Saturday, November 07, 2009

PREPARING US FOR A PROTESTANT-CATHOLIC GOVERNMENTAL TAKEOVER


PREPARING US FOR A PROTESTANT-CATHOLIC GOVERNMENTAL TAKEOVER



In small wide-margin study booklets, we have been gradually releasing the most in-depth series of final events Spirit of Prophecy studies ever researched out (our End Time Series).

Those of you who have been obtaining them, as they are released, well-know that the event which will trigger a cavalcade of final events, leading directly to the general close of probation and the Second Coming of Christ, will be an organized Protestant drive in the political field which will lead them ultimately to coerce Congress into enacting a nationwide Sunday Law with iron teeth.

In this present article, we will observe that the Religious Right is fast learning how to become political experts at manipulating the public, winning support for its positions, and getting the votes to place its men into office on all levels in America�from local school boards to the U.S. Senate.

As America becomes more decadent, many are aroused to try to stop it if possible by legislative enactments. But it quickly becomes obvious that success in stacking political committees and legislatures is crucial.

In 1980, the Religious Right worked hard to sweep Ronald Reagan into office. But there were many others in America who also wanted to see him elected: pro-gun advocates, hard-line anti-Communists, etc.

But the situation became confused when the national economy showed strong signs of collapsing in 1992. A large proportion of the public decided that keeping their jobs was more important than moralism. The result was the election of William J. Clinton, that strange one from Arkansas, who quickly revealed that he loved homosexuals, promoted hard-core pornography, and seemed anxious to encourage every imaginable type of secular and immoral takeover.

Every passing month since Clintons election has revealed some new favored vice or family scandal. And people across the land are becoming desperate.

Enter the Religious Right. It consists of a variety of Evangelical leaders, from James Dobson to Pat Robertson. And it also includes Roman Catholic bishops and cardinals.

But, in 1992, the Religious Right failed although by a small margin to win the presidential election. At the 1992 Republican Convention in Houston, it was reported that church leaders, such as Robertson, drafted major portions of the political platform. Strong speeches were given, which spoke of imposing moral values and eliminating the secular opposition.

Many reacted unfavorably to such strident language, including many key Republican leaders who were secular.

Our job is to win elections, not cling to intolerances that zealots call principles, said GOP National Committee Chairman Rich Bond, as he left office in 1993. He added: We cannot confuse principle with intolerance. Were not going to be exclusionary.

That was the attitude. Yet, as the months passed and the Clinton administration backed what Christians saw to be one abomination after another, the concern intensified.

It has become obvious that right now is the golden opportunity for the Religious Right to come to the forefront of American politics and take over local and federal governments across the land. People are getting fed up with the scandals, cover-ups, and trashy living that people in high office are encouraging.

Indeed, developments of each year since the 1990 Democratic victory seem to intensify the determination of people with morals to get rid of the immorality once and for all.

But, within the past six months, a majority of Religious Right organizations have swung over to the position that they must compromise on basic principles, if they are going to win the elections. The decision is being made that getting votes is more important than upholding standards and family values.

The underlying tactics appear to be: (1) Gain control of the Republican nominations on all levels. (2) Run for political seats on compromise platforms that please as many as possible. (3) Win the key elected offices in the nation. (4) Use those positions to bring a return to national morality and Christianity. (5) Enact legislation which will focus on commonalities which all the churches can agree upon.

A 32-year-old former political consultant, Ralph Reed, Jr., is a key man in this. As head of Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition, he is in charge of making the policy decisions which will ensure big wins in elections throughout the United States.

And what is the Christian Coalition? It is the largest single Christian political action group in America. It was founded on the mailing lists of Pat Robertson when, in 1988, he unsuccessfully tried to run for the presidency. It is now the leading Religious Right organization in the country, with 450,000 members in 50 states and an annual budget of $8-10 million.

Reed outlined the new strategy in the summer 1993 issue of Policy Review, a magazine published by a conservative organization, the Heritage Foundation. In an article entitled, Casting a Wider Net he outlined the plans for doing just that: reaching more voters in order to win more elected offices. Reed said that the problem was that the conservatives needed to tone down their message, so they could get more worldlings on their side at election time. He said the Religious Right was weakening its effectiveness by concentrating disproportionately on issues such as abortion and homosexuality. In support of this viewpoint, he cited polls showing that only 12 percent of the public favored elimination of abortion.

What did Reed recommend in place of that key conservative plank? such things as taxes, crime, government waste, health care, and financial security.

This was exactly what key Republican leaders had been urging them to do. Republican leadership, including National Committee Chairman Haley Barbour, applauds this willingness to compromise principles for the sake of votes. It is politics as usual.

In the months after the 1992 election, many were blaming the Religious Right for the loss of the White House. It was felt that the strong pro-Christian and anti-abortion speeches at the GOP Houston Convention (such as those by Pat Robertson and Pat Buchanan) turned the tide against the Bush re-election campaign. To some, Houston seemed like letting Christian fundamentalists take over the grand old party.

Progressives on both sides�in the Christian Right and in the main party itselfï decided they must get together, settle their differences, and find ways to work together. They must tear down the walls which separated them. Such things as anti-abortion must be toned down or, if necessary, eliminated entirely from party speeches. The term that used to describe their newfound alliance they called the big tent. There was room, they said, for both Christians, secularists, and even abortionists in the party!

And, believe it or not, it was even agreed upon that anti-homosexual talk must be toned down or cease.

Pro-choice Republicans now say the flight from anti-abortion is becoming a stampede. The desperate frenzy to win, win, win, is draining the Religious Right of its declared moral fiber. If you will not stand for anything, what will you stand for? only what the majority want?

Massachusetts Governor William Weld is thought by some to exemplify the ideal successful Republican candidate: pro-choice and pro-gay rights. Some Republicans want to move him on up to the presidency.

Listen to Ann Stone, chairperson of the Republicans for Choice: Our party should be pro-choice, not because were pro-abortion, but because were against government being involved in the decision process. After failing to get pro-life off the platform in 1992, she says, Next time around I think there's a good chance well either get pro-life dropped or the language radically changed.

But it should not be forgotten that, in November 1993, Mike Farris won 46 percent of the Virginia votes (although he lost the race for lieutenant governor and openly campaigned against abortion). At the same time, George Allen, Jr., won the governorship of Virginia�the first Republican governor of that state in 16 years�with the full backing of what his Democratic opponent (a judge) called extremist right-wing groups�such as Concerned Women for America. Allen did not make an issue of being against abortion, but did stand for other family values.

So what was the political mainstream in Virginia, and who were the losers? This fact came as a shock to many in politics and the media. Shortly afterward on Nightline, Ted Koppel admitted, Maybe the Religious Right isn't always wrong. That may be a bitter pill for some to swallow, but its the way things are. All across the country, there are people of faith who consider their values to be under siege.

In that last part, Koppel surely spoke the truth. But what he meant by saying not always wrong was that the Christian Right was able to get its candidate elected. And elected meant right, which is the crazy world of politics and worldlings in general: The majority is right, and nothing else matters.

On that same telecast, Pat Robertson was interviewed. In response to the remark that a subtle change, not in his beliefs, but certainly in his packaging had occurred, Robertson said this:

I would urge people, as a matter of private choice [private opinion to keep to yourself], not to choose abortion�because I think its wrong. Its something else, though, in the political arena, to go on a quixotic crusade when you know that you will be beaten continuously.

Not so subtle packaging. Robertson said, in effect, Its time to throw out the pro-life plank. Its time to work together with the abortionists and fellow travelers, with anyone who will help us get our candidates elected.

It was not a change in packaging, but in product.

Just as Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network has had its name changed to Family Channel, so Ralph Reed, head of Christian Coalition, has been hard at work to change its appearance and objectives.

The aim is simple enough: Take in enough non-Christians to win the ballot boxes of America. According to the new view, born-againers are simply not enough to do the job. Their unique goals need to be tabled for a time.

The Christian Coalition used to be mostly white and mostly Protestant. But now it is trying to take in minorities (Hispanics and Blacks), Catholics, and Jews. What do the people want? Give it to them. Later, in office, we can make the needed changes in legislation.

The 1993 New York City School Board elections were a classic. The Christian Coalition got together with the Catholic cardinal and plotted out political strategy. Then they brought in the Jews, Hispanics, and Blacks. This ecumenical coalition was able to win school board seats throughout the city. That same November, a Republican Baptist preacher, Mike Huckabee, became lieutenant governor of Clintons home state of Arkansas. He ran on a solid pro-life platform. Elsewhere in the nation, religious people and candidates backed by them were elected to school boards, city councils, and state offices. There is no doubt but that the reaction to Clinton is increasing.

In order to do this, Protestant political leaders are working closely with Catholic bishops. Robertson's Christian Coalition is going out of its way to court Catholic leaders. At its September meeting in Washington, D.C., the coalition (1) bestowed its first Catholic Layman of the Year award on Representative Henry Hyde, of Illinois, (2) held a workshop on Catholic-Evangelical cooperation, and (3) concluded the session with a Sunday mass as well as a Protestant church service!

It was the 1993 New York School Board elections that proved to both sides what they could do by working together. The election-winning breakthrough came in May 1993 when New York's Cardinal John O'Connor agreed to let the coalition distribute 100,000 voter guides in Catholic churches. Those guides told Catholics all over the city who they ought to vote for.

