Does your faith need strengthening? Are you confused and wondering if Jesus Christ is really "The Way, the Truth, and the Life?" "Fight for Your Faith" is a blog filled with interesting and thought provoking articles to help you find the answers you are seeking. Jesus said, "Seek and ye shall find." In Jeremiah we read, "Ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall seek for Me with all your heart." These articles and videos will help you in your search for the Truth.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Some Religious Leaders See a Threat as Europe Grows More Secular

Jack Ewing, NY Times, September 19, 2012
HOF, Germany—This sleepy town not far from the Czech border, in a hilly corner of Catholic Bavaria, is an unlikely place to find an active synagogue, and an even unlikelier focal point for a controversy that some see as a threat to religious tolerance in Europe and even the place of Jews in Germany.

Rabbi David Goldberg, a jovial 64-year-old Israeli who serves a community of about 400 Jews in Hof, has become an international cause célèbre after four German citizens filed criminal complaints against him with the local prosecutor. His alleged crime, which made headlines in Israel and elsewhere, was performing ritual circumcisions.

The dispute reflects the ever deeper secularization of European life that, in the eyes of some religious leaders, has mutated into a form of intolerance. This conflict between secular and religious values has most frequently involved Islam, with bans on minarets in Switzerland and veils that cover women’s faces in France. Elsewhere, a recent American-made anti-Islamic video has touched off violent demonstrations. And sensitivities were further inflamed Wednesday with the publication in a French magazine of unflattering caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, several of them showing him naked.

But the debate over ritual circumcision shows that the tensions extend even further.

Rabbi Goldberg does not seem especially worried. Anyone can file a complaint against anyone else in Germany, and he may never face formal charges. Rabbi Goldberg has not hired a lawyer and declined an offer from one who was willing to handle the case for free.

The more serious threat, in the eyes of Rabbi Goldberg and many Jews, Muslims and Christians in Europe, comes from what they see as an attack by secular society on religious ritual, on faith itself. A seemingly insignificant decision by a lower court in Cologne, against a doctor who circumcised a Muslim boy, has fed a rapidly spreading drive to criminalize a practice that is core to Jewish and Muslim belief.

In contrast to the United States, baby boys in Germany and other European countries are not routinely circumcised for health reasons. The World Health Organization recommends circumcision as a way to reduce the spread of AIDS, but many doctors in European countries regard the practice as harmful and even barbaric.

The line of demarcation between church and state in Germany is also different from that in the United States. Chancellor Angela Merkel leads the Christian Democratic party and is the daughter of a Protestant pastor. But, in contrast to the displays of piety expected of American politicians, she rarely mentions religion or is photographed attending church.

Nevertheless, Ms. Merkel is pushing for legislation to allow circumcision to continue, and she is winning praise from Jewish leaders. And Rabbi Goldberg says some of the most fervent letters of support he has received have come from Christians.

“They know the Bible,” he said, speaking in the renovated schoolhouse in a residential neighborhood in Hof that serves as synagogue, community center and residence for him and his family. “They are afraid for their religion as well.”

For the more than 100,000 Jews who live in Germany, the tenor of the circumcision debate has come as a shock, undercutting confidence that they had found a secure place in society after the horrors of the Holocaust. Only a few months ago, that confidence had seemed justified when voters in Frankfurt chose their first Jewish mayor since 1933.

But now, some Jewish leaders say, the circumcision debate has exposed how ignorant many Germans are about Jewish beliefs.

“This discussion has shown that we are foreigners in our own country, doing something that Germans are not supposed to do,” said Stephan J. Kramer, secretary general of the Central Council of Jews in Germany. “We are accused of torturing our own children.”

Muslims express similar sentiments. “There are more than a few people who have something against Muslims and Jews, and they are taking advantage of this,” said Aiman A. Mazyek, chairman of the Central Committee of Muslims in Germany. “They can hide behind this discussion. They can say what they always wanted to say.”

A German pediatricians’ association, as well as a children’s aid group, are helping lead a petition drive calling for a two-year moratorium on circumcision. For religious Jews, such a moratorium would be catastrophic. The Bible tells them to circumcise a baby boy eight days after birth, unless there is a medical reason to wait.

But Jews in Europe, not just in Germany, say that it is difficult to convince people who are not religious that circumcision is regarded as a command from God, and that without it a young man cannot enter Jewish society.

“It’s a secular society. People don’t have much sense about religion or much knowledge of religion,” said Ervin Kohn, a Jewish leader in Oslo, where a debate about circumcision is also under way. There are about 1,500 Jews in Norway, he said, out of a total population of 4.7 million.

“When people hear debate about circumcision, they have trouble connecting it with religious freedom,” Mr. Kohn said. “When I say that circumcision for us is an existential question, they don’t always understand it.”

The catalyst for the controversy and the complaints against Rabbi Goldberg in Hof was a State Court decision in Cologne in June that found that a doctor committed criminal bodily injury by performing a circumcision on a 4-year-old Muslim boy.

Under the German legal system, the decision had no binding effect on other judges or prosecutors, even in Cologne, said Jan F. Orth, a judge at the State Court there who serves as its spokesman.

A panel of three judges, two of whom were non-lawyers analogous to citizen jurors, did not impose a punishment on the doctor. More than a month went by before the decision was picked up by the German news media. The case is not being appealed and will not go to a higher court, Mr. Orth said.

Still, the Cologne case prompted hospitals as far away as Zurich to suspend circumcisions, and it emboldened an anticircumcision movement in Germany as well as in countries like Denmark that had gone little noticed until then.

Even though the court case involved a Muslim boy, the debate in Germany quickly pivoted to a discussion about Jewish religious practice—and then landed in Hof, a city of 45,000 that has been largely bypassed by the economic boom in the rest of Bavaria. Hof’s population has been declining for decades, but the Jewish population has grown.

Gerhard Schmitt, the chief prosecutor in Hof, said he has not yet decided whether to start a formal investigation against Rabbi Goldberg, much less file charges.

During 15 years in Hof, Rabbi Goldberg said, he has never encountered anti-Semitism. A handful of neo-Nazis staged a march in May, but local citizens organized a much larger counterdemonstration.

Local Christian leaders have rallied around Rabbi Goldberg. The Rev. Günter Saalfrank, a minister who oversees Protestant churches in Hof and the surrounding region, attributed the controversy to ignorance of Judaism and said it is unfortunate that the debate has revolved around the definition of criminal bodily injury.

There is not much demand for circumcision in Hof. But Rabbi Goldberg said he has been called to places like Prague and Budapest to perform the ritual, and he estimates that he has carried out 4,000 in a long career. He is puzzled by suggestions that circumcisions are harmful to babies.

“In Judaism, the health of the baby is more important than anything,” Rabbi Goldberg said.

The facts about the 'Jesus' wife' fragment


By Thomas White, Baptist Press, Sep 19, 2012
FORT WORTH, Texas (BP)—With all the media publicity over Karen King’s release of information about the fragment of “Jesus’ wife,” pastors likely will receive questions from members this weekend or in the near future.

The Facts About the Fragment:
— The fragment is smaller than a business card, with eight lines on one side legible under a magnifying glass, with about four words per line.

— The fragment comes from the middle of a text, which means you lose context on all sides.

— They think the fragment comes from the fourth century. It is written in an Egyptian language—Coptic, and is thought to be a translation of a second-century document. This has not yet been verified.

The Facts About Karen King:
— The Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard Divinity School, her books include “The Secret Revelation of John;” “The Gospel of Mary of Magdala: Jesus and the First Woman Apostle;” “What Is Gnosticism?;” “Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity;” “Revelation of the Unknowable God;” “Images of the Feminine in Gnosticism” (editor); and “Women and Goddess Traditions in Antiquity and Today” (editor).

