Search This Blog

Monday, 30 April 2018


John Calvin was a second generation reformer born in 1509 in Noyon, northern France. He was a young man of about twenty six years old and a recent convert to Protestantism when he wrote his first edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion. Soon after its publication, Calvin began his ministry in Geneva, Switzerland. He revised and expanded the Institutes over a number of years, until the fifth and final edition was published in 1559. Calvin got much of his inspiration for the Institutes from Augustine of Hippo, the founder of Roman Catholicism.

There is no evidence that Calvin was actually a born again believer. (Matthew 7:15-20). He is said to have been strongly devoted to Roman Catholicism as a youth and he trained for the priesthood at the Collège de Montaigu until around 1530. It is unlikely that Calvin's break from the RCC was based on theological differences or a heart for reform. Rather his withdrawal from the college appears to have been the result of a conflict between his father and the cathedral chapter of Noyon over a business matter in 1527. Calvin's father and older brother were excommunicated in 1528. As a result, Calvin's benefices and expectations became uncertain. In other words, Calvin's departure from the college was an inevitable consequence of these events. Calvin's father subsequently enrolled him in the University of Orleans to study law.

The basis of Calvin's soteriology was double predestination aka limited atonement:

Calvin: "All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death." {1} 

Calvin's doctrine of double predestination was taken directly from Augustine, whom he frequently referred to and directly quoted in his writings. It appears that Augustine's flawed teaching on predestination was an overreaction to the error of Pelagius and was a throwback to Gnostic Manichaeism. Critically, Augustinian predestination was not taught for the first 300 years of the early church period, as the writings of a considerable number of influential early church fathers demonstrates. {2}

Calvin: "The decree is dreadful indeed, I confess. (Decretum quidem horribile, fateor)."  - the horrible degree. Double predestination is extremely problematic and differs from the plain teaching of the bible in a number of key respects:

* everyone who believes in Jesus shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16).
* everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Acts 2:21).
* God commands all people everywhere to repent. (Acts 17:30). 
* The Lord.. is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (2 Peter 3:9).
* God desires all people to be saved. (1 Timothy 2:4). 
* Jesus gave himself as a ransom for all. (1 Timothy 2:6).
* He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2).

Calvin's mandatory implementation of his version of Christianity upon Geneva pre-empted even God Himself, or rather Calvin's idea of God. Following Augustine's example, Calvin literally forced "regeneration" upon the populace by his own, rather than God's "sovereign" intervention! In November 1552, the Council declared Calvin's Institutes to be "a holy doctrine which no man might speak against", hence Calvin became known as "the Pope of Geneva". Failure to become one of the "elect" was punishable by death or expulsion from Geneva. Failure to attend church was a punishable offence and all entertainments and shows were banned outright.

Calvin's compulsive implementation of paedobaptism (infant baptism) is a further indication of his flawed understanding of soteriology. Calvin denied that a conscious decision was necessary in order to become a believer, and he viciously overruled any objections from the Anabaptists. Protestants were known to “baptize” Anabaptist "heretics" by drowning them in rivers! Calvin defined baptism as: "..the sign of the initiation by which we are received into the society of the church, in order that, engrafted in Christ, we may be reckoned among God's children."

Free-will, a dirty word to Calvinists, was expunged... and so proceeded Calvin's rule of terror. Calvin's vile actions even contradicted his own writings:

Calvin: "..the kind of drawing, it is not violent, so as to compel men by external force; but still it is a powerful impulse of the Holy Spirit, which makes men willing who formerly were unwilling and reluctant." {3}

Prefatory Address in his Institutes to Francis, King of the French, 1536. "But when I perceived that the fury of certain bad men had risen to such a height in your realm, that there was no place in it for sound doctrine, I thought it might be of service if I were in the same work both to give instruction to my countrymen, and also lay before your Majesty a Confession, from which you may learn what the doctrine is that so inflames the rage of those madmen who are this day, with fire and sword, troubling your kingdom. For I fear not to declare, that what I have here given may be regarded as a summary of the very doctrine which, they vociferate, ought to be punished with confiscation, exile, imprisonment, and flames, as well as exterminated by land and sea. This, I allow, is a fearful punishment which God sends on the earth; but if the wickedness of men so deserves, why do we strive to oppose the just vengeance of God?"
Letter to William Farel, February 13, 1546. "If he [Servetus] comes [to Geneva], I shall never let him go out alive if my authority has weight."
Letter to the Lord Protector of Somerset, adviser to King Edward VI, October 22, 1548. "[They] well deserve to be repressed by the sword which is committed to you, seeing that they attack not the King only, but God who has seated him upon the throne, and has entrusted to you the protection as well of His person as of His majesty."
Letter of August 20, 1553, one week after Servetus arrest. "I hope that Servetus will be condemned to death."
Defense of Orthodox Faith against the Prodigious Errors of the Spaniard Michael Servetus, published in early 1554. "Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt. This is not laid down on human authority; it is God who speaks and prescribes a perpetual rule for his Church. It is not in vain that he banishes all those human affections which soften our hearts; that he commands paternal love and all the benevolent feelings between brothers, relations, and friends to cease; in a word, that he almost deprives men of their nature in order that nothing may hinder their holy zeal. Why is so implacable a severity exacted but that we may know that God is defrauded of his honour, unless the piety that is due to him be preferred to all human duties, and that when his glory is to be asserted, humanity must be almost obliterated from our memories? Many people have accused me of such ferocious cruelty that I would like to kill again the man I have destroyed. Not only am I indifferent to their comments, but I rejoice in the fact that they spit in my face."
Preface to Commentaries, July 22, 1557. "To these irreligious characters. and despisers of the heavenly doctrineŠ. I think that there is scarcely any of the weapons which are forged in the workshop of Satan, which has not been employed by them in order to obtain their object. And at length matters had come to such a state, that an end could be put to their machinations in no other way than cutting them off by an ignominious death; which was indeed a painful and pitiable spectacle to me. They no doubt deserved the severest punishment, but I always rather desired that they might live in prosperity, and continue safe and untouched; which would have been the case had they not been altogether incorrigible, and obstinately refused to listen to wholesome admonition."
Comments on Ex. 22:20, Lev. 24:16, Deut. 13:5-15, 17:2-5. "Moreover, God Himself has explicitly instructed us to kill heretics, to smite with the sword any city that abandons the worship of the true faith revealed by Him."
Letter to the Marquis Paet, chamberlain to the King of Navarre, 1561. "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels [Anabaptists and others], who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."


