Terrible Worship Songs; Should We Sing Them?

        Age-old hymns and Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) are predominantly sung in the churches. Contemporary Christian Music is also labeled as “Worship Songs” or “Praise & Worship Songs.”

            Quite undoubtedly, young people are largely attracted to churches that sing contemporary worship songs. However, the detractors of worship songs claim that some of these songs are theologically incorrect and hence they should not be sung in churches.

            This is not an endeavor to establish or suggest the supremacy of either of these genres of Christian music. But is it possible to justify Contemporary Christian Music, even if it is not theologically correct, for the simple reason that it attracts young Christians to the churches?

            Consider two key allegations against contemporary worship songs:

            (1) Some songs do not mention God or Jesus e.g. “In the Secret” & “Draw Me Close.” If the song does not mention God, it’s quite easy to misunderstand the lyrics. These songs would make sense if they were sung in churches or clubs.

            Consider the song “Draw me close,’ “Who do you want to draw you close? Could be the Lord. Could also be your middle school crush.”¹

            The song ‘In the Secret’ contains the lyrics, “I want to touch you, I want to see your face, I want to know you more.” Since this song does not mention God or Jesus, “It’s tough to sing lines like these when the song never mentions who you’re singing to, and this one never does. The vague lyrics could easily suggest a plan to sneak around and make out in the bushes or a desire to encounter Jesus.”²

            (2) Some songs contain faulty theology. The song, “When I look into your Holiness” contained the lyric, “when my will becomes enthroned in your love.” Our will cannot be enthroned in God’s love; instead HIS will should be ours. Hence, a more acceptable word “enthralled” replaced the contentious word “enthroned.” Our will can certainly be enthralled by HIS love, but it cannot be enthroned in HIS love.

            Another well known song that apparently contains faulty theology is, “Blessed be your name,” “the lyrics of the bridge (“You give and take away…”) are problematic.”³ The faulty theology is explained here, “The words “The Lord gives, and the Lord takes away,” from the lips of Job, are not good theology.  They’re bad theology.  According to Job 1, it was not God, but the Devil who took away Job’s children, health and wealth.  God allowed it to happen, but when Job said these words, as the rest of the story shows, he was not yet enlightened about the true nature of where his calamity came from and what God’s will actually was for his life — which was for good, and not for harm.”⁴

            Poor theology could be excused but what about songs devoid of theology? A well-known song, Oceans (Where Feet May Fail), is a case in point, “The whole thing seems to live in this self-indulgent purgatory, without any concrete statement of faith, without any trace of the Christian story, beginning and ending in these dream-like sequences of possible drowning. And it’s simply not a congregational song. If you MUST sing it, have it be done as a prayer by a soloist.”⁵

            Are these allegations devoid of rationality? Should we continue to sing these contentious worship songs?

            First, should we not sing any song that does not mention God or Jesus? If we are literally bound to this rule, then we should protest against the book of Esther (in the Old Testament), for there is no mention of God in the book of Esther.

            If the worship song does not mention God or Jesus, would not the sole purpose for writing the song and/or the context in which that song is sung, provide the much needed credibility to that song?

            The contentious song, Oceans, written by Hillsong United, was written for the sole purpose of singing in the church to worship God. Isn’t this sufficient to prove that that song is a Christian song? 

            Likewise, even if the song does not mention God or Jesus would not the church in which it is sung offer clarity that that song was meant to worship and glorify God?

            Second, should a worship song that is theologically incorrect be discarded? A worship song should be discarded if it contains a heresy. A worship song should be discarded, if it denies the core tenets of Historic Christianity.

            If the worship song does not promote a heresy, it need not be discarded. If a worship song does not deny the core tenets of Historic Christianity, it could be tolerated or suitable changes could be made to that song (if possible).

            Finally, those who claim to have apostatized⁶ because of a theologically incorrect worship song would discover, upon sincere introspection, the underlying reason(s) that was/were the primary cause for their desertion. For instance, a deep disappointment in God or Christians could surface while hearing or singing a particular worship song.

