This article is from The Converted Catholic Magazine and was written just after World War II ended in 1945. I never knew about the relationship between ritual and hierarchies of power before. This is what the Roman Catholic Church has and what Hitler and other dictators imitated.

FEW AMERICANS connect the Fascist tyranny with ritual and dogma. Yet it was by means of these that Mussolini, Hitler and their imitators put it over on the peoples of Europe.

Ritual divides people by establishing hierarchies of powers that lord it over the masses, and dogma makes heretics of all who do not conform to regimented beliefs. Side by side with hierarchies and heretics there is created the idea of a cruel God, the opposite from the God and Father of us all as taught by Jesus Christ.

The God that can salve the hurt soul of humanity today is that God and Father of us all, who is supremely concerned with human brotherhood, with the reign of justice and love on earth, not with the forms and rituals and the arbitrary dogmas of the Middle Ages.

Emphasis on the forms of worship as of divine origin and appointment has divided mankind into hostile, hating groups, and prevented combination and cooperation for the common good. The year 1945 should see the end forever of the uniformed hierarchs of the Nazi Fascists and their plan of dividing and regimenting mankind. We hope it will also see the beginning of the Christian religion of universal brotherhood under the loving God and Father of us all.

This article is from The Converted Catholic Magazine and was made available online by The Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry, LutheranLibrary.org.

There are plenty of articles about the Jesuit Order on this website, but this is one of the best-written and the most succinct in my opinion. It contains details I never read before.

J.J. Murphy was apparently a former Catholic priest. He’s the author of many articles in the Converted Catholic Magazine.

[The facts in the following article are fully substantiated and are not intended to scare anyone beyond their factual import.]

JESUITISM is the offspring of the peculiar Catholicism of Spain, which was shaped by centuries of Moorish rule and entirely cut off from the beneficial effects of the Protestant Reformation. Unless one understands this proud, intransigent Catholicism with its blind belief, fanatic intolerance, and contempt for Christian morals, he will never understand the Jesuit order to which it gave birth. As for Spain’s religious intolerance, one has only to think of the Spanish Inquisition that continued into the last century. As to its moral corruption, sufficient insight is given by a single fact recorded by the historian, Gerald Brenan, in his book, The Spanish Labyrinth (P. 49).

Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuits, was a Spaniard to the marrow of his soul. Terrorized during an illness with fear of death, he suddenly felt himself inspired to become the armed defender of the church who would bludgeon its enemies into submission by fair means or foul. He demanded the most servile obedience from his followers; they must obey sícut cadaver, ‘with the passivity of a corpse.’ Blind submission to the church even to a point where it becomes irrational and immoral was likewise demanded. “Ignatius gives it as a rule of orthodoxy to be ready to say that black is white, if the Church says so.” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, XV, 340.)

Speaking of Ignatius Loyola, Dr. John A. Mackay, of Princeton declares: “His ideal as stated by himself, was to ‘rule in a cemetery.’ When the world became transformed into a moral graveyard, the Kingdom of God would have arrived. Towards that sepulchral goal, the whole world policy of the Jesuit Order was directed.”¹

In even stronger language the great thinker and historian Carlyle says of Loyola: “There was in this Jesuit Ignatius an apotheosis of falsity, a kind of subtle quintessence and deadly virus of lying, the like of which has never been seen before. Measure it if you can. Men had served the devil, and men had imperfectly served God, but to think that God could be served more perfectly by taking the devil into partnership, this was the novelty of St. Ignatius.”²

If anyone thinks Carlyle was exaggerating he only needs to read the present-day writings of the Jesuits, who keep repeating that ‘it is allowed to do evil to prevent a greater evil.’

On these grounds of safeguarding the interests of their church, they justify, for instance, the Vatican concordats with Mussolini and Hitler. Their former pupil, Pope Pius XI, openly stated that he “would make, a deal with the Devil himself” to attain certain goals. The Jesuit practice that “the end justifies the means” has become the accepted policy of the whole Roman Catholic church.

The Jesuit System

The ruthless, militant organization that ex-soldier Ignatius founded for the purpose of destroying Protestantism and reestablishing the political Catholicism of the Middle Ages was essentially a dictatorship. It is not surprising that Hitler openly admired it, especially its daring intolerance, and based his Nazi system directly on it. The leader of this so-called Society of Jesus is given the military title of General. The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge says of him; “He holds in his hands the whole administration, jurisdiction, and government. He appoints the Provincials and all other officials. He can give dispensation from the rules just as he sees fit. His power is absolute. He is to the Order what the Pope is to the Church, the representative of God.”³

In the Jesuit Order, the will of the General is supreme. The members under him must strip themselves of all personal conviction and the slightest trace of individualism. He appoints the local superior of every house of the Order and gives him direct orders. This crushing out of individuality and conscience is and is meant to be a spiritual emasculation. The Schaff-Herzog quotation, partly given in the preceding paragraph, puts it this way:

The same point is made by the Encyclopaedia Britannica (XV, 341) in demonstrating that the Jesuits are so many “cultured mediocrities” or robots. It speaks of “the destructive process of scooping out the will of the Jesuit novice to replace it with that of the superior, as a watchmaker might fit a new movement in a case, and thereby tending in most instances to annihilate those subtle qualities of individuality and originality that are essential to genius. Men of the higher stamp will either refuse to submit to the process and leave the Society, or run the danger of coming forth from the mill with their finest qualities pulverized and useless.”

This immoral annihilation of one’s personality and the slavish obedience that follows become even more vicious in view of the fact that this submission has no limits or standards except the will of the superior. If an individual Jesuit remonstrates with a superior who commands him to do something sinful, he is reminded that he has vowed blind obedience and that it is not for him to decide whether a thing is right or wrong when he does not know the full circumstances or even why the order is given. This perverting of the subject’s conscience becomes all the easier since he has sworn obedience to the will of the superior who acts under secret rules that have never been disclosed to the average Jesuit.

This subtle means of forcing Jesuit inferiors to do evil to advance the power of the church was condemned by the famous Bishop of Angelopolis, Mexico, in his well-known letter to Pope Innocent X:⁴

The Jesuit system, however, is much too cynical to trust itself to the mere obedience of its subjects. It functions principally through an intricate system of ‘informers’ who spy on one another and report their findings to the superior. In this way fear motivates those who might otherwise relax at times from the rigid code of corpse-like obedience. All Jesuits are made aware from the beginning of their novitiate of this system of mutual spying. Repulsive as it is, it is no more repulsive than slavish obedience. It is sold to new members as a means of attaining humility and ‘Christian self-annihilation’ for Christ’s sake. The Encyclopaedia Britannica (XV, 340) refers to this system when it says: “By a minute and frequent system of official and private reports the General is informed of the doings and progress of every member of the Society and everything that concerns it throughout the world.”

The Inner Circle Of Jesuitism

It is not to be expected that within Jesuitism, the most secret organization in the world, the average member would share its esoteric doctrines. And the fact is that he doesn’t. After years of probation, the Jesuit takes his three final vows. Years later, of the many who make these three vows, a small and highly select minority are allowed to take a fourth vow. This inner circle is initiated into secrets of which the others know nothing. A still more select circle is made up of ‘Provincials’ appointed by the General. The Encyclopaedia Brittanica (XV, 339) makes mention of the two types of professed Jesuits:

Provincials of the Jesuits make a point of not appearing in the public eye. Best known of the four-vow Jesuits in the United States are Fathers Daniel Lord, Robert I. Gannon, Coleman Nevils, F. X. Talbot, M. J. Ahem, and last but not least the ace political intriguer, Boston-born Edmund A. Walsh.

Throughout Europe, the existence of “lay Jesuits” is a matter of common knowledge among the better-educated classes. The membership of such laymen in the Jesuit Order is kept in the deepest secrecy. They are frequently prominent members of the political, legal, or financial world, but no one has the slightest suspicion that they belong to the Jesuits or that such a thing is even possible in this country. They are usually known, however, as prominent Catholics, and, oftener than not, very articulate ones.