The Minutes Book of the Geneva City Council, 1541-59 (translated by Stefan Zweig, Erasmus: The Right to Heresy):
"During the ravages of the pestilence in 1545 more than twenty men and women were burnt alive for witchcraft.
From 1542 to 1546 fifty-eight judgements of death and seventy-six decrees of banishment were passed.
During the years 1558 and 1559 the cases of various punishments for all sorts of offences amounted to four hundred and fourteen.
One burgher smiled while attending a baptism: three days imprisonment.
Another, tired out on a hot summer day, went to sleep during a sermon: prison.
Some workingmen ate pastry at breakfast: three days on bread and water.
Two burghers played skittles: prison.
Two others diced for a quarter bottle of wine: prison.
A blind fiddler played a dance: expelled from the city.
Another praised Castellio's translation of the Bible: expelled from Geneva.
A girl was caught skating, a widow threw herself on the grave of her husband, a burgher offered his neighbour a pinch of snuff during divine service: they were summoned before the Consistory, exhorted, and ordered to do penance.
Some cheerful fellows at Epiphany stuck a bean into the cake: four-and-twenty hours on bread and water.
A couple of peasants talked about business matters on coming out of church: prison.
A man played cards: he was pilloried with the pack of cards hung around his neck.
Another sang riotously in the street: was told 'they could go and sing elsewhere,' this meaning he was banished from the city.
Two bargees had a brawl: executed.
A man who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled.
A book printer who in his cups [columns] had railed at Calvin, was sentenced to have his tongue perforated with a red-hot iron before being expelled from the city.
Jacques Gruent was racked and then executed for calling Calvin a hypocrite.
Each offence, even the most paltry, was carefully entered in the record of the Consistory, so that the private life of every citizen could unfailingly be held up against him in evidence." (See Pike, pp. 61-63).

Sources quoted in Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church, vol. 8:

"The death penalty against heresy, idolatry and blasphemy and barbarous customs of torture were retained. Attendance at public worship was commanded on penalty of three sols. Watchmen were appointed to see that people went to church. The members of the Consistory visited every house once a year to examine the faith and morals of the family. Every unseemly word and act on the street was reported, and the offenders were cited before the Consistory to be either censured and warned, or to be handed over to the Council for severer punishment."
Several women, among them the wife of Ami Perrin, the captain-general, were imprisoned for dancing.
A man was banished from the city for three months because on hearing an ass bray, he said jestingly 'He prays a beautiful psalm.'
A young man was punished because he gave his bride a book on housekeeping with the remark: 'This is the best Psalter.'
Three men who laughed during a sermon were imprisoned for three days.
Three children were punished because they remained outside of the church during the sermon to eat cakes.
A man who swore by the 'body and blood of Christ' was fined and condemned to stand for an hour in the pillory on the public square.
A child was whipped for calling his mother a thief and a she-devil.
A girl was beheaded for striking her parents.
A banker was executed for repeated adultery.
A person named Chapuis was imprisoned for four days because he persisted in calling his child Claude (a Roman Catholic saint) instead of Abraham.
Men and women were burnt to death for witchcraft. (See Pike, pp. 55,56).

From Other Sources:

Belot, an Anabaptist was arrested for passing out tracts in Geneva and also accusing Calvin of excessive use of wine. With his books and tracts burned, he was banished from the city and told not to return on pain of hanging (J.L. Adams, The Radical Reformation, pp. 597-598).
Martin Luther said of Calvin's actions in Geneva, "With a death sentence they solve all argumentation" (Juergan L. Neve, A History of Christian Thought, vol. I, p. 285).

