Antipodean59's Blog

Restored New Testament Christianity

Archive for the tag “Honesty”

The truth about sectarian christianity

According to the apostle Paul “God is not the author of confusion” (I Corinthians 14;33). Yet, today, there are hundreds of sects of “Christianity” all claiming to follow Jesus Christ and most if not all have a variation upon that theme. Is this how God wants it? Is this a “true and undefiled religion” (James 1:27)?

Listen to this preacher, Michael Hatcher and see if his lesson answers those questions.

Advertisements

Joe Biden’s Whopper

We all know Joe Biden has a propensity to put his foot in his mouth but it also appears Joe has forgotten the seriousness of Revelation 21:8 that is, all liars will spend eternity in hell. So here is Joe’s whopper last Thursday (Oct.11).

Thought For The Week

A Word To The Wise

A few weeks ago I wrote that the Law of Moses has been abolished, for Paul said it had been “nailed to the cross” (Colossians 2:14). However, in stating such one should not underestimate the old law still remaining as a great teaching tool. Once again the great preacher Paul says, “Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope” (Romans 15:4). The Law, it is said, conceals the New Testament, “For the law having a shadow of good things to come” (Hebrews 10:1). One such teachable premise is contained within the Levitical code which states “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbour, lest you incur sin because of him” (Leviticus 19:17 ESV). I believe God declares that communication in the brotherhood in respect to a sharp disapproval concerning specific or implied offence must be open, honest and direct lest a deep resentment is harboured in the heart. The New Testament reveals the same sentiment in Ephesians 5:11; that is, “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”

Many do not adhere to this authorised practice for fear of the sometimes inevitable consequence of alienation. They fear they may make too many enemies. Paul would no doubt encourage not to be fearful but simply retort with “Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth” (Galatians 4:16).

You see it is far better to be straight forward and let your feelings be known with the appropriate dignity and gentleness (I Peter 3:15) than to hold back resentment and anger in the heart of which the latter is sin (Ephesians 4:26).

Graham

Thought for the week

Standing For Truth

Sir Winston Churchill once said, “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something in your life” (Winston Churchill – 1874-1965). Now, don’t you find it astounding that perfectly contented souls will all of a sudden erupt in fits of vitriol when you point out a Bible truth? One need only visit a debate forum on Face Book, Google or such like to see them go hammer and tong all because someone had the audacity to quote the Bible. The quote invariably goes against their perception of truth or perhaps the lifestyle they or someone they know has indulged in. The apostle Paul would, however, counter with this: “Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth?” (Galatians 4:16). Yes, it is almost like one becomes their “enemy” all because God’s word which is the “truth” (John 17:17) was cited. The Bible believer must “not yield in submission even for a moment” (Galatians 2:5); rather, must continue to speak that “truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).
It should come as no surprise that these things take place for even Jesus, the Master teacher and counsellor said, “But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?” (John 8:45). My friends, if Jesus couldn’t persuade because of hardness of heart then we who stake our lives upon His truth ought to take comfort, for to repeat Churchill, “That means you’ve stood up for something in your life.”

Graham

Did Castro have JFK assassinated?

Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media has an interesting review of Brian Latell’s new book Castro’s Secrets.

Castro’s role in the JFK murder has been the subject of controversy for decades. In 2009, on one of the Sunday interview programs, ABC News correspondent Sam Donaldson said that he wanted to ask Fidel Castro before he died, “Did you do it? Meaning November 22, 1963.” This was the date of Lee Harvey Oswald’s assassination of JFK.

The answer, as Latell’s book makes clear, is that Kennedy was considered early on to be an enemy of the Cuban communist revolution, and that the Kennedy brothers had tried to kill Castro. For his part, Oswald was a pro-Castro Marxist activist who had traveled to the Soviet Union and had gone to the Cuban consulate in Mexico City on three occasions between September 27 and October 2, 1963, seeking a visa to travel to Cuba. During one of these visits, he proclaimed, “I’m going to kill Kennedy.”

Of course this is not new news and no doubt the skeptics will cry conspiracy but, nonetheless, it makes for interesting reading. Whatever the result, JFK’s murder violates God’s will and the perpetrators and accomplices will stand accountable before God (Romans 2:6; Hebrews 9:27). Further, He will carry through with His vengeance, for “vengeance is mine, I will repay” (Romans 12:19).

Graham

Beware! This is coming to a place near you.

Beware! If you think your country is immune to this then think again. The extreme Muslim religion is making inroads to push out inhabitants and once they do it will only be time before law and order breaks down and the sword of the “thuggee cult” will rule. Time to take a stand and speak out!

Was Sargent Bales operating alone?

In my opinion there is something mighty suspicious about the recent tragic murder of the innocent Afghans allegedly committed by a lone US Army Staff Sargent. As Trevor Loudon’s website article shows maybe there is more to it than meets the eye.

Here is an excerpt:

In an interview with Press TV’s U.S. Desk on Tuesday, Duff argued that the number of soldiers who committed the crime was more than one—despite earlier claims by the U.S. military that “only one U.S. soldier” was involved in the killings…

Duff insists that new evidence shows those involved “were not drunk.” He said they had “the permission” to leave their base and used a vehicle to drive “two miles” away to get the village where the fatal shooting took place. “They could not have left the base without the permission of the commanding officer revenge raid.”

Duff added that “No vehicle could possibly leave the gate of an American facility without the permission of an officer after midnight unless it were on an authorized military action.”

He also said that the soldiers even carried enough “gasoline cans” which they used to set the bodies on fire.

I realise we should not jump to conclusions or indulge in conspirsy theorys but I cannot help but smell a rat. As the old adage says: there is no smoke without fire.

Graham

Before you cross your Rubicon

To cross the Rubicon is a metaphor meaning to deliberately go beyond the point of no return.

An interesting article that may open your eyes can be read here

Think about the consequences before you leap!

Graham

Oooh, stop that nasty dihydrogen monoxide before it’s too late

I see the bright minds have concluded at Cancun and some left feeling they will make a difference by signing a petition to end the use of that nasty dihydrogen monoxide.  I say “bright” with an obvious tongue in cheek for if you read Robert Cook’s article how they have been duped by one of the classic scams you will see what a pack of dunces we have allowed to run rampant in the scientific/political world.

Graham

Be prepared or you will suffer

Degrees of Punishment

“But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.” (Matthew 11:22)

The subject of eternal hell is so repugnant to the modern ungodly world that people desperately search for some scientific rationale to justify their rejection of God’s Word. Charles Darwin was an example. He became an apostate from Christianity, not because of his scientific “discovery” of natural selection, but because of Christ’s teachings that unbelievers (including his own father) would end up in hell.

Nevertheless “the fearful, and unbelieving . . . and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8). These are words from God Himself!

But is there no difference in the punishment of, say, blaspheming and wicked unbelievers and the mere careless unbeliever? Yes, there is. As Christ said, the idolatrous inhabitants of Tyre would have repented if they had seen His mighty works, but the Galileans of Chorazin and Bethsaida who had seen His miracles and heard Him preach had not. Consequently they will suffer more.

Similarly, He said concerning those who would reject the gospel preaching of His disciples that “it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city” (Matthew 10:15). The wicked populace of Sodom, “giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh,” will suffer “the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 7), but even greater punishment awaits those who willfully reject God’s love in Christ.

There will, indeed, be degrees of punishment in hell, but they will be determined largely in proportion to degrees of “light” rejected. This is an unwanted–but urgently needed–message in these last days!

By Henry Morris (Institute of Creation Research)

 

 

Post Navigation