Golden QuillSeptember 2010 Newsletter

If you are looking for my examination of the uncut Cultures of Revolution video, click on this link to go to the MAVI MARMARA report.

I had an unusual dream. I dreamed that I was sitting at a table with a lady, listening to her elderly husband rant about his disappointment with a company that had not made a shirt according to the quality that he expected. He was telling us what he was going to say in a letter of complaint to them, and ended with the astounding statement that if they did not comply, he was going to call down a judgment of death on them. I leaped to my feet to reason with him, but he left the room just then. As soon as he returned to the room, however, I grabbed his hands and began to earnestly address him.

"Grandpa," I said, "That is not of the spirit of God. When Jesus went to go through Samaria and they would not receive Him, John asked if He would that they should call down fire from Heaven on them, but Jesus said that they did not perceive the Spirit that He came with, for He did not come to destroy men, but to save them." The old man then saw that he had been going overboard in his criticism of that company when I pleaded with him. Oddly, he looked like a young man in his thirties when I held his hands and spoke to him. He appeared at first as an old man, because he had been speaking out of his fallen nature.

When I awoke, I thought about what I had dreamed and recalled hearing a gentleman say recently that if people mocked the work of God, that he was likely to call down God's judgment on them. I know there is a place for this, but I hoped that he was not eager to do it. When I was watching Sid Roth's It's Supernatural program on the Internet, a minister told of how in one of his meetings, a woman kept laughing and saying it was fake every time he prayed for someone and they got healed.

He did not get upset with her. She genuinely did not believe that anyone was getting healed, that it was all a set up. She probably believed this because unscrupulous people have gone about as healing evangelists, pretending to heal people, and it was faked.

Sid Roth's guest said that he asked the woman, who had gray hair, what colour her hair used to be. She said it used to be brown. He asked her if she would believe that these people really were being healed if God were to turn her hair back to brown. She cheekily said she would, but it was obvious that she did not think there was any chance of that happening. Much to her astonishment, her hair instantly turned brown.

God will judge those who know He is real and purposely fight to keep souls from being saved from Hell, but He understands that there have been fakes in ministry who have discredited Christian ministry in the eyes of unbelievers. He is not in a hurry to judge people who genuinely have doubts.

I read of a popular evangelist who was apparently about to pray for a gnarled up man in a wheelchair to be healed, when the sheriff in that small town came forward and announced that, for many years, he knew the man in the wheelchair, and that he was phenomenally double–jointed. He was not sick at all. He announced to the congregation that this was a set–up and he ran the evangelist out of town.

The writer of the article, who had attended that meeting, said that, in spite of the evangelist's exposure, he continued in ministry for many years and was very popular, though eventually one of the evangelist's sons committed suicide, leaving behind a note saying that he could no longer endure the lying.

I wondered if that evangelist might have justified his fraud with the rationalization that if he could get people to believe that they were seeing a real miracle, it would activate their faith and help them receive their healing. The Bible says, though, that they who worship God must worship Him in spirit and in truth. God does not work cons, nor does He need cons, nor does He approve of cons. He says in His Word in Proverbs 12:22, "Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight."

If the evangelist's motivation was to "prime the pump" to get healings flowing, then he probably was not a genuine Christian, even if he preached the true Gospel. I am still trying to sort out who in ministry is genuine and who is fake. It is not an easy task.

People can say that Yehoshua is the Son of God, without believing it. A man said this to me one time, when I asked who he believed Jesus to be, but he said it with a triumphant note that indicated that he was mocking me, and then he added that he had learned that in Sunday School when he was a child. He knew it was the correct Biblical answer, but he did not believe that Yehoshua was the answer for him.

Maybe that evangelist was going about preaching the true Gospel of the Anointed Lord Yehoshua without really believing it, because he knew that there was money to be made off of Christians who were hungry to see the power of God in operation. He may have subscribed in his heart to the belief that people have the power in themselves to heal themselves, if their faith in healing could be triggered. Yehoshua said, however, that we do not have the power to heal ourselves.

This is partly what He meant when He said that by taking thought, we cannot add one cubit to our stature or make even one strand of our hair change its colour. He was making a flat statement that there is no such thing as the power of positive thinking, and that we are not gods, in the sense that we can influence matter through the power of our minds.

Whatever we worship, that is what we draw power from, whether it is God whom we worship, or satan, in whatever disguise he has adopted to beguile an individual. However, it is only the blessing of the Lord that truly makes rich and adds no sorrow to it. When satan gives a blessing, he demands far more in exchange for it than what his favours are worth, and he makes people pay for it over and over and over again. Forever, in fact, unless his dupes repent of their sins, while God is still giving them the opportunity to do so.

There seem to be plenty of Christians who have bought into the New Age doctrine that we are gods, though they put a Biblical slant on it. They think about how satan said to Eve that she could be a god if she ate of the forbidden fruit, and how Yehoshua told the Pharisees that they were gods. They don't understand what these Scriptures mean; they have accepted the lie because the words sound familiar, seeing as they are in the Bible, but they have not taken those words in the context of the rest of the Scriptures.

In the first instance, when satan told Eve that she would be like God, he was telling her that if she ate that fruit, she would not need God to tell her what to do. She could evaluate information independently from Him and make her own decisions about what she wanted to do. He planted a doubt in her mind about God's character, implying that He wanted to control her for selfish purposes, rather than direct her for her own good.

In the second case, Yehoshua was not acknowledging that the Pharisees were inherently endued with energy that could manipulate matter, if only they knew how to access that power and manipulate it. No, no, no. He was rebuking them for their rebellion against God. To Him, the term "god" with a small g means "self–willed". The fallen angels are gods, in that sense. He was telling the Pharisees that they were guilty of behaving like the devil and his angels, and like Adam and Eve when they fell.