"About the month of January 1546, a member of the Little Council, Pierre Ameaux, asserted that Calvin was nothing but a wicked man - who was preaching false doctrine. Calvin felt that his authority as an interpreter of the Word of God was being attacked: he so completely identified his own ministry with the will of God that he considered Ameaux's words as an insult to the honour of Christ. The Magistrates offered to make the culprit beg Calvin's pardon on bended knees before the Council of the Two Hundred, but Calvin found this insufficient. On April 8, Ameaux was sentenced to walk all round the town, dressed only in a shirt, bareheaded and carrying a lighted torch in his hand, and after that to present himself before the tribunal and cry to God for mercy" (F. Wendel, Calvin, pp. 85, 86).
Compiled by Jack Moorman {4}

How anyone would want to be associated with the name of Calvin after becoming acquainted with the history is staggering! Calvinism, whether Five Point Calvinism (TULIP), New Calvinism, Partial Calvinism, or whatever "ism" it is known by, is not based on the Holy Scriptures. (Galatians 5:9).

I have spent some time reading the material of former five point Calvinist, Dr Leighton Flowers, and also watching some of the exchanges between Flowers and his adversaries on YouTube. {5}

Flowers puts forward a compelling view of what he calls the "traditional" approach as against Calvinism, and he exegetes some of the scriptural passages very well. While I agree with Flowers technically, I have a huge problem with his excessive forbearance towards leaders who are aggressively pushing the Calvinist agenda. Sometimes it seems that Flowers would rather condemn those who call out false teachers than the false teachers themselves! A number of people involved in apologetics are called to.. contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. (Jude 1:3). "Winning the argument", in human terms, as Flowers puts it, is the last thing they are interested in doing! I find Flowers reductionism and his condemnation of those speaking out against apostasy highly offensive! Perhaps more attention to the damage being done to the flock might be in order! (Matthew 7:15; 2 Peter 2:1-2; 2 Timothy 4:3). The practice of "Stealth Calvinism" is particularly despicable i.e. the Founders Ministries advice to Calvinistic pastors to avoid full disclosure while interviewing in order to gain leadership positions! {6}

Flowers advice to those finding themselves under the authority of a Calvinist pastor who has insidiously taken over leadership of a "traditional" church: ".. bear with the pastor and pray for him ... ask questions, be patient, serve him, support him and to speak to him.." {7}. This counsel seems very tolerant and loving, but is it? Paul warned about the problem of false teachers who creep in unnoticed. (2 Peter 2:1). If a man has hidden his Calvinism prior to taking up a position as a pastor, then his personal integrity comes into grave question. (Luke 16:10). An elder should be above reproach and an example to the flock. (1 Timothy 4:12). ..to hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. (Titus 1:6-9 cf. James 3:1). The new pastor has created the problem, not those who are upset by his teaching. Not everyone is strong (Romans 14:1); and yet all will be obliged to come under the authority of, and be subject to, false teaching.. actually a different gospel. (Galatians 1:6; 2 Corinthians 11:4). Must a whole congregation suffer and be sacrificed because of one man's dishonesty? (1 Corinthians 5:7-8). I thought that shepherds were supposed to lay down their lives for the flock, not the reverse! (John 10:12-13). I do not think that Flowers would have got on very well with some of the advice the apostle Paul gave at times! (Romans 16:17; 2 Corinthians 11:13). My advice is to politely ask questions, at the beginning, and obviously to pray. After patiently exhausting the possibility of a resolution, failure to act decisively is tantamount to putting up with another gospel. (2 Corinthians 11:4). The sad fact is that Calvinism does split churches, and there comes a time when separation becomes inevitable. (2 Corinthians 6:17).

One teacher I highly recommend is Pastor Kevin G. Thompson: Beyond The Fundamenals. {8} Thompson takes a very strong position and calls out Calvinism for exactly what it is - philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition.. (Colossians 2:8). It is disappointing that Thompson has not applied the same rigorous exegesis to the pre-trib rapture debate. I am sure he would change his mind to embrace the pre-wrath position if he did.

{1} http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.v.xxii.html
{2} https://bjorkbloggen.com/2012/05/08/quotes-from-old-church-fathers-supporting-free-will-and-objecting-to-the-sinful-nature/
{3} http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom34.xii.vii.html
{4} http://www.a-voice.org/tidbits/calvinp.htm
{5} https://soteriology101.com/
{5} https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPRJ7X3hyFvm-3Jo8rVWYOw
{6} https://player.fm/series/soteriology-101-former-calvinistic-professor-discusses-doctrines-of-salvation/stealth-calvinism-and-pastor-search-committees
{7} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RxcEGCh_Hc
{8} http://beyondthefundamentals.com/calvinism-defeated.html

Wednesday, 25 April 2018


A 57-year-old former member of Northamptonshire's Jesus Army has been jailed for historic sex offences dating back to the 1990s.

Former member of the Bugbrooke-based Christian organisation Alan Carter has been handed a three-year sentence for crimes dating back to the early 1990s.
Operation Lifeboat was launched in 2015.

Operation Lifeboat was launched in 2015.