            Therefore, it is that deep disappointment in God that motivated the apostasy, and not the worship song. A worship song, in itself, cannot be cited as the sole reason to reject Christianity.

            Satan has succeeded in making substantial splits in Christianity, let us not be his agent to divide the church anymore. Let us be channels of unity and peace in the church of Jesus Christ.

Endnotes:

¹https://www.onfaith.co/discussion/lets-stop-singing-these-10-worship-songs?facebook_join=1#/_=_

²Ibid.

³http://www.patheos.com/blogs/ponderanew/2016/02/08/10-worship-songs-we-should-stop-singing/2/#MrvQMLLOUg7DEuEV.99

⁴http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2012/01/24/good-grief-soundings-part-one/#PYCFjAGxD8hr1rbU.99

⁵http://www.patheos.com/blogs/ponderanew/2016/02/08/10-worship-songs-we-should-stop-singing/5/#Prb0QwOLVZUIqQwy.99

⁶http://www.nashvillescene.com/music/article/13056969/how-a-terrible-worship-song-drove-me-from-christianity

Read More

What Does Critical Theory Say About Jonestown?

If anybody feels compelled to debate me on the Frankfurt School can you connect with me on Skype so I can record it please?

Read More

Interview With Robert Stanley

I first connected with Robert back in 2011 via Skype from Thailand to the US. Later on he moved to Hong Kong and we chatted again while I was in Bangkok. Then, by pure synchronicity I subsequently moved to an Island in Hong Kong that is literally minutes away from the Bay he lives on and we hooked up when time permitted and very pleasant it was too.

One thing about Robert's work and life journey that seperates him from most other researchers is that he's the only one to name the eye of the pyramid or rather if there really is an hierarchical control structure, then there must be an all seeing eye at the top in control. An individual if you wish.

Robert has a name for that being, and a back-story too which I don't think anybody else has articulated as cogently and persuasively as in Robert's case though he also comes  with first hand experience too. 

Having met him multiple times and at length I can vouch for his credibility.

Read More

Winston Keech

Win Keech of course is somewhat responsible for ushering in Simon Parkes on to the wider stage. There's a wonderful interview from back in the day when Simon was deferential to Win, though he now struts the contactee/experiencer stage in full jungle loin-cloth and chest wig expounding on any subject callers care to ask questions of, as well as charging for remote healings, a sideline I could easily get into if I started to believe my own BS.

This is still an excellent interview for just thought-provoking information grounded in Keech's obvious engineering credentials. I'm not saying it's all kosher. I'm just saying it's interesting.

Read More

No Country For Old Men

Intrigued by Tommy Lee Jones performance in A Coal Miners Daughter I returned to No Country for Old Men. 

10 years or so later,I'm still not convinced it's as great a movie as the critics claim, but it does have great characters. I particularly found Woody Harrelson's role as powerfully confident, though of course it's short lived, when he is prematurely terminated by the deeply unsettling Anton Chigurh played by Javier Bardem.

Read More

Wild Tales - 2014

Wild Tales is laugh out loud funny. It's a compilation of six stories of Argentinian script writing that really bring the human experience to life. It was a pleasure to watch this kind of film making again and it reminded me of the more humorous scenes of some of Pedro Almodovar's movies.

The story about the guy who has his car removed by the city council is particularly pleasing.

Read More

Exclusivity Claims of Major World Religions

You may have encountered and engaged these claims, “Christianity is intolerant!” and “Christianity is exclusive!” The other religions are allegedly tolerant and hence, inclusive. Is it so? No! Every major religion claims exclusivity.

Within the theme of “Religious Diversity,” three relevant theories should be recognized.1 The “Pluralist theory” believes that one religion is as truthful as another. The “Exclusivist theory” considers only one religion as uniquely valuable – the sole bearer of truth. The “Inclusivist theory” finds merit with both the pluralistic and exclusivistic religions by arguing that while the exclusivistic religion could hold most value, the others still have religious value, for there may be partial truth in the other religions.