— King currently is teaching a class titled “Women, Sex, and Gender in Ancient Christianity.”

— For reference purposes, King has named the “gospel” of which this is a part the “Gospel of Jesus’s Wife.”

No matter how good a fish tale you weave, this fragment is small. Also, the document dates too late to have impact. The Gospels have authenticity because of the date of their writing, the connection to an eyewitness, and consistency with the rule of faith. Any fragment too far removed from Jesus’ time loses credibility because of the distance from Jesus’ life, and we can’t know who wrote it or what agenda that person may have had. At best, this document tells us what some people were thinking in the second or fourth century. Yes, it is interesting, but no, it does not change anything. Bottom line is that we have older and more reliable documents in our Bibles.

Check the sponsors. King has an agenda. The naming of the fragment and the naming of the gospel play into her research field of women’s roles and unknown gospel accounts. This is like a hunting show demonstrating how you can’t kill a deer without a Rage broadhead on your arrow. Then at the end of the show you find out the only sponsor is Rage. While King may be considered a fine academic scholar, she has an agenda.

Was Jesus married? The New Testament never says so. We would expect to find this information in the Gospels if Jesus had a wife. Furthermore, Paul, when discussing this issue of marriage, notes in 1 Corinthians 9:5 that Peter was married. He likely would have stated Jesus also married to make his point, but he doesn’t. Most theories of Jesus’ wife have him married to Mary Magdalene. Even King says it is unlikely that Mary was Jesus’ wife because she is known by the area of her birth, and if she was married, she would be known by her husband.

At the end of the day, this unverified fourth century Coptic fragment from an unknown source written by an unknown author doesn’t compare to the New Testament record in our Bibles.

Friday, September 21, 2012

Not just Romney: Many in Middle East are losing faith in a two-state solution, too


By Christa Case Bryant, CS Monitor, September 18, 2012
Jerusalem—A newly leaked video shows presidential hopeful Mitt Romney questioning the longstanding US road map for peace in the Middle East—and, in fact, if the Palestinians want peace at all.

“I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there’s just no way,” he said, according to Mother Jones, which publicized the video taken at a private fundraising event.

Mr. Romney is not alone in his pessimism; many Israelis and Palestinians have also lost hope in the two-state solution outlined in the 1993 Oslo Accords. But Palestinians warn that blaming the stalemate squarely on their people risks damaging what little credibility the US has left in the Middle East.

“[Romney] has done everything possible in order to show himself not only [in support] of Israel but also of the most right-wing extremist parties in Israel,” says Qais Abdul-Karim, a veteran politician and a leader of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. “I think that this tendency to stand in the camp of the right-wing … plays with the future of the United States and its position in the region, which is already fragile and shaky. Such a policy will completely be devastating to whatever credibility the States still have in the eyes of the public in the Middle East.”

Israeli faith in negotiations to deliver a peace deal is now at the lowest level since 2003, according to the Negotiations Index, part of a monthly public opinion survey published by the Israeli Democracy Institute in Jerusalem. The August index stands at 40.7, a significant drop even since April, when it stood at 49.5.

And even in April, 58 percent of Jewish respondents and 51 percent of Israeli Arab interviewees “saw no chance of ending the conflict in accordance with the ‘two states for two peoples’ formula at the present time,” according to the monthly survey, known as the Peace Index.

Hopes are also flagging on the Palestinian side, with well over half a million Israelis now living over the 1967 borders that are widely seen as the basis for any eventual peace deal. The evacuation of the West Bank outpost of Migron last month underscores the enormous, if not insurmountable, challenge posed by the settlements to an eventual peace deal. The Israeli government, armed with a Supreme Court ruling and promises to build the residents new homes to the tune of some 33 million shekels ($8.7 million, or $187,000 per family), still faced stiff resistance in uprooting the tiny community.

Many Israelis and their leaders see the settlements as providing a security buffer for Israel and as fulfilling biblical claims to the land.

But Palestinians argue that the spread of settlements, and the roads connecting them, are whittling away at the land that could feasibly become a Palestinian state—already divided between the landlocked West Bank and the coastal Gaza Strip.

“If you look at the West Bank now, it’s like Swiss cheese,” says Hamas official Ghazi Hamad, who is deputy foreign minister in Gaza. “I don’t know what is left for negotiation.”

Now Palestinians and Israel’s 20 percent Arab minority are becoming increasingly vocal about giving up the two-state solution in favor of a “one-state solution”—in which higher Arab birth rates and the absorption of Palestinians would tip the demographic scale in their favor.

But Mr. Abdul-Karim says that is a bad idea.

“The situation is either a two-state solution or an apartheid state that controls all the lands of historical Palestine and in this case there will be … a more ferocious conflict that may go on for more decades and that this is not a solution in actual fact,” he says. “This is a recipe for prolonged and protracted war.”

According to Hamad, it’s now up to Israel.

“The solution is in the hand of Israel—settlements, borders, refugees, Jerusalem—everything is in the hand of Israel.”

But he says the winds of change in the Arab world can benefit Palestinians, who are already enjoying more support from Egypt. It’s a trend the US would do well to heed, instead of seeing everything through the prism of Israeli security, he says.

“I think we have to put forth a new strategy and US should understand that time has changed,” says Hamad. “They should take off the glasses of Israel from their eyes.”

European army backed


Bruno Waterfield, Brussels, The Age, Sept. 20, 2012
GERMANY, France and nine of Europe’s most powerful countries have called for an elected European Union president and an end to Britain’s veto over defence policy, in a radical blueprint for the continent’s future.

In a document released following a meeting between 11 foreign ministers in Warsaw, the bloc charted a vision for the “future of Europe”.

As well as calling for a single, elected head of state for Europe, the bloc demanded a new defence policy, under the control of a pan-EU foreign ministry commanded by Baroness Ashton, which “could eventually involve a European army”.

In order to “prevent one single member state from being able to obstruct initiatives”, a reference to British opposition to a European army, the German-led group demanded an end to existing national vetoes over foreign and defence policy. This would give the EU the power to impose a decision on Britain if it was supported by a majority of other countries.

The bloc also called for a new European police force patrolling the external borders of the Schengen passport-free zone and a single European visa.

The plan, which has the backing of Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, Holland, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg and Portugal, is likely to increase calls for a British referendum on EU membership.

The document also proposed powers for the European Parliament and further splitting of the EU, by creating a new parliamentary sub-chamber for the 17 countries of the eurozone.

In a joint statement, Guido Westerwelle and Radek Sikorski, the foreign ministers of Germany and Poland, called for the creation of a single EU president, running the commission and overseeing regular summits, and directly elected by voters in a pan-European vote “on the same day in all member states”.

“For Europe to be a truly strong actor and global leader it needs a strong institutional set-up,” said Mr Westerwelle and Mr Sikorski. “It needs a directly elected president who personally appoints the members of his ‘European government’.”

The 11 countries also said changes to European treaties should in future be adopted and implemented “by a super-qualified majority of the EU member states” instead of by unanimity, meaning treaties could no longer be blocked by “No” votes in referendums.

The document follows last week’s call by the president of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, for the EU to become a “federation” and growing calls in Britain for a referendum on any new European treaty or constitution.

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Blasphemy and Empire


By Justin Raimondo, Antiwar.com, September 16, 2012
Americans are baffled: why oh why are Muslims up in arms over a YouTube video, one which no one in America even knew about prior to the attack on our Libyan consulate and the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens? Having abandoned their own religion sometime in the last century or so, they just don’t understand why someone would get all hopped up over a little thing like blasphemy—after all, all one has to do is turn on the TV or view the latest Madonna music video and you’ll get a full dose of it.