While forced to admit that there were lay Jesuits in the earlier days, of their Order and that there could be some today, if the Society so wished, the Jesuits deny that there are any. A so-called lay Jesuit or Jesuit in voto is not necessarily unmarried, for his one vow is obedience to the dictates of the Society; out of deference to the Jesuits’ distrust of women, many lay Jesuits do not marry, however. Nor is the “lay Jesuit” necessarily a layman. He may be a secular priest, like Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, and still be a Jesuit in voto or a “lay Jesuit” because he has sworn obedience to the Society and obliges himself to confess regularly to a Jesuit appointed for that purpose. Two essentials of a lay Jesuit are that he occupies a key position in his profession, whatever it may, and that he adheres strictly to the reactionary ideology of the Jesuits. Thus, for example, Supreme Court Justice Frank Murphy, though a devout Catholic and a celibate like Senator David I. (for Ignatius) Walsh, could not be a lay Jesuit because he is a liberal who frequently has opposed Jesuit policies.

It can be said with the greatest likelihood that in the United States the following are lay Jesuits: Father Charles E. Coughlin; Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen; Senator David I. Walsh, head of the U. S. Senate Naval Committee; William T. Walsh, author; Robert Murphy, ambassador of the U. S. Department of State in Germany; Francis X. Woodlock, recently deceased financier and leading investment broker for Jesuit interests in Wall Street. It is more than probable that Louis F. Budenz, recently resigned editor of the Daily Worker, is a lay Jesuit who was “planted” in the Communist party. This is an old Jesuit stratagem.⁵

Regarding lay Jesuits, the Encyclopaedia Brittanica (XV, 339) says, “There are clauses in the Jesuits’ constitutions which make the creation of such a class perfectly feasible if thought expedient.” In fact, the first General Congregation of the Jesuits readily admitted that laymen “may be admitted into our Order, although not making their profession in our Society.”

The distinguished scholar, Saint Simon, in his Memoirs (XII, 164) authoritatively stated:

Secret Instructions Of The Jesuits

Chief among the Jesuit secrets are the policies, rules and other doctrines that are known only to the highest of the initiates. What the Jesuits have printed as “our constitutions and rules” are naturally only what they want to be known. No one but top Jesuits has ever had access to the original documents or the first drafts and editions of their constitutions. Nor have these ever said, “These are our complete constitutions.” Even to their members, they give only a “Summary of the Constitutions” and “Common Rules” which adhere together so loosely that copious omissions are more than evident. It should also be noted that, although the Order has published countless volumes on its history, it has never published even for its members the complete minutes of even one of the 25 or more General Congregations that it has held.

In fact, in the Institutes of the Jesuit Order (II, 86) mention is made of the secret statutes of the Order which exist only in manuscript form. Among the duties of the Socius of the Provincial it is stated. “He must take care of the separate archives of the Province of the Order, inasmuch as they contain manuscripts that are especially important for the direction of the Province… the book which contains the unprinted regulations by the Generals of the Order binding on the whole Society, and the book which contains another kind of unprinted circulars of the Generals.”

Roman Catholic Bishop de Palafox, in the letter to Pope Innocent X quoted above, says:

A copy of the Monita Secreta or Secret Instructions of the Jesuits was first published in 1612, in all probability by the Polish ex-Jesuit Zahorowski. Since then, on the suppression of Jesuit houses in mid-Europe, various copies have been found hidden in the rooms of Jesuit superiors. The Jesuits naturally deny that the Monita Secreta are authentic, as is to be expected, and say that the copies found hidden in their houses prove nothing since they are only copies of Zahorowski’s work. They build up their case on the grounds that these were not discovered until some time after that work was published.

But there was one copy of the Monita Secreta found hidden in a Jesuit superior’s room in Prague that in all probability was there before Zahorowski gave his copy to the world. The evidence is so convincing that the German historian Friedrich (Beitrage, p. 8) accepts it without question. But other authorities in general are naively impressed by the denial of the Jesuits and refuse to accept the Monita Secreta as genuine until someone can invincibly prove that a copy existed previous to 1612.

The whole controversy is much ado about nothing. Actually, the Secret Instructions of the Jesuits are not at all startling. They merely direct the Jesuits to do what everyone knows they have always done: play up to the rich and powerful to get all they can from them in money or influence. Everyone knows, for instance, how the Jesuits played up to the widow of Catholic multi-millionaire Nicholas Brady. She gave them two million dollars outright for their seminary in Maryland and, in spite of her second marriage, she willed them her sumptuous Long Island estate. It seems to matter little whether they do this through natural avariciousness or because they have been directed by their secret rules.

History is so filled with the hypocrisies and treacheries of the Jesuits that there is scarcely need of other proof of the existence of such secret and immoral rules. The ex-Jesuit Count Paul von Hoensbroech in his book, Fourteen Years a Jesuit, (II, 8), is willing to admit that possibly the actual form of these rules is the work of Zarohowski, but he goes on to say: “Of the genuineness of the contents, that is, that the Monita Secreta contain regulations in harmony with the spirit of the Order… I am as positive as of the existence of secret instructions of the Order.”

Of the supreme secrecy of the Jesuit Order in general there can be no question, Equally certain is the fact that there would be no need for such secrecy unless there was something that needed to be hid. Just how secret the inner workings of the Order are cannot be more tellingly expressed than in the words of the Spanish Jesuit Miranda, a Provincial of the Order, who was made assistant to the General in Rome. In a letter written to a friend and later published by Jesuit Father Ibanez in his report on the Jesuit government in Paraguay, he says:

The Goal Of Jesuitism

Such is the secrecy of the Jesuit Order. It makes clear how and why its members can be deceived into doing evil for the welfare of their church. Just how evil the Order was can be seen in the bull of Pope Clement XIV, Domimus ac Redemptor Noster, which decreed the abolishment of the Order on July 21, 1773. It tells of their defiance of their printed constitution and rules, of their political intrigues, of their stooping to pagan practices, and of their ruination of souls.

The dire fact is that the suppressed Jesuit Order has turned the tables on the Catholic church. Pope Clement XIV was apparently poisoned. The Jesuits refused to dissolve the organization, and within a generation forced the papacy to officially reestablish it. Since then, especially since the pontificate of Pope Pius IX, the Jesuits have become absolute masters of the Vatican and through it of the worldwide Roman Catholic church, which they have now centralized in Rome to an extent that was never before dreamed of. (cf. Encyclopaedia Brittanica, XV, 347, eleventh edition.)

Now that the whole Catholic church has become a tool in the hands of its Jesuit masters, what do they propose to do? They intend to continue their struggle for world power with the Catholic religion as a front for their ambitions. Their purpose as expressed by the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia (II, 1167) is “the rehabilitation of medieval Catholicism and the establishment of the reign of the Church over the State.” This means death to democracy.

Pierre van Paassen succinctly analyzes the aim of the Jesuit Counter-Reformation, when he says in his book, Days of Our Years, p. 539: “It sees decay and error and pestilence in everything that has been gained since the Protestant Reformation and the French Revolution, including the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the Bills of Rights, equal suffrage, the nonsectarian school — in fact all democratic institutions.”

This fanatical hatred of the Jesuits for democracy is best expressed in their own words. In the May 17, 1941, issue of their policy-setting magazine America, they said:

It would be difficult to find a more appropriate ending than the words of one of the founders of this country, the great and scholarly John Adams, former President of the United States. In the Official Monticello edition of The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (XV, 64) there is a letter of Adams to Jefferson in which he said:

“My history of the Jesuits is not eloquently written, but it is supported by unquestionable authorities, is very particular and very horrible. Their restoration is indeed a step toward darkness, cruelty, perfidy, despotism, and death. I wish we were out of ‘danger of bigotry and Jesuitism.’”

