Saturday, July 19, 2008

Judaizing The US Church

Judaizing Fundamentalist Christians

By Harmony Grant
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/judaizingnondenominationchurches16apr08.shtml
April 16, 2008

Judaizing Fundamentalist Christians (April 21, 2008)

http://www.rense.com/general81/juda.htm

Original title: Judaizing The US Church

The Jewish Forward's recent "most read" article worries that evangelicals might be stealing from the Jews. But it is Christians who should really be worried.

The article describes a Passover banquet in Alabama where 1,300 Christians gathered for unleavened bread and bitter herbs and donated more than $10,000 to the Jewish Federation. A local rabbi complains, "It is a total taking over and arrogation to themselves of the entire concept of the Seder. It's totally Christological."

Evangelical Christians' support of Israel is essential to the Jewish state. The powerful Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations even publicly supports Rev. John Hagee-Israel-firster extraordinaire; they recently wrote the NY Times to defend him as Israel's "true friend". Binyamin Netanyahu-Israel's ninth prime minister, an extremist who resigned as finance minister in 2005 to protest withdrawal from Gaza-said Christian Zionists are Israel's best friends in the world! In a recent poll, a whopping 82 percent of evangelicals agreed that Christians are morally obligated to support the Jewish state. In his New Testament letters, the apostle Paul repelled attempts by Jews to impose on the early church the rites and legalisms of Old Testament law. He furiously rebuked the apostle Peter for bending to Judaizing influences; he said Peter "stood condemned." (Gal. 2:11) As evangelicals today fall even deeper into this unbiblical love affair, they are increasingly eager to participate in Jewish rites, own Jewish trinkets, and learn about Jewish culture.

Who is really damaged by this Christian appropriation? Jews are not becoming more Christian. Christians are becoming more Jewish! Jews are not donating money for Christian evangelism or even allowing it in their country)! It is Christians who finance a religion dedicated to opposing their own. And their gift of millions of dollars to Israel is flatly contrary to Scripture. Christians are instructed to give their tithes and offerings to the "household of faith," i.e., many Christian charities and relief organizations that help further the gospel message. (Gal. 6:10) Judaism and the state of Israel are emphatically not of the household of faith. Israel's "anti-missionary law" mandates a five-year prison sentence for any evangelical who gives to an Israeli a "material inducement" (Bible tract or even a cup of coffee) that might help persuade him to become a Christian!

Christianity Today should be debating the Alabama Passover, not the Jewish Forward. Christian pastors should speak up about the Talmud's anti-Christ vitriol, persecution of Christians by Israel, oppression of Christian evangelism by Jews in Israel and the US-and gravely warn against the Judaization of the American church. We should be asking, "Is this good for the church?" as the Forward and others constantly debate what is good for the Jews. But we don't. These debates never happen.

The Seattle Times published an opinion piece titled, "Passover seders are out of place in churches." Very true. But it was written by Rabbi Mark Glickman, not a Christian pastor as it should have been.

In Ohio, Catholic high school students took a field trip to a Jewish synagogue where the principal of religious education told them: "Judaism is the base of all Christian religion. It's good to know where you come from." That's interesting; I thought Christ was the base of all Christian religion. The "debt" Christians owe to Jews is increasingly taught by evangelicals wanting to stimulate support of Israel and ride the wave of Hebrewness. This movement is so intense the UK Guardian says, "From the mobilising might of CUFI and televangelists, to Jerusalem marches and the 65 million copy-selling Left Behind series, to be an American evangelical has become synonymous with fanatically pro-Israel politics." And the only concerned people getting any real air time about this areJews, the ones worried about compromising and collaborating with possibly "anti-Semitic" Christians.

It's deeply troubling that Jews, not Christians, worry about the Judaization of the church. This demonstrates the incredible deception of the evangelical community, which is so much less wary than the Jewish community even though this alliance is currently only a threat to Christians. Jews remain adamantly, consciously, and militantly opposed to Christian evangelism and theology-leery even to accept evangelicals' strong political and financial support. Meanwhile, evangelicals are so blind to the theological enmity between themselves and Talmudic Judaism that they rush headlong to support, defend, and now absorb Jewish identity and actions.