Of course, this isn’t true for everyone: in Flyover Country; the rubes still persist in the faith of their fathers, and our elites pander to that whenever they must. However, the Georgetown cocktail party circuit and the world of the Washington power brokers isn’t a notably devout milieu: it is instead decidedly secular, and tinged with more than a little contempt for those Flyover Folks who must be pandered to around election time.

This is one major reason for Washington’s incomprehension when it comes to understanding the wave of hatred for the US currently sweeping the Middle East. That complete cluelessness is endemic, too, in the US media, where reporters are no different than the elites they cover in their militantly secular outlook. So when a deliberately insulting video depicting the prophet Mohammed goes out over the internet, after its makers made a determined effort to get Muslims to view it, they scratch their heads and say they just don’t get it.

Even as the protests spread, they insist it just can’t be about what Muslim protesters say it’s about: it’s all just a “flimsy” excuse, as Reason magazine editor Matt Welch told “national security Democrat” Heather Hurlburt. The US response, he went on to aver, was “not a robust statement of American values.” It was, instead, “kick me, please” rhetoric from a spineless Obama administration. This is a fair summation of the general right-wing response to the crisis, limning the Romney campaign, and over at the Weekly Standard the neocons concur:

“What we have seen unfold in the Middle East over the last week is what distinguishes the region’s societies from our own. The protests in Cairo and Benghazi were not really about the film, the preacher, or Muslim sensitivities. They were an exercise in raw power politics, partly aimed at intramural rivals in the Arab political sphere, but mainly against the United States.”

Like Welch, the Standard claims the protests are about something other than what the protesters themselves say they’re about. Forget the video, we’re told: it’s not about that. It was all a pre-planned carefully-thought-out al-Qaeda operation, in effect another 9/11—maybe not as spectacular, but hey it happened on the same day.

In any case, the Standard is right about one thing: the riots now threatening the security of US diplomats throughout the Muslim world do indeed dramatize what distinguishes the region’s societies from our own, and it’s all about the role of religion in society.

Yes, I know, it’s hard to believe: how could any civilized person take seriously the impulse to achieve transcendence and find meaning in the universe besides the pursuit of pleasure, fame, and money? I mean, really! How primitive can you get? Didn’t that kind of superstition go out with corsets, free silver, and the horse and buggy?

A society in which blasphemy is impermissible is inconceivable to the warlords of Washington, who, after all, live in the same society you and I do: one in which religion is increasingly pushed to the margins and regarded by the country’s elites with ill-concealed contempt. It’s a culture in which gays want to get married, straights are setting records for divorce, and the way to appeal to women in an election year is to make it easier for them to kill their unwanted babies. It is, in short, a culture so far removed from the “medieval” world of our recently conquered Middle Eastern satraps that the distance can only be measured in centuries rather than mere miles.

In the modern world, physical distance is no barrier to empire-building on the other side of the globe: however, this only exacerbates the problems created by the incalculable cultural distance between Washington, D.C., and the somewhat run-down suburb of Benghazi, in Libya, where a mob took the lives of four Americans.

The Romans never had this problem. Although they were just as decadent as we aspire to be, and soon abandoned the pagan faith of their fathers, they understood the mindset of their less “advanced” subjects: the German barbarians, who worshipped their violent and storm-driven gods, the Jews who prayed to a single G-d and awaited the arrival of His Messenger, the mystic cultists who performed their secrets rites in honor of Isis, Demeter, and Bacchus, the Greek deities who quarreled like spoiled children and started wars to amuse themselves at mankind’s expense. Religion of one sort or another permeated every province and client state of the Roman Empire, and in the Imperial City there was little division between the religious and the political spheres: the Roman emperor was himself considered a god, or at least divine in the formal sense, and was often given a religious title to buttress his legitimacy in the eyes of the populace.

In the modern West, where the only god is Mammon, the riots over those Danish cartoons were “a round of silliness,” as Welch described them. Hardly a surprising opinion from the editor of a magazine that has always been hostile to religion, but it’s fair to say this about sums up the general opinion of most Americans, which is why Welch is perfectly within his rights to advocate “a more American response” from Washington—and, although he doesn’t say so, it isn’t hard to imagine what the spirit if not the exact text of that oh-so-American response might be.

No, it’s not just about the video: there’s America’s relationship with the Arab world to consider, and specifically with Libya, Egypt, Yemen, and many of the other countries where rioters are burning our flag and assaulting our embassies. In Libya, we installed their present government and are keeping them on life support through “foreign aid” and “democracy promotion” grants. In Yemen, we’re bombing them: in Egypt, we’re trying to influence their elections, and they’re on the take from us to the tune of over a billion every year. We are, in short, at the center of their world—and yet not of it, indeed distinctly alien to it.

Murray Rothbard was one of the few libertarians who understood the major role religion has played in human societies, and his History of Economic Thought is a monument to that centrality: his analysis furthers an understanding not only of economic history but of all human history. Libertarians, plagued by a militant atheism from the very outset, have stoutly ignored a key aspect of what motivates humans to act as they do, and this has crippled our ability to not only understand but to change the world.

Natural Immune-Boosting Foods


OffTheGrid News, Sept. 2012
As we enter the cooler months, we also enter the time of year when we encounter more illness. This is especially true as school comes back in session. Kids are regularly exposed to new illnesses that they then bring home and share while we simultaneously close up our houses to keep the cold (and fresh air) out.

Considering this increased exposure, it might be a good idea to examine your diet. Some simple tweaks and additions can help to get your body prepared for the upcoming health challenges and boost your family’s immune systems so that their bodies can fight back effectively when the inevitable exposure to illness occurs.

Here are some natural immune-boosting foods you might want to consider incorporating into your menu plan. Most are easy to work in, whether for breakfast, lunch, snacks, or dinner.

Probiotic Foods. Eating a cup of yogurt a day that contains live and active cultures is a wise investment in your health. The cultures (beneficial probiotic bacteria) in the yogurt help to keep a balance of good bacteria in your gut, allowing it to function at its optimal level. Much of the body’s immune system is located in the gut, so keeping the gut happy should help to maintain good overall health.

If an illness has already gotten you down and you are on antibiotics, it is even more important to include probiotics in your diet. Antibiotics not only kill the bad bacteria that made you sick; they also kill the good bacteria in your body. This leaves you more susceptible to illness later in the season if you do not repopulate your gut with good bacteria.

Yogurt is not the only option when it comes to probiotic foods. Other foods you may want to consider trying are milk kefir, water kefir, kimchi, and fermented sauerkraut and veggies (such as old-fashioned pickles). Check out your local health food store for real, fermented foods or try making your own for even more benefits.

Oats. Oats contain beta-glucans, which have an even stronger ability to fight off illness than the oft-recommended immune-boosting herb, echinacea. In addition to their immune-boosting benefits, oats also help to encourage wounds to heal more quickly and potentially enhance the effectiveness of antibiotics. So, a bowl of oatmeal, granola, or O’s might be just the ticket for breakfast this fall and winter! This might even be your justification for eating that oatmeal cookie!

Berries. Berries contain both vitamin C and bioflavonoids, which work together to help the body to rid itself of toxins, boost the immune system, and to maintain healthy collagen levels in the skin. These are all things you want to have going for you in the winter season. Try putting berries in a yogurt smoothie, use them to top your oatmeal or cereal, or add them to salads or desserts.

Tea. True teas from the Camellia sinensis plant species have been shown in studies to contain high levels of antioxidants, which attack free radicals that contribute to disease. White tea contains the most antioxidants, followed by green tea, oolong, and black tea (including pu-erh). All of these teas have at least some benefit to the immune system and many additional benefits to the body as a whole.