The 57-year-old, who was living in Swansea at the time of his arrest, faced seven charges of indecent assault against a male and a further charge of buggery when he appeared at Northampton Crown Court last Wednesday.
Carter was a member of the Jesus Army at the time of the offences.
The conviction was part of Operation Lifeboat, launched in 2015 to look into historic sex offences at the organisation, founded in the late-1960s by firebrand preacher Noel Stanton.
Detective Chief Inspector Ally White from Northamptonshire Police, said: “I welcome Carter’s conviction and I hope it demonstrates that Northamptonshire Police takes all allegations of abuse seriously, whether recent or historic and that there can be a successful prosecution brought against non-recent offences of this nature.
“The people who have come forward to report historic abuse to us have shown tremendous courage in doing so and we would not have been able to secure convictions like this one if it wasn’t for the information they provided us with - information that has often involved bringing up painful memories.
“The emotional and psychological damage abuse can do to a person can be extensive and often has an impact on them for the whole of their lives.
"I want to remind people that our door is always open – Northamptonshire Police will always investigate allegations of abuse and I encourage people to take the step and report it to us. We can also refer victims of abuse to Voice – a confidential support service.
“If you would like to make a report to us, please call us on 101 or alternatively, you can call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555111.”
Carter's conviction was the third as part of Operation Lifeboat.
Last year, Nigel Perkins, 56, from Cornwall, pleaded guilty to three counts of indecent assault and two counts of gross indecency with a child under the age of 14.
He also received a three-year sentence and was made to sign the sex offender register for life.
By Paul Lynch, Northampton Chronicle. 24th April 2018.

Monday, 23 April 2018


For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. (1 Corinthians 3:11-13).

The meetings between the Pope and various New Apostolic Reformation leaders in 2016 is contradictory in many ways, not least because both parties claim the exclusive right to apostolic authority.

The glaring contradiction between "inclusivism" and the Council of Trent. 

Protestantism teaches "exclusivism", namely the biblical view that salvation necessitates personal and explicit faith in Jesus Christ. The official doctrine adopted by the RCC since Vatican II is "inclusivism", the outrageous teaching that non-Christians can be saved by Jesus Christ without faith! (Hebrews 11:6). Confusingly, "inclusivism" stands in opposition to the RC profession that it is the "sole Church of Christ" i.e. "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church", as defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. ALL non-Catholics were anathematized by the Council of Trent during the Counter Reformation (1545-1563). {1} Since RC anathemas are immutable and can never be rescinded, all Protestants remain officially excommunicated. The ex cathedra position held by the RCC is that it continues to condemn as heresy the Protestant tenet of justification by faith alone (sola fide) apart from works, a position confirmed by Vatican I and II. {2} 

Apostolic succession is the assertion that RC bishops represent the only direct uninterrupted line of continuity from the original apostles:

"The principle underlying the Roman claim is contained in the idea of succession. "To succeed" is to be the successor of, especially to be the heir of, or to occupy an official position just after, as Victoria succeeded William IV. Now the Roman Pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position, and perform the functions of  St. Peter; they are, therefore, his successors. We must prove that St. Peter came to Rome, and ended there his pontificate; that the Bishops of Rome who came after him held his official position in the Church." {3}

Problematically for the RCC, the claim that the apostle Peter had supremacy among the twelve apostles, and that he became the first bishop of Rome cannot be proved. No evidence exists that Peter ever went to Rome. As a consequence of this tenuous claim, the so called "separate churches" are officially judged by Trent to be entirely invalid. More than that, their own warped criteria necessitate that it is impossible for the NAR to have any claim to apostolic succession or prophetic authority. How is it conceivable that the Pope has acknowledged NAR "prophets" as genuine and given them his approbation? According to NAR "prophet" Kris Valloten, the Pope's opening comment at their 2016 meeting was: “We must invite the prophets back into the church and welcome them with open arms.” {4)

The NAR is a Protestant coalition consisting of neo Pentecostals and charismatics. NAR leaders claim that the second apostolic age is upon us on the authority of their now deceased "Presiding Apostle" C. Peter Wagner. Wagner announced the beginning of the "second apostolic age", claiming that the lost offices of prophet and apostle were restored in 2001. {5} The NAR is hyper-authoritarian and pyramidal in its hierarchical structure, with the guru "apostle" at the pinnacle.. very similar in fact to the structure of the RCC. NAR cults are the fastest growing sects of Christianity. An estimated 369 million people are a part of this movement worldwide. {6} The NAR have other things in common with the RCC, in particular ecumenism and their plan to infiltrate and dominate all sectors of society via their "seven mountain mandate". If we are to believe the Jesuit Extreme Oath, their aim is to do their uttermost to secretly infiltrate Protestant churches and to ".. extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals' doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, regal or otherwise." {7}

In reality, the New Apostolic Reformation aka Dominionism/Kingdom Now/Replacement Theology is a dangerous heretical movement consisting of proven false teachers such as Bill Johnson, Rick Joyner, Mike Bickle, Todd Bentley, Lou Engle, Cindy Jacobs, Rick Joyner, John and Carol Arnott and many more. {8} The NAR are very fuzzy on doctrine and rely heavily on extra-biblical revelations from their so called "prophets" and "apostles". These wolves have put themselves beyond accountability, since they make themselves the final authority. (Acts 17:10-11). According to the NAR, the church must submit to the authority of their own so called "apostles" in order for their dominionist objective to succeed i.e to transform nations for Christ in order to "establish the Kingdom of God on earth". {9} Wagner established the International Coalition of Apostlic Leaders (ICAL) and the Apostolic Council of Prophetic Elders whose mission it is to "..effectively accelerate the advancement of the Kingdom of God into every sphere of society." {10} The NAR dominionist agenda entirely contradicts the scriptures. Rather than Christians establishing dominion, the scriptures indicate the diametric opposite scenario of increasing godlessness and global hostility against Jesus Christ in the last days. (Revelation 19:19 cf. John 18:36; 2 Timothy 3:1-5).

