Category Archives: General

Orange Order promotes King James Bible only

The Orange Order are an old Protestant association which arose in Ireland. Here’s a quote from the Belfast area’s magazine from 12 July 2003, “Today as the 1611 King James (Authorised) Version of the Holy Scriptures remain the only version of the Holy Writ not to be contaminated by the scourge of ecumenism and liberalism, modernism and syncretism, may we be moved – individually and collectively – to cherish and obey its teachings, and hold fast to our own Laws & Constitution which state ‘only the King James (Authorised) Version (is) to be used within the Loyal Orange Institution’, so that we may loyally serve the King of kings and Lord of lords.”

Let’s hope that all Orange Order people are not going back on this King James Bible ONLY standard.

Antiochus Epiphanes 3.0

There was once an evil king named Antiochus Epiphanes. He hated Jehovah, but loved Jupiter.

History repeats itself.

There is a sinister Russian political character named Alexander Dugin. He is against Protestantism, but uses the astrological symbol for Jupiter to represent his “Fourth Political Theory”.

“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.” (Ecclesiastes 1:9, 10).

Antiochus was in Syria, which is under Russian protection today. Rome was against Antiochus just as the West is against Dugin.

No wonder Dugin is against Francis Bacon, because Bacon argued not just for repetitions in time, but germinant fulfilments or cycles of events, that the later is worse than the earlier!

If you study the Book of Daniel in detail, you can learn about three fulfilments to Daniel chapter eight. Find out for yourself, but reading the book, “Multiple Fulfilments of Bible Prophecy” here: bibleprotector.com/prophecy.

Russians want to divide Australia by race

Who would have guessed? The Russians are behind claims for Aboriginal sovereignty in Australia.

It is ironic that Russian extremism would be backing this leftist ideology. I don’t think they really care about anything with this, but trying to destroy our great nation.

Evidence:
Dugin
Another Katehon writer

Mr 3:24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
Mr 3:25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

 photo DSC00524.jpg

Confessing or professing?

Confessing and professing are not the same thing.

Sometimes the Bible says “confess”, with its meanings, and sometimes it says “profess”, with its meanings. Those words are not strictly interchangeable, but no doubt conceptually overlap.

In looking at the usages of these words, I would suggest that confess means to:
a. admit guilt
b. proclaim plainly agreement to a doctrine
c. reveal or disclose thoughts

Whereas profess means to:
a. claim, by speaking or proclamation
b. state one’s position or ability
c. lay hold in faith by speaking

Therefore, we can conclude that what some people call faith confessions (not to be confused with doctrinal confessions) really would better be called faith professions, like in this verse:

Mark 11:23 For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.

See the following:

1 Tim. 6:12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.

1 Tim. 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

Heb. 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)

Now, you can confess you agree with these Scriptures, but professing them means you act accordingly.

Eurasia and Oceania are at war

Charles Clover wrote in 2011, “the leader of the Eurasianist Movement, Alexander Dugin, … has worked to make dictatorship hip. … In Mr Dugin’s vision, a reborn Russia is a slightly retooled version of the Soviet Union with dystopian echoes of George Orwell’s 1984, where Eurasia was one of three continent-sized super states (Oceania and Eastasia being the other two) in perpetual war.”

In the Scripture, we find this prophecy, “And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.” (Daniel 11:40).

Sheikh Imran Hosein goads WW3

imran

Sheikh Imran Hosein, a leading Islamic eschatologist and bosom friend of Russian anagogical ideologue, Alexander Dugin, has “predicted” (like his Russian friend) that World War Three is coming. Hosein has instructed his followers to abandon money, but to return to gold and silver and to sell up and move to the country and begin to live off the land so as to survive the coming war. He teaches the Islamic view of the end times, including the Islamic view of a coming false pro-Jewish leader and the Mahdi (the great Muslim saviour). Hosein also advocates an alliance with Russia and the Eastern Orthodox religion.

Some Christians have bought into this view, claiming that the Islamic saviour is indeed coming, whom they are calling “antichrist”. They have tried to match the Muslim ideology into interpreting the End Times in the Bible. Accordingly, the dragon of Revelation might be viewed as representing Islamic nations. They are also trying to say that the coming antichrist is the same as what the Muslims are calling the Mahdi.

Those Christians are only half right. The proper way to understand Bible prophecy is to disregard any Islamic teachings altogether. When we begin from the Protestant tradition, we find that there is a view that there is a WESTERN and an EASTERN antichrist. This is explained in detail in the book, “Multiple Fulfilments of Bible Prophecy”, bibleprotector.com/prophecy

The Eastern Antichrist is spoken about in Daniel 8 and Daniel 11. This is not the same as the Western Antichrist of the end times.

The Eastern Antichrist has three stages:
1. Antiochus Epiphanes, the Hellenistic Syrian ruler who persecuted the Jews.
2. Mohammad and the history of Islam to 1967.
3. The coming leader of Russia, Gog.

We are rapidly approaching the third stage.

The facts today showing how the third and final Eastern antichrist of history is ready:

1. Russia is involved with Syria today, an Islamic nation.
2. Russia and Islam are connected, such as Russia’s backing of the Syrian dictatorship, the Iranian dictatorship, etc.
3. Russia’s leading spiritual leader, Alexander Dugin, is directly connected with Sheikh Imran Hosein, who are talking about eschatology and Gog and Magog.

The final events of the Eastern Antichrist are described in Ezekiel 38 and 39.

“And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” (Matthew 24:11).

Of course, world war does come when the very same false prophets push it. But the Bible shows God ends their war, “And behold at eveningtide trouble; and before the morning he is not. This is the portion of them that spoil us, and the lot of them that rob us.” (Isaiah 17:14).

The battle between believing the Bible and modernistic thinking

I asked some ardent modernists the following:

What is the Scriptural basis for arguing that the original source texts are more authoritative than present copies, and what in Scripture-based doctrine indicates any specific divine sanction to Greek or Hebrew MSS?

The answer? Basically, they say, it is because the science of textual criticism says so, that the Scripture doesn’t say anything about textual criticism/transmission and that the science is valid because after all, the Bible fails to address elements of things like evolution, Einstein’s special relativity, etc.

My response to these kind of folks is as follows:

You are, incidentally, confirming that this debate is between an Enlightenment-based philosophy versus a Biblical doctrine interpretation of Scripture. That is, the debate is between reasoning as though the Scripture says nothing on Biblical transmission versus an interpretation of Scripture where many such references are identified.

I can also understand how people can then start from some point out of the Scripture, and arrive at all kinds of views such as evolution, Einsteinian special relativity, etc., which are thoroughly un- and anti-Biblical. I do not want to say it belligerently, but I think your side’s modern bible textual criticism view falls into that category, alongside the unbelief of higher criticism.

The foundational issue is to then question why do I see references to the Reformation, perfection of the KJB, nature of transmission of the Bible, etc., in Scripture, while you do not interpret so. I think it is because of a vastly different hermeneutical presupposition.

Continue reading