Garlic. Garlic has potent antimicrobial properties that help the body to fight off illness. It aids in killing harmful bacteria in the gut, where much of the immune system resides. In addition, the volatile oils in garlic are beneficial to the lungs as a decongestant.

Garlic is most potent when chopped, allowed to sit a few minutes undisturbed, and eaten raw, but it is also beneficial when cooked. If you and your household are fighting illness, put generous amounts of it in everything you can think of to get it into your systems. I like to make hummus with extra garlic, pasta tossed with ten cloves of garlic sauteed in olive oil and with added herbs, and dill pickles with coarsely chopped garlic added (the garlic flavor is not as strong and I find it easier to eat the garlic raw in this way).

Garlic too strong for you? Try onions, which are in the same family as garlic, have many of the same properties, and may be a more palatable choice.

Eggs. Or more specifically, the egg yolks. Egg yolks contain zinc and selenium, which kick-start the immune system. What better reason to add an egg or two a day? Try them boiled for a snack or scrambled with some garlic, onions, and/or peppers for a light lunch.

If you have high cholesterol and have been told by your doctor to avoid eggs, please take that into consideration. Eggs from free-range or pastured chickens might be a better choice in this case, since they tend to be lower in cholesterol and higher in beneficial omega-3 fatty acids.

Ginger. Ginger has the ability to fight off illness on many fronts. It is an antimicrobial that can be taken internally as well as used topically, and it also acts as a natural antibiotic. It kills cold viruses, helps combat fever and chills, gets rid of congestion, and helps with nausea and vomiting, headaches, and indigestion, just to name a few. Ginger is also a beneficial food that has the power to help prevent and treat or kill many types of cancer.

Use ginger in your muffin and sweet bread recipes, slice fresh ginger and make a tea out of it, or add fresh or dried ginger to smoothies and to your meals. Chew on a piece of dried ginger as an afternoon snack. Stir-fries are delicious with ginger added, but expand your use of ginger and try it in other applications such as soup.

Mushrooms. Recent studies have shown that even the most common button mushrooms have beneficial properties—perhaps even more than the shiitaki and other exotic mushrooms that have been touted as health foods. In a study done on rats by Tufts University, white button mushrooms were shown to cause the body to develop significantly increased levels of natural killer cells, ready to attack whatever invader comes into the body. To get the best effect (and to decrease or eliminate the pre-carcinogenic compounds in mushrooms), it is best to cook the mushrooms rather than eating them raw.

Mushrooms are one of the few natural food sources of vitamin D, a vitamin in which many people are deficient in, and that has been shown in recent studies to be beneficial in preventing disease and illness. Mushrooms are also an excellent source of zinc.

Consider eating more mushrooms during the months of the year that you do not get sufficient sun exposure to allow your body to make enough vitamin D for itself. Add them to soups, salads, and stir-fries; saute them with onions to add to steak, burgers, or eggs; or include them in your shish kebabs on the grill.

Sweet and Hot Peppers. All peppers contain high levels of beta-carotene, which the body transforms into vitamin A, an antioxidant that also has the ability to protect the mucus membranes from getting infected. They also contain a healthy dose of vitamin C.

Hot peppers contain capsaicin as an additional asset. Capsaicin has the ability to clear sinuses, encourage movement/excretion of mucus, encourage the release of toxins through sweating, and is a general antimicrobial.

Beef. Beef is another source of zinc, which is very important in the production of white blood cells, which work to fight off bacteria, viruses, and other illness-inducing culprits. Many people are zinc deficient, and even a slight deficiency can seriously slow down the production of white blood cells and lessen the body’s ability to fight off illness.

Put beef on the menu and incorporate some of the other foods in this list: saute with peppers, garlic, onions, and mushrooms; add to your shish kebabs; or use ground beef in soups and sauces.

Chicken Soup. No list of immune-boosting foods would be complete without chicken soup. It may be the warm broth that is comforting; it may be the noodles reminiscent of what mom used to make; or it may be the vitamins present in the vegetables that cause us to feel better when eating this soup.

Homemade chicken soup has been shown to have anti-inflammatory properties. In addition, in one lab test, chicken soup was shown to help stop the movement of neutrophils, white blood cells that feast on bacteria and cellular debris that the body produces when it is affected by a virus such as a cold. These neutrophils have the ability to increase mucus production and may be one of the causes of stuffy noses and coughs when one has a cold. Prevention of this process may be one of the main reasons chicken soup helps us to feel better.

One main component of homemade chicken soup is the homemade broth itself. Homemade broth is most nutritious when both bones and meat are included in the pot. The marrow from the bones, when cooked into broth, has the ability to help the immune system by carrying oxygen to the cells of the body.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

The Fear of God


The Fear of God

I recently came across a topic that piqued my interest—the fear of God. The Bible speaks a fair bit about fearing God, and one can come away with the impression that we’re supposed to be afraid of God in the sense of being terrified of incurring His wrath. For Christians, this can be difficult to reconcile with the fact that God so loved the world that He sent His only Son to manifest His love, and we are to love God with all our hearts, minds, and souls.

There are verses throughout the Bible which speak of being afraid of God and His wrath, but there are many other verses which speak of fearing Him as something positive. When the Bible speaks of fearing God, there are two different concepts being referred to—being afraid of God and His wrath is one, and the other is honoring Him and having reverence for Him. Understanding this difference, we can see the relationship between fearing God and receiving His blessings.



Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly delights in His commandments![1]



Oh, how abundant is Your goodness, which You have stored up for those who fear You.[2]

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; all those who practice it have a good understanding.[3]



The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.[4]

The fear of the Lord prolongs life.[5]

The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life.[6]

The fear of the Lord leads to life, and whoever has it rests satisfied.[7]

I know that it will be well with those who fear God, because they fear before Him.[8]

Better is a little with the fear of the Lord than great treasure and trouble with it.[9]

The friendship of the Lord is for those who fear Him.[10]

The angel of the Lord encamps around those who fear Him, and delivers them.[11]

Oh, fear the Lord, you His saints, for those who fear Him have no lack![12]



He will bless those who fear the Lord, both the small and the great.[13]

The reward for humility and fear of the Lord is riches and honor and life.[14]

One of the concepts of fearing God portrayed in the Bible, as mentioned briefly above, is terror, dread, or fear; it’s in reference to being afraid of God, and is used mainly when speaking of people who have sinned and are going to face God’s judgment. Some examples of this concept are:



People shall enter the caves of the rocks and the holes of the ground, from before the terror of the Lord, and from the splendor of His majesty, when He rises to terrify the earth.[15]



How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which He was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.[16]

Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.[17]

This concept of the fear of God is different from the one that is spoken of in the positive sense of reverencing God.—That is, having awe, reverence, honor, and respect for Him. Synonyms for these words are wonder, admiration, amazement, astonishment, esteem, veneration, worship, devotion, high opinion, deference, regard. Fearing God in this way brings blessing and goodness to our lives.

In the King James translation, there are times when the word fear is used to meanreverence Newer translations often render it reverence or revere or respect. For example, Leviticus 19:3, which is translated in the King James Version (KJV) as “Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father,” is rendered in the English Standard Version (ESV) as “Every one of you shall revere his mother and his father.” It reads as “Every one of you shallreverence his mother and his father” in the New American Standard Bible (NASB), and “Each of you must respect his mother and father” in the New International Version (NIV).

Another example of fearing God meaning something other than “being afraid of Him” is from the book of Isaiah, which spoke of the Messiah fearing God.

The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. And His delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.[18]

Clearly, the Messiah wasn’t going to be in dread and terror of God. Rather it can be seen as the Messiah loving, reverencing, and giving glory to the Father.

