Random Blog
Join JournalHome.com.
Create your own free blog today.
Create Your Blog
Flag this entry/bog.
It will be manually reviewed.
Report This!

The Remnant

About Me


Home | Profile | Archives | Friends

Transformational Marxism, the Dialectic and the Dumbing Down of America - 8:21 AM, 1/21/2012


BernardPyronCeledonGlazedBowls1962
Transformational Marxism, the Dialectic and the Dumbing Down of America
Bernard Pyron


Many know George Orwell's book 1984 - published in the late forties -
as describing a horrible police state that apparently came out of
Marxism. But 1984 is also about the denial of objective reality. The
party poured out propaganda saying war is peace and black is white and
many more blatant lies.


In 1984 Orwell's main character Winston talked to his girl friend
about the denial of objective reality. But she was not interested in
such an abstract idea and was bored. While Winston was somewhat aware
of the Party's denial of objective reality, most people under the
regime in power accepted the enormous lies made by the Party's
propaganda apparatus.


Orwell points out that the Party created reality and substituted their
reality for objective reality. Using the denial of objective reality
and creating a new reality, the Party's conditioning - perhaps by
using the principles of behaviorism - finally beat Winston and he
lost his intelligence and independence from the Party. The Party had to break him, because it cannot allow people with understanding to oppose its rule and its propaganda.


Writing in the late forties, George Orwell was not focused only on a future post-Christian society in which the
family has been severely weakened by non-violent transformational
Marxism. His experience had been in the Revolution in Spain where the
violent Marxists fought the Fascists. Theodore W. Adorno's book, The Authoritarian Personality, had not been published then.

But the propaganda procedures of non-violent Marxism and those of Nazi
fascism and violent Marxism are much the same.


Orwell also wrote essays and in one he said that in Germany during the
Nazi era telling lies by the people in power was so common that the
people would not believe anyone was telling the truth. Orwell said
that in the forties the Nazi propaganda machine denied that such a
thing as truth existed.


Before people such as Dean Gotcher taught about what transformational
Marxism and the dialectic are about in the US since Theodor Adorno's
1950 book The Authoritarian Personality, few understood exactly what
the propaganda machines and methods of deception were all about.

Transformational Marxism and its dialectic method of changing
attitudes, perceptions and beliefs amounts to the denial of objective
reality. This is because when the "facilitator" focuses the attention
of his or her group upon understanding as being mere opinions to be
changed in a situation where the thing to do is "lets talk about it"
and come to an agreement, and "how do you feel about it" eventually
undermine accurate perception of objective reality.


Opinions, feelings and group consensus building overcome accurate
discernment. All this overthrows accurate perception of reality, since the
"facilitators" teach that there is no absolute objective reality.

What results when the public school system, the universities, the
media etc are all or almost all are run by transformational Marxists
using the dialectic is a massive amount of telling lies in society.

In the drug movement, starting in about 1962,the "facilitators" taught
many in the movement to value dreams, fantasy and private experiencing
on drug trips. The create your own reality idea was popularized by
the drug movement in the sixties and seventies. The drug movement
opened up a crack in the solid wall of belief in an objective reality.

This crack in the belief in an objective reality was widened by the
influence from humanistic psychology, such as the ideas of Carl Rogers
and Abraham Maslow.


Propagandists may appeal to the emotions and desires - because if you
can arouse feelings and desires rather than discernment, intelligence
and the will, then you have a better chance of getting people to
accept your lies and half truths.


Carl Rogers was a clinical psychologist who taught that people lie to
themselves and to others with their intellect. So he over-emphasized
the expression of feelings as being the authentic "self."


Abraham Maslow taught that the expression of emotions and fulfillment
of "needs" really desires, must come first. The call of Rogers to
express feelings and not discernment or cognition and that of Maslow
to first fulfill more animal-like "needs" or desires and to develop
self-esteem and go on to "self-actualization" plus Rogers emphasis
upon the "fully functioning person had widespread and strong
influence upon the educated youth and soon to much of the educational
world and to popular culture. This all fits in with transformational
Marxism, though neither Rogers nor Maslow were members of the
Frankfurt School from Germany like Theodore W. Adorno.


The debunking of intellect, cognitive ability, discernment and
intelligence as understanding made it easier for political and
cultural leaders to rule people by deception - because gradually
transformational Marxism with its attack upon the Christian foundation
of Western culture and its undermining of the family dumbs down the
majority of people so much they will believe the lies of the
propagandists.


Psychologist Randie L. Timpe affirms this revolt against a belief in
objective reality and accurate cognition of that reality when he says
"Our constructions of human nature and God are based on a philosophy
of constructive alternativism where the individual is free to
formulate new and alternative explanations."


Transformational Marxism and its dialectic is a method for dumbing
down the population so they do not have the cognitive ability any more
to discern that the "facilitators" are telling lies.

And those who have been dumbed down since some of the Baby Boomers
became hippies and followers of the drug movement will ridicule this
explanation including that of Dean Gotcher and refuse to try to
understand what has happened to them. Many don't have the cognitive
ability to read and comprehend anything beyond a grade school level,
though most have high school degrees.

Dean Gotcher has many audios and writings on the Internet. Google
"Dean Gotcher, Authority Research."
Share |


Technorati Tags: ,
Filed under: ,

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Genesis 3 and the Dialectic - 12:43 PM, 1/11/2012


Genesis 3 and the Dialectic
Bernard Pyron

Genesis 3: 1-7 says "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast
of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman,
Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2. And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of
the trees of the garden:
3. But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden,
God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest
ye die.
4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes
shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that
it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one
wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto
her husband with her; and he did eat.
7. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they
were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves
aprons."


God as the Father figure, the authority, told Adam and Eve that they
could eat of any tree in the garden except they must not eat of the
fruit of one tree. Lucifer who is subtle, or deceptive, practiced a
form of the dialectic on Eve. The dialectic challenges the authority
of God, and points man toward the fufillment of the flesh. By flesh
is not meant sex in this text, because God did not tell Adam and Eve
not to have sex. As long as man and woman have sex within the
structure God has provided for that, it is not sinful. But we have to
conform to that structure. Flesh is man's self, which includes his
self-esteem, pride and lust of the eyes. "For all that is in the
world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride
of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." I John 2: 16 The
lust of the flesh includes the pleasure of eating, etc.


Lucifer, acting as the "facilitator," moved Eve out of her obedience
to God's absolute moral commandment not to eat of this one tree, and
she then saw that the tree was pleasant to her eyes, that the tree was
good for food, for the pleasure of eating and wanted to become wise by
eating its fruit. She developed a relationship with the tree, and
Satan, the "facilitator," moved her to put that relationship above her
relationship with God, which included her obedience to God. Ol Adam,
because he had a relationship with Eve, though he knew better that to
eat the fruit, followed her and ate it also. Satan moved Eve and then
Adam following her, from the paradigm of absolute truth and absolute
morality to the paradigm of relationships, to man's pleasure in his
flesh (which includes self-esteem), and to opinions and feelings.


In Genesis 3 God confronted Adam and Eve about their disobedience to
him. "And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art
thou?
10. And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid,
because I was naked; and I hid myself.
11. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten
of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
12. And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she
gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
13. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou
hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
14. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done
this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the
field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the
days of thy life:
15. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between
thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise
his heel." Genesis 3: 9-15


The devil also tried to use his subtle methods of attitude and belief
change on Jesus Christ. Matthew 4: 1-12 tells the story of Satan's
attempt to change the paradigm of Christ: "Then was Jesus led up of
the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
2. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was
afterward an hungred.
3. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of
God, command that these stones be made bread.
4. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by
bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of
God.
5. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him
on a pinnacle of the temple,
6. And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down:
for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:
and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash
thy foot against a stone.
7. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt
the Lord thy God.
8. Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain,
and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9. And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou
wilt fall down and worship me.
10. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is
written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.
11. Then the devil leaveth him......."


The devil's dialectic did not work on Jesus. His response was "It is
written," meaning what God has inspired holy men to write is absolute
and not subject to compromise, and movement toward being mere
opinions.


But now with the falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 and the
leavening of the churches of Luke 13: 21 well underway, Lucifer has
led many into that paradigm shift from seeing truth and morality as
absolute into seeing them as opinions and feelings of man's flesh, the
sarx, which includes pride, reliance on appearances, envy, hate, and
violence. The desire of Christian Zionists to go to war against the Islamics could be an expression of this "sarx," which includes the desire to kill others.


Dean Gotcher has been exposing this paradigm shift and the use of the
dialectic for years.


http://authorityresearch.com/File Dean Gotcher/Audio Dean Gotcher/ADORNO/Theodor Adorno.htm


Dean Gotcher has a sixteen part series of audios of his lectures on
Theodor W. Adorno. Adorno, a key member of the Frankfurt School, posed
as a social and personality psychologist and wrote his highly
influential book, The Authoritarian Personality (1950), while he was a
professor at Berkeley. Using the Hegelian dialectic, Adorno claimed
that the strong family and Christianity cause fascism. But in saying
that the family and Christianity cause fascism, to those who believed
him, Adorno was really moving them toward Marxism.


In fact, this entire movement into transformational Marxism originated
in the atheism of Marx, Freud and other 19th century Western
intellectuals. Since there is no God, they thought, everything is
permitted. Much of contemporary atheism is really from
transformational Marxism. Some atheists don't know they have been
influenced by Marxism.


What Dean Gotcher has been talking about for years is not limited to
the dialectic as a deceptive method of attitude and belief change.
What Gotcher is talking about in his many audios on the Internet is a
paradigm shift - the shift is away from believing that truth and
morality is absolute - "it is written" - to a paradigm in which we
have opinions which can be shifted by clever "facilitators" who know
how to use the dialectic, and to the emphasis upon feelings as man's
authentic "self" (Carl Rogers. Gotcher also has a series of lectures
on "Uncle" Carl Rogers, once one of my professors at Wisconsin. I was
one of the research assistants under Rogers at one time, not because I
was a clinical major, but because I was an experimental major and had
an interest then in the theories of Carl Rogers.


Adorno and others of the Frankfurt School, such as Erick Fromm, and
Herbart Marcuse, all of whom Gotcher has lectures on, were
transformational Marxists, that is, mostly non-violent Marxists. Carl
Rogers was not a member of the Frankfurt School, but became a change
agent who had a lot in common with the members of the Frankfurt
School. Abraham Maslow was also not part of the German Frankfurt
School, but as a psychologist was an important change agent like Carl
Rogers. Maslow's main book was Motivation and Personality,1954,1970,
1987. In it he included a study of what he thought were highly
creative people. But I was impressed that he did not include Frank
Lloyd Wright as one of his "self-actualizers." Maslow may have had an
agenda in selecting his "self-actualizers," not to include one of
America's most creative and innovative architects, who was also one of
our greatest artists.


We might date the beginning of the paradigm shift away from absolute
truth and morality much earlier than 1950, with the publication of
Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality. But the attack upon absolute
truth and morality really got going in America with the 1950 book of
Adorno et al, from their stronghold at Berkeley, California.

Transformational Marxism and the dialectic got going in the early
fifties and influenced the counterculture of the sixties and
seventies. The Baby Boomers, born after 1946 (to about 1964) were the
first generation in which almost all members of that age group
experienced some degree of influence from transformational Marxism,
from the Red Horse of Revelation 6: 4. Transformational Marxism has
been called "political correctness," as well as "cultural Marxism."


The hippies and the drug movement as the core parts of the counterculture were anti-Christian. This anti-Christian attitude fits in with Adorno's agenda to weaken Christianity in the U.S. There were movements associated with the counterculture in the late sixties and during the seventies which not only opposed Christianity but opposed the family. That which opposes the family would fit in with Adorno's agenda. The New Age Occult movement had some connection with the counterculture, though it had origins that go back earlier than the sixties. And - the homosexual and lesbian movements associated in the seventies with the counterculture certainly opposed the family.

Self psychology was also allied with the counterculture and it came right out of Adorno and transformational Marxism. The art bohemian movement, which had roots back in the 19th century, in surrealism of the early 20th century and in New York City abstract expressionism was also linked to the counterculture to some extent. It too opposed Christianity and the family.


The fact that the Baby Boomers were the first generation to come under
strong influence of the transformational Marxists does not mean that
the generations born before 1946 have not also been under some
influence from this form of Red Horse Marxism. Some people older than
the Baby Boomers have become stronger followers of transformational
Marxism and the dialectic than other people from the older
generations.


But the older generations can remember a time when two plus two was
always four. In George Orwell's novel 1984, O'Brien, the
"facilitator", is trying to indoctrinate Winston with the Party's
dialectic and is trying to shift Winston's reality, what he sees as
being true and moral. O'Brien said that two plus two is not always four, but can be some other number.

And so a politician like Ron Paul, who is not a Baby Boomer, would be
a threat to the powers that be. Many who are older than the Baby
Boomers can remember back before the early fifties when truth and
morality were more absolute and God's word was "it is written," and
the word brought spiritual life.


The dialectic as an attitude and belief change procedure depends upon
the individual being part of a group, with whom he or she has a
relationship. Someone in the role of the facilitator (as in encounter
groups, but the group does not have to be a face to face one)
interacts verbally with the target person and tries to move him or her
away from absolute truth and/or absolute morality. Group acceptance
of the target person is used as a reward for shifting positions, and
group rejection of "wrong" positions of the target person act as
punishment. Dean Gotcher talks about the neurotransmitter dopamine,
which is a reward system in the brain, as being involved in the
pleasure of a relationship. Any relationship that the target person is in
can be used by the facilitator to move the person away from absolutes.

The goal of a facilitator in some Christian settings would then be to
move the target person away from what that person perceives as truth
by placing his relationship with someone, a group or something, above
his relationship with the truth of the Bible. The target person's
relationship might be with the group as his church - and there can be
a conflict between what the person believes is truth and what his preacher or
church teaches as truth. If the person places his relationship with the
church above his relationship with the truth of scripture, then he may
change his doctrines to conform with those of the church in a
dialectic dialogue. Or, he may place more importance upon his
relationship with Christ and Christ's truth and leave the church and follow Revelation 18: 4 to "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues."

Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Simplification of New Testament On Israel - 11:29 AM, 1/7/2012


Simplification of the New Testament On Israel
Bernard Pyron

The Catholic church did not replace Israel. And the dispensationalist
church is not some kind of lesser body of Christ which exists as a
people of God alongside of Israel. The "church" in the New Testament,
the ekklesia, is not a body of Christ different from Israel; it is a
meeting or congregation of the body of Christ as Israel transformed.
The Tyndale English Bible of 1524-1526 was consistent in translating
ekklesia as congregation rather than as "church."

