Details

Hits: 3566

Christians from around the country who spoke to VICE News said they’ve witnessed their congregations lose focus and slide into Christian nationalism.

By Tess Owen
July 18, 2022, 6:00am

Pastor Ron Tucker took the stage one weekend in early July at Grace Church in the St. Louis suburb of Maryland Heights to deliver a sermon on Romans.

In the first 15 minutes, Tucker railed about antifa, Black Lives Matter, critical race theory, feminism, gun laws, abortion, protesters disrupting Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s dinner at a D.C. steakhouse, and promoted the baseless claim that the Capitol riot was a hoax.

“Their woke ideology is separating people into groups and taking our nation apart, and it’s being taught in our schools under the heading of critical race theory,” Tucker said. “The way you get promoted in a woke business is based on your degree of victimhood. If you’re a Black lesbian, you’re at the top of the heap. I mean, would you trust someone to fly your plane just because they’re part of a minority?”

Tucker founded Grace Church, a nondenominational congregation, in 1978. These days, it’s not unusual for him to use his time in the pulpit to unleash a torrent of right-wing grievances and stoke fears of an imminent “Marxist takeover.” But according to some of his congregants, it’s a stark departure from his old preaching style.

“It’s honestly weird because it never used to be like that,” said Emily Lynch, 33, whose family joined Grace Church when she was 5 years old. “I
can remember the sermons growing up, and they never spoke about politics. It was a quote-unquote ‘feel-good’ church.”

Noelle Fortman, 23, and her mother had similar early experiences with Grace Church, which they joined in 2010. “It was a pleasant community. It was welcoming and diverse,” she said. “The sermons were just very uplifting, and, you know, biblical.”

Now, instead of talking about compassion and loving your neighbor, Tucker is preparing his 1,500-strong flock for a bloody “final battle” where “the bullets are real.”

In the “weekend resources” section of its website, Grace Church also offers a lengthy list of reading and watching recommendations, including books by far-right commentator Candace Owens and the “documentary” 2000 Mules by the far-right activist Dinesh d’Souza, which promotes baseless claims about fraud in the 2020 election. Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s special downplaying Jan. 6 as “mere vandalism” also makes the list.

“This is not cruise-ship Christianity right now,” Pastor Tucker said in another sermon earlier this year. “We are a battleship.”

It’s hard to pinpoint exactly when Tucker’s radicalization began, but Fortman said she first started noticing politics creeping into his sermons around the beginning of Donald Trump’s presidency. Initially, she said, it was easy to shrug off. Tucker was a trusted pastor and had been a consistent voice in her life for years. Plus, she and her mom weren’t that involved in the church community itself. They came for the Bible stories and the concert-quality music performances.

“He’d start his sermons with this rambling 30- to 40-minute rant that sounded like it was taken straight from, like, Fox News,” she said. “One time we went there, he referred to the COVID vaccine as the ‘mark of the beast’ that we needed to fight against. And I was like, ‘yo, this is crazy.’”

Another time, she saw a Black family get up and leave halfway through one of Tucker’s rants about critical race theory. She began noticing a lot of churchgoers doing the same. At the same time, she began seeing new faces, older and whiter than before. Fortman and her mother both left the church that year.

(In one recent sermon, Tucker acknowledged that he may have “offended” some members of the congregation. “I’ve read your emails. I’ve watched people walk out of church as I’ve gone into the stuff,” he said. But we’re in a “critical moment,” he said, and he’s concerned about the church being taken over by “a government agency called the Ministry of Truth.”)

Tucker did not respond to VICE News’ request for comment.

This story is not unique to Grace Church. Politics and culture wars have crept into pulpits and pews across the U.S. in recent years. It’s not just the Evangelical church, whose ties to the GOP have been the target of heavy scrutiny for decades. It’s churches and parishes across denominations, state lines, and socioeconomic status.

Christians from around the country who spoke to VICE News said they’ve witnessed their congregations lose focus and slide into Christian nationalism.

Christian nationalists believe that America is an inherently Christian nation and that the nation’s laws should reflect evangelical values. This belief system directly undermines the founding philosophy of the United States: the separation of church and state. It also results in a murky moral framework where right-wing culture war issues—whether its Hunter Biden’s laptop, Drag Queen story hours, or the results of the 2020 election—take on biblical significance.

Trump was hailed by many of his supporters as a God-sent, Christlike figure—despite his reported philandering and habit of using crass language. His presidency ushered in a new era of Christian nationalism in the U.S. A widely cited report earlier this year identified Christian
nationalism as the overarching ideology among the mob who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Far-right members of Congress have since proudly identified themselves as Christian nationalists. One of them, GOP Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, recently decried “this ‘separation of church and state’ junk.” The recent slew of regressive opinions from the Supreme Court have included dismantling the national right to abortion and opening the door to allow Christian prayer in public schools.

At the same time, extremist groups are co-opting the language of Christian nationalism to build alliances, blend into the mainstream, and justify political violence.

The Catholic Church, for example, has sought to distance itself from Church Militant, a far-right organization that claims to be Catholic. QAnon conspiracies have crept into the pews of evangelical churches. Andrew Torba, the CEO of Gab, a social media platform popular with the far-right, has talked about the need for “Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant Christians to unite against the rise of communism in the West.” White nationalists bearing crucifixes have shown up to abortion-rights rallies. So-called “OrthoBros,” or young, far-right Orthodox conservatives, have flocked to Russian Orthodox churches. And Proud Boys have provided security for Christian nationalist pastors.

Noah Jones, 23, from Dalton, Georgia, was raised in the Southern Baptist Convention, the world’s largest Baptist denomination. Jones said he was on track to become a preacher and served as a youth pastor for a stint and as an assistant choir director. He also voted for Trump in 2016.

Jones loved—and still loves—the stories from the Bible. But when preachers started sprinkling in references to Trump while talking about those stories, he felt like something wasn’t right. He became increasingly concerned that church leadership was cherry-picking Scripture to make political points or to promote lawmakers like Trump or Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.

“I began seeing the way those stories were interpreted and being used almost as a means to—and I don’t say this lightly—but to control people,” Jones said.

Like for Fortman, 2020 was also the breaking point for Jones. When COVID-19 hit, Jones felt that the church was prioritizing politics over people’s health by continuing to hold in-person services.

When Jones and many other members of the community in Dalton—which has twice the poverty rate of the U.S. as a whole—lost their employment as a result of lockdowns, he says the church wasn’t helpful, despite having millions of dollars in the bank.

And when nationwide racial justice protests broke out in response to police murdering George Floyd, Jones said his church turned its back.

“The church was not showing love in any capacity. That’s where I really drew the line, because in my own idea, Christianity is about love, it’s about loving your neighbor,” he said. “It’s about showing compassion to every single person.”

Jones left the church that year, and while he still identifies as a Christian, he said he’s been unable to find a local congregation that adequately reflects his faith.

“It feels to me that the churches in this area are no longer true Christian churches. They’ve morphed into something that’s completely unrecognizable,” he said. “And I don’t think a lot of people know that they’ve been radicalized.”

“Something has happened to these people,” he continued. “I think it’s Fox News. I think it’s social media, causing division among people. And they’re using Christianity as a means to divide people.”

Although many Americans might be just waking up to the threat of Christian nationalism, the radicalization happening in pews and pulpits has been happening for years. And faith leaders have been sounding the alarm.

In 2019, the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, an 86-year-old, Washington, D.C.-based group of ministers, lawyers, and political activists formed a new initiative: Christians Against Christian Nationalism. Thousands of Christian leaders from around the country have since signed onto their mission statement, acknowledging Christian nationalism—described as a “damaging political ideology”—poses a “persistent threat to both our religious communities and our democracy.” The statement also points out that Christian nationalism “often overlaps with and provides cover for white supremacy and racial subjugation.”

“At the time, we felt a real need to provide this resource, because of escalating violence around Christian nationalism,” Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty executive director Amanda Tyler said. The catalyzing event was the mass shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018. Though there was no indication that the shooter explicitly identified as a Christian nationalist, the combination of references to religious violence, Trumpism, and conspiracy theories in his social media ramblings troubled Tyler.

(The Baptist Joint Committee also co-authored the 2021 report that identified Christian nationalism as the driving ideology behind the Capitol riot.)

A Pew survey conducted in March 2021 found that 21 percent of Christians believe that the federal government should declare the U.S. a “Christian nation,” and a quarter of them believe that the federal government should stop enforcing the separation of church and state. Though these beliefs place them in the minority of Americans, it still adds up to an alarming number of Christians.

The survey also identified a close overlap between support for Trump and a desire to break down the walls between church and state. Seventy-three percent of respondents who believe Trump was a “great” or “good” president also wanted church and state to be integrated.

But Christianity’s embrace of politics has raised a key question: Should these kinds of churches be allowed to maintain 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status? According to the Internal Revenue Service, 501(c)(3) status only applies to churches or charities that do “not participate in, or intervene in… any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office).”

The editorial board at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch thinks that Grace Church has crossed a line. The paper ran an op-ed in March noting that the church had shared a flyer on its website promoting two church members in their bids for school board elections. Although the document was eventually removed, the editorial board wrote:

“Federal law couldn’t be more clear. Grace Church has stepped far beyond the boundaries and deserves a thorough review of its tax-exempt status.”

As soon as Trump took office, Jonathan Coate sensed a shift among his fellow parishioners. At that time, he was serving as a youth minister in an Episcopal church in an affluent suburb of Washington, D.C.

