [2 Peter 1:10].” Far from the doctrine’s being useless, it thus “afford[s] matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God [Ephesians 1:6; Romans 11:33]; and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the Gospel [Romans 11:5-6, 20; 2 Peter 1:10; Romans 8:33; Luke 10:20]” (WCF 3.8).]

Comment: Reading Beisner’s critique of Federal Vision, apparently the Visionists resist any effort to confront them with inconsistencies and the logical conclusions of their theology. I would also say that their confused theology itself resists any logical critique. It defies systematical examination.

Beisner: [But antipathy to logic is contrary both to Scripture (Isaiah 5:29: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”) and to the overwhelming practice of Reformed theologians.]

[Anyone who embraces this historic commitment of the Reformed faith and its great theologians to logic must greet the Federal Visionists’ objections, in principle, to logical critique of their statements with skeptical concern. Wilson, who co-authored an introductory text on logic, ought to know better. Yet, in his overview paper for this volume, he seeks to shield the Federal Visionists’ inconsistent assertions about how covenant, election, salvation, baptism, and assurance are related from criticism...

What fretting church members crave regarding their own assurance is not “Well, on this level of discourse, your baptism assures you that you’re saved, but on another level it doesn’t.” Such equivocation is not the responsibility of the minister of the Word of God, who is called to sound a clear trumpet (1 Corinthians 14:8), whose “Yes” should be “Yes” and whose “No” should be “No” (Matthew 5:37), whose message is to be “not Yes and No, but . . . always Yes” because in Christ “all [not just some! ] of the promises of God” are “Yes” and “Amen” (2 Corinthians 1:19-20). No one will spend eternity blessed in heaven in one “level of discourse” and cursed in hell in another.

Federal Vision theology will continue to be unstable and plagued with error so long as its adherents continue to resist the universal application of logic to theology ?which is, in the final analysis, all that is meant by systematic theology.]


I read your article on the Israel of God with interest but intend to read it again. The timing could not have been better as far as I am concerned as I am working on some things in my mind.

I am preaching thru Acts and am to chapter 11. (No we are not bankrupt!) As you are well aware, one can often read something over and over and suddenly something jumps out that he never saw before and that has been the case with me and the story of Peter and Cornelius. The things that are coming clearly into focus for me are:

1. It was the intention of God for the gospel to go to the Gentiles all along. I have always been taught that the gospel went to the Gentiles because the Jews rejected it but when Peter was commanded to preach to Cornelius that had not fully taken place as yet. There was opposition from Jewish circles but the followers of Christ were still all Jewish and in their minds the gospel would stay with the Jews.

2. There was no merit on the part of the Jews in their being chosen but they were a “stiff necked people.” There is really no human reason why God chose Israel, it was completely an act of grace and so the gospel to the Gentiles, although Biblically defended based on Israel’s rejection, was justified on the merits of grace alone.

3. The only way the Great Commission could be carried out would be for the gospel to be taken to the Gentiles.

My question for you concerns Acts 10 - 11. Do we have here the clear “changing of the guard” so to speak in that national origin was once and for all eradicated in these chapters and in your words, the Israel of God established as a mixture of natural Jews and Gentiles alike?

Thanks for your help.

Dear Brother Need:

Am grateful that you can send me, an old age pensioner, copies of The Biblical Examiner as they are prepared and sent out. Was especially interested in the latest number with the discussion of possible restoration of Israel. Just in case James Jordan was not included in your research, I enclose two papers of his creation which bear on the subject. Your comments would be welcome.

Personally, from my study of the Word, I must come close to Jordan’s view, that there is really no place today for any thing other than the Church of the redeemed. Thee has been a lot of terrible wasteful study which has not helped the cause. Typically, the Hebrew word Alan so often translated everlasting is mis translated. I checked with the Trinitarian Bible Society in London. They indicated that in most cases “everlasting” is a mistranslation to the Hebrew word. The word translated everlasting in Isaiah 9:6 is an entirely different Hebrew word.

I even checked with a Hebrew of the Hebrews who suggested that alan could well be translated dispensation as used in the OT for that would in one word describe what the word is meant to convey.