I honor My Father.[19]

[Jesus] lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son that the Son may glorify You.”[20]



Jesus said, “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in Him.”[21]

There are examples of people in the Old and New Testaments who honored and revered God, and thus were said to fear Him.

[The Lord] said [to Abraham], “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”[22]

There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil.[23]

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God.[24]

By contrast, there are those who are unbelievers or are wicked, who are said to have no fear of God, meaning no reverence, respect, or honor for God.

Transgression speaks to the wicked deep in his heart; there is no fear of God before his eyes.[25]

Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.[26]

It will not be well with the wicked, neither will he prolong his days like a shadow, because he does not fear before God.[27]

Your evil will chastise you, and your apostasy will reprove you. Know and see that it is evil and bitter for you to forsake the Lord your God; the fear of Me is not in you, declares the Lord God of hosts.[28]

As saved Christians, we need not have the dread of punishment for our sins, for Jesus has already taken that punishment on Himself through His death on the cross. We have been forgiven for our sins and delivered from the “wages of sin” through the gift of God of salvation and eternal life with God.

That doesn’t mean there won’t be any consequences for our sins in this life; nor does it mean that God will countenance willful sin and disobedience of His moral laws. The Bible does speak of chastisement or being disciplined. Chastisement in Scripture is generally spoken of as training or causing one to learn, the molding of the character by reproof or admonition, which is quite different from punishment for our sins. The Lord may chastise us in some way for our sins for the purpose of teaching us or molding us, which is an act of His love.



For the Lord disciplines the one He loves, and chastises every son whom He receives.[29]

As believers, the right reaction to all God is and has done is having the fear of the Lord—in the sense of veneration and devotion, of reverence and deference, of worship and devotion, as well as awe and wonder. When we think of His creating the universe, from all of the stars to subatomic particles, we can only marvel at His power and glory. When we realize that as human beings we sin and therefore deserve His punishment, but that because of His love He made our salvation and reconciliation possible, then the correct response is praise and worship, honor, love, obedience, and reverence. It’s all part of acknowledging that He is God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

There are blessings in store for those who honor Him in this way.

Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly delights in His commandments![30]

Blessed is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways![31]

Oh, how abundant is Your goodness, which You have stored up for those who fear You and worked for those who take refuge in You, in the sight of the children of mankind![32]

The time for the dead to be judged, and for rewarding Your servants, the prophets and saints, and those who fear Your name, both small and great.[33]

Those of us who love the Lord don’t need to have the type of fear that causes us to be afraid of God and His wrath. We are part of His family, having been given this right through our faith in Jesus. Our sins are forgiven, so we won’t face the punishment of God. We are redeemed. Our relationship with the Lord is one of love, of gratitude, of praise and worship. As such, we are rightly to fear the Lord by giving Him our love, obeying His Word, and living in a manner that glorifies Him, for He is infinitely worthy.

Worthy are You, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for You created all things, and by Your will they existed and were created.[34]


Notes

Unless otherwise indicated, all scriptures are from the Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.



[1] Psalm 112:1.


[2] Psalm 31:19.


[3] Psalm 111:10.


[4] Proverbs 1:7.


[5] Proverbs 10:27.


[6] Proverbs 14:27.


[7] Proverbs 19:23.


[8] Ecclesiastes 8:12.


[9] Proverbs 15:16.


[10] Psalm 25:14.


[11] Psalm 34:7.


[12] Psalm 34:9.


[13] Psalm 115:13.


[14] Proverbs 22:4.


[15] Isaiah 2:19.


[16] Hebrews 10:29–31.


[17] Matthew 10:28.


[18] Isaiah 11:2–3.


[19] John 8:49.


[20] John 17:1.


[21] John 13:31.


[22] Genesis 22:12.


[23] Job 1:1.


[24] Acts 10:1–2.


[25] Psalm 36:1.


[26] Romans 3:14–18.


[27] Ecclesiastes 8:13.


[28] Jeremiah 2:19.


[29] Hebrews 12:6.


[30] Psalm 112:1.


[31] Psalm 128:1.


[32] Psalm 31:19.


[33] Revelation 11:18.


[34] Revelation 4:11.

The Heart of It All: Sin

By Peter Amersterdam

September 18, 2012
What Is Sin?

This set of articles is going to address the topic of sin. It will cover the definitions of sin, the origins of sin and its effects on humanity and the world, and will touch on God’s plan for redemption from sin. (Redemption will be covered at length in future articles.)

Sin is an important topic to cover, since it affects the life of every human being and is what has caused the separation of humans from God. Thankfully, God, in His love and mercy, has made salvation from sin available to humanity through Jesus’ suffering and death. As Christians, we have the incredible blessing of being forgiven for and redeemed from our sins. We are saved from the punishment of sin in the afterlife, a gift which is of inestimable value, as we will live forever with God. Sadly, we live in a world with many who don’t know that salvation is available. It is our mission as Christians to share the good news of the Gospel with them.

As Christians, it is important for us to understand the various aspects and effects of sin in our personal lives as well as in the lives of others we are trying to reach and help; also, it motivates us to bring the good news of salvation from sin to those who haven’t yet received it. It also helps us to better understand and explain to others why evil things happen in our world, and the origin of many of the problems and suffering humankind faces today. Having a fuller picture of sin helps us to better understand and communicate to others the need for and importance of salvation, while bringing about a deeper appreciation for our own salvation and what we’ve been saved from. While we’ve been blessed with redemption, for those who reject salvation, the effects of sin will have serious long-term consequences, not just in this life but in the life to come.

Christian philosopher Rufus M. Jones offers the following exposition of sin:

Sin is no abstract dogma. It is not a debt which somebody can pay and so wash off the slate. Sin is a fact within our lives. It is a condition of heart and will. There is no sin apart from a sinner. Wherever sin exists there is a conscious deviation from a standard, a sag of the nature, and it produces an effect upon the entire personality. The person who sins disobeys a sense of right. He falls below his vision of the good. He sees a path, but he does not walk in it. He hears a voice, but he says “no” instead of “yes.” He is aware of a higher self which makes its appeal, but he lets the lower have the reins. There is no description of sin anywhere to compare with the powerful narrative out of the actual life of the Apostle Paul, found in Romans 7:9–25. The thing which moves us as we read it is the picture here drawn of our own state. A lower nature dominates us and spoils our life. “What I would, I do not; what I would not, that I do.”[1]

The main topic of these articles is sin in humanity in general and the effects and consequences of sin on human beings overall. It will also touch on the sins or weaknesses of Christians, but that is not the main focus.
What Sin Is

The most common Hebrew word used for sin in the Old Testament is chata, which is defined as “to miss the goal or path of right and duty, to miss the mark, to wander from the way.” The Old Testament also uses words translated as to break off (as in breaking God’s covenant), transgression of God’s will, rebellion, going astray.

The New Testament uses a variety of words when speaking of sin. These are translated as violate, transgress, overstep, miss the mark, go past, fall beside, failure, wrongdoing, deviate from the right path, turn aside, a deviation from truth and uprightness, unrighteousness of heart and life, lawlessness, ungodliness, unbelief, rebellious disobedience, and falling away.

Some definitions of sin from theologians are as follows:

Sin may be defined as the personal act of turning away from God and His will. It is the transgression of God’s law … the violation of God’s command. It is the turning away from God’s expressed will.[2]



We define sin in general as a deviation from the divine moral law, no matter whether that law has been written in the human heart, or communicated to man by positive precept [through Scripture].[3]



Sin is any failure to conform to the moral law of God in act, attitude, or nature.[4]

While God has expressed His will and moral law through the Bible, there was a time when the Bible didn’t exist. There are also many who haven’t heard of it or read it, or don’t know that it contains truth about God and His will. However, all throughout history humans have inherently known God’s moral law to some extent, as God has embedded it in the heart of each person.