“Typically, the Episcopal Church is one of the last places you’d expect to see a lot of themes of Christian nationalism,” Coate said. “It’s usually one of the more progressive churches, but it’s also got a bit of a legacy. Tucker Carlson was an Episcopalian. Throughout the 50s and 60s, if you were rich, white, and Protestant, there was a good chance you were an Episcopalian.”

Coate said some prominent Republican lawmakers attended his parish. But even still, his church leadership were committed to maintaining distance from the culture wars that began bubbling up during the Obama administration. The approach was, according to Coate, “We will be polite, we won’t intentionally misgender people, we are fine with same-sex marriage, as long as it’s not something our parish has to do.”

The “facade”—as Coate described it—of tolerance, seemed to fade when Trump took office. Coate began to detect some deep-seated resentment from parishioners who felt like they’d been strong-armed into acceptance “under the barrel of a cancel culture gun” during the Obama years. Trump gave them permission to be blunt and bigoted.

For a while, Coate and his wife thought they had a responsibility to stay in the church and be a “moderating force” in the congregation.

But in 2021, they left and sought out a new parish in a different part of town. Two sermons in particular finally drove them away. One was about vaccines, and the other bemoaned LGBTQ rights.

“It was clear that we were no longer pretending to be passive witnesses to culture, we are no longer pretending to be withdrawn from culture. We are suddenly going on the attack,” Coate said.

If someone wanted to adorn their home with Christian nationalist regalia, it wouldn’t take long to find some options. Amazon, for example, sells a pro-police “Thin Blue Line” flag that features Matthew 5:9, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.” On Etsy, there’s a T-shirt that features a truck, an eagle, a cross, and an American flag, with the words “Jesus Take the Wheel.” There’s another T-shirt, offered by a custom shirt company, that depicts Jesus in a suit and a Trump-esque red tie, standing before the American flag, and the words “Jesus for President.”

It’s precisely these types of small examples of Christian nationalism that concern Amanda Tyler and her allies with Christians Against Christian Nationalism.

“Christian nationalism leads to idolatry: worship of the nation over worship of god,” she told VICE News. “It confuses religious authority with political authority and leads people to abandon their theological convictions in service of nationalism.”

For Tyler Stooksbury, a 29-year-old from Knoxville, Tennessee, the resurgence of Christian nationalism was inevitable, because so many Christians have been conditioned to celebrate their love of America alongside their faith. He grew up in Baptist churches and participated in megachurch worship bands. But over time, Stooksbury contends, the bedrock of “church and state” philosophy has been crumbling.

“I feel like a lot of Christians are very accommodating towards patriotic symbols in churches,” he said. “It’s not an alarming thing for most churchgoers to see an American flag in church. People are just very OK with a casual level of patriotism in the church.”

Tyler said that while churches have to address the most extreme examples of violent Christian nationalism, it’s important to think of the ideology overall as a “far-reaching threat.” And that means stopping the quiet encroachment of Christian nationalist ideas into houses of worship before they become even more normalized.

Christians Against Christian Nationalism offers webinars and other resources to help faith leaders and believers alike think more critically. They have a list of discussion points, like, “How could a group of people ‘fuse’ or ‘merge’ their Christian and American identities?” and are challenged to “give some examples of persons who are good Americans, but not Christian.” They also offer printable leaflets explaining what Christian nationalism is, for churchgoers and leaders to distribute.

Of all the resources they offer online, Tyler, of the Baptist Joint Committee, said the slide that tends to get the most attention shows an altar draped with an American flag and the Christian flag.

“The reason that image generates so much conversation is that it’s so familiar,” she said.

Jan. 6 raised additional concerns for the group about whether it needs to go one step further and develop deradicalization materials for pastors in churches.

“It’s a long-haul project, it’s not something that we will immediately solve overnight,” Tyler said. “It’s really vital to have resources for people to help name and differentiate Christian nationalism in order to dismantle it.”

Correction 6/19: This story has been corrected to reflect the correct year that Christians Against Christian Nationalism launched. We regret the error.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7vew9/christian-nationalism-churches

Details

Hits: 3580

CP VOICES | WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2022
By Jan F. Dudt

There is always a dilemma for Christians in best handling and reacting to the positions and counsel of Christian leaders. Often these are people we have grown to trust and respect as followers of Christ.

Their convictions at times are consistent with Christian principles and biblical wisdom. They champion appropriate positions and defend causes from a historically Christian perspective. They gain traction and respect even among cultural, political, and religious opponents because of the internally consistent strength of their arguments and their winsome and gracious demeanor.

And yet, it is impossible for any fallen and sinful person to be right all the time. Similarly, it is quite possible — and regularly demonstrated — that the unregenerate are not always wrong.

As a case in point, contrast Dr. Francis Collins and President Donald Trump.

Trump, not convincingly a born-again Christian, became president in large measure because he promised to represent conservative Christians and their concerns. His appointing of originalist judges to federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as his attendance at events like the annual March for Life while he was in office (this was unprecedented for a president), were encouragements to many Christians. Yet his demeanor was consistently characterized as non-Christian. Such may well have cost him re-election. Christians and conservative political analysts will debate for decades whether he was a net positive or negative influence on America. Clearly, both cases can be made. Different Christian voices have weighed in on the matter. Many Christians, even conservatives, felt that Trump used them for his personal gain and prestige.

In certain notable ways, a case could be made that the Francis Collins’ situation at times echoes the debate over Donald Trump among Christians.

Dr. Francis Collins, the famous geneticist, was and is vocally Christian. He has clearly identified as such, and he has taken heat for it. For example, in the summer of 2009, after his nomination as director of NIH by President Barack Obama, outspoken atheist Sam Harris attacked Collins in the New York Times as unfit for the job because of his religious convictions.

Collins became known to many Americans during his direction of the Human Genome Project through the 1990s. In February 1998, Scientific American profiled Dr. Collins with the headline “Where Science and Religion meet: The U.S. head of the Human Genome Project, Francis S. Collins, stives to keep his Christianity from interfering with his science and politics.” That article quoted Dr. Collins saying he is “intensely uncomfortable with abortion.” He said that he does not advocate changing the law and is “very careful” to ensure his personal feelings on abortion do not affect his political stance.

The article went on to say: “researchers and academics familiar with Collins’ work agree that he has separated his private religious views from his professional life. He shows no influence of religious beliefs on his work other than a generalized sensitivity to ethics issues in genetics.”
In essence, what these people were saying is that Francis Collins is such a good scientist because you can hardly tell he is a Christian from his work.

As a much younger biology professor at the time, I was aghast at this. A Christian has separated his religious views from his professional life. Why is that a good thing?

I emailed Dr. Collins at the time, asking him if Scientific American had it right. Maybe the article misunderstood Collins? My email was never answered. Not that I expected that it would be, given my obscurity and his standing and responsibilities. Still, the article troubled me, as I was always left with the lingering question.

Dr. Collins went on to launch the BioLogos Foundation, a Christian/science interface organization that advocates for the reconciliation of modern science and Christianity. The idea is that nature and Scripture are both from God and ultimately are not in conflict. This reflects Dr. Collins’ Christian convictions and his love of science, the study of God’s physical world. Give Dr. Collins credit for leveraging his popularity, leadership qualities, and obvious pastoral instincts for the noble cause.

Ultimately, I met Dr. Collins several years ago at a conference and heard him speak. There is no reason he would remember our quick contact in an elevator any more than he would remember my email. However, one cannot help but be impressed by his genuine humility and his concern for the spiritual health of the people around him. He has made it clear that he believes that Jesus Christ is incarnate and divine and that humans are made in the image of God (although he rejects the historic Adam), and that salvation is real.

Yet, inconsistencies remain. Dr. Collins seems to allow his science to inordinately arbitrate over biblical truth, or at least when the two are portrayed as in conflict. As his professional life has unfolded, it has become clear that the Scientific American article had gotten a lot right. It is fair to say that he has remained uncertain about when human life begins. He concedes that the fertilized egg is alive at conception, but believes that maybe it is not quite human. Consequently, in his 2010 book, The Language of Life, he advocated for experimentation using excess human embryos from in vitro fertilization (IVF) that are stuck in cryo-storage with uncertain futures, “so that some good could come from them.” He has never publicly disavowed human embryonic research because he sees its potential fruitfulness. In fact, as late as last summer, experiments involving human embryonic cells and mice was supported by NIH funding at the University of Pittsburgh.

There are ongoing ramifications of Dr. Collins’ acceptance of abortion as the law of the land. The Scientific American article in 1998 mentioned that Dr. Collins was concerned that embryonic genetic testing might lead to abortions of fetuses that have conditions that are less than disastrous. The article did not suggest what he would consider “less than disastrous.” For instance, would my great-nephew’s Downs syndrome condition be considered less than a disaster? Princeton bioethicist and legal scholar, Dr. Robert George, made a clearer case in his 1998 address to the American Political Science Association Convention, stating, “once I was a child, once I was an infant, once I was an embryo, I cannot say I was once an egg or a sperm.”

However, it is clear that the viable sperm and egg are quite alive. Also, it is good to remember what we say in the Apostle’s Creed. “He was conceived … born … suffered … died … and … rose again.”

What human is not on that trajectory of life and death? The Bible teaches that we all are.

This leaves many conservative Christians convinced that Dr. Collins would rather come down on the side of a quote from his old boss, President Barack Obama. In March 2009, Obama signed an executive order that lifted President George W. Bush’s 2001 ban on federal funding of human embryonic research. “Today … we will lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research,” stated Obama. “We will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research. And we will aim for America to lead the world in the discoveries it one day may yield.” Obama continued, “Promoting science isn’t just about providing resources — it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and … that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.”

Obama insisted that “I’m going to let scientists do science. I’m going to remove politics, religion, and ideology from that.”

Of course, the reality is that such a thing cannot be done. The president’s own politics and ideology were clearly stated and inserted.

One would hope that Dr. Collins would be more comfortable with the principles articulated in President George W. Bush’s 2006 State of the Union Address. “A hopeful society has institutions of science and medicine that do not cut ethical corners, and that recognize the matchless value of every life,” stated Bush. “Tonight, I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research — human cloning in all its forms … creating or implanting embryos for experiments … creating human-animal hybrids … and buying, selling, or patenting human embryos. Human life is a gift from our Creator—and that gift should never be discarded, devalued, or put up for sale.”

These are all ethical issues that have confronted Dr. Francis Collins as a man of science and of faith. The issues more recently included COVID mask and vaccine mandates. To many in the evangelical community, the pro-life appeals he made for the mandates have rung increasingly hollow, and his seeming inconsistencies have been bothersome.

Os Guinness, in his book, The Magna Carta of Humanity, brings out a principle that every intentional Christian should keep in mind: “The notion of arguing on behalf of the true, the right, and the good lies behind the biblical principle of corrigibility.” Guinness quotes Jewish Hebrew scholar Jonathan Sacks, “We are all open to challenge. No one is above criticism, no one is too junior to administer it, if done with due grace and humility.”

This requires knowing scripture and applying its logical conclusions, consistently. Otherwise, our ability to be salt and light is diminished, and we can be played. Francis Collins needs to add salt and light. Many of us have admired him, and we expect more from him in his Christian witness to science.

Dr. Jan Dudt is a professor of biology at Grove City College and fellow for medical ethics with the Institute for Faith & Freedom.

https://www.christianpost.com/voices/christian-leaders-and-controversies-the-case-of-francis-collins.html?clickType=link-topbar-news

Details

Hits: 3591

Analysis by John Blake, CNN Updated 12:46 PM ET, Sun July 24, 2022

(CNN) — Three men, eyes closed and heads bowed, pray before a rough-hewn wooden cross. Another man wraps his arms around a massive Bible pressed against his chest like a shield. All throughout the crowd, people wave "Jesus Saves" banners and pump their fists toward the sky. At first glance, these snapshots look like scenes from an outdoor church rally. But this event wasn't a revival; it was what some call a Christian revolt. These were photos of people who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, during an attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The insurrection marked the first time many Americans realized the US is facing a burgeoning White Christian nationalist movement. This movement uses Christian language to cloak sexism and hostility to Black people and non-White immigrants in its quest to create a White Christian America. A report from a team of clergy, scholars and advocates — sponsored by two groups that advocate for the separation of church and state — concluded that this ideology was used to "bolster, justify and intensify" the attack on the US Capitol.

Much of the House January 6 committee's focus so far has been on right-wing extremist groups. But there are plenty of other Americans who have adopted teachings of the White Christian nationalists who stormed the Capitol — often without knowing it, scholars, historians, sociologists and clergy say. White Christian nationalist beliefs have infiltrated the religious mainstream so thoroughly that virtually any conservative Christian pastor who tries to challenge its ideology risks their career, says Kristin Kobes Du Mez, author of the New York Times
bestseller, "Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation." "These ideas are so widespread that any individual pastor or Christian leader who tries to turn the tide and say, 'Let's look again at Jesus and scripture,' are going to be tossed aside," she says. The ideas are also insidious because many sound like expressions of Christian piety or harmless references to US history. But White Christian nationalists interpret these ideas in ways that are potentially violent and heretical. Their movement is not only anti-democratic, it contradicts the life and teachings of Jesus, some clergy, scholars and historians say. Samuel Perry, a professor of religious studies at the University of Oklahoma who is authority on the ideology, calls it an "imposter Christianity." Here are three key beliefs often tied to White Christian nationalism.

A belief that the US was founded as a Christian nation

One of the banners spotted at the January 6 insurrection was a replica of the American flag with the caption, "Jesus is My Savior, Trump is My President." Erasing the line separating piety from politics is a key characteristic of White Christian nationalism. Many want to reduce or erase the separation of church and state, say those who study the movement. One of the most popular beliefs among White Christian nationalists is that the US was founded as a Christian nation; the Founding Fathers were all orthodox, evangelical Christians; and God has chosen the US for a special role in history.

These beliefs are growing among Christians, according to a survey last year by the Barna Group, a company that conducts surveys about faith and culture for communities of faith and nonprofits. The group found that an "increasing number of American Christians believe strongly" that the US is a Christian nation, has not oppressed minorities, and has been chosen by God to lead the world. But the notion that the US was
founded as a Christian nation is bad history and bad theology, says Philip Gorski, a sociologist at Yale University and co-author of "The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy." "It's a half truth, a mythological version of American history," Gorski says. Some Founding Fathers did view the founding of the nation through a Biblical lens, Gorski says. (Every state constitution contains a reference to God or the divine.) But many did not. And virtually none of them could be classified as evangelical Christians. They were a collection of atheists, Unitarians, Deists, and liberal Protestants and other denominations.

The Constitution also says nothing about God, the Bible or the Ten Commandments, Gorski says. And saying the US was founded as a Christian nation ignores the fact that much of its initial wealth was derived from slave labor and land stolen from Native Americans, he says. For evidence that the United States was founded as a secular nation, look no further than the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, an agreement the US negotiated with a country in present-day Libya to end the practice of pirates attacking American ships. It was ratified unanimously by a Senate still half-filled with signers of the Constitution and declared, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on Christian religion." Does this mean that any White Christian who salutes the flag and says they love their country is a Christian nationalist? No, not at all, historians say. A White Christian who says they love America and its values and institutions is not the same thing as a White Christian nationalist, scholars say. Gorski also notes that many devout Black Americans have exhibited a form of patriotism that does not degenerate into Christian nationalism.

Gorski points to examples of the 19th century abolitionist, Frederick Douglass, and the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Both were devout Christians who expressed admiration for America and its founding
documents. But their patriotism also meant that "they challenged the nation to live up to its highest principles, to become a place of freedom, equality, justice and inclusion," he says. The patriotism of White Christian nationalists, on the other hand, is a form of racial tribalism, Gorski says. "It's a 'My tribe. 'We [White people] were here first. This is our country, and we don't like people who are trying to change it or people who are different' form of nationalism," Gorski says.

A belief in a 'Warrior Christ' Videos from the January 6 attack show a chaotic, tear-gas-soaked scene at the Capitol that looked more like a medieval battle. Insurrectionists punched police officers, used flagpoles as spears and smashed officers' faces against doors while a mob chanted, "Fight for Trump!" The attack left five people dead and nearly 140 law enforcement officers injured. The incongruity of people carrying "Jesus Saves" signs while joining a mob whose members are pummeling police officers leads to an obvious question: How can White Christian nationalists who claim to follow Jesus, the "Prince of Peace" who renounced violence in the Gospels, support a violent insurrection?

That's because they follow a different Jesus than the one depicted in the Gospels, says Du Mez, who is also a professor of history and gender studies at Calvin University — a Christian school — in Michigan. They follow the Jesus depicted in the Book of Revelation, the warrior with eyes like "flames of fire" and "a robe dipped in blood" who led the armies of heaven on white horses in a final, triumphant battle against the forces of the antichrist. White Christian nationalists have refashioned Jesus into a kick-butt savior who is willing to smite enemies to restore America to a Christian nation by force, if necessary, Du Mez and others say. While warlike language like putting on "the full armor of God" has long been common in Christian sermons and hymns, it has largely been interpreted as metaphorical. But many White Christian nationalists take that language literally.

That was clear on January 6. Some insurrectionists wore caps emblazoned with "God, Guns, Trump" and chanted that the blood of Jesus was washing Congress clean. One wrote "In God We Trust" on a set of gallows erected at the Capitol. "They want the warrior Christ who wields a bloody sword and defeats his enemies," says Du Mez. "They want to battle with that Jesus. That Jesus brings peace, but only after he slays his enemies." And that Jesus sanctions the use of righteous violence if a government opposes God, she says. "If you deem somebody in power to be working against the goals of a Christian America, then you should not submit to that authority and you should displace that authority," she says. "Because the stakes are so high, the ends justify the means."

That ends-justify-the means approach is a key part of White Christian nationalism, says Du Mez. It's why so many rallied behind former President Trump on January 6. She says he embodies a "militant White masculinity" that condones callous displays of power and appeals to Christian nationalists. But with few exceptions, White Christian nationalists do not accept this "militant masculinity" when exhibited by Black, Middle Eastern and Latino men, Du Mez writes in "Jesus and John Wayne." Aggression by people of color "is seen as a threat to the stability of home and nation," she writes. Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson echoed this double standard last year when he said on a radio talk show that he never really felt threatened by the mostly White mob that stormed the Capitol on January 6. "Now, had ... President Trump won the election and those were tens of thousands of Black Lives Matter and Antifa protesters, I might have been a little concerned," Johnson said. Johnson later elaborated, saying "there was nothing racial about my comments-- nothing whatsoever." This embrace of a warrior Christ has shaped some White evangelicals' attitudes on issues ranging from political violence to gun safety laws. A survey last year by the Public Religion Research Institute revealed that of all respondents, White evangelicals were the religious group most likely to agree with the statement, "true American patriots might have to resort to violence in order to save the country."

