Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Ecclesiastical Megalomania’

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano

And Jesus answered and said unto them, ‘Take heed that no man deceive you.’”

  • Matthew 24:4

Several times in Scripture, believers are commanded not to be deceived.  The quote at the top of this post is just one of them. 

Unfortunately, many Christians, or at least those who claim to be Christians, are often deceived by the wiles of the devil.  One of the greatest deceptions of our time is the increasing acceptance of the Roman Catholic Church-State (RCCS) as a Christian church and her laymen, priests, nuns, monks, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and popes as genuine Christians.  This deception has its origin in the Antichrist RCCS and has been eagerly promoted by many leading Evangelicals since the end of WWII, with men such as Billy Graham and Charles Colson leading many astray.

The pro-life movement has been one of Rome’s most effective tools for deceiving Protestants and has led many astray.  “After all,” so the thinking goes, “if the local archdiocese wants to organize a march against abortion or protest in front of an abortion clinic, why shouldn’t Protestants join their brothers and sisters in Christ in the protest?  We’re stronger united than separated.”

But those who think this way go wrong right from the beginning, showing themselves to be deceived about the Church of Rome and its doctrines.  The RCCS is not a Christian church, neither are Roman Catholics Christians.  This is not something spoken out of spite, be a necessary conclusion drawn from the teachings of Rome herself.  The gospel of justification by faith (belief) alone is essential to the Christian faith; Rome denies the gospel of justification by faith (belief) alone; therefore, Rome is not a Christian church.  And what does the Bible teach Christians about ecumenical work with unbelievers?  “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them” (Ephesians 5:11).

Read Full Post »

The Trinity Foundation homepage, click to “Newsletter Subscribe/Unsubscribe” in lower left corner of the homepage to join the email list.

Forgotten Principles of the Reformation,” by John W. Robbins, The Trinity Review, October 2004

Pope Demands Silicon Valley “In the Name of God” Censor “Hate Speech,” “Conspiracy Theories”,” by Paul Joseph Watson, Summit News

Joe Biden Plans Vatican Meeting with Pope Francis On October 29,” by Charlie Spierling, Breitbart

Opinion: Don’t rant about short-staffed stores and supply chain woes,” by Micheline Maynard, The Washington Post

Breaking: Migrant Caravan in Mexico encounters Mexico’s @INAMI_forces,” by Griff Jenkins, Fox News

Read Full Post »

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on July 16, 2021 (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour:  for we are members of one another.

  • Ephesians 4:25

“There has to be, I think, some sort of way  in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.” 

These words are from a speech by Barak Obama in October 2016, just a few weeks before Donald Trump shocked the world by winning his presidential campaign over the establishment endorsed Hillary Clinton.

In the same speech, Obama went on to deny that he was calling for censorship, noting, “The answer is obviously not censorship, but it’s creating places where people can say ‘this is reliable’ and I’m still able to argue safely abut facts and what we should do about it.” 

Nearly five years later, it’s fair to say that quite obviously Obama and others of his political persuasion were talking about censorship, and this became clear enough last week that even the most ardent deniers of the big government/big tech censorship complex have not excuse for missing the Biden regime’s full-bore attack on the First Amendment. 

Just last week, Biden regime official propagandist Jen Psaki stunned many observers with her admission that the administration is flagging posts for Facebook that are “problematic” because they contain “misinformation” on Covid-19.    

In the same press conference, Psaki voiced her displeasure that Facebook was not deplatforming spreaders of “misinformation” fast enough for her, and presumably, for her boss’s tastes.  She said, “there’s about 12 people who are producing 65 percent of the anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms.  All of them remain active on Facebook, despite some even being banned on other platforms, including Facebook – ones that Facebook owns.”

If all that wasn’t enough, Psaki was at it again the next day.  In a Friday 7/17 press conference she offered that, “You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not other if you – for providing misinformation out there.” 

As the saying goes, I need new conspiracy theories, because all my old ones are coming true.

Seriously, people have speculated for years that the Deep State has been behind much, if not all, of the social media censorship.  But this is right in your face government censorship.  We have what is, in my opinion, an illegitimate government installed through election fraud stomping on the right of American’s to freely access information on a matter that affects all our lives.   

Read Full Post »

Amy Coney Barrett and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

As if 2020 weren’t already tumultuous enough, the death of Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has managed to stir things up even more. 

Talk, not only of Ginsburg’s death, but also of her replacement, has dominated the news since her death on Friday, September 18.  Perhaps the most notable feature of the discussion has been controversy about whether Donald Trump should name her replacement now or wait until after the November election.

This is a discussion that should not even come up.  The president has the right to nominate a justice to the Supreme Court and the Senate has a right to hold confirmation hearings.  About this there is no question.  The Democrats don’t like it, but their not liking something is not the same as it being illegal or unconstitutional. 

Noteworthy but unsurprising was the reaction of many Democrats to the possibility that Donald Trump would nominate a new justice to replace Ginsburg before the election.  Not only did they argue that a nomination of a new justice must wait until after the election, but actually threatened violence should the President and the Senate attempt to carry out their constitutionally mandated duties. 

And the threats of violence were not coming from some dark corner of the internet or from obscure people, but from several high-profile Democrats and progressives on Twitter and other high-profile platforms.  Reza Aslan, a writer who has written numerous books, produced a series on world religions for CNN and is currently a professor of creative writing at University of California, Riverside, took to Twitter and threatened that, “If they [the Republicans] even TRY to replace RBG [Ginsburg] we burn the entire…thing down.” 

Canadian professor of Political Science Emmett Macfarlane tweeted, “Burn Congress down before letting Trump try to appoint anyone to SCOTUS.” 

Scott Ross, a member of the Wisconsin Ethics Commission tweeted, “If you can’t shut it down [the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice], burn it down.”

Playwright Beau Willimon commented on Twitter, “We’re shutting this country down if Trump and McConnell try to ram through an appointment before the election.”

In the pages of GQ, writer Laura Bassett threatened, “If McConnell jams someone through, which he will, there will be riots.”   

It’s tempting to say that such threats have become the modus operandi of Democrats and progressives in recent years.  But in truth, Democrats and progressives have a longstanding tradition of using violence and threats of violence to get their way.  It’s how they roll.  Not for nothing did Samuel D. Burchard refer to the Democrats as, “the party whose antecedents are rum, Romanism, and rebellion.”  Burchard made the comment in 1884.  It was true then, and it is true today.

Since the matter of selecting a new justice is a matter of supreme importance both to Democrats and Republicans, and since the upcoming Senate  confirmation hearing of Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s nominee to replace Ginsburg, promises to dominate the headlines in the coming weeks, perhaps overshadowing even the upcoming election, it seemed good to this author to take the opportunity to weigh in. 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: