Viewing 1 - 8 out of 8 Blogs.

Halloween: This Trick is NO Treat!
By Eric Barger & David Benoit

NOTE: In 1999, we (Eric Barger and David Benoit) released a pamphlet that outlined our concerns about Halloween. We’ve reprinted it here in its entirety. Thus far over 200,000 of them have been printed and distributed worldwide. Though you may have seen far more extensive pieces exposing Halloween (see links for two more perspectives at the bottom of this page), we feel that what we share here is very usable in communicating to children. Feel free to distribute this information. The only restriction is that if you print this, we ask that you print it in its entirety. This information also appears in the book Entertaining Spirits Unaware: The End-Time Occult Invasion.

When we were kids growing up, we always looked forward to Halloween. We knew nothing about how it began, or what the meanings were behind it. All we knew was that we could get dressed up funny and go through the neighborhood and people would give us candy.

The information you are about to receive is to help you understand the seriousness of Halloween. It is not to spoil your fun, but to ask the question: Should we, as Christians, join in a festival whose history and practices are for the dead? Today, with Halloween being a billion dollar business second only to Christmas in retailing, few understand the true nature and historic foundations of this occult celebration.

Origin of Halloween

The word "Halloween" actually has its origins in the Catholic Church. It comes from the words "All Hallows Eve," "All Hallows Day," or "All Saints Day." This day was set aside to honor saints. The holiday was founded to try and divert attention away from the pagan practices taking place on this day each October. Though perhaps well intentioned, trying to "Christianize" pagan practices can never be pleasing to God, and Halloween may be the most vivid example of this. Some believe Irish immigrants fleeing the potato famine may have brought its origins to America in the 1840s.

In occult and witchcraft circles, October 31 represents a day of worship called Samhain (pronounced sow-en). This is the Celtic New Year. History tells us that the Celtic people were worshipers of earth gods, woodland spirits, and sun deities. One legend explains that on Samhain the spirits of all those who had died throughout the year would come back in search of living bodies to possess for the next year. It was believed to be their only hope for entering the afterlife. It was also the day that the living were to communicate with the dead (with magnified effectiveness). This practice is called necromancy. Time and again we read - from occult sources - that Halloween is focused at the worship and contact of dead ancestors and communication with the spirit realm.

Deuteronomy 18:11 tells us that God considers this practice evil. We see examples of necromancy portrayed in movies like The Sixth Sense, Lion King, and Ghost, to name a few. Regardless of where or how the ritual practice started, one thing is certain—God forbids contacting any spirit unless it's the Holy Spirit!

Symbols of Halloween

Trick or Treat. Here are three of the possible origins of present day "trick or treating":

a. In the early practice of Halloween, people were afraid of spirits doing harm to their home, so they would leave treats out side their homes to keep them happy.

b. The Europeans tried to "Christianize" this pagan ritual by calling it "souling." They would go out and collect soul cakes. The more cakes you would receive, the more prayers you would send up for your dead relatives.

c. In celebration of the recently completed harvest, Celts would give offerings of food to the gods. They often went from door to door to collect food to donate to their deities. History tells us that on Halloween the Celts would terrorize the countryside and populace, butcher cattle, and take it as spoil to please their gods.

Today’s trick-or-treating consists of going from house to house and receiving candy from all the neighbors. Even if Halloween were totally harmless and free from pagan tradition, I would still be concerned about taking my children door-to-door and taking candy from people that I may not know. Throughout the rest of the year, we teach our children not to take anything from a stranger. But on Halloween we break our own rules!!!

The Jack o’Lantern. The Celts that lived in what is now Great Britain and northern France would carry a lantern when they walked on the eve of October 31. These lanterns were carved out of big turnips and the lights were believed to keep the evil spirits away. Children carved faces in the turnips calling them "jack o’lanterns." People later started to use the pumpkin in order to carry a bigger light.

The myth behind the jack o’lantern was that a man named Jack made a pact with the Devil and had to wander aimlessly through the darkness with only a piece of coal from hell in a turnip to guide him.

There are many people who believe that a person can never become a Christian because they have made a pact with the Devil. This is not true. Before a person accepts Christ they already belong to the Devil. In John 8:44a Jesus tells us, "You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do."

But inviting Jesus into their hearts sets men free! So, why would the Devil make a deal with someone when they are already his? If you call on God to forgive you—no matter what your past was like—He will hear you today.

Witches. When David and Eric were growing up, they were always told that witches were make-believe. But, witches are real. The Bible talks about them in several passages. Today witchcraft is a very popular religion among our youth in America. Who would have ever thought that a seventeen-year-old honor student in Detroit, Michigan, could sue her school for the right to wear her pentagram, which is a symbol of her Wiccan religion. This is exactly what Crystal Seifferly did, according to the Chicago Tribune, February 10, 1999.

The Wiccan religion does not believe in the Devil or Satan. They believe in five elementals, which are the false gods of forces. The five elementals are earth, wind, fire, water, and spirits. Witches do not claim to be Devil worshippers. Witches do not believe the Bible is true so they will not accept a character from the Bible to worship. Many witches will hide behind environmentalism as a cover-up for the worship of Gaia, the goddess called "Mother Earth."

The Black Cat. The black cat has long been associated with witchcraft. Many superstitions have evolved about cats. It was believed that witches could change into cats. Some people also believed that cats were the spirits of the dead. Friends and relatives who had died would often return, with their souls inhabiting an animal—often a black cat. Black cats have remained a symbol of Halloween to the present. On the eve before their New Year (October 31), it was believed that Samhain called together all of the deceased. The dead would take different forms, with the evil spirits taking the form of animals—the most wicked taking the form of cats.

The belief in people coming back from the dead is not a Christian belief. That belief is called reincarnation. The Bible teaches that man dies only once. "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" (Hebrews 9:27).

Dressing in Costumes. During the festival of Samhain, there was a fire festival to honor the god of death. Sacred bonfires were lit on the tops of hills in honor of the false gods. History tells us that after the bonfire to Samhain, people were afraid to walk home in the dark. They were in fear of being possessed by spirits. So they dressed up in costumes and carved scary faces in their fire holders. They hoped that the spirits would be frightened and not bother them.

Without even knowing it, children in our society today continue this pagan practice by dressing up in various costumes. Pumpkins are now the objects of choice to carve faces into. The wearing of death masks is still used around the world in demon worship.

In Conclusion...

In Deuteronomy 18:10–12, God gave His people nine things they were to stay away from. Many of the practices go hand in hand with the traditions of Halloween and go directly against God’s Word.

1. Human sacrifice: In ancient times, they would offer children to false gods of fire. The bonfire was used by pagans who worshipped fire gods, like Baal. To appease these gods, they would offer children in the fire.

2. Divination/fortune telling: If you watch much TV, you can’t miss the advertisements of psychics and people who are suppose to know your future. This practice is condemned in the Bible.

3. Observer of times: This is astrology. Christians do not believe that the stars can guide their life. Christians believe that God will guide our lives through His Word.

4. Enchanter: A person who uses chants to cast spells.

5. Witch: Witches are not make-believe characters. Exodus 22:18 says: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Though New Testament Christians certainly do not condone the Old Testament practice of executing witches, the fact is they have become accepted members in our culture today.

6. Charmer: Objects that are made by someone to protect you or curse others.

7. Consulter of familiar spirits: a familiar spirit is a spirit that impersonates a person who is dead.

8. A wizard, magician, or sorcerer: a person who uses magic to control people or uses occult practices to entice people into witchcraft.

9. Necromancer: someone who claims to contact the dead.

Deuteronomy. 18:10–12 says:

"There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, (11) Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. (12) For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee."

You may have another question: What should I do with those things in my life that are associated with witchcraft? Follow Acts 19:18-20 which states:

"And many that believed came, and confessed, and showed their deeds. (19) Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. (20) So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed."

So, what is the answer to our opening question—should a Christian be involved with the pagan holiday of Halloween? No! Ephesians 5:11 says, "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." Not only should a Christian not partake in evil, we are to expose it!

But there is a more important question . . .

Christ is asking for our obedience, but first He wants our hearts. He is willing that anyone who calls on His name can be saved and be delivered from darkness. Witch, Satanist, murderer . . . it doesn’t matter, He can and will forgive you! Praise God!

The steps to salvation are simple.

n You must admit that you have sinned against God. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23).

n You must understand the penalty for sin is death. "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:23).

n You need to understand that God loves you no matter what you have done. "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8)

n You must confess that Jesus Christ is the true Messiah and receive His gift of salvation. "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" (Romans 10: 9–10).