God divorced physical Israel and transformed it into that spiritual
house mentioned in I Peter 2:5. That part of physical Israel which was
transformed into a spiritual house was the Remnant that Paul talks
about in Romans 11: 5. People who were formerly Gentiles without God
were grafted into Israel reborn in Christ (Romans 11: 17), so that in
that spiritual house as Israel reborn there is now neither Jew nor
Gentile (Galatians 3: 28-29). The Jew who is only a Jew outwardly is
no longer a true Jew, but all who are Jews inwardly are true Jews
(Romans 2: 28-29) and they which are the children of the flesh
(physical descendants of Abraham) but not born again in Christ are not
the children of God (Romans 9: 8). "

Any one, Jew or otherwise, can still come into that spiritual house of
Israel transformed by beginning a relationship with Christ.
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

On The Great Evangelical Disaster (1984), By Francis Schaeffer - 11:27 AM, 1/7/2012


On The Great Evangelical Disaster (1984), By Francis Schaeffer
Bernard Pyron

When I first became a Christian I began to read the books of Francis
Schaeffer. I read almost all of them, and corresponded with him
briefly when he was still in Switzerland, before he died. Schaeffer
was Reformed, but I do not remember anything in his books about Five
Point Calvinism.


He was not a dispensationalist, but I don't remember him being
critical of dispensationalism. He is said to have been historical
premillennialist, but again, I don't remember him writing about that.
Schaeffer belonged to a small Reformed denomination, the Reformed
Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod which I think became the
Presbyterian Church in America. During his lifetime, the falling away
had not become as evident as it is now.


His last book was The Great Evangelical Disaster (1984). Schaeffer was
concerned that evangelicals were no longer standing up for the truth,
and that Christianity had lost much of its influence upon the world,
which says in the words of Daniel 12: 7 that the power of the holy
people had by 1984 been scattered. The spiritual power of Christians
had been reduced, and had Schaeffer been younger (he was born in
1912), he might by now understand that the great number of English
translations of the Bible, almost entirely based on the Alexandarian
or Egyptian Greek texts, meant to replace the Textus Receptus, has
been one cause of this, along with the almost complete takeover of the
Evangelical church by the dispensationalists.

Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

THE Anti-Christ - 2:23 PM, 12/30/2011


THE Anti-Christ  Bernard PyronTHE antichrist
By making John's revelations about antichrist in I John 2: 18-22, 4: 3 and 2John 7 into a one man powerful political leader who is only to appear during the tribulation period the dispensattionalists have focused attention on that comic book figure. And that takes attention away from what John actually says, especially in I John 2: 18, that even in his day there were many antichrist...s running around and in I John 4: 3 that there is a spirit of antichrist. Applying what John actually taught makes it possible to see many individual political, religious or other leaders, many nations and many groups having the spirit of antichrist.

The Islamics operate in the spirit of antichrist, because they reject the Gospel that Jesus Christ as fully God came in man's flesh to save the lost. The Jews who are under another religion also operate in the spirit of antichrist. The Pharisees were led by the spirit of antichrist. Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama II, Slick Willie Clinton, Daddy and "W" Bush were all led by the spirit of antichrist. The US government is also.
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

On "King James Only" Christians - 1:09 PM, 12/29/2011


On "King James Only" Christians
Bernard Pyron

 I posted this on a Christian forum::

 "Present Day Pharisees In Their Whited Sepulchres
The present day Pharisees in their whited sepulchres teach false doctrines, ridicule the "King James Only" Christians, are agents for the government of their IRS incorporated 501 c(3) churches, often teach that Christians should always obey the government, sometimes argue against that which is of faith, often make salvation appear to be an easy broad way one time event, and tend to be led by the Christian celebrities and themselves try to attain to good appearances or images as taught by the Christian Celebrity System - and in that conformity to worldliness of the Celebrity System are often deceptive.


A guy on this form then asks: Here are some questions we should all ask about our own
preferred translations....not just the KJV.

Q1: How long has the King James version been around and what did God
use for "his Word" before the KJV?
Q2: Does it use clear language to the present and younger generation?
Q3: Do all people speak "The 1600s King's English" or "English" in the
world? How many editions and re-writes since the 1611 version are
there? This should tell us all something. Would you preach KJV only to
the Chinese?
Q4: Is it possible that your church or upbringing has indoctrinated
you into thinking that the KJV is the only acceptable translation?
Q4: Is the KJV more accurate than the Hebrew and Greek scripture
manuscripts we translate from?
Q5: Have people been saved and blessed through other Bible translations?
Q6: Does God's Word even mention the KJV?
Q7: If you say "King James only" (or any version only), are you adding
a "new law" to God's word as the pharicees often added their own man
made laws?
Please do not put this yoke on your grandchildren.
Q8: Is it possible that you have made an idol of the KJV in your heart?


"Q1: How long has the King James version been around and what did God
use for "his Word" before the KJV? The issue is the English
translations of the Greek New Testament, not earlier Latin or other translations.

"Q3: Do all people speak "The 1600s King's English" or "English" in
the world? "

The English language after 1611 owes its development in part to the Authorized
Version. The King James Version was a model for the development of the
English language. Its elegant but simple style had an influence on
English-speaking writers" (World Book Encyclopedia). This partially
explains why the King James English is more alive and explicit while
most other literary-type texts from that
period are more difficult to read.

The English of the King James Version is not the English of the early
17th century. It is biblical English, which was not used on
ordinary occasions even by the translators who produced the King James
Version. As H. Wheeler Robinson (1940) pointed out, one need only
compare the preface written by the translators with the text of their
translation to feel the difference in style. The King James Version
owes its greatness not to 17th-century English - which was
very difficult - but to its faithful translation of the original. Its
style is that of the Hebrew and of the New Testament Greek. Even in
their use of thee and thou the translators were not following
17th-century English usage but biblical usage, for at the time these
translators were doing their work these singular forms had already
been replaced by the plural you in polite conversation (The King James
Version Defended, Des Moines: Christian Research Press, 1984, pp.
218). Ye is a more exact word, for example, that calling a bunch of
people you, because we use you to address a single individual.

The writing style in the Preface is more complex than that of the 1611 King
James Version Bible, whose wording is less complex and often more
exact. This is largely because of the translation method of the King
James, which
tended to be more word for word. That is, the verse wordings of the King James
Version derive more from the Greek wordings of the Textus Receptus than from
the writing style of Elizabethian English in 1611.

The more interesting and lively words of the King James Version come
from its word for word method of translation. The NIV, on the other
hand, tends to use what is called "dynamic equivalency" in translating
the Bible, which sometimes results more in an interpretation,
according to the translator's theology. In general, the NIV does not
follow word for word the Hebrew or Greek words as closely as does the
King James Version, and this is a very important difference for this
issue of which version is inspired by God and which is closer to the
very early copies of the New Testament.

"Q4: Is it possible that your church or upbringing has indoctrinated
you into thinking that the KJV is the only acceptable translation?"
Whether a "church" or denomination upholds the King James Version or
some more recent one is not necessarily relevant to the issue
of whether the King James is closer to the early Greek New Testament
copies than say the NIV.

"Q5: Have people been saved and blessed through other Bible
translations?" By "other Bible translations" you probably mean
the English translations since 1881 (Revised Version) or American
Standard Version of 1901. Yes, some people
have been saved through these recent English versions. But the
falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3 began at about that time, so
that how many were saved after the falling away got going is
uncertain. In addition, the leavening of the "church" began also at
this time. Luke 13: 21 says "It is like leaven, which a woman took
and hid in three measures till the whole was leavened." The word
"till" indicates the leavening occurs over a period of time, and
neither the leavening nor the falling away occur only during the
dispensationalist tribulation.

The Great American and English revivals, however, went on before the
falling away began at about the end of the 19th century - and in those
great revivals the King James Version was used. The gradual substitution of the new versions
and turning away from the King James were not the only causes of the
falling away and the leavening. Dispensationalism and several other less popular
false doctrines also began in the 19th century.

"Q6: Does God's Word even mention the KJV?" This is the most obvious
example of all of a question which tries to side step the issue of
whether the King James Version is inspired and is closer to the very
early New Testament Greek texts. Some of the other questions also
tend to side step that issue.

Obviously, the Bible does not mention any specific English or other
Bible translations.

An attempt to side step or come against a thesis from a flanking
movement is the dialectic argument, which is not that of "it is
written." Dean Gotcher calls the dialectic the Diaprax. The Diaprax
is a deceptive way or arguing against that which is of faith, or the
truth. A Bible translation is important for the creation of
faith.

I doubt if I can get away with putting a link here. But if anyone is
interested in the dialectic, or the Diaprax, type in "Dean Gotcher" on
Google. You will get: "The Institution for Authority Research
DIAPRAX EXPOSED
This website is not for those who are content in the way things are,
it is for those who have already been abused by the dialectical
process and want to know what happened and how to respond. Learn what
Diaprax is (the dialectic process--of Hegel and Marx 'fame'--put into
social practice-- praxis) and how it is affecting you and the world
around you.
About the Institution for Authority Research
Articles on Diaprax Check out the introduction to the articles, says
it all...Radio programs
Why I continue to use the KJV of the Bible (the Textus Receptus)."
Dean Gotcher is one leader of what some call the Remnant.

The dialectic or Diaprax is a method of attitude or belief change
which tries to make every truth or moral into an opinion.

"Q7: If you say "King James only" (or any version only), are you
adding a "new law" to God's word as the pharicees often added their
own man made laws?
Please do not put this yoke on your grandchildren."

This question seems to assume that there is one Greek New Testament
text, and the many English versions since 1881-1901 have somewhat different verse
wordings, using that one Greek text.

Therefore, you can pick and choose any Bible version you want, and put
different verses from different versions together to create you own
man-made doctrine. Beware of this, because this is what Satan wants
you to do. It creates confusion about what is the authentic word of
God.

To do justice to the issues of which version is God-inspired and which is closer to the early New Testament copies, you need to learn which English New Testament versions are from the Textus Receptus and which are from the Alexandarian Wescott-Hort Greek texts. You also should learn the characteristics of the Textus Receptus as opposed to the Westcott-Hort.

Two New Testament texts do deal with the issue of what is the word of
God and its inspired nature:

II Timothy 3: 16: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and
is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness."

II Peter 1: 21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of
man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

The issue is whether the Textus Receptus, from which the King James
was translated word for word, or the NIV and other recent versions,
from the Westcott-Hort Greek text are inspired, and the extent to
which he KJV or the others are faithful to the wordings and doctrines
of the early New Testament Greek text copies.

These questions need both the Holy Spirit and honest scholarship to
deal with. As far as honest scholarship is concerned, these issues
can't be dealt with by Byte-Speak, the use of a few sentences.

Westcott and Hort argued that since the Alexandarian Greek texts from
the fourth century were earlier than the existing Byzantine Greek
texts, therefore the Alxandarian texts were closer to the originals
and more authentic.

But many Papyri fragments of the New Testament contain Byzantine readings,
that is, the verse wordings are more similar to the Byzantine Greek
text than to the Alexandarian text, used by Westcott and Hort for
their 1881 Greek text, and from which almost all recent New testrament
versions were translated.

"Harry Sturz discusses these "distinctively Byzantine" readings in his
book, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament Textual Criticism."

"The most important of these discoveries was several Egyptian papyri.
Sturz lists "150 distinctively Byzantine readings" found in these
papyri. Included in his list are papyri numbers 13, 45, 46, 47, 49,
59, 66, 72, 74, and 75 (pp.61, 145-159)."

"Sturz brings up another very important point about these papyri,
"They attest the early existence of readings in the Eastern part of
the Roman empire in which the Byzantine and the properly (i.e.
geographically) Western witnesses agree and at the same time are
opposed by the Alexandrian" (p.70). "

What Sturz is saying is that many early Papyri Greek texts agree with
the verse wordings of the Byzantine or Textus Receptus type Greek text
more than with the Alexandrian or Westcott-Hort type Greek text.

"Sturz concludes, "In view of the above, it is concluded that the
papyri supply valid evidence that distinctively Byzantine readings
were not created in the fourth century but were already in existence
before the end of the second century and that, because of this,
Byzantine readings merit serious consideration" (p.69)."

"Aland says all but one of the these early papyri, "... are from Egypt
where the hot, dry sands preserved the papyri through the centuries."
Meanwhile, in Asia Minor and Greece (eastern areas), "... the climate
in these regions has been unfavorable to the preservation of any
papyri from the early period" (pp.59,67)."

The writer of this site then says "So it is not surprising many early
papyri have been found which reflect the Alexandrian text since this
text existed in Egypt. But even some of these Egyptian papyri, as
mentioned above, contain Byzantine and even Western readings."

The papyri from as early as the late second century, some of which
contain Byzantine or Textus Receptus-King James type verse wordings
and some have Alexandarian or Westcott-Hort-recent versions wordings,
were found mostly in the dry climate of Egypt since 1881 when the
Westcott-Hort Greek text was published. So, the argument of Westcott
and Hort that the Alexandarian Greek texts are more authentic because
they are older than the Byzantine has not been supported.

The Byzantine or Textus Receptus Greek texts have longer and more
elaborated verse wordings, though not always. The Alexandarian texts
tend to have more abbreviated verse wordings. The extreme example is
I John 5: 7-8, where, for the Westcott-Hort and its numerous English
versions, as compared to the Textus Receptus and the King James, the
text is so short and abbreviated that it does not clearly explain the
doctrine of the trinity.

ELABORATION IN THE KING JAMES

If you compare verses from the King James to those of the modern
translations, you will find that many verses in the NIV and other
modern versions are shorter, more abbreviated and not amplified or
elaborated as much.

The reason why the verses in the new versions are shorter, though not
always, is because the Greek text behind the new versions generally
has shorter wordings. I will show this later with such texts as I
John 5: 7-8 as examples. Westcott and Hort set up their critical
rules so that the shorter wording of verses in the Vaticanus and
Sinaiticus would be used rather than the longer and more amplified or
elaborated wordings of the Textus Receptus.

In the Bible, God often amplifies a thought as he chooses words to
connect to the mind, and to communicate the holiness and the
inspiration linked with holiness. The human mind can more easily learn
and remember a thought that is amplified and elaborated than a thought
that is presented only in a very brief way. I know that sometimes we can
communicate more clearly with statements that are brief, but if we
know our subject matter and can use words well, we can be more clear
by expanding on that thought and associating it with different other
ideas.

A person who at first knows little of New Testament doctrines should
be better able to learn and remember those doctrines from reading them
in the King James than from the NIV or other modern versions. In part,
this is because of the greater elaboration of the thoughts in the King
James.

So, after becoming more familiar with the 17th century English of the
King James, a person wanting to learn New Testament teachings can
learn them more fully from the longer and more elaborated verses in
the KJV than from the shorter verses of the new versions.

The King James reader may also be better able to remember the gist
meanings of those doctrines than the reader of the NIV. This is
really an empirical question, and could be tested in experiments.
Now, a person who has not read the Bible over and over for a time will
have some difficulty in remembering exactly what verses say and
exactly how a New Testament doctrine is stated. Here again, the
longer, more elaborated verses of the King James should help that
person re-learn the verses and the doctrines, while reading them in
the NIV should be of somewhat less help in the re-learning process.
Remember that the new versions play down, dilute, abbreviate and
weaken some New Testament doctrines.

The teaching that Christ who is
fully God and is always omnipresent but took on the flesh of man in
the material world to save us from our sin is one of these doctrines
that is played down and weakened in the new translations. This is
because it is weakened in the Westcott-Hort Greek text.

The longer wording of some verses in the King James, its greater
amplification and elaboration of meanings is one quality. The actual
individual words used is another issue dividing the King James Version
from the modern versions.

THE SPIRITUALLY POWERFUL WORDS OF THE KING JAMES

Isaiah 66: 5 "Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word:
your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake,
said Let the Lord be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and
they shall be ashamed."