That success got them to working closely together elsewhere. This month the coalition is mailing 2 million voter guides to Californians including 400 to Catholic pastors in the hope that the clergy will support Proposition 174 (which would date school vouchers) from the pulpit. In Atlanta last week, a spokesman for Catholic Archbishop John Donoghe reported that the church shares many common goals with the Christian Coalition. Newsweek, November 8, 1993.

This is good political sense, for one-fourth of American voters identify themselves as Evangelicals, while another fourth say they are Catholics. We expect to top out with 1 million Protestant members, says Ralph Reed. With Catholics, we can double that. With that in mind, Robertson recently transferred Marlene Elwill from a Midwest campaign direction to a new post, as liaison to U.S. Catholic cardinals, bishops, and their political organizations.

In the latest issue of his magazine, Christian American, Robertson excused the fact of the new alliance with the remark, I feel I have a lot more in common with this pope than with liberal Protestants.

But, although it may make good political sense, what does it wind up with? Obviously, the end result can only be legislation upon which both the Evangelicals and Catholics could agree. And the book, Great Controversy, clearly states what that single unifying point would be. When it passes Congress, the final crisis will begin.

Martin Mawyer is president of the Christian Action Network, another major Religious Right organization in America. He is incensed at Robertson's sell-out, especially in regard to his blatant willingness to set aside the abortion issue and consider approving a pro-gay platform. Mawyer says Robertson is charting his course by opinion polls, instead of standing for the right because it is right. We would agree with Mawyer.

A lot of leaders place hobnobbing above the issues. They feel the best strategy to getting their agenda across to the nation is by making friends with very powerful people, Mawyer said in an interview with Karen Augustine, of Rutherford magazine (March 1994). The problem is that if you use hobnob politicking, you end up compromising too much.

Continuing on, he says, Because they [Christian Coalition] are so locked into Republican politics, they are continually forced to re-define themselves based on the current political climate and who's in charge of the Republican Party. That disturbs me. I've seen several flip-flops on issues just this year.

When asked what kind of flip-flops, Mawyer replied,

Some Republicans last summer said, We need to have a larger tent, a more diverse set of views on the religious, social, and moral issues. Christian Coalition said that, if the Republican Party tried to enlarge its circle, it would become nothing more than a pup tent. However, several months later, Christian Coalition began to apply the enlarged tent policy to their own organization and downplayed the importance of [opposing] abortion, homosexuality, and [supporting] school prayer. They tried to re-define themselves as more interested in tax reform, health care, and NAFTA mainstream issues.

Mawyer concluded with this remark: Ralph Reed can take whatever surveys he wants and get the answers he wants in his public opinion poll, but we also take a poll twice a month and get different results.

For his part, when Ralph Reed, head of the Christian Coalition, was asked to define the goals of his organization, he said this:

Our role is much like that of the AFL-CIO in regard to union work. We want to mobilize people. We want to get millions of people involved and get them registered to vote. Rutherford, March 1994.

Many, including Mawyer, have been disturbed at the way Christian Coalition keeps changing its positions, in an effort to please everyone. But all the while it keeps moving closer to Rome. Jerome Himmelstein, author of To the Right: The Transformation of American Conservatism, says the Christian Right continually moves back and forth in this unstable fashion. They've always tried to appeal to that broad range of people with a broad conservative agenda. Its just a tactical question of which issues to emphasize at any given moment.

Secularists and religion haters, in general, declare that the Religious Right are vicious people who use stealth tactics of deception and subterfuge to win elections.

Holly Gunner, head of the Lighthouse Institute for Public Policy, writing in Freedom Writer (April 1994) quotes Ralph Reed as saying, It is just good strategy. Its like guerrilla warfare . . Its better to move quietly, with stealth, under cover of night . . It comes down to whether you want to be the British Army in the Revolutionary War or the Viet Cong.

Gunner comments: At a Religious Right conference in Denver last year, participants were instructed in tactics that include: Hide your affiliation and true agenda; use the gay issue to raise funds for the cause; always cover your tracks with local front men; appeal to peoples fears of society and change; appeal to Americas worst [most fearful and angry] impulses; remember that tension will provide the winning edge for candidates.

Her article continues:

If voter turnout is low, and they [the Rightists] can work behind the scenes without being visible for most voters, they can win by getting enough votes through their own networks.

Religious Right candidates . . have often attempted to hide their religious or educational views and organizational affiliations from public scrutiny. In the words of Clay Mankameyer, at the South Weymouth, Massachusetts Christian Coalition leadership school for potential Religious Right candidates, You're not obligated to say all things to all people . . You don't have to answer every question; and, if you do so, you're going to get yourself in trouble.

Church and State magazine declares: Reeds new and improved Christian Coalition is the same bunch of theocrats with a new disguise. GOP party moderates fear that its objective is to take over the Republican Party. And, of course, that is exactly what the coalition is determined to do. It is significant that, within recent months, coalition agents have succeeded in gaining control of GOP state organizations in Virginia, Iowa, Kansas, Texas, and Washington State.

For his part, Mawyer says that the Coalitions mainstreaming policy is based on deceiving the American public as to their real intentions.

Georgia Senator Paul Coverdale benefited from this compromise method. He is a pro-choicer who happened to also be against the Freedom of choice Act (FOCA), as it is presently worded. So the coalition helped him to success at the ballot box. Ann Stone, head of an organization, who determined to make the Republican Party pro-choice, was delighted. She commented that the next step will be for the coalition to support any pro-choice candidate�as long as they are against federally-funded abortions. And the next step after that?

The Christian Coalition should keep in mind that a survey, conducted by the Family Research Council in December 1993, revealed that more than half of the respondents who identified themselves as Bush voters�said they would be less likely to vote Republican if the presidential candidate is for abortion and homosexual rights.

In September 1993, the Christian Coalition held a Road to Victory 93 conference in Washington, D.C. At that session, former education secretary and presidential hopeful William Bennett warned the group against losing its identity:

Its fine for you to expand your focus, but don't forget who you are. You are not the Lower Taxes Coalition, not the Free Trade and Full Employment Coalition, not even the American Empowerment Coalition. You are the Christian Coalition.

It was clear from the response at that meeting, that the majority of those in attendance agreed more fully with Bennett than with Ralph Reeds mainstreaming ideas. Indeed, which is more important: winning elections or standing for principles?

Charles Colson recently said: Some even think of political defeat as spiritual defeat. It is not. Spiritual defeat would come only if we were to abandon our moral principles in order to seek political victory.

Yet it was Chuck Colson who recently led out in linking Evangelical and Catholic leaders in a joint compact to work together in the future in a variety of ways to improve the position of the Religious Right and their objectives.

The following text is transcribed from a presentation by Max C. Karrer, M.D., at the Christian Coalitions Road to Victory Conference in Washington, D.C., last September. Dr. Karrer is the north Florida coordinator for the Christian Coalition of Florida and the chairman of the finance committee to the board of trustees for Regent University. He also serves on the executive board of the Republican Party of Duvall County, Florida. Titled, Using Computers at the Grass Roots, the presentation attracted a standing-room-only crowd.

First you select your churches. There are some churches where you would not necessarily find what I call Christians in the church, your charismatic churches. You don't select your liberal, mainline denominations. If you select your churches right, you'll have a ninety percent match on voters who will be with us. That's what we do.

As an example of how this works, we had a legislative race where we had a female Jewish lawyer liberal feminist endorsed by now, who had knocked out, three year ago, a pro-life Christian. We didn't know what we were doing they poured NARAL money in and managed to beat him by 200 votes. And it was all because we didn't know what we were doing.

By this time she was the darling of the Democrats in the Florida legislature. They gave her all the choice committee assignments; they had bigger and better plans for her, and so on. And we had a fellow who was running for his first political office named Jim Fuller who jumped into the race.

This time we had our Christian voter data base. We had our church liaison committees. We had our voter guides going. And we could quietly we were not allowed to give them away, so we charged him five dollars but we printed labels, for him, of the Christian voters, which enabled him to put out directed mailings to the Christian voter, that he would not necessarily do to the general public.

To make a long story short, he beat her by 65% to 35%it was a landslide. And they didn't know what hit them, because you want to talk about stealth campaigns it was quietly done, and they didn't realize they were in trouble until it was too late. This also convinced the state Republican Party that they better deal with the Christian Coalition, at least in Duvall County, because every candidate we got behind won [emphasis added], in Duvall in the 92 elections. This was the method we used.

We don't give our list to anybody. What we will do is print labels for some people. That we will do I sold him the labels, I didn't give them to him. Its legal then, see. For five dollars!

The thing I want to say about building up a Christian data voter base is: Political candidates, or politicians, only understand two things, and that's money and votes. And if they think you control a lot of votes, you suddenly become very powerful in their eyes.

Politicians in our section think we have a bigger data voter base than we do. But we don't change that perception, we don't tell them. They come to us now. When someone wants to run for office, they come to Christian Coalition; they want to talk to us. It gives you and not just for elections lobbying power with the legislator, because they think you have this huge bloc of voters that you can swing though you cant necessarily.


.

Blogger says Cuban agents beat her

November 7, 2009 10:14 a.m. EST



Havana resident Yoani Sanchez's blog, "Generation Y," draws about 1 million hits a month.