� 1999, 2001, 2003 Eric Barger & David Benoit


Let me add as a postscript that if there is any single thing Christians need to do on October 31st it is to pray! This is the highest unholy day of those in the occult. Many involved with witchcraft believe that the separation between the natural and spiritual worlds is thinnest during this day. So, if for no other reason, the amount of evil supernatural activity is going to be greatest that day just because more occultism is being practiced. Also, it is known that more sacrifice (animal and yes, human) is carried out on October 31st than on all of the other days of the year combined. Christians - full of the Holy Ghost and fire - should be praying and conducting spiritual warfare against the powers of darkness! Along with Christ-centered celebrations of life and activities for our kids, churches should consider some teaching from the above information we've shared followed by a power-packed time of prayer, binding the forces of darkness and asking God to protect our neighborhoods, cities and citizens.
- Eric Barger

A Tangled Tale of Scripture Trying to sort out the massive complexities of the Mormon scriptures is somewhat akin to the frustration one might feel trying to rewind a pickup load of tangled fishing line. Every time you feel like you have made some headway, another mess pops up. It would be easier to just cut the line and clear up little sections at a time, but that's the basic problem! Mormon scripture is comprised of four documents; the Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. However, the Mormons have never really had to confront their scriptures as individual units within a full set of integrated documents that can be measured by simple "scriptural test" procedures. The average Mormon sees LDS scripture only in the inflexible context of classroom references within the rigid teaching structure imposed by the LDS instruction manuals. It is never looked at from a critical, scholarly perspective. The Mormon is taught to unequivocally accept the LDS scriptures as the pure word of God, without error or inconsistency - except, ironically, the Bible, which is in fact the only real standard by which any doctrine can be tested. By discrediting the authority of the Bible, Mormons thereby cut loose the other three LDS scriptures loose from any Biblical accountability. The only acceptable measurement for LDS scripture is the LDS scripture itself and that has already been given the fullest approval of an "infallible latter-day prophet." There is no room for the application of generally accepted biblical scholarship. The Eighth Article of the LDS "Articles of Faith," states, "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe The Book of Mormon to be the word of God." [1] Mormonism teaches that there are several problems with the Bible. First, many of its books are missing, so it is only an incomplete compilation at best. Second, we are told that many plain and precious things were taken away from the Bible by that "great and abominable church," as recorded in I Nephi 13:25- 28 in The Book of Mormon. The very document requiring Biblical testing discredits its only credible witness! The final severance from biblical accountability is the continued LDS teaching that what was left of the Scriptures has been so often and badly translated that our present Bible is of almost no "stand alone" value. Apostle Orson Pratt, an early Mormon theologian, summed up the LDS position when he stated: ...and who, in his right mind, could for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the whole Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original? [2] Joseph Smith taught, "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors." [3] What they are saying is that the Bible, which, at best, represents only 25% of the LDS scriptures is the weak link. Yet, Mormons are winning people to their biblically unfounded faith by carrying Bibles under their arms as though they read and believe it. It's just a ticket in the Christians' doors for the Mormons. What the Mormons end up with is a set of spiritual laws that force them to judge their scripture as perfect, by their own measure of faith and not by any objective criteria. If there is an obvious contradiction with the LDS scripture and what the present prophet, is teaching, the Mormons cannot judge or test the prophet by the scripture. According to the late President and Prophet of the church, Ezra Taft Benson, the current LDS doctrine is that the living prophet is above scripture. There is absolutely no way out. Burning in the Bosom The finality of the Mormon theology is not based upon evaluation by scriptural evidence, but based entirely upon a "burning in the bosom." Again, LDS Scripture demands this final proof of itself and tells its members that this experience is what they must seek. Oliver Cowdery was the second elder to Joseph Smith in the founding of the church and in the translation of The Book of Mormon. In a word of admonition to him during the translation of The Book of Mormon, the Mormon god declared through Joseph Smith: But behold, I say unto you that you must study it out in your own mind; then you must ask me if it is right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore you shall feel that it is right. But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong... [4] When the Mormon missionaries come into a home, they will talk about their first prophet, Joseph Smith and The Book of Mormon and will instruct the investigator to read The Book of Mormon and to pray about it. They will encourage the reader to seek that divine burning in the bosom which will prove that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God and The Book of Mormon is really scripture. Moroni 10:4 [Book of Mormon] will be quoted: And when you have received these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the eternal father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you by the power of the Holy Ghost. The missionaries use this quote to put the burden of proof on the investigator's sincere heart, his real intent and his level of personal faith, rather than on fact. Actually, the investigator will feel good about it. It all becomes a subjective evaluation. The LDS scriptures and prophet are not to be tested. The LDS doctrines are not to be tested. In fact, the real heresies of Mormonism will not have been shared with the investigator at this stage of conversion. The biblical knowledge and Book of Mormon knowledge of the investigator are not to be tested. They are to just pray sincerely and this divine burning in the bosom will be the proof that the missionaries are delivering divine truth directly from God. Ed's own Personal Experience I vividly recall my own experience with the burning in the bosom. I can vividly remember lying on my bed for the better part of a whole night crying out to God for a burning in my bosom so that I would know the church was true. Hour after hour I lay there, with my breast lifted upward, as though it were on an altar of sacrifice, pleading for the evidence of this eternal truth. I knew that my heart was sincere, and yet the guilt of my not experiencing the manifestation was almost more than I could bear. Finally, many hours into my vigil, that burning came. I felt an actual, physical burning sensation in my breast. I would later testify that it was as though I had a rise of 7 or 8 degrees in body heat. My chest was at a high fever temperature. I rejoiced in the certainty of my faith. I knew that the church was true, that Joseph Smith was a true prophet and that The Book of Mormon was the pure, true word of God. Yet, in retrospect, I never checked one single teaching of the missionaries against the Holy Bible to see if it matched up. It is kind of interesting that when, as a born again believer, my wife, Carol, prayed the prayer of Moroni 10:4 as she read The Book of Mormon, seeking to know of its truth, she would fall asleep and experience that stupor Oliver Cowdery was told would be the evidence of untruth. Perhaps she was praying to the wrong God. When I prayed it, not being born-again, I prayed as instructed by the missionaries. I received one answer and she received a totally different one. Yet, we were both sincere. What was the difference? An Inspired Version? Mormons use only the King James Version of the Bible. It is also interesting to note that the LDS Church publishes its own edition of the King James Bible. An article, "Church Publishes First LDS Edition of The Bible," by Lavina F. Anderson, appeared in the October 1979 edition of the LDS Ensign magazine and described the enormous project and the intense commitment of the project workers to cross-reference this edition to the other standard works of the church. Aside from the very obvious question of why the prophet did not take this opportunity to add back all the plain and precious missing parts and correct the translation errors the LDS Church claims have been plaguing the Bible all these years, one comment regarding the project almost flew off the page. In the last paragraph of the article, the writer concluded, "Brother Rasmussen added, 'Sometimes Brother Patch and I would be discussing a matter of linguistics, and, as we concluded, one of us would remark, "That feels good." I suppose to some people this might seem like a slipshod way to be scholars, but we could tell when we were moving in the proper direction and we could certainly identify the stupor that came over us when we weren't.' He paused, then added quietly, 'In some ways, scholarship was the least important part of our work. [5] As a by-product of referencing the new edition, one long-debated topic among the diverse sub-groupings within the various branches of Mormonism, including the numerous Josephite or Restorationist churches, was clarified. It dealt with the authenticity of a manuscript called The Inspired Version of the Bible, written by Joseph Smith prior to his death. The copyrighted property of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Inspired Version was never given full credentials by the Utah branch--until the release of the new, LDS Edition of the King James Bible. It is quite significant that this new edition firmly places the Inspired Version in the position of a Standard Work or a fifth item of approved Mormon scripture, integrated into the fourth. The title page classifies the new edition as "Authorized King James Version with Explanatory Notes and Cross References to the Standard Works of the Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." In the "Explanation Concerning Footnotes," on page vi, it identifies JST as the code for the Joseph Smith Translation. The Joseph Smith Translation (The Inspired Version) is referenced by footnotes throughout the new LDS Edition in clarification of some of the errors in the King James Edition. The Problem with Inventing Scripture During the question and answer time following an early showing of the film, "The God Makers," in Colorado Springs, Colorado, I made the point that all the extra-Biblical scripture was out of order with God's Word. Among the several references I gave was Revelations 22:18-19, which clearly stated that anyone who would add to the Bible or subtract from it in any way was in deep trouble with God. A Mormon woman in the group challenged me on this statement and emphatically declared that this was only in reference to the Book of Revelation in its single content and had no bearing upon any other book of Scripture, including any Latter-day Saint scripture. I asked her if these curses would be in effect if anyone had dared to alter just the Book of Revelation in any way. She replied that this was obviously so. I then showed her that in the Joseph Smith Translation Smith had added to, or subtracted from the Book of Revelation over 85 times. [6] "Even in the smallest context of the warning, Joseph Smith stands condemned as a false prophet," I declared. She stared in shock. Later, a local LDS leader came up to me after the meeting and quietly whispered, "It doesn't matter; he was just adjusting the incorrect parts. I know that he is a true prophet!" The Jesus of The Book of Mormon Is The Book of Mormon "Another Testament of Jesus Christ," as the Mormons claim? Or is it a testament of another Jesus Christ? Let's check it with one simple test, comparing what happened when Jesus went to Calvary in the Bible and in The Book of Mormon. If they are testifying of the same Jesus Christ, the testament should be the same! The various New Testament writers in the Bible describe the events this way: Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, "truly this was the Son of God." (Matthew 27:50-54) [emphasis added] And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, truly this man was the Son of God. (Mark 15:37 ) And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost. Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, "certainly this was a righteous man." (Luke 23:44) When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "it is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. (John 19:30) The word "earthquake" is used in the verses from Matthew 27 to state that the earth shook. It must not have been severe, since John doesn't even mention it. Luke indicates that people stood by as the earth shook and the sun went into eclipse for three hours. There is one clear thing. No one died from the earthquake. At His resurrection on the third day, graves were opened and some Saints were resurrected to walk into the city. In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, "Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay." (Matthew 28: 1-6) Again, the word "earthquake" is not used in the destructive sense. The earth shook and the stone rolled away from the door. People were not killed. It's not quite the same in The Book of Mormon The Book of Mormon describes a supposed migration of Jews to Meso-America hundreds of years before Christ was born. There is no archeological evidence of this ever occurring; however, Mormons are taught to believe the truthfulness of the tale in spite of the facts. In The Book of Mormon, the Mormon Jesus brought death and destruction with him to the Cross. In Third Nephi, Chapters 8 and 9, The Book of Mormon details the events surrounding Christ's crucifixion as they were experienced by the people of this new world, Book of Mormon lands. Judge for yourself if it is the same Jesus. These Book of Mormon chapters describe the desolation at Christ's death of the great city of Zarahemla by fire. It states that the city of Moroni -- did sink into the sea and the inhabitants thereof were drowned... the earth was carried up upon the city of Moronihah...there was great and terrible destruction in the land southward......terrible destruction in the land northward....the highways were broken up....many great and noble cities were sunk and many burned and many shaken till the buildings thereof had fallen to the earth.....all these great and terrible things were done in the space of three hours. Third Nephi 9 tells of further wrath as the Lord also destroyed the cities and inhabitants of Gigal, Onihah, Mocum, Jerusalem, Gadiandi, Gadiomnah, Jacob, Gimgimno, Jacobugath, Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen. (A total of 16 major cities.) Who did all this killing to testify of the Lord's atonement on Calvary? Third Nephi 9:15 reveals the murderer of approximately 2 million innocent inhabitants of The Book of Mormon lands, "Behold, I am Jesus Christ the son of God. I created the heavens and the earth and all things that in them are." He adds, (in verse 21), "behold, I have come unto the world to bring redemption unto the world to save the world from sin." It appears that the easiest way to bring redemption was to kill the vast majority of the people in those lands, the very people Mormons believe are Jesus' "other sheep... which are not of this fold," referred to in John 10:16. This Mormon Jesus was a god of wrath. Could this truly be the act of the One Who was supposed to be the end of the law (Romans 10:4)? Compare that Mormon Christ to the biblical Jesus who compassionately cried out to His Father, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." In another case, when the disciples would call down fire on a Samaritan village, Jesus rebuked them and made it clear that he brought peace and restoration, not the kind of retribution evidenced by the Mormon Jesus of The Book of Mormon. Now it came to pass, when the time had come for Him to be received up, that He steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before His face. And as they went, they entered a village of the Samaritans, to prepare for Him. But they did not receive Him, because His face was set for the journey to Jerusalem. And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, "Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?" But He turned and rebuked them, and said, "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives but to save them." And they went to another village. (Luke 9:51-56) Simply put, there are two different Jesuses at work here. The Christ of Mormonism is not the Christ of the Bible. Second Corinthians 11:1-5 tells us that there will be those who would teach a different Christ. Paul says of them, "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ." (2 Corinthians 11:13) There is a biblical warning about those who would bring the doctrine of another Jesus plus a simple test. Do the Mormons and The Book of Mormon pass that test? No, they do not and never will. Power in the Blood The Mormons have a difficult time understanding what actually happened at Calvary. In the LDS pamphlet, "What the Mormons Think of Christ," we see the problem. In the section, 'The Blood of Christ' (page 22 in the 1976 edition), we read: Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose one's salvation. For instance, many believe or pretend to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept him as our personal savior, we are thereby saved. They say that his blood, without any other act than mere belief, makes us clean. What is the true doctrine of the blood of Christ? Salvation comes because of the atonement, and the atonement was wrought through the shedding of the blood of Christ. In Gethsemane Christ sweat great drops of blood from every pore when he conditionally took upon himself the sins of the world, and then the shedding of his blood was completed upon the cross. In Article 3 of its Articles of Faith the Mormon Church teaches, and professes: We believe that through the atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel [The laws and ordinance of the gospel, according to the LDS prophet]. The Bible clearly teaches another Christ.....and another gospel: And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. (Colossians 2:13 -15) But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. (Colossians 2:13-17) In the early LDS church, a more orthodox Christ was preached. But when Joseph began to teach the strange doctrines of this different Christ, the church could no longer embrace the reality of the blood of Calvary and its full redemptive work. That was when the church removed the red wine from the communion table and began using water. This act literally washed away the reality of the blood from its Christian converts. The same holds true today. The cross and the blood have become strangers to the Mormons. The Cross of Christ is absent from every single one of the many thousands of Mormon Churches. And so is the Christ who went to it willingly for us all. I remember the day of my own salvation in January of 1975, when the little church we were visiting served Christian communion. I held the elements of that communion in my hands and looked down at the red grape juice. I knew it represented the blood that was shed for me and as I took it to my lips, I wept, knowing that I was lost and separated from God by the works of my own flesh. That night I went forward and prayed for forgiveness and gave my life over to the Lord Jesus Christ. The Pearl of Great Price Throughout this book I have quoted many references from the Doctrine and Covenants, which is a compilation of doctrines put forth by the Church's prophets. No discussion of LDS scripture would be complete, however, without touching upon the Pearl of Great Price, and in particular, that part known as The Book of Abraham. Joseph Smith supposedly translated The Book of Abraham from some papyrus fragments that the Smiths had purchased from a man claiming to be an Egyptologist. At the time, he was traveling through the area in which the Smiths lived with several mummies on display. Using several of the facsimiles (Egyptian pictures found with the mummies) from the papyri, Joseph Smith demonstrated that these were representations of Father Abraham in Egypt and then proceeded to "translate" the papyri fragments into their English meanings. This was done prior to the general understanding of the Rosetta Stone decoding of the ancient Egyptian language. In a recent comparison of the papyri to Joseph's notes, it was apparent that the thirteenth and fourteenth verses of Abraham 1 were translated from one single character resembling a backward E. Yet, in fact, Joseph Smith translated this into 76 words, with nine proper names and eight other nouns. The character for the Egyptian god, Khonso, was translated by Joseph Smith into 177 words in Abraham 1:16-19. Dealing with this issue has been a major test of faith for Mormon scholars. Three major non-LDS Egyptologists, Klaus Baer, Richard A. Parker and the late John A. Wilson reviewed the fragments and all concluded that Joseph's translation was totally incorrect and his restorations of the facsimiles [Egyptian pictures found with the mummies] were a gross injustice to the art of Egyptology. What the Egyptians had inscribed on the papyri and what Smith had described them as were not even remotely comparable. Richard A. Parker described Fascimile 1, an Egyptian picture found facing Page 1 of The Book of Abraham as a-- well-known scene from the Osiris mysteries, with Anubis, the jackal-headed god on the left, ministering to the dead Osiris on the bier. The penciled restoration (by Smith) is incorrect. Anubis should be jackal-headed. The left arm of Osiris is in reality lying at his side under him. The apparent upper hand is part of a second bird which is hovering over the erect phallus of Osiris (now broken away). The second bird is Isis and she is magically impregnated by the dead Osiris and then later gives birth to Horus who avenges his father and takes over his inheritance. [7] Klaus Baer basically repeated the same description in his translation of the papyri as the "Breathing Permit of Hor." He stated; The vignette of P. JS I [Joseph Smith papyri] is unusual, but parallels exist on the walls of the Ptolemaic temples of Egypt, the closest being the scenes in the Osiris chapels on the roof of the Temple of Dendera. He specifically described Facsimile 1: There are some problems about [Smith] restoring the missing parts of the body of Osiris. He was almost certainly represented as ithyphallic, ready to beget Horus, as in many of the scenes at Dendera. [8] In other words, the picture was a known pagan image. It meant something. It wasn't even remotely close to what Joseph Smith claimed in his Father Abraham fraud. All three Egyptologists confirmed that the Joseph Smith papyri dealt exclusively with pagan rituals, pagan gods and the Breathing Permit of Hor. Again, the Mormons are free to cling to the their unfounded delusions, which certainly fit the occult background of the founder of Mormonism! Dr. Edward H. Ashment, an LDS Egyptologist working with the translation department of the LDS Church, published one of the most revealing and honest "in-house" appraisals of this document. Throughout Ashment's appraisal of the facsimiles, he dealt with pagan rituals and pagan gods. At no time did he make a connection to Abraham, Abraham's God or Abraham's religion -- just paganism. While Ashment went far out of his way to soften any blows against Mormonism's founding prophet, no one can read his work and not see the totally illiterate definitions given the pagan works by Joseph Smith. [9] How can any intelligent Mormon hold these pornographic drawings in the Pearl of Great Price as the sacred Word of God? This is blasphemy and blindness at its highest. Previously, I described the Mormon scriptures as similar to a pickup truck filled with tangled fishing line. We are still standing in that pickup truck, up to our waists, almost incomprehensibly looking all about us at the unbelievable mess. Where do we go from here? We have hardly begun to clear up the twisted ends. Our God is not the author of such confusion. I have taken you far enough so that you may never doubt what Proverbs 30:6 means when it says, "Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." You have seen only the beginning of an endless series of lies built upon lies, so compounded that it is an impossible task to work your way back to truth. Footnotes: [1] Pearl of Great Price, page 60. [2] Orson Pratt, The Bible Alone an Insufficient Guide, Early LDS Pamphlet, pages 44-47. [3] Joseph F. Smith, The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 1938, page 327. [4] Doctrine and Covenants, Section 9: 8-9. [5] Ensign Magazine, October 1979, page 18. [6] Edvalson & Smith, Plain and Precious Parts, published by the Seventy's Mission Bookstore, Provo, Utah, 1977, pages 62-63. [7] Richard A. Parker, "The Joseph Smith Papyri, A Preliminary Report", Dialogue Journal, Summer 1968, page 86. [8] Klaus Baer, "The Breathing Permit of Hor", Dialogue Journal, Summer 1968, pages 109-110, 119 [9] Dr. Edward H. Ashment, "The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham", Sunstone, Volume 4, Numbers 5 and 6, pages 33-48. (c) copyright 2005, Ed Decker, all rights reserved Saints Alive In Jesus PO Box 1347 Issaquah WA 98027 ed@saintsalive.com