But in any case, nothing Jewish has had any legitimacy since September of AD 70 when Jerusalem was destroyed.

I remember my Mother being so bothered by the treatment that Herbert Hoover was given in the 1929-1933 period. Your review of the Hoover book confirms the correctness of Mother’s concern. I note that in his latter days Hoover was moved to the Waldorf-Astoria in New York to keep an eye on him your comment [sic] on the book confirms all of this. And how much is the book, probably too much for an old-age pensioner.

Any way, keep up the good work.

In Christian Concern, Joseph M. Canfield.


Thanks for your newsletter. Of course, I found the letter from Carl that mentioned me of special interest. I will, if I may, comment upon some of what he wrote:

Carl: “I began to base my selfworth and favour with God on my racial background....”

Ted Weiland: I’m sorry to hear this. He certainly did not get such a perspective from me. We are all sinners who fall short of the glory of God, and whose only hope is in the blood atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Christ.

Carl: “ conscience testified against this mancentric fleshly/nationalistic view as contrary to the character and nature of God....”

Ted Weiland: I am likewise against anything “mancentric.” The fact that anyone can claim to be an Israelite does not gain them anything, except the fast track to judgment. However, this does not change the fact (as I understand it) that Yahweh chose to make the New Covenant with a born-from-above remnant of physical descendants of the house of Judah and the house of Israel (Jeremiah 31:31-37, Hebrews 8:8-9).

Carl: “Adam is NOT the father of the White Race only.”

Ted Weiland: I agree.

Where Carl got these ideas, I don’t know, but they didn’t come from me.

Blessings to you and yours, Ted R. Weiland


You may have heard on the news about a southern California man put under 72-hour psychiatric observation when it was found he owned 100 guns and allegedly had (by rough estimate) 1-million rounds of ammunition stored in his home. The house also featured a secret escape tunnel. My favorite quote from the dimwit television reporter: “Wow! He has about a million machine gun bullets.” The headline referred to it as a “massive weapons cache”. By southern California standards someone even owning 100,000 rounds would be called “mentally unstable.”

Just imagine if he lived elsewhere:

In Arizona, he’d be called “an avid gun collector”.

In Arkansas, he’d be called “a novice gun collector”.

In Utah, he’d be called “moderately well prepared”, but they’d probably reserve judgment until they made sure that he had a corresponding quantity of stored food.

In Montana, he’d be called “The neighborhood ‘Go-To’ guy”.

In Idaho, he’d be called “a likely gubernatorial candidate”.

In Wyoming he’d be called “an eligible bachelor”.

And, in Texas, he’d be called “a huntin’ buddy”.


4/23 gives us a strange winter, certainly. We had 10 in of snow in October, and the winter stayed mild enough that the blue birds did not even leave the area. The fruit trees bloomed 3 weeks early, and then it got down to 290. 6/8, there is still some fruit left on the trees, but nothing like it would have been without the freeze. Now it is snowing a good bit. I knew it would because we took the snow blower off our lawn tractor two weeks ago. It was our insurance against snow, and it worked.

April 17, we went to the AF Museum in Dayton to meet Larry Kelly, a friend of Bettie’s who owns a B-25. He invited us over for a B-25 fly-in for the 70th anniversary of the Tokyo Raid, led by Jimmy Doolittle. Obviously, we got a personal tour of his aircraft. He organized the fly-in, which consisted of 17 B-25. We took a young man with us from here who is very interested in WWII history, particularly any kind of vehicles and aircraft used in that useless conflict. (McArther later said the A-bombs were wasted, for the war was within a few weeks of being over.) We also took him to the creation museum. (see

April 29, 2012, marked 11 wonderful years now into our second marriage. Unbelievable how fast time moves at our age.

We finally got our garden all in, but we may not be here for all of the harvest. We hope to go to Nairobi, Kenya, to visit with Bettie’s oldest daughter and their 10 children. Her husband, Matt Chancey, works with Brad Phillips and Persecution Project in the Sudan. They have been there for a year and a half now, and may be there for a couple more years.