The English words that the King James translators chose to use in
translating Hebrew and Greek words describe the nature of God and the
doctrines God wants us to follow. The words the translators chose
work well upon the human mind, on our intellect as well as on our
emotions. The words of the King James are effective and powerful in
arousing awe for the Lord and in creating faith, at least in those who
fully believe in that word of God.

The King James English words can put believers into a closer relation
to God, to his greatness and can lead us to become more holy as God is
holy. The words can inspire us to separate from our own sins and from
sinners and those who hold false doctrines.

The KJV's words can help put us into a spiritual relation with
Jesus Christ, who is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from
sinners, and made higher..."

On the other hand, the words of the NIV tend to be more the uninspired
and secular words of modern people in the world of the universities,
the media, government and big business. Of course, the promoters of
the new Bible translations will say this is one of the reasons we
should use the NIV, since it uses the language of our time which we
understand and not the "archaic" language of the old King James.
Many of the words used in the NIV and in other new versions are shown
by Edinburgh University's Associative Thesaurus to be unholy, harmful,
defiled, and anything but separate from sinners. That is, the
associations these words evoke tend to be more unholy, harmful, and
defiled.
Share |

1 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

The Counterculture's Whole Earth Movement and the 20th Century Alternative Health Interest - 11:50 AM, 12/16/2011


Blake's Daughters At Council Circle
The Counterculture's Whole Earth Movement and the 20th Century Alternative Health Interest
Bernard Pyron


I have been aware that the 20th century alternative health movement
had one point of its origin in the
very late sixties and early seventies part of the counterculture which
we called the "Whole Earth Movement," After the Whole Earth Catalog of
that era.


I was in Madison, Wisconsin at that time and was familiar with the
counterculture at the University of Wisconsin.

There were several movements then associated with the core
counterculture, the hippies and the drug movement, such as the art
bohemians, self psychology, feminism and the New Left.


So there were many people I knew in Madison who were influenced by the
counterculture and its associated movements who were not hippies and
did not use drugs, including myself.


The hippies were into sex, drugs and an anti-Christian attitude. But
by 1970 there was that agrarian commune movement as part of the
counterculture, which had young people going into the country and
starting up communes. Of course, many of these people were not
university people, that is, not those who had been students at the
University of Wisconsin or Michigan. But some were university people
and I was part of one network that included a smaller group, I call
the Judy Anderson Group, who did live in a rural commune in northern
Idaho in the seventies. I was never there.


In the early seventies I wrote a book called Forest Culture: Essays
In Total Human Ecology, which was sold in several Madison places,
including in the Whole Earth Coop on East Johnson Street. For a while
I lived a couple of blocks away from the Whole Earth Coop. I lived on
Lake Mendota.


The counterculture's back to the earth movement then included an
emphasis on nutrition, on eating fresh vegetables and fruit, and on
whole grains. It also was into some forms of food supplements, those
available in health food stores back then. This is one of the few
positive things of the counterculture.

It was one origin of the present alternative health movement.


http://www.avclub.com/madison/articles/the-spirits-of-madison-activism-show-up-in-sign-fo,40427/


"Madison Calendar
Music/Film / Arts/City Life / Eat/Drink / Contests
Back to A.V. National
The spirits of Madison activism show up in sign form
Read it and weep, Madison.
by Mark Riechers


"Madison's status as a progressive bubble has long been tied to
cultural hotspots scattered throughout the city. But unfortunately,
many of these progressive institutions have completely vanished. So
the Madison Museum Of Contemporary Art is presenting Milwaukee artist
Nicolas Lampert's project, "Then And Again,” designed to memorialize
these spaces by placing signs at six sites (on display from April
24-Sept. 26) remembering Madison institutions lost. The A.V. Club
investigated a few of them to find out if the new tenants would please
the ghosts of Madison activism."


"Whole Earth Co-op (817 East Johnson St.)


Like the other co-ops that sprang up around Madison in the '70s, Whole
Earth emphasized local foods away from grocery store chains.
Specifically focusing on self-reliant baking, selling home-ground
flour, lentils, and oats, Whole Earth unfortunately closed in 1996
after volunteer support for the co-op dried up."


http://www.mmoca.org/aboutus/pressroom/NicolasLampertPR.php


"MADISON, WI"Drawing on the city's long tradition of politically
charged graphic design in public settings, the Madison Museum of
Contemporary Art presents Then and Again: A Public Project by Nicolas
Lampert. The exhibition, comprised of six signs created by Lampert,
will be on view in outdoor locations in Madison's downtown this spring
and summer."


"Lampert's signs commemorate important institutions in Madison's recent
history: Lysistrata Restaurant, Mifflin Street Co-op, Whole Earth
Co-op... Each of these organizations contributed to the city's
reputation for political and cultural activism. For example, the Whole
Earth Co-op was one of the first institutions in the country to foster
living in harmony with nature and the benefits of do-it-yourself
resourcefulness."


"Many of these institutions represent Madison's counterculture of the
1960s and 1970s, which contributed to the city's informal status as
the "Berkeley of the Midwest.” Then and Again reinvigorates interest
in our collective past for individuals who knew these institutions,
while also introducing them to a new generation.


Mifflin Street Co-op: 32 North Basset Street

Whole Earth Coop: 817 East Johnson Street."


My note: The Mifflin Street Co-op might have been an earlier model
for the Whole Earth Coop. Both stores were counterculture-oriented
and owned and run by counterculture people.


But the Mifflin Street Co-op was right in the heart of hippie-Madison
and sold canned goods as well as bulk food. The Whole Earth Coop was
almost on Lake Mendota, a little east of the Square and downtown
Madison. In was in a little more upscale or less "ghetto" part of the
city.


Paul Soglin famous former mayor of Madison wrote an intro to the
history of the Mifflin Street Co-op:


http://www.waxingamerica.com/2006/05/history_of_the_.html


"The media always played up the colorful aspects of those times of
turbulence and creative fertility: the drugs, the riots, the
threatening new leaders, the perceived sexual freedoms and social
nonchalance. But these images, while showing one side of what was
going on, yield a stereotyped analysis of the sixties in our minds, an
analysis that never attains much depth or profundity for those who
lived through it. Those who didn't experience that era, tend to see a
simplistic, over romanticized fairyland scenario that is either
naively embraced or seen as naive itself."


"The sixties were a time of affluence. Jobs weren't as scarce as they
are now. This made it easier for middle class students to dream, and
attempt to realize their dreams...."


"The Mifflin Street Community Co-op is one of those projects which has
an interesting history that reveals many sides of the sixties legacy:
its flamboyance as well as its skilled, practical grass roots
organizing, its visionary politics, vulnerable humanness, isolated
idealism and blatant hucksterism."


"The cast of characters includes martyrs, hustlers, ordinary folks,
drug addicts, police, students, rip-offs and businesspeople. Some had
definite ideas, some were mostly confused, and not all of them might
seem interesting. This series of articles on the co-op's history will
attempt to review the co-op's stormy life, with an eye toward
illuminating the strength and depth of the counterculture, as well as
gaining increased understanding of both the co-op as a business and
part of our community...."


In the seventies I used the Mifflin Steet Co-op every few days to buy
much of my food, though at one point in that decade I lived next door
to El Rancho supermarket on University Ave.

Share |



0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Daniel 12: 7: Scattering the Power of the Holy People - 4:52 PM, 12/3/2011


Daniel 12: 7: Scattering the Power of the Holy People
Bernard Pyron

In Daniel 10: 8-21 an angel sent from God comes to Daniel to give him a prophecy.

But when the angel finally comes to Daniel he says in Daniel 10: 12-14 "Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.
13. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. 14.Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days."

The prophecy the angel gave to him is in Daniel Chapter 11 - but there is no clear break
in the text between the end of Chapter 11 and the shorter Chapter 12. There are verses from Daniel 11: 33 to Daniel 11: 45, the end of the chapter, which seem to depart from the description of the actions of "he" who is the actor in these last verses of the chapter.

For example, Daniel 11: 33 says "And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days." This prophecy on those with understanding instructing many is continued in Daniel 12: 3, "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."

"They" who turn many to righteousness are the same "they" who understand and instruct many in Daniel 11: 33. But in Daniel 12: 3 the text adds the turning of those instructed to righteousness, and that they who are wise will shine as the brightness of the firmament and as the stars for ever and ever."

Righteousness is important in understanding who the holy people are in Daniel 12: 7.

Remember that the angel told Daniel that he came to make him understand "what shall befall thy people in the latter days." But in the churches the usual view is that Daniel 11 is only about a series of actions in the struggle between the King of the North and the King of the South. To most Christians now, the prophecy was exhausted at the end of the conflict between the Ptolemaic and the Seleucid empires, with the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes by disease in 164 BC, who was the King of the North, or of Syria as opposed to Egypt of the South.

There are, however, scenarios in Daniel 11 which can be seen to fit historical events in much later periods of history, even up to the early 21st century. And Why would an angel from God be sent to Daniel the prophet to tell him the forthcoming history of the battles between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires? This history does not reach the time when Christ was born during the Roman empire. There is more to Daniel 11 than the story of battles between the house of Ptolemy and the house of Seleucus before the birth of Christ. This "scripture of truth" (Daniel 10: 21) is not likely to be limited to political and military struggles between two ancient dynasties.
There is a statement in Daniel 12: 1 which sounds a lot like what Christ said in Matthew 24: 21, "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

Daniel 12: 1 says "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book."

Lets get to the very interesting part in Daniel 12: 5-10. "Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river. 6. And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders? 7. And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. 8. And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9. And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."

This starts with an image of two men standing on either side of a river, with a man not in the river but "upon the waters of the river." This has to be Jesus Christ, who walked on the water in Matthew 14: 25-29. The two men on either side of the river could represent those in the valley of decision in Joel 3: 14, or the two parts cut off in Zechariah 13: 8-9, or perhaps two groups of people who claim to be of God, physical Israel and the "church."

The important part is in verse 7, "...when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished."

The end will come at the time when the holy people are scattered.
But look at that the New International Version has for this part of verse 7. The NIV for some reason leaves out "he" and says "When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things shall be completed."

This is interesting. Broken is different from scattered. And what does breaking or scattering the power of the holy people mean? On a fleshly or political level, breaking the power of the holy people could mean that Christians in America toward the end will not be as important a group in determining elections of presidents, etc as they were just a few years ago. But breaking or scattering the power of the holy people has a more significant spiritual meaning.
Who are the holy people? Strict classical dispensationalism postulates clearly that God now has two people, the physical Israelites and the "church." And in its insistence on interpreting scripture in a consistent literal way, Israel is always physical Israel, and never can be Israel reborn in Jesus Christ. And dispensationalism does not accept Paul's division of Israel into two groups in Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8 and Galatians 4: 25-26. Therefore, for many or most, in the "church" the holy people in Daniel 12: 7 has to be physical Israel, the Israelites, the chosen people of God prior to God's transformation of physical Israel to Israel reborn in Christ.

But the problem is that to be holy a people must be in Christ and have his righteousness. Man has no righteousness of his own, but only takes on the righteousness of Jesus Christ. There was a small remnant of physical Israel who accepted Christ as Paul shows in Romans 11 and elsewhere in the New Testament it is clear some Israelites became fully born again.

The holy people in Daniel's prophecy of Daniel 12 have to be Christians, and those that understand among the people and instruct many are Christians, though this can apply also to the apostles in the First Century. Those in Daniel 12: 3 who turn many to righteousness, the righteousness Christ gives them, and who shine forever, are Christians.

The holy people of Daniel 12: 7 are Christians, completely born again in Christ, for otherwise they could not be holy.

The NIV says the power of the holy people is to be broken, with the implication that their power - political and/or spiritual - is destroyed, or almost completely destroyed.

The New American Standard Bible says "a time; and as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed."

The New Revised Standard Version says "...two times, and half a time, and that when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end, all these things would be accomplished."

Then the American Standard Version has "...and a half; and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished."

And the Catholic Douay-Rheims says "And when the scattering of the band of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be finished. "

So, the English Catholic Bible agrees pretty much with the King James Version.

What does the key Hebrew word translated as scattered, broken, and shattered mean?

The Hebrew word, in Daniel 12: 7, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Number 5310, naphates, is said to mean "to dash to pieces, break in pieces, dispersed, scatter." It could mean break in pieces or to scatter the holy people.

If we follow the older Protestant method of interpreting scripture by scripture, then what texts are most relevant to Daniel 12: 7?
II Thessalonians 2: 3-4, plus Matthew 24: 11,
I Timothy 4: 1, II Timothy 3: 13, and II Peter 2: 1 about the falling away and many false prophets deceiving Christians are relevant to the weakening of the spiritual power of Christians in the end times. So is Luke 13: 21 on the leavening of Chirstians.

The majority of Christians can be seen to go into apostasy in the end times and in that way lose their spiritual - and political - power. But there are verses which say that God will preserve a Remnant who do not lose their spiritual power, though they may be so small in number and not organized that they have little political power.
Isaiah 10: 22-23, Zephaniah 3: 12-13 and Romans 9: 27 all talk about the Remnant. A Remnant existed when physical Israel fell away and will and does exist when the "church" has fallen away.

In Revelation 12: 5-6 and Revelation 12: 14, 17 a "woman" goes to the wilderness where she gives birth to a "man child" and her "remnant," in verse 17. The wilderness is metaphoric for being outside of any organized group.     The people of God got out of Egypt by going into the literal wilderness.   Getting out of "Egypt" could be a metaphor for leaving the apostate churches. So the end time Christian Remnant is not organized and not together in a physical place, though they are in substantial unity in Christ.


The Remnant is scattered over the world. The scattered remnant agrees with the King James and Douay-Rheims scattering of the holy people. The Christian Remnant is the holy people of the very last days. 
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Memories of A 20th Century South Texas Brush Country Family - 10:58 AM, 11/21/2011


Memories of a 20th Century South Texas Brush Country Family
Bernard Pyron


The story of the Blake Pyron family in the 20th century is one of cattle,
oil, grocery stores, rattle snakes,  running hounds after coyotes, and  grandfather
A.M. Pyron, who had been in the Confederate army, and when a young man had lived
among Texas trail drivers in the Mustang Creek and Sweet Home area of Lavaca county, Texas. Grandfather died at 86 when I was only one.


My older sister, Mary, in this essay on her memories of our family, provides information which I never knew because I was the youngest of four children. For example, I only remember Doctor Ware’s name as T.P. Ware. Mary says it was Preston Ware, and I now have a vague memory that was
his first name. He helped in the delivery of me, and perhaps also of Louise
and Mary. I am not sure where George was born, but I am sure he was
born at home, like the rest of us. Rural and village people in that
period did not go to hospitals to have babies, something which may
seem strange now that everyone is born in a hospital.


I have a memory of people coming into Somerset on Somerset Road, which
ran just to the West of the Pyron lands (330 acres in the thirties and
forties) in wagons pulled by two horses. And I can remember the
cowboys in town, especially on Saturdays, and the jungle of their
spurs. I remember a time when Uncle Casey came and got a cow which
was killed or severely injured on Somerset Road. It was on our place
along the road. He came with a kind of sled pulled by horses and put
the cow on it and pulled it to his place, apparently to butcher it.