A Desperate Need For Correction Correction is one of the most conspicuously absent yet essential ministries in the church today. There are those who seek to avoid correction by hiding behind a misapplication of Christs words, Judge not, that ye be not judged (Matt. 7:1). It is conveniently forgotten that these words were spoken by the same One who warned the Jews to judge righteous judgment (John 7:24), told us to judge the fruit of prophets (Matt. 7:16), and promised His disciples that they would sit on thrones judging Israel (Matt. 19:28). From the context and remainder of the Scripture, it seems clear that Christ was warning us not to judge motives, because these are hidden from us. We must put the best reasonable interpretation upon what others say and do, not judging their hearts, which only God knows. However, we must judge doctrines and deeds. Paul exhorted Timothy, Reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. On what basis would one reprove or rebuke without having judged conduct or doctrine to be wrong? Such correction is a major theme throughout Scripture. Public teaching of false doctrine and publicly known sin must both be rebuked publicly. Paul reminded Timothy, Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear (1 Tim. 5:20). To the church at Corinth Paul wrote, Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the others judge (1 Cor. 14:29). Public teaching, whether in sermons or songs or the operation of the gifts of the Spirit, must be judged publicly as to biblical authenticity and accuracy. This should be done by the pastor and elders at the time the teaching occurs in the local fellowship, though this seldom happens. It is even more essential, however, that the teaching pouring forth from the powerfully influential mass mediaradio, television, magazines, and booksbe judged and, if found wanting, publicly corrected. That goes for this authors teachings and writings as well as those of all others. Paul considered it necessary and proper to name publicly Hymenaeus and Philetus because of their publicly taught false doctrine which had overthrow[n] the faith of some (2 Tim. 2:17-18). How much more essential would public correction be if a modern Hymenaeus and Philetus as a bestselling author or popular Christian television personality were leading millions astray! Instead of giving priority to protecting the reputations of those whose teachings may be publicly questioned, should we not rather be concerned for the thousands and perhaps millions of people whom they influence? Such an attitude should surely characterize every leader who is truly a man or woman of God. Those in control of most Christian television programming generally refuse to allow on their stations or networks Christian leaders who would question their views. Moreover, instead of judging within their own ranks, as Scripture says must be done, they decry correction as divisive and instead preach unity based not upon truth but upon the agreement not to disagree with one another. There is much talk of love, as though somehow it rules out correction. Yet the Bible teaches that love speaks the truth (Eph. 4:15), which may very well be negative. Real love corrects those who are loved: Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth (Heb. 12:6). Jesus Himself declared, As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten (Rev. 3:19). No wonder Solomon said, Rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee (Pro. 9:8)! A wise man desires and welcomes correction and loves the one who corrects, considering rebuke not an attack but a kindness. Inspired of the Holy Spirit, Solomon declared, Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way, and he that hateth reproof shall die (Pro. 15:10). Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee (Pro. 9:8). The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding but fools despise wisdom and instruction (Pro. 1:7). From Genesis to Revelation, a major theme of the Bible is correction. This is because God loves us and desires to lead us from death and judgment into the eternal and abundant life available in Christ. Referring to the Old Testament narrative accounts of the history of Israel, Paul declared, They are written for our admonition (1 Cor. 10:11). John the Baptist preached repentance and correction, and so did Christ. Much of what our Lord said was in the nature of reproof aimed directly at the religious leaders, but indicting also the typical Jew of His day. It is dishonest to focus only upon what one considers to be the positive aspects of Christs ministry and to fail to take to heart and apply in our lives and churches the correction He brought. Christ did not hesitate to call the religious leaders hypocrites and white sepulchers and blind leaders of the blind, and His own disciples fools and slow of heart. He had obviously never taken a Dale Carnegie course in How to Win Friends and Influence People, and did not consider being positive the only, or even the best, way to present the truth! The pastors, the evangelists, and radio and television preachers who fail to press upon themselves and their audiences the corrective teaching of Christ because they dont want to be negative are not only ignoring the example He set but are repeating the very sin for which He rebuked the religious leaders of His day. Much of the New Testament was written to correct error that had already crept into the church in the first century. The epistles of Paul, Peter, James, John, and Jude embody the major corrective doctrines of the church, which of course are still valid today. Leaders in the early church were expected to be involved in an ongoing corrective ministry. Unfortunately, many of todays most popular church leaders seem astonishingly unwilling either to judge the teaching of other leading Christians or to accept correction themselves. It is claimed by some that openly questioning or correcting the doctrinal teaching of church leaders is divisive, as though all division were bad and to be avoided. Yet Christ declared that He came to bring division (Luke 12:51), and it followed His ministry wherever He went (John 7:43; 9:16; 10:19; etc.). The division He brought was essential: it separated between truth and error, between light and darkness. Romans 16:17, for those who cry division in order to avoid correction, is usually quoted only in part: Mark them which cause divisionsas though division were the problem being dealt with. However, the verse actually says, Mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, making it clear that the issue is sound doctrine. It is those who refuse to have their false doctrines judged who are causing the wrong kind of division, not those who earnestly contend for the faith (Jude 3), as we are admonished to do. Nor dare we compromise truth for the sake of avoiding controversy. J.I. Packer reminds us, First, there is nothing unscriptural about controversy when the good of souls requires it, as it did in the controversies of (for instance) Christ and Paul, and when the good faith of ones opponents is respected. Second, the motive of those who make a virtue of avoiding controversy is likely to be nothing nobler than the self-protectiveness of folk who are conceited and thin-skinned and, perhaps, unaware of the value of truth. --Dave Hunt 1998

PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST Senate Floor Statement by U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla) March 4, 2002 I was interested the other day when I heard that the de facto ruler, Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Abdullah, made a statement which was received by many in this country as if it were a statement of fact, as if it were something new, a concept for peace in the Middle East that no one had ever heard of before. I was kind of shocked that it was so well received by many people who had been down this road before. I suggest to you that what Crown Prince Abdullah talked about a few days ago was not new at all. He talked about the fact that under the Abdullah plan, Arabs would normalize relations with Israel in exchange for the Jewish state surrendering the territory it received after the 1976 Six-Day War as if that were something new. He went on to talk about other land that had been acquired and had been taken by Israel. I remember so well on December 4 when we covered all of this and the fact that there isn't anything new about the prospect of giving up land that is rightfully Israel's land in order to have peace. When it gets right down to it, the land doesn't make that much difference because Yasser Arafat and others don't recognize Israel's right to any of the land. They do not recognize Israel's right to exist. I will discuss seven reasons, which I mentioned once before, why Israel is entitled to the land they have and that it should not be a part of the peace process. If this is something that Israel wants to do, it is their business to do it. But anyone who has tried to put the pressure on Israel to do this is wrong. We are going to be hit by skeptics who are going to say we will be attacked because of our support for Israel, and if we get out of the Middle East--that is us--all the problems will go away. That is just not true. If we withdraw, all of these problems will again come to our door. I have some observations to make about that. But I would like to reemphasize once again the seven reasons that Israel has the right to their land. The first reason is that Israel has the right to the land because of all of the archeological evidence. That is reason, No. 1. All the archeological evidence supports it. Every time there is a dig in Israel, it does nothing but support the fact that Israelis have had a presence there for 3,000 years. They have been there for a long time. The coins, the cities, the pottery, the culture--there are other people, groups that are there, but there is no mistaking the fact that Israelis have been present in that land for 3,000 years. It predates any claims that other peoples in the regions may have. The ancient Philistines are extinct. Many other ancient peoples are extinct. They do not have the unbroken line to this date that the Israelis have. Even the Egyptians of today are not racial Egyptians of 2,000, 3,000 years ago. They are primarily an Arab people. The land is called Egypt, but they are not the same racial and ethnic stock as the old Egyptians of the ancient world. The first Israelis are in fact descended from the original Israelites. The first proof, then, is the archeology. The second proof of Israel's right to the land is the historic right. History supports it totally and completely. We know there has been an Israel up until the time of the Roman Empire. The Romans conquered the land. Israel had no homeland, although Jews were allowed to live there. They were driven from the land in two dispersions: One was in 70 A,.D. and the other was in 135 A.D. But there was always a Jewish presence in the land. The Turks, who took over about 700 years ago and ruled the land up until about World War I, had control. Then the land was conquered by the British. The Turks entered World War I on the side of Germany. The British knew they had to do something to punish Turkey, and also to break up that empire that was going to be a part of the whole effort of Germany in World War I. So the British sent troops against the Turks in the Holy Land. One of the generals who was leading the British armies was a man named Allenby. Allenby was a Bible-believing Christian. He carried a Bible with him everywhere he went and he knew the significance of Jerusalem. The night before the attack against Jerusalem to drive out the Turks, Allenby prayed that God would allow him to capture the city without doing damage to the holy places. That day, Allenby sent World War I biplanes over the city of Jerusalem to do a reconnaissance mission. You have to understand that the Turks had at that time never seen an airplane. So there they were, flying around. They looked in the sky and saw these fascinating inventions and did not know what they were, and they were terrified by them. Then they were told they were going to be opposed by a man named Allenby the next day, which means, in their language, ``man sent from God'' or ``prophet from God.'' They dared not fight against a prophet from God, so the next morning, when Allenby went to take Jerusalem, he went in and captured it without firing a single shot. The British Government was grateful to Jewish people around the world, particularly to one Jewish chemist who helped them manufacture niter. Niter is an ingredient that was used in nitroglycerin which was sent over from the New World. But they did not have a way of getting it to England. The German U-boats were shooting on the boats, so most of the niter they were trying to import to make nitroglycerin was at the bottom of the ocean. But a man named Weitzman, a Jewish chemist, discovered a way to make it from materials that existed in England. As a result, they were able to continue that supply. The British at that time said they were going to give the Jewish people a homeland. That is all a part of history. It is all written down in history. They were gratified that the Jewish people, the bankers, came through and helped finance the war. The homeland that Britain said it would set aside consisted of all of what is now Israel and all of what was then the nation of Jordan--the whole thing. That was what Britain promised to give the Jews in 1917. In the beginning, there was some Arab support for this action. There was not a huge Arab population in the land at that time, and there is a reason for that. The land was not able to sustain a large population of people. It just did not have the development it needed to handle those people, and the land was not really wanted by anybody. Nobody really wanted this land. It was considered to be worthless land. I want the Presiding Officer to hear what Mark Twain said. And, of course, you may have read ``Huckleberry Finn'' and ``Tom Sawyer.'' Mark Twain--Samuel Clemens--took a tour of Palestine in 1867. This is how he described that land. We are talking about Israel now. He said: A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds. A silent, mournful expanse. We never saw a human being on the whole route. There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country. Where was this great Palestinian nation? It did not exist. It was not there. Palestinians were not there. Palestine was a region named by the Romans, but at that time it was under the control of Turkey, and there was no large mass of people there because the land would not support them. This is the report that the Palestinian Royal Commission, created by the British, made. It quotes an account of the conditions on the coastal plain along the Mediterranean Sea in 1913. This is the Palestinian Royal Commission. They said: The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track, suitable for transport by camels or carts. No orange groves, orchards or vineyards were to be seen until one reached the Yavnev village. Houses were mud. Schools did not exist. The western part toward the sea was almost a desert. The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many villages were deserted by their inhabitants. That was 1913. The French author Voltaire described Palestine as ``a hopeless, dreary place.'' In short, under the Turks the land suffered from neglect and low population. That is a historic fact. The nation became populated by both Jews and Arabs because the land came to prosper when Jews came back and began to reclaim it. Historically, they began to reclaim it. If there had never been any archaeological evidence to support the rights of the Israelis to the territory, it is also important to recognize that other nations in the area have no longstanding claim to the country either. Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941; the borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks. Historically, Israel gained its independence in 1948. The third reason that land belongs to Israel is the practical value of the Israelis being there. Israel today is a modern marvel of agriculture. Israel is able to bring more food out of a desert environment than any other country in the world. The Arab nations ought to make Israel their friend and import technology from Israel that would allow all the Middle East, not just Israel, to become an exporter of food. Israel has unarguable success in its agriculture. The fourth reason I believe Israel has the right to the land is on the grounds of humanitarian concern. You see, there were 6 million Jews slaughtered in Europe in World War II. The persecution against the Jews had been very strong in Russia since the advent of communism. It was against them even before then under the Czars. These people have a right to their homeland. If we are not going to allow them a homeland in the Middle East, then where? What other nation on Earth is going to cede territory, is going to give up land? They are not asking for a great deal. The whole nation of Israel would fit into my home State of Oklahoma seven times. It would fit into the Presiding Officer's State of Georgia seven times. They are not asking for a great deal. The whole nation of Israel is very small. It is a nation that, up until the time that claims started coming in, was not desired by anybody. The fifth reason Israel ought to have their land is that she is a strategic ally of the United States. Whether we realize it or not, Israel is a detriment, an impediment, to certain groups hostile to democracies and hostile to what we believe in, hostile to that which makes us the greatest nation in the history of the world. They have kept them from taking complete control of the Middle East. If it were not for Israel, they would overrun the region. They are our strategic ally. It is good to know we have a friend in the Middle East on whom we can count. They vote with us in the United Nations more than England, more than Canada, more than France, more than Germany--more than any other country in the world. The sixth reason is that Israel is a roadblock to terrorism. The war we are now facing is not against a sovereign nation; it is against a group of terrorists who are very fluid, moving from one country to another. They are almost invisible. That is whom we are fighting against today. We need every ally we can get. If we do not stop terrorism in the Middle East, it will be on our shores. We have said this again and again and again, and it is true. One of the reasons I believe the spiritual door was opened for an attack against the United States of America is that the policy of our Government has been to ask the Israelis, and demand it with pressure, not to retaliate in a significant way against the terrorist strikes that have been launched against them. Since its independence in 1948, Israel has fought four wars: The war in 1948 and 1949--that was the war for independence--the war in 1956, the Sinai campaign; the Six-Day War in 1967; and in 1973, the Yom Kippur War, the holiest day of the year, and that was with Egypt and Syria. You have to understand that in all four cases, Israel was attacked. They were not the aggressor. Some people may argue that this was not true because they went in first in 1956, but they knew at that time that Egypt was building a huge military to become the aggressor. Israel, in fact, was not the aggressor and has not been the aggressor in any of the four wars. Also, they won all four wars against impossible odds. They are great warriors. They consider a level playing field being outnumbered 2 to 1. There were 39 Scud missiles that landed on Israeli soil during the gulf war. Our President asked Israel not to respond. In order to have the Arab nations on board, we asked Israel not to participate in the war. They showed tremendous restraint and did not. Now we have asked them to stand back and not do anything over these last several attacks. We have criticized them. We have criticized them in our media. Local people in television and radio often criticize Israel, not knowing the true facts. We need to be informed. I was so thrilled when I heard a reporter pose a question to our Secretary of State, Colin Powell. He said: Mr. Powell, the United States has advocated a policy of restraint in the Middle East. We have discouraged Israel from retaliation again and again and again because we've said it leads to continued escalation--that it escalates the violence. Are we going to follow that preaching ourselves? Mr. Powell indicated we would strike back. In other words, we can tell Israel not to do it, but when it hits us, we are going to do something. But all that changed in December when the Israelis went into the Gaza with gunships and into the West Bank with F-16s. With the exception of last May, the Israelis had not used F-16s since the 1967 6-Day War. And I am so proud of them because we have to stop terrorism. It is not going to go away. If Israel were driven into the sea tomorrow, if every Jew in the Middle East were killed, terrorism would not end. You know that in your heart. Terrorism would continue. It is not just a matter of Israel in the Middle East. It is the heart of the very people who are perpetrating this stuff. Should they be successful in overrunning Israel--which they won't be--but should they be, it would not be enough. They will never be satisfied. No. 7, I believe very strongly that we ought to support Israel; that it has a right to the land. This is the most important reason: Because God said so. As I said a minute ago, look it up in the book of Genesis. It is right up there on the desk. In Genesis 13:14-17, the Bible says: The Lord said to Abram, ``Lift up now your eyes, and look from the place where you are northward, and southward, and eastward and westward: for all the land which you see, to you will I give it, and to your seed forever. ..... Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it to thee.'' That is God talking. The Bible says that Abram removed his tent and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar before the Lord. Hebron is in the West Bank. It is at this place where God appeared to Abram and said, ``I am giving you this land,''--the West Bank. This is not a political battle at all. It is a contest over whether or not the word of God is true. The seven reasons, I am convinced, clearly establish that Israel has a right to the land. Eight years ago on the lawn of the White House, Yitzhak Rabin shook hands with PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. It was a historic occasion. It was a tragic occasion. At that time, the official policy of the Government of Israel began to be, ``Let us appease the terrorists. Let us begin to trade the land for peace.'' This process continued unabated up until last year. Here in our own Nation, at Camp David, in the summer of 2000, then Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Barak offered the most generous concessions to Yasser Arafat that had ever been laid on the table. He offered him more than 90 percent of all the West Bank territory, sovereign control of it. There were some parts he did not want to offer, but in exchange for that he said he would give up land in Israel proper that the PLO had not even asked for. And he also did the unthinkable. He even spoke of dividing Jerusalem and allowing the Palestinians to have their capital there in the East. Yasser Arafat stormed out of the meeting. Why did he storm out of the meeting? Everything he had said he wanted was offered there. It was put into his hands. Why did he storm out of the meeting? A couple of months later, there began to be riots, terrorism. The riots began when now Prime Minister Ariel Sharon went to the Temple Mount. And this was used as the thing that lit the fire and that caused the explosion. Did you know that Sharon did not go unannounced and that he contacted the Islamic authorities before he went and secured their permission and had permission to be there? It was no surprise. The response was very carefully calculated. They knew the world would not pay attention to the details. They would portray this in the Arab world as an attack upon the holy mosque. They would portray it as an attack upon that mosque and use it as an excuse to riot. Over the last 8 years, during this time of the peace process, where the Israeli public has pressured its leaders to give up land for peace because they are tired of fighting, there has been increased terror. In fact, it has been greater in the last 8 years than any other time in Israel's history. Showing restraint and giving in has not produced any kind of peace. It is so much so that today the leftist peace movement in Israel does not exist because the people feel they were deceived. They did offer a hand of peace, and it was not taken. That is why the politics of Israel have changed drastically over the past 12 months. The Israelis have come to see that, ``No matter what we do, these people do not want to deal with us. ..... They want to destroy us.'' That is why even yet today the stationery of the PLO still has upon it the map of the entire state of Israel, not just the tiny little part they call the West Bank that they want. They want it all. We have to get out of this mind set that somehow you can buy peace in the Middle East by giving little plots of land. It has not worked before when it has been offered. These seven reasons show why Israel is entitled to that land. U.S. Senator James M. Inhofe (R - Oklahoma) Read Senator Inhofe's other Floor Statement AN ABSOLUTE VICTORY