The deer herd is recovering from the bad winter a couple of years ago. We were overrun with deer before that snow. It was not unusual at all to find a dozen in our back yard, and a herd of 30 or more on the hill across the road from us. The snow greatly reduced the herds. But now we are seeing a few in our back yard again, even casting covetous eyes to our garden. Should be good hunting out of our back window this fall.

The Lord has been and is good to us.

Study Finds Wind Farms Contribute to “Local” Warming

Despite being hailed as a leader in “green” innovation, wind farms might cause a warming effect on local climates, concluded a new study.



Old news, but in case you missed it:

WND, through the internet archive, Wayback Machine, discovered an August 2003 listing of Dystel & Goderich’s author bios, which included the following: “Barack Obama was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. He was born in Kenya to an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, and was raised in Indonesia, Hawaii and Chicago. His first book is ‘Dreams of My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.”

* In April 2007 -- two months after Obama launched his presidential bid ? Dystel & Goderich as authorized agents for Obama was STILL marketing then-Senator Obama as “born in Kenya.” This was edited only a few weeks later.

Despite the Obama administration’s best efforts to scrub the Internet and conceal the truth from the American people, the evidence just keeps stacking up against him.

Forwarded to me

Mass Exodus US Oil Refineries

What Obama’s policies are doing to the American oil industry. Interesting reading.

The individual who sent this has worked for Shell for most of his life. This is thought provoking.

The Closure Of The U.S. Oil Refinery Industry In The Past 2 Years

In 2010, there were 149 operable U.S. refineries with a combined capacity of 17.6 million barrels (2,800,000 m3) per day. Something odd started happening in late 2010-early 2011. The US oil refinery industry quietly announced the closure of numerous US oil refineries.

Many are completely unaware the US ships oil overseas to be processed. We do so as we do not have enough refineries to process the vast amounts here, and we are barred from building anymore refineries. All refineries perform three basic steps: separation, conversion, and treatment. Pretty simple.

Several reasons include technical and economic factors as to why we ship it overseas to be processed.

1. The crude petroleum is sold to the highest bidder, NOT the nearest bidder

2. There are different kinds of crude oil, such as sweet/light and dark/heavy. They have different applications and uses.

3. Different kinds of refining processes are needed to make different products from the crude oil. Petroleum is processed to make lots of products other than gasoline, like plastics and asphalt.

4. Politics, unions and the “environmentalists”

How many of you are aware Sunoco, ConocoPhillips and The HESS Corp are all closing US oil refineries? Not many, as the media refuses to give this HUGE story coverage. My guess is that if Americans understood the complete truth to how we are being sold out, and enslaved there just might be the much needed revolution to turn this country around.

Last September, both Sunoco & CP announced plant closing, effecting thousands of workers. Sunoco announced they are completely getting out of the oil industry. Closing up shop. They are done with the US oil industry.

Sunoco is closing it’s 2 oil refineries in July 2012 in Philadelphia and Marcus Hook, Pa. Those 2 facilities alone process over 500,000 barrels a day.

Also announced last year, ConocoPhillips announcd 2 plant closing for sure in Trainer, PA and Bayway, NJ., the other 3 plants are undecided as of today.

Conoco also announced they were closing their Alaskan refining facility:;

Valero also announced in late 2011 the closure of US oil refining facilities, costing numerous jobs, and the loss of 210,000 barrels of oil per day:

Just a week ago, the US 3rd largest oil refinery owned and operated by The HESS Corp just announced it’s permanent closure. Costing over 2,000 jobs, and effecting 950 contractors:

Refineries on the East Coast of the US supply 40% of the gasoline sales and 60% of the diesel and other fuel oils.

Of that, HALF that comes from the Sunoco & ConocoPhillps plant closures.

When ConocoPhillips announced that it was closing the Trainer refinery, Willie Chiang, then ConocoPhillips’ Senior Vice President of Refining, Marketing, Transportation and Commercial, noted that their decision to sell, like Sunoco’s, was based on unfavorable economics caused by a competitive and difficult market environment characterized by “...product imports, weakness in motor fuel demand, and costly regulatory requirements.”

They are ALL closing up shop due to gov regulations, union demands and excessive operating costs brought on by the Gov regulations.

Then you have the unions, led by Barry’s buddy Leo Gerard saying they will clsoe ALL US oil refineries starting from the east coast to west coast today.