How does the Vatican square its claim to apostolic succession and the Pope's meeting with NAR "apostles" and "prophets" and vice versa? Surely there is a theological impasse, or are they closer than we are led to believe? Certainly Rick Joyner makes no secret of the fact that he is a Knight of Malta (Order of Malta), an RC lay religious order. {11} The bizarre "knighting ceremony" for graduates of Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry (Bethel Church Redding), apparently resonates with the Order of Malta ceremony. {12} Lou Engle, founder of The Call, who claims the "mantle" of ecumenist Billy Graham, actually participated in a sickening act of mutual prostration with RC leader Matteo Calisi in 2016 at LA event Asusa Now. {13} Calisi proposed a covenant between Engle and themselves stating: "..division is a diabolical sin.. Jesus doesn't care about our differences.. for our doctrines, for our traditions.." These statements from Calisi stand in direct contradiction to the teaching of Jesus Christ and the real apostles! The rejection of the scriptures concerning doctrine is the rejection of Christianity itself! (1 Timothy 4:3,16; Titus 2:1, 9). More up to date is the full Catholic Mass held by RCC clergy at the mega-ecumenical Hillsong Alpha Conference in February 2018. {14} Hillsong was founded on New Order of the Latter Rain (NOLR) principles and is also Kingdom Now/NAR.

NARWatchIsrael describe the NAR as a "cuckoo in the nest". They continue: "Years ago this movement set out to ‘infiltrate and pervert the course of the true Church, in order to plant a whole new understanding of God, the Holy Spirit, the Coming, the Endtimes – and almost everything else’, and it is very close to achieving that -worldwide. So much so, that one of its senior proponents boasted: ‘The NAR, in fact, is the 21st century's mainstream Christianity.’" {15} 

In 2000, the Assemblies of God (AG), the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world, issued a statement warning against Dominion theology, a warning that many individual Assemblies of God churches have wilfully ignored!

This statement was adopted by the General Presbytery of the Assemblies of God on August 11, 2000:

"Kingdom Now or Dominion theology. The thought that God’s kingdom can come on earth with a little help from humankind is intriguing to those who advocate this approach to impacting society. Rather than scoffing at the promise of Christ’s imminent return (2 Peter 3:3,4), this errant theology says that Jesus will not return until the Church takes dominion of the earth back from Satan and his followers. By taking control, through whatever means possible, of political, ecclesiastical, educational, economic, and other structures, Christians supposedly can make the world a worthy place for Christ to return and rule over.6 This unscriptural triumphalism generates other related variant teachings." {16} 

The RCC And The NAR Claim To Apostolic Authority Is False!

The idea of "apostolic succession" is not found in the scriptures. Rather apostolic authority is passed on through the teaching of the original apostles, not through apostolic succession. The inerrant scriptures are the benchmark by which we test all things. (1 Thessalonians 5:21; 1 John 4:1Acts 20:32; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; Acts 17:11). False apostles and prophets would have us abandon the authority of the Word of God in favour of their own unverifiable extra biblical revelations and feigned authority.

Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. (2 John 1:9).

No direct lineage between the RCC and any of the apostles can be established. Critically, deviation from the apostles foundational teaching automatically disqualifies the RCC as the "one true church" and "apostolic succession". The present Pope aka the "supreme Pontiff" has supremacy over the RC church as the "vicar of Christ "(Latin vicarious Christi) from vicarious, meaning...." acting or done for another". This title effectively identifies the succession of popes as antichrists. (1 John 2:18). Antichrist both opposes and stands in place of Jesus Christ. (2 Thessalonians 2:4; Matthew 24:5, 24 cf. Matthew 23:9).

These days we should use the title "Apostle" with extreme caution. The term can be loosely applied to a church planter, a missionary or a pioneer, but nothing more. It is imperative that we understand that those who claim to be "apostles", do not have the authority of Jesus' original apostles and they cannot supersede the apostles teaching. (Acts 2:42). 

The RCC is full of contradictions, and is at odds not only with the scriptures, but also within itself and its previous catechisms. Similarly the NAR is a contradictory confusing movement, continually changing the goalposts, and claiming authority on the precepts of men. (Matthew 15:9). God is not the author of confusion. (1 Corinthians 14:33).

This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. (Titus 1:5-9).

{1} http://heritagebiblechurch.com/PDFs/Facts/Trent.pdf
{2} http://www.liturgyoffice.org.uk/Resources/YOF/Sacrosanctum-Concilium.pdf
{3} http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01641a.htm
{4) https://krisvallotton.com/pope-francis/
{5} https://books.google.co.uk/books?
{6} https://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,136116
{7} http://www.reformation.org/jesuit-oath.html
{8} http://www.so4j.com/new-apostolic-reforma:tion-latter-rain
{9} https://www.icaleaders.com/about-ical/statement-of-faith
{10} https://www.icaleaders.com/about-ical/
{11} https://www.morningstarministries.org/about/questions-and-answers/knights-malta-rick-joyner#.WtS-s0xFzIU
{12} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acEJ78_3ym4
{13} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOMY6jLNTw0
{14} https://emergentwatch.com/2018/02/15/hillsong-sponsoring-contemplative-alpha-allows-catholic-mass-at-conference/
{15} http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/NARWatchIsrael.pdf 
{16} https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index/Revival-Endtime-Revival--Spirit-Led-and-Spirit-Controlled

Friday, 20 April 2018


We know that C S Lewis has been, and continues to be widely acclaimed as a great apologist for Christianity and, while it is not my purpose in this piece to dispute such acclamation - it is certainly my intention to explore the possibility that this prolific writer was not a Christian - by any biblical definition of the term.