Havana, Cuba (CNN) -- A Cuban woman known for writing critical blogs about life in the communist nation said she was briefly detained by government agents Friday in the capital.

Yoani Sanchez said agents pulled her hair and beat her when she refused to get into their car, according to Roots of Hope, a nonprofit that works with Cuban youth. She said she was on her way to an anti-violence march when she was detained.

Sanchez gained international attention for her blog "Generation Y," which gets about 1 million hits a month.

Read Yoani Sanchez's blog

Before agents released Sanchez, they warned her that her writings had gone too far, the nonprofit said. Freedom of speech is limited in the island nation, where media are controlled by the government.

There was no immediate comment from the Cuban government on Sanchez's claims, which CNN could not independently verify.

Earlier this year, the blogger was named one of the world's 100 most influential people by Time magazine. The government barred her from traveling to New York in October to receive a journalism award. .


.

Meeting the Bridegroom


Lesson 25Meeting the Bridegroom

Sabbath, December 19, 2009

Meeting the Bridegroom

“That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” Ephesians 5:26, 27.

Preparation
1. What parable did Jesus give to underscore the need to be constantly alert? What special significance for today is contained in the concept of the virgins? Matthew 25:1, 2.

“In the parable, all the ten virgins went out to meet the bridegroom. All had lamps and vessels for oil. For a time there was seen no difference between them. So with the church that lives just before Christ’s second coming. All have a knowledge of the Scriptures. All have heard the message of Christ’s near approach, and confidently expect His appearing.” –Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 408.

2. How did He describe the virgins and their preparation? Matthew 25:2-4; Luke 12:35, 36.

“Get dressed for service and keep your lamps burning; be like people waiting for their master to come back from the wedding celebration, so that when he comes and knocks they can immediately open the door for him.” Luke 12:35, 36.

“The class represented by the foolish virgins are not hypocrites. They have a regard for the truth, they have advocated the truth, they are attracted to those who believe the truth; but they have not yielded themselves to the Holy Spirit’s working. They have not fallen upon the Rock, Christ Jesus, and permitted their old nature to be broken up. This class are represented also by the stony ground hearers. They receive the word with readiness, but they fail of assimilating its principles. Its influence is not abiding. The Spirit works upon man’s heart, according to his desire and consent implanting in him a new nature; but the class represented by the foolish virgins have been content with a superficial work. They do not know God. They have not studied His character; they have not held communion with Him; therefore they do not know how to trust, how to look and live. Their service to God degenerates into a form.” –Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 411.

Sleeping And Caught Off Guard


3. What happened after the virgins waited for a very long time for the bridegroom? What was the joyful proclamation that woke them at midnight? Matthew 25:5, 6; Mark 14:37, 38.

“It is in a crisis that character is revealed. When the earnest voice proclaimed at midnight, ‘Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him,’ and the sleeping virgins were roused from their slumbers, it was seen who had made preparation for the event. Both parties were taken unawares; but one was prepared for the emergency, and the other was found without preparation. So now, a sudden and unlooked for calamity, something that brings the soul face to face with death, will show whether there is any real faith in the promises of God. It will show whether the soul is sustained by grace. The great final test comes at the close of human probation, when it will be too late for the soul’s need to be supplied.” –Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 412.

4. In what grave predicament did the foolish virgins find themselves? Could the wise virgins give them oil? What does the oil represent in terms of our spiritual life? Matthew 25:7-9; Proverbs 13:9.



The oil is a symbol of the Holy Spirit…

““Without the Spirit of God a knowledge of His word is of no avail. The theory of truth, unaccompanied by the Holy Spirit, cannot quicken the soul or sanctify the heart. One may be familiar with the commands and promises of the Bible; but unless the Spirit of God sets the truth home, the character will not be transformed. Without the enlightenment of the Spirit, men will not be able to distinguish truth from error, and they will fall under the masterful temptations of Satan.…

“This is the class that in time of peril are found crying, Peace and safety. They lull their hearts into security, and dream not of danger. When startled from their lethargy, they discern their destitution, and entreat others to supply their lack; but in spiritual things no man can make up another’s deficiency.... But character is not transferable. No man can believe for another. No man can receive the Spirit for another. No man can impart to another the character which is the fruit of the Spirit’s working.” –Christ’s Object Lessons, pp. 407, 410-412.

Separation And Disappointment


5. When the foolish virgins returned, what did they find? Matthew 25:10; Luke 12:24, 25.

“Let none follow the example of the foolish virgins and think that it will be safe to wait until the crisis comes before gaining a preparation of character to stand in that time. It will be too late to seek for the righteousness of Christ when the guests are called in and examined. Now is the time to put on the righteousness of Christ–the wedding garment that will fit you to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb. In the parable, the foolish virgins are represented as begging for oil and failing to receive it at their request. This is symbolic of those who have not prepared themselves by developing a character to stand in a time of crisis…. Character is not transferable. It is not to be bought or sold; it is to be acquired. The Lord has given to every individual an opportunity to obtain a righteous character…, but He has not provided a way by which one human agent may impart to another the character which he has developed….” –That I May Know Him, p. 350.

6. What terrible disappointment met the virgins who were too late? What did it mean that the bridegroom did not know them and therefore could not admit them to the feast? Matthew 25:11, 12; Luke 13:25, 26.

“The ten virgins are watching in the evening of this earth’s history. All claim to be Christians. All have a call, a name, a lamp, and all profess to be doing God’s service. All apparently wait for Christ’s appearing. But five are unready. Five will be found surprised, dismayed, outside the banquet hall.

“At the final day, many will claim admission to Christ’s kingdom,… In this life they have not entered into fellowship with Christ; therefore they know not the language of heaven, they are strangers to its joy. ‘What man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.’ 1 Corinthians 2:11.” –Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 412, 413.

Prepared For The Wedding Feast

7. What does this parable teach us who are living so near to the coming of the Bridegroom? Matthew 25:13.

“Now, while probation lingers, while mercy’s voice is still heard, is the time for us to put away our sins....” –Maranatha, p. 79.

“The Lord wants all to understand His providential dealings now, just now, in the time in which we live. There must be no long discussions, presenting new theories in regard to the prophecies which God has already made plain. Now the great work from which the mind should not be diverted is the consideration of our personal safety in the sight of God. Are our feet on the rock of ages? Are we hiding ourselves in our only refuge? The storm is coming, relentless in its fury. Are we prepared to meet it? Are we one with Christ as He is one with the Father? Are we heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ? Are we working in copartnership with Christ?” –(Manuscript 32a, 1896) Evangelism, p. 199.




.

Luke 21 - Jesus Warns of Jerusalem’s Fall and His Return


Luke 21 - Jesus Warns of Jerusalem’s Fall and His Return

A. A widow’s sacrificial gift.

1. (1-2) Jesus observes the widow’s giving.

And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury, and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites.

a. He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites: This poor widow must have been a welcome sight to a weary Jesus, who endured a storm of questions from His enemies.

i. Jesus looks at us when we give. He notices how much we give, but is far more interested in what that amount says about our hearts than anything else.

b. Two mites: According to Poole’s calculations, the value of a mite can be determined like this: a denarii is one day’s wage, and equals six meahs; one meah equals two pondions; one pondion equals two issarines; one issarine equals eight mites. When you figure it all out, two mites is 1% of a denarii - 1% of a day’s wage.

c. She gave two mites, not just one. The widow might have kept one coin for herself, and who would blame her if she did? Giving one meant giving half of all her money. But in giving two mites, her giving has a certain recklessness about it.

2. (3-4) Jesus assesses the widow’s gift.

So He said, "Truly I say to you that this poor widow has put in more than all; for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God, but she out of her poverty put in all the livelihood that she had."

a. This poor widow has put in more than all: Jesus did not say that she put in more than any one of them. He said that she put in more than all of them - all of them put together! How could it possibly be said that she put in more than all? Because all the others gave out of their abundance; she gave sacrificially, out of her poverty.

b. This means that the poor man can serve and please God just as much as a rich man. It doesn’t matter if you are poor in influence, in gifts, or in money; if you sacrificially give to God what you have, He sees it and is pleased.

c. Jesus had just criticized the scribes as those who devour widow’s houses (Luke 20:47). Now a lone widow makes a spectacular contribution - had her house been devoured by a scribe?

3. What, in God’s eyes, determines the value of a gift?

a. Remember that God does not need our money - it is our privilege to give to Him; giving is necessary for our sake, not for God’s sake.

b. A gift’s value is determined by the spirit in which it is given. God doesn’t want grudgingly given money, or guilt money - God loves the cheerful giver.

c. The value of a gift is determined by what it cost the giver; this is what made the widow’s gift so valuable. David refused to give God that which cost me nothing (2 Samuel 24:24).

B. Jesus speaks of future events.

1. (5-6) Jesus makes an amazing prediction concerning the temple.

Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said, "These things which you see; the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down."

a. As some spoke of the temple: This temple was originally rebuilt by Zerubbabel and Ezra (Ezra 6:15), but greatly expanded and improved by Herod. It was the center of Jewish life for almost a thousand years - so much so, that it was customary to swear by the temple (Matthew 23:16), and speaking against the temple could be considered blasphemy (Acts 6:13).

i. After Herod, the temple was huge - nearly 500 yards long and 400 yards wide. Herod’s rebuilding work started in 19 b.c., and was only completed in 63 a.d., taking more than eighty years. It was finished only seven years before it was destroyed.

b. How it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations: The temple wasn’t just big, it was also beautiful. The Jewish historian Josephus says that the temple was covered on the outside with gold plates, that were so brilliant that when the sun shone on them, it was blinding to look at. Where there was no gold, there were blocks of marble of such a pure white that strangers, from a distance, thought there was snow on the temple.

i. As great as the temple was, Jesus never hesitated to claim that He was greater than the temple (Matthew 12:5). For man Jews of that day, the temple had become an idol - it subtly began to mean more to the people than God Himself did. God has a habit of destroying our idols.

ii. Good things can become the worst idols; and sometimes God sours even good things that we have allowed to become our idols

c. Not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down: Some 40 years after Jesus said this, there was a widespread Jewish revolution against the Romans in Palestine, and they enjoyed many early successes. But ultimately, Rome crushed the rebels; Jerusalem was leveled, including the temple - just as Jesus said.

i. It is said that at the fall of Jerusalem, the last surviving Jews of the city fled to the temple, because it was the strongest, most secure building in the city. Roman soldiers surrounded it, and one drunken soldier started a fire that soon engulfed the whole building. Ornate gold detail work in the roof melted down in the cracks between the stone walls of the temple, and to retrieve the gold, the Roman commander ordered that the temple be dismantled stone by stone. The destruction was so complete that today, they have true difficulty learning exactly where the temple was.

2. (7) His listeners ask about the events connected with the temple’s destruction.

So they asked Him, saying, "Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?"

a. Teacher, but when will these things be? Jesus will tell them about the fate of the temple, but also about the fate of the whole world.

b. "Most divines think that God in the destruction of Jerusalem intended to give a specimen of the general conflagration, and ruin of the world at the last day; so as the signs of the same kind with those seen before Jerusalem was destroyed, shall be seen before the great and terrible day of our Lord’s coming to judge the world." (Poole)

3. (8) To walk in these dangerous times, do not follow false leaders.

And He said: "Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He,’ and, ‘The time has drawn near.’ Therefore do not go after them."

a. For many will come in My name: Jesus knew that many would arise more than willing to assume the role of political messiah for Israel. One striking example of this was a man named Bar Kokhba, who 100 years after Jesus was considered by many Jews to be the Messiah. He started a widespread revolution against the Romans and enjoyed early success, but was soon crushed.

b. Therefore do not go after them: These people who rejected Jesus when He came to them as Messiah ended up falling for false messiahs who led them into nothing but death and destruction. If we don’t stand on the truth, we may fall for anything.

4. (9-11) To walk in these dangerous times, do not be frightened by catastrophes commonly associated with the end times.

"But when you hear of wars and commotions, do not be terrified; for these things must come to pass first, but the end will not come immediately." Then He said to them, "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven."

a. When you hear of wars and commotions, do not be terrified: All these things preceded the destruction of Jerusalem. Were there wars? The Romans were frequently at war with the Jews, the Samaritans, the Syrians, and others during this period. Were there earthquakes? Historians tell us of great earthquakes in the Roman Empire before Jerusalem was destroyed. Were there famines? Acts 11:28 tells of one in this period. Were there fearful sights? Pompeii blew its top just seven years before Jerusalem was destroyed. Were there signs in the heavens? Not long before Jerusalem was destroyed, a comet that looked like a sword hung over the city by night for a year.

b. Yet, Jesus also speaks of general conditions that will precede His second coming. The world has seen incredible catastrophe since the time of Jesus. Even in our century we have seen genocide on an unimaginable scale, world wide war, and whole continents given over to disease and famine; yet these things in themselves are not the signs of Jesus’ coming.

5. (12-15) To walk in these dangerous times, do not worry about your legal defense when you are persecuted and face charges because of your Christian witness.

"But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name’s sake. But it will turn out for you as an occasion for testimony. Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what you will answer; for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist."

a. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name’s sake: Our greatest occasions for testimony come when we are "on trial" before others, either in a formal or an informal sense. We can trust Jesus that He will do as He promised: give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist.

6. (16-19) To walk in these dangerous times, when all others turn against you, persevere and take a firm stand.

"You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, relatives and friends; and they will put some of you to death. And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But not a hair of your head shall be lost. By your patience possess your souls."

a. By your patience possess your souls: The word for patience here is the great Greek word hupomone. It speaks of a strong endurance, not a passive waiting. Our souls will be kept by the strong endurance that the Lord works into us.

7. (20-24a) To walk in these dangerous times, flee Jerusalem when armies begin to surround it.

"But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations."

a. But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies: Most Jews expected the Messiah to return in glory when hostile Gentile armies surrounded Jerusalem. When the Romans circled the city in 70 a.d., there was a sense of rejoicing among many of the Jews.

b. Let those who are in Judea: However, Christians in Jerusalem knew what Jesus had said and they obeyed Him, fleeing across the Jordan River to a city named Pella. No Christians perished in the fall of Jerusalem.

c. For these are the days of vengeance: But 1.1 million Jews were killed; and another 97,000 were taken captive in one of the worst calamities ever to strike the Jewish people. Jesus warned them to avoid it.

i. When the Romans were done with Jerusalem in 70 a.d., not a single Jew was left alive in the city. The Romans eventually renamed the city Aelia Capitolina, and for many years would not allow a Jew to even enter what was formerly known as Jerusalem, except on one day a year - the anniversary of the fall of the city and the destruction of the temple, when Jews were invited to come and mourn bitterly.

ii. Truly Jesus meant it when He said these are the days of vengeance. This is why He wept over Jerusalem in 19:41-44, because He could see the massive devastation that was coming upon this city He loved - and why He warned all who would listen how they could flee from the coming destruction.

8. (24b) Jerusalem will be trampled by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are over.

"And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

a. Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles: The Israelis took possession of Jerusalem in 1968, but the holy mount is still Arab property, under Arab rule. As far as God is concerned, the most important piece of real estate in Jerusalem - and prophetically speaking, the most important in the world - is still trampled by Gentiles.

b. Until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled: What happens when the times of the Gentiles are over? Then, His particular dealings with Israel begin again, and the last seven-year period of Daniel 9 begins. The calamities described in following verses will come in this period.

9. (25-28) When the final period of calamity hits the world, look up - your redemption is on the way.

"And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of heaven will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near."

a. Signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity: This kind of total chaos and calamity is described in horrific detail in Revelation 6, 8-9, and 15-18. All this will culminate in the dramatic, spectacular return of Jesus, coming with His church to this earth.

b. Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near: The things that will begin to happen are described in Luke 21:25-27. Jesus assures believers who are on the earth at that time to be ready, because the time of great tribulation they are experiencing will not last forever, but Jesus will return in glory soon.

10. (29-33) When you see these signs (spoken of in Luke 21:25-26), you know that the end is very near.

Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away."

a. Look at the fig tree: The fig tree is just one example of a tree that buds before summer; no special reference to Israel seems to be intended (and all the trees). The idea is that when a fig tree buds, there is an inevitable result - summer is near, and fruit is coming. In the same way, when these signs are seen, the coming of Jesus in glory, with His church, to this world will inevitably follow.

i. The generation that sees those signs will also see the very end. God will not prolong the Great Tribulation forever.

b. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away: No mere man could truthfully say this. Jesus claims that His words are the very words of God - and they are.

11. (34-38) How to live in the last days.

"But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly. For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man." And in the daytime He was teaching in the temple, but at night He went out and stayed on the mountain called Olivet. Then early in the morning all the people came to Him in the temple to hear Him.

a. We must take heed because there are certain things that will make one unprepared - carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life. Each of these things can make us unprepared for the day of Jesus’ return.

i. Carousing literally refers to the hangover that comes after a time of intoxication.

b. Watch therefore: We must watch. Anyone who watches will never be caught in a snare - our failure to watch keeps us from being ready.

c. We must pray always, that we may be found worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass. The good news in Jesus is that we don’t have to go through this calamity that is coming. He will take as many as are ready before this calamity begins.

i. Regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, those who listened to and obeyed Jesus escaped the horrible destruction that came upon the city.

ii. Regarding the far greater destruction that is coming upon the whole earth, those who listen to and obey Jesus can escape the horrible destruction that will come.



© 2000 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission





.

Friday, November 06, 2009

Satan, the Ultimate Cross-Dresser



Satan, the Ultimate Cross-Dresser

In this article, we are going to explore certain aspects of history from the Creation of this world until the return of Christ. Jesus came to this world to bring eternal life to all who believe in Him. Satan's goal is to bring destruction to all who follow him. His greatest upcoming plan is to personate Christ just before the second coming for the purpose of deception. Everything significant that God does, the devil endeavors to counterfeit.

While there are many fronts on which the devil works to deceive, there is one of which God's remnant church has, for the most part, been unaware. Could it be that Satan has gained an advantage over us, and that we truly are ignorant of his devices? The Laodicean message of Revelation 3 seems to indicate a spiritual blindness, i.e. a deluded ignorance, that is characteristic of the professing, lukewarm church. We “know not” our condition. We need the Holy Spirit to open our eyes.