1. The Other Spanish Christ, by John A. Mackay, president of the Princeton University School of Theology, page 56.↩
2. Quoted from The Jesuits, by Rev. F. A. Lillingston, former vicar of St. James, London, page 10.↩
3. Vol. 11 p. 1166. This celebrated and authoritative work was edited by Dr. Philip Schaff of Union Theological Seminary in New York City. The quotations in this article are taken from the revised edition of 1891, published by Funk and Wagnalls Co. The article on the Jesuits was written by the German scholar, Dr. George El. Steitz, Konsistorialrath at Frankfort-am-Main, Germany. This English encyclopedia is based on the Real-Encyclopadie of Herzog, Plitt and Hauck.↩
4. Bishop Don Juan de Palafox’s Letters to Pope Innocent X, page 116.↩
5. In France, lay Jesuits are called “Jesuits of the Shorter Robe.” Women at times also have been used as lay Jesuits, especially those susceptible to psychic influence.↩

The “Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience” is a manifesto issued by Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christian leaders to affirm support of “the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty”. It was drafted on October 20, 2009, and released November 20, 2009, having been signed by more than 150 American religious leaders. – Wikipedia

Of the 100 evangelicals who signed the document, the most famous people or institutions they head I know of are Dr. Mark Bailey, President, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dr. James Dobson, Founder, Focus on the Family, Campus Crusade for Christ International, Dr. Wayne Grudem, Christianity Today International, Jerry Jenkins, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Moody Bible Institute.

Those who did not sign include John MacArthur, R. C. Sproul, and James White.

What former Catholic priest, Richard Bennett has to say about it:

In order to soften up the Evangelicals in their separation from the Catholics on Biblical doctrinal issues, particularly the authority of the Bible alone and the Gospel, the Catholic modus operandi calls for using social issues on which both Evangelicals and Catholics agree as preliminary common ground. The major social issues selected by the Manhattan Declaration are acceptable, but what gives away the underlying Catholic far left political agenda is some of the vocabulary used. This vocabulary has a general meaning, to be sure, but in the context of Roman Catholic social doctrine, it means something quite specific.

As Evangelicals are drawn together with Catholics on social issues – like the social issues mentioned in this document – the ensuing ecumenical dialogue “serves to transform modes of thought and behavior and the daily life of their [Evangelical] communities [churches]. In this way, it [ecumenical dialogue] aims at preparing the way for their unity of faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible: thus ‘little by little’…all Christians will be gathered” into the Roman Catholic Church-State with its dual authority base, false gospel, and accompanying far left agenda.

The Roman Catholic Church-State’s primary goal is to make enforceable its claim that it is the only true church of Jesus Christ and its pope, the claimed “Vicar of Christ,” has the right to judge everybody, as he did during the Middle Ages. In order to accomplish this, the Papacy must do away with the supreme authority of the Bible and the Gospel and it must silence all who stand against it in this endeavor. This is the Roman Catholic context in which the Manhattan Declaration is set.

(Quoted from https://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=270)

Because of the fascination of the world with the office of the Pope and his power, it is important to study the topic historically and in the light of Biblical truth. This article is an overview of the history of the Papacy from its inception to rule of Pope John Paul II. A biblical analysis of the basis on which the Office of the Papacy claims to be the Rock of Matthew 16:18 is found on our Webpage: www.bereanbeacon.org

Early church at Rome

The church at Rome was in the beginning a community of brothers and sisters, guided by a few of the brothers. The four Gospels and letters of the Apostles settled the great questions of doctrine. A pompous title and position of one man lording it over the others did not exist, as such is forbidden by the Holy Scriptures. The lives of the believers and the doctrine taught were in accord with the Lord’s words, “One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.”¹ The Scriptures, however, warned that from the midst of the brotherhood would arise a power that would attempt to destroy the Gospel and the simple brotherhood of believers. This was nowhere more graphically fulfilled than in the rise of the Office of the Papacy out of the church that had been established in Rome.

Gradual rise of Papal Rome

The respect enjoyed by the various Christian elders in the second century was roughly proportionate to the rank of the city in which they resided. At that time, Rome was the largest, richest, most powerful city in the world, the queen of the Imperial Roman Empire. If Rome was the queen of cities, why should she not be the one to have a bishop to be the king of bishops? Thus, even when pagan Rome fell to the barbarian nations, some of the political esteem that she had won from the nations of the earth remained. The Barbarian overthrow of the Western Roman Empire was succeeded by the gradual rise of Papal Rome. Gradually, bishops from different parts of the empire, seeing themselves as above ordinary elders, yielded to the bishops of Rome some portion of the honor similar to that which the world gives to a prince. From this approbation, the Bishops of Rome began to demand submission as the third, fourth, and fifth centuries passed. In these centuries also, as the true Gospel was watered down, there came in its place the growth of ritualism in the churches, in which true worship of God and the inner conviction of the Holy Spirit was replaced by ceremonialism and idolatry. Pagan practices took on a veneer of Christianity. The clergy-laity division of the people of God became the accepted base. This further devolved into a hierarchy of the ruling clergy. By the end of the fifth century, the early ministers of the Gospel, who had taught the Scripture, had become replaced by a sacrificing priesthood in which the priest presumed to mediate between God and men. The church was no more the fellowship of believers under Christ Jesus, but rather an institution dominated by a hierarchy, with the most powerful individual being the Bishop of Rome.²

Bishop of Rome becomes the Pope

The power of the Bishop of Rome ascended as the imperial power of the Emperor declined. Edicts of the Emperor Theodosius II and of Valentinian III proclaimed the Roman bishop “as Rector of the whole Church.” The Emperor Justinian, who was living in the East in Constantinople, in the sixth century published a similar decree. These proclamations did not create the office of the Pope but from the sixth century there was such advancement of power and prestige that from that time the title of “Pope” began to fit the one who was Bishop of Rome.³

Fraudulent documents aid rise of Papacy

It was not until the middle of the eight century that serious contentions were made claiming the transfer of power and authority from the Emperor Constantine to the Bishop of Rome. The Donation of Constantine was purported to be the legal document in which the Emperor Constantine donated to Sylvester, the Bishop of Rome (314-335), much of his property and invested him with great spiritual power and authority. The vastness and splendor of the inheritance allegedly given by Constantine to Sylvester in the spurious document is seen the following quotation from the manuscript,

“We attribute to the See of Peter all the dignity, all the glory, all the authority of the imperial power. Furthermore, we give to Sylvester and to his successors our palace of the Lateran, which is incontestably the finest palace on the earth; we give him our crown, our miter, our diadem, and all our imperial vestments; we transfer to him the imperial dignity. We bestow on the holy Pontiff in free gift the city of Rome, and all the western cities of Italy. To cede precedence to him, we divest ourselves of our authority over all those provinces, and we withdraw from Rome, transferring the seat of our empire to Byzantium; inasmuch as it is not proper that an earthly emperor should preserve the least authority, where God hath established the head of his religion.”⁴

The Donation of Constantine was probably forged a little before A.D. 754. Of it, Wylie says, “In it Constantine is made to speak in the Latin of the eighth century, and to address Bishop Sylvester as ‘Prince of the Apostles, Vicar of Christ’. During more than 600 years Rome impressively cited this deed of gift, inserted it in her codes, permitted none to question its genuineness, and burned those who refused to believe in it. The first dawn of light in the sixteenth century sufficed to discover the cheat. In the following century another document of a like extraordinary character was given to the world. We refer to the Decretals of Isidore. These were concocted about the year 845. They professed to be a collection of the letters, rescripts, and bulls of the early pastors of the Church of Rome…The writer, who professed to be living in the first century, painted the Church of Rome in the magnificence which she attained only in the ninth, and made the pastors of the first age speak in the pompous words of the Popes of the Middle Ages. Abounding in absurdities, contradiction, and anachronisms, it affords a measure of the intelligence of the age that accepted it as authentic…It became the foundation of the canon law, and continues to be so, although there is not now a Popish writer who does not acknowledge it to be a piece of imposture.”⁵

As early as 865, Pope Nicholas drew from these forgeries a way to demand submission from bishops and princes. The arrogance of the popes grew from this time onward. Popes became intoxicated with their own pride; some in their teens and twenties lost their senses in drunken immorality.⁶ The infamous women of history, Theodora and Marozia, for many years governed the papal throne. That unholy See, pretending to rise above the majesty of kings and bishops, was sunk in the dregs of sin. Theodora and Marozia installed and deposed at their pleasure those who sat in the pretended chair of St. Peter. For two centuries, the Papacy was one wild arena of disorders as the most powerful families of Italy disputed and fought over it like a possession.