Preposterous - untrue - unfair - unfounded - ridiculous - risible - heretical - irrational - you cannot be serious - judge not lest ye be judged…The tirade of comments which I’ve received in knee jerk defence of C S Lewis’ Christian integrity are as endless - as they have been formidable - as they have been hostile. Indeed I sometimes wonder if it wouldn’t be more acceptable in some ‘Christian’ circles to attack Christ’s claims of divinity rather than cast the ‘merest’ shadow of doubt over the authenticity of C S Lewis’ Christian status.

But, setting aside the subject of the popular author’s Christian credentials let me digress, momentarily, by introducing the following questions:

Does a sport’s commentator need to be practised in the sport on which he/she offers informed commentary?

For instance, the renowned, now retired Formula One Racing commentator - Murray Walker - was he ever a Formula One racing driver?

Since the answer to both questions is an emphatic ‘No’, I can promptly return to the main theme with the affirmation that a person doesn’t need to be practised in a discipline to become an ‘expert commentator’ on that discipline. - and it is with this ‘thin edge’ of reason that I hope to begin the arduous process of wedging open the most prejudiced of closed minds to the possibility that a person can have an intellectual grasp of, and be an ‘expert commentator’ on Christianity - without necessarily being a real ‘Christian’.

And, having placed that ‘thin edge’ of reason against, what might only be, the slightest of fissures on the stubborn skull of the partisan, pro-Lewis mindset - let me continue by attempting to hammer the wedge in a little deeper and open the crack a little wider…..

Thwack, thwack.

Window cleaners are an interesting bunch, are they not?

The window cleaner’s task enables him to gather a considerable amount of information about customers’ homes and lifestyles - without any need to enter their houses. When the chamois champ goes about his daily business he can’t help but engage his natural inquisitiveness and explore the furnishings, fittings and personal effects which lie in the rooms behind each of the windows he has cleaned.

Indeed, if such a cleaner, for whatever reason, developed an obsessive interest in any particular customer - he could, if he so desired, prepare a very detailed dossier on that client’s home, habits and interests - and it would all have been done, quite naturally, in the normal course of his work -  without the necessity of entering the home.

So the questions arise, and they are crucial questions:

Was C S Lewis an occupant of a house called ‘Christian Faith’ - or was he merely an inquisitive window cleaner who, for his own selfish reasons, took a special interest in that particular house and occupiers?

Or, to put it another way, did C S Lewis glean all of his information about Christianity purely as a self indulging intellectual exercise - or did he obtain his knowledge by actually becoming a spiritually regenerate  Christian ?.

Thwack, thwack.

Well, despite his copious knowledge of the ‘Christian Faith’ - and his undoubted intellectual familiarity with some of its general precepts and principles, C S Lewis didn’t seem to have much of a ‘inkling’ as to where the only entrance to ‘Christian Faith’ was located - and neither did he have any idea of the doorway’s form - which raises the interesting question of whether or not he had ever actually entered the house………

Thwack, thwack.

So, what of this doorway - where is this ‘one and only entrance’ to ‘Christian Faith’ of which C S Lewis had apparently no personal knowledge and experience?

Well - the door is invisible to the naked eye, indeed it cannot be detected by any natural human sense, nor can it be intellectually appraised - because, like the house which it serves, its substance is spiritual - and therefore, it can only be spiritually discerned and understood.

Yes indeed, as the apostle Paul confirmed in 1 Corinthians 2/14, no natural man (as C S Lewis must have been before his ‘conversion’) is capable of true spiritual discernment:

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Unless, that is - and according to Jesus, the natural man undergoes true spiritual birth:

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. –

 John 3/5-7

Thwack, thwack………

Not that C S Lewis’ experience of spiritual regeneration reflected this.

Thwack, thwack.

Consider the author’s own description of his ‘conversion’ experience:

You must picture me alone in that room at Magdalen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England" (Surprised By Joy, ch. 14, p. 266).

Well - it might have been the ‘unrelenting approach of Him’ whom he so earnestly desired not to meet - but I think that this unwelcome 'god' had a more natural origin - I believe that his unwanted visitor went by the name of 'cognitive dissonance'.

Cognitive dissonance is a common psychological condition experienced by all who can hold established attitudes on any subject. The condition presents as a terrible feeling of unease and occurs when a person, in holding a settled viewpoint, is confronted with information which challenges that viewpoint.

When cognitive dissonance prevails, the host will seek to regain peace of mind by engaging one or, if need be, two consecutively operating mechanisms. Initially the host will stubbornly disregard the opposing information and, if this is successful, peace of mind will, once again, prevail - and there will be no more to be done. However, should the incoming information (in over-riding the initial ‘deaf ear’) be persistent and unrelenting in its presentation and persuasion, this might induce a second, more dramatic and very much different response - that of a sudden ‘paradigm shift’ - the result of which is a complete rejection of the established attitude, and the unconditional acceptance of the new viewpoint.