There are also some White Christian nationalists who believe the Second Amendment was handed down by God.

Samuel Perry, co-author of "Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States," wrote in a recent essay that among Americans surveyed who believe "The federal government should declare the United States a Christian nation," over two-thirds rejected the idea that the federal government should enact stricter gun laws." "The more you line up with Christian nationalism, the less likely you are to support gun control," wrote Perry. "Guns are practically an element of worship in the church of white Christian nationalism."

A belief there's such a person as a 'real American'

In the 2008 presidential election, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin introduced a new term to the political discourse. She talked about "the real America" and the "pro-America areas of this great nation." Since then, many conservative political candidates have used the term "real Americans" to draw contrasts between their supporters and their opposition. Such language has been co-opted into a worldview held by many White Christian nationalists: The nation is divided between "real Americans" and other citizens who don't deserve the same rights, experts on White Christian nationalism say. Gorski, author of "The Flag and the Cross," says he found in his research a strong correlation between White Christian nationalism and support for gerrymandering —an electoral process where politicians manipulate district lines to favor one party or, some critics say, race over another. He found similar support among White Christian nationalists for the Electoral College, which gives disproportionate political power to many rural, largely White areas of the country. When White Christian nationalists claim an election was stolen, they are reflecting the belief that some votes don't count, he says. "It's the idea that we are the people, and our vote should count, and you're not the people, and... you don't really deserve to have a voice," Gorski says. "It doesn't matter what the voting machines say, because we know that all real Americans voted for Donald Trump."

Why White Christian nationalism is a threat to democracy

Those who want the US to become a Christian nation face a huge obstacle: Most Americans don't subscribe to their vision of America. The mainstreaming of White Christian nationalism comes as a growing number of Americans are rejecting organized religion. For the first time in the US last year, membership in communities of worship fell below 50%. Belief in God is at an all-time low, according to a recent Gallup poll.

Add to that the country's growing racial and religious diversity. People who identify as White alone declined for the first time since the census began in 1790, and the majority of Americans under 18 are now people of color. On the surface, White Christian nationalism should not be on the ascent in America. So White Christian nationalists look for salvation from two sources. One is the emboldened conservative majority on the US Supreme Court, where recent decisions overturning Roe vs. Wade and protecting school prayer offer them hope. Critics, on the other hand, say the high court is eroding the separation of church and state. Not all Christians who support the high court's overturning of Roe v. Wade and its school prayer decision are White nationalists. For example, plenty of Roman Catholics of all races support racial justice
yet also backed the overturning of Roe. But White Christian nationalists are inspired by those decisions because one of their central goals is to erase the separation of church and state in the US. A recent study concluded that five of the justices on the Supreme Court are the "most pro-religion since at least World War II," and that the six conservative justices are "all Christian, mostly Catholic," and "religiously devout."

While some Americans fear the dangers of one-party rule, others like Pamela Paul, a columnist, warn of the Supreme Court instituting one-religion rule. "With their brand of religious dogma losing its purchase, they're imposing it on the country themselves," she wrote in a recent New York Times editorial. Gorski, the historian, says White Christian nationalism represents a grave threat to democracy because it defines "we the people" in a way that excludes many Americans. "The United States cannot be both a truly multiracial democracy -- a people of people and a nation of nations -- and a white Christian nation at the same time," Gorski wrote in "The Flag and the Cross." "This is why white Christian nationalism has become a serious threat to American democracy, perhaps the most serious threat it now faces." The other source of hope for White Christian nationalists is a former occupant of the White House. Their devotion to him is illustrated by one of most striking images from the January 6 insurrection: A sign depicting a Nordic-looking Jesus wearing a red "Make America Great Again" hat. If Trump returns to the presidency, some White Christian nationalists may interpret his political resurrection as divine intervention. His support among White evangelicals increased from 2016 to 2020. And what the men carrying wooden crosses among the Capitol mob couldn't achieve on January 6, they might yet accomplish in 2024.

An 'imposter Christianity' is threatening American democracy - CNN.pdf

Details

Hits: 3431

CP CHURCH & MINISTRIES |
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2022
By Michael Gryboski, Mainline Church Editor

A pastor has warned attendees of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Annual Meeting against using things like “politics,” “social justice” and “music” to grow their congregations instead of the Gospel.

Juan Sanchez, senior pastor of High Point Baptist Church in Austin, Texas, gave the Convention sermon on Wednesday morning in Anaheim, California.

Sanchez preached about Ephesians 4:11-16, noting that in the Bible passage, Paul of Tarsus writes about the foundational importance of prophets and apostles.

“The foundation of the Church is the apostles and prophets because that is the group to whom the Father revealed that Jesus is the Christ,” Sanchez explained. “The foundation of the Church is this revelation of the Father that Jesus is the Christ. He is King, He is Lord. It is through Jesus that God will bring together all that has been broken.”

Sanchez then warned against using other means to increase membership numbers, telling those gathered that “we cannot build the Church on any other foundation.”

“If our primary end is merely church growth,” said Sanchez, “we will be tempted to build on other foundations. We’re tempted to build our churches on a foundation of music styles, or age-graded ministries, or even politics or social justice or even our own personalities.”

“Growth that comes by something other than the Word of God about Jesus is not lasting, nor is it God-glorifying. As a friend of mine says, ‘what you win people with is what you win them to.’”

In keeping with this reasoning, Sanchez said that “if you win them with music, you’ve won them to music. If you win them with children’s ministry, you’ve won them to children’s ministry. If you win them with politics, you’ve won them to politics. If you win them with your personality, you’ve won them to you, but not to the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Sanchez also focused on verse 14 of the passage, which talks about no longer being “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive.”

“If this does not describe the Church in the last two years, I don’t know what does,” said Sanchez. “The Church has been tossed about by every wind of doctrine, by human philosophies, by conspiracy theories, by worldly opinions.”

“And is it possible that the reasons our congregations have been so thrust by the winds and the waves, is because we have not ground them in the Word of God?”

Sanchez saw healthy spiritual growth as being a “corporate” effort, noting people in his life who, while not being famous or prominent, nevertheless helped his faith development growing up.

“I heard the Gospel, I saw the Gospel, I repented of my sins, I trusted in Christ, all through the ministry of people that you have never heard of,” he said. “That’s what I love about the Church of Jesus Christ.”

Sanchez’s sermon took place on the second day of the SBC's Annual Meeting, held June 14-15 at the Anaheim Convention Center, with the theme of “Jesus: The Center of it All.”

On Tuesday, the SBC messengers voted to elect Pastor Bart Barber of First Baptist Church in Farmersville, Texas, to be the new president of the SBC following a runoff ballot.

Barber will succeed Pastor Ed Litton, who was elected last year and made headlines when he announced that he would be the first SBC president in decades to not seek reelection.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-warns-southern-baptist-convention-about-using-politics-music-to-grow-church.html

Details

Hits: 3324

BY JOSHUA ARNOLD/FRC JUNE 02, 2022

New analysis from Arizona Christian University's Cultural Research Center reveals a "particularly shocking" absence of biblical worldview among pastors of evangelical churches, "because evangelical churches, by definition, believe that the Bible is God's true and reliable words to humanity."

The latest release of the American Worldview Inventory, conducted in February and March of this year, revealed that 37% of Christian pastors held a biblical worldview, and the numbers are only slightly better among pastors of evangelical (51%) and independent or non-denominational (57%) churches.

"With barely half of evangelical pastors possessing a biblical worldview -- and that number continuing to decline -- attending what may be considered an 'evangelical' church no longer ensures a pastoral staff that has a high view of the scriptures," said George Barna, Senior Research Fellow with FRC's Center for Biblical Worldview.

"We're really not being the kind of light in the darkness that Christ has called us to be," said Barna, who conducted the research. "American culture is doing more transforming of the American church." The report comes as the nation continues to reel from recent mass shootings in Texas, New York, and California. "Historically, in times of tragedy, Americans look to the pulpit for answers," said FRC President Tony Perkins. "Fewer pulpits believe the Bible actually has the answers."

The research showed pastors without a biblical worldview (62%) hold to a blending of biblical ideas with other philosophies "best described as Syncretism," resulting in "a unique but inconsistent combination that represents their personal preferences." Barna's research identified a biblical worldview according to 54 questions in eight categories, which found a majority (57%) of pastors aligned with the Bible in only one category, "the purpose of life and their calling with it."

The lowest category (39%) "might have been expected to top the list: beliefs and behaviors related to the Bible, truth, and morality." Only two percent of pastors aligned with the Bible in this category while lacking a comprehensive biblical worldview.

A biblical worldview is "a combination of beliefs and behavior because you do what you believe," said Barna. "Everybody makes decisions all the time ... and so we make those choices on the basis of our worldview, ... the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual filter that ... enables us to make sense of the world around us and our place within it."

He explained a worldview "helps us determine right from wrong, ... what kind of person we want to be, ... all of those choices that we make." A worldview begins developing as young as 18 months, is established by 13, and "we refine it during our teens and twenties, but it rarely changes after," Barna explained. "Everybody has a worldview."