Lusts of the mind

The year 1073 was a turning point from the centuries of gross immorality. Rigorous discipline filled the papacy. Reaching above the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of papal minds began to clutch at the things of God. Pope Gregory VII, the noted Hildebrand, ambitious beyond all who had preceded him, took to himself the idea that the reign of the Pope was but another name for the reign of God. He resolved never to rest until he had subjected all authority and power, both spiritual and temporal, to the “chair of Peter”. Hildebrand’s successors continued his project, and strove by trickery, by arms, by crusades and by anathemas, to place the world under the scepter of the papal throne. For two centuries from the time of Hildebrand’s reign, the papacy increased in power and glory, and was maintained by thousands of destroyed lives, many deposed kings and princes, many sacked cities, and many fields deluged with blood.

Popes Innocent III (1216) and Boniface VIII (1303) put the final touches to Papal triumph in spiritual and temporal power. Seventy-five popes, one after another, from Pope Innocent Pope Pius VII, approved of torture, murder, and burning at the stake, and the confiscation of property of believers in the horrific centuries of the Inquisition.⁷ Many of those slain were true Bible believers.

“The most ghastly abomination of all was the system of torture. The accounts of its cold- blooded operations make one shudder at the capacity of human beings for cruelty. And it was decreed and regulated by the Popes who claim to represent Christ on earth. In 1252 Pope Innocent IV solemnly authorized it. Confirmatory or regulatory decrees about it were issued by Alexander IV, Clement IV, Urban IV and Clement V.”⁸

The Papacy had become “drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.”⁹ No other kingdom or power has ever drunken so deeply of this blood as had Papal Rome. Thus as streams are traced to the fountain, so is the Papacy traced to the prophecies of Scripture, which correctly interprets the Papacy. This is “the same horn [that] made war with the saints, and prevailed against them.”¹⁰ “And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”¹¹

The Papacy and Modern Times

A partial list of the successes of the Papacy under Roman Catholic dictators in twentieth century includes: Adolf Hitler in Germany, 1933-1945; Benito Mussolini in Italy, 1922-1943; Francisco Franco in Spain, 1936-1975; Antonio Salazar in Portugal, 1932-1968; Juan Peron in Argentina, 1946-1955; Ante Pavelic in Croatia, 1941-1945; and Engelbert Dollfuss and Kurt von Schuschnigg in Austria, 1932-1934. The Vatican’s legal agreement with those nations is well known; few, however, see the Nazism of Germany and the Fascism of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Croatia, and Latin America as consequences of the Papacy’s economic and social teachings, and legal agreements between the Vatican and these nations.¹² The Crusades and the 605 years of the Inquisition have stopped, but the power of the Papacy to influence and to control governments, social, economic, political life and the destinies of peoples, has continued.

Power through law

What had looked like a mortal wound to Papal power took place in 1798.¹³ A general of Napoleon’s army entered the Vatican, removing Pope Pius VI from his throne; and so it was that Popedom lost its basis as a civil power. Pope Pius IX, not having territorial or civil power, sought to re-establish the Papacy. An internally important part of his design brought about the declaration of Papal infallibility. With remarkable ingenuity against not only the Scriptural absurdity of the concept, but also in spite of the historical fact of heretical popes, this was made doctrine at Vatican Council I in 1870. Further, the Papacy re-established itself internally by re- organizing Roman Catholic law into the 1917 Code of Canon Law.¹⁴ The apparent mortal wound of 1798 was to be healed in 1929 when under Mussolini, the Vatican was again recognized as a civil power and seated on all seven hills. The concordat with Mussolini was just the beginning of many civil concordats, one of the most infamous being that between Pope Pius XII and Adolf Hitler.¹⁵ The Papacy had again consolidated its power from within by the 1917 Code of Canon Law and from without by legal concordats with the various nations. Thus the Vatican, with its own citizens as part of sovereign nations across the world and with her civil agreements with the same nations, has a double cord of power. The individual Catholic, fearing for his salvation, and laden with his first allegiance being to “holy Mother Church” is a pliable pawn in the hand of the Papacy.¹⁶

The major change of direction made visible by Vatican Council II (1962-1965). That council moved from separation from other religions to false ecumenism, not only with the religions of the world, but also with Bible believers in particular. “Separated brethren” was a new term for those always considered heretics, while the pagan religions of Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism now became accepted ways to God.¹⁷ This new approach was established by the RCC to win the world to herself by means of dialogue, the rules and goal of which she has carefully spelled out in her post-Conciliar Document No. 42 on ecumenism, which states that “dialogue is not an end in itself….it is not just an academic discussion.” ¹⁸ Rather, “ecumenical dialogue…serves to transform modes of thought and behavior and the daily life of those [non- Catholic] communities. In this way, it aims at preparing the way for their unity of faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible.”¹⁹

The Pope’s official position is that “ecumenical encounter is not merely an individual work, but also a task of the [RC] Church, which takes precedence over all individual opinions.”²⁰ The Papacy expects this process of dialogue to take time. The Roman Catholic Church’s stated aim of bringing all Christian churches under her authority is clearly her goal. She says,

“…little by little, as the obstacles to perfect ecclesial communion are overcome, all Christians will be gathered, in a common celebration of the Eucharist [the Mass] into that unity of the one and only Church….This unity, we believe, dwells in the Catholic Church as something we can never lose.”²¹

Pope John Paul II, while initially having been thought to be liberal and modern, consolidated further the dictatorial powers afforded him by the 1917 Code of Canon Law and by his purported infallibility, bequeathed him by Vatican Council I. This he did by revising the 1917 Code, making it even more conservative than it had been, and has been careful to appoint new bishops in line with his centralized way of thinking.

Like another Hildebrand, John Paul II is determined to build, by both Church and civil law, the structure by which the Papacy can again at the appropriate time wield might and power among the nations.²² This same Pope John Paul II has been adamant in his efforts to update the laws of the Roman Catholic Church. Since the days of Hildebrand, popes have seen the necessity of making iron and inflexible church laws before attempting to control her subjects and those not Catholic by compulsion and violence, if necessary. In 1983, John Paul II’s revision of the 1917 Code of Canon Law added to the Roman Catholic laws, for example, “The Church has an innate and proper right to coerce offending members of the Christian faithful by means of penal sanctions.”²³ Examination of these laws shows them to be even more absolute and totalitarian than those of the past. If one rejects submission of his intellect and will to the Pope, or some of the other laws of the Papacy, Canon 1371, Para. 1 states that “The following are to be punished with a just penalty: 1 a person who…teaches a doctrine condemned by the Roman Pontiff….” Canon 1312 outlines specified penalties that are to be carried out, “Para. 2. The law can establish other expiatory penalties which deprive a believer of some spiritual or temporal good and are consistent with the supernatural end of the Church.” The perverse vindictiveness of these laws contravenes the repeated Scriptural commands to be not despotic, as are the rulers of this world. From the creation of the Papacy in the sixth century, its heart has been that of law and force. Grace and the Gospel have been superseded by decrees and coercion. A veneer of Christianity has always been upheld, yet this surface ritual religion has always repressed and persecuted true godliness. The history of the Papacy shows that unequivocally it is a power structure built on forgeries, craft, persecution, a false gospel, church law, civil power, and concordats. Nonetheless, the Papacy for most of its history has succeeded in deluding millions. Present day Catholicism continues to insist that its Papal Office is of God, and the world for the most part bows down before her shrine and her Christ, the Pontiff himself.