In his Seattle opinion piece, Rabbi Glickman makes a point that should shock many evangelicals. He says that "to be perfectly honest - the Seder [ritual feast held on first and second nights of eight-day passover] developed, in part, as an anti-Christian polemic - a "slam" on the then-new and growing religion called Christianity. Such religious critique is all but absent from contemporary Seders, but the anti-Christian roots of the event are unmistakable. A church Seder is thus a Christian event rooted in anti-Christianity." Basically-Christians who participate in the Seder are participating in an event directed against their own existence!

Glickman's admission is astonishing on many levels. First, it demonstrates Jews' safety and power in American society, that a rabbi could publicly admit the anti-Christianity of a yearly Jewish event. Second, it highlights a fact that Israel-first Christians refuse to face: Judaism opposes the recognition of Christ as God incarnate, Savior of mankind. For two millennia, it has been self-defined by opposing the explosion of Christian faith. Christians today can't participate in Judaism without opposing their own community and Lord. They can't support Israel without supporting Israeli persecution of Christians and Christian evangelism.

Besides that, the Judaization of the church corrupts and corrodes Christian theology. It's gotten so bad that a bunch of evangelical leaders recently took out a big NY Times ad just to remind people that Christians have to spread the faith (a major thing Jesus told us to do) and to evangelize Jews along with everyone else. This responded to a growing heresy that Jews have a separate covenant with God and don't need faith in Christ or need Christian evangelism. The Times ad expressed kindergarten Christianity-a basic element of our identity that is subverted by our growing obsession with Jewish identity.

Jews have long recognized that assimilation into Gentile culture posed a greater threat to world Jewry than physical persecution. It is long past time for Christians to recognize the threat of losing their unique identity as followers of Jesus and His earth-shaking message. St. Paul knew that the rites and observances of the Mosaic/rabbinic law would entangle the infant church, drawing Christians into their spell of legalism. He knew legalism would drive out the empowering liberating New Testament message of justification by faith alone.

How should believers respond to increasing efforts to incorporate Judaic elements in Christian theology and worship? Such "Judaizers" should be rebuked and repulsed, not embraced.

Source: http://educate-yourself.org/cn/judaizingnondenominationchurches16apr08.shtml

What do you think about the Anglo-American-Israel theory?

What do you think about the Anglo-American-Israel theory?

BRITISH ISRAELISM

Is there evidence that these so-called "ten lost tribes" appeared in England or the United States?

By playing with words, British Israel enthusiasts come up with some astonishing conclusions. They start with the Hebrew "berith", omitting the vowel "e" because there are no vowels in the Hebrew language, yet retaining the vowel "i", and they get the word brith.
As the British like to drop their "h"s, they remove the "h" which gives them the word brit. They add to this the Hebrew word for man, which is iyish or ish, and get the word British.

The Israelite descendants of Isaac are said to have dropped the "i" from Isaac, and that is where we are supposed to get the term Saxons, from Saac's sons. it is claimed that the Danube river comes from the name of the tribe of Dan.

This strange comparison of sounds between two completely different languages is considered preposterous to the Hebrew scholars with whom we have spoken. Hebrew is a semetic language, while English is of Aryan origin. Playing with words may be an interesting pastime, but it is of no value to the serious Bible student.

Those who teach British Israelism generally maintain three claims:
1.) That the ten tribes were lost.
2.) That since the time of the separation of Israel and Judah, the term "Jew" must refer only to Judah, and never to anyone of the other tribes.
1.) That the ten lost tribes later appeared in certain northern European and North American nations.

Firstly, were the ten tribes lost? Nowhere does Scripture speak of any of the twelve tribes as being "the lost tribes", nor is there anything in the Bible that indicates that they were ever lost.

The prophet Daniel, in his prayer recorded in Daniel 9, shows that he knew nothing of any tribes being lost. He said: "Oh, Lord, righteousness belongs to you, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the man of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are afar off, through all the countries whither Thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against You."---Daniel 9:7.

Near the close of the Old Testament, Zechariah speaks of "all the tribes of Israel," [Zech 9:1] and Malachi still refers to both Judah and Israel being in Jerusalem. [Malachi 2:11].

At the time the New Testament was written, there were still twelve tribes of Israel. James addressed his epistle to these people: "James, a servant of GOD and of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greetings."---James 1:1

It is evident that they were not lost. Scattered among the nations, yes; dispersed, without any doubt, but definitely not lost. Remnants of all twelve tribes continue to be recognized as such.