Barna's research revealed senior pastors are most likely to have a biblical worldview (41%) followed by associate or assistant pastors (28%). "They're the future senior pastors," said Barna, "so we're looking at a reduction in the future if that trend holds to be true."

The research also identified biblical worldview among children's and youth pastors (12%), teaching pastors (13%), and executive pastors (4%). Executive pastors are presumably responsible for managing a church's finances, which means almost all
churches handle their finances according to worldly business principles instead of according to a biblical worldview.

Teaching pastors are commonly found in large churches, explained Barna, but "you have to ask the question, 'what is it you're teaching?'" Among pastors of churches which average more than 600 adults at weekend services, around 15% are Integrated Disciples, according to the data, while over 40% are integrated disciples for smaller churches.

Integrated Disciples "have a biblical worldview" and have "successfully integrated their biblical beliefs into their daily behavior." Barna suggested it was "plausible that pastors of some large churches attract people by teaching a cultural standard rather than a biblical standard."

The worldview deficit among children's and youth pastors is impacting the next generation. For "people who have a biblical worldview, it has largely been shaped through the coaching or mentoring of another individual who has that biblical worldview," said Barna, "not only teach it to them, but also model it for them and help them to be accountable for the choices that they're making."

Paul told the Corinthians, "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ" (1 Corinthians 11:1), and he told Timothy, "what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also" (2 Timothy 2:2). Passing on instruction and imitation from person-to-person instruction and imitation have been the bedrock of Christian disciple-making since the time of the apostles.

The lack of biblical worldview among pastors carries implications for children raised in Christian homes. "If we have a deficit of biblical worldview in the church, ... that does not speak well for Christian homes," Perkins said. "At the tip of the spear is parents. ... But we've got to have, at the same time, churches reinforcing and actually equipping the parents."


Parents "have the primary responsibility of shaping the worldview of their children," Barna agreed. "But it's the community of faith that has the responsibility of helping to equip and to support those parents in the process."

It also carries implications for believers seeking to join a healthy church. Barna said, "if you're going to go to a church, it's incumbent upon you to do your homework, to figure out, 'is this a church that not only believes the Bible and not just talks about it, but really is living it, really is being held accountable?'"

He offered a warning, "They're going to tell you that they love the Bible, that they teach the Bible. We can no longer assume that that's the case."

Originally published at Family Research Council
https://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=5394

Details

Hits: 3618

CP CHURCH & MINISTRIES | WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2022
By Michael Gryboski, Mainline Church Editor

The Southern Baptist Convention has delayed a decision on whether to remove Rick Warren's Saddleback Church from the denomination in light of the California megachurch's ordination of three female pastors last year.

Saddleback Church's ordination of the three pastors last May in what the church called a "historic night" drew the ire of many in the largest Protestant denomination in America in light of the 2000 Baptist Faith & Message statement's ban on female ordination.

Some called for the congregation to be disfellowshiped from the convention over the ordination of — Liz Puffer, Cynthia Petty and Katie Edwards.

The SBC Credentials Committee, tasked with handling concerns about whether churches that cooperate with the convention are abiding by the SBC standards of faith and practice, announced Tuesday at the SBC Annual Meeting in Anaheim, California, that it would delay a decision on Saddleback's standing.

"Based on the information available to us currently, including direct communication with Pastor Rick Warren, ... we have concluded that we are not yet prepared to make a recommendation regarding Saddleback Church, recognizing there are differing opinions regarding the intent of the office of pastor as stated in the Baptist Faith & Message 2000," Committee Chair Linda Cooper told meeting attendees.

"We feel it is very important for you to know that it is the unanimous opinion of the Credentials Committee that the majority of Southern
Baptists hold to the belief that the function of lead pastor, elder, bishop or overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture."

But Cooper noted that the committee "found little information evidencing convention beliefs regarding the use of the title of pastor, for staff positions with different responsibilities and authority than that of lead pastor role."

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President Al Mohler was among the critics of the ordination, writing in a 2021 column that he considered it "contrary to Scripture."

"This is no longer a point of tension and debate. These moves represent an attempt to redefine and reformulate the convictional foundation of Southern Baptist faith and cooperative ministry," wrote Mohler.

"The theological issues have not changed since the year 2000 when Southern Baptists spoke clearly and precisely in the Baptist Faith & Message. More importantly, the Holy Scriptures have not changed and cannot change."

At last year's SBC annual meeting, a motion was offered to break fellowship with Saddleback over the ordination, with the measure being referred to the SBC Credentials Committee.

Warren, the popular author of The Purpose Driven Life who had recently announced his retirement from Saddleback Church, addressed the convention floor. He said that he would not defend himself at that time.

Instead, Warren focused his Tuesday remarks on how he believed the SBC had positively influenced his ministry over the decades and warned against divisiveness.

"As Western culture grows more dark, more evil and more secular, we have to decide are we going to treat each other as allies or adversaries?" Warren stated.

"Are we going to keep bickering over secondary issues, or are we going to keep the main thing the main thing?"

The Credentials Committee initially recommended that the SBC messengers vote during the meeting this week to create a study committee that would report to the 2023 SBC Annual Meeting a "recommendation to provide clarity regarding the office of pastor."
Some leaders, including Mohler, voiced opposition to the idea of creating a study committee.

"If we eventually have to form a study committee over every word of our confession of faith, then we are doomed and we are no longer a confessional people," Mohler said to applause from the crowd.

The Credentials Committee rescinded its recommendation for a study committee after Warren addressed the meeting. It's unclear when the committee will make another recommendation regarding the original motion.

https://www.christianpost.com/news/sbc-delays-decision-on-saddleback-churchs-female-pastors.html

Details

Hits: 3602

BY JONATHAN BRENTNER/JONATHANBRENTNER.COM MAY 24, 2022

If our world is not on a direct path to the fulfillment of Revelation 13, the only alternative is to assume that something with a most uncanny resemblance to the mark of the beast is coming our way.

In other words, if what the globalists' propose for our world is not the prelude to the mark of the beast, I do not know what it would look like. The plans they have for our future fit like a glove with what the John wrote in Revelation 13:15-18:

"And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666."

Please understand that this passage does not reach its complete fulfillment halfway until through the seven-year Tribulation, well after the Rapture of the church. What we see today is NOT the mark of the beast, but it's most certainly both a prelude to and a conditioning for it.

John 8:44 is another key passage that's essential for understanding the agenda of the elite powerbrokers. Though not a prophecy, it speaks directly to what we see in our world today because the devil and his demons control the globalists who wield great power in the governments of the world as well as in the business world.

"You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

The Luciferian elite of our day have two basic goals: First, they plan to reduce the world's population and second, they intend to deceive and control those who remain through the means of transhumanism. Both objectives are essential to their final goal of forming a one-world government over which they hope to rule and enslave humanity. WHAT IS TRANSHUMANISM? Transhumanism is the combining of machines and human beings with the intent to monitor our behavior so they can later control our behavior and even our thoughts.

Wikipedia describes it this way:

"Transhumanism is a philosophical movement, the proponents of which advocate and predict the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies able to greatly enhance longevity, mood and cognitive abilities . . . Some transhumanists believe that human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into beings with abilities so greatly expanded from the current condition as to merit the label of posthuman beings."

Leading the way to bring about this change is a group called the World Economic Forum (WEF) with Klaus Schwab as its founder and CEO. Here is a quote from the group's website regarding the changes they wish to impose on the world:

"The Fourth Industrial Revolution [the WEF term for transhumanism] represents a fundamental change in the way we live, work and relate to one another. It is a new chapter in human development, enabled by extraordinary technology advances commensurate with those of the first, second and third industrial revolutions. These advances are merging the physical, digital and biological worlds in ways that create both huge promise and potential peril. The speed, breadth and depth of this revolution is forcing us to rethink how countries develop, how organizations create value and even what it means to be human."

The globalists of our day do not hide their objectives; they are in plain sight for all to see if one is willing to investigate. Is it not shocking that they intend for us to "rethink . . . what it means to be human?" The theme of merging "the physical, digital and biological worlds" runs through many of the articles on the WEF website. They do not keep their evil intentions a secret, but openly broadcast them to all who are paying attention.

TRANSHUMANISM BEGINS WITH PHARMACEUTICALS

On November 20, 2017, an article appeared on Forbes website entitled, Transhumanism and The Future of Humanity: 7 Ways the World Will Change By 2030. The following quote from it appears under the heading of "Our bodies will be augmented."

"The coming years will usher in a number of body augmentation capabilities that will enable humans to be smarter, stronger, and more capable than we are today. Wearables will be one form of body augmentation, but they will far surpass the fitness trackers of today. . . . We will also see increased use of implants ranging from brain microchips and neural lace to mind-controlled prosthesis and subdermal RFID chips that allow users to unlock doors or computer passwords with the wave of a hand. However, the most powerful body augmentation will come from biological augmentation as a result of increased insight into our genomes, advances in IVF technology that may allow us to select the most intelligent embryos, and powerful CRISPR gene-editing technology which may one day give us the ability to eliminate all heritable diseases. 

These body augmentation capabilities will give rise to humans that are more resilient, optimized and continually monitored."