When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.[5]

While many people do not specifically know the moral laws of God as expressed in Scripture, everyone has a basic understanding that murder, stealing, lying, etc., are wrong, which is evidence of an overall moral consciousness that humans have. This understanding is often referred to as natural law or moral law and is contained within the Ten Commandments, some of which state:

You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s.[6]

Because humans have intuitive knowledge of the moral law within them, they have a sense of what is right and what is wrong, of moral accountability. Their conscience “bears witness.”

J. I. Packer offers the following explanation:



Conscience has in it two elements, (a) an awareness of certain things as being right and wrong, and (b) an ability to apply laws and rules to specific situations. Conscience, as distinct from our other powers of mind, is unique; it feels like a person detached from us, often speaking when we would like it to be silent and saying things that we would rather not hear. We can decide whether to heed conscience, but we cannot decide whether or not it will speak; our experience is that it decides that for itself. Because of its insistence on judging us by the highest standard we know, we call it God’s voice in the soul, and in that extent so it is.[7]

Wayne Grudem explains it this way:



The consciences of unbelievers bear witness to God’s moral standards, but at times this evidence of God’s law on the hearts of unbelievers is distorted or suppressed. Sometimes their thoughts “accuse” them, and sometimes their thoughts “excuse” them, Paul says. The knowledge of God’s law as derived from such sources is never perfect, but it is enough to give an awareness of God’s moral demands to all mankind. (And it is on this basis that Paul argues that all humanity is held guilty before God for sin, even those who do not have the written laws of God in Scripture.)[8]

God’s expressed moral law and will in Scripture, and each person having an intuitive knowledge of the moral law and a conscience that bears witness when they break the moral law, means that all humans—whether they know Scripture or not—are aware that they fail to conform to or that they deviate from the moral law, and that they are doing wrong.



Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.[9]

While the sins humans commit are often sins against others, such as stealing from someone or lying about them, and while these sins can also damage the person committing the sin, they are first and foremost sins against God. To do such things is to break the moral laws of God; however, more importantly, these are sins against the Lawgiver Himself. They are an affront to His holiness and righteousness, and cause a separation between human beings and Him.


Sin Is Universal

The Bible teaches that sin is universal—that every human being, with the exception of Jesus, has been and is a sinner. Both the Old and New Testaments speak of everyone as sinners and no one as fully righteous.



All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.[10]

No one living is righteous before You.[11]

Who can say, “I have made my heart pure; I am clean from my sin”?[12]

Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.[13]

If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.[14]

All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.[15]

The universality of sin is a concept that is present even in many pagan religions, which confirms that humankind has an intuitive understanding of God’s moral law, and of man’s sinful condition. Throughout the ages, religions made sacrifices because they believed they had displeased their gods.

Rufus M. Jones writes:

That is human nature. That feeling is deep-rooted in man wherever he is found. He is conscious that sin separates and he feels that something costly and precious is required to close the chasm. Sacrifice is one of the deepest and most permanent facts of the budding spiritual life. Its origin is far back in history. The tattered papyrus, the fragment of baked clay, the pictorial inscription of the most primitive sort, all bear witness to this immemorial custom. It is as old as smiling or weeping, as hard to trace to a beginning as loving or hating. It is bound up with man’s sense of guilt, and was born when conscience was born.[16]

Louis Berkhof wrote:

The heathen religions testify to the universal consciousness of sin and of the need of reconciliation with a Supreme Being. There is a general feeling that the gods are offended and must be propitiated in some way. There is a universal voice of conscience, testifying to the fact that man falls short of the ideal and stands condemned in the sight of some higher Power. Altars reeking with the blood of sacrifices, often the sacrifices of dear children, repeated confessions of wrongdoing, and prayers for deliverance from evil—all point to the consciousness of sin.[17]
Where Did Sin Originate?

Before God created the universe, sin didn’t exist, as only God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—existed. It is clear from Scripture that God is holy and that He doesn’t abide evil and doesn’t sin. Therefore, sin would not have been present before God created the angels.

When God created moral beings, angels and humans, He created them with free will. He created them with the ability to make moral choices, and in doing so, made it possible for them to choose to do good and right. However, giving them free will also allowed for the possibility for them to choose to do wrong. Their freewill choice to disobey God is where sin originated. God did not cause the moral beings He created to sin. However, they freely chose to disobey His commands and expressed will, and thus to sin. (More on this below.)

God is not the author of sin. He is holy; He separates Himself from sin. He doesn’t commit sin, He does no wickedness or wrong, and He doesn’t tempt people to do evil. Evil is the absence of good. It’s not a physical thing that is created. Evil is, in a sense, the absence of God, just as darkness is the absence of light. God couldn’t create evil, as if He did, He would be acting against His nature and character, which God does not do, and in fact cannot do. Let’s take a brief look at how the Bible expresses God’s holiness and righteousness and His outlook on sin:

The Rock, His work is perfect, for all His ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is He.[18]

The Lord is upright; He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.[19]

Far be it from God that He should do wickedness, and from the Almighty that He should do wrong.[20]

Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and He Himself tempts no one.[21]

In the King James Version of the Bible there is a verse which says, I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.[22] This translation can be seen as meaning that God created moral evil. While the Hebrew noun ra, translated as evil, can mean moral evil, it has other meanings as well, such as disaster or calamity, which aren’t moral evils. Most modern translations don’t use the word evil in this verse, but rather disaster or calamity. The ESV renders the verse this way:

I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things.

God hates sin and it is an abomination to Him.

These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace; do not devise evil in your hearts against one another, and love no false oath, for all these things I hate, declares the Lord.[23]

There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to Him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.[24]

For all who do such things, all who act dishonestly, are an abomination to the Lord your God.[25]

The Lord tests the righteous, but His soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence.[26]

While God didn’t create or cause sin, He did create a universe with creatures that have free will, which meant that His free-will creatures could choose to do wrong. In His omniscience and foreknowledge He knew this would happen, and in His love and mercy He made the way to reconcile humankind to Himself.

Theologian Jack Cottrell states:

If there were only rocks and trees and animals, “right and wrong” would still not be applicable. But with the creation of angels and men, who have the unique capacity consciously to choose to act either within or against the will of God, right and wrong suddenly become meaningful concepts, since there now exists the potential for the reality of moral evil or sin.[27]



Before the first humans sinned, sin was present in the spiritual or angelic world. Angels were created as immaterial beings without physical bodies. They are created moral beings with free will and the ability to choose to do right or wrong, as evidenced by the fact that at some point they were faced with a moral choice in which some angels chose wrongly and fell away from God while others chose to remain true to God. Not much is said in Scripture about the fall of the angels, as to when it happened or what the sin was, though it is commonly understood to be pride. In any case, some of the angels sinned and are thus separated from God. They are now referred to as fallen angels and their leader as the Devil, or Satan.

God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment …[28]

The angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, He has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day.[29]

Then He will say to those on His left, “Depart from Me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”[30]

The next article will discuss sin’s entrance into the world of humanity.



[1] Rufus M. Jones, The Double Search—Studies in Atonement and Prayer (Philadelphia, PA: John C. Winston Co., 1906), 60–61.


[2] J. Rodman Williams, Renewal Theology, Systematic Theology from a Charismatic Perspective, Vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 222.


[3] John Theodore Mueller, Christian Dogmatics, A Handbook of Doctrinal Theology for Pastors, Teachers, and Laymen (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1934), 212.


[4] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 490.


[5] Romans 2:14–15.


[6] Exodus 20:13–17.


[7] J. I. Packer, Concise Theology, chapter Conscience (Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 1993), 96.


[8] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 122.


[9] Romans 3:19.