Calvary Chapel's Position Paper There has been talk on this board about whether or not certain Calvary Chapels should be able to hold the Calvary Chapel title. Examples included the church pastured by Chuck Smith Junior since his evident stand on Homosexuality. Emergent Church movements have been spreading world wide with ferocity, and in some cases, the idealism of the Emergent Church has seeped into Calvary Chapel. This has been an issue of great alarm and prayer for a vast number of Calvary Chapels still holding fast to the philosophy of ministry set forth in the beginning of the Calvary Chapel movement. This philosophy is what makes Calvary Chapel distinctive among movements, a distinction of presenting the whole truth of God's Word without compromise. Very recently, a statement paper was produced by CCOF following the most recent Pastors conference. I have copied this and will paste it here for all to read. I am personally enthralled with the stand that Calvary Chapel has taken, and I hope that those holding the Calvary Chapel title while introducing unbiblical doctrine and philosophy into the church will politely drop the title and allow Calvary Chapel to remain the philosophy and distinctive that it has always been. _____________________________________ Parson to Parson The time has come for us to restate the position of Calvary Chapel on a number of issues. We do this because Calvary Chapel has become known to represent a fairly definable entity in its approach to sound biblical teaching and approach to biblical doctrine. It's not that we believe we have the "best" or "only" way; it's simply the way we approach God's word within Calvary Chapel. And likewise, if a different approach is to be taken, then all we ask is that the name Calvary Chapel not be attached to it. First of all, Calvary Chapel is not a denomination; but rather a movement. We often receive inquiries as to whether or not Calvary Chapel some kind of relationship with a national or international group. We answer such inquiries with our stated position that each church is independent and has established its own set of bylaws. We seek to identify with the true body of Christ in many denominations. We are ministers who hold basic common beliefs, and maintain them within a varied range of practices. We believe that every minister is responsible to Jesus as the chief Shepherd, and will ultimately answer to Him for his ministry and not to us. We love and respect each other and rejoice with those that rejoice, and weep with those who weep. As with the Apostle Paul, we do not feel that we have apprehended that for which we were apprehended, neither are we perfect, but this is what we seek to do. Forgetting those things which are behind and reaching for those things that are before, we press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Secondly, we hold to the supremacy of Jesus as the head of the body, His church. We look to the Holy Spirit to guide and direct each decision in the building up of the body of Christ. Having begun in the Spirit, we do not seek to be made perfect in the flesh, but seek to continue to be led by the Spirit. We believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God and is infallible and the final authority for our faith and practice. We believe that God established the model for the church in the book of Acts, and seek to follow that model as much as is possible. We feel that church history is for the most part a sad commentary of the failure of men who sought by human genius and resources to perfect that which was begun in the Spirit. The messages of Jesus to the churches in Revelation 2 and 3 show how early in the history of the church problems developed for which they need to repent. So much for church history, but something that we must not simply disregard. We must realize that it shows us so clearly how the enemy has, is, and will continue the attacks upon the church and upon our individual ministries. How our heart grieves for the many who have started the race but have failed to complete it. In the book of Acts we see that the activities of the church were described as: 1. Continuing steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine, which we understand to be a systematic teaching of the Bible. 2. Fellowship, which we understand to be a loving and caring relationship with each other. As John wrote, "That which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you, that you may have fellowship with us and truly our fellowship is with the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ." 3. The breaking of bread. This to us is a tangible representation of the unity that we share in Christ for we understand that the bread speaks to us of the body of Christ which was broken for us, and as we all eat the bread and it is assimilated into our bodies, we are spiritually united through Jesus with each other; in the fact that the bread that is nourishing me and is becoming a part of me, is also nourishing you and becoming a part of you. Thus, we are united together in Christ. He dwells in me; He dwells in you. 4. Prayer. Through prayer we unite our hearts with the heart of God that we might see His will accomplished in the church and throughout the world. We believe that when the church will make these four things the major activities of the church, that happened in the book of Acts, the Lord will add daily to the church such as should be saved. Thus, we do not look to the myriad of church growth programs that are being promoted for the building of the church but to Jesus Himself, who said that He would build His church. We do watch as the many programs come and go in which man by his wisdom tries to do the work of God more effectively, but rather than entering into the programs of man, seek to continue to be led by the Spirit of God. We realize that the Scriptures warn us of aberrant doctrines that would come into the church, even going so far as to deny our Lord Jesus. Second Peter chapter 2, verse 1 tells us, "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privately shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction." Likewise in Jude, chapter 1, verse 4 we read, "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." We see a tendency toward this in what is commonly called the "Emergent Church" teachings. Some of the concerns that we have are with the speculations and positions that they are suggesting: 1. That Jesus is not the only way by which one might be saved. It seems that they are postulating a broader gate and a broader path to heaven, a sort of "all roads lead to heaven." That good people by every religious persuasion may be received into heaven. We feel that this goes against the plain teaching of the Scriptures and negates the need of the cross for the expiation of our sins. Paul wrote of those men in his letter to the Philippians and called them enemies of the cross of Christ. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life, no man can come to the Father but by Me." This is not relative truth, but absolute truth. 2. The soft peddling of hell as the destiny for those who reject the salvation offered through Jesus Christ. There are suggestions of universalism in their teaching, that all will ultimately be saved. 3. We have difficulty in their touchy-feely relating to God. Where the experience of certain feelings become the criteria for truth rather than the word of God. 4. We have great problems with the use of icons to give them a sense of God or the presence of God. If they want to have a tie with the historicity of the church, why not go back to the church in Acts, which seems to be devoid of incense, candles, robes etc., but was filled with the Spirit. 5. We do not believe that we should seek to make sinners feel safe and comfortable in church. Is it right for me to speak comfortable words to a man who is going to hell unless he turns from his sin? If I fail to warn him of the consequences of his sin, and he dies and goes to hell, will God require his blood at my hand? When is godly sorrow and conviction of sin such a wrong thing? 6. Should we seek to condone what God has condemned, such as the homosexual lifestyle? Should we tell them that their problem is a genetic disorder rather than a blatant sin that God condemns over and over in the Bible? How long before they tell us that they have discovered that rapists, pedophiles, and adulterers have a genetic disorder and need to be understood rather than condemned? 7. Should we look to Eastern religions with their practices of meditation through Yoga and special breathing techniques or repeating a mantra to hear God speak to us? If this is needed to enhance our communication with God, why do you suppose that God did not give us implicit instructions in the Scriptures to give us methods to hear His voice? Is it the position of my body or my heart that helps me to communicate with Him? 8. The great confusion that exists in the divergent positions of the Emergent Church results from their challenging the final authority of the Scriptures. When you no longer have a final authority, then everyone's ideas become as valid as the next person's, and it cannot help but end in total confusion and contradictions. There are those who say that Emergent movement has some good points, but so does a porcupine. You are better off if you don't get too close! So, let us not turn to our own understanding, but rather return to our own first love; and teach that the Bible is indeed the true word of God; and teach it in its entirety; nothing less and nothing more.