References

1. Matthew 23:8.

2. See J. A. Wylie, The History of Protestantism, originally published in 1878 (Kilkeel, N. Ireland: Mourne Missionary Trust, 1985) Vol. I, Book I, pp. 3-14. See also J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, History of the Reformation in the Sixteenth Century, A New Translation (New York: John B. Alden, Publisher, 1883) Book I, pp.1-34.

3. D’Aubigne, Book I, p. 81.

4. Quoted from copy of the document in Pope Leo’s letter in Hardouin’s Collection, Epistola I., Leonis Papoe IX; Acta Conciliorumet Epistoloe Decretales, tom. 6, pp. 934; Parisiis, 1714. The English reader will find a copy of the pretended original document in full in Historical Essay on the Power of the Popes, Vol. II, Appendix, Tr. from French, London, 1838

5. Wylie, Vol. I, p. 29-30. See also Roman Catholic historian Ignaz Von Dollinger, The Pope and the Council, Auth. Tr. from German, 2nd ed. (London: Rivingtons, 1869) Sect. 7 “Forgeries”, pp. 94-142.

6. Peter De Rosa, Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy (New York, NY: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1988) p. 47-56.

7. De Rosa, p. 175.

8. William Shaw Kerr, A Handbook on the Papacy (London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott Ltd., 1950) p. 239.

9. Revelation 17:6.

10. Daniel 7:21.

11.Revelation 13:7.

12. For fuller documentation of this see John W. Robbins, Ecclesiastical Megalomania: The Economic and Political Thought of the Roman Catholic Church (Unicoi, TN 37692-0068: The Trinity Foundation,1999) ISBN: 0-940931-52-4.

13. “Edward King, insightful in 1800 wrote about this defeat as the mortal wound or end of Pontifical Power, “THIS IS THE YEAR 1798.—And just 1260 years ago, in the very beginning of the year 538, Belisarius put an ed to the Empire, and Dominion of the Goths, at Rome…He had entered the City on the 10th of the preceding December, in triumph, in the name of Justinian, Emperor of the East: and had soon after made it tributary to him: leaving thenceforward from A.D. 538 NO POWER in Rome, that could be said to rule over the earth,excepting the ECCLESIASTICAL PONTIFICAL POWER.” Remarks on the Signs of the Times (Philadelphia ed., 1800) pp. 18-19 in LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1950) Vol. II, p. 767.

14. RC writer John Cornwell states, “At the turn of the century [1900], Pacelli [later Pope Pius XII]… collaborated in redrafting the Church’s laws in such a way as to grant future popes unchallenged domination from the Roman center. These laws, separated from their ancient historical and social background, were packaged in a manual known as the Code of Canon Law, published and brought into force in 1917. The code, distributed to Catholic clergy throughout the world, created the means of establishing, imposing, and sustaining a remarkable new ‘top-down’ power relationship. As papal nuncio in Munich and Berlin during the 1920s, Pacelli sought to impose the new code, state by state, on Germany….” Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII (New York, 10014: Viking, 1999) p. 6.

15. Cornwell, p. 7 “In 1933 Pacelli found a successful negotiating partner for his Reich Concordat in the person of Adolf Hitler. Their treaty authorized the papacy to impose the new Church law on German Catholics and granted generous privileges to Catholic schools and the clergy. In exchange, the Catholic Church in Germany, its parliamentary political party, and its many hundreds of associations and newspapers ‘voluntarily’ withdrew, following Pacelli’s initiative, from social and political action. The abdication of German political Catholicism in 1933, negotiated and imposed from the Vatican by Pacelli with the agreement of Pope Pius XI, ensured that Nazism could rise unopposed by the most powerful Catholic community in the world…”

16. See RC author Cornwell and Presbyterian author Robbins.

17. No. 56, Nostra Aetate, 28 October 1965, Austin P. Flannery, Ed., Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1975, 1984).

18. Vatican 11 documents, No. 42, “Reflections and Suggestions Concerning Ecumenical Dialogue”, S.P.U.C., 15 August 1975, p. 549.

19. Vatican 11 documents, No. 42, pp. 540-1. Bolding in any quotation indicates emphasis added in this paper.

20. Vatican 11 documents, No. 42, p.545.

21. Vatican 11 documents, No. 42, p. 541.

I received this message from a friend through Facebook Messenger who doesn’t remember where he got it from.

My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. (John 18:36)

Jesus Christ made this statement to Pontius Pilate, the politician who ruled Judea in Palestine some 2,000 years ago. In light of that statement, we may wonder nowadays why so many Christians have rallied behind modern Israel and her dream of “Greater Israel” – especially when that “dream” means occupying and seizing Palestinian territory, browbeating and driving out its inhabitants to become refugees in surrounding countries, and even applauding America’s warfare against Israel’s neighbors – Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon.

Christ taught that the kingdom of God is within you and isn’t ushered in with visible signs. (Luke 17:20-21) In this present Age, God’s Kingdom is not a political one that can be seen physically, but one that rules and reigns in our hearts – a Kingdom of peace, love, faith, and righteousness. Only with the Return of Christ will the Kingdom’s spiritual power and authority be established, physically, in our earthly realm. In the meantime, Christ’s followers are enjoined to prepare the way by working to further God’s Kingdom of love, peace, and righteousness in this present broken and corrupted world.

We would do well to ask ourselves then, how can we – as followers of Christ who are supposed to be peacemakers – be rooting for the establishment of a political kingdom, Israel, and all the blood-letting, suffering, and wars that go along with it? How can we not raise our voices against such violations of God’s (and the U.N.’s) standards for all peace-loving nations? Are we taking seriously the teachings of the Founder of Christianity – to love your enemies and love your neighbor as yourself? (Matthew 5:44, 22:39)

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God, Jesus taught. From His own example, we know that Jesus trusted fully in the power of the Almighty to bring about change. His teachings were revolutionary in His day, and still are. His peaceful methods have revolutionized and brought much positive change to human society over the last 2,000 years. . . and will continue on into the upcoming Age of Peace known as the Millennium.

Sadly, it is also true that, throughout history, political and even religious leaders have fomented all sorts of war and trouble in the name of religion, falsely claiming to have God on their side. Jesus knew this was going to happen and warned His followers, Indeed the time is coming when those who kill you will think they are doing God a service. (John 16:2)

Is it possible that a sizeable portion of Christianity thinks “they are doing God a service” when all they’re doing is giving support to an unjust and cruel political agenda?

What kind of misguided logic is at work here, we may wonder? Much of it has to do with a common misunderstanding about certain prophetic promises in the Old Testament regarding a “greater Israel”. Some of these were fulfilled long ago in the days of King David and King Solomon. Others speak of a “greater Israel” to come in the future Age of the Millennium. Sadly, these passages have been misinterpreted and hijacked into serving as justification for modern Israel’s territorial ambitions.

True, Israel did enjoy special favor from God in the days of the Old Testament. But even then, when Israel sometimes departed from the ways of God, she lost that blessing and protection; and ancient Israel plunged into periods of difficulty and subjugation to her enemies.

This idea that Israel has a special corner on God’s favor and blessings has hoodwinked much of mainstream Christianity into ignoring and excusing Israel’s present-day misconduct – especially towards her Palestinian neighbors. And this comes in a bigger package of tacit support for American wars in the Middle East, wars which Israel hopes will work to her advantage.

For the record, a brief history: After World War 1, the Palestinians allowed Jewish immigrants to settle in their land. After World War 2 and Jewish suffering in the Holocaust, an agreement was made in 1948, in conjunction with the United Nations, to partition the land so that each community could dwell peaceably side by side.

In the aftermath of the war that followed, and in the decades following, the Israelis have driven the Palestinians out of their lands into refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan and have turned the West Bank and Gaza Strip into occupied territories, little better than giant-sized prison camps.