Let's go back to the Creation of this world:

Man was the crowning act of the creation of God, made in the image of God, and designed to be a counterpart of God. R. & H., June 18, 1895

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Genesis 1:27.

God's crowning act of creation resulted in two distinct sexes of the human family. In this article, you will see how part of the devil's plan is to obliterate the distinctive male and female roles. We will see how he works to accomplish his purpose by gender impersonation.

Just as God had a crowning act of creation, Satan will have a crowning act too, but it will not be one of creation, but for the purpose of the destruction of humanity. Satan's crowning act of deception will be the personation of Christ.

"As the crowning act in the great drama of deception, Satan himself will personate Christ. The church has long professed to look to the Saviour's advent as the consummation of her hopes. Now the great deceiver will make it appear that Christ has come. In different parts of the earth, Satan will manifest himself among men as a majestic being of dazzling brightness, resembling the description of the Son of God given by John in the Revelation. [Revelation 1:13-15.] The glory that surrounds him is unsurpassed by anything that mortal eyes have yet beheld." GC 624

Satan wants the glory and worship that belongs to Jesus, so he is going to “dress up” to look just like Him! Right now Satan is doing all he can to prepare the minds of men and women to accept this final deception.

What is the meaning of the word personation? Personate - to fraudulently portray another person; to impersonate; to portray a character (as in a play); to act; to attribute personal characteristics to something; to personify. pose: pretend to be someone you are not; sometimes with fraudulent intentions;

Imagine the audacity of Satan to try to masquerade as Jesus! He will dress up in royal garments, pretending to be Jesus.

“Satan sees that he is about to lose his case. He cannot sweep in the whole world. He makes one last desperate effort to overcome the faithful by deception. He does this in personating Christ. He clothes himself with the garments of royalty which have been accurately described in the vision of John. He has power to do this.” TA 273

“If men are so easily misled now, how will they stand when Satan shall personate Christ, and work miracles? Who will be unmoved by his misrepresentations then--professing to be Christ when it is only Satan assuming the person of Christ, and apparently working the works of Christ?--2SM 394

“But while he will bear the appearance of Christ in every particular, so far as mere appearance goes, it will deceive none but those who, like Pharaoh, are seeking to resist the truth.”--5T 698

Notice that Satan has the ability to appear like Christ in every particular! In this masquerade, those who have not the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit will mistake Satan as being Christ. Their spiritual eyesight has become dull by looking at and loving the things of the world.

We will be unwrapping a mysterious plan that Satan has in which he is trying to get people to cross dress in order to cause great confusion among us. This Babylonian confusion will set us up to be tricked by his final deception. He has figured out a way to get us to misunderstand our distinctive role as females, and men's distinctive role as males. That spills over into the marriage relationship, which spills over into our spiritual relationship with Jesus.

Satan is diligently working to separate God's people from Christ's body, the Church which is described in His Word as His Bride. Holy matrimony provides a fitting symbol of Christ's relationship with His Bride, His church. The symbolic roles of husband and wife teach us our proper relationship to Jesus; that He is our loving authority, our protector, our spiritual husband, and we are the loved, protected and cherished recipients of His headship. We are to be the Bride of Christ.

As we study the Word, specifically Ephesians chapter 5, we see clearly that it is within the context of this mysterious spiritual relationship that we receive the preparation needed to receive immortality. Christ is longing to perfectly reproduced His character in us, so He can receive us unto Himself.

It's obvious that Satan is attacking marriage. Whenever Satan succeeds in weakening our view of the sacred marriage relationship, he also succeeds in distorting our understanding of our intimate relationship to Jesus. He wants to break up the heavenly marriage! He's trying to steal Christ's Bride, so he can abuse and destroy her.

Satan wants to keep us from looking at the big picture, the great controversy. He makes us comfortable by bringing in his ideas slowly, until we are conditioned to them. He mixes good with bad, so we are confused. He is a master deceiver, and if we're not on the alert, we are going to be blind to his devices.

What is Satan using to blind-side us? In the Spirit of Prophecy we find this surprising statement:

“Obedience to fashion is pervading our Seventh-day Adventist churches and is doing more than any other power to separate our people from God.” 4T 647

Satan is using fashion, more than anything else, to separate us from God! How could that be possible? We rarely hear this addressed in any sermon. Could it really be true?

One thing we must realize: A Seventh-day Adventist cannot obey fashion's dictates, and the Lord's standards simultaneously. If fashion is followed, it will lead us to depths of degradation of which we have never dreamed.

As we explore this topic, we will see how Satan is using fashion to undermine the sanctity of marriage in our society. He is doing so by attacking the feminine and masculine roles.

Before you read further, please be aware that we will be discussing some topics that are extremely disgusting, and which plummet the depths of degradation. If you already understand why Christian women should not wear pants, you probably don't need to read further. If, however, you feel that pants are acceptable attire for women, you should know the past, present and future trends for this practice. You will see an amazing prophecy unfolding before your eyes.

Let's take a brief look back, to a time before any of us were alive, to see what Satan has been up to. Since we didn't see it happening before our eyes, and since it has taken over a hundred years to develop, our perception must be enlightened with historical information.

There are several movements that Satan has used to carry out his agenda. Spiritualism was directly tied with the early women's rights movement in the mid 1800's. Feminism's roots in Marxist communism are undeniable. And the homosexual movement gains its momentum from the ground work of the foregoing movements. They are all linked together.

Spiritualism attracted many nineteenth-century radicals and reformers. Its ranks were chock-full of abolitionists, women's rights activists, and those who believed in temperance, dress reform and the rights of workers and children. Source (Warning: Use extreme caution when clicking on these source links as some will take you to sites containing extremely offensive content.) ...Disabled...
The beliefs of spiritualism , which teaches that the dead communicate with the living, were embedded in the hearts of those women who were militant about achieving equal rights as men.

From the handful of women who began to stand up for themselves grew a cohesive network of individuals who were committed to changing society in the United States by demanding rights that were equal to those of their male counterparts in all areas. A group of strong and outspoken women who were regular attendees at séances given by the many mediums in the area, were pivotal to the beginnings of a movement that ultimately led to a woman's right to vote in this country. Source

We find this information in the book, “Radical Spirits: Spiritualism And Women's Rights In Nineteenth-Century America” written by Ann Brauden, which reveals that:

“Women Spiritualists became the only religious sect to embrace women's rights as a first priority,” advocating, among other things, the female vote, dress reform, marriage reform, “free love,” socialism, the abolition of slavery, vegetarianism and anti-Sabbatarianism.

“Spiritualists believed individuals could serve as vehicles of truth because each embodied the laws of nature in his or her being. Such individualism laid the foundation for Spiritualism's rejection of male headship over women — or indeed of any individual over any other — whether in religion, politics or society.

“To dismiss Spiritualists as a ‘lunatic fringe' is to ignore the significant ways in which their faith reflected the values of Victorian America….Spiritualism helped a crucial generation of American women find their voice….More women stepped beyond conventional female roles because of Spiritualism than they would have without it. In mediumship and in its inherent individualism, Spiritualism held up a model of women's unlimited capacity for autonomous action to the men and women of 19th century America.” Source

This movement of Spiritualism helped foment these causes, which included truth mixed with error. The devil was using these women as mediums for his agenda.

Amelia Bloomer gets the spotlight for blazing the trail for women to wear pants. Was God leading her in this undertaking? Her rebellious, God-defying attitude is apparent in this statement: “We shall no longer be answerable to the laws of God or man, no longer be subject to punishment for breaking them.”

"A pair of baggy trousers gathered at the ankles and worn with a short belted tunic was sported by Amelia Jenks Bloomer of Homer, New York, in 1851. She had copied the pants costume from a friend, Elizabeth Smith Miller. But it was Mrs. Bloomer, an early FEMINIST and staunch supporter of reformer Susan B. Anthony, who became so strongly associated with the MASCULINE-TYPE outfit that it acquired her name. Pants, then MEN'S wear, appealed to Amelia Bloomer...Amelia Bloomer REFUSED to wear the popular fashion. Starting in 1851, she began to appear in public in baggy pants and a short tunic. And as more women joined the campaign for the right to vote, Mrs. Bloomer turned the trousers into a UNIFORM OF REBELLION... CHALLENGING the long TRADITION of who in the family wore the PANTS." --article on the origin of bloomers/women wearing pants, taken from "Panati's Extraordinary Origins of Everyday Things" by Charles Panati

Spiritualism, which includes rebellion against God's order, lies at the root of the plan for women to impersonate the male sex, to cross dress. And Communism built upon these diabolical principles.

So what can we gather from all this? That a feminist miscreant desired to wear the other sex's clothes to express a demand for "women's rights" and to spark a rebellion against the traditional mores in decency. Feminists challenged the tradition of the man being the head of the family by wearing his clothes. Later on in the 1930's, the Communists would finalize this revolution in women's clothing. Using gnostic "theology", the communists deemed women nothing more than imperfect men, who in order to be as perfect as men, had to express masculinity and repress their feminine attributes. They made it the ideal fashion, in their propaganda, that women, in order to express true equality with men in all things, would also have to wear the masculine clothing for men only, called Pants. So we can see that this custom of women wearing pants is nothing more than a feminist tradition. It certainly does not come from the long held decency code passed down from [Christianity]. Source

The feminist agenda includes the “sameness” of the sexes, equating woman with men in every way. Putting pants on women was part of the plan, because it gave women an edge in their quest for men's roles. They were a symbol of female liberation. Pants gave women authority and rights, while feminine clothing was seen to be symbolic of oppression and the degradation of women.