The Roman Catholic Church The Roman Catholic Church The Roman Catholic Church has always been identified with Christianity because it upholds four fundamentals of the Christian faith: -The Deity of Christ, -The Triune God, -The virgin birth, and -The bodily resurrection and return of Christ to the earth. However, Catholic teaching opposes the doctrine that is most essential to the Christian faith- the doctrine of justification by faith alone. The Vatican not only denies this doctrine, but also condemns anyone who believes it. Other Catholic doctrines deny that Christs work of redemption is finished and that His atonement is sufficient. For this reason Roman Catholicism must be identified as an apostate church and Catholics need to be evangelized. In spite of this there are some Catholics who do not adhere to all the teachings of their church and have had a genuine born-again experience. Still, with over one billion Catholics in the world and a growing ecumenical movement to unite all religions under the power and influence of the pope, the truth about Roman Catholicism must be told. THE MOTIVATION OF CATHOLICS It is important to realize that most of the clergy and lay people that teach Roman Catholic doctrine are not deceiving people with malicious intent. They are simply passing on what has been taught to them, believing that it is the truth. Many Catholics have a zeal for God but it is not based on biblical knowledge. Prayer, love, compassion, and understanding are needed along with the power of the Word of God to penetrate their hearts. Patience is needed to untangle Roman Catholics from the dogmatic web in which they are held captive (Colossians 2:8). CONTRASTING the BIBLE and ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION (Scripture quotations from The New American Bible. Catholic Bible Publishers 1978/1979 edition. RCC quotations from Catechism of the Catholic Church. Ignatius Press, 1994. Catechism paragraph numbers are in parenthesis) The Doctrine of Jesus: the Savior- BIBLE: He saved us, not because of any righteous deeds we had done, but because of His mercy (Titus 3:5). RCC: teaches that by His death and resurrection, Jesus Christ has opened heaven to us (1026). Each person attains His own salvation by grace and good works (1477). the sinless Redeemer- BIBLE: For you know it was not with perishable things that you are redeemed but with the precious blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18,19). RCC: teaches that Mary is the sinless co-Redeemer. Without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and work of her son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with Him being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race (494). our Advocate and only Mediator- BIBLE: God is one, one also is the mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5, 1 John 2:1). RCC: teaches that Mary did not lay aside [her] saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. She is Advocateand Mediatrix (969). expiates our sin- BIBLE: Through His blood, God made Him the means of expiation for all who believe (Romans 3:25). RCC: teaches that sins are expiated in purgatory through a cleansing fire and that we must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace (1030,31; 1472-75). finished the work of redemption- BIBLE: By one offering He has forever perfected those who are being sanctified (Hebrews 10:14). Unlike the other high priests, He does not need to offer daily sacrifices (Hebrews 7:27,28). RCC: denies it is finished. The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice the same Christ who offered Himself once in a bloody manner on the alter of the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner (1367). The sacrifice is offered in reparation for the sins of the living and the dead (1414). His life, death and resurrection provided the only way to be saved- BIBLE: There is no salvation in anyone else, for there is no other name in the whole world given to men by which we are to be saved (Acts 4:12). RCC: denies this by claiming the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation (846) and claiming the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims (841). His shed blood is the only remission for sins- BIBLE: Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness (Hebrews 9:22). Since these [sins] have been forgiven, there is no further offering for sin (Hebrews 10:18). RCC: teaches an indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which may be applied to the living or the dead (1471). cleanses us from sin- BIBLE: When He [Jesus] had cleansed us from our sins, He took His seat at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven (Hebrews 1:3). Christ presents you to God holy, free of reproach and blame (Colossians 1:22). RCC: teaches that all who die in Gods grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven (1030). Head of the church- BIBLE: He has put all things under Christs feet and made Him, thus exalted, head of the church (Ephesians 1:22,23). RCC: teaches that the Pope, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered (882). He exercises infallibility when he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals (891). the soon-coming King- BIBLE: This same Jesus, who has been taken away from you into heaven will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven (Acts 1:11). RCC: teaches that Jesus returns daily to the alters of Catholic churches to be worshipped: The body and blood soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ is truly, really and substantially contained in the Eucharist (1374-78). The Doctrine of Salvation: Salvation is proclaimed in the gospel- BIBLE: It is the power of God leading everyone who believes in it to salvation (Romans 1:16). It is the good news of Jesus Christ, His life, death and resurrection according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). If anyone preaches a gospel to you other than the one you received, let a curse be upon him (Galatians 1:9). RCC: preaches a different gospel by demanding additional requirements for salvation including: the sacraments (1129), meritorious masses (1405), church membership (846), purgatory (1030), indulgences (1498), and baptism (1256). Salvation is of God, not of man- BIBLE: When you heard the glad tidings of salvation, the word of truth, and believed in it, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13). Those who believe in His name were begotten not by mans willing it, but by God (John 1:13). RCC: teaches Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration without which no one can enter the kingdom of God (1213, 1215). Salvation is through faith, not works- BIBLE: Salvation is yours through faith. This is not of your own doing, it is Gods gift, neither is it a reward for anything you have accomplished, so let no one pride himself on it (Ephesians 2:8,9). Yet in no way can a man redeem himself, or pay his own ransom to God. Too high is the price to redeem ones life; he would never have enough (Psalm 47:7,8). RCC: teaches salvation through faith plus works. People can obtain their own salvation and at the same time cooperate in saving their brothers through good works and indulgences (1477, 1479). Salvation is by grace, not merit- BIBLE: All men are now undeservedly justified by the gift of God (Romans 3:24). It is not because of their works, otherwise grace would not be grace (Romans 11:6). RCC: denies justifying grace is undeserved: We can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life (2027). Salvation rejected is Hell- BIBLE: Those who do not acknowledge God nor heed the good news of our Lord Jesus will suffer the penalty of eternal ruin (2 Thessalonians 1:8,9). RCC: teaches that Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer eternal fire (1035). To sum up the preceding- The Gospel of Grace Reveals: Jesus Christ, His life, death and resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1-4). Salvation is Only through Christ (Acts 4:12) A gift of Gods grace (Eph. 2:8,9) By faith alone (Eph. 2:8,9) Attained by Christ (Rom. 5:9) At the moment a sinner believes the gospel (Eph. 1:13,14) Secured by God (John 10:27-30) Sins are expiated by Christs blood (Rom. 3:25) Salvation glorifies God alone (Eph. 1) The work of salvation is finished (John 19:30) The Gospel of Roman Catholicism Reveals: A religious system of sacraments, indulgences, purgatory, and prayers for the dead (1032; 1471-79, 1498) Salvation is Through the Roman Catholic Church (846) Merited by doing good works (1815, 1821, 2010, 2027) By faith plus the law, sacraments, and good works (1129, 1131) Attained by man (2010, 2027) A process from baptism through purgatory (161-2, 1254-55) Never assured in this life (1036, 2005) Sins are expiated by suffering in purgatory (1030-31) Mary and all the saints are also glorified (1476-77) This work continues with daily sacrifices (611, 1405) Preparing Catholics for Eternity: Roman Catholics can prepare themselves for eternity only by obeying the first command of the Lord Jesus Christ. He called everyone to repent and believe the Gospel (Mark 1:15). To repent is to forsake all efforts to save oneself through sacraments, good works, indulgences, purgatory, obeying the law or participating in the sacrifice of the Mass. To believe the Gospel is to trust the Lord Jesus Christ alone- His death for the forgiveness of the complete punishment for sins and His resurrection for justification and a right standing before God (Col. 2:13-14; Rom. 4:25). It is only by grace- Gods unmerited undeserved favor- that sinners can receive the gift of eternal life. Once received it can never be lost or revoked (Rom. 11:29). For further questions message or comment me. I would be happy to help.