Please note that the "CRISPR gene-editing technology" that the writer of the Forbes article says will someday augment our bodies is exactly how the experts today describe the mRNA injections, AKA "COVID-19 vaccines." What the Forbes article predicted in 2017 would eventually lead to the altering of humans became a reality in 2020-21 with the emergence of "CRISPR" gene therapy injections from Pfizer, Moderna, and other pharmaceutical companies.

Notice how the writer of the article stresses the positive possibilities of the "CRISPR" gene therapy injections as eliminating "all heritable diseases" before telling us that they will also lead to the continual monitoring of people. The transhumanists promise great advancements that will benefit humanity, but their final objective is control such as in buying and selling.

As further evidence of the long-range planning behind what we see today, ponder this quote from Aldous Huxley, a philosopher and author, at the California Medical School in 1961:

"There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution."

Though spoken over sixty years ago, these words represent the blueprint from which the globalists operate today. What Huxley talked about in 1961 has now become reality. "Pharmaceutical methods" have become the weapon of choice for those seeking to change humanity by combining humans with machines. What we see is just the beginning, drugs will continue to play an essential role leading to the mark of the beast.

TRANSHUMANISM ON OUR DOORSTEP

As evidence that transhumanism already resides on the doorstep of our world, please consider these three related initiatives that are opening the door for what we see depicted in Revelation 13:6-18.

1. PATENT WO2020060606: THE TECHNOLOGY OF CONTROLLING THE BUYING AND SELLING

Microsoft, along with Bill Gates, obtained this international patent in 2020: Patent WO2020060606 - Cryptocurrency System Using Body Activity Data. Yes, this patent is real as is its number.

Here is the legal description of the patent:

"Human body activity associated with a task provided to a user may be used in a mining process of a cryptocurrency system. A server may provide a task to a device of a user which is communicatively coupled to the server. A sensor communicatively coupled to or comprised in the device of the user may sense body activity of the user. Body activity data may be generated based on the sensed body activity of the user. The cryptocurrency system communicatively coupled to the device of the user may verify if the body activity data satisfies one or more conditions set by the cryptocurrency system, and award cryptocurrency to the user whose body activity data is verified."

This patent envisions the use of a sensor that detects "the body activity of the user" and reports it to an outside digital computing source. The behavior of the individual then becomes the basis for his or her award of "cryptocurrency." The reward or lack thereof results from what the senor reports regarding the conduct of the individual.

Now imagine a world where all currency exists digitally, and that day is coming, and your receipt of it does not come entirely from the fruit of your labor, but from behaving according to the desires of a distant governing body that sets the parameters by which the computing source rewards you. They will know your every move because your activity is monitored by a chip inside you or a mark on your body.

This is the future envisioned by Patent WO2020060606 - Cryptocurrency System Using Body Activity Data.

2. ID2020: INCLUDING THE "SMALL" AND THE "POOR" IN THE ANTICHRIST'S PROGRAM

ID2020 is another Bill Gates and Microsoft initiative that seeks to provide 1.1 billion people in the world with the legal identification that they currently lack; it will give them a digital ID along with a vaccine, of course. They will be one and the same.

Here is a description of ID2020 from the official Microsoft blog, dated January 22, 2018:

As discussions begin this week at the World Economic Forum, creating universal access to identity is an issue at the top of Microsoft's agenda, and we think technology can be a powerful tool to tackle this challenge. It was last summer that Microsoft took a first step, collaborating with Accenture and Avanade on a blockchain-based identity prototype on Microsoft Azure. Together, we pursued this work in support of the ID2020 Alliance - a global public-private partnership dedicated to aiding the 1.1 billion people around the world who lack any legal form of identity. To say that we were encouraged by its mission would be an understatement. We were inspired by it.

Notice the players include the World Economic Forum (WEF) that vigorously promotes both the Great Reset and transhumanism. ID2020 is not some isolated initiative that does not relate to transhumanism or the effort of the globalists to control people. It's all about identifying everyone on earth so the globalists can include them into their system of worldwide control, vaccinate them, and thereby continually monitor and dictate their behavior.

3. QUANTUM DOT TECHNOLOGY: THE TATTOO

So far, we have looked at the plans of the globalists to incorporate everyone on the planet into their scheme of controlling the flow of digital currency. But how do they intend to do this?

"Quantum dot" technology may answer that question; I believe this will become the means for the antichrist to deliver his infamous mark and accompanying vaccine to the population of the world. By it, he will mark those who belong to him by tattooing their right hand or forehead.

A diagram of how the "Quantum Dot" will inject a vaccine and leave a tattoo on the skin at the same time.

According to Bill Gates, quantum dot delivery of a future vaccines will connect the recipient to an external digital source via the ID2020 technology to verify the vaccination. Initially, this will vaccinate the individual as well as leave a tattoo, perhaps visible, that will electronically reveal his or her vaccine status.

Together, these three initiatives lay out a clear path to what will become the "mark of the beast" by the halfway point of the tribulation. By then, the electronic tattoo will appear on one's forehead and hand and reveal one's ability to buy and sell as well as to the degree they are able to participate in such activities.

Later, this tattoo will be the only means of participating in market of goods and services.

Before the dawn of this century, it would have taken an army of several hundred thousand to control the buying the selling across the planet and even then, it would not have been foolproof. Now with artificial intelligence and all the many advances related to transhumanism, the technology exists for one person to do this.

That person will be the antichrist. The globalists will have everything in place before he steps onto the world stage. Because of the speed at which technology and transhumanism are advancing, everything will be ready for him when the time comes for him to appear on the world's stage.

Originally published at Jonathan Brentner

https://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=5377

Details

Hits: 3433

Introductory Comments:

The article below informs us of the rising dissonance promoted by the reigning champions of systematic error-Catholicism- in the form of Thomas Aquinas. While this error-filled trend may be evident to many of us, (or even new to us), manifesting itself in various ways, what we surely cannot miss is the elevated popularity of the Jesuit Order and their theologies openly displayed and promoted by secular and religious media, as well as so-called Protestant theologians. Her rise from former disdain and even expulsion from several countries over many years past have been spectacular and mercurial.

Long forgotten by the fallen churches in their haste to return to the Papal fold is the history, purpose and aims of that organization, perhaps conveniently so. We are therefore reminded of these words:

“Throughout Christendom, Protestantism was menaced by formidable foes. The first triumphs of the Reformation past, Rome summoned new forces hoping to accomplish its destruction. At this time the order of the Jesuits was created, the most cruel, unscrupulous and powerful of all the champions of popery. Cut off from earthly ties and human interests, dead to the claims of natural affection, reason and conscience wholly silenced, they knew no rule, no tie, but that of their order, and no duty but to extend its power.” GC 234

Not only are Jesuits committed to the survival of the Order, but they are sworn to the triumph of the Papacy and the destruction of Protestantism- a feat they have all but accomplished except for the stubborn Seventh Day Adventists and a few other faithful groups. The writer Stuart Quint (below) examines the impact of Aquinas’ theologies upon which Catholicism so much depends. (RJG)

Reformed Leaders Hypnotized by Catholic Teachings of Thomas Aquinas

By Stuart P. Quint

“O foolish Galatians! Who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?”[i]

Why are some leaders in Reformed circles uncritically imbibing the deceptive wine of the “Angelic Doctor” of Rome?

Thomas Aquinas is experiencing a revival in the 21st century. This unholy “revival” is occurring in conservative seminaries, many with a Reformed pedigree.

One example is the Master’s Seminary (where Richard Bennett preached once). The spring 2022 issue of The Master’s Journal[ii] featured an interview with Dr. Matthew Barrett of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary[iii]. He touted Thomas Aquinas as “the most useful scholar of the Middle Ages on the Trinity.”[iv] and an indispensable source for seminary education of Bible-believing ministers.[v]

The Master’s Journal includes other citations and even articles from other champions of Thomas Aquinas and the “Great Tradition” he represents. They include R.C. Sproul[vi], Dr. James Dolezal of Cairn University[vii], and Dr. Craig Carter of Tyndale University[viii].

Yet, other Reformed leaders such as Dr. James White[ix] and Jeffrey Johnson[x] have voiced grave concern about the influence of Aquinas and his “Thomist” philosophy in Christian circles.

The issue is not judging these leaders’ motives. The fruit of their recommendation is questionable.

The Epistle of James reveals that God holds teachers to a higher standard of judgment: “Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.”[xi]

These leaders have great influence on the next generation. They are training the next generation of future pastors who will shepherd our children and grandchildren. Introducing them to the leaven of Thomas Aquinas is a grave issue.

“The teachings of Thomas Aquinas are the foundation of the Church’s socialistic teachings on economics, private property rights, and government social policy, but Thomas has deeply influenced the Roman Catholic Church in more areas than those just named, and he has influence outside the Roman Catholic Church as well.”[xii]

Believers need to beware and reject Thomas Aquinas even in the 21st century.

Personal Testimony from a Vatican Alumnus of the Ill Fruits of Thomas Aquinas

Let us consider the testimony of a man who actually studied and lived out the teachings of Aquinas – in the Vatican and in the Roman Catholic priesthood. His direct experience will shed more light than mere romantic sentiment speculated by academics with third hand exposure to Aquinas.

Were he alive on this earth today, Richard Bennett would be utterly dumbfounded at the blind attraction of Reformed leaders to the perilous doctrine of Thomas Aquinas.