The essence of the feminist revolution was a rejection of the role God ordained for women. It is Satan that wants to do away with God's design, and blur the distinction between the sexes. Satan wants women to become like men, and men like women. Where is this heading? We have seen already the great increase of crime and confusion.

Feminism which espoused "women's rights" actually has driven femininity underground, torn the sexes asunder, and stripped woman of recognition for being wives and mothers, roles essential to their own fulfillment, to men, and to children and society.

Young women were told they were rebelling against oppressive patriarchy and inequality and all things bad. They never imagined they were betrayed by feminist teachers and politicians, intent on breaking up the family and abandoning us to State and corporate control. Source

Much has been written on the history of the development of fashion. There are many excellent studies on this web site, so we will not repeat them here. But the facts are that Satan has been successful in undermining the distinctive roles of men and women through the fashion industry.

When did women start wearing pants? As the proverbial question of who "wears the pants" in a relationship suggests, the history of women's pants says as much about the evolution of twentieth century gender roles as it does about the capricious swings of the fashion pendulum. Pants for women emerged from the burgeoning nineteenth century feminist movement, which demanded a change from Victorian dresses to a more practical costume that would permit women to engage in activities beyond those traditionally assigned to the female domestic sphere. Ironically, however, women's pants would achieve widespread social acceptance only when the fashion industry convinced women that pants were a necessary part of a well-dressed woman's wardrobe. Source

Satan's influence over the feminists empowered fashion to deteriorate rather quickly. Here a blogger writes about the feminist movement's influence on fashion:

How did the feminist movement affect the style of women's dress? Was the feminist movement responsible for the switch from women wearing dresses only, to women freely wearing pants? The answer is yes. In fact, today it is much more common for women to wear pants or shorts, than it is for them to wear dresses or skirts. How did the feminist movement accomplish this great shift in less than two hundred years?

The 1950s saw pants as acceptable clothing for women, and the 1960s brought unisex trends in attire. Today, pants have become so common that a long dress on a woman is becoming almost a rare sight. Tight, form-fitting jeans, with fly fronts like men's jeans, are especially fashionable. The hemlines of pants have risen higher and higher, until now shorts that cover only a very small portion of the upper thigh are acceptable wear. Source

Feminists have a very clear picture in their minds about the significance of women in pants. They know that it is not just a neutral fashion that developed. There is a specific purpose behind it.

“Wearing pants to work is a feminist act. Pressuring working women to wear skirts and dresses is a way to remind us we are different from men. It reminds everybody else too, because when women are wearing dresses and skirts it visually sets us apart from men far more dramatically than would be the case if women wore clothes that were similar or even identical to those worn by men." Source

“But pants-wearing has always been a feminist issue: At a time when studios were looking for skirt-wearing blonde bombshells, Kathereine Hepburn rocked trousers with flair. And against the backdrop of the "Women's Lib" movement of the 1970s, Virginia Slims marketed its cigarettes as for the pants-wearing women who had "come a long way." The point is this: We, as women, have the right to wear pants. Source

In the 70's, it was very popular at many Seventh-day Adventist boarding schools for boyfriends and girlfriends to wear identical men's clothing.

Let me ask you, Why was it so acceptable for girls to wear men's clothing, but not for guys to wear women's clothing?

100 years ago, if would have been just as horrifying for a girl to wear pants as it would be for a guy to wear a dress today.

“Trousers for women were considered "indecent" or "shocking" during the early 1900's and were considered men's attire.” Source

Do you see how Satan has moved pants on women from being “shocking” to becoming totally acceptable? Because “everybody's doing it” we assume it's “right.” Since when does society define God's standard of righteousness?

Most Seventh-day Adventists have little understanding of the mind set of homosexuals, which is as it should be. As Paul declared, And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them . For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. Ephesians 5:11, 12. God does not want us to pollute our minds in even thinking about such reprobate activities.

On the other hand, we cannot afford to ignore the hidden agenda that is unfolding before our eyes. It is closer to home than we realize. We cannot afford to be ignorant of the devil's devices. Here's the agenda:

"In order for there to be true gender equality, it is necessary to eliminate gender as the way in which people are grouped. Gender must be removed from legal documents, from language, and from the way in which children are indoctrinated into society. . . . It is important that this be stopped at the source. The movement must then make sure that gender is not used as a basis for any sort of discrimination at any point in the individual's life. . . . It is only through the elimination of the appearance of gender difference, which is created solely through a belief in gender difference, that gender discrimination can end." Source

So, how has the idea of "gender elimination" progressed this far in our society? It started with women wearing men's clothing, pants in particular. The first women who put on clothing resembling men's clothing were intentionally "cross-dressing."

Cross-dressing is the first step toward impersonation of the opposite gender. Since most women already wear pants, the term has come to focus on men. That is because society has become accustomed to the practice of women wearing men's clothing so that it is no longer “shocking.”

Cross dressing refers to the practice of dressing in clothing typically associated with the opposite gender -- generally men dressing in women's clothing, since in our culture women often dress in clothing practically indistinguishable from men's wear. Source

This cross-dressing is a form of rebellion against God's plan. The following statement is from a web site promoting homosexuality:

“Many lesbians also adopted the clothing of the opposite gender. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the adoption of male dress was a means for many women, including many lesbians, to protest the status of women and the roles assigned to women in patriarchal societies. Source

This disgusting subject is covered in a book entitled Cross Dressing, Sex, and Gender. The description of the book talks about how society doesn't determine your sex by your physical characteristics, but by the mental perception. In other words, if you feel like a man, you are truly a man, even if you were born female!

In any society, the perception of femininity and masculinity is not necessarily dependent on female or male genitalia.

Cross dressing, gender impersonation, and long-term masquerades of the opposite sex are commonplace throughout history. In contemporary American culture, the behavior occurs most often among male heterosexuals and homosexuals, sometimes for erotic pleasure, sometimes not. In the past, however, cross dressing was for the most part practiced more often by women than men. Source

It is an accepted fact that the women who first donned pants were cross-dressing in a deliberate gender impersonation. The many years that have passed since then cannot change that fact. Time cannot validate their rebellion. Are not women today who follow the example of these rebellious women in putting on pants also cross-dressing?

Here's a new twist of the cross-dressing aspect. The following excerpt is from a recent article written by the director of Traditional Values Coalition:

Will Cross-Dressing Activists Come To Your School? As our children have returned to public schools this fall, they face a new threat to their sense of morality and sexuality: Transgender activists are targeting children for seduction into gender confusion.

Not only will children be facing pro-homosexual recruitment efforts in their elementary, junior high and high schools, but now they are likely to face cross-dressers and transsexual propagandists who will teach them that “gender” is a myth and that they can seriously consider having “sex change” operations to correct nature's alleged mistake. Source

Gay activists are against home schooling because they want to exert their influence on the very young children. They have an aggressive program to do just that:

Homosexual activists have a vision for tomorrow, for an America in which their lifestyle is not simply tolerated but celebrated. And to achieve that vision activists have begun enlisting their footsoldiers for tomorrow's army: children.

The youngest Americans have been targeted for a change of heart. Where, then, can these activists obtain access to children in large numbers, away from the watchful eyes of their parents? The public school system has become the answer.

This use of the public school system as a propaganda tool for the homosexual movement is merely the fulfillment of a decades-old goal. Radical activists foresee a time when homosexuals literally rub elbows with children in an effort to alter their views.

Homosexuals are not fighting this “bloody war” in a haphazard manner. Instead, homosexual groups like the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), are organizing and developing a national strategy to get into public schools. Based in New York City, GLSEN has been enormously effective since it was formed in 1990. Some 7,500 GLSEN members now promote their agenda in more than 80 chapters throughout the U.S., and the number of Gay-Straight Alliances in public schools registered with GLSEN now stands at 400.

GLSEN activist and New York kindergarten teacher Jaki Williams said starting in kindergarten is a must, since children at that age are still developing their ideas about the world around them. Even at that age, she said, “the saturation process needs to begin.”

Williams, in fact, is a model teacher when it comes to this “saturation” process. She regularly initiates conversations with her children by reading to them such controversial books as Heather Has Two Mommies, Daddy's Roommate, and One Dad, Two Dads, Browns Dads, Blue Dads. She also hosts a viewing of the video Both of My Moms' Names Are Judy: Children of Lesbians and Gays Speak Out, produced by a San Francisco pro-homosexual advocacy group. Source

Is this not horrifying to you? Are we becoming numb to where society is heading? A deadly moral cancer is spreading at a phenomenal rate. This should give us great cause for concern for the future of our children, and for society at large. How would you like to have the following taught to your child?

Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network is selling and distributing a curriculum guide titled Preventing Prejudice: Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender Lesson Plan Guide for Elementary Schools. It includes a lesson, geared to children in kindergarten through third grade, using a children's book titled Jesse's Dream Skirt, by Bruce Mack. The story is about a young boy named Jesse who likes trying on his mother's dresses and dreams of a skirt “that whirled, twirled, flowed and glowed, and felt soft inside.”