To give a veneer of respectability to all these injustices, certain Biblical passages were pulled out of their historical context and used to promote the belief that God had given the land to the Israelis as if they were still living in the days of the Old Testament. This may suit the agenda of politicians and profiteers, but to stuff that agenda into the sacred writings is a risky business; landing on the wrong side of Divine displeasure is never advisable.

Those who want to invoke the passage about a “Greater Israel” should take note of this important guideline: ‘You will divide it [the land] by lot as an inheritance for yourselves, and for the strangers who sojourn among you and who bear children among you. They shall be to you as native-born among the children of Israel; they shall have an inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel. And it shall be that in whatever tribe the stranger sojourns, there you shall give him his inheritance,’ says the Lord GOD. (Ezekiel 47:22-23)

What “inheritance” has modern Israel given to the “strangers who sojourn among” them? Modern Israel has ignored this provision, outlined in their own Scriptures and in U.N. resolutions. It is bad enough that the Palestinians have been turned into “strangers” in their own land, but now on top of that, the Israelis are actively disinheriting them, in complete violation of God’s own instructions.

Interestingly, that same prophetic passage is preceded by a description (Ezekiel 47:6-12) of the land being in a paradise-like state… meaning that the promise of “greater Israel” is not even supposed to be applied to the present Age. The historical context is a future era, coming after the Return of the Messiah and the establishment of God’s Kingdom on Earth – the Age known as the Millennium.

There is nothing in Scripture to say that Israel is destined to possess a “greater Israel” in this present age, much less have the right to grab territory by force or subterfuge, nor to fight brutal wars against her weaker neighbors.

Lopsided, shocking statistics like these make it clear that something’s wrong somewhere. Modern Israel has simply lost its way. She is no “promised land”, that’s for sure – and no better than any other nation in today’s world.

Israel will get her promised land in due time, but it will come from God’s hand, not her own. And it will not come until the Age of the Millennium, and until she has been duly humbled before God and the rest of the world. It will be a painful process but will result in Israel finally becoming the God-fearing, charitable, and concerned nation and wise ruler that God has always intended for her to be.

What further complicates the Mideast tragedy is America’s geopolitical interest in the region. Her war economy depends on the flow of oil and payments made to Saudi Arabia and other nations. These payments, made in dollars and re-invested in U.S. treasury bonds, are used to buttress the dollar and the expensive U.S. war economy, the military-industrial complex. So, to maintain her influence in the Middle East and her own economy, the U.S. is fighting wars there to keep in line the nations that are getting too independent of American (and Israeli) interests.

Conclusion: For too long, Christians have been hoodwinked into giving unconditional support to Israel, and by extension, fooled into supporting, or keeping silent about, American wars in the Middle East. In addition, American politicians are happy to appease Israel because that is profitable for them and garners favor with the powerful voting bloc of the mainstream Christian community.

How sad that Christianity has been infiltrated like this, unable to speak out against America’s gruesome, never-ending wars – wars that benefit no one except the U.S. dollar and arms manufacturers. Many believers, of course, are simply misinformed and innocent followers of what they have been taught. But be enlightened! Remember Christ’s words to His followers: Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.

True followers of Christ have left behind the dream of a literal Promised Land – a “greater Israel” – aiming instead for the far greater reality of the kingdom of God in the hearts of humankind. They have been liberated from the narrow confines of earthly human limitations into the glorious truth and freedom of the realm of God’s Spirit. Their vision has expanded beyond the national boundaries of human origin to that of the worldwide universal fellowship of those who long for peace, truth, justice, love, and righteousness. They have catapulted from insignificant earthly goals to the glorious reality of God’s heavenly Kingdom!

Are you a peacemaker? Invite the Prince of Peace to enter your life today! Embark now on a thrilling, love-filled journey into the Kingdom of Heaven. . . in this life and in the life to come!

— Author Unknown

When I was a kid I dreamed of being a scientist someday. It turns out I wasn’t good enough in mathematics to become one. I respect true scientific researchers, people like Dr. James Tour for example. He’s an American chemist and nanotechnologist, a Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Materials Science and Nanoengineering at Rice University in Houston, Texas. And he’ll tell you in his podcasts he loves Jesus more than anything! He was raised Jewish and came to know Jesus as his Messiah through the witness of a fellow student when he was a teenager. And I have a personal friend who’s a scientist and a Bible-believing Christian, Dr. John Gideon Hartnett of Bible Science Forum.

Contrary to what some Christians are saying, there is such a thing as true science. And what is true science? It’s the study of the laws and principles of God’s creation! And there are pseudosciences, science falsely so called as it says in 1 Timothy 6:20:

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

The teaching of Darwinian evolution is one of them. And who teaches it? Secular scientists who are mostly atheists.

Another pseudoscience is flat-earth. Who teaches that? Sad to say, many Bible-believing Christians do. They fell for a CIA psyop that is set to discredit their testimonial for Christ. I already wrote a lot about why I don’t believe the earth is flat on this website, and so I won’t get into it now.

Darwin’s evolution has hindered true science and tainted many branches of it. Just off the top of my head, the branches of science it has tainted are number one, biology, and also geology, anthropology, ecology, psychology, medicine, and any other study that has to do with mankind and life. Evolution has surely tainted cosmology and astronomy as well.

Science is knowledge and knowledge can be used for both good and evil. As Christians, we want to use what we know for God’s kingdom. Science has brought us technology, and technology has made our lives easier. If you don’t think so, wait till the power goes out and you lose your phone and Internet connection. This is what I experience for a whole day from time to time in the Philippines. And technology from science has brought us the Internet which makes it far easier and far less expensive to share the Gospel and the truth of the Word of God to the world.

Below is an article one of my former pastors wrote about Darwin’s evolution.

It’s so ridiculous for man to not believe in God!–Because man can’t help but believe in God if he just looks at Creation! If you’re not an absolute fool, if you have a reasoning mind at all, all you have to do is look at the Creation to know Somebody had to design it, pattern it, and put it together and make it work like it does!

Why, the simplest country boy out in the country can just look around out in the country at the Creation God made and SEE that there’s a God!–It’s obvious that all that didn’t just happen by accident! It’s as plain as day that Somebody had to plan it and figure it out, because God’s beautiful Creation works so beautifully, so systematically, so perfectly–Creation, so-called Nature, is not just natural–God made it! It’s created! It’s all supernatural! It’s all miraculous!

If you haven’t got enough sense to know there’s a God, then just look at His Creation! Just look at the sea, the sky, the clouds, the mountains, the valleys, the trees, the flowers, everything! They’re all virtually shouting, “There is a God! Look what He made! Look what a beautiful World He made for you to live in!”

I can prove from the Bible that these scientists and teachers and evolutionists and all who claim not to believe in God are LIARS!–They do believe in God. Only an absolute fool, an imbecile, an insane idiot, somebody who’s not quite straight in the head would actually in his heart believe there’s not God!–Maybe these “smart” people are that demented! God’s Word says the smart ones, if they don’t glorify God, become fools. The Bible says, “The fool hath said in his heart, ‘There is no God’!” (Ps.14:1) Now a lot of people will say with their mouth, “There is no God,” but all the time in their heart they know there’s a God!

In fact, most people who CLAIM they don’t believe really DO believe, but they’re in rebellion against God! They don’t want to know Him and they don’t want to confess that He exists, because if they do, then they have to recognize Him!–And if they recognise Him, then they have to admit that they owe Him some kind of acknowledgement and obeisance and obedience.

The greatest proof of the existence of God is His Creation! That’s why Evolution is so evil, and Devil-inspired, because it tries to explain away Creation by saying that it just happened by accident and it threw itself together! Isn’t that ridiculous?

“For the INVISIBLE things of Him from the creation of the World are clearly SEEN, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse!” (Ro.1:20) His invisible existence is manifest or proven by the things you can see, His Creation.–The existence of our invisible God is proven by His visible Creation!