The unions are shutting down ports, rail and air across the pond right now......the SAME EXACT thing they plan on doing here. When the ships stop importing, the rails & air stop much is everything you consume gonna cost? Remember...we are a CONSUMING country, no longer a producing one.

The excessive and costly gov regulations on the US oil refinery market has forced companies to re-evaluate the cost of doing business in the US .

Why have operations in the US where you bleed money via regulations & demands, when you can have refineries built in Columbia , Mexico or Brazil for pennies on the dollar, and less regulations?

It’s all business America ...nothing personal.

Besides.....your gov is giving BILLIONS to Columbia and Brazil to build refineries to process all that oil the US is losing.

We are building up every country on earth, while destroying our own....all in the name of redistribution of wealth.

I covered some of these “deals” Barry inked in my previous note:!/note.php?note_id=14514852226824

You do the math. When the US oil refineries finally close up shop, who will process all that oil....and how much do YOU think that oil will cost when it’s ALL processed over seas?

Think gas and energy costs are high right now.......wait 6 months. You haven’t seen anything yet.

How can anyone expect any company to do business with an anti-American, hostile gov out of control? You can’t. That is why we are seeing a mass exodus, across the board in every industry in the US LEAVING.

Lies, lies and more lies

Beware: These Best-Selling Products Can Make You Sick

By Dr. Mercola

How far will companies go to ensure they continue making money on products that make you sick? Answer: No extreme is too extreme, including bold-faced lying, if it means keeping the bucks rolling in.

This article will cover an assortment of examples of how you’re being deceived by four of the largest industries the chemical, biotech, pharmaceutical, and processed food industry.

“This Popular Drug Creates Over 60,000 New Diabetics Each Year”


FDA Adds New Warning Labels to Statin Drugs

Following an internal meeting between the FDA’s Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology and Office of New Drugs, the Agency announced it would be requiring additional warning labels for statin drugs. Among them are warnings that statins may increase the risk of:

  • Liver damage
  • Memory loss and confusion
  • Type 2 diabetes
  • Muscle weakness (for certain statins)
  • According to Dr. Amy Egan, the FDA’s deputy director of safety in the division of metabolism drug products, the new warnings, particularly the one for memory loss, came as the result of anecdotal reports compiled over the past year. In short, with well over 30 million Americans now taking statin drugs, we’re witnessing a massive ongoing ‘live’ experiment, and many are putting their health on the line for drugs that offer little in the way of heart protection. In fact, they may actually make your heart health worse.


    “Civil War”?

    “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant

    Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012

    In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive civil war” in America.

    “Folks, we’re getting ready for one massive economic collapse,” Hagmann told TruNews host Rick Wiles.

    “We have problems . . . The federal government is preparing for civil uprising,” he added, “so every time you hear about troop movements, every time you hear about movements of military equipment, the militarization of the police, the buying of the ammunition, all of this is . . . they (DHS) are preparing for a massive uprising.”

    Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of the population, is armed.

    Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards, author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.

    Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S. treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S. foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies Iran and Syria.

    “The one source that we have I’ve known since 1979,” Hagmann continued. “He started out as a patrol officer and currently he is now working for a federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security; he’s in a position to know what policies are being initiated, what policies are being planned at this point, and he’s telling us right now-look, what you’re seeing is just the tip of the iceberg. We are preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive civil war in this country.”

    “There’s no hyperbole here,” he added, echoing Trends Research Institute’s Founder Gerald Celente’s forecast of last year. Celente expects a collapse of the U.S. dollar and riots in America some time this year.

    Since Celente’s `Civil War’ prediction of last year, executive orders NDAA and National Defense Resources Preparedness were signed into law by President Obama, which are both politically damaging actions taken by a sitting president.

    And most recently, requests made by the DHS for the procurement of 450 million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.

    These major events, as shocking to the American people as they are, have taken place during an election year.

    Escalating preparatory activities by the executive branch and DHS throughout the last decade-from the Patriot Act, to countless executive orders drafted to suspend (or strip) American civil liberties “are just the beginning” of the nightmare to come, Hagmann said.