[10] Isaiah 53:6.


[11] Psalm 143:2.


[12] Proverbs 20:9.


[13] Ecclesiastes 7:20.


[14] 1 John 1:8.


[15] Romans 3:23.


[16] Rufus M. Jones, The Double Search—Studies in Atonement and Prayer (Philadelphia, PA: John C. Winston Co., 1906), 66–67.


[17] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996), 239.


[18] Deuteronomy 32:4.


[19] Psalm 92:15.


[20] Job 34:10.


[21] James 1:13.


[22] Isaiah 45:7.


[23] Zechariah 8:16–17.


[24] Proverbs 6:16–19.


[25] Deuteronomy 25:16.


[26] Psalm 11:5.


[27] Jack Cottrell, What the Bible Says About God the Redeemer (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2000), 249.


[28] 2 Peter 2:4.


[29] Jude 6.


[30] Matthew 25:41.


Copyright © 2012 The Family International.

Selling War to the Public – An Interview with James Corbett


via GlobalResearch.ca

Interview with James Corbett of The Corbett Report pertaining to war propaganda, the ongoing crisis in Syria and the role of what he describes as “the real alternative media”. The real alternative media is independent and grassroots, and is not funded by the NGOs or foundations. Devon DB begs the question: How can people break free from the current system of oppression and media disinformation?

* * *

Devon DB: What is your opinion of the ongoing crisis in Syria?

James Corbett: The crisis in Syria can only be understood through the lens of what the mainstream Western media is leaving out of their reporting, namely the ongoing, on-the-record support of outside actors in arming, equipping, and training the so-called “opposition” that is currently waging a ground war against the Syrian government.

This help is coming in the form of equipment and tactical involvement from the US State Department and the CIA, arms and supplies from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, logistical support and operational bases in Turkey, and armed militants associated with Al Qaeda and other Wahabbi Sunni terror organizations from Libya, Iraq, and elsewhere. In this context, the constant demands of Clinton and other Western representatives for Russia to “stop arming Assad” can be seen as the hypocritical and deeply dishonest position that it is.

In fact, the entire conflict can only be understood when it is seen not as the spontaneous outgrowth of a popular internal resistance, as portrayed by the West, but as a foreign-funded and armed terrorist insurgency whose open terror campaign of car bombings, ethnic cleansing and other war crimes are consistently praised as heroic by the new “humanitarian interventionists” of the neoliberal imperialist set. Given what has taken place in Libya in recent days, those gun-ho interventionists who are currently praising the “Syrian freedom fighters” would be well-served to contemplate who it is they are helping to bring to power in Damascus.

Devon DB: Many in the alternative media are focusing on the actions of the rebels, while, some would say, ignoring the actions of the Assad regime. This usually results in one being accused of being a regime supporter. Why do you think that the focus is so much on the rebels rather than on the regime and how would you respond to such accusations as being a regime supporter?

James Corbett: Selling war to the public has always involved portraying the issue as a clear-cut case of black and white, good and evil. Once the issue is framed in that way, anyone who opposes the war can be portrayed as a supporter of evil. In every instance, the case for peace is effectively taken off the table by arguing that “if you’re not for the war, you’re supporting X,” where X is the boogeyman du jour.

This has transitioned easily from the Bush era “axis of evil” and “war on terror” to the Obama era of “humanitarian intervention.” The rhetoric and reasoning are virtually identical, but they have been transposed into a liberal-friendly context. This thinking necessarily begs the question of who gets to decide who to “help” and what groups will take over in the aftermath. I do not support Assad any more than I supported Gaddafi or Assad. But neither do I support Mugabe, or the Al Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain, or the House of Saud, or Netanyahu, or any of the other leaders of repressive regimes. Why is one leader demonized and the other feted? The answer is obvious.

So the question is whether refusing to support the bombing and military invasion of a foreign country is morally equivalent to supporting that government’s leader. This comes down to the question of moral responsibility. As a Canadian citizen in Japan I have absolutely no control over what happens in Syria. I do have a say over what the Canadian government does, what actions it takes, and what its military does. When it lends its support to the bombardment of Libya, I become implicated in the deaths of those civilians who were killed in those strikes. So it is up to us to stop the violence, bloodshed and power grabs made by our leaders under the guise of “humanitarian intervention” as it is up to the people of Syria to deal with the Assad government however they can. This is the nature of moral responsibility.

Devon DB: In the alternative media, we have read and heard time and again that the situation is Syria could lead to “a World War 3 scenario.” Do you actually think that this is possible?

James Corbett: If NATO were to roll into Damascus tomorrow with guns blazing, there would be military repercussions. Russia has face to save in the Syria situation as well as strategic interests to protect in the country, so it would not sit idly by while the country is taken over by a foreign military. This is precisely why there has been no direct military intervention by any outside military, nor is there likely to be barring some international outrage like a false flag event.

More worrying, perhaps, is the relentless, years-long campaign by Israel to drum up support for a military strike on Iran. Such an event is very much on the table, very much a possibility, and would almost inevitably draw Russia, China, and other military powers into armed conflict with the NATO powers, which very well could lead to a third world war scenario.

Devon DB: Switching gears now, how would you define alternative media and what do you think its purpose is?

James Corbett: There are two types of alternative media. There is the establishment alternative media and the real alternative media. The establishment alternative media is usually funded (at least partially) by the big name foundations and NGOs with ties back to the usual cast of behind-the-scenes oligarchs. They will present differing views from the mainstream media, and often offer more balanced, thoughtful and contextual reports to their audience. When it comes to key paradigmatic issues like the necessity of R2P or the responsibility of Al Qaeda for 9/11, however, they will circle the wagons and defend the system.

The real alternative media is independent and grassroots, and is not funded by the NGOs or foundations. As a citizen journalist movement, it cannot be defined by any particular ideology or viewpoint; it is a representative of the population at large. Given this media landscape, it is tempting to portray the mainstream and establishment alternative media as inherently bad and the real alternative media as inherently good, but this is too simplistic.

The establishment media occasionally does good work and often reports true facts (with heavy amounts of spin and lies by omission). The establishment alternative media contains some of the best critiques of the prevailing mainstream opinion, even if those critiques are careful never to cross certain lines. The real alternative media is completely unmuzzled, but it is also unfiltered. There will be brilliant examples of truly independent reporting and analysis, and there will be dreadful examples of unreasoned speculation. No one medium is inherently good, and it is up to all of us to do the (sometimes laborious) work of piecing together the truth from a myriad of sources, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, good points and blind spots.

Devon DB: What role would you say the Corbett Report plays in the overall alternative media scene?

James Corbett: The Corbett Report is nothing more nor less than my own attempt to fill in the context that is being left out of much of the so-called debate in the mainstream and establishment alternative media. Initially spurred on by the dreadful lack of contextualization of the events of 9/11 in the media, I have branched out my own investigation into economic, social, geopolitical, scientific and philosophical matters. Through my tendency to link back all of my factual statements to source documents, I hope to be in the process of creating a resource that will be valuable for those who are seeking to come to a better understanding of the world at large.

Devon DB: Why do you think more and more people seem to be turning to the alternative media?


James Corbett: The internet has surpassed newspapers and is the process of eclipsing television as the main source for news and information for most people. This means necessarily that more people are turning to the types of alternative media outlets that can only be found on the web to keep them informed about the world. There are a number of technological and social factors that are playing into this transformation, but the number one issue has to be the public’s growing awareness of the information controls that exist in the traditional media. With the internet, people are suddenly able to become their own editors, deciding what stories are important, what sources are reliable, and what pieces of information are worth pursuing.
Why would anyone relinquish the power that comes from this very liberating experience of the world of information back into the hands of a few corporations run by the same few rich, well-connected men who have a vested interest in keeping the current order the way it is? And now that social media and blogging are making the tools for creating media platforms accessible by nearly everyone on the planet, the very idea that “news” is something that is organized by some centralized company in New York or London or Tokyo is being overthrown. The end of the old media paradigm is already here, the newspaper, magazine and tv companies just don’t know it yet.