C S Lewis was friends with the Roman Catholic writer J R Tolkien, and had been influenced by G K Chesterton, another Roman Catholic writer - as well as being schooled and heavily influenced through the writings George MacDonald - a Scottish (Universalist) minister and writer of fantasy tales.

With the weight of their combined theistic beliefs warring against the author's established atheistic mind set, an increasingly unbearable mental stress, i.e., ‘cognitive dissonance’ would have prevailed in his psyche. And, when this tension reached intolerable levels it would have precipitated a sudden 'paradigm shift' in his thinking and, Voila, our reluctant hero moved instantly from being a stubborn atheist to becoming a confirmed 'Christian'.

In other words C S Lewis' conversion was not 'spiritual' - it was a natural phenomenon which had nothing to do with Christ's supernatural union with his hitherto unregenerate spirit......and had everything to do with the author instinctively, naturally and selfishly seeking to preserve and promote the ‘intellectual’ peace of his own mind.

There are many, many people of the C S Lewis type who have become ‘Christian’ based on their own natural, self preserving and self promoting terms and, because 'their god' essentially remains their own (unregenerate) mind and emotion, they will constantly experience difficulty in extending unconditional authority to God's word. And, alas, when a contentious issue raises it ‘discordant’ head, and they start to feel the goads of conflict between God’s Word and their own established opinion they will, quite naturally, seek to preserve their ‘peace of mind’ by ignoring God’s word - while still maintaining, with one excuse or another, that their ‘traditional’ or ‘modern’ slant on Biblical teaching is ‘reasonable and rational’

I understand that C S Lewis perceived his own ‘spiritual’ re-birth as a life long process which involved as much of his own effort and initiative - as it did God’s.

He referred to God’s presence in His own, or anyone’s life as the ‘Christ life’ (how very impersonal) and he also asserted that the way in which to improve - or increase this ‘Christ life’ resource was by a combination of three different means viz. baptism, belief and participation in the Mass, the Eucharist - or Communion.

Baptism (in the true biblical sense) and ‘belief’ (presumably in Christ) are surely things which would be practiced after eternal birth i.e., after a person had been made spiritually alive in and to Christ - and would be undertaken - or practised to confirm rather than initiate or create new eternal life.

And, likewise, participation in the Lord’s Supper is essentially a commemoration of Christ’s sacrifice, which would - and always will be carried out by those who have already been ‘born again’. As for his inclusion of the Roman Catholic Mass……..well, there is nothing biblical - or Christian about that particular ceremony….and to refer to it as ‘Christian’ must, in itself, call his ‘spiritual integrity’ into serious question.

I can only conclude that his understanding of ‘Christian Faith’ was gleaned from his own external observations - and not as one who had truly entered His Father’s house. And I come to this conclusion with Christian conviction because, through the grace of God, I live in ‘Christian Faith’ - and the hallway which C S Lewis describes in one of his books - with its various doors leading to, and occupied by different denominations - it isn’t there - it just isn’t there - and neither is it planned, for it was never in the Architect’s original blueprint:

My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

 John 17/20-23.

Thwack, thwack…….

The problem with C S Lewis and all who come to ‘adopt’ Christianity as a preferred lifestyle - because they have been persuaded ‘intellectually’ that it is in their best personal interests so to do - is that they are ‘coming to Christ’ on their own selfish (unrighteous) terms, and selfish motive (unrighteousness) is not eternal in derivation or spirit - and therefore cannot contribute in the remotest way to eternal birth. It is that simple. New eternal life needs eternal and perfectly selfless - or sinless parentage - which qualities mankind is absolutely incapable of producing.

Eternal conception requires immaculate contribution coming together in immaculate, selfless consummation to give birth to immaculate life, and thanks be to God, it is God who has provided the ‘absolute perfection’ in every instance:

When the eternal Spirit of God descends upon and unites with any person, it does not unite with the sin which has enshrouded and corrupted that person’s true eternal identity, rather it penetrates that sinful mantle - and unites with, and consummates a life giving relationship with that person’s original and true eternal identity.

It is a system which cannot fail, and does not fail, because there is no sin - no anti-life influences to adversely effect a perfect outcome.

God - Jesus Christ is eternally pure; the eternal essence which lies implicit and swaddled within every elect person is eternally pure, the matching of the two partners is perfect because they are the separated parts of a previously intact spiritual reality - and the entire ‘reconciliation’ process is being carried out in the pure and selfless Spirit of Eternal Love.

And the outcome of that eternal consummation is a redeemed and complete child of God - an eternal child of God who will grow and develop as it focuses and feeds exclusively on his/her true eternal companion - on Christ's Holy Spirit for all of his/her spiritual guidance and sustenance:

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

John 16/13-14.

Thwack, thwack.

I believe that C S Lewis lived in a house called ‘Mere Christianity’ - I have never visited it, never had the inclination - but I am aware that the driveway serving this mansion is served by very wide and very grand gates which are situated at the end of a very broad avenue called Destruction Way:

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Matthew 7/13-14.

Thwack, craaaaaaaack.

Why have I written in such a provocative - controversial way about C S Lewis?