Refuting The Da Vinci Code Fable Dr. Stan Fleming Gate Breakers Ministries Gatebreakers@hotmail.com The DaVinci Code by author Dan Brown is a best-selling novel with movie following in May, 2006. The plot undermines the essential beliefs about the origins of Christianity. Though it poses as a fictional novel, it begins with a Fact page: "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate." Yet, many of the descriptions are inaccurate, misleading, and fabrications. Below is a partial list of errors the book purports along with brief refutations. 1. The Louvre Pyramid has 666 window panes corresponding with the number of Satan (p.21). Not true. There are 673 and have nothing to do with Satan.1 2. The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1950's, tell the true Grail story, speak of Christ's ministry in human terms, and survived Emperor Constantine's plot to destroy them (p.234). They were actually discovered in the 1940's, say nothing about the Grail story, confirm the authenticity of the Old Testament, and had nothing to do with Emperor Constantine. 3. The Christian story of the Magi bringing baby Jesus gifts was borrowed from a Hindu story about Krishna (p.232). Ancient Hinduism has no such story. 4. The scientist Robert Boyle was a Grand Master of the Priory of Sion, thus against formal and historical Christianity (p.326). Rather, he was a devoted Christian. For instance he wrote: "The Christian Religion brings mankind diverse positive Benefits, such as are, more cleare and extensive knowledg of God, and divine things; the Remission of Sins; the Favour of God; severall graces and vertues suitable to mens respective needs and conditions; and above all, a happy Immortality in the Life to come."2 (Old English) 5. Leonardo DaVinci was a flamboyant homosexual (p.45). According to most of his biographers, he was falsely accused of this. DaVinci was celibate, non-sexual. None of his massive writings indicate any sexual activity. He wrote, "Intellectual passion drives out sensuality."3 6. The Last Supper painting by Leonardo DaVinci supplies hidden codes and Mary Magdalene sits next to Jesus (p.243). The painting is a scene from John 13:21-24. DaVinci did not include Mary Magdalene. John is youthful looking because he was the youngest. Florentine artists of DaVinci's period often characterized young, unmarried men with feminine facial features to contrast with older, breaded men with rougher features. DaVinci's painting of John the Baptist is similar. 7. Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdalene is of historical record (p.244), and they had a daughter named Sarah whom Mary bore in France (p.255). They were not married and there is no such historical record. The strong ancient tradition regarding Mary Magdalene is that after Jesus' death and resurrection she went to Italy. There she witnessed to Tiberius about the resurrection of Christ and preached the gospel throughout Italy. The legend of her having a child in France did not emerge until the ninth century. Tradition says Lazarus and his sisters Martha and Mary went to France. 8. The Merovingian bloodline is from Christ and there are descendents today named Plantard and Saint-Clair. The ancient secret society of the Priory of Sion holds this knowledge (pp.257, 442). According to the early Church fathers (Clement, Tertullian, Athenagoras, Methodius and numerous others) Jesus was a virgin all of His life, never married, and had no offspring. The ancient Priory of Sion was not secret and rather unremarkable.4 9. 80 gospels were considered for the New Testament. Constantine chose the four current Gospels in 325 AD. The others were outlawed by him (pp.231, 234). Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were perceived as authentic from the beginning. They are referred to early on by Clement of Rome (96 AD); Polycarp (160 AD); Justin Martyr (160 AD), etc. Tatian's Diatessaron harmonized the four prior to 170 AD.. Constantine did not choose them and His Edict of Milan in 313 gave freedom of religion. 10. Constantine never converted to Christianity. He plotted with early Church Fathers in 325 to control the empire. He was forced into baptism near the time of his death (pp.231-235). Constantine converted in 312 when he saw a vision in the sky during a battle campaign. Only 10 percent of the population was Christian in 325 so there was no political advantage. He was baptized near death as was the custom in those days in that part of the empire. 11. Thousands of ancient documents chronicled Jesus life as merely a moral man (p.234). Where's the proof of Brown's claim. Even many of the erroneous Gnostic apocryphal books revere Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior (i.e. Gospel of Thomas, The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles, The Dialogue of the Savior). 12. Before the Council of Nicaea in 325 nobody thought Jesus was God (p.233). From the beginning, Christians understood that Jesus was the Son of God, thus God, "Immanuel – God with us" (Matthew 1:23). Clement, Aristides, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Irenaeus, etc. all wrote in terms of Jesus being divine. 13. Jesus never claimed to be God (p.232). False, here is Matthew 26:63-64 in which the high priest was interrogating Jesus: "And the high priest answered and said to Him, 'I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!' Jesus said to him, 'It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.'" Jesus also said, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die." (John 11:25-26). 14. Thousands of documents and tens of thousands of pages of Sangreal documents from the first few centuries chronicle Jesus life as a mortal man and reveal His bloodline (pp.234, 256).This is a complete fabrication. Dan Brown, show us the proof? 15. Jesus' death and resurrection were from a myth and his followers knew he was only a mortal man (pp.232-233). Not true. Here are two of his followers: Tertullian (207 AD): Against Marcion "God lived with men as man that man might be taught to live the divine life; God lived on man's level, that man might be able to live on God's level: God was found weak, that man might become most great. If you disdain a God like this, I doubt if you can wholeheartedly believe in a God who was crucified."5 Clement (96 AD): 1st Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians "Think, my dear friends, how the Lord offers proof after proof that there is going to be a resurrection, of which He has made Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead."6 1 Glass on Web: www.glassonweb.com/articles/article/94/ 2 Robert Boyle, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/boyle/ 3 http://www.adherents.com/people/pd/Leonardo_DaVinci.htm 4 http://priory-of-sion.com 5 Henry Bettenson, The Early Christian Fathers (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1956) 6 Clement, chapter 24, as recorded in Betty Radice, 33