I remember in the thirties that the oldest grandchild, who we called
Billy, or William Pyron Kenny, sometimes
worked cattle on our place, that is, on the four and a half acres we
had of the 15 or so acres
of the A.M.Pyron homestead tract. Billy was often dressed in chaps, with
cowboy boots and
a huge hat " no six shooter though. I do remember sitting in our Model
A along the sidewalk
of the Kenny store in Somerset watching Daddy talk to Jesse James, who
did have a six
shooter in a holster on his belt. This is the Somerset Jesse James,
who was a student of Mother’s back in 1915. Once Mother had her students write an essay on what they wanted to be when they grew up.  Jessie James wrote that he wanted to become  a  “notorious desperado.”   Jessie had an older brother named, guess what? Yes. Frank James.  The third  James brother was Luther James, who ran coyote hounds and sometimes hunted with my Father and older brother, George.  Jesse James was killed in the Somerset coal mine by George Leonard during World War
II. He was an uncle of the High School Superintendent when I was in
High School, Bill James.


I clearly remember the sound of Uncle Casey’s pumping engine, about
three quarters of a mile to the east. The engine was loud and fired
in a regular slow beat. His engines pulled cables that ran along the
ground, some into Daddy’s 63 acres bordering the pump station to
the west. I remember the rods along the ground that moved back and
forth to pump the oil
wells on our land. Our land was across the road from the land of Gus
Kurz, father of Billie Kurz, high school classmate and one time girl
friend. The father of Gus Kurz, Carl Kurz, discovered oil on his land,
which bordered grandfather’s 640 acres.


Mary is accurate on the Pyron history, as far as I can tell.


I remember they had lived
in Robestown, way down in the Brush County for a while, apparently
sometime in the
twenties before I was born. The lived in Lytle once too, and I
remember a story of Daddy with George as a small boy walking from
Lytle to Somerset when the moved back to Somerset " and Daddy put
George up on the milk cow he was pulling, all the way for 8 miles to
Somerset. I think he had a Model T then but he had to move the milk
cow to Somerset and just pulled her all the way on foot. On a photo of
George with me as a baby maybe six months old the family Model T sits
in the background. a reminder of what era this was.


MARY PYRON BUSH’S  PYRON STORIES


“One morning I awoke early with the feeling I needed to go back over
the old picture of Grandpa Pyron, the dog-eared one taken about 1920
showing him with a mustache. Suddenly, a picture formed in my mind of
a gray mustache,stained by tobacco. I had been unable heretofore to
find an image of Grandpa Pyron prior to his stroke in my memory,but
then I recognized the mustache. I remembered the smell of the chewing
tobacco, I remembered the smelly spittoons and I remembered the
cutting machine that resembled a miniature paper cutter. At the
store, chewing tobacco came in a rectangular bar. The proper way to
chew tobacco was to first cut bite sized chunks of tobacco from the
plug. Grandpa was a proper man; so he cut his tobacco in a proper
manner. Of course, an individual could cut off a chew from his plug
with his pocket knife. That was acceptable. What was not acceptable
was to take the whole bar to your mouth and try to bite off a piece
with your teeth.


Whether grandpa smoked cigarettes or cigars, I can’t remember. Daddy
smoked cigarettes when we were small children but he quit and never
attempted to smoke again. His younger brother, William Milton, known
always as Casey, smoked, at least until he had a heart attack sometime
possibly in his late fifties. Casey rolled his own cigarettes from a
Bull Durham sack of tobacco. As a child I was fascinated to watch his
skills. Casey was a master story teller. He remembered every deer
hunt, every wolf hunt he had ever been on and could make each hunt
interesting and lively. He would take out his sack of tobacco,
retrieve a cigarette paper, then place it in the exact curl he wanted
in his left hand, pour in the tobacco, wrap up the cigarette while
still relating his exciting story, with only a telling pause to lick
the paper, bend the end of the completed cigarette, find a match and
light the thing"all a total and complete execution of intense drama.

It is possible Aunt Delia, his wife, did not enjoy tobacco smoke.
Neither Casey’s house nor ours when we were children had indoor
plumbing. I remember the floor in Casey’s privy was littered with
cigarette butts. He smoked in his yard, in the covered back porch
where he slept for years and in our back yard on the open porch where
we all gathered in the evenings to hear the grown ups recount the
events of the day and retell their stories.


Casey worked for an oil company, he was a “pumper.” He was assigned to
operate several pump houses in the area, to see that the oil tanks at
the wells were filled so that the oil could be picked up periodically
by a tank truck where the oil was then delivered to the refinery. It
was his job each day to start the big booming pump, to check the pump
rods that carried the energy from the large pump to the jack at the
well which then produced the strokes that brought the oil from the
ground to the surface. He worked outdoors every day and his
complexion was dark, a reddish brown color which matched the color of
some of the Plains Indians. He had brown eyes, dark hair with bushy,
dark eyebrows. His nose was prominent,with a high bridge similar to
the proverbial Roman nose.


When we walked in the pasture we were always conscious of the sound of
the pump engines, we could hear the swish of the long rods as they
moved backward and forward at the stroke of the engine beat. We
quickly learned the power of the beat of the pump because it didn’t
take long to know you couldn’t walk on the moving rods.

Even after the well had been drilled and had the pipes and jack in
place, the derrick was left at the well because it was necessary from
time to time to “pull” the well"put in different pipes, relocate some,
plus other such work. Work on the rigs was dangerous. Daddy’s sister
Ida, had married an oil field worker who fell to his death from a
derrick not too far from town. I don’t remember how the work load
designations were made"I just remember the “pumper” and the
“roustabout.”


Grandpa Pyron, after he discovered oil and had retired, still ran
cattle on his property. He allowed daddy and Casey each to develop
their own small herds. Grandpa loved the land and often walked from
his house to his pastures, always carrying a worn down garden hoe
which he had bent straight with the handle to form a cutting tool as
well as a walking stick. Mostly, he used the hoe for protection
against rattlesnakes. For some reason the brushy area near our house
was infested with rattlesnakes. Daddy did not keep all the rattles
from the snakes he killed in and around our yard, but I remember a
box, cmbe.Z shaped, which was full of rattles. (My note: This garbled
word to the left, is an indication I used optical character recognition
software on this and did not type it all out myself).

Not far from our house some land had been cleared for a field. I
remember once when I was young, probably about 4 years old, I was
running up and down in a hole left after a very large tree had been
removed. At the bottom was an attractive item which appeared to a
child to be a man’s necktie. I moved to pick up the thing, when
suddenly it moved, swirled into a curled position and began rattling
loudly. I don’t know what saved me, possibly George was nearby and
recognized the snake and called for help. Mother periodically had
frightening nightmares"we could hear her tremulous calls, not unlike
the call of a screech owl in the night. Always a snake was after her
or one of her children in her dream.


Once we heard the rattle of a snake under our house. The floor was
about 18 to 24 inches off the ground with siding covering all the way
down to the ground. There was one small trap door for an entrance
under the house. Daddy took a flashlight and a shotgun with him and
crawled into the dark reaches of this precarious space. He promised
us that the snake would rattle when he got near and he would be able
to locate it in the dark. After a virtual eternity with mother beside
herself with anxiety we heard the blast of the gun. Daddy didn’t
yell, “I got it”, there was just silence. We had to think perhaps the
gun had accidentally discharged and daddy was hurt. Then daddy
appeared at the trap door, laid the gun on the ground and said he had
killed the snake. We had a hoe nearby; so he reached under the house
and pulled out a huge rattlesnake. Something that always interested me
was the reflex action of the snake after it had been killed, even when
its head had been cut off. It moved, in and out, attempting to coil,
and this went on for a long time. We were told the snake would
continue to move until the sun went down.


Today we have easy access to bird books so we can identify birds, we
have books on trees, flower books to help us learn the names of the
plants. Daddy had an uncanny knowledge of nature’s critters and the
names of plants. He understood and observed nature. He could tell
the time in the night by the movement of the stars. After he retired,
he spent a lot of time carrying cracked corn to the fence row near the
house where he fed a nice covey of bob-white. A roadrunner had made a
nest year after year in a small tree at the front of the house.
Regularly, the birds made their trips to the back of the house into
the pasture. They passed daddy each time while he sat outside in the
yard. It gave daddy great pleasure to anticipate the roadrunners’
movements. He called the bird, Paisano"in Spanish, fellow countryman.


Perhaps it was a difficult adjustment for people who had farmed and
tended cattle to become merchants. Grandpa built the store and the
Pyron Brothers were in business. Casey and daddy. Aunt Mary, our
family spinster, tended the books, an important job since most of the
business was credit. I remember the store wall, where things were
located. Most of the groceries were on shelves behind the counter.
The customer would ask for an item or items which were brought forward
to the counter until the order was filled. Mostly, I remember where
the candy counter was located. More than anything I enjoyed watching
the candy salesman, probably from the Jenner’s Candy Company in San
Antonio, open his leather cases and show the various items that could
be ordered. One special selection I recall was a miniature ice cream
cone that was stuffed with a colorful marshmallow filling. Of course
there were Hershey kisses, jelly beans, suckers and candy coated nuts.
One of the popular, but dangerous items, was a special candy that was
filled with surprises. Sometimes you would bite into the candy to
find a ring, or a jack from a set of jacks, but mostly, we found
marbles, some colorful glass ones, but more than often the surprise
was a tan colored marble made from clay which were placed inside the
semi-circle we drew on the ground. The object was to shoot out these
marbles. Ralph Nader would have had a field day with that candy!


Pyron Brothers Store In Somerset, Mid Twenties


Delivery service was expected by many customers. They phoned in the
order, then someone had to leave the store to deliver the groceries.
Also, much of the merchandise had to be picked up from the wholesale
houses in San Antonio. Daddy had to trade in his Model T sedan for a
small Ford truck. Aunt Delia’s mother had sick spells often and Delia
had to drive out a distance to care for her; so it was decided daddy
should be the one to get the truck. I didn’t mind riding in the back
of the truck when we drove to the Blackjacks, but I felt uncomfortable
in town when we drove past a schoolmate. Susanne, I could always
understand how you felt about “Old Blue.” Regardless, that situation
for me didn’t last too long because after my second year in school we
moved to Robstown because the business was bankrupt, not like our
bankruptcy situations today.


In the winter when the pastures were bare and the cattle had little to
eat, daddy suffered for the cows. He could never bear the thought
that man or beast should go hungry. He had a noisy kerosine burning
“pear burner”, as we called it. At the top was a fuel tank with a pump
attached to add pressure to the fuel. A long metal pipe carried the
kerosine down to a burner which could be ignited. By pumping more air
into the fuel a better flame was available. The burning process was
very noisy. Cattle in the pasture could hear the pear burner and
associated the sound with food. By moving the flame over prickly pear
the thorns were burned away, thereby providing sustenance for hungry
cows. Sometimes the cows were so hungry they ate the cactus when it
was still hot. Although the operation was dangerous, daddy was
cautious. It was easy to ignite nearby grass and start a bad fire.
Another problem cattlemen faced in those days was losses through screw
worm infections. Sometimes blow flies attacked the tender skin of
baby calves after the umbilical cord was detached, but mostly, the
problems developed after castration. Blow fly larvae are horrible
wiggle worms which had to be treated immediately.


Screw worm medicine, colored red and distributed in a long neck glass bottle was
the best treatment available at the time. After an application, the
larvae, or screw worms could be dug out of the affected area with a
stick or a blunt instrument. Casey raised hogs for several years.
The same conditions applied to hogs as well as cattle. Casey would
come by periodically and ask me to help him. He called me, “Libbus.”
He would hold the hog on the ground while I dug out the worms. I
didn’t like the job but there was satisfaction in knowing I was
helpful. Through work of U. S. scientist in the Agriculture
Department the screw worm is under control.


During the hard times of the early 1930s, we witnessed a sad situation
which to me has never seemed right. The bottom had dropped out of the
cattle market. In order to possibly improve prices, the government
stipulated that cattlemen should round up their cattle, shoot a
certain percentage so there would be less cattle on the market,
thereby driving up the price. President Roosevelt had asked for and
been granted unlimited executive powers. Congress did not have to act
on such measures. I can’t remember the details (if I am judged on my
work here, call me lazy. Research would be tedious, but I could be
more exact.), but I believe a government agent came and checked the
cattle that were designated for the kill. This eliminated the
possibility the cattlemen would include culls and sick cows. I don1t
recall who shot the animals, but their bodies were burned. How much
the government paid for each animal I can’t recall. Anyway, the
reason the episode remains in my memory is because Grandma Pyron was
so upset about the whole situation. She kept repeating, “It’s wrong,
it’s wrong.” We believed that basically Roosevelt was our savior, but
there were some actions taken that were drastic.


Two operating oil refineries in Somerset provided work for a number of
people. However, gasoline prices were so low, finally one of the
refineries closed. Not too far from our school were at least three,
possibly four huge, huge storage tanks filled with oil or gasoline, I
can’t remember which. One night one of the tanks blew up. There was
speculation lightening had caused the explosion because there had been
a storm that night. The windows at the school on the side near the
fire had been blown out. Of course, there was no school the next day.
The smoke rose high in the air, leaving a smoke trail that extended
for miles and miles, reported by the news as nearly a hundred miles.
The oil company had experts on the scene to try to protect the
remaining storage tanks. One fire fighter said there would be a
second explosion.


The experience remains vivid in my memory. Louise and I were outside
playing with our neighbor cousins, Casey1s daughters, when suddenly we
saw a huge wall of fire shoot high into the air. We ran because to us
it seemed the fire would consume us. Those spectators who had
gathered at the sight had moved in as close as the intense heat would
allow, they also had to run to save their lives. Several cars that
had been parked too close were enveloped in flames when the fire wall
came down. Our doctor, Preston Ware, lost his car in the fire.

There are such varied and interesting activities for children growing
up today I wonder whether it seems as long each year until Christmas
for them as it did for us? Dolls were not on my want list. Louise
loved them and loved to play house. Making mud pies and sipping
imaginary tea from a tiny tin cup didn’t appeal to me. Poor Egie had
to make mud pies by herself. I did enjoy paper dolls. We couldn’t
wait for the new Sears and Roebuck catalogue each year because we
could cut out the people in the old catalogue and make them our play
like families. We created interesting families; we could take the lid
of a shoe box and imagine we were taking our families on a bus trip.
Our families were all pretty with handsome men.


George had a little metal truck that was exciting. He was tall enough
to push it on the two by four that formed the top of our yard fence.
It was a long way around on this grand highway. One truck wasn’t
enough for the three of us; so Louise and I used bottles for our cars.
We could always go down to the dumping place in a ravine near the
house and find a bottle that looked just like a car. The regular 8
ounce medicine bottle had a flat bottom while the ton was a nice oval
shape like a snazzy 4 door sedan. The bottle neck was the
radiator-George had grand schemes for the town lay out. He built
roads with a garden hoe. We brought in scrap blocks and made
interesting houses. One Spring George built a dam so we could have a
lake near our town. Following the first rain, mother had trouble
holding us back until the storm was over and we could check on the
dam. Sure enough, there was some water there, for a while, at least.