Jesse's mom helps him make a skirt, and he wears it to day care, where his classmates make fun of him. The day care teacher, Bruce, gathers the children together and says, “Jesse loves his skirt. Why are some of you making fun of him?” A girl says, “Well, I wear pants. Why can't Jesse wear a skirt?”…At the end of the story, most of the children end up liking Jesse's skirt, and some start making dresses themselves. Source

This is how the homosexuals are trying to indoctrinate the next generation. Let me ask a serious question to the pants-wearing Seventh-day Adventist mother or grandmother. How could you, in good conscience, stand up against this agenda with strong conviction and determination? What will you say when your son or grandson asks why he can't wear a skirt? After all, if enough of them do it, for a long enough period of time, it would be accepted by society, would it not? Wouldn't it be OK then? This is the same reasoning that "allows" women to wear pants.

Where is our indignation? Are we becoming conditioned to these developments? How will you react when you see little boys twirling around town in skirts? Or men in skirts?

Most Americans would be outraged at how rapidly revolutionary ideas about gender are invading our classrooms. But discussions about cross-dressing, sex change surgery and even abolishing gender altogether are now part of the trendy "gay" agenda and as such are gaining widespread acceptance by teachers, the NEA, and school boards. Source

The ground work has already been laid. This cross-dressing agenda for both sexes will succeed if God does not directly intervene. Society is ripe for gender annihilation.

"Men's Paris Fashions Blur Gender Boundaries

By JOELLE DIDERICH, Associated Press Writer
PARIS - The French menswear collections ended on Sunday in a sea of sequins, silk and all things pink, challenging the adage that boys will be boys.

Fine fabrics like silk, gazar and crepe de Chine crept into the male wardrobe for spring-summer 2009 as Paris designers increasingly blurred gender boundaries.

“The most striking thing is the amount of crossover from women's collections that seems to be happening,” Michael Roberts, fashion director of Vanity Fair magazine, told The Associated Press." Source

Please note what country these fashions are originating from. France is the very country that represented Egypt and Sodom in fulfillment of prophecy.

This is atheism; and the nation represented by Egypt would give voice to a similar denial of the claims of the living God, and would manifest a like spirit of unbelief and defiance. The “great city” is also compared, “spiritually,” to Sodom. The corruption of Sodom in breaking the law of God was especially manifested in licentiousness. And this sin was also to be a pre-eminent characteristic of the nation that should fulfill the specifications of this scripture. {GC88 269.2}

The confusion and chaos will increase. Are we standing against this diabolic program, or are we assisting its progress?

How does fashion tie in to all of this? The homosexual influence in fashion must be reckoned with:

Few industries are seen as gayer than fashion. Stereotypes aside, the world of couture has indeed been molded by the vast numbers of gay men and lesbians working in the industry. Fred Goss in the 1997 issue (June 10, volume 735) of the Advocate Source

American designer Calvin Klein has created an extraordinarily successful fashion empire through the simple and elegant design of his clothes and through his skilful employment of provocative advertising campaigns that are saturated with homoeroticism [homosexual love and desire; same-sex erotic expression.] More than efficient, the advertising campaigns for Klein's products have made homoeroticism a staple of consumer culture in North America and Western Europe. Source

The gay community is proud of the way they have used fashion to promote their interests. When society at large accepts homoerotic, gay-influenced fashion, we also reap the consequences. We haven't seen the end of this yet.

Throughout the twentieth century there was an undeniable association between homosexuality and fashion. Even in the two centuries preceding the last one, an overt male interest in fashion had associations of effeminacy and, consequently, of sodomy.

The role of gay men in the fashion industry has also changed, from an unspoken assumption that gay men worked in fashion to an overt acknowledgement of the immense contribution they have made at all levels of the fashion industry.

Living in a society where the prevalent belief was that gay men were female souls trapped inside male bodies (and lesbians male souls trapped inside female bodies), some gay men made the obvious and daring choice of wearing items of dress designed for women.

Many lesbians also adopted the clothing of the opposite gender. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the adoption of male dress was a means for many women, including many lesbians, to protest the status of women and the roles assigned to women in patriarchal societies.

The rise of radical feminism entailed a rejection of fashion-forced femininity. A new stereotype was born--that of the dungaree wearing, crew-cut lesbian feminist.

Throughout the twentieth century many of the top couture (high-fashion clothing created by designers) fashion designers were gay, even though social pressure called for them to keep their sexuality quiet if not secret. Indeed, many of the greatest names in twentieth-century fashion were gay or bisexual, including such figures as Christian Dior, Cristóbal Balenciaga, Yves Saint Laurent, Norman Hartnell, Halston, Rudi Gernreich (who was one of the founding members of the first American homophile organization, the Mattachine society), Giorgio Armani, Calvin Klein, and Gianni Versace.

The early 1990s saw the advent of "lesbian chic" in the fashion world. This manifested itself most visibly in a series of photographs in Vanity Fair in 1993, including a cover that featured lesbian singer k.d. lang cavorting with supermodel Cindy Crawford. Source

Androgynous (being neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine, as in dress, appearance, or behavior) fashions are becoming increasingly popular. This is the "hip" look for today's fashions.

An androgyne in terms of gender identity , is a person who does not fit cleanly into the typical masculine and feminine gender roles of their society. They may also use the term ambigender to describe themselves. Many androgynes identify as being mentally "between" woman and man, or as entirely genderless. They may class themselves as non-gendered , genderneutral , agendered , between genders, intergendered , bigendered ,"pangender' or genderfluid. Source

"Androgynous trends are at an all-time high." Source

"Androgynous women are becoming more prevalent in today's society and are often considered more fashionable than even the most feminine woman. Androgyny has two definitions; the first referring to physical attributes of those who are intersex- meaning they have both male and female genitalia. The second has a psychological connotation and is a combination of both masculine and feminine traits; a kind of unified gender that defies social roles and psychological attributes.

When referring to the term “androgynous” in mainstream society, it is the psychological definition that is most often being used, usually pertaining to a person's style or appearance. Being androgynous has taken on a much trendier meaning for women in the 21 st century. It has become hip for women to experiment with the androgynous look. It allows women to incorporate the best of both worlds: the comfort of men's clothing, along with the style of women's clothing. Androgynous fashion is everywhere these days, so it is important to have a clear understanding of this current trend." Source

In the following excerpt, notice what hinders androgyny--Christianity! And what revives androgyny? Rebellion against God's order, and belief in evolution!

"What do international celebrities, Michael Jackson, David Beckham, and Angelina Jolie have in common? Besides being superstars and multi-millionaires, they are the icons of androgyny in our modern culture. As borders blur, markets merge, and cultures blend, androgyny seems to have found its way to global mainstream. . . . It seems as lifestyles continue to change, society has accepted human sexual diversity as manifestations of humanity.

"In reality, human sexual diversity had long existed in world civilizations. In fact, bisexuality was institutionalized in ancient Greece and Rome where men practiced homosexuality in the form of pederasty (a man who has sexual relations, especially anal intercourse, with a boy) while maintained heterosexual relations with their wives for procreation. Historically, pederastic relationships were found in writings and arts not only in western cultures but also in non-western cultures as in China, Japan, South Pacific, and Middle East. Even world religions have embraced numerous deities and demi-deities with androgynous qualities, such as Hapi (Egyptian), Dionysos (Greek), Shiva ( Hindu), and Obatala (Voudoun religion in Africa, South America and the Caribbean).

"What caused the obsolescence of androgyny was the prominent rise of Christianity which buried the culture of androgyny and drove same-sex relationships underground. In the traditional biblical point of view, God created human beings in His own image. They are not accidental, but essential part in the grand scheme of things. Homosexuality defies the purpose of God in humanity as male and female, and therefore is a perversion against God and Creation.

"The argument for the revival of androgyny offers a contrary perspective in two-fold — human is by nature androgynous; and humanity is an accident of evolutionary process. First, androgyny in humanity is ‘natural' since all humans are born with both sex hormones. Furthermore, men and women have the same emotions but their gender behaviors are conditioned by social norms varying from culture to culture. By discarding the imposed restrictions and inhibitions, one would discover the ‘natural' androgynous self. Second, humanity is an accidental creation of Nature. Evolution underlies the ‘natural' process of change in which accidents are created without any divine intervention. Thus, humanity is one of the accidents created in the evolutionary process of Nature.

"Apparently, the increasing global attraction to androgyny indicates that the modern theory of evolution holds greater sway than the traditional doctrines of Christianity. Some may believe that androgyny is just a passing trend, and others may think that it's part of the evolution of humanity. Whichever it is, one thing seems inevitable — as the world becomes more integrated and complex, society will adapt pervading changes as social norms to move humanity forward in its social evolution." Source

One cross dresser, bemoaning the new trend for androgynous styles, made this revealing statement, "How am I supposed to challenge socially constructed gender norms and defy Deuteronomy 22:5 under these conditions?" Source In other words, if everyone's defying God, it's more difficult to enjoy the headiness of rebellion. Fashion has entered into blatant rebellion against God in androgynous styles.