2.] Does the term "Jew" always exclusively refer only to the tribe of Judah? After the return from exile this term came to mean all that returned to Jerusalem as exiles. It is true that many were from the tribe of Judah. We have two proofs that all of these "Jews" were not of that tribe: a.] All of GOD'S people were invited to go back to rebuild Jerusalem regardless of the tribe they belonged to:

"Who is there among you of all His people? His GOD be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord GOD of Israel, [He is GOD] which is in Jerusalem."---Ezra 1:3

Though Jerusalem belonged to the tribe of Judah before the captivity, people from all tribes went back and rebuilt the city and the temple together.
b.] The Jews who rebuilt the temple were from the twelve tribes. They sacrificed twelve goats for the twelve tribes that were represented there [Ezra 6:12; 8:35] in the promise of the restoration of Jerusalem as it is given in the book of Zechariah, the people who were to inhabit Jerusalem are clearly defined:

"And it came to pass, that they were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel: so will I save you, and you shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong."--- Zechariah 8:13

After the return from exile, only one Jewish nation existed. The word "Jew" came to signify all people of the Hebrew race wherever they lived.

3.] Is there evidence that these so called "lost tribes" appeared in England or the United States? Non, whatsoever! Only a play on words and a twisting of two languages that are worlds apart.

"But mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee; thy throne shall be established for ever."---2.Sam 7:15,16.

The British Israel theory advocates use these verses to support their contention that GOD made an unconditional promise to David that his throne, his house, and his kingdom would never fail, regardless of their faithfulness or unfaithfulness. The theory is unsound and false in the light of these texts, which declare the promise to be conditional:
"If thou wilt walk before me...in uprightness...and wilt keep my statutes and my judgments: Then will I establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever, as I promised to David...But if ye shall at all turn from following Me...Then I will cut off Israel...and his house...will I cast out."---1.King 9:4-7
The theory is further proven unsound by these undeniable facts: 1. The word "forever" does not always mean "without end". 2. The fleshly Israel was completely disqualified because of their disobedience [Rom. 4:13; 9:7,8; 11:20].---source Joe Crews and the Word of GOD.

Source: http://www.come2jesus.info/britishisrael.htm

Adventist Church president continues call for involvement of women, youth in leadership

Adventist Church president continues call for involvement of women, youth in leadership

Paulsen's latest pastoral dialogue in South America; lay-involvement obviously key for a pastor of 72 churches



Pastor Jan Paulsen met yesterday with seven pastors in South America a Spanish-language dialogue broadcast internationally on the church's Hope Channel. The Adventist world church president brought his usual encouragement of involving women and youth in leadership and urging pastors make time for their families. [photo: courtesy Hope Channel]

The dialogue with pastors was broadcast yesterday from the Adventist Media Center -- Brazil. Though Paulsen asked about local challenges, many issues were similar to those raised during his pastoral dialogues in other parts of the world.

President of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Pastor Jan Paulsen, brought the latest episode of his live, televised dialogues with pastors to South America yesterday, encouraging local churches to include women and young members in leadership.

Paulsen spoke through a translator during two separate episodes with seven pastors from Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries in "Pastors: In Conversation." The third and fourth unscripted telecasts were broadcast internationally on the church's Hope Channel from here at the Adventist Media Center -- Brazil.

When asking about challenges specific to the region, most participants spoke to issues that have resonated in other regional pastoral dialogues: intercultural ministry and training lay leadership.

"The church will do well when the spiritually gifted lay people in the local church are activated," Paulsen said. "A church does not do well when it relies entirely on the pastor."

Paulsen also spoke to another universal challenge of prioritizing one's own family.

"Your wife, your closest partner should also receive a sense that your care for her is not diminished by your care for the church, and that [your] children feel they have a ? high value in your setting aside quality time," Paulsen said.

The task can be a difficult one when some pastors are in charge of more than one church, Paulsen acknowledged. One pastor, Pablo Carbajal from Ecuador, said he pastors 72 different churches.

Paulsen learned from the group that women make up more than 70 percent of local congregations. He asked how they were leading out in ministry.

Carbajal said women made up nearly 70 out of 80 attendees of a recent leadership workshop. Pastor Nelsen Tapia from Chile said many women are involved in a hospitality ministry, while Pastor David Barzola from Argentina said some women are preaching and offering counseling.

Roughly a quarter of a million people join the Adventist Church in South America each year.

Paulsen has hosted previous conversations with pastors in North America and Europe and will host another episode in Africa in August.