There were three families in our Pyron compound that used the dump. We
liked the blue bottles Milk of Magnesia came in. It didn’t have a flat
side, but it was pretty. There were lots of bottles fiat on both
sides: vanilla bottles, liniment bottles, etc. These could either be
used as trucks with no tops or they were touring cars with the canvas
top folded back. Remember, the early cars had detachable canvas curtains that could be
hooked on the sides where glass side windows are now used. Although
visibility was limited with just a small peep hole, the rain and the
cold was kept out.


Grandpa Pyron had built a large 2 car garage not
too far from his house. During this particular period in our
childhood I remember a huge black touring car in the garage. Johnny
Hilton, Aunt Ida’s son, who lived with his mother at grandpa’s house
following the death of his father, Dr. Hilton, drove the family around
town or where-ever they needed to go. Then Johnny became a grown man
and left on his own , leaving the car to deteriorate in the garage. I
wont say what make it was because I don’t know. The back leather seat
was huge, it would hold at least 6 kids. We loved to play in it when
Aunt Mary wasn’t around. The radiator cap was fascinating: it was
large, round with a thermometer to gage the heat. We had to be
careful when we entered the car, the top had disintegrated long
before, because we might sit on an egg. Grandma had setting hens,
black and white Dominiquer chickens and the garage was one of their
favorite places to lay their eggs. Aunt Mary was sure their breed of
chickens out performed mother’s Rhode Island Reds.

From time to time, a traveling show would stop in town for a week or
so. Inside a large tent portable bleachers were set up and actual
talking movies were shown. Usually Aunt Delia took us, probably
because she was the only grown-up who could sit through the western
movies of that period. Aunt Delia was addicted to the Romance novels
of that period. Sometimes when I ran out of books to read I would
borrow one of hers. Always the cover had been removed from the book.
I asked Ruth, her daughter, why the covers had been removed and she
said Aunt Delia did that so that Casey would not notice when she had
bought a new book.


It wasn’t too long before George realized that he was too grown up to
play with his little sisters; so we had to find other games to play.
Louise and I plus Casey’s daughters, Ruth and Virginia, played out the
movies we had seen. Ruth chose to be Tom Mix; Louise was Hoot Gibson
and I chose to be a character I had liked in one of the movies" his
name I have forgotten because he never made it in big-time westerns.
It wasn’t too difficult to find toy six-shooters, and at times we had
make-do guns. I managed to nail leather reins on our stick horses.

We had toys. When daddy worked for Mr. Morrison, one of the bottling
companies, Coca Cola, I believe, gave toys as bonus incentives to
merchants. We had nice red wagons and there were several scooters. I
haven’t seen a scooter in a toy store for a long time. We enjoyed
playing on them. A toy children of today wouldn’t understand was the
metal hoop that was guided by a bent metal strip, used inside the
hoop. The hoops probably came off old wagon wheels, they were smooth
inside-Once the hoop had been set in motion, you could keep it rolling
and control it by using the bent strap.


For part of Bernard’s childhood he had hound dogs galore to play
with. Daddy would never have expended the time nor the expense
required to maintain a good pack of wolf hounds for his own pleasure.
Mother once told me that daddy was concerned about George gowning up
in a small town where it was easy for a young boy to become influenced
by a gang of boys who were not bad, but who participated in activities
daddy and mother could not condone. So, he brought in good dogs that
could do well on hunts. Apparently, George was pleased because he
entered the game with determination to learn all he could about hound
dogs. He subscribed to the magazine, “Hunters Horn” and read each
copy religiously. He knew the genealogy of every dog they had. I can
remember the sheets of paper he used to copy the blood lines. There
was a picture of a dog he had drawn on the cover of each of his school
books.


On Saturday nights when the weather was right a hunt was planned.
George had everything ready, the dogs loaded in the trailer, the chuck
box filled when daddy got off from work. Often other hunters in the
area would agree to meet at a certain place and the hunt was on. There
was a certain competitive feeling among the hunters concerning
their  dogs. A good hunter could recognize the bark of his dog
when it was on a trail. If the hunters were together enough they all
soon learned the bark of a particular dog, especially if it were a dog
that was aggressive and found the scent of a wolf quickly and stayed
on the hunt. Young dogs sometimes were a problem. They were excited
about the hunt and if turned loose too soon, they more than likely
would find the scent of a rabbit and would chase it, much to the
chagrin of the owner. To train the young dog, the owner would wait
until the older dogs had picked up the scent of game and were on a hot
trail, then they would release the young dogs.


Sometimes the dogs followed a trail that led far away from the camp.
There was nothing to do but wait. It was then the chuck box became
important. Coffee was brewed, hot and strong. Daddy always had good
thick slices of bacon which were cooked over the fire, then placed in
slices of bread to be eaten. If he had time during the day he would
make fresh bacon, take fresh pork, cut off the rind or thick skin,
slice it and season the meat. The chuck box and its contents became an
attraction for townspeople who weren’t hunters but who enjoyed being
outdoors with the lure of a camp fire.


There were few wolves in the area and more often than not the only
chase the hounds could find was a coyote, or perhaps a fox. The
hunters could recognize the prey’s pattern and knew what the dogs were
chasing. More and more as time went on the hunters had to drive a
distance to find good hunting grounds. A wolf could lead a pack of
dogs for miles and miles. The trained dogs stayed on the trail. When
the camp was broken and the dogs had not returned, that meant a
search the next day, Sunday, for the missing dogs. After a number of
years trailing dogs and caring for them, George found a new
interest"Ruby Nell Kurtz. Daddy was older, mother wasn’t well; so the
hunts ended. Bernard ended up with just one dog. Jack, a lovable water
spaniel.



Above: Father Blake B. Pyron On His Brush Country Pony, about 1915


Above: Grandfather A.M. Pyron after he got out of the Confederate army, but before he went to Texas in 1867.



Above:  Older brother George Pyron with me when I was a baby.  Notice the family car, a Model T, in the background, by the ‘four trees.”


pyron_coyote_hounds_late_thirties

Above: Pyron Coyote Hounds About 1938




 


Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Daniel 12: 7, and the Comic Book Version of the Anti-Christ and the Rebuilt Temple - 7:49 PM, 11/12/2011


Daniel 12: 7, and the Comic Book Version of the Anti-Christ and the Rebuilt Temple
Bernard Pyron

Daniel 12: 7 says ""...when he shall have accomplished
to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be
finished."

The end will come at the time when the holy people are scattered.

The key question is who are the holy people in Daniel 12: 7? Do you define them by man made theology or by scripture?

But Daniel 12: 7 does not fit the end time scenario of comic book prophecy, that the church will be raptured before the tribulation starts and then the Jews will be saved and there is to be a one man super world political dictator who is going to come and sit in a newly re-built temple in Jerusalem and defile it. This event is to mark the start of the dispensationalist seven year tribulation.

The quotes below are from an online version as a pdf file of:
Christian Zionism: Its History,
Theology and Politics, by Stephen Sizer
AAARGH Internet Editions
2005

http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livre...Rchriszion.pdf

Its from Stephen Sizer's chapter on Hal Lindsey

The Re-Built Temple In Jerusalem

Lindsey starts from Daniel 9: 24-27, and tells us that:
"This prophecy speaks of sacrifice and offerings which demand that the
Jews rebuild the
Temple for the third time upon its original site. At that point,
Judaism and Islam will be placed on an
inevitable course of war over the site, a war that will start
Armageddon. Many prophecies demand
rebuilding of the ancient Temple, indicating that the event is a
significant prophetic sign (see Matthew
24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:3,4). Therefore any move toward that
direction is a crucial clue to what
hour it is on God's prophetic timetable".160

"This prophecy" is Daniel 9: 24-27 The key verse is Daniel 9: 27.
"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to
cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it
desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be
poured upon the desolate."

"He" shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease." This is where the
dispensationalists derive their doctrine that a third temple will be
built in Jerusalem before their anti-Christ appears.

But who is "he" in Daniel 9: 27? "He" has to refer back to the
previous verse, which is verse 26, saying "And after threescore and
two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the
people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the
sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end
of the war desolations are determined."

"He" is the Messiah, Jesus Christ. The only other man mentioned in
verse 26 is the prince, who is Titus, the Roman General that led the
army in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

The footnote here, 160, is to 160 Lindsey, Israel., p. 23., Israel
and the Last Days 1983, Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House,

Sizer says "Lindsey points to the existence of two talmudic schools
training some 200 Levite priests and the
accumulation of vessels and clothing necessary to perform sacrifices,
as further proof of the imminent plans to rebuild the Temple."

Sizer quotes Lindsey as saying "So the rebuilding of the Temple is
significant not only because of the potential firestorm it will
create between Jews and Muslims in the Middle East. It is also a
critical development in the entire
prophetic scenario. The Bible makes it clear that in the last days the
Antichrist will establish his reign
in the Temple of Jerusalem. Therefore, the Temple must and will be
rebuilt."177 Lindsey, Final, p. 104.The Final Battle (Palos
Verdes, California, Western Front, 1995);

The Super One Man Political Anti-Christ

Sizer quotes Lindsey as saying "We believe that the dramatic
elements which are occurring in the world today are setting the
stage for this magnetic, diabolical Future Fuehrer to make his
entrance.301 301 Lindsey, Late., p. 113. The Late Great Planet Earth
(London, Lakeland, 1970);

"As I wrote 10 years ago in The Late Great Planet Earth, I believe this
man is alive today-alive
and waiting to come forth... I believe this leader is alive somewhere
in Europe; perhaps he is already a
member of the EEC parliament.302 302 Lindsey, 1980's., pp. 15, 106.The 1980's:
Countdown to Armageddon (New York, Bantam, 1981

He will immediately rise to prominence in the EEC and from that
post he will offer the world amazing solutions to all its complex and
terrifying problems. Because of his
superhuman powers and his solutions to the world's conflicts, the
anti-Christ will be chosen to lead the
EEC.303 303 Lindsey, 1980's., p. 109 The 1980's:
Countdown to Armageddon (New York, Bantam, 1981

Heading up what will evolve into a 10-nation confederacy will be a
man of such magnetism
and power that he will become the greatest dictator the world has ever
known... And he is alive today.
There is a potential dictator waiting in the wings somewhere in Europe
who will make Adolf Hitler and
Josef Stalin look like choir boys. Right now he is preparing to take
his throne, inflaming his soul with
visions of what he will be able to do for mankind with his grand
schemes and revolutionary ideas... Is
alive and well on planet Earth... Lets go meet him."304 304 Lindsey,
Planet., pp. 232, 235.
The Liberation of Planet Earth (London, Lakeland, 1974);

Sizer says "Despite promising in 1995, 'I will show you who will be
the key players in this endtimes drama,'and for thirty years, making
detailed predictions about this 'someone', supposedly alive today,
Lindsey is still unable to identify the anti-Christ."

The one man super anti-Christ of the dispensationalists is to sit in the re-built
temple to desecrate it, which is their take on Paul in II Thessalonians 2: 3-4. "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4. Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."

In scripture, rather than in Comic Book Theology, Paul teaches in I Corinthians 3: 16-17 and I Corinthians 6: 19 that the believers, those born again in Christ, are the temple. Then what he says in II Thessalonians 2: 4 is metaphor and does not talk about one guy sitting in a literal temple. If it refers to one super New World Order anti-Christ politician sitting in a literal temple, then Paul was not writing under the the Holy Spirit in either II Thessalonians 2: 4 or in I Corinthians 3: 16-17 and I Corinthians 6: 19. The Holy Spirit does not inspire contradictory doctrines.

In Paul's metaphor the man of sin, representing many false prophets or those who have the spirit of anti-Christ, will influence, or "sit," in the minds and hearts of the believers who have been deceived into accepting the false doctrines taught.

Another part of the comic book scenario is that the dispensationalist church will be raptured off the earth right before the one man anti-Christ appears and sits in the literal temple in Jerusalem. John in I John 2: 18-19, and I John 4: 3 does not predict a one man anti-Christ who is to appear during the tribulation. Rather, he talks about many anti-Christs being in the world when he wrote and that there is a spirit of Anti-Christ.

In the comic book scenario the "Holy People" are the Jews who in postponement theology are all saved and totally born again after the "church" has been raptured. If the born again Jews are to be scattered, and remember it says the power of the holy people is to be scattered, this does not fit with the dispensationalist scenario that "All Israel" shall be saved during the tribulation. Remember also that during the tribulation in the comic book scenario the 144,000, all male Jew virgins, are running around doing something. Hal Lindsay says they are 144,000 "Billy Grahams." Though the Jews as the "Holy People" may not all be in one place during the tribulation their power will not be reduced by the scattering as told in Daniel 12: 7 - in the comic book scenario. The Holy People have to be those born again in Christ, since people have no righteousness of their own, but only take on the righteousness of Christ when they are in him and receive some part of his mind into their inner life.

So, the comic book theologians have to ignore Daniel 12: 7 or make up explanations about how it is fulfilled in some way that doesn't involve "All Israel shall be saved" during the tribulation.

And - the Holy Spirit is not the Restrainer of II Thessalonians 2: 7. Get a good concordance and look up texts involving the Holy Spirit and how he deals with us. He leads into the truth. The restrainer is not the Holy Spirit. Since the Holy Spirit leads into the truth, then how could a Remnant or the 144,000 operate in great faith on the earth during the very last days? And how could 144,000 male Jewish virgins all be Hal Lindsey's "Billy Grahams" without the Holy Spirit? Lindsey apparently meant that the 144,000 will have spiritual power. No one has spiritual power without the Holy Spirit. Lindsey used the wrong guy, though, because a 33rd degree mason - unless he fully repents - does not have spiritual power from the Holy Spirit. 
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Daniel 12: 7: Scattering the Power of the Holy People - 5:44 PM, 11/10/2011


Daniel 12: 7: Scattering the Power of the Holy People
Bernard Pyron

In Daniel 10: 8-21 an angel sent from God comes to Daniel to give him a prophecy.

But when the angel finally comes to Daniel he says in Daniel 10: 12-14 "Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.

13. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. 14.Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days."


The prophecy the angel gave to him is in Daniel Chapter 11 - but there is no clear break
in the text between the end of Chapter 11 and the shorter Chapter 12. There are verses from Daniel 11: 33 to Daniel 11: 45, the end of the chapter, which seem to depart from the description of the actions of "he" who is the actor in these last verses of the chapter. For example, Daniel 11: 33 says "And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days." This prophecy on those with understanding instructing many is continued in Daniel 12: 3, "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."


"They" who turn many to righteousness are the same "they" who understand and instruct many in Daniel 11: 33. But in Daniel 12: 3 the text adds the turning of those instructed to righteousness, and that they who are wise will shine as the brightness of the firmament and as the stars for ever and ever."


Righteousness is important in understanding who the holy people are in Daniel 12: 7.


Remember that the angel told Daniel that he came to make him understand "what shall befall thy people in the latter days." But in the churches the usual view is that Daniel 11 is only about a series of actions in the struggle between the King of the North and the King of the South. To most Christians now, the prophecy was exhausted at the end of the conflict between the Ptolemaic and the Seleucid empires, with the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes by disease in 164 BC, who was the King of the North, or of Syria as opposed to Egypt of the South.