Richard Bennett, the founder of the Berean Beacon ministry, completed his 8 years of study in the Dominican order at the Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas in Rome.[xiii] He originally intended to become a professor at a Catholic seminary. In His mercy, God had other plans for Richard’s life.[xiv]

Even as a devout Catholic with big dreams, Richard’s doubts began in his studies at the Vatican:

“Then, in 1963, at the age of twenty-five, I was ordained a Roman Catholic priest and went on to finish my course of studies of Thomas Aquinas at The Angelicum University in Rome. But there I had difficulty with both the outward pomp and the inner emptiness. Over the years, I had formed from pictures and books, pictures in my mind of the Holy See and the Holy City. Could this be the same city? At the Angelicum University I was also shocked that hundreds of others who poured into our morning classes seemed quite disinterested in theology. I noticed Time and Newsweek magazines being read during classes. Those who were interested in what was being taught seemed only to be looking for either degrees or positions within the Catholic Church in their homelands.”[xv]

About to complete his fourth year of study under the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas,[xvi] Richard prayed and decided not to complete his theological degree. Instead, he wanted to fulfill the ambition of his youth to become a Catholic missionary.

“The priest who was to direct my thesis did not want to accept my decision. In order to make the degree easier, he offered me a thesis written several years earlier. He said I could use it as my own if only I would do the oral defense. This turned my stomach. It was similar to what I had seen a few weeks earlier in a city park: elegant prostitutes parading themselves in their black leather boots. What he was offering was equally sinful. I held to my decision, finishing at the University at the ordinary academic level, without the degree.”[xvii]

Doubters might question, “Richard had an unpleasant experience with people centuries after Thomas Aquinas lived, but that does not implicate the doctor himself!”

Let us consider Thomas Aquinas himself. First, why are some people attracted to him?

“Thomas Aquinas was a genuinely brilliant man with an extraordinary intellect. He has been called the Angelic doctor. He was born probably in 1224 into nobility. He initially joined the Benedictine monks at the famous monastery in Monte Cassino where he first came into contact with the teachings of Aristotle. He later joined the Dominican order (the same order I was in myself). He wrote the Summa Theologica, which he finished in 1273. It was based on some things in the Bible, but also papal teaching, Roman Catholic theology, and ‘the philosopher’. He presupposed that people knew ‘the philosopher’ was Aristotle.”[xviii]

Yet the erudition of Thomas Aquinas turned into a stumbling block. A major influence in his life and teaching was the pagan philosopher Aristotle.

“He [Thomas Aquinas] was a genuinely brilliant man who based his search for and defense of truth on a pagan philosopher who lived 300 years before Jesus. The man was utterly abject of truth because he mixed this pagan philosopher with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. A lethal and dangerous mixture of pagan philosophy and Catholic teaching with Scripture that is having its influence on people all over the world.”[xix]

The philosophy of Aristotle also served as a gateway to accepting the “mystery” of the Catholic sacraments, including the priesthood:

“All priests must study Aquinas for at least 2 years. I even could memorize many dictums in Latin… Aristotle [taught us] how the physical [sacrament] could give spiritual life.”[xx]

Thomas Aquinas elevated the human intellect over God’s revelation in Scripture:

“As he drew from Aristotle, he drew one of the famous principles: Nothing is in the intellect that was not first in the senses. This idea that the intellect gets all its information first from the senses, which reveal to the intellect truth, is the human rationale that by experimental data we can know intellectual truth and be sure of it. That is the horrific base by which people go astray, because they look to their intellect for truth… Scripture alone is our source of truth. Intellect can give us data, but it cannot give us truth. Aquinas has devastated so many to our day [such as leaders in the emerging church movement].”[xxi]

Upon becoming a priest, Richard found Thomas Aquinas to be utterly wrong about Rome’s sacraments:

“In my first 14 years as priest (altogether 22 years) mostly on a small island off Venezuela called Trinidad… I was in parish work as a priest. I presupposed what I was taught about truth from Aquinas – it was the Bible plus our intellect, what we derived from our senses, plus what we learned from great philosophers such as Aristotle… When I baptized babies, gave absolution at the confession box, it grieved me to see people coming back with the same sins… All I could see evidently is that these sacraments were not working. Because I supposed physical things such as the sacraments must be true because of what I learned from Aristotle. But it wasn’t working.”[xxii]

Thomas Aquinas greatly hindered Richard’s confidence and ability to read the Scriptures. Richard had to undergo “spiritual deprogramming” from Thomas Aquinas to be able to hear and understand God’s Word:

“I was seriously damaged… Because I did not hold to Scripture alone, and was still damaged by the philosophy of Aquinas… my search of the Scripture did not add up to anything… Those first 14 years as a priest were really damaged because of my presupposition that Aquinas was right, Aristotle was right… I was amazed to hear Paul say that Scripture could not be broken… when I began to study what the Bible says about the Bible, then I said the Bible is what is true… If we do not have the Bible as the only authority, we are hopeless. That changed my outlook… Then in my last 7 years [as a Catholic priest], I was trying as desperately as I could to hold to Scripture as my authority alone.”[xxiii]

Another person whose thinking was damaged by Thomas Aquinas is Alan Jones, Deacon of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco.[xxiv] A prominent speaker in the emergent church movement, Jones mixed mystical union with God and Roman Catholic doctrine into his talks. In his book Reimagining Christianity he wrote: “Aquinas studied a pagan philosopher named Aristotle. Why was he not afraid? Truth from whatever source is of the Spirit.”[xxv]

Another bad fruit of Thomas Aquinas was liberation theology, the root of today’s Communist woke ideology. For a time, Richard had fanatic, almost martial, devotion to liberation theology: “Liberation theology was highly influenced by Aquinas. That quote [of Thomas Aquinas: “In a case of a like need a man may also take secretly another’s property in order to succor his neighbor in need.”[xxvi]] was in Vatican Council II that it is not a sin to take someone else’s property… I taught liberation theology from my pulpit. Some of the rich people were annoyed, but some of the poor people were happy with me… I took up a court case against a doctor who wanted bribes… Because of my involvement in liberation theology, I was threatened by a machete and a gun, I nearly lost my life because I lived by the principles of liberation theology, of Thomas Aquinas.”[xxvii]

Could this “evangelical revival” of Thomas Aquinas open the door for further spreading the revival of “woke theology”, critical race theory, and intersectionality to unwitting churches?[xxviii]

Thomas Aquinas Weaponizes Rome’s Hostility to the Reformation

The teachings of Thomas Aquinas enjoy great authority even today in the Roman Catholic Church.

“He is not just a doctor, but THE doctor, the ‘angelic doctor’ of the [Roman Catholic] Church… In 1923, Pope Pius XI required Aquinas as the guide for younger men preparing for the priesthood. That was the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church well before 1923. It was some time after his death [in 1274]. Not long after his death, he was recognized as the seminal and the principal doctor of the Church… It is interesting that in the Catechism of the Catholic Church… published in 1994… gives footnotes and citations from Thomas Aquinas, so this shows that the Papacy has unleashed upon the world the teachings of Aquinas… His teachings bear the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.”[xxix]

Thomas Aquinas had great impact on many ecumenical councils of the Catholic Church, even on the Council of Trent. In a papal encyclical “Aeterni Patris: On the Restoration of Christian Philosophy”, Pope Leo XIII stated:

“The ecumenical councils, also, where blossoms the flower of all earthly wisdom, have always been careful to hold Thomas Aquinas in singular honor. In the Councils of Lyons [1274], Vienna ]1311-1313], Florence [1439], and the Vatican [1869-1870] one might almost say that Thomas took part and presided over the deliberations and decrees of the Fathers, contending against the errors of the Greeks, of heretics and rationalists, with invincible force and with the happiest results. But the chief and special glory of Thomas, one which he shared with none of the Catholic Doctors, is that the Fathers of Trent [1545-1563] made it part of the order of the conclave to lay upon the altar, together with sacred Scripture and the decrees of the supreme Pontiffs, the Summa of Thomas Aquinas, whence to seek council, reason, and inspiration.”[xxx]

Claiming the relevance of Aquinas today, Romanus Cessano, OP, current chair of theology at Ave Maria University and ordinary fellow of the Angelicum, writes: “

…[Trent] occupies a central place in Catholic life. The disciplinary reforms and theological clarifications made by the college of bishops under the authority of the pope still shape Catholic teaching. Because of the development of the Thomist Commentatorial Tradition by the middle of the sixteenth century, Aquinas greatly influenced the thinking of the council’s leading participants The Summa theologiae and, especially, its commentary by Thomas de Vio, Cardinal Cajetan (d. 1534), who had held exchanges with Luther, helped to resolve many of the council’s most pressing agenda items… Toward this end, the articulation that Aquinas introduces into Catholic theology enabled the Council to distinguish authentic Catholic teaching from some of the distortions that appeared around the time of the Protestant Reform[ation].”[xxxi]

Contrary to the misconception of certain evangelicals, the Council of Trent is “central” to understanding today’s Roman Catholic Church. The whole purpose of the Council of Trent was to combat the revival of Biblical teaching inspired by the Reformation.

“If anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified, let him be anathema [cursed].”[xxxii]

“If anyone shall say that by the said sacraments of the New Law, grace is not conferred from the work which has been worked [ex opere operato] but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace, let him be anathema.”[xxxiii]

True Christians have no business giving moral support to the Council of Trent! Neither should they lend any sympathy to its president “in spirit” Thomas Aquinas. Recall that Pope Leo XIII refers to Thomas Aquinas as the one who “took part and presided over the decrees and deliberations” of the Council of Trent!