    He added, “It’s going to get so much worse toward the election, and I’m not even sure we’re going to have an election in this country. It’s going to be that bad, and this, as well, is coming from my sources. But one source in particular said, `look, you don’t understand how bad it is.’ This stuff is real; these people, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), they are ready to fight the American people.”

    TruNews` Wiles asked Hagmann: who does the DHS expect to fight, in particular? Another North versus South, the Yankees against the Confederates? Hagmann stated the situation is far worse than a struggle between any two factions within the U.S.; it’s an anticipated nationwide emergency event centered on the nation’s currency.

    “What they [DHS] are expecting, and again, this is according to my sources, what they’re expecting is the un-sustainability of the American dollar,” Hagmann said. “And we know for a fact that we can no longer service our debt. There’s going to be a period of hyperinflation . . . the dollar will be worthless . . . The economic collapse will be so severe, people won’t be ready for this.”


    Christian Identity

    “7. We believe the Bible, archaeology, history, linguistics, heraldry, and Jewish testimony all point to the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic, and kindred peoples as the descendants of the biblical Israelites.”

    I have been asked by more than one person to do a “study” of the milder form of Christian Identity than what I did in Identifying Identity. This milder form is defined above in Identity evangelists Ted Weiland’s # 7 statement above. It teaches that the true Israel of God consists of the white Anglo-Saxon race, which actually makes up the “Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.”

    Up to #7, Ted Weiland’s doctrine seems fine. Here, however, though he lists “Bible” first, the scriptures he uses have had their word meanings radically changed through his unique linguistic understanding of the Greek and Hebrew.

    Identity authors depend on their supposed linguistic ability, archaeology, history, heraldry, and Jewish testimony to support their Identity theories. Heraldry, “The system by which coats of arms and other armorial bearings are devised, described, and regulated.” Identity authors search every possible avenue to find anything that might support their unique and strange views of Scripture.

    I was sent some material written by a Christian Identity evangelist, Ted R. Weiland, Israel’s Identity, IT MATTERS, & The Mystery of the Gentiles, both published by Mission to Israel Ministries, Scottsbluff, Nebraska. Mr. Weiland has been on my mailing list for a good number of years, probably since our debate in Indianapolis, IN, 1996. (

    I consider him a friend. However, friendship cannot overlook serious error. Furthermore, speakers and authors must expect challenge over their public statements, and I have had my share of challenges over several of my public theological statements.

    With the material sent to me was a request to please do a Scriptural examination concerning Weiland’s many strange claims. From what I see, his books are based on his retranslation of many common Scriptural words. Identity authors apparently believe their language expertise is greater than the holy men of old who wrote as inspired by the Spirit, and the godly men who gave their lives to give us our English translations of the Geneva and the Authorised version.

    Weiland is one of several who promote the Anglo-Saxon theory. Others include Dr. Stephen Jones, who claims that a “personal revelation of God” led him down the Identity path. [See] Another promoter was Peter J. Peters, who much like Weiland, only...... stood on this one Anglo-Saxon plank of the Identity platform. [Peters died 7/7/11, but his messages continue to run 24/7 on the internet and on short wave.]

    Identity authors rely on clues, assumptions, their unique “linguistic expertise” and appearances to make words say what they want them to say, that the Biblical Israel is actually the Anglo-Saxon race. [Mystery, pp. 136] Using their newly discovered word meanings, they overwhelm the reader with their newly developed ideas. Those who are not thoroughly grounded in Scripture are overwhelmed with the multitude of “proof texts”, not realizing the texts have been corrupted by Identity’s newly found hidden word meanings that only Identity authors can find. With their unique translation skills, they produce unique meanings: Gentile does not mean non-Israelite, Jew does not mean members of the Israelite race, and Israel actually means the White Race.

    The modern [Identity, ed.] movement owes its foundation to Richard Brothers (1757-1824), a half-pay officer of eccentric habits in the English navy. According to his account he was a Divinely appointed prophet. He described himself as a ‘nephew of the Almighty,’ and claimed descent from David. Among his prophecies were those of the imminent restoration of Israel to the Holy Land, and the elevation of himself as prince of the Hebrews and ruler of the world. Brothers was confined as a lunatic, but succeeded in obtaining many admirers, among them Nathaniel Brassey Halket, M.P. for Lymington. ... (Encyclopaedia of Religion & Ethics, 13 volumes, James Hastings, 1908, T&T Clark, Edinburg, New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 153-157 Fifth Avenue. Vol I, p. 482. Identifying Identity gives a much more detailed account of Identity’s roots.)

    Probably the most egregious violation of Scripture is in the area of Identity’s teaching on Salvation:

    “The impact upon the Celto-Saxon people worldwide would be earthshaking if they were to discover their Israelite roots. This does not mean the sole answer for the problem of the nations is in the discovery of their Israelite heritage. However, a person cannot come to know his Israelite legacy and not be drawn, to some extent, to Yahweh, His kingdom, and His laws. With these, comes Christian domination. This is the answer for these nations.” (Matters, p. 10.)

    “Non-Israelites who join themselves to Yahweh are simply proselytes to the covenants that belong to the Israelites and they are, therefore, able to share in some of the benefits thereof. Because sin is a transgression of the law (1 John 3:4) and because Yahweh gave His law to only Israelites (Deuteronomy 33:4; Psalms 78:5; 147:19-20; Romans 9:3-4), the question arises whether only Israelites need to be saved from their sins. When non-Israelites sojourned in the land of Israel , they were accountable to the same laws that governed Israel. If they transgressed those laws, they became sinners in Yahweh’s sight and were liable to the judgment prescribed in those laws.” [Mystery, p. 147.]

    “This is not to say that non-Israelites are unable to share in some of the New Covenant benefits available through Yahshua and His blood-atoning sacrifice, much the same as non-Israelites did under the Old Covenant. See Appendix 3 -- Yahweh’s Plan for Believing Non-Israelites.” [Mystery, p. 48.]

    Physical descent has very little significance without Yahshua’s blood-atoning sacrifice and resurrection from the grave. There is no such thing as salvation by race, even for the descendants of Jacob Israel. [Mystery, p. 67.]


    First, Christian dominion is offered by Identity to only the White Race, and “proselytes” to that Race.

    Second, Identity’s appeal to the “patriotic spirit” is that it paints a true picture of the evil pit into which the “Western” nations have fallen without God’s law. Then through “the Bible, archaeology, history, linguistics, heraldry, and Jewish testimony” they offer their “Israelite” hope. That is, the “Celto-Saxon” people must realize they are actually the Israelites of the Old Testament. With that realization comes the drawing of the Spirit into God’s kingdom.

    Third, Weiland strongly emphasizes trust in Christ Jesus alone for salvation, yet the redemptive message is restricted to the White Race; that is, the “Lost Ten Tribes”, which Identity found. Stranger yet, he says “the intent of His [Christ’s] mission and the primary emphasis of Romans 11 is the reunion of the Israelites from the House of Israel [White Race] with the Judahites from the house of Judah through Yahshua’s blood-atoning sacrifice as prophesied by the Old Testment prophets.” (That is, reunite the 12 Old Testament tribes. Mystery, p. 63)

    Fourth, though he basically restricts salvation to the White Race, Israel, the Whites still need the atoning sacrifice, for they are not automatically saved by being White IsraelitesГThere is no such thing as salvation by race...” Weiland uses the common Scriptural terms for salvation, but uses them in his uncommon way. Note, “very little significance.”

    Fifth, according to Weiland, 1) Non-Israelites must “proselyte” to an Israelite for salvation, yet Identity claims the White Race is Israel. So how does one proselytizes into the White Race? 2) “some of the benefits”, not all. Which benefits were available to the “proselytes”? 3) the law only applies to Israelites, the White Race. 4) the non-Israelites, non-Whites, were/are not responsible to the law, so they do not become “sinners” unless they “sojourned in the land of” Israel. Note his play with words: He does not say how the Old Testament “sojourner” translates into New Testament living in the “land of Israel.” Throughout his books, he makes similar statements. He will state an Old Testament fact with an implication that it applies today, but does not say how it applies. 5) Why would any non-Israelite want to proselytize, when he would not be a sinner if he does not “join” the White Race?