There are, however, scenarios in Daniel 11 which can be seen to fit historical events in much later periods of history, even up to the early 21st century. And Why would an angel from God be sent to Daniel the prophet to tell him the forthcoming history of the battles between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires? This history does not reach the time when Christ was born during the Roman empire. There is more to Daniel 11 than the story of battles between the house of Ptolemy and the house of Seleucus before the birth of Christ. This "scripture of truth" (Daniel 10: 21) is not likely to be limited to political and military struggles between two ancient dynasties.


There is a statement in Daniel 12: 1 which sounds a lot like what Christ said in Matthew 24: 21, "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."


Daniel 12: 1 says "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book."


Lets get to the very interesting part in Daniel 12: 5-10. "Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river. 6. And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders? 7. And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. 8. And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9. And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."


This starts with an image of two men standing on either side of a river, with a man not in the river but "upon the waters of the river." This has to be Jesus Christ, who walked on the water in Matthew 14: 25-29. The two men on either side of the river could represent those in the valley of decision in Joel 3: 14, or the two parts cut off in Zechariah 13: 8-9, or perhaps two groups of people who claim to be of God, physical Israel and the "church."


The important part is in verse 7, "...when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished."

The end will come at the time when the holy people are scattered.


But look at that the New International Version has for this part of verse 7. The NIV for some reason leaves out "he" and says "When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things shall be completed."


This is interesting. Broken is different from scattered. And what does breaking or scattering the power of the holy people mean? On a fleshly or political level, breaking the power of the holy people could mean that Christians in America toward the end will not be as important a group in determining elections of presidents, etc as they were just a few years ago. But breaking or scattering the power of the holy people has a more significant spiritual meaning.


Who are the holy people? Strict classical dispensationalism postulates clearly that God now has two people, the physical Israelites and the "church." And in its insistence on interpreting scripture in a consistent literal way, Israel is always physical Israel, and never can be Israel reborn in Jesus Christ. And dispensationalism does not accept Paul's division of Israel into two groups in Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8 and Galatians 4: 25-26. Therefore, for many or most, in the "church" the holy people in Daniel 12: 7 has to be physical Israel, the Israelites, the chosen people of God prior to God's transformation of physical Israel to Israel reborn in Christ.


But the problem is that to be holy a people must be in Christ and have his righteousness. Man has no righteousness of his own, but only takes on the righteousness of Jesus Christ. There was a small remnant of physical Israel who accepted Christ as Paul shows in Romans 11 and elsewhere in the New Testament it is clear some Israelites became fully born again.


The holy people in Daniel's prophecy of Daniel 12 have to be Christians, and those that understand among the people and instruct many are Christians, though this can apply also to the apostles in the First Century. Those in Daniel 12: 3 who turn many to righteousness, the righteousness Christ gives them, and who shine forever, are Christians.


The holy people of Daniel 12: 7 are Christians, completely born again in Christ, for otherwise they could not be holy.


The NIV says the power of the holy people is to be broken, with the implication that their power - political and/or spiritual - is destroyed, or almost completely destroyed.


The New American Standard Bible says "a time; and as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed."


The New Revised Standard Version says "...two times, and half a time, and that when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end, all these things would be accomplished."


Then the American Standard Version has "...and a half; and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished."


And the Catholic Douay-Rheims says "And when the scattering of the band of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be finished. "


So, the English Catholic Bible agrees pretty much with the King James Version.


What does the key Hebrew word translated as scattered, broken, and shattered mean?

The Hebrew word, in Daniel 12: 7, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Number 5310, naphates, is said to mean "to dash to pieces, break in pieces, dispersed, scatter." It could mean break in pieces or to scatter the holy people.


If we follow the older Protestant method of interpreting scripture by scripture, then what texts are most relevant to Daniel 12: 7?

II Thessalonians 2: 3-4, plus Matthew 24: 11,
I Timothy 4: 1, II Timothy 3: 13, and II Peter 2: 1 about the falling away and many false prophets deceiving Christians are relevant to the weakening of the spiritual power of Christians in the end times. So is Luke 13: 21 on the leavening of Christians.


The majority of Christians can be seen to go into apostasy in the end times and in that way lose their spiritual - and political - power. But there are verses which say that God will preserve a Remnant who do not lose their spiritual power, though they may be so small in number and not organized that they have little political power.


Isaiah 10: 22-23, Zephaniah 3: 12-13 and Romans 9: 27 all talk about the Remnant. A Remnant existed when physical Israel fell away and will and does exist when the "church" has fallen away.

In Revelation 12: 5-6 and Revelation 12: 14, 17 a "woman" goes to the wilderness where she gives birth to a "man child" and her "remnant," in verse 17. The wilderness is metaphoric for being outside of any organized group, and it is metaphoric for the people of God getting out of Egypt and going into the literal wilderness. "Egypt" is metaphoric for the apostate churches. So the end time Christian Remnant is not organized and not together in a physical place, though they are in substantial unity in Christ.


The Remnant is scattered over the world. The scattered remnant agrees with the King James and Douay-Rheims scattering of the holy people. The Christian Remnant is the holy people of the very last days.

Share |


Technorati Tags:
Filed under:

1 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Cultural Marxism and the Dialectic Attitude Change Procedure - 10:20 AM, 11/7/2011


Cultural Marxism and the Dialectic Attitude Change Procedure
Bernard Pyron

The dialectic is a procedure for changing attitudes and beliefs, and
not in itself a belief, position, doctrine or attitude.
It comes out of a philosophical position, from Hegel, Marx and Freud,
which denies there is absolute truth and absolute morality. In other
words, the dialectic is a procedure, which can be used to negate
morality, so the "facilitator" can end up moving a small group, or one
target person, out of his or her morals.

To learn to identify the use of the dialectic in discourse, you need
verbatim records of conversations illustrating its use. When one
person presents an opinion, idea or piece of information, this is the
"thesis." Another person may want to change that person's position,
which is his "thesis," and/or he wants to change a group's position by
using the person who presented the thesis as an example.

Usually, with the dialectic, the "facilitator" who tries to change an
opinion, perception, idea or bit of information will not immediately
challenge the thesis head on. The facilitator may even begin by
appearing to agree with the thesis, or will claim he agrees with it in
part. Then, the facilitator side steps a head on challenge of the
thesis based on fact, and challenges the thesis from the side.
Sometimes this is where using one particular point, not the main
point, of the thesis comes it. The facilitator will focus on one point
and make it the focus of attention, in part, changing the thesis to
that one point. Or, the facilitator will bring up a point that appears
to be somewhat irrelevant to the thesis. Or, the facilitator will
misrepresent the thesis slightly or in big way. There are other
methods of using the dialectic.

Dean Gotcher emphasizes the role of acceptance by the group which the
person who brings up a thesis belongs to. The dialectic works better
when the person targeted wants to be accepted by the group. He may be
willing to compromise his position in order to gain group acceptance.
The facilitator works to crate group coherence and agreement on the
issue at hand. This use of group acceptance can work also with an
Internet forum, where there tends to be some agreement on positions,
but there are factions also in the group, which may be in the
minority. The user of the dialectic, the facilitator in the Internet
forum situation, may try to appeal to the majority view against the
minority view. This assumes the target person, part of the minority,
or a minority of one in some cases, wants acceptance by the group, or
at least wants some in the group to accept his views.

Gotcher talks a lot about the contemporary origins of the dialectic.
He especially spends time in talking about the following guys in
history:

Georg Friedrich Hegel (1770 " 1831)
Karl Marx (1818 " 1883)
Abraham Maslow
Carl Rogers
Irvin Yalom
Theodor Adorno
Erick Fromm
Norman O. Brown
Herbart Marcuse

Adorno and Marcuse were core members of the Frankfurt School. Fromm
was similar to them
in ideology. Theodor W. Adorno, who was the senior author of the
highly influential book, The Authoritian Personality (1950), posed as
a social psychologist, and taught that fascism is caused by
Christianity and the strong family. The Frankfurt School, which
included Wilhelm Reich on its fringes, represented what is called
cultural Marxism. They set out to overthrow the major institutions of
the West, especially Christianity and the family, by non-violent
means, rather than by the violent means of classical Marxism. The
dialectic is one important procedure in overthrowing the foundational
institutions of the West.

But - the dialectic is not limited to cultural Marxism, because its
use spread to the institutions of society, including the Christian
church, And in the churches, the dialectic is not limited to the Rick
Warren type of mega-churches, which emphasize church growth more than
adherence to the Gospel.

Cultural Marxism, via the Frankfurt School, began to be spread from
the major universities, especially the University of California at
Berkeley in the early fifties. Those in personality and social
psychology became familiar with the Adorno book and the huge number of
attitude studies that grew from it. A few years later, the cultural
Marxism movement, plus Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers self psychology,
spread to higher education and soon to the public school. This is
where Dean Gotcher encountered the dialectic since he was in
education.
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Two Major Reasons For the Falling Away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 - 1:09 PM, 10/30/2011


Two Major Reasons For the Falling Away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4
Bernard Pyron

Two influences that originated in England during the 19th century, and gained great momentum in the U.S. have contributed a great deal to the falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 and to church Christians being deceived by false prophets as shown in Matthew 24: 11, I Timothy 4: 1-2, II Timothy 4: 3-4, and II Peter 2: 1-3.

 These two influences were dispensationalism and the Westcott-Hort Greek text of 1881 which they created to unseat the Textus Receptus and the King James Version. Both influences gradually weakened faith.

 As Luke 13: 21 says these influences as leaven were hid in most of evangelical Christianity until "the whole was leavened." The two influences worked together to undermine faith in the word of God; the influences were additive in weakening faith in God and in his word.

This does not mean that all followers of dispensationalism have used new translations based upon the Westcott-Hort. But - since most church Christians have been using the New Translations based upon Westcott-Hort, this meant that most dispensationalists also used the same translations, since the majority of church Christians are followers of dispensationalism to some extent. Although some dispensationalists use the King James Version, the influence of Westcott-Hort has not been overcome at all.

And - many Christians in the reformed camp also use the Westcott-Hort derived versions. In fact, the Reformed people in the churches, or most of them, defend the entire church as the beast of Revelation 17: 9-11 against those who have heeded Revelation 18: 4 and have come out of "her."

The purpose of this thread is to support the Textus Receptus-King James Version, and to show that the wrecking machine that is Westcott-Hort is something to get off of, to come out of "her" as Revelation 18: 4 says, so that those who come out of the Westcott-Hort influence are not partakers of her sins and do not receive her plagues. Revelation 18: 4 is a call to come out of the apostate system - but Westcott-Hort helped make it apostate.

 Dean Gotcher, the authority on the use of the dialectic in society and in Christian discourse, on his website, http://www.authorityresearch.com/ARTICLES_Other/Source of the King James Bible.htm

says "Faith does not come by hearing mans opinion of God's word (there is no certainty, conviction, or conversion in opinions), but rather faith comes by hearing God's word itself. It is important you know (you are certain) that what you are hearing, reading, studying, preaching, and teaching is God's word. "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the God." Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 8:3 What eventually became entitled the Textus Receptus or the "received text" (1633) was first presented by Erasmus (Novum Instrumentum omne, 1516). It was compiled from several manuscripts from the 'Majority text,' i.e. the Byzantine (Syrian) text, which were a large number of manuscripts and fragments originally protected by the eastern church from the western church's (Roman Catholics church's) efforts to destroy them, and therefore were not accessible to the western world until after the 1453 conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire. By Christians fleeing from the east into the west, these guarded manuscripts were eventually accessible to western scholars.

 Today there is a major move to confuse the Protestant Church and bring it back under Roman Catholic rule (the "ecumenical" movement). By discrediting the use of the Textus Receptus as God's Word, examining (and thus negating) the Word of God in the "light" of Gnostic text, the Protestant Church is being seduced, deceived, and manipulated, drawn away from the preaching and teaching of sound doctrine and into the dialoguing of mans opinions. The Alexandrian and Origen text (Gnostic texts) are the basis for almost all contemporary translations.

 Oregenes Adamantius 185-245 AD, was a Greek, Egyptian-born Gnostic writer, teacher, & mystic, who, with his contingent of scribes, synthesized philosophical teachings into the scriptures (which no longer made them God's word but rather the opinions of men, needing enlightened men thereon to interpret them). These Gnostic texts, with their humanistic, philosophical base, have opened the churches and seminaries up to humanistic reasoning (higher criticism or vain speculations) and dialogue, with the opinions of men in control of the meaning of God and His Word. Almost all translations today carry this error (heresy).

 Most Christians who detected the error of the "Church Growth Movement," the emergent church, etc. were using translations from the Textus Receptus (King James, Geneva, Tyndale, Luther, etc. bibles) They discerned the compromise, i.e. the structural change of the word of God, and the resulting humanism being practiced within the "contemporary" church, by their having been raised in Churches using translations from the Textus Receptus."

On a Christian forum a guy said "In His great wisdom, our God has allowed these texts to be there and although I believe some mischief has come from them, it has provoked another in depth study of God's great Word."

"These texts" are the Westcott-Hort Greek text and its English offspring, including the New International Version..

Romans 9: 21: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?"

Luke 17: 1 "It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!"

John 8: 35; "And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever."
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Comments On Excerpts From W.E. Best - 1:27 PM, 9/13/2011





No
Photo
Yet

View Profile
History

Comments On Excerpts From W.E. Best
Bernard Pyron

W.E. Best says "BIBLICAL TRUTH: Neither the prophets nor the apostles spiritualized away the final culmination of human history into pure subjectivity. A literal prophecy spiritualized is exegetical fraud. It makes as much sense to spiritualize Christ’s first advent as His second advent. Amillennialism is a taunting dream, whereas a future kingdom with the Son of Man on the throne is an energizing hope which purifies the elect (Luke 1:32; I John 3:2,3)." This is ambiguous. The question is what does he mean by "spiritualized?"

He sounds like he is opposing the broad sweeping allegorical interpretations of Origen, a method which was taken up by Augustine, and by the Catholic Church, and then by Calvinism after the Reformation. The dispensatinalists over-reacted against these broad sweeping allegorical interpretations, and gave us a system of "hermeneutics" which is not worakable, in part because the literal method of Bible interpretation cannot be applied consistently to all Scripture. It tends to distort parables and metaphors which are found in so many Bible texts.

So, was W.E. Best here influenced by dispensationalism? I thought when I first started reading this that he might belong to the Reformed Camp.

I found an interesting use of the word "assembly" by W. E. Best. He says "The supreme mission of the assembly of Jesus Christ is to glorify God, but this may be done only as she earnestly contends “for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3)." And he says "The assembly must be separated from the world in order to minister to it."

If he is using "assembly" to avoid the use of "church" that is interesting. But from what he says I can't tell for sure that this is what he is doing. Is he questioning the use of the "church" as a separate body of Christ, separate from Israel? What I found on him in a brief search on Google doesn't say whether he belonged to a Reformed group. Some contemporary Reformed

leaders say the "church" is Israel, and some orthodox Lutherans agree. But they don't question the "church" as a separate body of Christ.

Best says "All whom God foreordained to salvation will be glorified (Rom. 8:28-34). The foreordained, predestinated, called, justified, and glorified are equal in number. God never starts something that He is incapable of bringing to its foreordained conclusion (Phil. 1:6)." This sounds like Calvinism.