Thomas Aquinas is no friend of Christ’s gospel. “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.”[xxxiv]

We have a responsibility to protect God’s church from infiltration by such as Thomas Aquinas. That includes not even entertaining false teachers with their teaching. “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.”[xxxv]

“Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.”[xxxvi]

Thomas Aquinas embodies the essence of Roman Catholic philosophy placed on a par with Scripture. Indeed, Aquinas dilutes the authority of God’s Word.

So then how can professing Reformed teachers still justify their advocacy of Thomas Aquinas?

Conclusion: Brothers and Sisters, Beware of Thomas Aquinas

One might object. “Well, certain godly Christians have recommended Thomas Aquinas. Look at R.C. Sproul, who vehemently opposed ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together). He vouched for Aquinas.”

Indeed, this author praises God for having used R.C. Sproul for much good in his ministry.

However, we also need to consider what God commands about watching ourselves and our doctrine, especially as it might impact others watching us:

“Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.”[xxxvii]

The hall of faith in Hebrews 11 lists two examples of leaders of God’s people who “subdued kingdoms, obtained promises.”[xxxviii] Despite being judges anointed by God with great responsibility, both suffered serious blemishes on their legacy in ministry.

Consider Samson. Out of utter carelessness, Samson fell for Delilah’s ruse.[xxxix] God’s Word does not deny the powerful way God used Samson, but the black mark in Samson’s legacy remained.

Consider Gideon. God used Gideon to break down the idol of Baal and rally Israel against their enemies. Yet, after God delivered through him a great victory over the Midianites, Gideon erected a golden ephod. Ironically, this ephod became a new idol that ended up ensnaring the people of Israel once again in idolatry.[xl]

The point is that you might strive to be a faithful servant of Jesus. Yet, you also have the potential to cause much damage to your own legacy, as well as to those whom you are serving.

The legacy of Thomas Aquinas has had global impact, especially on Roman Catholicism. However, unfortunately, leaders like Sproul have opened the door for this dark influence of Aquinas to penetrate evangelical Reformed circles generations after him.

This is not a unique case. Otherwise Biblically sound teachers such as A.W. Pink[xli] and Donald Grey Barnhouse[xlii] believed in “gap theory”, indirectly opening a door for those pushing ungodly and unfounded evolution through groups such as Biologos.[xliii] A.W. Tozer had a strange fetish for Catholic mysticism.[xliv]

Believers need to pray for and support their leaders. Remembering those who teach the Word of God, we are to consider the outcome of their lives and imitate their faith in action.[xlv]

However, believers must be on guard against false prophets who will come.[xlvi] Leaders also must guard their churches from false doctrine.[xlvii]

Thomas Aquinas is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He is not a Bible-believing teacher, but rather a purveyor of man-made philosophy. Thomas Aquinas represents the elite of Rome, not God.

Christ’s people must reject wolves of Rome such as Thomas Aquinas.

Church leaders and all believers should take seriously Christ’s goal for maturing His church:

“That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ.”[xlviii]

https://bereanbeacon.org/reformed-leaders-hypnotized-by-catholic-teachings-of-thomas-aquinas/

Details

Hits: 3260

12:00PM EDT 5/8/2022
JENNIFER GLASS STEFANIAK

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" (Hos. 4:6a, ESV).

"When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13a).

"[L]et every good and true Christian understand that wherever truth may be found, it belongs to his Master." —Augustine, On Christian Doctrine II.18

"All truth is from God." —John Calvin

Our world is full of information, all of it immediately accessible with just a few keystrokes. It is at times overwhelming and can be very confusing. Just last week, the Department of Homeland Security announced the formation of the Disinformation Governance Board to "protect national security" by combating "misinformation and disinformation" pertaining to, among other things, "COVID-19 vaccines."

As followers of Jesus, we know that He is the way, the truth and the life. But how does that apply to nontheological areas of daily life, especially in these supposedly "unprecedented" times? How do we know the way to go, the truth to believe? The last two years have been pervaded by fear: fear of catching, spreading or dying from COVID. Our lives have been reordered around this fear to the point of restricting the breathing of toddlers and allowing our elders to die alone. In 1 John 4:1, we are warned "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." In 2 Timothy 1:7 (NKJV), we are admonished that "God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind" (author's emphasis). Our Creator gave us physical bodies as well as souls and provides for the needs of both, whether through explicit revelation or the ability to use reason to logically apprehend scientific truth. Unquestioning, blind belief in "experts" on spiritual or temporal matters is never taught in Scripture.

Informed consent is a fundamental principle of both medical ethics and law, which requires that a patient have sufficient information before making a decision about his or her medical care. The Nuremberg Code was articulated in response to the German torture of Jews during World War II, and the first of its 10 points states:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element
requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

Though the term "experiment'" is used, this principle also applies to every medical procedure that occurs in the United States today.

In direct contradiction to the premise of informed consent, the implementation of COVID responses has restricted the power of choice (via lockdown, preventing the use of FDA-approved drugs), used coercion (via threat to employment or denial of services without proof of vaccine), used fraud/deceit (the FDA approved Pfizer's vaccine after only 108 days of data review, but attempted to block that data from public release for 20,000 days—or 55 years—until a lawsuit mandated otherwise) and employed far-overreaching dictates (the CDC claimed authority to impose a nationwide rent moratorium and mask requirement for transportation). Yet dissent for any of these or other methods dictated by "the experts" within the last two years has elicited cries of "grandma-killer, superspreader, selfish science-denier."

In February of 2020, Drs. Kirk and Kim Milhoan were completely immersed in ministry as pastor and pastor's wife of Calvary Chapel South Maui, Hawaii, doing worldwide medical missions via their nonprofit For Hearts and Souls and actively practicing in the medical fields for which they were trained: pediatric cardiology (Kirk) and pediatric cardiac anesthesiology with assistant clinical professorship (Kim). When government orders limited the regular operation of church services, they pivoted to serving the community via a seven-day-a-week food pantry that routed through the sanctuary. As they waited in line, needy people listened to worship music and were met by members of the congregation who offered listening ears and even hugs to those impacted more by loneliness than illness.

As they watched their church not only survive, but thrive, while doing the complete opposite of social distancing, Dr. Kim became curious as to the medical community's experience with COVID. She searched out other professionals online and at the clinics she worked; she read journals and opinions by experts in the fields of epidemiology and virology. What she observed began to diverge with what she had been taught as a medical practitioner: the majority of her colleagues seemed motivated mainly by fear, did not tolerate questions, and reacted to differing views with name-calling instead of rational discourse based in fact. Dr. Kim, knowing the scientific method to rest upon an endless retesting of hypotheses, came to realize something was amiss.

Further research into the origins of the measures being recommended (masks, social distancing, lockdowns) or prohibited (early treatment, the use of approved, repurposed drugs, risk stratification) revealed they had never before been utilized for pandemic response. As she studied the mechanism of the vaccines that were made available, she realized the technology they employed was completely different from all prior vaccines, predicated on inducing the body to manufacture the exact spike protein that is the most dangerous part of the coronavirus. When she brought these concerns to her husband, he asked that she keep them private until he could evaluate the data for himself. He was, after all, a pediatrician who had always considered "vaccine hesitancy" a danger to the populace at large. Also, at this point in the pandemic, any deviation from the approved narrative could mean job loss, professional disgrace and public shaming as conspiracy theorists or worse.

When Dr. Kirk similarly became convinced that the data did not match the information being disseminated to the public via news outlets, influencers and governmental health agencies, they both decided to pursue the truth at all costs. As Christians, the two knew that their allegiance to Jesus, the ultimate truth, far outweighed any personal or professional status. Furthermore, in this matter, knowing (or not knowing) scientific truth would have a tangible, physical impact for many.

Their efforts led them to a partnership with Dr. Lorrin Pang, the head of the state Health Department's Maui District Health Office and a former consultant for the World Health Organization. Although Dr. Pang had been overseeing the local pandemic response and vaccination effort, he agreed with the Kirk and Kim that the information being made available to the public was not sufficiently evidence-based, and much being withheld or discredited was actually necessary for people to make informed decisions for the prevention and treatment of COVID. They also created a local chapter affiliated with the Global COVID Summit (gcsmaui.org), a worldwide alliance of scientists and physicians committed to speaking truth about COVID pandemic research and treatment. They have participated in panel discussions and conferences with like-minded colleagues and appeared as guests on podcasts, employing all means available to make truth available to the public. Just as Deuteronomy, and subsequently Jesus, required "every charge ... be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses," *(Matt. 8:16b, ESV) not just one, the Milhoans have refused to succumb to the current mantra of "trust the experts; believe the science."

Predictably, a result of their attempt to promote discourse via the Pono Coalition for Informed Consent, the Hawaii Medical Board filed complaints against both Dr. Pang and Dr. Kirk Milhoan in August of 2021, accusing them of "providing misinformation." In April 2022, both complaints were cleared with no action taken.

2 Timothy 4:3-5 warns that "The time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry." Drs. Kim and Kirk live this daily, as they continue to practice medicine and minister to their community with the goal of sharing truth that gives freedom from fear and leads to life, both temporal and eternal.

Jennifer Stefaniak is a flight attendant for a major U.S. carrier.

https://www.charismanews.com/culture/89106-disinformation-governance-or-freedom-to-seek-the-truth