The False Prophecies of Joseph Smith The very existence of Mormonism hinges on its central tenet that it was founded by Joseph Smith, who claimed that he was called of God to re-establish Christ's true Church on the earth. In the last chapter you saw that this could not possibly be true. However, Mormons revere Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God and the holy man upon whom God himself laid the authority to oversee God's people and usher in the last dispensation of time. If Smith's claims of having seen God and Christ and to have received his prophet-hood and authority from them really were true, two very important things would follow. First, the Christian world would have to recognize that the "New Testament" era was over and a new era had begun. To understand this concept one needs to understand the place of the "office" of prophet. The calling of the Old Testament prophet was "one to whom and through whom God spoke. Their messages were very largely the proclamation of the Divine purposes of salvation and glory to be accomplished in the future." [1] The prophets and their messages were the pointers to Jesus! In Luke 16:16, the Lord clearly stated, "The Law and the Prophets were until John: Since that time the Kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it." The time for declaring the forthcoming of the Kingdom was over; the kingdom itself was now to be declared by the Son himself! Hebrews 1: 1-2 makes it even clearer. "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds." This was said after Christ had risen and the church was in operation. No prophet was appointed to be the head of the church and spokesman for God. Christ had fulfilled that empty office in His own right when he said, "It is finished." Yet as we read in 1 Corinthians, the gift of prophecy was active in the body of the Church.... not something found only in the headship of the church (see 1 Corinthians 14). So, if Joseph Smith was the spokesman through whom God would now issue His orders, then the established order of New Testament government would have to be ended, and the church would step into a new covenant that was not foretold by Christ, by whom God was to speak to us in New Testament times. Second, If Smith's claims to have restored Christ's true church on earth were true, then we could step back from the responsibility "every man presseth into it" and simply listen to the instruction and counsel of the Mormon prophet and trust and obey the words from his mouth as though they came directly from God. However, before we take that step of obedience, it would be wise for us to check the Biblical tests of a prophet, as given in the Bible and put this new era prophet to the same simple tests by which every Old Testament prophet was judged. We need to do that with Joseph Smith. After all, Christ fulfilled over 300 exact prophecies in His birth, life, death and resurrection. Some of these prophecies were foretold over 900 years before His birth. Prophets can be checked out for accuracy. One would think that any member of a "restoration" church which bases its very existence on its own personal latter-day prophet would be able to give any willing listener a long litany of "true prophecies." At least the earnest seeker would expect to find dusty volumes of such prophecies abounding in church libraries throughout the new kingdom. Yet in Mormonism, they don't exist in mind or matter. While some people who claim both scholarship and membership have written books on the subject, the church does not receive them in any official capacity, especially since much of the work is contrived. If you doubt that the true Mormon avoids such discovery, just ask a Mormon to extemporaneously recite 5 or 6 favorite Joseph Smith prophecies. You will rarely get past one or two of the most commonly used "faith promoting" stories that are hardly kingdom shaking. One such story that really did come true (if Joseph actually gave it) was a "word" given to Orrin "Porter" Rockwell, Joseph Smith's body guard and Church assassin for apostates of the early Mormon Church. Smith promised Rockwell a quiet death in bed if he never cut his hair. Porter Rockwell killed a lot of men through the years, never cut his hair and we are told he died in bed. It is amazing that when the LDS missionaries share the joys of having a church led by a living prophet and are asked to produce a list of the prophecies of their living prophet or any of their deceased prophets, including Joseph Smith, they cannot produce any such list. You would expect that any reasonable, thinking person would flee from such foolishness. Yet millions of Mormons testify that they "know" by personal revelation, that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God. In actuality, Joseph Smith meets the test of Scripture as one of the foretold false prophets who would come in the last days. A number of the prophecies of Joseph Smith, some of which were buried deep inside the LDS closet, certainly failed to come to pass. Judge them for yourself. The False Prophecies of Joseph Smith Remember, as you read the following list, that according to Deuteronomy 18:20-22, it only takes one false prophecy to make a prophet false, just as it only takes one murder to make a person a murderer. As you read the many false prophecies of Joseph Smith, keep this Biblical teaching in mind. 1) The Abridgment of D&C 137 Although there are actually dozens of false prophecies I could begin with, I chose one which has come to newfound prominence in recent years. In 1976, Section 137th of Doctrine & Covenants was submitted to the General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for a vote to be "sustained" as scripture. It is a narrative of a vision supposedly seen by Joseph Smith in Kirtland, Ohio, in 1836. What the members who voted on this new addition to scripture were not told by "The Brethren," is that whole paragraphs (216 words) of the actual revelation as recorded in the History of the Church had been conveniently left out of the version to be included in the D&C. The reason for these omissions was that four obviously false prophecies were contained in the part of the revelation that was censored out. These were prophecies so obviously false that even the average Mormon reader would pick them up. Therefore they went down the "black hole" of Mormon history. What exactly did these missing parts contain? If you go to the official History of the Church published by the church's own publishing company, you will easily be able to find the missing prophecies. [2] Here is what is not in the new D&C 137: [Joseph Smith:] "....I saw the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb, who are now upon the earth, who hold the keys of this last ministry, in foreign lands, standing together in a circle, much fatigued, with their clothes tattered and their feet swollen, with their eyes cast downward, and Jesus standing in their midst, and they did not behold him. The Saviour looked upon them and wept. I also beheldElder M'Lellin in the south, standing upon a hill, surrounded by a vast multitude, preaching to them, and a lame man standing before him supported by his crutches; he threw them down at his word and leaped as a hart, by the mighty power of God. Also, I saw Elder Brigham Young standing in a strange land, in the far south and west, in a desert place, upon a rock in the midst of a bout a dozen men of color, who appeared hostile. He was preaching to them in their own tongue, and the angel of God standing above his head with a drawn sword in his hand, protecting him, but he did not see it. And I finally saw the Twelve in the celestial kingdom of God. I also beheld the redemption of Zion and many things which the tongue of man cannot describe in full......." [all emphasis added]. Now, if this prophecy were true, it would have been a truly inspiring and wonderful declaration! Unfortunately, for the Mormon faithful, a short look at these missing parts reveals the false prophecies contained therein. The most striking of these is that Smith claimed to see his original "Twelve apostles" all in the celestial kingdom. [3] This is difficult to imagine, since there was already division between Smith and the majority of the apostles, beginning with discord in Kirtland, Ohio. The first portion of the missing parts shows his less than subtle rebuke of their resistance to his will. "...fatigued....tattered...eyes cast downward....The Saviour looked upon them and wept." Smith was calling them to get into line and submit themselves to his full authority. That's the carrot offered in the last portion, "I finally saw the Twelve in the Celestial Kingdom of God." However, his "thus saith the Lord" must have had little effect on these men, because at least seven of the twelve were soon excommunicated or apostatized from the church: John F. Boynton & Luke S. Johnson (1837), [4] Lyman Johnson (1838), [5] William E. M'Lellin (c.1838), [6] Thomas B. Marsh & Orson Hyde (1838), [7] and William Smith (1845). [8] How could they have ever attained the celestial kingdom under those conditions? They couldn't! They were not only accursed by their very acts of apostasy or excommunication, but fell victim to the LDS Church's own scriptural denunciation. D&C 84.40-41 clearly states: Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved. But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth there-from, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come. Although a few of these men later returned to the church, none of them were even close to the standards necessary for attainment of that highest degree of glory. The majority remained apart for life. Therefore, the prophetic utterance, "I finally saw the Twelve in the Celestial Kingdom of God" could not be true. It would have been false even if only one Apostle remained outside the fold. In addition, the vision of M'Lellin preaching and working miracles in the south never came true because he apostatized from the church without ever doing it! Brigham Young did bring the Mormons west and was a great colonizer and orator, but the vision of Brigham Young preaching to "men of color" in their own language, in some strange and faraway place in the southwest never took place either—or at least there is no trace of it in the very detailed records and diaries concerning his reign as prophet. Finally, "Zion" (Independence, Missouri) was never redeemed, has never been redeemed in the 165+ years since the prophecy was made. Is it any wonder that The Brethren chose to remove whole chunks of this "inspired" revelation? Was Emma Smith Destroyed? One of the most significant sections of the Doctrine and Covenants is Section #132, which deals with the plural marriage (polygamy) revelation. However, it also contains many false prophecies! And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant [i.e.. polygamy or plural marriage], it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness there must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.… (v.6) Let mine handmaid, Emma Smith [Joseph's first wife] receive all those [wives] that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure and have said they were pure shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.…and I give u