He also says "Christians are neither regenerated nor glorified gradually. Both are instantaneous. The Bible teaches that when redemption is applied to souls or bodies, it is complete and forever. The Charismatics reach the unavoidable conclusion that the salvation of one’s soul is like the healing of his body, either of which he can have today and lose tomorrow."

This also sounds like Calvinism. If what he says is true of all believers, then Satan could not lure those who believe into false doctrines. And those who as Baby Christians have an experience from the Holy Spirit which brings them to believe what they know of the Gospel, they may then go on to grow up in Christ and know and believe much more of the doctrines of Christ, and come to have a love of Christ as the truth himself and a love for his doctrines. This is all a process, not instantaneous.

"Wilbern Elias "W. E." Best was born on June 18, 1919, in east Texas. He was the youngest of five children. He made a false profession of faith at 15. At 20, God changed his heart and life, and W. E. genuinely repented, converted, and knew he was called to preach the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Some of our assembly members served with and were shepherded by pastor Best (or as Christian brethren often address each other, "by Brother Best") for over 50 years. As of December 2006, our pastor retired. On Friday, June 15, 2007, Bro. Best went home to be with the Lord."

Many of the writings of W.E. Best are available online. at:

http://www.webbmt.org/EnglishBooks.htm

There are both contemporary and past Christians who have been associated with Reformed theology, but who follow historical premillennialism; they believe that Christ will set up his kingdom on earth as Revelation 20: 1-5 says, but they do not believe in a pre-trib rapture nor in Jewish supremacy as do the dispensationalist premillennialists. You can Google this topic and find which recent Calvinists were historical premillennialiss. And there have been Reformed leaders in the past who did not dwell on the five points of orthodox Calvinism.

I have a book on the writings of the English evangelist Richard Sibbes (1577-1635), who is classified as a Calvinist. In these writings Sibbes does not get into predestination or the other starting points of what we think of as Calvinism. He an evangelist, and spiritually a rival leader to William Ames (1576-1633). Ames spent time in Holland and his Calvinism was closer to Dutch Calvinism than was that of Richard Sibbes. And importantly, William Ames was the spiritual father of the New England Puritans.

The Calvinism of the New England Puritans, closer to Dutch Calvinism, was a different breed of theology than that of the Scotch-Irish followers of John Knox, Samuel Rutherford and other leaders of the Calvinism of Scotland. The emphasis in Puritan theology upon one's occupational calling and making that a success, plus Calvin's liberalization of the Biblical teaching against usury, contributed to the descendants of the original New England Puritans to becoming a money elite (by the time of the War of Northern Aggression).

And it happened that one of the backbones of the Southern resistance to the rule of the New England, former Puritan elite, was the Scotch-Irish of the South who were Calvinists but not of the Calvinism of New England. The ancestors of those Scotch-Irish guys of 1861-1865 had fought the English and later again in the American Revolution. The Southern Planter class elite which stood in the way of the New England elite's rule over the entire U.S., and which helped got the South into that war, were derived mostly from Church of England English settlers.

The Calvinism of Scotland in John Knox and Samuel Rutherford taught that Christians had a right to defend themselves physically from a totalitarian government and they did not accept the Catholic and Church of England interpretation of Romans 13, that Christians must obey the government no matter what it does to them or to others. Knox had personal experience in resisting a Catholic run government that tried to kill him. That brand of Calvinist theology from Knox and Rutherford was translated into a secular ideology of government as a republic by John Locke. Thomas Jefferson used Locke's writing on government as a foundation for the Declaration of Independence.

Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

The Khazar Theory - 9:59 PM, 8/5/2011


The Khazar Theory
 Bernard Pyron

On a Christian forum there has been discussion of the theory that Jews, or Ahkenazi Jews, are really descendants of the Non-Semitic Khazars.  

Khazaria was an area  between the Black and Caspian Seas where people mostly  of Turkish descent lived in the seventh to tenth centuries.  The Khazar theory says that Jews today, or just Ashkenazi Jews, are not racially Jews, but are descendants from the Turkic tribe of Khazars, whose ruling class and some others converted to Judaism in the 8th or early 9th century.  The Thirteenth Tribe (1976), by Arthur Koestler, helped to spread the Khazar theory.

On  http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html they report a number of genetic studies on Jewish populations.

"The main ethnic element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews), Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite. The Israelite haplotypes fall into Y-DNA haplogroups J and E.
Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples from the northern Mediterranean region and even less from Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."

"The 185delAG breast cancer mutation is found among both Ashkenazim and Moroccan Jews."

" Many Spanish-speaking Latinos of the American Southwest are descended from Anusim (Spanish Jews who were forced to convert to Catholicism)."

"There are known skeletons of Khazars from the Don-valley (Sarkel, Semikarakovskoye, etc.) and from the Crimea (e.g., Sudak). It is important to note that Khazarian skeletons and North Caucasian Turks have not yet been used to compare Jewish genes with likely traces of the Khazars. Thus, the Khazar theory has not really been put to the genetic test yet."

But whether there might be some bit of evidence in favor of the Khazar theory, or whether it is totally false, does not matter because we want to argue from what scripture states and from inspiration from the Holy Spirit rather than from a man-made
theory.

You don't want to use the theory that Ashkenazi Jews are primarily Khazar and not Semitic to try to refute the teachings of dispensationalism, the Hebrew Roots Movement, the Sacred Namers, most
Messianic Judaism groups, Christian Identity theology and the Mormons that the Hebrews are, by their genetics, still God's chosen people. You want to use Scripture to refute the Jewish supremacy teachings, or Hebrew Supremacy in the case of the Christian Identity people. Christian Identity followers say Germanic and Celtic people are descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel  (the Hebrews of the Nothern Kingdom called Israel) and they generally oppose Jews.

The spiritual battle of the little Remnant who try to hold up the truth of the New Testament to instruct many as Daniel 11: 33 says to bring a group larger than that small Remnant out of the false doctrine of Jewish supremacy and out of the churches lies in using scripture. Using race theories about the Khazars just allows Ol Scratch to mess up that spiritual battle, because the Lord is not going to support it. Ephesians 6: 14 says to stand, having your loins girt about with truth, and verse 17 commands us to take up the spiritual sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. Its a spiritual battle and the battle is going to grow in intensity, and without the Spirit and the word of God, you don't really go out on the field and do battle. You can't battle spiritually with a worldly theory.

At the Cross entry into the Kingdom was no longer by blood lines, but all had to be born again in Christ. This truth is what we use in the spiritual battle.   And - this truth makes the argument from a race point of view of no value, whether you argue for or against the Jews being the chosen people because of their blood lines. In other words, using the Khazar theory to show that the Jews are not descended from Abraham involves a focus again on race.   In the transformation or translation of physical Israel into that other Israel which Paul points to in Romans 9: 8 and Galatians 4: 26, race was totally done away with. In that transformation  to Israel reborn in Jesus Christ, there  is no place given to race (Galatians 3: 28)   It doesn't matter about the Khazar theory because there is no place for race in God's New Covenant.  The New Testament, in Paul's writing in Romans (2: 28-29, 9: 6-8) and Galatians (3: 28-29, 4: 24-26), but also by Peter, especially in I Peter 2: 9, argues from  Holy Spirit inspiration, which is far better than the Khazar theory, that there is no more entry into the Kingdom of God by genetics.  I Peter 2: 9 explains that Christians are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, and holy nation, a peculiar people..."
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

More On the Dialectic Change Procedure - 9:24 PM, 8/1/2011


More On the Dialectic Change Procedure
Bernard Pyron

 The dialectic is a procedure for changing attitudes, beliefs,
doctrines, or any other held
   position in politics, religion, economics, etc. It is not in
itself a position. When members of a
   Christian Yahoo Group were first introduced to the teachings of
Dean Gotcher, some in the group
   thought it was a doctrine, that is, a position, rather than just a
procedure to change people's
   positions. They said that John Hagee represented the dialectic,
when, in fact, he tends to preach his
   doctrines in a didactic way. He might use the dialectic in
conversations. What Hagee teaches
   must in itself be examined for its conformity to the New Testament.

   However, the procedure of the dialectic does come out of an
anti-Christian system of thought, a set
   of doctrines, beliefs and attitudes. The Marxists have a term they
call "Dialectical Materialism." The social
   and clinical psychologists who began to popularize the use of the
dialectic were not exactly followers of Christ.

   The dialectic is a procedure for making use of peer pressure, not
peer pressure itself. You can use the
   didactic way of communicating to make use of peer pressure. The
dialectic is usually more deceptive than
   the didactic procedure for changing positions. And - the dialectic
as a procedure is not easily
   understood when you are first exposed to what it is. What is often
needed to show people what
   it is would be a verbatim, or almost verbatim record, in writing
or as an audio, of a conversation type of verbal
   interaction involving someone who is taking the role of the
facilitator and another who is the target
   of the procedure. This is why Luke 11: 14-28, as an almost
verbatim record of the conversation between Christ
   and the Pharisees and the woman in Luke 11: 27 who offered the
compromise is so instructive.

   This woman offered the dialectic side step to move the two
opposing sides to a compromise. She did not
   really deal with the main issue, of whether Jesus was casting out
demons with the power of Satan. She, in effect,
   tried to change the "thread," or change the topic, to the physical
woman and her beasts that nursed Jesus. Notice that Jesus didn't
exactly agree with her. He said in verse 28, "Yea. rather, blessed are
they that hear the word of
   God, and keep it."
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

The Book, The Great Rebellion, In the Dallas Theological Seminary Library - 11:02 AM, 7/31/2011


My Book, The Great Rebellion, In the Dallas Theological Seminary Library
Bernard Pyron

The Dallas Theological Seminary Library for some reason has a copy of
my book, The Great Rebellion. This seminary has been for decades the
foremost promoter of dispensationalist theology. Its the major center
from which dispensationalism has spread since 1924.  The classical
dispensationalists, were John Darby, C.I. Scofield,  and Lewis Sperry
Chafer.  Dallas Theological Seminary - or "Cemetery" - was founded as
Evangelical Theological College in 1924 by Lewis Sperry Chafer,
Famous dispensationalists who graduated from this seminary include Hal
Lindsey,   J. Vernon McGee, J. Dwight Pentecost,
Charles Caldwell Ryrie, John F. Walvoord, and many others.

see     http://library.dts.edu/uhtbin/cgisirsi/zhM7gse8Ix/SIRSI/83870004/9

The Library Catalog at
Dallas Theological Seminary

The great rebellion
   Pyron, Bernard.
BR115 .C8 P76 1985      1       Book    Turpin 2d and 3d floors general collection

The people who frequent the library of Dallas Theological Seminary are
mostly looking for books by Christian writers with good images, that
is, who show signs of success. I didn't attain to image, that is, I am
not even a minor celebrity.

The Great Rebellion, though - unfortunately - is not about  the many
scriptures that contradict the teachings of dispensationalism, and it
is not about the Remnant.  It is a  review of the studies on the
counterculture by social scientists, and a Biblical criticism of the
counterculture.

If I were to write the book now, I would include a discussion of the
Baby Boom Generation and its interaction with the counterculture. In
the book, though, I did emphasize II Timothy 3: 1-7. There Paul starts
by saying "in the last days perilous times shall come" and then he
lists several personality traits of people in the last days. These
traits not only fit those described by the three social scientists who
studied the counterculture but are also  a prophecy by Paul about
the personality traits of people in the end times - and especially of
the Baby Boomers.
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

A Stealth Dispensationalist On Ol Dave Frantz's Short Wave Station (2004) - 8:22 AM, 7/31/2011



A Stealth Dispensationalist On Ol Dave Frantz's Short Wave Station
Bernard Pyron

This was posted in 2004 on a Christian Yahoo Group, cmnfolks. In it I
first used the term "Stealth Dispensationalist."  I did not give the name
of the guy who was then broadcasting on Dave Frantz's short wave station,
and I have since forgotten his name.  He was not a Christian celebrity.  He
answered my letter and we exchanged a few messages by old time snail mail.
It is not surprising that a man on the radio, whether FM, AM, or short wave,
would be a dispensationalist.  A very high percentage of evangelicals on the
radio are dispensationalists.  Pete Peters, who died recently, was one
exception.  He was into Christian Identity, another problem theology.  Harold
Camping was another guy on the radio who was not a dispensationalist.  Camping
got into his strange use of the pre-trib rapture only in the last few years.
Camping was also into numerology and his is beyond that found in Scripture. I
looked at his date of May 21, 2011, for his version of the rapture, and its
not necessarily based upon prime numbers, which are used by the ruling elite to
set important dates. But - 11 is a prime number, and Camping set the dates for
the end of the world in 2011.

A Stealth Dispensationalist is one who does not admit to being one, and
much of his teaching appears to be sound, out of scripture.  At present,
a stealth dispensationalist would be one who has rejected the pre-trib
rapture, but sticks to the doctrine that God has two distinctly different
peoples, the Jews and the church, with whom he deals in different ways.

"I was interested in Michael A. Hoffman’s Judaism’s Strange Gods, and
Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare. On hearing a short wave
broadcaster talking about preterism, Tom Valentine, The American
Free Press, I wrote to him, asking if he knew where Hoffman is coming
from. He answered saying that Hoffman is “Promulgating the party line
of Romanism.” He is referring to his Judaism’s Strange Gods. The
broadcaster citied a book by Dagobert D. Runes, The Popes Against the
Jews. This book discusses the exposure of the Talmud by the Jesuits in
Italian newspapers in the late 19th century. "The Jesuits went beyond
mere exposure of the problems of the Talmud to an attack upon the
character of the entire Jewish people, and this may have helped cause
the Nazi holocaust."

In obedience to Ephesians 5:11, we can expose the Talmud and the
Kabballah. But New Testament morality does not allow Christians to
attack the character of any group of people as the Jesuits apparently
did.

The broadcaster also fired off his cannon at Strong’s Exhaustive
Concordance and Replacemenet Theology, and says there is no evidence
for a Greek version of the OT, the Septuagint, in the first century.
He also claimed that Texe Marrs may be an agent of the Jesuits.

I wrote him in a second letter saying he may be following the
dispensationalist teaching about Jewish Supremacy in some form during
the end times and/or in the millennium.   In his reply he did not
acknowledge that he is a follower of the dispensationalists. Instead,
he said “I urge you to read the Bible without seeking to figure what
the contending viewpoints would place on each verse, but take them at
face value. Jeremiah 30:7-11 and Jeremiah 31:10-12 indeed are plain
that there is a total restoration of the nation (he means Israel)
spiritually and physically.” God in II Kings 17:15-20 said he “…
rejected the seed of Israel…” and in Jeremiah 3:8 he divorced Israel
and the implication is that he also divorced Judah at about the time
that southern nation was utterly defeated by the Babylonians.

He has made a number of broadcasts saying there will be some kind of
restoration of the nation of Israel, that is, of the Jews, and warning
Christians not to bash or even criticize the Jews. Yet he has, to my
knowledge, not identified himself with the dispensationalist Big Guns
like John Darby, C. I. Scofield, Lewis S. Chafer, John Walvoord or
Charles C. Ryrie. I wonder if he went to “cemetery”.