And THAT’S why the World wants to reject Creation and say it’s all just a meaningless chaotic evolution!–Because if the World and its inhabitants are God’s Creation, then they’re His property–and if they’re His property, then He’s got the right to be Boss–and they don’t want God to be Boss! Therefore “they did not like to retain God in their knowledge”, in their education. (Rom.1:28)

“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools!” (Rom.1:21,22) They got so smart that they could do without God and the Bible, and so they became what?–Fools!–Absolute fools, who “changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator!” (Rom.1:23,25)

So why did the Devil and man cook up this ridiculous, idiotic scheme of evolution?–To try to get rid of God and the knowledge of God, “as they did not like to retain God in their education.” And since they threw God out and they threw Creation out and they threw the Bible out, they had to cook up something new! They didn’t want the truth anymore, so they had to figure out some big lie!

Evolution is the craziest, hardest thing in the World to believe!–That it all just happened by accident, that it all just kind of fell together. Dr. Robert A. Millikan, the great physicist who developed the splitting of the atom, said,

“If you’d say that this watch just put itself together, invented itself, you’d be crazy! And just as there had to be a watchmaker behind the synchronized perfection and order of every watch, so there had to be a Creator behind the perfect synchronized perfection of the Universe!”

Yet this evolutionary doctrine of delusion has become the general theme of modern so-called science! Evolution is now referred to as the “great principle” of biology. But a principle, according to the dictionary, is a foundation, truth or fact–the basis of other truths. And if you know anything about evolution at all, you know that it has never been proven to be either a truth or a fact, much less the foundation or basis of other truths!

There is no absolute proof for evolution! It has to be believed, therefore it’s a faith, therefore it’s a religion! Even the high priest and founding father of this false faith, Charles Darwin himself, confessed that “the belief (note the emphasis on belief) in natural selection (evolution) must at present be grounded entirely on general considerations…When we descend to details, we can prove that no one species has changed … nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.”–Ha!

So evolution is really a RELIGION of UNBELIEF in God! And that’s its whole purpose: To eliminate faith in God and to foster the false doctrine of devils that the Creation created itself and God had nothing to do with it, so there doesn’t need to be a God–it could have happened without Him!–What an idiotic and ridiculous lie!

And even if you don’t believe the Bible, honest scientists have figured out that if evolution actually took that many millions of years, we would be ten miles deep in evolutionary fossils, missing links, instead of having to search the World over trying to find one! And nearly every one of those crazy fossils that were supposed to be the missing links have now been debunked!–Some of them were even confessed fakes, like Piltdown Man, Java Man, etc.

“In the beginning, God,” not chaos, not some nebulous cloud of gases, but “in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth!”–The first verse of the first chapter of the first book of the right Book, praise God! Now either you believe that, either you believe what God’s Book says, or you’re going to take what some liar says!

“And GOD created man in His Own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.” (Gen.1:27) He didn’t look like some ape-man or monkey, or some fish or bird.–He created man like Himself, God! And God formed man out of what?–Previous forms?–Apes?–Beasts?–Birds? “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” (Gen.2:7)

Creation is the premise and preface and basic foundation of the entire Bible! If you don’t believe this, you won’t believe anything! Because when you doubt one word in the Bible, you’ll soon doubt the whole Bible! Why?–What happens in a court of law with the testimony of a witness when one thing he’s said is proven to be a lie?–They throw his entire testimony out, including the true things he said, because they can’t believe it and every word will be in doubt. If he lied about one thing, maybe he lied about another! And that’s the way it is with the Bible!

Jesus said, “Had ye believed Moses (who compiled the Book of Genesis, ye would have believed ME. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe My Words?” (Jn.5:46,47) Now, what’s the first of Moses’ writings, upon which all five books are based?–GENESIS!–“In the beginning … ,” all about Creation and the beginning of God’s dealings with man.

If they had believed that book of Genesis all about Creation and God, then they would have accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior! What, then, did the Devil know he had to do to prevent people from believing in Christ? He knew he had to destroy their belief in the writings of Moses and in the book of Genesis in particular, in the Creation, the glorious Creation! And how’d the Devil do that?–By what doctrine, what big lie?

EVOLUTION!–That was his greatest lie and greatest manufacture and most clever piece of teaching! Evolution!–As ridiculous and idiotic as anything you could possibly study, because it has NO foundation in fact whatsoever; there’s NO evidence for it; no discovery has been made to prove it! As one of its top exponents, Margaret Mead, the famous anthropologist, wrote in her own introduction to her textbook on anthropology:

“We as honest scientists must confess that science has yet to discover one single iota (tiny speck) of concrete evidence to prove the evolutionary theory!”

Darwin’s evolution is science falsely so-called, pseudo-science, of which St. Paul warned dear Timothy, “Beware of the lies of science falsely so-called!” (1Tim.6:20) Because once you reject the truth about Creation, about God, about Jesus, and about happiness and the proper rules of life and love, there’s nothing else to believe but lies and the Devil!

If the Devil always came around with hooves and horns and a long tail and a pitchfork in his hand, he wouldn’t be half as dangerous as the way he really comes around: In the form of some smooth-tongued professor in today’s modern universities, teaching courses that are nearly all lies, phoney lies, very little truth to them!–Pure vain imaginations, somebody’s dreams–nightmares!
They, as Jesus said, are blind leaders of the blind, and He said they’re both going to fall into the ditch! “The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken, lo, they have rejected the Word of the Lord, what wisdom is in them?” What wisdom is in them?–Without God’s Word there is no wisdom, no knowledge that amounts to anything or is worth anything! (Mt.15:14; Jer.8:9)

The Bible prophesies that in the Last Days, “the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine (the truth); but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears (ears that want to be tickled with lies!); And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables!” (2Ti.4:3,4) This time has come, and these days are here, and their ears have turned from the truth and are turned unto fables!–Like evolution!

“Because they received NOT the LOVE of the TRUTH, that they might be saved, for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth!” (2Th.2:10-12) And if you don’t like the truth, you’ve only got one alternative–a lie!–And damnation!

DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD? Look at the World, look at the beautiful trees, look at the flowers, look at the sea, look at the sky!–Does God love you?–You can see it and you can feel it in the beautiful World He’s given you to live in!

GOD is the only One Who can give MEANING to the Universe and purpose to the planets and love to our hearts and peace to our minds and health to our bodies and rest to our spirits and happiness to our lives and joy to our souls and the wisdom to know that “the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom” and “the wisdom of this World is foolishness with God”! (Pr.9:10; 1Cor.3:19) Take Jesus and His Truth today!

There are not many churches and pastors who talk about cultural and social issues from the pulpit, topics such as the wars America has been involved in, the southern border crises, the evils of the LGBTQ agenda, the genocide Israel is committing in Gaza, etc. The only ones I know of in the USA besides the Christians in this interview are Chuck Baldwin of Liberty Fellowship in Montana, Michael Hoggard of Bethel Church, Missouri, Steven Anderson of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona, and John MacArthur of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California, who defied the governor of California by disregarding the COVID-19 lockdown mandates. I’m sure there must be many others, but obviously, they are way too few because the churches in America have not had the effect on society today they used to have up to the 19th century.

The transcript and video below is an interview led by two leaders of an organization called, Our Country Our Choice (OCOC), Colonel (retired) Douglas Macgregor and Pastor Casey (that’s the only name given.) They discuss current events with a pastor, Gary Hamrick of Cornerstone Chapel. I deem them all to be solid Bible Believing Jesus Christ following Christians.

Transcript

Gary Hamrick: It’s unfortunate but a lot of times Christians today feel like they’re not supposed to get involved in politics in any way shape or form. The fact of the matter is the First Amendment was given to us to keep government out of the Church, not the Church out of the government. And so unfortunately too many Christians have been sitting on the sidelines, and a lot of pastors have been encouraging them to sit it out. The result is, that we have a country in which many of us are not liking the direction (it’s going).

And we always understand that in the big picture of things, of course, the enemy is at work. And the Bible tells us the world is going to get more corrupt and more evil as we get closer to the return of Christ. But, at the same time, the Church should be that restraining force against evil in our world. If we sit it out then evil will just run rampant.