A religion proclaims exclusivity if it absolutely contradicts an essential doctrine (Godhead, Sin, Salvation etc.) of another religion. Since mutually contradictory statements cannot be true at the same time and in the same sense (Law of noncontradiction), the either-or logic (not the both-and) should be applied while determining the truth. When two religions mutually contradict each other, the truth remains with eitherreligion A or religion B (both religion A and religion B cannot be true, in this instance). Therefore, only one religion could be true, but the fact remains that both religions claim exclusivity, for both these religions claim to bear the truth.

Every major religion in the world, either implicitly or explicitly, claims exclusivity. Ravi Zacharias states, “The truth is that every major religion in the world claims exclusivity, and every major religion in the world has a point of exclusion…”2 Therefore, a preliminary study of the claims of exclusivity of the major world religions is in order.

Exclusivity of Hinduism

Hinduism, one of the world’s oldest religious systems, claims to be inclusive.3 But it is not so.

Hinduism excludes other religions based on its core doctrines. Consider the doctrine of God in Hinduism. Brahman, the absolute God of Hinduism, is a mysterious being.4

Although Brahman is one God, he manifests in innumerable forms, “Hinduism is unique because it is essentially a monotheistic faith which acknowledges polytheism as reflective of the diversity in God’s creation. God is one, but also many. He manifests Himself in innumerable forms and shapes.”5 But the God of Christianity does not manifest Himself in innumerable forms. Hence, Hinduism should exclude Christianity or Islam on the basis of the Godhead. The same holds true for doctrines such as karma and reincarnation, which absolutely contradict Christianity and other religions.

While Hinduism claims inclusivity, it excludes the exclusivists, “Hinduism does not recognize claims of exclusivity or a clergy. Anyone who claims to by [sic] the exclusive possessor of spiritual truth or the only ‘method’ of reaching God finds no place in Hinduism; a method or a message can only be one among many…Krishna, speaking as God in the Bhagavad-Gita, says, “All paths lead to me”, and also those who worship other gods with devotion worship me….Hinduism does not force itself on others through proselytisation…”6

Existentially, Hinduism contradicts its own claims for inclusivity. If Hinduism is truly inclusive, it would not proselytize. But Hinduism, in India – the country of its origin, is actively converting people. The recent Ghar Wapsi (Home Coming) program in India is a classic case in point. Ghar Wapsi is, “a series of religious conversion activities, facilitated by Indian Hindu organizations Vishva Hindu Parishad and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, to facilitate conversion of non-Hindus to Hinduism”7

Furthermore, Ravi Zacharias, who was born into a Hindu household, asserts the exclusivity of Hinduism, “Hinduism, for example, is often represented as being the most tolerant and accepting of other faiths. That is just not true. All Hindus believe in two fundamental, uncompromising doctrines—the Law of Karma, and the belief in reincarnation.”8

Therefore it is very reasonable to conclude that Hinduism is not an inclusive faith, since it claims exclusivity.

Exclusivity of Buddhism

Rejection of Hinduism led to the birth of Buddhism, says Ravi Zacharias, “Buddhism was born out of the rejection of two other very dogmatic claims of Hinduism. Buddha rejected the authority of the vedas and the caste system of Hinduism.”9

There are several irreconcilable differences between Buddhism and Historic Christianity. Two such differences are found below:

First, Buddhism rejects the notion of a personal God, which is in stark contrast to Christianity, “There is no almighty God in Buddhism. There is no one to hand out rewards or punishments on a supposedly Judgement Day.”10 However, Buddha is worshipped by some Buddhists.

Second, Buddhism excludes other religions that believe in sin, for there is no such thing as sin in Buddhism, “Buddhists do not regard man as sinful by nature of ‘in rebellion against god’. Every human being is a person of great worth who has within himself a vast store of good as well as evil habits…According to Buddhism, there is no such thing as sin as explained by other religions.”11

There are many such points of exclusions in Buddhism. Hence, Buddhism is also an exclusive religion.