However, in his January 10th broadcast he comes closer to coming out
and saying what he is all about in being so protective of the Jews and
insisting on some vague kind of Jewish kingdom in the end times. He
cites Matthew 19:28 where Jesus said to his disciples “…in the
regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory,
ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of
Israel.” The broadcaster says this mention of the twelve tribes of
Israel shows us the “regeneration” is to be an earthly Jewish kingdom.
He also said that the prayer Jesus taught the disciples to pray in
Matthew 6:9-13 is a Jewish prayer.

His second reference to the New Testament was Acts 1:6, “When they
therefore were come together, they asked of him (Jesus), saying,
‘Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?’
And he said unto them, ‘It is not for you to know the times or the
seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. ”

Our short wave broadcaster says Acts 1:6 and Matthew 19:28 prove that
the restoration of the nation of Israel, that is the Jews as a total
people, is found in the New Testament.
In Acts 1:6 Peter, John and the other disciples were believers but
they were yet unregenerate. They had not yet received the Holy Spirit
who regenerated them spiritually; after the Holy Spirit came to them
at Pentecost, they were Born Again. Our short wave broadcaster is
looking to unregenerate disciples"without the Holy Spirit"for his
doctrine.

I do not know why Jesus did not correct the disciples and tell them in
Acts 1:6 that in the regeneration there would be no distinction
between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians and that all must be
Born Again to enter in. We know that the Holy Spirit did come to the
disciples at Pentecost and that by Acts 15 Peter, James and probably
the other main disciples were made aware by the Spirit that Gentiles
too received the Holy Spirit and were Born Again.

In Acts 15:9 Peter says the Gentiles were given the Holy Ghost and God
“…put no difference between us (the Christians who were formerly Jews)
and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” In verse 15-17 James says
“And to this agree the words of the prophets: as it is written.” What
agrees with the words of the prophets? It is that the Gentiles were
being given the Spirit and were Born Again, which agrees with the
words of the prophets. James, in verses 15-17, quotes Amos 9:11, which
in the OT King James says “In that day will I raise up the tabernacle
of David that is fallen, and close up the branches thereof; and I will
raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old.” The
quote by James in Acts 15:25-27 says “After this I will return, and
will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down: and I
will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up. That the
residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon
whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.”
James seems also to quote Hosea 3:5 in the last part of his
quotations. Hosea 3:5 says “Afterward shall the children of Israel
return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king: and shall
fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter days. Isaiah 54:2-3 does
mention that the Gentiles will be included in the restoration of
Israel.

In Acts 1:6, before the Holy Spirit came to them at Pentecost, the
disciples were believers in Christ, but they were yet spiritually
unregenerate, not Born Again. In the condition of being believers but
not being Born Again, they were much more likely to hold to false
teaching. One of these false teachings was that the Jewish Messiah
would come and re-establish a physical and earthly Jewish kingdom.
They knew nothing of God’s plan that the Jews must be Born Again in
order for God to take them back, after he had divorced them. In the
same way, many people in the present day incorporated, tax exempt
501c(3) churches are believers, but not Born Again, and so they too
easily accept false doctrines taught them by the hireling pastors.

On his December 6th broadcast, this pastor said “We Christians regard
the Jews as a special people… The new birth pertains to the nation of
Israel… God never grants repentance to an entire Gentile nation. Why?
Because the Jews come first.” He says to expose the Talmud is to label
the Jews as being dirty. Although he is teaching false doctrine that
there is to be some sort of Jewish Supremacy in the end times,
nevertheless it is important to look at this false doctrine. Paul says
in Galations 4:19, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth
again until Christ be formed in you.” If many hireling preachers in
the apostate churches teach church members that during a part of the
tribulation and/or in the millennium there will be only Jews and not
also Christian Gentiles, or that Christian Gentiles will be second
rate citizens or mere servants, what does this do to their identity in
Christ? If a Christian is second rate to the Jews, can Christ be
formed in him or her?

I Peter 2:9-10 has an answer to the false doctrine of Jewish Supremacy
in saying, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an
holy nation, a peculiar people that ye should show forth the praises
of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light:
which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of
God..."” Peter is not saying that this chosen generation are the Jews
only, but are made up of all kinds of different peoples.

Paul criticized Peter in Galatians 2:11-13 for being so afraid of the
Jews that at Antioch Peter withdrew from eating with the Christian
Gentiles to eat with the Jews. The Jews had a custom that they could
not eat with Gentiles. Paul says "…I withstood him to the face,
because he was to be blamed..:” Paul would tolerate no distinction
between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles.

Yet the evidence of New Testament Scripture that the Judaism of
Christ’s time was not the religion of the Old Testament, and texts of
the NT showing that there is to be no distinction between Jews and
Gentiles in Christ does not allow Christians to attack Jews beyond
pointing out these Scriptural proofs.

The Jews in Israel, in the U.S. and elsewhere, may play an important
role in the end times, even though there is not to be an exclusively
Jewish national restoration. We should pay attention to how the
American Zionist Jews and the Christian Jewish Supremacists influenced
by dispensationalism are now supporting these wars, and there may be
more to come. Christian celebrities who are dispensationalists"or
Jewish Supremacists"like Hal Lindsey, are supporting the Bush wars in
the middle east to protect Israel. I heard Hal Lindsey try to justify
the invasion of Iraq on the Joyce Riley show, and it may be that
dispensational celebrities such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson
have said similar things in support of the Bush wars. Jesus said "…it
must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the
offense commeth (Matthew 18:7, and Luke 17:1).” I still do not know
where Michael A. Hoffman is coming from. In the two books of his that
I read, he does seem to show an interest in things Catholic.

Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Romans 11: 28-29 and the Issue of God's Chosen People - 9:26 AM, 7/30/2011


Romans 11: 28-29 and the Issue of God's Chosen People
Bernard Pyron

"As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." Romans 11: 28-29

The large majority of physical Israel rejected Christ and the Gospel and hated it. Because of this rejection, the Gospel was given to the Gentiles. But - the dislike and rejection of the Gospel by the physical Israelites should not hinder the acceptance of it among them - or some of them - in the future. Because there are a number of physical Israelites that God loved and has given salvation by grace, this is unchangeable. the Calvinists would find here some support for their doctrine that God calls to salvation who he wants to call, and once they are called he does not revoke that call.

To interpret Romans 11: 28-29 as saying that all of physical Israel, who reject Christ, past, present and future, remain God's chosen people is to contradict what Paul said in Romans 11: 20 that those of physical Israel who did not believe were cut off, and it contradicts Romans 9: 8, that "They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God, and also Galatians 4: 25-26, another text that teaches there are two Israels, as well as Romans 2: 28-29, and Galatians 3: 28-29 . Paul was not double minded (James 1: 8). But the dispensationalists are if they accept Paul's teachings that there are two Israels (with the implication that one is saved and the other not saved) and yet postulate that unsaved Israel are still God's chosen people. This is the issue which can become so contentious that those who say Christians are God's chosen people following I Peter 2:9 and not unsaved physical Israel, who are mostly following the Babylonian Talmud, will be persecuted by those who hold to the belief that there is one Israel and they are the chosen.

Romans 11: 28-29 can be interpreted by Paul's teaching on the remnant in Romans. In this same chapter, Romans 11: 4-5 he says there is a remnant, and he means a remnant of the physical Israelites who are the elect. In Romans 9: 27 he quotes Isaiah 10: 22-23 on the remnant of Israel, and Paul is applying this to the physical Israelites of his time who became saved. Paul must be talking in Romans 11: 28-29 about a remnant in the future of physical Israel who will be saved.
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb

Daniel 11 and Prophecy That Can Fit Present Day Reality - 8:20 PM, 7/29/2011


Daniel 11 and Prophecy That Can Fit Present Day Reality
Bernard Pyron

Popular end time prophecy almost always puts the fulfillment in the
vague future, most often sometime during the tribulation.  Even the prophecy
of Paul in II Thessalonians 2: 3 about the falling away is placed in the
tribulation by popular prophecy writers.  

Daniel 11 is a different kind of Bible prophecy.  It states fairly explicit
scanarios of action by two figures in conflict with one another, the King of the North
and the King of the South.  It starts in Daniel 11: 4, "And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those."

The Greek military leader, Alexander, died and his empire was divided into four major portions to four of his generals in about 301 BC: (1) Cassander ruled over Greece, (2) Lysimachus ruled in Asia Minor, (3) Seleucus I Nicator ruled in Babylon and Persia, and (4) Ptolemy I Soter ruled over the Holy Land and Egypt.  Cassander and Lysimachus dropped out of the picture and two kings were left, the Seleucus empire in Babylon and Persia and the Ptolemy empire in Egypt and Palestine.

Daniel 11: 4 fits with the division of Alexander's empire.  This does not necessarily mean that the entire prophecy of Daniel 11 as given to Daniel by the angel in Daniel 10: 8-21 is just a description of the events in history involving the struggle between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid empires. The angel says to Daniel in Daniel 10: 21, "But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince."  Why would an angel from God be sent to Daniel the prophet to tell him the forthcoming history of the battles between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires?  This history does not reach the time when Christ was born during the Roman empire.
There is likely more to Daniel 11 than the story of the history of battles between the house of Ptolemy and the house of Seleucus. The "scripture of truth" is not likely to be limited to political and military struggles between two dynasties.

Starting in Daniel 11: 5 the text describes a series of actions in the struggle between the King of the North and the King of the South.

To try to keep this from being very long, lets jump ahead to Daniel 11: 24, and began there.  The modern division of the North from the South internationally began in 1991 when the Soviet Union fell.  After that, the main division was no longer between the West and the East, but between the industrial North controlled in large part by big bankers and the less developed nations of the South, where the many Islamic nations are important, though the South now includes some nations of South America (Venezuela under Hugo Chavez is one example) and perhaps China. Though China is not necessarily in the geographic South, it is allied with the developing nations of the South, and would boost their political, monetary, economic and military powers tremendously.
 
"...he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his father's fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches....." (Daniel 11:24)  "He" is the King of the North.

The modern scenario that fits this part of the  prophecy in Daniel 11: 24 is this:    George H.W. Bush  defeated the forces of
Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War, but did not bring about a regime change.  His  son George W. Bush in Gulf War Two invaded
Iraq and took over the country, ousting Saddam Hussein. He did that which his father did not do.  There is a reference in the text to spoil and riches.  I will get to that later.

"And he shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of
the south with a great army; and the king of the south shall be
stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he shall
not stand: for they shall forecast devices against him.
26. Yea, they that feed of the portion of his meat shall destroy
him, and his army shall overflow: and many shall fall down slain." Daniel 11: 25-26

Again "he" in verse 25 is the King of the North. In the period of 2001 to 2008 George W. Bush held
the office of the King of the North.  He began his war against Iraq in March of 2003 and it is not
exactly finished even in 2011.

With a great army George Bush Junior stirred up his and the power of the U.S. and its courage
to attack Saddam's forces. Bush and his generals
forecasted devices against Saddam in saying they were going to war because Saddam
had weapons of mass destruction.  Bush bragged that they would mount an attack of "shock and awe"
against the third world army of Saddam. When Bush's "lets roll"
army got near Baghdad, the agents of the King of the North bribed the
commanders of the Republican Guard not to fight. Later these bribed
generals are said to have been re-located to the U.S. and given more rewards.
These Republican Guard generals fed at the portion of Saddam's
meat but destroyed Saddam. They caused their troops not to fight and
as a result Saddam was defeated and hanged.

"Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart
shall be against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and
return to his own land." Daniel 11: 28

George W. Bush, the oil man, was set up to own an oil company and later to become President
by his carpetbagger father who went to Texas
to exploit the Texans.  Bush Junior went into Iraq for oil and returned with control of Saddam's oil
and his buddies Halliburton  and Dick Cheney made millions if not
billions from that war.  Who knows if Bush didn't get some of the money they made
off the war? Bush made great riches for a few from the war.

The "King of the North," or the ruling elite which is now in charge of
the nations of the north, is empowered by usury. Usury is forbidden to
be used by God's people in Exodus 22: 25, Leviticus 25: 36-37,
Deuteronomy 23: 19-20, Ezekiel 18: 8, 13,, 17, Ezekiel 22: 12 and a
few other texts. Usury is making money from charging interest on
loans. The big usury bankers are parasites, who are allied with the
U.S. and other governments, so that they feed money into the economy
through debt, and then take over the money of the people from interest
on these debts.

The King of the North as a more general metaphor is about the
big bankers of the North creating riches for themselves by usury.

Banking and usury started in earnest in ancient historical
Babylon, in the city of Babylon and in nearby cities. Guess what modern nation
the old city of Babylon is in?

"In the 1920's, Sir Leonard Woolley, excavating the Mesopotamian city
of Ur, the fabled birthplace of Abraham, found himself standing in the
remains of what must have been an upper middle class neighborhood near
the center of the ancient city....Professor Marc Van De Mieroop of
Columbia University has used
Woolley's careful excavation notes to match the dozens of excavated
clay tablets to the homes where they were found. From these, he has
been able to identify what must have been a very early "Wall
Street...Many of the clay tablets found were records of loans for
which the
lenders collected interest, or usury. The article on usury in ancient
historical Babylon goes on to say that:

"It is difficult to escape the conclusion that, while the first loan
contracts and the legal system that enforced them may have been good
for the Mesopotamian economy, they made life miserable for the working
man and woman."

"...his heart shall be  against the holy covenant."

This is part of Daniel 11: 28, really another prophecy. 

George W Bush, who was helped to become president by many conservative Christians and was supported by them, thinking he was also a Christian, were forsaken when Bush claimed that Christians and Muslims "worship the same God." So, his "heart" was against the "holy covenant."  Obama is doing much the same thing.

In Daniel 11: 25 the King of the North shall stir up his power and courage against the King of the South
with a great army.   Many won't like this idea that this prophecy can have more than one application, not only in time
but also in geographical locations.  The somewhat detailed  scenarios of Daniel 11 may have repeated in history, though I don't know the details of history well enough to show how the scenarios have worked for different periods of time and in different locations of the world.

There has been a North versus South struggle in many nations.  North versus South Korea is just one example, where the South has so far come out best. In the British islands, the North, as Scotland, was in a political and military struggle with the South as England in times past, and the South won out to put Scotland under its rule.  In the United States there was a political conflict between the more industrial North with its elite which was more of a money power against the more agrarian South which wanted to maintain the older system in which the states had greater sovereignty than the North wanted. The conflict between the Northern elite led by the former Calvinist Puritans of New England who had become a money power elite  (usury) and the agrarian planter and slave holding elite of the South  resulted in the 1861-65 war.

The King of the North is said
to  stir up his power and courage against  the king of the South with
a great army.  Remember, soon after Lincoln was elected, the
War of Northern Aggression began, the King of the North against the King of
the South in 1861-65.  Verse  29 says the King of the North shall
return and come toward the south.  In the scenario of the War of
Federal Aggression, the King of the North kept coming back again after
the South defeated his army in battle on several occasions. The more
impulsive South apparently believed that if they could win a few battles that they
could win their independence.  But the North, allied with the federal govenment under the Radical Republicans,
was systematic and deliberate and would not give
up its drive to rule over the states of the South.












 
Share |

0 Comments | Post Comment
Share and enjoy
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • DZone
  • Netvouz
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb
« Last Page Next Page »