I know that a person can be a genuine Christian, even if they buy into that false doctrine. I know this because I bought into it for a time myself, until the Lord opened my eyes and showed me its errors. Some people think that genuine Christians can never be deceived about anything. I actually heard a man say this. Only one man, though, because most Christians aren't so naive as to believe that a Christian can never be deceived.

The man supposed that because the Bible says in Mark 13:22, "For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect." The man assumed that this verse indicates that true Christians can never be deceived about anything. WRONG!

We can be deceived about plenty of things because of our human limitations and flaws, but if a heart genuinely yearns to do God's will, God does not allow us to remain deceived. He opens our eyes and shows us the truth. Case in point: the Apostle Peter forgot what he had been taught by the Lord and was deceived for a time by the Judaizers into thinking that it was right to impose the Laws of Moses on Gentile believers, until the Apostle Paul straightened him out on that, and Peter humbly acknowledged that Paul was right.

So, maybe that evangelist who set up the double–jointed guy to pretend to be healed was deceived himself, or maybe he was just a cynical person who employed psychological tricks to fleece suckers. Only God really knows, but either way, He wants us to be skeptical, where it is warranted, and He does not hold it against people when they have honest doubts.

When He rebuked His disciples for having doubts, the case was different. They knew Him. They lived with Him and had ample opportunity to see His character and power and hear His teachings and get to know His ways, so it annoyed Him when they did not believe that He was all–powerful, or when they misread His character, or did not get the point of what He was saying.

Some things that go on in church meetings seem weird to unbelievers, even the genuine stuff that comes from God. God does not hold it against people, if they are intially taken aback. People are entitled to explanations, and we should be ready to patiently explain to people the Scriptural basis for the things we do. It should make sense on a Scriptural basis. If a person rejects the Scriptures as valid after they have been responsibly presented, then there is a valid case against them and they stand in danger of judgment.

I know a minister who pronounced judgment on someone in his meetings who was mocking his preaching, and the man instantly fell down dead. I gather from what happened that the man did not have genuine doubts, but rather was attending the meeting to deliberately make trouble, after having decided to reject God. The people were gathered to learn more of the Scripture and they wanted to hear what the minister had to say. The man who disrupted the meeting was disrespecting the effort those people went to in order to attend the meeting, as well as wasting their time.

If the minister had been deliberately teaching false doctrine, there might have been justification for someone to boldly stand up and logically show from the Bible where he was in error. The man who died showed disrespect not only for the minister and the people gathered there who wanted to hear the preaching, but for God Himself, and he was judged accordingly.

Of course, the minister was arrested and detained for a day, as the police had to investigate if he had somehow set this man up to be killed to make himself look like a powerful man of God, but they could not find any evidence of him having done so. He just verbalized what he heard the Spirit of God say, and God backed it up.

I sure am glad that God does not say stuff like that arbitrarily and that He is not eager to judge people. He has to judge sin, if people will not accept His mercy, because He is a holy God, but it causes Him great pain to have to do it. He says in Ezekiel 18:23, "Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? says the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?"

I have heard for many years that judgment will come on Canada and the US for their sins. I have been hearing it since I first got saved back in 1972, but I sure am glad that it has not happened, yet, though these countries richly deserve it.

We had a Christian heritage. There were many churches and the Bible was taught even in the schools, so people knew the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. There were hidden evils, but the mainstream of society embraced morality and respectability. Men wanted to marry virtuous women whom they could rely on, so most girls demonstrated this by saving their virginity for marriage.

To win women like that, most men proved that they were ready to settle down and be pleasing to a woman by demonstrating that they could hold a job, minding their manners, watching their language around females and children, shaving and bathing regular, and laying off the booze. If most women had continued to behave like ladies and refused to date men who behaved like jerks, today we would have many more men of higher quality, instead of so many who behave like oafs. It may not be fair that it is usually women who have to take the initiative to set a respectable tone for society, but it is a fact of life. If women are willing to settle for less, men tend to oblige them.

This works in reverse, as well, but with the advent of women's lib, men let it take its course because it preached that women should have as much right as men to sleep around without being tagged with nasty labels. In God's eyes, men have never had the right to sleep around, and they deserve the nasty labels just as much, but men liked the idea of increased availability of bed partners, and of not being polite to women by holding doors open for them, or giving up their seat on a bus, or paying for all the expenses on a date without any expectation of the woman feeling that she had to go to bed with them to show her appreciation.

I have a friend who went on a date with a guy who took her to a fancy restaurant and ordered an expensive meal for them. As he was about to take the first bite of food, he leered at her and said with a grin, "We'll go to my place for dessert." Sherlene slapped $50.00 down to pay for her meal and snapped, "If that's what you want, then go buy it on the street!" Then she left.

I was shocked. My daughter laughed when I told her the story and we both waved our hand, pretending to summon the server, as we said, "Could I have a doggie bag, please?" Really! Fifty dollars for a meal that she didn't even get to eat! Sherlene is just too nice.

I would have left right away, but not paid for the meal. Rather, I would have told the guy to chalk the expense up to experience that not every woman whom he buys a meal for is going to feel obliged to sleep with him. And anyway, guys have a lot of nerve when they think that ten, or twenty, or even fifty bucks is all it should take to get a girl to sleep with them. Any prostitute who would do it for only that much money is probably in really bad shape.

I suppose that with the changes that women's lib wrought, men also resented the increased competition for jobs that were traditionally held by men. That isn't too much of a challenge for reliable, highly skilled men, but there have been plenty of men who have taken out their resentment on women, giving them a hard time on the job and to other women in general. Women's lib did some good things for society, but it also did a lot of damage, too. In spite of flaws in our society in the fifties, our countries prospered because so many people were trying to do what the Bible teaches is right.