Exclusivity of Islam

Islam, being strictly monotheistic, rejects every contradicting worldview (Trinitarian monotheism, polytheism, pantheism etc.). Moreover, Islam, by virtue of rejecting Christ’s divinity, excludes Christianity.

Islam is also a legalistic system. A Muslim must earn his salvation by holding to the “Articles of Faith” (belief in God, Angels, Scripture, Prophets, and Last Days) and following the “Pillars of Faith” (The Creed, Prayer, Almsgiving, Fasting, and Hajj Pilgrimage). This is in absolute contrast to Christianity, which believes that man is not saved by his good deeds, but is saved by the grace of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Therefore, Islam stakes claim to exclusivity by excluding the contradicting religions.

Exclusivity of Judaism

It may be an effortless task to prove Judaism’s claim to exclusivity vis-à-vis other religions that are not named Christianity. Judaism and Christianity have much in common. Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, in their work “Handbook of Today’s Religions,” state the fundamental similarity, “It is to historic Judaism, the Judaism of the Old Testament, that Christianity traces its roots. Christianity does not supplant Old Testament Judaism, it is the fruition of Old Testament Judaism. One cannot hold to the Bible, Old and New Testaments, as God’s one divine revelation without also recognizing and honoring the place God has given historic Judaism.”12

Given this relationship between Judaism and Christianity, the exclusivity of Judaism would be clearly emphasized if Judaism excludes Christianity. A couple of points of exclusion are highlighted below:

First, Judaism rejects the Christian belief that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, “While Christianity recognizes that the promise of a personal, spiritual savior is the core of biblical revelation, Judaism has long vacillated in the concept of messiahship. That Jesus Christ, the true Messiah predicted in God’s Word, would be rejected by the Jews of the first century shows that even at that time there was divergence of opinion on the meaning and authority of messianic passages in Scripture. In the course of Jewish history the meaning of the Messiah had undergone changes. Originally, it was believed that God would send His special messenger, delivering Israel from her oppressors and instituting peace and freedom. However, today any idea of a personal messiah has been all but abandoned by the majority of the Jews. It has been substituted with the hope of a messianic age characterized by truth and justice.”13

Second, the salvation of the Jews is predicated on sacrifices, penitence, good deeds and a little of God’s grace, since they reject the substitutionary atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ.14 Salvation in Christianity is absolutely contingent on God’s grace, but not on the performance of good deeds.

Conclusion  

Every major religion of the world remains exclusive, for there are irreconcilable contradictions between these religions. The notion that Historic Christianity is the only religion that claims exclusivity is, therefore, incorrect.

Endnotes:

1http://www.iep.utm.edu/reli-div/

2http://rzim.org/a-slice-of-infinity/point-of-exclusion/

3http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/hinduism-is-more-inclusive-and-not-exclusive-rss-chief-mohan-bhagwat-2947063/

4http://www.hinduwebsite.com/brahmanmain.asp

5http://www.hinduwebsite.com/onegod.asp

6M. G. Chitkara, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh: National Upsurge, A.P.H Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 2004, p61.

7https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghar_Wapsi

8http://rzim.org/a-slice-of-infinity/point-of-exclusion/

9Ibid.

10http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/snapshot01.htm

11http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/182.htm

12Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, “Handbook of Today’s Religions,” Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, 1983, p364.

13Ibid. p372.

14Ibid. p373.

Websites cited were last accessed on 2nd August 2017.

This article was published at www.christianapologeticsalliance.com

Read More

Ole Dammegard - Staged Terror: Manchester, London, Charlottesville

To the uneducated mind the notion of staging terror to socially engineer populations seems impossible, and to be quite honest I've not paid much attention to this type of news since the tediously synthetic Boston bombing. 