"Source: Adventist News Network"

Source: http://news.adventist.org/data/2008/1215032165/index.html.en

P.S. Good Job, your handlers ought to be proud of you! Atta'boy Prez Paulsen, stir up more controversy the world wide church you head is too unified; Stir up disorder and discontent in the local churches; That is your job after all. It must get pretty boring in SILVER Spring, Mary-Land when you need to sow seeds of turmoil in third world countries. Egg them on, why don't you! Encourage dissent: Ordo Ab Chao.

Here's the reason why this is taking place to reproduce in the SDA Church, what's happening here:

Church of England faces split over women bishops

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM Jul 08 2008 11:46


The Church of England was facing a serious split on Tuesday after its ruling General Synod voted to allow women bishops despite threats by more than 1 300 clergy that they would quit over the issue.

The Synod, the church's legislative body, voted late on Monday to press ahead with the ordination of women bishops and rejected the legal safeguards demanded by traditionalists.

The Synod members voted to approve the drawing-up of a statutory national code of practice to accommodate parishes and clergy who object to women bishops on grounds of conscience.

That fell short of demands by traditionalists, who had wanted new dioceses to be created for parishes and clergy opposed to women bishops.

The Synod also rejected compromise proposals to create a new order of three male "super bishops" to cater for objectors.

The crunch vote at the University of York in northern England followed a passionate six-hour debate that pitched conservatives against liberals and ended with one bishop in tears as he said he was "ashamed" of the Church of England.

The Reverend Stephen Venner, the Bishop of Dover in south-east England, who supports women bishops, said the failure to agree to create "super bishops" meant that every opportunity to allow objectors to "flourish" with the Church had been blocked.

"I have to say, Synod, for the first time in my life, I feel ashamed," he said.

Bishops voted to bring forward legislation to ordain women bishops by 28 to 12, clergy were in favour by 124 to 44 and lay people by 111 to 68.


The Church of England, led by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, is the mother church of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which has about 77-million followers.

It first ordained women priests in 1994 amid a storm of controversy.

For conservatives, women and gay clergy -- an issue which has also caused bitter splits in the church in recent years -- cast doubt on the interpretation of Christianity's sacred text, the Bible.

But liberals argue it is time to take a more inclusive approach.

"It seems to me a total nonsense that the church proclaims a gospel of equality for all while seeming to categorise some of its ordained ministers as unacceptable," Reverend Ferial Etherington was quoted as saying by the Times newspaper in the debate.

The Church of England's two most senior figures -- Williams and John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York -- reportedly favoured a compromise that would satisfy both sides.

Sentamu, who was born in Uganda, said: "There is a wonderful African saying: 'He who travels fast, travels alone and he who travels far, travels in the company of others.'

"I would like to travel in company with everybody in the church."

A total of 1 333 clergy have threatened to leave the Church of England if they are not given legal safeguards to set up a network of parishes that would remain under male leadership.

Traditionalists could now quit the Church ahead of its once-a-decade meeting, known as the Lambeth Conference, which starts in the southern English city of Canterbury next week.

"It is getting worse. It is going downhill very badly. It is quite clear there is a pincer movement and we are being squeezed out," a leading traditionalist, Father David Houlding, told the Times.

Liberals and conservatives have been at odds over the ordination of homosexual clergy since the consecration of openly gay Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire in the United States in 2003.

Nearly 300 conservative Anglican bishops and archbishops formed a breakaway movement, the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FOCA), after a conference in Jerusalem last month.

FOCA claims to represent half of the world's Anglicans and many of its members say they will stay away from the Lambeth Conference. -- AFP

Shall We Gather At The River?

A pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.”

Revelation 22:1-2

Shall we gather at the river,
Where bright angel feet have trod,
With its crystal tide forever
Flowing by the throne of God?

Refrain

Yes, we’ll gather at the river,
The beautiful, the beautiful river;
Gather with the saints at the river
That flows by the throne of God.

On the margin of the river,
Washing up its silver spray,
We will talk and worship ever,
All the happy golden day.

Refrain

Ere we reach the shining river,
Lay we every burden down;
Grace our spirits will deliver,
And provide a robe and crown.

Refrain

At the smiling of the river,
Mirror of the Savior’s face,
Saints, whom death will never sever,
Lift their songs of saving grace.

Refrain

Soon we’ll reach the silver river,
Soon our pilgrimage will cease;
Soon our happy hearts will quiver
With the melody of peace.