Then the Bible was banned from schools and other government venues. Children were instead taught that truth is relative and they were presented with situational ethics. I was in Grade 10 the first time I heard them introduced.

Prior to this, I received an excellent education in knowing that there is such a thing as Truth, and that with earnest seeking, one could come to know what the real Truth is. I was taught in school to think for myself, to discern what authors were trying to teach in their books, instead of seeing them as entertaining stories and unwittingly absorbing their messages. It was up to me to decide whether I accepted those messages, but before I could do that, I needed to know what the messages were. It was really meaningful and useful.

In the latter part of Grade 10 when I transferred to another school, I was confronted in my English class with the bewildering situation of a group of people being cast adrift on a raft, with very limited food and water, and the class was asked to decide who should be thrown overboard to save the lives of the more valuable people.

The teacher just threw it out there and let us have at it. Nobody stopped the process and said, "We are talking about murder here. It is never right to murder. Why are we discussing this stupid question?" No, in the guise of ethics, we were introduced to the idea that sometimes it is all right to murder people. The retarded kid was the first to go. The old person was the next. The last person left on the raft was the scientist. It sounds suspiciously to me like an idea that scientists dreamed up, to give themselves more standing with society, on the assumption that scientists do society a lot of good.

Some of them do, but is it not scientists who discovered how to split the atom and make weapons of mass destruction? It is not scientists who develop chemical and biological weapons? Aren't they the guys who conducted research on whether children need physical affection or not by taking two groups of orphaned babies, giving both groups all the basic care they needed, but only one group was cuddled and talked to? The other group was ignored, and a large number of babies in that group died. This proved that children need cuddling and other types of friendly attention.

A few times, I have heard this study cited, but I have never heard anyone express astonishment at the callousness of using vulnerable little children for such a cruel, inane study. There was never any real need for it in the first place. Common sense tells us that children require affection and attention. The Bible teaches it, as well. When the Disciples tried to push the children away, thinking them to be a nuisance, Yehoshua rebuked them, and He took the children up in His arms and blessed them. As far as I am concerned, the people who conducted that experiment murdered those little children by deliberating depriving them from necessary affection. They could have been offered for immediate adoption to loving families, instead of used as guinea pigs to satisfy perverse curiosity.

Yup, scientists have contributed to a huge lot of suffering in our world, subjecting people and animals to cruel experiments that damaged them both physically and psychologically. It is one thing when a person voluntarily submits to an experiment, but multitudes of people have not been given any choice.

Prisoners are the most obvious group. Some people might consider it justified, feeling that criminals forfeit all their rights to decent treatment, but that is not justice. And what about prisoners of war and political prisoners in concentration camps who are used as test subjects for viruses and chemical weapons, and surgical procedures without their consent? Or as organ donors without their consent? It is those brainy types who do the operations.

Another vulnerable group is army personnel. A lot of soldiers were subjected to radiation during nuclear tests, to see what effect it would have on them. Was Hiroshima and Nagasaki not proof enough that radiation is deadly? Oh, well, they needed more test subjects to see if they could find cures for it, I guess. Did anyone ask those soldiers if they wanted to be test subjects? They were compelled to obey orders, even at the cost of their health. Soldiers were also used to test drugs such as LSD, to observe its effects. Not everybody liked the trips. Some people had really bad trips and begged to be allowed to not have to take the drugs. Also, I doubt that any of them wanted to become addicted to drugs.

If we had known when we were teenagers about how evil some scientists are, we probably would have thrown the scientist off the raft before anyone else. At least, we would have questioned what kind of research they did. And if it turned out that he or she was a good scientist, if they truly were a good scientist, they would not have allowed anyone to be tossed off the raft. They would have said, "We are all in this together and we will look out for each other. We will divide our provisions evenly and die together, if need be. Who knows? Help may come before then."

One of the ideas that was conveyed in those exercises, though, was that there is no God who can intervene in our lives with miracles. If we are to have any help, then it is help that comes from ourselves. Years of more experience has shown me that God does exist, that He is the God who is revealed in the Bible, and that He does indeed intervene in people's lives. A lot of people do not realize how much He does miracles, though, because the media is largely under the control of people who do not want us to believe in the God of the Bible, so they squelch that information by not reporting it, or by trying to discredit reports that manage to get out.

Getting back to the life raft, who was to say that a mentally retarded person has less value than a scientist? I knew a mentally retarded man who could hear from God. Sometimes he said things to people that had to be a word from God, because this man was not capable of keen perception otherwise. It sure was a blessing to me when I learned from this man's sister that he was praying for me because of a need I had that the Lord had shown him. I think he did me a lot more good with his prayers than those people who concoct deadly viruses in labs.

There was also in that situational ethics exercise the assumption that mental retardation is a permanent condition. God can change that, and He has. There is the case of RICKY ROBERTS, mentioned in my last newsletter, who was healed of mental retardation when he was sixteen years old, and received instant downloads of knowledge that enabled him to pass a test, verfiying that he could instantly go from Grade 3 to Grade 10. Prior to his healing, he knew only 100 or so words; it cost his parents thousands of dollars to pay special teachers to bring him to that modest level of education. Now he is considered to be an expert in ancient languages. Ricky is not the only person whom God has healed of mental retardation. I have heard other testimonies besides.

The old person on the raft was considered highly expendible. It was agreed that they had lived their life and should make way for younger people. There are plenty of old people who are pretty useless to society, and I am not referring to those who are senile and need constant care. I am thinking of those who have reached an advanced age, but still live self-centred, selfish lives, having ignored the things they were supposed to learn. What if the old person on the raft was someone who had learned godly principles and were needed to pass their wisdom on? I have benefited from wise, old people. They were men or women of God who could say something important with one little sentence, more than what some people can say in a whole book.