However, Ole Dammegard is quite an authority on this subject, and as ever, he's just asking questions that ordinary journalists should be asking, but they can never digest the concrete fact that NATO has a long history of documented 'Strategy of Tension'.

Read More

Steve Pieczenik Schools Alex Jones

Alex Jones is discredited within the truth seeking community for dispensing with 9/11 truth to shill for Donald Trump. He has been told of Israel's considerable role in 9/11 by Steve Pieczenik, and now prefers to focus on anything but what really happened to bring us to this point in time. Pieczenik is not my favourite CFR member so I have no attachment to him in particular but from time to time he does say the uncomfortable truth and here we see him remind Alex that Trump cranking up the war machine in Afghanistan is another example of political and military cowardice in action.

Until people are prepared to join the dots up and call out 9/11 for the obnoxious lie it is then nothing gets fixed, and I am hearing the silence of the left and right on this for over a decade now because unless people are talking about it, they are moral cowards.

Read More

Gary Fisher - Presidio

I accidentally picked up a really sweet bike recently. It's a Gary Fisher Presidio that's been sitting in storage so I picked it up for a song. I'm still not over losing the KLEIN to a stupidly small lock outside the Siam Paragon in Bangkok and then I lost the vintage replica I bought on a mad night out on Sukhumvit Road. Since then I've been borrowing other people's bikes till I bought a cheap bike in Jomtien follow by a Giant Talon which is a terrific bike but I had to let it go after leaving Hong Kong. Fortunately the great Robert Stanley was coincidentally living just across the bay bay from me so he took it off my hands and saved me lugging it back to the UK at a premium.

The Talon has arrived. It's a lot heavier than the KLEIN

A post shared by Charles Edward Frith (@charles.frith) on Dec 5, 2016 at 2:47am PST

The Talon Reassembled

A post shared by Charles Edward Frith (@charles.frith) on Dec 9, 2016 at 7:28pm PST

Strange isn't it? The name Presidio. 

Also, it was for a sale literally a few doors up the road from where I am. 

Another piece of synchronicity. 

Anyway it's a real gents bicycle but it rides faster than any bike I've had yet. Like a hot knife through butter with the sweetest Bontrager tires imaginable and comes with a new found love for handlebar gear changes.

Sweet As.

Read More

Hell Or High Water - 2016

I'm not a big fan of robbery movies or even guns in scripts at all. However this movie more than compensates for a fairly pedestrian story with exquisite photography that captures the bigness of Texas.

Jeff Bridges is a poignant addition, playing a role that squeezes a dimension of acting out of him that we haven't seen before, though he's much older and I guess so am I.

Here's what the DOP Giles Nuttgen had to say about finding the right shot.

"The only way to do that was to keep a shot longer than it could hold and finding something that was almost so banal that you had to wait long enough for what the visual interest would be".

Read More

Joseph Atwill & Tim Kelly - Power & Principalities Episode 13

What makes these conversations so special is that unless interviewing a proper scholar like Joseph Atwill, Tim Kelly can sometimes overwhelm the guests with his extensive knowledge and considerable book reading. Here, they both compliment each other and this series of discussions are among the finest on the net at present.

CIA Nazis, Knights of Malta, Vatican II, Lifetime actors, P2 Lodge, Illuminati and the New World Order get a good airing. Tim's riff on Vatican II is particularly impressive and I don't even agree with them both on a lot of narrative frameworks they settle on, as I feel there's a different way to assemble the moving parts. Just my opinion of course.

It's still the dogs bollocks.

Read More

Andy Weatherall - Music's Not For Everyone

It's a blessing when great music comes into our lives and elevates the pedestrian to the meaningful. I can barely move on Mixcloud there's so much quality music in my stream.

Read More

21 Grams - 2003

21 Grams is a non linear story with a surprise ending. There's something very comforting that the original website for the movie from 2003 is still on the internet. 

I didn't even know that 9/11 was a synthetic terror event in 2003.

Read More

Vape Life

Miss Mandikat

Rebuild methods using pre and self-made wicks and coils.

