Monday, December 28, 2015

“The Big Short”: Smug, Preachifying, Gimmicky, Lying, Liberal Mess

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!

“The Big Short”: Smug, Preachifying, Gimmicky, Lying, Liberal Mess

By Debbie Schlussel
bigshort
I don’t need comedic actor Will Ferrell and uber-hypocrite Brad Pitt lecturing–and lying to–me about what happened in the 2008 mortgage crisis. But that’s essentially what “The Big Short,” in theaters today nationwide, is.
“The Big Short” (TBS) is a smug, arrogant, lying, preachy, gimmicky mess, the narrative of which bears little resemblance to what actually occurred in the mortgage meltdown. Brad Pitt executive produced this movie. And while Ferrell isn’t in the movie, his guru–Adam McKay–wrote and directed this crap-pile. McKay is the director of such movies as “Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy,” its sequel “Anchorman 2,” “Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby,” and “The Other Guys”–all Ferrell star vehicles and all dopey, juvenile comedies. He’s also the writer of liberal “short” films, “Cops: Ferguson” and “Mexican Donald Trump,” as well as several other Ferrell flicks, including the disastrous anti-“White privilege” comedy, “Get Hard.” TBS is in the same “spirit” as these–a preachy, lying liberal message, bad jokes, and a lot of gimmickry. Throughout the movie, there are scenes form pop culture at the time. Who cares? Also, airheaded bimbo starlets like Margot Robbie and Selena Gomez talk to the screen and “explain” to you complicated financial issues. Haha, funny. Arrogant leftist chef Anthony Bourdain uses cooking analogies, like putting bad fish in his stew. Wow, soooo insightful. Actually, not really.
Based on a best-selling book of the same name by liberal writer Michael Lewis, TBS follows three groups of investors who discover independently of each other that mortgage investments–specifically subprime mortgages issued to people with bad credit and little income–are going to collapse. And, so, they bet against the market and win gazillions.
The movie, while respecting these very smart and insightful investors, also mocks them. Dr. Michael Burry (Christian Bale), a medical doctor and brilliant hedge fund chief at the time, is mocked for his glass eye, and his Asperger’s Syndrome. Mark Baum (Steve Carell) is mocked for being Jewish–a religion with which the movie seems to have a sub rosa obsession. We are introduced to his stereotypical, silly rabbi who taught him Talmud as a kid and is upset with him for questioning the Talmud and the word of the rabbis and G-d. That’s interesting because even the most religious Judaism encourages adherents to question everything. Oh, and by the way, when they make a movie mocking Muslims, imams, the koran, and those who study it, please let me know. Baum and his minions are approached by a sleazy, pseudo-Jewishy investment banker, Jared Vennett (Ryan Gosling) who tells them about the collapse of the housing market and wants to sell them investments shorting the market, so long as he gets a huge percentage in fees and cuts.
There is also a third group–a couple of young investors eager to make a lot of money, who stumble onto information about the collapse of the housing market–one of whom has a Jewish-sounding surname, Geller. The pair involve their eccentric, retired, wealthy former investor friend (Brad Pitt) to obtain the licenses they need to short the mortgage investment market and make a killing.
TBS allegedly tells the story of how the housing mortgage market collapsed. And you guessed it: the banks and Wall Street are the villains. Never ever mentioned in this extremely long diatribe is the fact that banks were forced to grant mortgages to minorities who were not creditworthy and that government regulators regularly told banks they weren’t allowed to use that RAAAAAYCIST! criteria called “credit” to issue loans. Instead, banks were forced to give credit and mortgage backing to people from the poorest cross-sections of America–people who would never ever be able to pay it back. But the movie doesn’t show you any of that. That would be racist, and you should know better than to use your “White-privileged” call for facts and accuracy in a movie. Also, it’s beyond the comprehension of Margot Robbie and Selena Gomez and their abilities to memorize scripts and look pretty.
Instead, the banks are the big, bad evil villains who take advantage of poor people. No responsibility is required here on the part of those poor people because we are apparently required to accept at face value that all poor people are idiots–like the White stripper the movie shows you with her five condo mortgages. She isn’t supposed to be able to do the math or understand when the ARM portion of her mortgage comes into play and her payments go up significantly. The bad guys are the two evil White men–one of them a former bartender and the other a Yale grad–who wrote up the mortgage policies and approved the stripper because–come Monday morning–they are selling her subprime mortgage to a bank or some other investors. White privilege again. The privileged White guys tell us about their primary mortgage candidates: NINJAs (No Income, No Job or Assets). Again, the government–not the banks–rigged the system this way.
The movie assumes and puts forth the assumption on you as fact that banks gave subprime loans to poor people and investment houses backed bonds in the mortgages because they knew the government would bail them out. But the fact is that most banks and investment houses lost money on these, and they aren’t in the business of giving money out only to know they won’t get it back. Whether or not the government bails them out isn’t a foreseeable result and not something any banks were counting on. Remember Lehman Brothers? Nobody bailed it out. The movie also mentions investment houses selling these crappy investments to “ignorant people” who are average investors and retirees. But what do banks do when they are forced to give bad mortgages to poor minorities who don’t make payments? They sell them to another bank or investment house and the cycle continues. The government caused this, not greedy bankers. That’s not to mention that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back a lot of these mortgages. Without those agencies, a lot of these mortgages would never have been issued.
Maybe the one accurate thing in this movie is the portrayal of federal regulators who were unwilling to investigate the mortgage investments and their artificially high ratings. As the movie notes, government regulators are always looking to get private sector jobs with the parties they “regulate.” And, as the movie fails to note, government workers are lazy, politically correct, and have zero creativity, imagination, or incentive to do anything of value.
But, as I noted, here’s what government regulators are, indeed, willing to do: I have a close friend, who is now retired but was a part owner in a bank until relatively recently. And he told me that every month bank regulators were at his chain of banks, breathing down bank officials’ necks, looking over the books, and making sure that a certain percentage of the bank’s loans went to minorities, especially the mortgage loans. Since not enough creditworthy minorities patronized the bank, my friend and his fellow investors had no choice but to issue loans to minorities who would predictably fail to pay back their loans. And the bank would sell those loans to another party . . . at a loss. That is the price of doing business as a bank in America today and was in 2008 and before.
But there is no “The Big Short” movie about that. Facts are stubborn things. It turns out, though, that Hollywood liberals bent on an agenda, are more stubborn. And that’s why this phony baloney movie is served up on the ignorant American movie-going public. Posters for this movie announce, “THIS IS A TRUE STORY.” Uh, no it isn’t.
The acting in this is good, but the story is a big fat lie. You see that–they just did a Big Short on the truth.
Merry Christmas, chumps.
THREE MARXES PLUS TWO OBAMAS PLUS TWO MICHELLE LAVAUGHN ROBINSON HUSSEIN OBAMA IDI AMIN DADAS
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgplus.jpgisisbeheadingisisbeheadingplus.jpgobamasmilingsmallerobamasmilingsmallerplus.jpgmichelleobamaangrysmallermichelleobamaangrysmaller
Watch the trailer . . .