I am sure that these people had plenty to say, actually, but there were not many people who were willing to listen. I was guilty of that. I remember giving a godly lady an argument when she started to share some of her ideas. I kick myself for it now. I no longer have the same opportunity to pick her brains. I wish that I had just shut up and let her talk, and quietly done some Bible studies later to find out if she knew something that I had not yet perceived.

The idea that scientists have the answers we need seem to now be fairly well–established in our society, but has it made our society better? The Bible was kicked out of our schools and now we have kids who are afraid to go to school because they never know when one of their classmates might go berserk and start shooting up the place. When my daughter was in elementary school, she talked about seeing other kids with not only knives, but also with guns!

She was afraid of getting beaten up. I never saw anyone fight in school, either boys or girls, but one time I heard a tough girl snarl at a pretty girl in my Grade 7 class. She said, "Meet me down by the fence after school, Elfe." I did not laugh out loud because I didn't want that girl to threaten to beat me up, but it was funny. The girl who made the threat seemed like an ape, and I doubted that Elfe would meet her at the fence just because she demanded it. Only really nasty girls tried to pick fist fights, but they were rare. By the time my kid was in school, girls beating up on other girls had become a lot more common.

When I was a child, I saw kids being scolded for chewing gum, running in the halls, not having their homework done, or for wearing their skirts too short. There were more serious school issues, especially in the inner city, but scandals in regular schools were not as frequent as they are now.

In high school, I never saw guys hustling girls to become prostitutes for them. Though I hung around with a rough crowd in those days, I never heard of such a thing occurring in high schools. A lot of girls were tossing away their virginity when they were 15 or 16, but nowadays it is little kids of 9, 10, and 11 who are losing their virginity. There was plenty of drug use, but that was among teens. It was not common among elementary school children. Many of my daughter's friends had parents who were drug addicts. The kids were not learning about morality at home, and because the Bible was banned from school, they weren't learning it anywhere else.

It grieves me to see how the society I live in has become so degraded. Some things have improved, but they are small compared to how much things have gone downhill. I grieve for children whose innocence has been ripped away from them, though not necessarily through hands on abuse. They have been robbed of it because of how polluted the media has become.

Even in spite of having seen films about menstruation when I was ten years old and knew that a woman's egg unites with a man's sperm to produce a child, I still did not understand just how that sperm came in contact with the egg. When I was twelve, I asked my mother how babies are made. She replied that a man sleeps with a woman and then looked at me cautiously to see if I would ask further questions.

I was totally satisfied with her answer and did not ask. I had resented the silly answers I received previous to this, about finding babies under cabbages, or my parents had ordered us from Sears, etc. I was happy that my mother finally told the truth. That there was more to be told did not occur to me. I mean, this just made perfect sense. While the man and lady were asleep, God did something mysterious and the next thing you knew, the lady was "expecting". That was what we called being pregnant back in those days.

It really was bliss to not know all the details and to have a wholesome childhood where my thoughts were mainly focussed on innocent interests. I did not have a totally pure mind, but I am so glad that it was not more sordid than what it was. Eventually it dawned on me that there was a bit more to adults sleeping together, but at thirteen, I still found it difficult to comprehend the details.

Nowadays, the kids know all about it far younger ages and Christian parents pretty much have to teach their kids about it when they are very young, to forestall their first impressions about sex to be associated with it being dirty because other kids they associate with have seen a lot of lewd stuff on TV from babyhood, and advertising posters have become quite raunchy.

There aren't too many people nowadays who keep sexual material out of view of children, or consider sex a topic for private discussion. I hear teens talking about it in explicit terms on public transit. They swear a lot, too, probably because they have grown up among adults who swear a lot. My stepfather was not a Christian, but I have never in my life heard him use the F word. When I was a child, when he argued with my mother, he used a few swear words, but they were of a rather mild sort, compared to what is commonly heard now. When my parents said something was bloody, then you knew they were really angry.

When I think about how evil our society is now, I know it deserves to be judged, but it is not something I look forward to. I have wept when I have walked through neighbourhoods, looking at the lovely houses with their nice lawns, and envisioned the day when enemy soldiers might be running across those lawns, looting the homes, raping and murdering the inhabitants. A lot of the people living in those homes are living common law, or if they are married, many of them have affairs, but in spite of their faults, most of those people are really nice folks. They show kindness to others, they are friendly and pleasant to chat to, and if they are left to themselves, they will never do anything atrociously evil like rape or murder. I hate it that their blatant disregard for God's laws about sexuality are part of what will bring judgment on our nation, but I like a lot of those people and don't want anything bad to happen to them.

I also think of how the little children will suffer, and how unfair it is that they will suffer, as they have not done anything at all to deserve it. Little babies, if they survive an invasion or natural catastrophe, might not ever know who their parents were. They might not even know their own name that their parents gave them. Kids might grow up with no education, being used for slave labour or for sexual exploitation, probably both. They will be frightened by the chaos.

I had a dream where I saw America lying waste from nuclear warfare. I am not saying that this will happen. I have had many dreams with many different scenarios, and I think God gives them to me to show me what satan is planning, so I can pray that they will not come true. In this dream, I saw that the American military was trying to keep order, but they were perceived as enemies by many of their own people. There were groups of bandits going about, taking advantage of the chaos to do whatever they felt like doing. They were demented and this one group had gotten hold of a small missile, which they gleefully launched from a truck at a group of soldiers, killing them all. I felt so sad to see those good, stalwart, disciplined men being murdered like that, leaving people who wanted to live in peace at the mercy of bands of grotty, insane criminals.

This happened in some mountains that were absolutely bare of any green thing. It was just all rocks. Then I saw two, pretty, little blonde girls about four years of age, sitting off to the side with a grubby, old man. He was in poor health, so he stayed behind to keep an eye on them while the rest of the ruffians took out the soldiers with that missile. This man was the only person in the group who showed the little girls any kindness. He gave them food and joked around, trying to cheer them up.

They were not cheered, though, because the old man was a pedophile, as were all the other men in the group, and they knew he did not really care for them; he just wanted them to cooperate when he used them, and showing them some little kindnesses supported his delusion that he was not really a bad person.

The little girls knew otherwise. Their eyes were blank, their faces expressionless. All these little girls saw of the world was that it was evil and they were victims. Their souls were in deep bondage. They had no hope. No, I sure do not look forward to coming judgment. A lot of innocent people are going to suffer when it does, because the nature of sin is that it defiles everything around it and hurts the innocent.

It is not reasonable to expect the unbelievers to change their ways and to pray. They don't believe in God, or if they do, it is a god of their own making, not the God of the Bible. Their god lets them sin, reject Yehoshua's offer of forgiveness and a new, holy life in Him, yet still have an expectation of going to Heaven or of escaping retribution for their sins through simply ceasing to exist.

Christians know better what is right and what is wrong, but many Christians brush off the conviction of the Holy Spirit when He calls them to a higher level of revelation and holy living. Many Christians compromise because they don't want worldly people to think that they are too weird and no fun. The result? Worldly people don't see that there is much difference between themselves and people who call themselves Christians, so they are not convicted about their sins.

The world sees people going to church and living common–law. They know of Christian teens and adults who paw and pet on dates, just like they do, and even going all the way. They see a lot of divorces happening because Christian men don't love their wives as Christ loved the church, trying to control them rather than serving them. They see Christian co–workers compromising their values on the job, just like many of the ungodly do. They see girls who go to church dressing slutty, just as the ungodly youth, though there aren't as many who go so far as to deface their bodies with tattoos.

One young man told a pastor that he could not go to his church anymore, because the girls in the church tempted this thoughts to go in the wrong direction by the way they wore their tops cut so low. There are a lot of Christians, both young ones and older ones, who use profanity and say stupid things that one would expect only a worldly person to say. They watch all sorts of shows and listen to music that endorse ideas that are very contrary to the Scriptures. How can one expect to be a good example of a Christian when they subject their minds to things that undermine Biblical values, or even to know anymore what is good and right, after deliberately exposing their minds to such things?

A lot of people have lost their way and are wandering through a deadly swamp that political correctness has made for them. Proverbs 4:19 says, "The way of the wicked is as darkness: they know not at what they stumble."

I saw this in a dream. There was a man in a jail cell. He looked like one of the thieves from Home Alone. He did not know why he was in jail and he wondered how he could get out. Then I saw his face light up as he cheerfully thought to himself, "I know! I will steal something!" Suddenly the light in his cell went out and he was perplexed as he stood in darkness. He wondered why the light went out. He did not make any connection between his decision to sin and his situation becoming worse. He thought it was okay to steal.

I then saw my ex–husband in another cell. He was hanging in chains that were attached to the ceiling. The thief had not been chained. This was because he was an unbeliever and not as accountable for his sins. Some type of horrible stuff oozed from the walls of my ex–husband's cell and I knew it was resentment. He resented that I had not lived up to his expectations. It tore at my heart to see his suffering and I cried out to him that he did not have to suffer because he knew what he needed to say to be free. Just two little words, "I forgive." But he still clung to his bitterness, wanting me to be punished for having made him unhappy.

The dream moved on to a third cell. I saw a young, Jewish man with thick, curly hair. He was hanging in chains from the ceiling of his cell and crying out, "I want to be free!" He meant that he wanted to be free from sin. Sin itself was far more horrible to him than the punishment of it. This was like how the Apostle Paul lamented about how he found himself doing the things that he hated and not doing the things he wanted to do, comparing his sin nature to a body of death. Back in Paul's days, the Romans punished murderers by tightly strapping their victim's body onto them and making them carry it around until the decay from the body infected the murderer and caused them to die. Paul thanked God that he knew that Yehoshua was able to deliver him from his tendency to sin.

I related my dream to a psychologist who was an unbeliever and told her that I believed that the young Jewish man represented me, and how much I yearn to live up to what God expects of me. She looked startled and said, "Religion is really an emotional issue for you, isn't it?" I would call it faith rather than religion, but I thought, "Well, of course! God made us with emotions, so why would it not be emotional?" God wants to be central in our lives and to affect every aspect of our being. This is His due, seeing as He is our Creator, and also deserves our trust because it is impossible for Him to be anything but good.

This lady seemed, like many people, to consider religion something to be compartmentalized, attended to through various rites to give one a veneer of respectability, but not necessarily have much impact on one's deep inner sense of morality. It could influence a person to not steal, which is not acceptable to most people, particularly if they are the ones being victimized by it, but not considered revelant to modern practices regarding sexuality, sins that people erroneously figure hurt nobody as long as it is engaged in between consenting adults.

Many people have lost a sound sense of what constitutes good morals because they have bought the lie that truth is not absolute, and that what makes good sense to a person who has respect for the Bible does not necessarily have to be accepted by others. People now think that it is okay to do a lot of things that society used to frown on when it was strongly guided by the Bible. But even if society now allows some things that they used to consider disreputable, God has not changed His mind about what is right and wrong, and the law of sowing and reaping is still in place.

A lot of people recognize that law, but because they don't believe in the Bible, they call it "karma", and they are rather elastic about what they consider punishable by karma. Sometimes they wonder why crummy stuff is happening to them. They might recognize that lying to their friends is wrong, but not acknowledge that it is wrong to be dishonest about reporting their income. They might recognize that it is wrong to steal their sister's husband, but think it is all right to make a play for a stranger's husband. A man might recognize that it is wrong for someone to steal his tools and be ticked off when it happens, but figure it is okay if he can get away with stealing a wrench from some other guy.

I met a law student who was mad that someone had stolen his gas cap from his car. He angrily told me that because of that, he was going to go out and steal someone else's gas cap. I was only a teenager at that time, but I thought, "How is it right that he should steal from someone who had nothing to do with stealing from him? And this guy is going to be a lawyer? Man, what kind of law are we going to have, if the people in charge of it think like this?"

It happens all the time, though. People have dirt done to them, and then turn around and do dirt to others, frequently to people who had nothing to do with what happened to them. The worst is probably when people who were molested when they were children become child molesters. They are so angry about what happened to them that they want to be the ones who are in control and have a turn at making others suffer. What happened to them is no excuse, though, for their behaviour. Since they know how awful it is to be a victim, they should have compassion on helpless little children and not participate in giving them such grief.

It is a crazy, mixed up world. I was born in the fifties and my memory goes back to being two years old. Bad stuff happened back then, but there was still a lot going on that was really wholesome. Our society took a deep plunge in the sixties when the hippies arrived on the scene promoting promiscuous sex, drug use, and their idea of free speech (lots of profanity, obscenity, and preaching rebellion against authority). It was a backlash against the threat of the atom bomb. They blamed everybody over thirty for messing up the world, so they ditched the older generation's values.

It was not everybody over thirty who messed things up, though. It was the power mongers. There were plenty of people back then who had a sense of honour. There were good judges who upheld good laws, and they had nothing to do with making mass weapons of destruction. Not all judges were good, but there were a fair amount of them who tried hard to do what was right. There were many men and women who worked hard to support their families and tried to bring their kids up decently. Everything about the older generation was not wrong, but the hippies and political radicals undermined their credibility, which caused many youngsters to be disrespectful to their elders.

Where are we today? In a mess. The next generation did as they liked, pretty much, and set a bad example for their kids. They lived common–law, they smoked pot, they used profanity in front of their kids, and gave the finger to people who ticked them off. My stepfather had a vocabulary for bad drivers. He called young women dames, older women were bags, young men were clowns, and older men were apes. It was unpleasant enough to have to listen to him gripe about other drivers and call them names, but he never, ever made obscene gestures in front of us kids, if he ever did it at all. He had his faults, some of them serious, but I appreciate the good things that he did. I remember him telling us that we should step aside for elderly people on the sidewalk. My Dad had some good ideas and passed them on.

It seems that a lot of the people in my generation did not pass on those kinds of ideas to their kids. I see a lot of young men sitting on the bus while middle–aged ladies stand, and they don't give up their seat for the elderly unless someone tells them to. When I was a little girl, men were expected to give up their seat for any woman, even a young one.

Then women libbers came along and said that that kind of chivalry was outdated. Interesting thing that I heard about women's lib, though. There is an entertainment promoter who claims that he was befriended by a rich and powerful man who wanted to recruit him for the One World agenda that he was promoting. He asked him what he thought women's lib was about. He replied that it was about fighting for women's right to equal pay for equal work. The man laughed and said scoffingly, "No, that's not what it was about. It was set up to get taxes from the half of the population that wasn't earning income, and to get their kids into daycare where we could instill our ideas in them."

I have heard a lot of bad language on the Skytrain from kids. Elderly people are clearly offended, but they are afraid to say anything. The kids have not been taught by their parents that this kind of talk is inappropriate, and if an older person were to try to reprove them, they would get a lot of sass and maybe beat up, as well.

It is not like young people never spoke like that to older people when I was young, but if they did, it was only to older people who clearly were oafs, perhaps some rough–looking, cranky woman with a cigarette hanging out of her mouth, who was yelling and swearing at bratty kids. Kids did not normally talk like that around respectable, mannerly, neatly dressed people, but there are a lot of kids now who feel that they have a perfect right to say what they please, wherever they happen to be, and regardless who might overhear.

As if how they talk is not bad enough, they even grope each other at bus loops and on the Skytrain. I wonder if I had a protected childhood. I never saw anything like this in public when I was a kid. If it had occurred, it would have been the prerogative of prostitutes, not of teenagers riding on the buses. This generation, though, has a greatly diminished sense of common decency, but how would they know what is wholesome behaviour, when their parents went so far astray?

As a parent, I contributed to this, as well, by not living up to the Christian values that I knew were true. My kids learned to swear, not out on the street, but in their own home when they witnessed their parents fighting with each other. It was really shocking to me years later when I came across a copy of The Christian Family in my library, thought to myself that I should have read it, then opened it and saw it underlined in a lot of places. I had read it! But I had been too selfish to follow its good advice. I changed my ways, but I still have had to deal with damage that I caused when I was younger.

How will people endure judgment when it is loosed, if they cannot comprehend in the first place why it is happening? I dread to think of how my fellow countrymen will suffer, and particularly feel for the children, but I can see that God is justified in judging this country.

I wish it could be confined to only those who are responsible for downgrading our society, such as the pornographers and the movie makers, the rock stars and other musicians who put songs out there that promote immorality, the people who are pushing for unrighteous laws and the law makers who are approving them, the brewers who are encouraging alcoholism so that they can sell more of their product, the drug dealers on every level, the people in high places who engineer wars and promote Luciferianism, but the fact of the matter is that lot of these people manage to figure out a way to profit when catastrophes happen, and may not experience any appreciable retribution until after they die and go to Hell.

In the meantime, it is usually just regular people who have to deal with the cruelties of war and nature and disease. Why do Christians not see that taking a stand for righteousness is more compassionate to our unsaved neighbours, rather than compromising our values and being mealy mouthed about various issues so that they don't feel uncomfortable? If we were all living more holy, like Christians ought to, God would spare our country for our sakes, and our neighbours would get the benefit of extended peace. Unless it is too late for that, but at least it would soften the judgment.

Lot was considered a righteous man because he feared God and did not get involved in extreme sin, but he compromised to the extent that nobody took him seriously. His sons–in–law laughed at him when he tried to warn them of impending doom, his wife did not share his values, nor did his daughters, and his neighbours did not have any interest in his religion.

Why should they? They openly flaunted their perversion, but Lot put up with it for the sake of his own convenience and profit, though there were other plenty of other places in those days where he could earn a decent livelihood. If Lot had managed to persuade only nine other people to reverence God and follow His ways, God would have spared that city. His wife and daughters would have been three, his sons–in–law two more, which would have made six righteous, then just four more people, perhaps the parents of those sons–in–law.

Maybe he thought he was doing his bit, not being too confrontational, just a little witness here and there, showing the people around him that he accepted them, in spite of their perversions, by being friendly and likeable. Politically correct. Keeping his controversial opinions to himself. Laughing at their naughty jokes, as long as they weren't too gross. They probably got the impression from him that they were okay just as they were. It sounds like some Christians I know, whom, though I enjoy them for the most part, at times they are so wishy–washy that it makes me want to puke. When we show acceptance to the extent where it is no longer clear what our personal values are, we become like salt that has lost its savour.

Before I had the dream about judgment, I dreamed that a movie had just come out that was very popular, but I thought it was horrible and tried to warn people against it. It had something to do with the British fighting the Arabs; it was based on history, back in the times of Lawrence of Arabia. I had not seen the movie, but had read what it was about and thought it was horrid to watch men being killed, whether they were British or Arab.

I had no intention of seeing it and tried to warn others against it, saying that the only movie that I thought was worse was The Passion of the Christ (that a lot of Christians got sucked into going to see). I said in my dream that I did not need to watch a movie to know that it was bad; I just needed to read a review that told me what it was about. Some argued that the person who read the review might be wrong in their assessment and I should see it for myself. The point was not whether they were right or wrong about the quality of the movie, though. It was the subject matter that was at issue with me, not the acting or directing.

I was accused recently of being narrow–minded because I refused to read a novel by Voltaire. The person who brought up the subject was trying to demonstrate that he was intellectually superior to me because he is acquainted with that kind of literature and thinks he knows how to discuss it knowledgeably. Besides that, he wanted to stir up some trouble, as he was well aware, due to my Christian beliefs, what my response was likely to be.

I don't give a hoot who wrote something if what they wrote is antichrist, no matter how highly the world acclaims them. This man thought that I had no right to judge the book without having read it. I had seen enough of the story when it was performed as a play on TV to know that it would contaminate my soul, if I got into it. My soul has been contaminated enough by living in this world; it needs to be cleaned up and renewed through aggressive study of God's Word.

The person was so incensed that I did not esteem what he esteemed, and therefore not impressed with his knowledge nor apt to subscribe to his mangled way of thinking, which undermined his desire to control me, that he started to swear at me and insult me. I told him that he was being rude by using crude language, but he insisted that I was being rude because I objected to his profanity. Hmmm. That was weird, but oh well.

It is interesting that Voltaire predicted that in a hundred years, nobody would pay attention to the Bible. I suppose he thought his reasoning was so superior and his influence so great, that it would have this profound of an effect. Twenty–five years after his death, a Geneva Bible society bought his house and used his printing press to print Bibles. God is an expert in poetic irony.

It is not easy to retain one's savour, and doing so does not make a person easy for twisted people to live with, but at least by maintaining my Christian savour, I can live with myself. It is much more important for one to be able to live with themself than to be popular.

What do those other people who want us to compromise our values care about us anyway, except for our usefulness towards helping them achieve their selfish ambitions? If they drag us down to Hell with them, will they be able to offer us a drop of water to cool our tongue, or even want to, if they could?

All flesh is as grass, they fade as the flower in the field, and then are cast into the furnace, but God lives forever, and is Him who it is most important to please. Who knows? If we stick with what we know is right, we might be able to persuade a few other people to get saved, as well, but if we join the flow of the river of political correctness and compromise, we will be washed over the falls with all the rest, and be a broken, useless vessel forever.

I appreciate how God speaks to me in my dreams, warning me of dangers that are ahead, reproving me for wrongs that I have done, warning me away from compromising, encouraging me in His Word, teaching me His principles, interceding for others. This morning as I am writing this, I had a dream where I saw butter and then heard a crash. I discerned that the Lord was warning me in regards to business, that buttering people up will result in a moral crash, and that it will not save from a financial crash. Flattery and compromise is the way that the world operates, but not the way that God wants His kids to go.

I have been very blessed this month by listening to the teaching of ANDREW WOMMACK. I had never heard of him before, but I came across a fabulous testimony by a young woman named NIKI OCHENSKI WELLER, whom God healed of extreme fibromyalgia and allergies. Niki was in a wheelchair, unable to walk and confined to a sterile room, trying to patiently wait on God to give her a progressive healing. Then she heard Andrew's teaching, which said that God could heal her instantly. Perplexed, she asked the Lord why He had told her that He was going to give her a progressive healing; He replied that He had answered her according to her faith. I think that the prinicple of praying through an idol was in effect here, the idol being unbelief. Niki's faith went to a higher level and she was completely healed the very next day.

She had to fight to maintain her healing, though, which is to be expected. Satan is a sore loser and tries to regain his ground, which is why 95% of the people healed in Kathryn Kuhlman's meetings lost their healing shortly afterwards. They had needed to be taught on maintaining their healing.