Read More

Coal Miners Daughter - 1980

Quality film making. There are so many scenes in this movie that could be in 1990, 1890 and 2019. 

It's a timeless movie in this and many respects.

Sissy Spacek is, as usual, extraordinary.

As an aside Tommy Lee Jones who plays Loretta's husband in the movie, has a Neanderthal brow, supporting the DNA evidence that Homo Sapien both decimated, coexisted and bred with Neanderthals. 

Online I discovered that Spacek expected fellow Texan Tommy Lee Jones to be a good old boy but soon learned he was a sophisticated Harvard graduate. "I can honestly say he's always the smartest person in the room," she wrote in her autobiography. "Tommy Lee had great instincts about the film. ... He elevated my performance in every way."

Read More

Yeshua or Jesus? How Do We Call HIM?

            Don’t call HIM Jesus, call HIM Yeshua! Some messianic Jews and some Christians insist that Jesus should only be called Yeshua, “Some people claim that our Lord should not be referred to as “Jesus.” Instead, we should only use the name “Yeshua.” Some even go so far as to say that calling Him “Jesus” is blasphemous. Others go into great detail about how the name “Jesus” is unbiblical because the letter J is a modern invention and there was no letter J in Greek or Hebrew.”¹

            Is it a sin to call our Lord as Jesus? Should we eliminate the name Jesus, henceforth?  

The Case for Yeshua

            Those who call HIM Yeshua claim the following:

            (1) Yeshua/Yahshua (Yay-shoo-ah or Yah-shoo-ah) is the recognized Jewish name for Jesus.

            (2) The name ‘Jesus’ is a pagan invention, for it is derived from the pagan source of Isus or Zeus.

            (3) The name Jesus is not found in the Scriptures, “The Bible was not written in English. What we read in English today are translations from other languages. The "New Testament" was written in Greek. Hence, the name "Jesus" is found nowhere in the Scriptures - it is a translation of the Greek name "Iesous" (pronounced "[ee]yeh-sooce"). "Iesous" came over into the Latin "Jesu" (pronounced "yehsoo") and finally into English as "Jesus." So in the most technical sense, saying "Jesus" is saying a twice-removed translation of the name we find in the "New Testament" Scriptures…”²

The Case for Jesus: Rejecting the Hebrew Roots Movement

            The Hebrew Roots movement is probably the main cause for the Jesus / Yeshua controversy. It aims to recover the Jewishness of Christianity:³

The premise of the Hebrew Roots movement is the belief that the Church has veered far from the true teachings and Hebrew concepts of the Bible…They teach that the understanding of the New Testament can only come from a Hebrew perspective and that the teachings of the Apostle Paul are not understood clearly or taught correctly by Christian pastors today. Many affirm the existence of an original Hebrew-language New Testament and, in some cases, denigrate the existing New Testament text written in Greek…they all adhere to a common emphasis on recovering the "original" Jewishness of Christianity…For the most part, those involved advocate the need for every believer to walk a Torah-observant life. This means that the ordinances of the Mosaic Covenant must be a central focus in the lifestyle of believers today as it was with the Old Testament Jews of Israel. Keeping the Torah includes keeping the Sabbath on the seventh day of the week (Saturday), celebrating the Jewish feasts and festivals, keeping the dietary laws, avoiding the "paganism" of Christianity (Christmas, Easter, etc.), and learning to understand the Scriptures from a Hebrew mindset…they prefer to be identified as "Messianic Christians." Many have come to the conclusion that God has "called" them to be Jewish and have accepted the theological position that the Torah (Old Testament law) is equally binding on Gentiles and Jews alike. They often wear articles of traditional Jewish clothing, practice Davidic dancing, and incorporate Hebrew names and phrases into their writing and conversations. Most reject the use of the name "Jesus" in favor of Yeshua or YHWH, claiming that these are the "true" names that God desires for Himself. In most cases, they elevate the Torah as the foundational teaching for the Church, which brings about the demotion of the New Testament, causing it to become secondary in importance and only to be understood in light of the Old Testament…

            But recovering the Jewishness of Christianity is unnecessary, “God never intended Gentiles to become one in Israel, but one in Christ. The influence of this movement is working its way into our churches and seminaries. It's dangerous in its implication that keeping the Old Covenant law is walking a "higher path" and is the only way to please God and receive His blessings. Nowhere in the Bible do we find Gentile believers being instructed to follow Levitical laws or Jewish customs; in fact, the opposite is taught. Romans 7:6 says, "But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."”⁴

The Case for Jesus: The New Testament Mentions Jesus not Yeshua

            If Yeshua is the only appropriate reference to our Lord, the authors of the New Testament (the Lord’s disciples included), who wrote the New Testament in Greek, would have used the name ‘Yeshua,’ isn’t it? But they did not! They transliterated the name of our Lord to “Iesous” (pronounced as ee-ay-sooce').⁵

            The fact that the New Testament does not use Christ’s Hebrew name is an adequate refutation of the Jesus / Yeshua controversy, “The entire New Testament was written in Greek, and the word Jesus is the word that is used.  It is not the Hebrew  יֵשׁוּעַ which is Yeshua.  So, it is simple.  Jesus is properly called Jesus… the New Testament uses "Jesus" as the name and not a Hebrew name.  For people to say that Jesus' real name is Yashua or Yahusha or Yahushua, etc., is Jesus' real name is just a statement of pushing an agenda and not believing the New Testament text.”⁶

            Some people believe that the New Testament was written in Hebrew. This is a false belief, “Some claim that the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew and then translated into Greek. However, the records of early church history do not support this assertion. Tatian, Papias, Tertullian and Irenaeus, to name but a few writers of the early church, describe the original writings and quote from them. Yet not a single quote is taken from a Hebrew text—all are taken from Greek texts. Although Papias asserts that Matthew compiled his early reports in Hebrew, no evidence is given. Early translations of the New Testament are all based on Greek texts. The Harmony of Tatian, translated in 170 AD, is based on a Greek original, as is The Muratorian Canon. The Old Latin version translated in 180 AD is based on a Greek original. Early Gothic, Egyptian, Ethiopian, Armenian and Palestinian versions are all based on Greek originals. Even the Aramaic versions of the New Testament are translations from the Greek (see The Books and the Parchments, by F. F. Bruce, p. 189). No evidence of a Hebrew original has been found in all the centuries that have followed the writing of the New Testament.”⁷

The Case for Jesus: Demons Tremble at the Name of Jesus

            Christians involved in the ministry of exorcism would claim that demons flee upon hearing Jesus’ name.

            If Yeshua is the only correct representation of the Lord, there is absolutely no need for the demons to respond to the name of Jesus. But the fact that the demons flee at the name of Jesus is an adequate and reasonable existential proof debunking the claim that Yeshua is the only correct reference to the Lord.

Conclusion

            Call HIM Jesus or Yeshua, it does not matter. But please do not claim that those who are calling HIM Jesus are sinning or blaspheming. 

           Let the words of these messianic Jews conclude this essay, “So now to the question…should we cease to call him Jesus?... If you relate to him by his name Jesus, then don’t let it be a burden to you to change to Yeshua if you don’t feel the need to. He knows his sheep, and his sheep know his voice...”⁸

            “In the words of Dr. Brown, “Do not be ashamed to use the name JESUS! That is the proper way to say his name in English—just as Michael is the correct English way to say the Hebrew name mi-kha-el and Moses is the correct English way to say the Hebrew name mo-sheh. Pray in Jesus’ name, worship in Jesus’ name, and witness in Jesus’ name. And for those who want to relate to our Messiah’s Jewishness, then refer to him by His original name Yeshua—not Yahshua and not Yahushua—remembering that the power of the name is not in its pronunciation but in the person to whom it refers, our Lord and Redeemer and King...”⁹

Endnotes:

¹https://www.gotquestions.org/Yeshua-Jesus.html

²https://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/yeshua.htm

³https://www.gotquestions.org/Hebrew-roots.html?fref=gc

⁴Ibid.

⁵http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/iesous.html

⁶https://carm.org/jesus-name-really-yeshua

⁷http://www.cbcg.org/franklin/SA/SA_NT_Originally_Written_in_Greek.pdf?fref=gc

⁸https://www.oneforisrael.org/bible-based-teaching-from-israel/jesus-vs-yeshua/

⁹https://www.gotquestions.org/Yeshua-Hamashiach.html

Websites cited were last accessed on 17^th August 2017. 

Read More

CW Chanter on David Wilcock

David Wilcock has the burden of being blessed with considerable intelligence and a seismic ego to go with it. He writes interesting new-age style books, researches in a syncretic manner that joins up very interesting dots, yet is completely unable to see what a bell-end he is. 

David is like Kerry Cassidy. They're the kind of people who have made a robust contribution to the alternative media scene, yet the aching yearning they both have to be recognised by the very same toxic Hollywood they have provided a counterbalance to is self evident any time a whiff of celebrity and stardom has come close to either of them.

Lately David, Kerry and that other wannabe celebrity Jimmy Church, have shredded their reputations by nailing their colours to the mast of some preposterous alien story that has been discredited by pretty much anyone of substance.

CW Chanter makes an amusing presentation on this subject. 

This is a train spotters blog post. It matters to a few hundred people around the world, maybe a few thousand most.

Read More

Requiem - 2006

I no longer always accept the orthodox psychiatric view of demonic possession and potentially see this (for example) in people throwing women under buses. I'm not saying neurological problems don't exist but I often see a spiritual problem in those often diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar and temporal lobe epilepsy.

I was born in Germany and lived there during the time this movie is set in around 1976. In this respect it was quite a nostalgia trip.

Sandra Huller is once again a great actress who seems to convey a lot while often saying or doing very little. 

Read More

The CIA & Charlottesville Nazis

WHOA: Here's the BOMBSHELL Ukraine / DNC / CIA story I just dropped... https://t.co/GuF7NsYFIX

— Lee Stranahan (@stranahan) August 14, 2017

Lee Stranahan was fired by Breitbart for being a proper journalist. Here he outlines the connections between the Ukrainian Nazis that Obama's State Department sponsored, and the psychopath who mowed down a protestor in Charlottesville.

There's always violence around the Extreme Right and Left (Antifa).

They're both manipulated by outside forces and only a shallow fool would think otherwise. This is a must watch presentation for those who are still breastfeeding on mainstream media version of events.

Read More

Children of Men - 2006

It's the year 2027. Swarms of illegal migrants are flooding into the UK, and police state Britain with all cops wearing black paratrooper uniforms is tooled-up to the nines.

The fertility rate is non existent so the youngest person is in their 20s. There's sky rocketing autism and government bombs going off everywhere in false flag scenarios to keep the sheep in a constant state of fear.

I was gobsmacked watching this movie which in 2006 was clearly fiction. 

Now? 

Not so much.

Read More

All Or Nothing - Mike Leigh 2002

Ultimately, the story's characters don't mesh together as smoothly as they should. The thin mother of an obese family including an obnoxious son who subsequently has a heart attack, thus pulling the family together, in a way that is mawkish and doesn't feel coherent. 

Individually they all knock out great performances, but the star is Sally Hawkins who easily has that screen-presence that fizzes and crackles. Her latest news article elaborates on her preference for privacy and perhaps that's why I've never come across her before but I'll be looking into her body of work for more gems.

Many describe Mike Leigh's work as bitter sweet, though for my taste it's about quintessentially working class English characters who live somewhat sour lives, punctuated by moments of respite described as sweet. 

It's still great work.

Update: I have come across Sally Hawkins in Blue Jasmine

Read More