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly
    
 

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

The Strange Tale of Simon the Magician

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Simon Magus. This follows this post about Planned Parenthood, which was funded in the Omnibus Budget Bill. This follows this post about Merry Christmas. This follows this post about Star Wars. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.
Please follow me here for continued posts.



http://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets

Video of Beyond Today -- The Strange Tale of Simon the Magician

This obscure individual may have had a profound impact on what you think is true, biblical Christianity.

Transcript

 
[Gary] Simon the Magician. Have you ever heard of him? Well this obscure historical person may have had a profound impact on what you think is biblical Christianity. Simon came from the Middle East, but his religious cult would spread over a wide area creating a conspiracy that perverted the teachings of Jesus. His megalomania drove him to claim that he was god. His followers met in secret conclaves practicing strange rituals for centuries after his death.
Sometimes it is difficult to separate historical fact from fable. Well in this case, the truth is stranger than fiction. Today, we’re going to explore how an ancient cult influenced modern Christianity - maybe even your Christianity.
Join us in exploring, "The Strange Tale of Simon the Magician."
[Announcer] Join our host, Gary Petty and his guests, as they help you understand your future on Beyond Today !
[Gary] Years ago, I had a long conversation with a prominent member of a mainstream Christian church. He claimed that Jesus freed him from having to obey any biblical law. He explained that as long as he loved in the spirit, physical actions - well, they didn’t even matter.
So I countered his argument by saying that God’s law says, "Don’t commit murder." (Exodus 20:13) And asked him, "Do you think a Christian can break this law, commit murder, and this is acceptable to God?"
His reply really surprised me. He said, "Well you know, many husbands and wives love each other, but in a fit of rage murder their spouse." He believed that God didn’t judge a Christian who committed murder in such cases, because God knew that in the killer’s heart he really loved the murdered spouse.
Now before you say that this man’s beliefs are ridiculous and non-Christian, are you sure you don’t have some beliefs that are different than what Jesus taught?
I really want to challenge you with the next question: Has your church actually been influenced by an ancient pagan cult?
Today, we’re going to answer this question by looking at the life and times of a man who is mentioned in the biblical book of Acts - a man who left his mark on a counterfeit Christianity - maybe even your Christianity.
Jesus' disciples were busy spreading the gospel. A Christian leader named Philip traveled to Samaria, an area that’s not far from Jerusalem, and many people began to respond to his message. The Samaritans were outcasts from Jewish society. They mingled biblical teachings with paganism to create a unique, sort of paganized Judaism.
Well there, Philip came in contact with a religious leader known as Simon the Magician. Simon had a large following among the Samaritans because he performed "miracles" though demonic power.
Many of Simon’s followers believed Philip’s message about Jesus as the prophesied Messiah. They even began to be baptized (Acts 8:12-13). And then, Simon himself professed to be a Christian and he too was baptized.
Upon hearing of this interest in Jesus as the Christ, the apostles Peter and John traveled to Samaria to instruct the new converts and to lay hands upon them so that they would receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17-19). Now, when Simon saw that God’s Spirit was given to people, he offered the apostles money if they would give him this power.
This is where we get the English word simony , which means the selling and buying of religious offices.
Now let’s take a minute, and really look at this biblical story, and then explore how this practically unknown person may have influenced your religious views.
Simon was a very religious man who was attracted to the belief that Jesus was the Messiah. Now remember, he was publicly baptized as a Christian. Now when he saw that authentic Christianity also involved receiving the Spirit of God, he wanted that power.
Simon recognized a core issue in his life that we all share. He understood that he was somehow incomplete. Now before, he had been practicing pagan rites that tapped into demonic powers, but he couldn’t begin to experience the real power of the Almighty God. The biblical account doesn’t say that Simon wanted to give up his pagan religion or even change his way of life. What he wanted was power (Acts 8:19). He didn’t want to submit to God, he wanted to become his own god. And remember, that is exactly what he did in his life.
The apostles rejected Simon as a man of - they called him a man of bitterness (Acts 8:23). The "Magician" disappeared from the biblical account. Now this doesn’t mean that Simon vanished. He would continue to lead his religious cult, adding elements of the teachings of Jesus to his pagan-Jewish mixture. Simon and his cult would be part of a movement to create a paganized Christianity that in many ways had little to do with the real Jesus.
For hundreds of years after Simon’s death, his cult appears in historical records. You know, he even occasionally pops up in modern culture. Some of you may even remember, Jack Palance played a somewhat theatrical Simon in the 1954 movie, The Silver Chalice .
> Did you hear the crowd when I came in? "Hail Simon!" they shouted. They sensed the moment of my greatness and are ready to accept me.
>> Fly Simon!
> I am god!
>> Fly in the name of Caesar into His everlasting glory.
[Gary] At the heart of Simon’s heresy was the belief that he could receive power from God without changing his ways to please God. The Simonian cult was part of a religious movement known as gnosticism. Now, one of the main tenets of this movement is that biblical laws and morality are all made invalid by a new enlightened freedom. For gnostics, true religion is found in the power of secret knowledge. With this secret knowledge you discover the truth - -now listen, but it is a truth that comes from within.
If this sounds a little bit familiar it is because it is a main tenet of the New Age movement. But just like the Christians in the first century, many Christians today hear the same message that it is possible to receive the power of God without submitting to God. In the New Testament, when they confronted this wrong teaching, it was called lawlessness.
Now "law" is one of those words that cause many Christians to sort of cringe. I mean, maybe you’ve heard that obedience to law is anti-grace. It’s anti-love. The truth is, you will never really experience the love of God until you know how God defines love.
The foundation of the teachings of Jesus is love. But have you ever asked yourself: What did Jesus mean by love? Was He speaking of a sort of indefinable emotion? And that’s how a lot of people see love when we talk about the Bible or about Jesus - sort of this indefinable emotion, this feeling.
Well you know, a man came to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?" (Matthew 22:25-36)
Now, Jesus had the perfect opportunity to claim, now listen, love erases all of God’s laws. Instead, He responded, " 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment." (Matthew 22:37-38)
Now, did Jesus simply make up this foundational principle of life?
Well, no. It is a quote from the Old Testament book of the law, known as Deuteronomy. You see, to love God is total, unreserved trust, surrender and obedience. And Jesus said this is the first of all the laws.
Now in answer to the man who asked about the law, Jesus went on to say, "And the second" - or second law - "is like it: [and] 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 22:39-40).
Now once again, Jesus quotes from the Old Testament. Notice, He doesn’t say that to love your neighbor is an indefinable feeling. He says that loving neighbor is behaving towards others as you would want them to treat you. And this, these two commandments, this is the core of authentic Christianity - and they are laws.
Now, it is absolutely true that no one can receive salvation through any law - I mean even God’s law. The purpose of law is to define good and bad behavior. We are all saved - and this is important to understand - we are all saved by the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, the lawless teachings of Simon, which crept into early Christianity, continues to this day to cheapen the grace of God.
Do you want to experience the real grace of God? Well if you do, one important step is to get your free study guide: The Church Jesus Built . If you want to be a true disciple of Jesus Christ then you must know what He taught. His people, His Church , must reject the teachings of the great conspiracy started by false teachers like Simon the Magician.
If you are serious about being a disciple of Jesus Christ then you must read, The Church Jesus Built . You can read it online at BeyondToday.tv or get a free copy sent to your mailbox by calling: 1-888-886-8632. Remember that. You can write it down: 1-888-886-8632. Or, you can write to us with your request to the address that’s on the screen right now. So, please contact us (Beyond Today, PO Box 541027, Cincinnati, OH 45254).
Magician, Simon the Magician, lawlessness… this may seem rather meaningless to you. Now as a Christian, you are under grace and love which are anti-law. Is that what you think? Think about that. The law of God was done away when Jesus came, right? Is this what you hear from your pulpit?
If it is, I want you to listen very carefully to what I am about to read from the New Testament. The apostle Paul prophesied about a man who will deceive the entire world before the second coming of Jesus Christ. He described this man this way: "...for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4).
Paul then writes - now listen, "For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work…" (2 Thessalonians 2:7).
The lawless approach to God, as taught by Simon, will be prevalent at the return of Jesus Christ. Now notice, Paul wrote that it was already present in his day.
Are you guilty of substituting cheap grace for the real love towards God and neighbor taught by Jesus Christ?
Do you know that this false idea may be actually in your church, even though it claims to be Christian? I mean, does your church teach that the law of God was nailed to the cross? Or that love in your heart means that you don’t have to obey God? Or, do you believe a gospel based on the belief that all truth must come from within - just trust your heart?
Well, are Simon’s teachings in your church?
Most likely, in one way or another, yes! Go ask your pastor about these things. Check out your beliefs against the Bible!
These ideas, prevalent in the New Age movement and far too many Christian pulpits, are not based in the teachings of Jesus, but a false interpretation of the Bible that can be traced back to an obscure pagan cult from the time of the earliest Christians.
Why would God inspire this story of Simon to appear in the Bible? It’s a very short story. What are we to learn from a pagan who tried to buy the power of the Holy Spirit? The story of Simon the Magician is in Scripture to help us - you and I - it’s to help us avoid those exact same pitfalls.
Simon wanted to be like God. He wanted to satisfy that spiritual hunger that we all experience. He wanted to be respected as a spiritual leader. But he wanted all this without a willingness to love God or submit to God.
Simon disappeared from the biblical narrative after Acts 8, but he continued to lead a religious movement that mixed elements of paganism, Judaism and Christianity. His cult would exist for hundreds of years and have an effect on the formation of mainstream Christianity.
So we’ve seen that at the heart of the Simonian cult, and the larger movement known as gnosticism, was a belief that biblical laws and morality are to be rejected by the enlightened mind, discovering truth through secret knowledge. Now this concept, it’s what the New Testament writers call lawlessness.
So it’s very important that we take right now some time, to look at what Jesus said about lawlessness. And we’re going to look in the Sermon on the Mount:
Jesus said, "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven."
"Many will say to Me in that day," - Now what He means here is when He returns. When Jesus Christ returns to gather His elect, to gather His people, He says many will come to Him and say, " 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'" - the name of Jesus Christ - "And then [Jesus declares] to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'" (Matthew 7:21-23).
Let’s take a second to allow those words to really sink in.
Jesus said that when He returns there will be people who claim to be His followers whom He will reject. That’s right! Jesus Christ is going to reject some people who do great works in His name. Why? Because they practice lawlessness. The old Simonian lie will be alive and believed by people claiming to be followers of Jesus at the time of His return. Don’t get caught up in it yourself!
Remember, even Simon claimed to be a Christian and he was baptized. Now have you ever heard this message that I just said taught as part of the gospel brought by Jesus? It’s in the Sermon on the Mount - Matthew 7 - look it up. Because it’s a frightening statement. Are you in danger of being rejected by Jesus Christ when He returns? You know, Christ doesn’t want to reject anyone, but He - remember in His own words - He said He will not accept lawlessness.
We read earlier that Jesus taught that all of the teachings of the Old Testament are based in two great laws from the Old Testament: love God and love neighbor.
Love is the basis of God’s law. Now, the law of God defines good behavior and bad behavior. It defines love! The Ten Commandments aren’t anti-love or anti-grace. They define the most basic behaviors of love. Do not steal. Do not lie. Do not murder.
Now this doesn’t mean that Christianity is simply a matter of ritualistically keeping a set of rules. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus expanded the meaning of the word love beyond the simple letter of the law. He said that the law says, "do not murder." And then He told His followers to obey the law by learning not to hate. You see, hatred is the root cause of murder.
So let’s go back to the man who argued that the law against murder was erased by Jesus, and how a Christian could commit murder, but not be judged by God as long as he somehow had "love" in his heart.
Well, this is nothing more than the old lie of lawlessness taught by Simon. It is impossible to hack a person to death, or gun them down, while you’re loving that person in your heart while you’re in some fit of rage.
Simon the Magician, and other gnostic leaders, may have influenced your Christianity more than you know. You know, it is time - now, to return to the true teachings of Jesus Christ - His love, His laws, His morality, His doctrines, His prophesies, His teachings about the Father. It’s time to discover the real power of God’s Spirit - right now, in your life. Go dust off your Bibles and read the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Even in Simon’s death, his whole life is just shrouded in myth. One story claimed that in order to prove his divinity, he was buried alive so he could be resurrected after three days and nights. Where did he get that from? Well, according to the account, he’s still buried there today.
The Acts of Peter , written toward the end of the second century, claimed that Simon deceived many by flying around like a giant bird until Peter called upon God and Simon fell to the ground and broke his leg. Following an operation he died. His life, his teachings, his death - just a bizarre mixture of insanity and myth.
Now, we’re going to discuss how the lawlessness of Simon the Magician is still prevalent in Christianity today with our Beyond Today panel, but first let me tell you about today’s free offers that can help you discover authentic Christianity as taught in the pages of your Bible.
The Church Jesus Built is a detailed study guide that explains what the Bible means by Church and God’s purpose for the creating a Church . There is an entire chapter explaining the origins of the conspiracy leading to this counterfeit Christianity .
Now if you desire to become a true disciple of Jesus Christ, then you need to order your free copy of: The Church Jesus Built . Go online to download a free copy at BeyondToday.t v or call: 1-888-886-8632.
And when you do, we will also send you a free subscription to The Good News magazine . This bi-monthly magazine will help you live a happier, more productive life - all the while preparing you for eternal life in God’s family - in His Kingdom. You’ll receive helpful articles on family life, doctrine, prophecy and analysis of today’s confusing world news. Call us today for both of these free offers, or write to us at the address on your screen (Beyond Today, PO Box 541027, Cincinnati, OH 45254).
We’ve been discussing the conspiracy of Simon the Magician and the effects his cult had on early Christianity. Many people are surprised that many of the teachings he had then, still exist today and still affect Christianity today. Well to further expose this conspiracy, we are joined by fellow Beyond Today hosts, Darris McNeely and Steve Myers.
People would be surprised that there’s still lessons we need to learn about the life of this obscure person of Simon in Acts 8.
[Steve] It’s an amazing story. When you consider right at the very beginning of Christianity, right when the New Testament Church was beginning to take off, here is this conspiracy against it that Simon is at the heart of, and immediately it takes a hard left turn away from the truth. And I think many don’t realize that that was right at the very beginning, and so then what became mainstream Christianity really was off track right from the start.
[Darris] It’s interesting that God inspired Luke to record this one story just once and nothing else is mentioned about this man in the entire New Testament. When you look at the story, and you see that he wanted to buy the Holy Spirit because he saw that it was by the laying on of hands that people received the gift of the Holy Spirit, you have there a perfect example of people, of an idea, a religion that wants to take a shortcut toward the most important matter - that really all religion has tried to do but only the Bible shows us how. And that is to have the power of God within us.
That is what the Holy Spirit is - God’s power within us, Christ living His life within us. And that’s what Simon tried to buy. And I think that that is one of the great lessons - not only shows the positive way by which God gives His Spirit but that you can’t buy that. There’s nothing cheap about that. There’s no shortcut to that. You must follow what God lays down in His Scripture. God gives His Spirit, it says, to those who obey Him. And there’s no shortcut to obedience.
[Gary] Well it’s amazing when you think about, if you read about the Simonian cult and what Simon did the rest of his life. He declared himself to be a God.
[Darris] Yes.
[Gary] He couldn’t receive the power from God so he declared himself to be a god. And the result is, is he created the strangest - even by Roman standards - it was a strange cult and strange beliefs, but he had been baptized a Christian. So he claimed to have a Christian, be a Christian and his cult was Christian, and of course it wasn’t.
[Steve] Yeah, and some of those subtleties I think that we miss if we don’t really notice what was going on. Darris mentioned about the Holy Spirit given through the laying on of hands. I had a circumstance come up a while back where a friend of mine was baptized - which was a very good thing. And I said, that’s great! And I asked him, did you have hands laid on you? Because that’s the example that’s given there. And, was dead silence, because he hadn’t.
And I wonder how many Christians today follow what’s actually written or have they been skewed in what they believe thinking that there’s shortcuts to getting where the Bible teaches the facts, the truth, and yet their practice is something totally different. I think it is important to think about that.
[Gary] Because in that story, when you think about that story, Simon was baptized. But none of the people who were baptized received the Spirit until the apostles came and laid hands on them. So it shows that those two things are connected together, and unfortunately a lot of people today do not even believe in baptism. They are even too, that far from what the Scripture says.
What are some of the lessons we can learn or what are some of the teachings of Simon, you just mentioned one, that we still find that are existed today? We talked about lawlessness a little bit...
[Steve] There are so many plain statements in the Bible that contradict the teachings of Simon. If you look at 1 John 5:3, it says very plainly that love is keeping the commandments. This is the love of God, it says, keeping His commandments. So you can’t separate the love of God which many would say yes, I love God - but you need to keep His commandments! And in fact, it goes on to say those commandments are not burdensome. And so, commandment-keepers are Christians and Christians have to keep the commandments if they truly love God.
[Gary] Now, I am going to say something here that may seem very, very strange. We want you to order our free study guide, The Church Jesus Built , but while you are waiting for it to come, we want you - before you even read this - pick up your Bible and read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. And pray, and ask God to open your mind to His Word, and then we can help you sort through it.
When you order, The Church Jesus Built , we will also send you a free subscription to The Good News magazine. This will help you discover the authentic Christianity taught by Jesus Christ. Call: 1-888-886-8632, or go online to download a free copy at BeyondToday.tv .
Nearly 300 years after Peter confronted Simon, a Catholic bishop named, Eusebius lamented that the Simonian cult still existed. Now he wrote,
"It is an astonishing fact that this is still the practice of those who to the present day belong to his (this) disgusting sect. Following in.... [Simon’s] footsteps they slip into the church like a pestilential and scabby disease, and do the utmost damage to all whom they succeed in smearing with the horrible, deadly poison concealed on them" ( The History of the Church by Eusebius.)
Simon’s greatest heresies were infecting Christianity hundreds of years after he is mentioned in the book of Acts. This is one of the reasons God inspired Luke to record these events. Remember, Christians will be combating the "mystery of lawlessness" until the return of Jesus Christ. And what this means, if you are serious about Christianity, it is time to remove all vestiges of Simon the Magician from your beliefs and become a living stone in the Church Jesus is building.
Join us next week on Beyond Today as we continue to discover the gospel of the Kingdom. We also invite you to join us in praying, "Thy Kingdom come." For Beyond Today , I’m Gary Petty. Thanks for watching.
[Announcer] For the free literature offered on today’s program, go online to BeyondToday.tv . Please join us again next week on Beyond Today !

Top 10 PC Campus Offenses of 2015

A timely post from http://www.yaf.org  about hostility towards mainstream American students on universities. This follows this post about  Star Wars anti-white message. This follows this post about Pope Francis's opinion of Mexicans. This follows this post about Muslim immigration and Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

 
  • New Guard Inner

Top 10 PC Campus Offenses of 2015

 Posted by Emily Jashinsky
Top 10 PC Campus Offenses of 2015
 top10pc15
Any American who follows the news knows that it's been an historic year for campus controversies. From the Mizzou protests to the proliferation of safe spaces to mandatory sensitivity trainings, in 2015 the PC Police were more active than ever on our nation's campuses, continuing their efforts to suffocate students' rights to free speech and open debate.
Take a look back at some of this year's most egregious offenses and share the list to help us spread the word and fight back in 2016.  
10.  American University Instructs Students to Introduce Themselves by “Gender Pronoun” at Orientation, UTK Issues Bizarre Pronoun Guide
At American University's freshmen orientation this August, students were instructed to introduce themselves by name, hometown, and "gender pronoun."
When AU freshman Tristan Justice, a Young Americans for Freedom leader, questioned this instruction, his orientation leader responded, "Here at AU, we don’t like to make assumptions about people’s gender."
Justice told The New Guard, "Despite being informed that American University was a very liberal campus, I went to orientation with high hopes that it wasn’t as bad as it sounded, but I was wrong."
Tristan’s story was covered by outlets including Fox News and The Drudge Report, bringing the proliferation of this radically progressive ritual to the attention of a national audience.
At the same time, the University of Tennessee’s decision to issue a bizarre guide to gender pronouns like “ze” and “zir” was also making big headlines. The school’s Young Americans for Freedom chapter pushed back by publishing a viral video that showed their peers struggling to even pronounce the words in the guide. Soon after, their school removed the guide from its website.

9. Duke University Broadcasts Muslim Call to Prayer
In an initiative to promote religious pluralism, Duke University decided last January to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer every Friday on campus from the Chapel bell tower.
After pressure from Young America’s Foundation, whose spokeswoman Ashley Pratte reported extensively on the story on Fox News, other conservative leaders, and thousands of concerned parents, students, and alumni, Duke canceled the initiative.

8. Students Vote to Remove Chick-Fil-A From Campus
In January, students at Indiana University voted 18-9 to remove Chick-Fil-A from its Bloomington campus, based on concerns over the company's views on same-sex marriage.  But in the same meeting the Residence Hall Association voted unanimously to support and establish a residence hall floor for gender blind housing for those who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.
The school’s Young Americans for Freedom chapter leader Andrew Ireland was interviewed about the decision by Elizabeth Hasselbeck on Fox & Friends, where he noted this was a giant double standard. Ireland remarked, “[The vote] was an act of discrimination against a worldview.”
Political correctness is coming for your chicken.

7. High School Principle Seizes Mic to Dismiss Students During YAF Lecture, Says Shapiro “Crossed a Line”
In front of a capacity crowd of more than 450 students, an Otay Ranch High School administrator dismissed students from conservative powerhouse Ben Shapiro’s speech, which was organized by the school’s Young Americans for Freedom chapter and sponsored by Young America’s Foundation, after telling the audience Shapiro’s conservative beliefs “crossed a line” earlier this December.
The administrator’s actions were caught on camera and can be seen at the :44 second mark in the video below.
The administrator seized the microphone from a student during the Q&A session to dismiss the enthusiastic audience after he objected to Shapiro’s conservative outlook on poverty. The audience cand be heard booing their teacher on video, with one student saying “I want to stay!”
More proof that students are conditioned to oppose conservative ideas before they even get to college.

6. University of California Board of Regents Considers Restrictive Speech Code
As debates over free speech intensified at campuses across the country, the University of California system considered adopting an exceptionally restrictive speech code in the fall of 2015. The policy encouraged students to report “derogatory language reflecting stereotypes or prejudice” as speech that was in violation of the code, among other things.
The process ignited a fierce debate in California and in the national media, exemplifying the troubling trend of unconstitutional restrictions on exercises of First Amendment rights on American campuses.
Of all places, the UC system should have a strong respect for free speech since the movement began at Berkeley fifty years ago.
While the policy was rejected, California bureaucrats like Janet Napolitano will likely continue their efforts to crack down on students’ rights to free expression.
 freespeechcafeucb

5. Christina Hoff Sommers’ Speech Combated with ‘Safe Spaces’
When it was announced that widely respected conservative feminist Christina Hoff Sommers would be giving a lecture at Georgetown University sponsored by the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, the school’s feminist community was outraged. They claimed Sommers’ insistence upon questioning false statistics about sexual assault amounted to “hate speech” and was “triggering” for students on campus.
Students set up “safe spaces” where anybody who felt unsafe because of Dr. Sommers’ words could seek shelter—they held signs in the back of the lecture hall redirecting attendees who became endangered by Dr. Sommers’ “hate speech.”
After the event, Georgetown requested that CBLPI take down their video of the lecture. In response, Luce Institute president Michelle Easton remarked, “Could it be that the University is trying to conceal the embarrassing behavior and declarations of its feminist students at our lecture? Dr. Sommers‘ lecture was a public event, and the camera was in plain view. Surely the University understands that.”
This event brought the proliferation of  “safe spaces” to national attention, shedding light on the Left’s new strategy to further isolate college students in bubbles of progressivism and eliminate conservative speech from campus completely.


4. GW YAF Threatened with Defunding, Called Violent and Hateful for Resisting Sensitivity Training
The George Washington University’s YAF chapter had no idea how much controversy they would cause by simply suggesting the university provide a religious exemption for students who wanted to opt out of recently mandated sensitivity training. But after their peers found out they had resisted the student government’s mandated reeducation camps, other student organizations demanded they be defunded, compared them to ISIS and cancer, and said they had “committed an act of violence” against the transgender community.
Their story went viral, earning coverage on Fox News, The Daily Caller, Breitbart, The Washington Times, and many other outlets. Most importantly, top administrators assured students that no mandatory training would ever be held at The George Washington University. The following semester, the chapter had their highest recruiting drive in recent memory.
GW YAF’s victory for free speech drew national attention to the pervasive trend of university-mandated sensitivity training, which is typically no more than a thinly veiled effort to institutionalize leftist ideas and label conservative beliefs “hate speech.”

3. American Sniper Screening Canceled for ‘Islamophobia’
When the University of Michigan announced it would be screening the hit film American Sniper, Muslim and Middle Eastern students began circulating a petition demanding the movie be cut because of its allegedly anti-Muslim message. Students complained the film made them feel “uncomfortable” and unsafe.
The university announced it would cancel the screening of American Sniper and replace it with the children’s movie Paddington.
Michigan YAF took the lead in pushing back against the university’s decision to pull the movie. Chairman Grant Strobl called for a return to sanity as a guest on Fox News.
After being harshly criticized in the national media, and from football coach Jim Harbaugh, for their strange decision, the university announced it would indeed be showing American Sniper and called their choice to cancel it a “mistake.” Still, other schools had similar issues with the film.
 
 

2. Yale Students Riot Over Halloween Email
In recent years, Halloween has brought out the worst in our nation’s professors and university administrators. Annually, they lecture students across the country on ensuring their Halloween costumes are politically correct, inoffensive, and “microaggression”-safe. This involves discouraging students from wearing sombreros, dressing up like Pocahontas, or imitating their favorite rappers. This new push against “cultural appropriation” inspired a Yale faculty member to send students a notably calm and rational defense of politically incorrect Halloween costumes, urging students not be censored by the university, which had sent an earlier email reminding them to be “culturally aware” and sensitive.”
This one thoughtful and reasonable email set off a firestorm. Students gathered to demand an apology and a resignation for the faculty member’s failure to create a “safe space.” As he attempted to reason with them on the quad, a viral video caught the students screaming expletive-laden rants about sensitivity in his face.
In response to the uproar over “cultural appropriation” exhibited by students at Yale and across the country, Virginia Tech’s Young Americans for Freedom chapter actually staged a “Funeral for Halloween” on their campus, complete with a coffin and eulogy for the once enjoyable holiday.
vt halloween funeral 15

1. Mizzou Turned Upside Down Over Questionable Accusations of Racism, Black Conservative Called ‘Uncle Tom’
This case is easily our country’s most high profile campus controversy in recent memory. Large-scale protests and demonstrations in early November drew reporters and camera crews from around the world to the University of Missouri campus. After the school’s football team joined with black student groups to demand the university president resign for allegedly failing to adequately address racial issues, they succeeded and Tim Wolfe stepped down.  Not satisfied, they continued to protest and demand more resignations. The protests at Mizzou spawned a spate of protests at school’s around the country that drew heavy coverage from the national media.
Unsurprisingly, many of the allegations of racism turned out to be false or wholly unsubstantiated. Students and professors were captured on tape turning journalists away and speaking out against free speech rights.
Still, one real and documented case of racism went completely ignored by the demonstrators. When Mizzou’s conservative club took Young America’s Foundation’s activism advice and defended the school’s statue of Thomas Jefferson from campus liberals who had vandalized it, Jasmine Wells, a black member of the conservative club, was called an “Uncle Tom” on social media. Not a single one of the protestors expressed any concern.
The weekend after their campus erupted into chaos, members of Mizzou’s conservative club attended Young America’s Foundation’s Fall Conference at the Reagan Ranch where they heard from conservative powerhouse Ben Shapiro. Within a day of Shapiro’s speech, Young America’s Foundation organized a free-speech oriented lecture by Shapiro on Mizzou’s campus. Hundreds of students attended the lecture in person. As of now, nearly half a million people have viewed the video online.
 

Monday, December 21, 2015

Editorial: Primary Against Paul Ryan!

Editorial

As we saw in the Omnibus budget bill,
1. Planned Parenthood was FULLY FUNDED, in spite of this year's revealing videos
2. "Syrian" Refugees were FULLY FUNDED, in spite of security concerns
3. Immigration was increased in the form of
    A. Increased H2-B Visas
    B. Continued funding of Sanctuary Cities
    C. Unaccompanied Alien Minors are not Deported
4. The deficit was increased by over $1.1 trillion dollars

Immigration is the key to so many other issues because, as was noted in the book of the year, Adios America, by Ann Coulter, recent immigrants vote for the Democratic Party at a rate over 80% so these immigrants will vote for pro-abortion and pro-homosexual candidates at that rate!

Six Ways I’ve Seen Pro-Choice People Try to Censor Pro-Lifers

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about censorship of pro-lifers. This follows this post about pro-life presidential candidates. For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

Abortion is not merely immoral, it is obviously immoral.
That abortion is obviously immoral is also why I’m open-minded. Some people think that being open-minded means being wishy-washy, and that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Being pro-life and open-minded means being pro-life because it’s rational, not because it’s comfortable. I’m pro-life because rationally it’s what I have to be, not because it’s what I want to be. If somehow my arguments against abortion were defeated and a stronger argument for abortion was presented to me, then I would change my mind.
Any open-minded person should be disgusted whenever people try to silence their political opposition.[Tweet that] I’m almost never disgusted with pro-choice people. I honestly think most of them mean well, but suffer from a combination of self-deception, flawed reasoning, and difficult emotional experiences. But I become truly angry when anyone attempts to shield himself and others from hearing arguments against his view by preventing his opposition from speaking.
I want to defeat pro-choice arguments by presenting better arguments, but I want the opposing arguments to be made. Sometimes I even help pro-choice people make their arguments stronger before I present my own. I believe the more light that is cast on both views, the more clearly the pro-life side comes out the victor.
Censorship attempts to prevent one of the sides from being visible. Censorship doesn’t want people to choose the more compelling view, it wants to force people into only having one view to choose from. Censorship is an incredibly powerful weapon for anyone cowardly enough to use it.[Tweet that]
Honest dialogue is aimed at truth, which makes it the greatest friend of the truth-seeker. It is created by two people being willing to acknowledge that they have been wrong before and that they want to believe true things, no matter how uncomfortable. Censorship, on the other hand, is the greatest enemy of the truth-seeker.
Censorship is at its strongest when it is hidden in the shadows, so out of a desire to make it as weak as possible and make it easier to recognize in the future, I am going to briefly share six experiences (or types of experiences) where I have seen attempts to censor pro-life people.
Unfortunately the attempts at censorship are getting more and more common. I’m not afraid of pro-choice arguments, but I am afraid of a political climate that trains people to refuse to even listen to pro-life arguments. If enough people are brainwashed to only listen to people that agree with them, we will not be able to stop abortion.
All six of these experiences are of pro-choice people doing the censoring. I’m not saying that censorship doesn’t exist on the other side, but I do think it is significantly less common. I formally renounce all attempts pro-life people have ever made to censor pro-choice people. Let them speak. If the truth is on our side, what have we to fear?

#1: Censoring Abortion Images

Warning: For this example, I will show a picture of protesters in front of a pro-life exhibit, and abortion images can be seen on the exhibit.
On a very cold day at the University of Georgia, I stood in front of the Justice For All (JFA) Exhibit and tried to dialogue with pro-choice students. Most of the panels on the JFA Exhibit include an image of an abortion victim. Every day I’ve ever used a public display with abortion images, I’ve seen angry students vocalize their outrage at the images. That’s okay, because I’d rather people be open with their emotions so we can talk about them, and if JFA has the free speech to show the pictures, angry students should have the free speech to express their anger at them. This day in Georgia was unusual because it was the first time I ever saw a group of students attempt to block the abortion images by lining up together and holding up bedsheets. This particular attempt was not very successful because the JFA Exhibit is almost two stories tall.
justiceforall2
I honestly admire those pro-choice students’ dedication. They took it in turns to stand in the cold with their arms raised over their heads for a long time. That’s more discomfort than many pro-life people are willing to endure for their beliefs. But I don’t admire the students’ attempt to cover up the abortion images. If you really think abortion is justified, you shouldn’t be afraid of true images of what abortion does to babies. You don’t have to like looking at them, but if you’re so confident that your view is right, you shouldn’t try to prevent people from being able to consider all of the evidence about abortion. (To learn more about how ERI uses abortion images and why, go here).