The main reason is that I believe that the writings of C. S. Lewis have been directly responsible for the promotion of the strong - and strengthening spirit of Ecumenism which is prevalent in ‘Christendom’ today.

And Ecumenism does not worship God, as Christ directed, in spirit and in truth - God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. – John 4/24. Rather the followers of the ecumenical movement worship ‘God’ in accordance with the lowest common denominator which prevails among their previously mixed and conflicting beliefs - to the continued exclusion, or subsequent rejection of vital eternal precepts.

In consequence Ecumenism produces a false Christianity which does not promote, and therefore cannot produce true conversion (mortal to eternal) in the lives of those who follow its teaching and, as a result, cannot effect real change in the lives of its adherents. 


(Even though several members of my family - including my mother, my sister and her husband, my brother and his wife, and yours truly - have studied at Wheaton College, I'm tempted to pun its name and call it the "Wheaton Tares College" and the following explains why:)

     Several days ago on April 17 the "Pulpit & Pen" site published an astounding article entitled "Marxist Brain Trust Gathers at Wheaton to Discuss Moving Evangelicals Left."

     Here's a portion of it:


It is no mistake, as Pulpit & Pen has thoroughly covered, evangelical “thought leaders” among the pseudo-Reformed camp known as “New Calvinism” have been the financial recipients of millions of dollars from globalist and Marxist financiers, George Soros and James Riady. With Soros funding Russell Moore and Matt Chandler’s Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) – an organization actually belonging to Soros himself – and with James Riady funding Westminster Philadelphia, Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS) and Ligon Duncan, and other religious institutions like Biola University and Ouachita Baptist University, it should be apparent that some kind of quid pro quo exists. Riady’s influence in particular is far and wide in American religious institutions, and particular among New Calvinists, and the gobs of cash he’s giving them is reportedly surpassing unheard of levels. And in spite of Riady being known primarily as the head of corruption during the Clinton Campaign Finance Scandal, in spite of him being kicked out of the country for trying to affect American politics with piles of international cash, and in spite of Riady still funding the Clinton Global Initiative and the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, leaders like Ligon Duncan still readily receive his cash, the Gospel Coalition promotes his Indonesian school on the cyber-pages of their blog, and his wife and children still speak at New Calvinist institutions in the place of their father, who cannot return to the country.
Make no mistake about it, the Evangelical Intelligentsia – which we have defined here – are well-funded by foreign political interests. In the name of “repentance,” these evangelical leaders are promoting purely Marxist ideological inventions like Critical Race Theory, White Guilt, Intersectionality, and Cultural Marxism during 2018’s White Guilt and Gospel-Redefinition Apology Tour that took place last week at Together for the Gospel and the week before that, the MLK50 event hosted by The Gospel Coalition and the ERLC. It’s not conspiracy theory; it’s conspiracy facts. Consult the hyper-links provided and see the primary sources with your own eyes. The fact is that these evangelical leaders who all suddenly, mysteriously, and with suspiciously coordinated timing who came to “repentance” on the issue of race (proposing the social gospel, which they have renamed “social justice”) have taken money from Soros and Riady. It is up to your gullible, incredibly naive judgment if you choose to determine that Soros and Riady are simultaneously funding a globalist-Marxist strategy worldwide while funding a certain stream of American religious thought out of the contriteness of their heart.
In the meantime, these same evangelical “thought leaders” – aka the Evangelical Intelligentsia (EI) – have gathered at Wheaton College to discuss how to shift evangelicals away from supporting conservative politics in the name of “saving evangelicalism.” Yesterday and today – April 16 and April 17, 2018 – these leaders are in a closed-door meeting that, according to the Washington Post, was organized by avowed Marxist and Gospel Coalition co-founder, Tim Keller. Approximately 50 such leaders from the EI are discussing the best ways to shift evangelicals away from supporting conservatism, and they include Keller, Ed Stetzer, A.R. Bernard (the pastor who very publicly resigned from Trump’s faith advisory panel over Trump’s lack of political correctness following the Charlottesville race riot), Doug Birdsall (an honorary chair of the rabidly globalist and pro-Roman Catholic Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, which you can read about in E.S. William’s book, here), Jenny Yang of World Relief (which signed a public statement condemning President Trump over his enforcement of U.S. immigration law regarding the “Dreamers”) Bishop Claude Alexander (who signed a letter from evangelicals condemning Trump, using the ideology of Critical Race Theory to do so), Mark Labberton of Fuller Seminary (who wrote a book, Still Evangelical?, which is a collection of essays encouraging evangelicals to abandon their title for the sake of not alienating the political left), Jo Anne Lyon of the Wesleyan Church (who is a part of Evangelicals for Social Action, along with other progressives like Rachel Held Evans), and Gabriel Salguero of the National Latino Evangelical Association (who, as you would expect, has written articles in places like the New York Times encouraging evangelicals to go politically left if they desire to coalesce with Hispanic believers).

     I'm still reeling - and I'm not a movie projector! And I can imagine that Dr. V. Raymond Edman and the Blanchards who founded Wheaton are doing cartwheels in their graves!
     I invite you to read the entire Pulpit & Pen article. This shocking situation is also being covered by CBN and other members of the media.
     The falling away of II Thess. 2 isn't coming. It's here - in the middle of the road!