Andrew offers excellent teaching on this subject. I strongly recommend going to his website and listening to his TV and radio recordings. I agree with about 90% of his teaching, which is a pretty high ratio, but as Andrew himself has said, if we don't agree with him on some things, to just chuck it. I have noticed that he subscribes to some Word Faith errors, among other things, but most of what he teaches is really awesome. He sees things in the Word that I have not heard taught on before, but it makes very good sense.

I looked after the grandkids for several days while my daughter moved. We had a great time with a game that I invented. I showed them a video of the little Scottish town where their grandfather was born and then suggested that we make some towns like that. We used duct tape on the floor to map out our roads, permanent marker for the line down the middle of the roads and for the crosswalks, and then made Lego houses for our villages, and used little toys as accessories. Jake the Giant was banned from the area until after everything was set up and Connor had had a chance to play with the village. Jake is really good about playing by himself, though, and he got a chance to play with the village before I packed it up for the night.

We posted the villages to Connor's Facebook, which was a good thing. He considers it obligatory to complain to his Mom that he doesn't want to go to my place when she announces that I am going to babysit him and Jake. He says that he has no fun, though he always seems to be having fun when he is over here. Not that it is 100% fun for him because I scold him sometimes, but we always do enjoyable stuff and he seems, for the most part, to like the activities.

Heather blasted him this time, telling him, "I saw that stuff you posted on Facebook and it looked like you were having a good time, and you tell me that you never have a good time at Grandma's and you're not allowed to go on the Internet!" The noive of that kid! I always let him check his email and Facebook and chat to his friends. And sometimes we watch funny animal videos. What a little monkey.

Connor is going to be eleven years old pretty soon. Incredible! It seems like only yesterday that he was a cute, fat, little baby. I have had so much fun with him! He has always had an amazing sense of humour. We bonded when he was four–months–old over a joke. I had just finished changing his diaper and putting him in a clean sleeper, then sat him on my lap to chat to him a bit. I took my glasses off so that I could see him better and his eyebrows shot up in surprise. I burst out laughing and pointed my finger at him, saying, "You thought they were a part of me!" Connor burst out laughing, too, and it was the heartiest laughter that I have ever heard from such a young baby. He totally understood the joke.

From that time on, we were always yukking it up. Heather told her friends, "Mom can make Connor laugh at anything!" It was very true. Just turning my head quickly to take him by surprise would send him into gales of laughter. I particularly remember one time when he was six months old and I sent a little chicken in a car streaking across the hardwood floor. He laughed so hard that he turned red and rolled on the floor.

Connor is an ENFP and has a high interest in having fun, which explains why he has always been so jolly. I love his personality and it is a perfect fit with mine. I used to think that we got along so well because grandparents and grandkids are natural allies, until I learned about the Myers/Briggs personality profiles.

Andrew Wommack does not approve of personality profiles and he has a good point that we are not locked into our them, that we can change, but I have found it really useful to figure out what profile people fit into and cut them some slack concerning their natural weaknesses, as well as to appreciate their strengths more. By understanding Connor's personality, I have been able to seed some good ideas into him to help him overcome his natural weaknesses, so that they won't be as much of a problem for him as what they usually are for adult ENFP's.

One ENFP male weakness is that they like to rule the roost. Oh man! Heather and I have seen a lot of this already! He figures that since we're just girls, he can take us on. One day, after getting hold of Katharine Bushnell's book God's Word to Women, I told him, "You know, Connor, the Bible does not actually teach that husbands are supposed to tell their wives what to do. That is a mistranslation. God's plan for marriage if for husbands and wives to be equals, and men are supposed to submit to their wives, just the same as a wife is supposed to submit to her husband."

Connor objected, stubbornly shaking his head at the idea that the Bible taught such a thing, but Heather voiced her agreement. (It is the first time she agreed with me on what the Bible says.) Connor left the room to get away from us and the disturbing idea that when he was an adult, he would not have the right to be the big boss in his home.

I sure sympathize with the little guy. All his childhood, he had two women bossing him around, and he was hoping to get a turn at bossing around a woman. Just about any boy, ENFP or not, would have some trouble assimilating the idea of equality with women and not always having their own way, but getting the idea into them when they are young will help make the world, and the Church, a better place.

I don't agree with everything that Katharine Bushnell taught. I think that sometimes she overstated her case, but she had a good point that young women should be taught Greek and Hebrew, so that they know what the Bible really teaches, instead of having to depend on the translations of men who were reluctant to surrender their notions of male superiority and desire to control women to God's truth about the matter. Most of what Katharine taught is really good, and she was a courageous campaigner against the abuse of Chinese and Indian women by the British government. Reading her stuff puts a person in a closer touch with reality, so it does take guts to read it.

Well, I gotta go. Jake is here at my place, and having the time of his life setting up a village, now that Connor is not around to dominate that activity. He slept late, but as soon as he got up and finished brushing his teeth, he was after me to move the chairs so that he could make a village. He needs his breakfast, though, and Heather should be here soon for a visit. Besides that, Jake is so excited about setting up the village that he is chattering non–stop, asking me about whether he should set it up this way or that way, and what do I think of how he put this thing or that thing, and I can't concentrate on this newsletter any more.

Archives

February 2010 Newsletter
March 2010 Newsletter
April 2010 Newsletter
May 2010 Newsletter
June 2010 Newsletter
July 2010 Newsletter
August 2010 Newsletter

Home
Return to HOME

Copyright © 2010, Lanny Townsend
Page modified by Lanny Townsend on September 8, 2010

Scripture references on this website are closely paraphrased from e–Sword's King James Bible.