#2: Censoring Dialogue with Noise

justiceforall
This is the only example on this list I didn’t witness personally, but I’ve heard about it from several people that were there that day, including my colleague Jacob Nels, and it is too remarkable an example to not include.
In fall of 2010 at University of Oklahoma, the Justice For All staff had set up their Exhibit and were trying to create good dialogues. Unfortunately, the pro-choice students on campus made that extremely difficult by using a rather unusual form of protest. They came with kazoos, tambourines, and other noise-makers and went around making so much noise that it impeded JFA’s attempts to get into dialogues.
Photo credit: Justice For All. Used with permission.
Jacob Nels recounts that my friends Stephen Wagner (still of Justice For All) and Trent Horn (now of Catholic Answers) tried to stage a loud debate out of desperation, with Trent pretending to be pro-choice. When one of the protestors noticed and called him out as actually being pro-life, Trent frustratedly exclaimed, “I’m trying to get some information out there, and all you’re doing is blowing kazoos, and kazoos have very low informational value!”
Most attempts at censorship are more subtle than this. I wish I could have asked one of those students, “Does it make you uncomfortable that your best solution to stop pro-life people from being persuasive is blowing kazoos instead of trying to counter their arguments?”

#3: Censoring by Claiming to be Offended

The ratio of the number of times people on college campuses these days say they are offended versus actually offensive statements that are made is frighteningly high. People have told me that I have offended them by saying abortion is wrong, by saying abortion hurts women, by saying the unborn deserves the same protection born children do, and even for saying it’s wrong to murder newborns. None of these statements are actually offensive. If you disagree with them, then just say so and make your case. Saying “I’m offended” as a response to one of these statements is just another way of saying “Shut up, I don’t want to listen to you!”
The worldview that you have the moral right to a safe space where you don’t have to hear anything that could possibly offend you is despicable. Honest truth-seeking is necessarily painful because it means challenging even the beliefs that you love the most. Honest truth-seeking means intentionally avoiding confirmation bias by seeking to understand the strongest arguments of people that disagree with you. Believing in a moral right to a safe space from anything offensive means believing confirmation bias is a virtue.
We have a duty to treat people with dignity. I think that makes certain kinds of trigger warnings appropriate, such as material that could be traumatizing for a rape survivor.
Prudence dictates that we not offend needlessly. If you want to be persuasive, you should remember that irritated people tend to be less likely to change their minds. But we do not have a duty to protect people from the possibility of ever being offended.

#4: Censoring on the Basis of Gender

IMG_0884-1200
Literally every day I have ever spent on a college campus doing pro-life outreach, I have been told I am not allowed to speak or even have an opinion about abortion because I’m a man. If you want to learn an incredibly effective and persuasive way to respond, read here.
Objecting to the right of a human being to make a moral argument on the basis of his gender is sexism, plain and simple. It is discrimination against men for the simple purpose of silencing as many pro-life people as possible.
To be fair, I think some people that object to my gender don’t understand that they are engaging in censorship. They wrongly believe that someone’s opinion is not legitimate if he cannot completely understand a person’s emotional state. That’s a silly thing to believe, but if that’s honestly what is driving their objection to my gender, they aren’t exactly trying to censor me. But for other pro-choice people, it is a calculated, intentional, shameful effort to shut down their opposition from being able to speak.

#5: Censoring on the Basis of Race (and Gender)

I was having a great conversation at a Justice For All event at the University of North Texas in spring of 2014. The student was asking fair questions about the implications of believing abortion is wrong, and between answering her questions, I was making a positive case for the value of the unborn. Then I noticed one of the pro-choice protestors from earlier in my peripheral vision, listening to our conversation. Instead of ignoring her, I wanted to welcome her to be a part of our conversation, so I smiled, reached out my hand, and said, “Hi, I’m Tim.” She squinted her eyes and just glared at me, motionless. I asked, “You don’t want to shake my hand?” Her verbatim response, loaded with venom, was, “I don’t trust white men.” Then she did her very best to shut down my productive conversation by interjecting every couple of minutes to rant about how racist and sexist I was simply for being a white male in America.
Do our cultures affect our views dramatically? Yes. Do I as a white person fully understand what it’s like to experience serious racial discrimination? No, I really don’t. But the increasingly common claim that white people are racist simply for being white in America is itself racist. How about judging people based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin? I think some smart guy with a dream said something like that.
The belief that only white people can be racist is not just wrong, it is both evil and stupid. It is evil because it rationalizes the racial hatred that many non-white people have, and it is stupid because it is so obviously wrong, no truth-oriented person could possibly believe it. Using this evil, stupid belief to try to intimidate people that disagree with you into silence is unconscionable.

#6: Censoring by Accusing Us of Inciting Violence

I already wrote at length why pro-life advocates are not responsible for the recent Planned Parenthood shooting, contrary to the claims of thousands of pro-choice people, including a presidential candidate. I won’t repeat myself here. But I would like to point out the intended effect of this massive attempt to blame pro-life advocates for this shooting. These pro-choice people were not trying to convince pro-life people to be more loving or gracious as they advocate on behalf of the unborn. They were trying to force pro-life people to stop advocating on behalf of the unborn. In essence, these pro-choice people were saying, “Shut up about abortion, or we’ll accuse you of being responsible for murder.”
The police officer who was murdered while heroically defending the Planned Parenthood staff and patients was a pro-life Christian named Garrett Swasey. The logical conclusion of the argument of many pro-choice people is that Swasey was responsible for his own murder. They had the gall to use sympathy for Swasey’s death to censor anyone who agrees with him from speaking on behalf of the unborn.
It is very difficult for anyone to take the opinions of a close-minded person seriously, whether they are pro-life, pro-choice, Christian, atheist, or anything else. If you aren’t willing to reconsider your own views, then it’s hypocritical for you to think other people should reconsider theirs. If you haven’t seriously tested your own ideas in the fire of genuine truth-seeking, then honestly you probably have shallow ideas. You might have some true beliefs, but not likely for good reasons. If you genuinely want to be a truth-seeker, the first thing you should do is ask questions of intelligent people you disagree with. The last thing you should do is demand that people who disagree with you not speak at all.
LifeNews Note: The post “Six Ways I’ve Seen Pro-Choice People Try to Censor Pro-Lifers” originally appeared at the Equal Rights Institute blog.