That’s why Christians are supposed to be involved. Because why? Jesus told us to be salt and light! And salt and light means you penetrate the darkness as light, and you flavor the world as salt.

And so unfortunately too many Christians have been sitting it out, and too many pastors think that you shouldn’t get political. My response is, look, all these issues that we’re looking at today when everything from the whole transgender sexual identity confusion, the thing about same-sex marriage and abortion and all these issues, I mean, these are issues that the Bible speaks about. So when the government has gotten involved in these issues of life and liberty and sexuality, they’ve crossed into our lane. And so the Church needs to be engaged to be a voice of reason and a restraining force against evil in our world today.

So that’s my basic take on why Christians should be involved because there’s a mandate to be salt and sight and to not sit it out, to be a restraining force against evil in our world.

Pastor Casey: Fantastic! Well-spoken. In fact, God’s moral law does restrain evil. One of the things that we like to say here at OCOC is that the truth will set you free but you must speak. And so the truth will set you free, but when we speak God’s moral law, it has a restraining factor. Thou shalt not lie, and thou shalt not kill, those things that God has established from the very beginning. When we speak those things, it helps not only to restrain evil but to guide Christians. It also is a conviction factor.

When we talk about the Gospel, it brings the lost under conviction and they see that they are sinners in need of a savior. Tell us briefly about the Gospel before we move on to the next subject if you don’t mind.

Gary Hamrick: Well, the Gospel is central to what what we’re about. I mean, it’s the good news of Jesus Christ, putting your faith and trust in what Christ did for us.

The beautiful thing about Christianity is that it’s different from all other world religions. All other world religions put the burden on you to try to get up to God. Christianity tells us, the Gospel tells us, that God came down to us. And He took on flesh and died for our sins. And so our faith and trust are in Him as our Lord and Savior.

And that’s important to add to, and I’m glad you asked the question because sometimes I’ll get accused of, “You’re putting government above God.” Not at all. We believe the central message of Truth is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But at the same time, Martin Luther once said, “If you preach the Gospel in all aspects with the exception of the issues which deal specifically with your time, you are not preaching the Gospel at all.” Jesus is central to everything we’re about, and from Him, all other things flow.

Pastor Casey: Well said! Thank you very much. In regards to Christian participation in the Gospel, I think nothing else needs to be said. And now I’m really interested in how we can encourage perhaps a mindset towards these endless wars. You said on your website that you’re a News Junkie and I’m sure you’ve seen the colonel and his contributions, so you guys dialogue a little bit in regards to the two front wars that are going on and why and all of these things that us as Christians need to be educated on how we view these types of things to be able to help steer our country in the right direction.

Gary Hamrick: Well Colonel, I’m going to defer to you to answer that question first.

Col. Douglas Macgregor: Well, to go back a little bit, you know the whole point of the (US) Constitution if you read through the statements of the people that wrote it up, was to leave us in the maximum freedom possible. And that’s really the idea. The Constitution is all about what the government cannot do. It doesn’t say what we must do, it says this is what the government cannot do to you. And we forget that. And increasingly we’re dealing with people in Washington who are desperate to fundamentally change us. They want to change us by bringing in millions and millions of people whom we know nothing about, who are not coming to become Americans. That’s all nonsense. They’re coming to jump into the giant consumption machine and profit. We know that. And of course, our rule of law has been largely destroyed as a result of this sort of thing.

The issue is fundamentally this: The wars that we’ve been involved with, certainly since the Korean War, are almost universally things that we started. I’d say that perhaps the Perian Gulf Wars are one exception. We essentially responded to something that had happened in the region. Our goals were limited, and we went and then we left. All of the other wars have involved precipitating hostility for reasons removed from the interests of the American people because a small number of people in Washington made decisions that it was in our interest to do something without ever consulting us.

No one declares war. There are few if any debates anywhere about what we should or shouldn’t do. Everyone seems to be very anxious to bomb and sanction repeatedly. If we take Christianity seriously, I don’t think Jesus would tell us to sanction and bomb everyone into submission.

But I don’t hear enough from Christians about that. Why are they not standing up and questioning the wisdom and the conduct of these wars? How many people have we killed unnecessarily? How much have we destroyed unnecessarily? And at the same time, is this a distraction so that we pay no attention to what’s being done to us by our own government here at home? So why don’t you think about that and tell us what your views are?

Gary Hamrick: The debate I suppose is over America’s vital interests in the world and whether or not we should get involved in certain wars to protect those vital interests. And at times I’m a little fuzzy on what’s our vital interests. I don’t know, sometimes when I see us engaged in different wars, the one thing that troubles me is you mentioned the border.

The border is a huge crisis right now. And you’re right, it’s not people coming over necessarily to find a new beginning. I think a big concern for me at least is the potential for terrorism and and terrorist cells to be coming into the United States through a very porous southern border in particular. I just heard yesterday that even the northern border has more terrorists on the watch list. And so, we have to protect our borders.

By the way, God’s not opposed to borders. He kind of divided up the nation of Israel to the 12 tribes of Israel. And they had borders in which to live and the nations had borders. And so that’s pretty biblical.

I’ve been concerned with how much money are we sending to the war in Ukraine that could be put into protecting our own borders. So there does seem to be a conflict of how we’re spending our resources for some of these battles compared to what we need even to protect our own home front.

Col. Douglas Macgregor: Yeah, I agree. If I could just mention that the border crisis should be deemed as a war, and it is because it’s one-sided and we’re not coming to the forefront there. And so if we were taking it seriously, and we were to dispatch our military or our army over there, and put a stop to the cartels, to put a stop to all of the traffickings, to put a stop to all of the ridiculous rapes and child abductions, and this is a crisis and it’s definitely been ignored to a big extent. I would really love to see Christians say, “We’ve had enough. We’ve got to stand up for what’s right.”

Gary Hamrick: I just had a friend who went down to the southern border to personally eyewitness some things, and he said he saw three buses unload of military age-fighting Chinese men! Now, why are three busloads of military-age Chinese young men coming across our border? Not for good reasons, I guarantee you.

Col. Douglas Macgregor: That’s right. And by the way, a number of those are, I’m told, people that were actually sought in China for various criminal activities. Some of them were involved in the shadow banking industry with financial crime. This is a huge issue right now in China. They’re really going to town, so to say, against senior party members and bureaucrats who have cheated and stolen vast sums of money. And these are probably some of those people. That’s the biggest problem.

A friend of mine who is from El Salvador sent me an email last night and he wrote, “Don’t people understand that a lot of the men who are from Latin America who want to join the US military, I know where they’re from, they’re MS-13 (an international criminal gang)! They’re joining the Army or the Marines so they can get some experience, then get out and continue their criminal activities here with citizenship. This is a catastrophe for us. He pointed out that it has taken him six years to become an American citizen. So he was very upset about this whole thing.

I find people who have come here legally are among the most strident opponents of illegal immigration. And too many Americans are too busy watching the latest football game and following Taylor Swift’s affairs to pay attention to what’s really important. We have got to get their attention, and I don’t know what it’s going to take.

Well, would you stop for a second and tell us in your estimation what you think we could do? We’re an organization that is not satisfied with simply complaining, we want to take action. We want to cooperate with people, particularly with churches across the country. And by the way, we are not exclusively a religious organization. You don’t have to be a Christian per se to be a member of OCOC. We just regard those (Christian) values largely as essentially founding values of the country. I know it’s not popular to say that but that’s true. But the point is, how do we get more churches, more organizations, and people who are similarly minded as we are to join us? We welcome any suggestions you have in any context that you want to suggest to us after the program.

Gary Hamrick: I would be glad to share some of that with you. One of the things that I’m most concerned about is the lack of involvement of the local church in important civil and cultural issues, let alone governance. It’s because there’s silence in the pulpits! When pastors are not helping their people to become engaged in the issues of the day, they’re not going to see the need and importance of doing so.

(End of transcript)

The above are the most important points in the video, about half of it. Please listen to the entirety below.