    Please see Identifying Identity, p. 13 for a very lengthy list of Scriptures that prove that God’s Law applies to the whole earth. This is point number “4) all of Isaiah 24 describes God’’s judgment against the inhabitants of the earth and the reason for that judgment, vv. 1-6. Vv. 5 & 21, give the reason for the whole earth, including pagans, being devoured: they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant... Note that the heathen are not judged because they are not of God’s people, but because they have transgressed the laws of God (this does not contradict John 3:18, 36 in any way).”

    Consequently, the Covenant-Law covers all mankind, the inhabitants of the earth. Though man tries to hide in his religion, &c., he has no place to hide, no place to escape from God’s Law of the Covenant, for it is as total as is God’s creation, Isaiah 24:18. The wrath of God is upon the world today because mankind has forsaken His Law of the Covenant, the Ten Commandments.

    Identity’s errors are innumerable, and beg for honest Biblical answers. Identity offers its version of every major Christian doctrine, but that version is based upon “the Bible, archaeology, history, linguistics, heraldry, and Jewish testimony”, with the Bible retranslated according to Identity’s unique “linguistic” ability.

    Finally, I was struck by the lack of quotes from the Book of Acts. Acts gives us a clear distinction made between JewsÐphysical Israelites, and Gentiles, non-Israelites.

    Let me finish with this question: What is the purpose of making a mystery out of a non-mystery?

    If you are interested in the book I am working on, let me know. A good name for it would be “The Great Non-Mystery of the Gentiles”, but I have not yet decided on a name. I find naming something more difficult than writing the material.


    Passing score lowered for FCAT Writing exam

    Emergency meeting called over drastic drop in FCAT scores

    Author: Kala Rama, Anchor/Reporter,, May 16 2012


    The Board of Education decided in an emergency meeting Tuesday to lower the passing grade on the writing portion of Florida’s standardized test after preliminary results showed a drastic drop in student passing scores.

    The results indicated only about a third of students would pass this year’s tougher Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test exam, compared with a passing rate of 80 percent or more last year. ...


    Raid on Michigan farmers and killing pigs is straight out of the United Nations Agenda 21. Coming to your state soon!

    Roundup Herbicide Linked To Parkinson’s-Related Brain Damage

    April 20, 2012, Alarming new research published in the journal Neurotoxicology and Teratology supports the emerging connection between glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide, and neurodegenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s disease and Parkinsonian disorders. ...


    End of Peak Oil

    200-Year Supply Of Oil In One Single Shale Formation

    There’s plenty of oil, and even the global elites can’t hide it anymore.

    A.M. Freyed, June 8, 2012

    GAO: Recoverable Oil in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming :About Equal to Entire World’s Proven Oil Reserves’...

    The Green River Formation -- an assemblage of over 1,000 feet of sedimentary rocks that lie beneath parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming -- contains the world’s largest deposits of oil shale. USGS estimates that the Green River Formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil. At the midpoint of this estimate, almost half of the 3 trillion barrels of oil would be recoverable. This is an amount about equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves. -- CNS (5/11/12)

    About 6 months ago, the writer was watching a news program on oil and one of the Forbes brothers was the guest. The host said to Forbes, “I am going to ask you a direct question and I would like a direct answer; how much oil does the U.S. have in the ground?” Forbes did not miss a beat, he said, “More than all the Middle East put together.” -- Media Matters (5/1/12)

    Carbon Currency is not a new idea, but has deep roots in Technocracy ... The principal scientist behind Technocracy was M. King Hubbert, a young geoscientist who would later (in 1948-1956) invent the now-famous Peak Oil Theory, also known as the Hubbert Peak Theory. Hubbert stated that the discovery of new energy reserves and their production would be outstripped by usage, thereby eventually causing economic and social havoc. -- Voice of the Resistance (5/12/12)

    British-based explorer Tullow Oil PLC says it’s discovered oil off the shore of Ivory Coast. The announcement Thursday comes a year and a half after the company began pumping crude from an offshore field in neighboring Ghana worth billions of dollars. Exploration Director Angus McCoss called the finding encouraging and said the company looks forward to future drilling. -- Washington Post (6/7/12)...