CNN reports: "An all-male college in Atlanta, Georgia, has banned the wearing of women's clothes, makeup, high heels and purses as part of a new crackdown on what the institution calls inappropriate attire. No dress-wearing is part of a larger dress code launched this week that Morehouse College is calling its 'Appropriate Attire Policy.' " Source

Men wanting to wear dresses! We have yet to see how low the morals of society can fall. What's the latest in the entertainment industry? Women performers impersonating men, not just by wearing men's clothing, but with other disgusting features not fit to mention.

Drag kings—women whose performance art centers on the impersonation of men—are a relatively new phenomenon. True, women have been adopting male clothing styles for centuries; in fact, women have cross-dressed for so long that there is arguably no such thing as female-to-male cross-dressing any longer. But women impersonating men, in full costume, is, as a phenomenon at least, just a few years old, and subversive. When women "become" men, a whole power system is challenged (especially since many drag king performers are lesbians). Director John Waters, says that drag kings' subversiveness is part of their allure. Source

Dear Seventh-day Adventist sister, this is quite enough sewer surfing! The degradation of society is unthinkable. It should be quite clear to us now why Ellen G. White prophesied:

They will imitate the opposite sex, as nearly as possible. … Confusion will be the result. In this style of dress God's order has been reversed, and his special directions disregarded. Deuteronomy 22:5. "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God." ….God's prohibitions are lightly regarded by all who would advocate the doing away of the distinction of dress between males and females….God designed there should be a plain distinction between male and female dress, and has considered the matter of sufficient importance to give explicit directions in regard to it; for the same dress worn by both sexes would cause confusion, and great increase of crime. 2 SM 477

The Spirit of Prophecy clearly makes an application of the Old Testament commandment in Deuteronomy 22:5 so there is no question that this verse applies to us today. Are we not seeing the fulfillment of the above prophecy?

Could it be that as Seventh-day Adventist women, we have inadvertently promoted this diabolic homosexual agenda that has helped to undermine God's ideal for our marriages and confused our children? Do our children and youth understand these issues? How can they possibly understand them when the vast majority of their mothers, female Sabbath School leaders, youth leader's wives and pastor's wives are wearing pants? Instead, we need to set a pure and uplifting example for our children by turning away from this practice.

Children should be kept free as possible from the demoralizing influences of the fashions of this age. {PH096 15.1}

The wearing of men's clothing by women has brought in a demoralizing influence upon the church. We are in need of returning to that purity that will lead us to shun the customs of the world. Jesus's dress was in marked contrast to the spiritual leaders of His time. Our dress should be in marked contrast to any demoralizing influence that fashion introduces.

Divine truth has never been in harmony with the traditions and customs of the world; it has never conformed to their opinions. Christ himself received not honor from men. He was meek and lowly of heart, and made himself of no reputation. His simple dress and unpretending manners were in so marked contrast to the pomposity, self-conceit, and vain display of the Pharisees, that they would not accept him. {RH, November 7, 1882 par. 10}

Just like in Christ's time, so today, the vast majority will not accept Christ. Instead, the world is following the rebel of God, the devil. And Satan has been intent on destroying God's plan for the human race, which is formed of two distinct sexes. Sodom's sins are becoming widespread.

We are living in a time when the world is represented as Noah's time, and as in the time of Sodom. {SpTB15 13.2}

We are living in an age of moral debasement; the world is as a second Sodom. {SpTB16 15.1}

Satan wants to erradicate God's plan. He wants to pull us all into Babylonian confusion. And, indeed, he has made the whole world like Sodom.

"Is there not enough transpiring about us to show us the dangers that beset our path? Everywhere are seen wrecks of humanity, broken-down family altars, broken-up families. There is a strange abandonment of principle, the standard of morality is lowered, and the earth is fast becoming a Sodom. The Sodomitish practices which brought the judgment of God upon the world, and caused it to be deluged with water, and which caused Sodom to be destroyed by fire, are fast increasing. We are nearing the end." {RH, November 10, 1885}

If we lived in Sodom of old, we would be so used to the evils of society, that they would cease to shock us. And that is exactly what is happening to society today. We are hardly shocked at all by these degenerate practices, because they're becoming increasingly common. We need to wake up and give the trumpet a certain sound.

The sins of Sodom are repeated in our day, and the earth is destroyed and corrupted under the inhabitants thereof; but the worst feature of the iniquity of this day is a form of godliness without the power thereof. Those who profess to have great light are found among the careless and indifferent, and the cause of Christ is wounded in the house of its professed friends. Let those who would be saved, arouse from their lethargy, and give the trumpet a certain sound; for the end of all things is at hand. {ST, October 16, 1893 par. 9}

Are we being vigilant in resisting this sodomite influence around us? Are we pleading with God to preserve our hearts from the evil desires so prevalent in our society?

Watchfulness and vigilance are needed now as never before in the history of the race. The eye must be turned off from beholding vanity. Lawlessness, the prevailing spirit of the age, must be met with a decided rebuke. Let none feel that they are in no danger. As long as Satan lives, his efforts will be constant and untiring to make the world as wicked as before the flood, and as licentious as were the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. The prayer may well be offered daily by those who have the fear of God before them, that he will preserve their hearts from evil desires, and strengthen their souls to resist temptation. {RH, October 11, 1881 par. 4}

Here's the bottom line. Satan's plan of undermining of the distinction between the sexes by wearing the “uniform of rebellion,” promotes sexual deviance and gender disorientation. God calls this an abomination.

There is an increasing tendency to have women in their dress and appearance as near like the other sex as possible, and to fashion their dress very much like that of men, but God pronounces it abomination. {1T 421.3}

If it is an abomination for women to dress in a similar manner to the opposite sex, we need to pay attention! Someone needs to “Cry aloud , spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.” Isaiah 58:1. We need to sigh and cry about all the abominations, including the abomination of women dressing in clothing that pertains to or resembles men's clothing.

When you have a sense of your accountability to God, you will feel your need of faithfulness in prayer, and faithfulness in watching against the temptations of Satan. You will, if you are indeed Christians, feel more like mourning over the moral darkness in the world than indulging in levity and pride of dress. You will be among those who are sighing and crying for the abominations that are done in the land. {PH013 15.2}

Has Satan tricked us into accepting and participating in the impersonating of the opposite sex? Is he not conditioning us, by getting us to following fashion, to accept the immoral attitudes of society. As a result, we have become immersed in worldly Babylon confusion. "...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18:4.

Now it is clear what Ellen White meant when she made those radical statements that “Satan invented the fashions…” 4T 629 In light of the evidence presented in this article, the wearing of pants by women is one fashion that can be clearly seen to have come straight from the devil's hand.

Most of us Seventh-day Adventist women have worn pants (without a dress or tunic covering them) at some point in our lives. We've wore them for many decades without a thought of wrongdoing. But what about now, as the real source of this practice has been revealed--what should be our response?

“And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:” Acts 17:30

Considering all of the counsel that God has given on dress, the wearing of pants by women is the pivotal point. If we resist and ignore God's counsel on this matter, the chances are that we will be indifferent toward the rest of God's counsel on dress. We have thrown away the standard. We have lost our bearings. We will be likely to accept most any fashion that comes along. "The standard of morality and holiness is trailing in the dust. . . . "{HP 196.4}

But if we are willing to receive the eye salve of spiritual discernment, then the light from God's counsel will shine into our hearts, so that we become willing to follow Him in other areas He reveals to us.

To wrap this up, we return to the "crowning acts" of God and Satan, and see how the great controversy has been playing out. Satan has worked hard to take the "crowning act" of God's creation, male and female, and so confuse God's divine order that the lines of distinction are blurred. He has done this to prepare the world for his final "crowning act" of deception, which is the personation of Christ.

If, in defiance of God's clear counsel, we see nothing wrong with Satan's idea to do away with distinction between the sexes, we will also become fuzzy on the roles God designed for men and women, and the marital relationship. That leads us to become confused about our relationship with Jesus. That's Satan's ultimate goal. He uses love of the world, with its fashions and customs, to destroy our love for God. It's an automatic result.

Thus we have lost our spiritual discernment. We are blind and don't even know it. And then when the master deception comes along, we will fall for it all the way. It's been a gradual process, but we're all set up to be deceived.

These are solemn times. The fabric of society is falling apart. Moral decay abounds. How we need a solid foundation so that we may be able to withstand the final deception. Our prayer for each Seventh-day Adventist sister is that God will give you the grace to respond in obedience to His call on your heart. May you grow closer and closer to Jesus every day so that you are settled into the truth so that you cannot possibly be shaken.

There are lessons for the children of God to learn. They are required to come up to their high and holy position as members of the royal family, children of the heavenly King. They are of heavenly extraction, and they must reveal this in all their works. Have you the light of truth? Then impart the same in purity, in a peaceable disposition, in quietness and heavenly-mindedness. We plead with you to put on your beautiful garments, even the robe of Christ's righteousness, woven in the loom of heaven. Submit yourselves wholly to God. Then you will be vessels unto honor, whom he can use to his own name's glory. {RH, January 19, 1897 par. 13}



Now, please read "10 Reasons Why Satan Wants Women to Wear Pants."

Also, you will find many other articles on this subject at the above link.

Source: http://movingtowardmodesty.com/subpages/CrossDress.htm


(Addendum) Or try the main site: http://www.movingtowardmodesty.com/


.
.