Refrain

Words & Music:
Ro­bert Low­ry, 1864; first pub­lished in Hap­py Voic­es, 1865, num­ber 220
(MI­DI, score):

Friday, July 18, 2008

Wall Street meltdown: Media's third-toughest beat

Wall Street meltdown: Media's third-toughest beat

Commentary: Journalists have covered a stream of depressing financial news

By Jon Friedman, MarketWatch
Last update: 12:04 a.m. EDT July 18, 2008
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Aside from Iraq and Afghanistan, the most demanding assignment in journalism this year has been covering the meltdown of the U.S. financial system.
Talk about a depressing, fast-moving beat. Let's recap with some headlines from Wall Street:
Financial firms have taken about $380 billion in write-downs worldwide. Subprime problems evolve into a full-fledged fiasco. Proud, old Bear Stearns has to beg for a buyer, while Lehman Brothers (LEH:
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc
Last: 19.11+0.21+1.11%
4:01pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
LEH
19.11, +0.21, +1.1%)
teeters. Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch (MER:
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc
Last: 30.91+0.18+0.59%
4:00pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
MER
30.91, +0.18, +0.6%)
and Wachovia (WB:
Wachovia Corp
Last: 12.97-0.47-3.50%
4:01pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
WB
12.97, -0.47, -3.5%)
all fire their top executives. This week, regulators are talking about limiting naked shorting of shares in Fannie Mae (FNM:
Fannie Mae
Last: 13.40+2.47+22.60%
4:01pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
FNM
13.40, +2.47, +22.6%)
and Freddie Mac (FRE:
Freddie Mac
Last: 9.18+0.85+10.20%
4:02pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
FRE
9.18, +0.85, +10.2%)
. By the time you read this, something else entirely may be in the spotlight. Read related MarketWatch column.
Video: The Business News Rollercoaster



One of the toughest beats in journalism has been chronicling Wall Street's meltdown -- and the media have met the challenge of covering a fast-moving world of unending stream of depressing news. (July 18)
"I've been doing this for almost 40 years," said Allan Sloan, a top writer for Time Warner's (TWX:
time warner inc com
Last: 14.70+0.05+0.34%
4:00pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
TWX
14.70, +0.05, +0.3%)
Fortune magazine. "What's been going on is the most dangerous -- and weird -- [financial] market. And the stock market is the least of it."
The flow of scary news "just doesn't go away," Sloan marveled. "It sends a shiver down your spine. People are losing faith in deposit insurance."
The seemingly endless stream of gloomy financial news has posed special challenges to journalists. I interviewed two of the best: Sloan and Daniel Gross, who succeeded Sloan at Washington Post's (WPO:
The Washington Post Company
Last: 597.00-10.00-1.65%
4:03pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
WPO
597.00, -10.00, -1.6%)
Newsweek and also writes for online magazine Slate.
Fast news cycle
What has made an impression on Gross is how quickly everything is changing.
For instance, the collapse of Bear Stearns, one of Wall Street's proudest investment banks, was a major news story for weeks. "Now," Gross mused, "I walk past the Bear Stearns building and don't give it a second thought."
That's because so many fresh headlines have been written since then. Some Wall Street pundits have speculated that Lehman could suffer a similar fate.
Gross sees bloggers playing a bigger role in reporting on the latest financial woes than in previous Wall Street fiascos.
"This is a story made for bloggers because there are so many manifestations of credit problems popping up: car sales, student loans, foreclosures in California, layoffs at Merrill Lynch," he said. "The best blogs scour the Internet for bits and pieces that might seem random and then, by aggregating them, seem coherent."
In addition to newspapers and some magazines, Gross regularly reads such blogs as Irvine Housing and Calculated Risk.
Gross praised Grant's Interest Rate Observer, long a financial-news bible, by saying that "James Grant was one of the only people who nailed this story in all its complexity, ahead of the curve." Gross also complimented The Wall Street Journal's comprehensive coverage of the Bear Stearns and Lehman stories. (The Journal, like MarketWatch, the publisher of this column, is a unit of News Corp. (NWS:
news corp cl b
Last: 14.40-0.13-0.89%
4:03pm 07/18/2008
Delayed quote data
Sponsored by:
NWS
14.40, -0.13, -0.9%)
)
For financial journalists, the biggest challenge may be trying to accumulate instant expertise in so many areas.
"You have to get a primer on Fannie and Freddie," lamented Gross. "Next week, it's going to be the FDIC. Before, it was the Fed and the discount window. It has been a rolling problem."
Seeking out the truffles