    GM now China Motors

    General Moters is becoming China Motors, thanks to US “Tax Dollars.” Note that China loans us the money to update our auto plants, and then those auto plants move to China.

    God’s hand of wrath is heavy against Secular America.

    Quote from a Confederate Chaplain

    “This is the first time ... that I have been called to address men whose marching orders are onward to the battle-field, whose motto is victory or death. The probability, nay, the bare possibility, that I may be delivering my last message to some, perhaps to many of you, fills my heart with inexpressible anguish. I feel therefore deeply solicitous to meet the responsibilities of this hour, in a manner becoming a watchman for souls.”

    Chaplain John Jones, 8th Georgia


    Fellow Compatriots in the Chaplains’ Corps and Friends:

    The month of April for a true Southerner brings about reflections of what the War of Northern Aggression and Appomattox Court House were really all about. The heritage of Patrick Henry, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, John Witherspoon and others too numerous to name visit the mind. Their descendants who fought for the Confederacy said they were fighting for the same liberty as their fathers who fought in the War for Independence from England. During the South’s defense against Northern invasion these descendants said they were asserting their constitutional rights and were fighting for the same values as their forbearers.

    In a world filled with misinformation and downright lies one must be a bit skeptical and willing to search out dependable history to find the truth. Political history or revisionist history or politically correct history seems to be the diet of the day which brings me to ask, “Have we been defrauded of our legacy?” American history is today shrouded in the cloak of propaganda; yes, we have history with an attitude but telling the truth does not seem to be an element often considered as mandatory.

    The words that God has preserved for us in His sacred Word should be of help. We are reminded, “Truth shall be established for ever” (Prov. 12:19). That is a divine reminder that ultimately whether in time or in the last judgment those who are guilty of misinformation, in whatever form, will stand before the eternal God and be judged. God’s truth is eternal as He is! If the truth sets free then lies enslave. The Lord Jesus said, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Jesus is Himself the personification of Truth and no one comes to His Father in salvation except by Him. “Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17). Life in heaven and life on earth are to be based on the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. May we ask, “What does the Bible say?” Saving truth and living truth are in Christ. However, misinformation takes eternal truth and seeks to redefine it. False propaganda may come from the so called government Ministry of Truth. The citadels of learning have become the greatest disseminators of untruth about God, the Bible, history and life in general.

    Dr. R. L. Dabney a Confederate theologian, chaplain and chief-of-staff of Gen. Thomas J. Jackson wrote of those involved in distorting the truth, “... after committing the crime of destroying a sovereign and coequal commonwealth, seek also to bury her memory under a load of ... falsehood. The last and only office that remains to her sons is to leave their testimony for her righteous fame - feeble it may be now, amidst the din of passion and material power, yet inextinguishable as Truth’s own torch.” The sons of the South must be the promoters of truth and not the purveyors of propaganda. We must know whereof we speak! What kind of legacy are we leaving? Are we adding to the load of falsehood or are we uncovering truth? Are we standing for truth? Truth’s torch is inextinguishable!

    Frank Lawrence Owsley, in the now agrarian classic I’ll Take My Stand, eloquently remarked, “After the South had been conquered by war and humiliated and impoverished by peace, there appeared still to remain something which made the South different - something intangible, incomprehensible, in the realm of the spirit. That too must be invaded and destroyed; so there commenced a second war of conquest, the conquest of the Southern mind, calculated to remake every Southern opinion, to impose the Northern way of life and thought upon the South, write ‘error’ across the pages of Southern history which were out of keeping with the Northern legend, and set the rising and unborn generations upon stools of everlasting repentance.” Our Southern children and grandchildren who have been subjected to government schools have not only been on those stools of everlasting repentance but they have been turned into repudiators of their parents, their churches, their accents, their history and on we could go with the litany of errors. Do we care that our children have been made stooges for the state?

    First, we need to return to the Lord and renounce our sins against Him; then we need to educate ourselves in the truth. When we speak of Southern things we must seek to be truthful. As the saying goes, “Truth is error’s best antagonist.”

    (Chaplain’s Corps Chronicles of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, April, 2012)