Devon DB: In your podcasts and radio shows, you have used the term “global enslavement grid” or variations of it. What exactly do you mean by that term?

James Corbett: The global enslavement grid is an interlocking system of economic, social, political and psychological controls that have been put in place to direct society toward a planned future global government structure. Although it has existed in some form or other for centuries (and, presumably, millennia), its modern form can be traced back to the British eugenicists of the late 19th century and the Fabian socialists of the early 20th century. One can trace a line stretching from Francis Galton to Paul Ehrlich, going through such figures as H.G. Wells, Julian Huxley, Walter Lippmann, B.F. Skinner and Bertrand Russell, amongst others, who were all obsessed with the problem of how to create a well-ordered society through scientific methods. To one extent or another, they all wrestled with the question of society and how it is to be governed, as well as the possibility of using scientific methods to control the lower strata of society for the benefit of a ruling elite.

We see this coming to fruition in the creation of the modern surveillance society, where the centuries-old idea of the panopticon is being implemented at a societal level, and in the modern environmental movement, which has produced in many the conviction that humanity itself is a cancer and that the control (and eventual eradication) of humans is in itself a good thing. The history of the development of this enslavement grid and the ways that it operates is too large to encapsulate in short form like this, and it’s difficult to do justice to an idea this expansive in so few words. Articulating the enslavement grid has been one of the primary goals of my website, which has so far produced thousands of hours of media and will hopefully be able to produce many thousands more, exploring this idea and its development, as well as fruitful forms of resistance for those who are opposed to this agenda.

Devon DB: How do you think people can unplug from this matrix that has been created by the elites and is fed to us on a daily basis?

James Corbett: The most important thing people can do (and what I have come to believe is the only thing that people can do) is to realize that the power to change society truly rests with you. We tend to shunt off the big questions about “how to change the world” to the political arena, where we can support this or that political movement or put our hopes in this or that political candidate. This is part of the global enslavement grid itself. By constantly focusing on what is outside of us and waiting for a savior to come and put society back in order, we are ceding our power over our own lives to the very corporate-military-banking-governmental superstructure that is creating the global dictatorship that we are seeking to resist. Worse yet, we continue to support that very structure in the most straightforward way possible: by buying their products, shopping at their stores, banking at their banks, and voting for their politicians. How can we possibly presume to have any effect on changing the current course of society when we are still supporting the very corporations, businesses, governments and institutions that are behind it with our time, money, and energy on a day to day basis?

The only solution is to begin to create the alternative society that we want to live in. That means beginning the long, hard process of decoupling ourselves from the corporate/retail/banking system that we are born into and transitioning into a local, independent economy that bypasses that corporate structure altogether. There are thousands of ways to do this: growing your own food, buying what you need at local markets and independent retailers, participating in local alternative currency systems, supporting independent alternative media and detaching ourselves from the technology that is increasingly embedding us in this matrix. It is not an easy process, and in all likelihood it is a generational project. But it will not begin unless we take those first steps.

James Corbett is an independent journalist based in Japan. He is the producer of The Corbett Report. He is also producer and film director for Global Research TV.

Devon DB is a 20 year old independent writer and researcher. He is studying political science at Fairleigh Dickinson University. He can be contacted at devondb[at]mail[dot]com.

I Love to Speak to You!

By M. Fontaine

Download Audio (5.66MB)

Here is a beautiful message of encouragement regarding hearing from the Lord in prophecy, which has good promises we all can claim. The Lord clearly says here that it really doesn’t matter how we feel—whether we’re “good” enough or “spiritual” enough—all we have to do is ask Him for the faith to receive His answers, and He will give them. We have to do our part, but when it comes down to it, the Lord is the one who has to do the miracle. “Faithful is He that calleth you, who also will do it!”1

The Enemy would love to use condemnation to stop us from clearly receiving the Lord’s messages, or having faith in them once we receive them, by trying to make us feel that because we’re such a mess, we must not be very clear channels either. The Lord knows that we’re a mess—and He still allows us to hear from Him! So don’t let the Enemy stop you through his ploy of condemnation. Open up and receive the loving words Jesus has for you. Prophecy is His gift of love to you, to make your life easier and more complete!

Jesus says:

It doesn’t matter how you feel or how you don’t feel, or what you think when you sit down to pray and hear from Me in prophecy—because I can and will override all of your ways completely if you will just ask Me to.

If you feel discouraged and as if you can’t do it, that you can’t be desperate enough, you can’t be good enough to receive something as wonderful as My messages from heaven—all you have to do is ask Me to override those feelings and replace them with a gift of faith.

You don’t have to have great faith; you just need the simple faith of a little child. Just ask Me for the faith of a child who reaches up and receives her Father’s gifts. She doesn’t think about it and analyze the message, because she has childlike faith and trusts that her Father knows what He’s doing and He knows what’s best, and all she has to do is trust.

If you’re ever tempted to feel discouraged that you’re not spiritual enough, or good enough to receive My wonderful, life-changing words of prophecy, remember that I have often chosen the weak things of this world, the despised things, and the people whom most others look down on in scorn and disbelief to accomplish My will.2 I like to use little people, even the underdogs that no one else wants, but who have a burning love for Me and are willing to do whatever I ask of them.

I love to use men or women who don’t think much of themselves and are little in their own eyes, so that I can pour through them and give My wonderful life-giving words through them. I delight to use you, and sometimes it’s even when you feel the least usable and the most incapable that I use you the most, because that’s when you’re the most desperate for Me to do it through you.

So don’t worry if you feel incapable. It’s good to stay humble and be desperate when you sit down to pray, because then you are open to My Spirit, My anointing, and My help.

This feeling of weakness can be a strength—that feeling of being incapable, that scary feeling that you can’t do it, that awesome feeling that it’s too big for you, too much, too great, that you’re too small and incapable. If that feeling keeps you desperate and dependent on Me, then it becomes a strength to you.

So don’t despise the weakness, the insecurity, and the feeling of being incapable. Don’t let the Enemy discourage you.

Whenever the Enemy tempts you to feel discouraged, that you’re not doing good enough, you’re not receiving good messages or clear messages from Me, or that it’s too hard and takes too long—just remember that if something discourages you from hearing from Me, that’s not My voice speaking to you.3

If you are tempted to feel that it’s too hard and it takes too long to hear from Me, remember that’s not true and that it doesn’t matter how long it takes. It’s not a competition. You can’t listen to the voice of discouragement, or to anything negative when it comes to prophecy and hearing from Me. I say you can hear from Me, and I will continue to help you each time you ask to receive from Me. I will speak and I will pour into you.

You must have believing faith, faith that trusts and believes and receives, no matter how hard it might seem, no matter how long it takes, no matter how you feel at the time, no matter what you think about yourself or the message I’m giving you. You have to set all of that aside, and reach up and receive.

If you’re obeying, listening, and doing your best to stay in tune, to stay close to Me and to keep your heart right with Me, you have nothing to worry about and nothing to fear. Just keep close to Me and trust Me to do everything else.

Opening up your channel to Me is often a test of faith in many ways, and sometimes it’s a struggle or difficult, because you’re receiving My words from heaven—you’re receiving life and light and spirit—so the Enemy fights it and he fights you to try to hinder you and stop your faith. But even that can be good, because it keeps you humble, and that keeps you close to Me and dependent upon Me. So it all works together for good and for My glory.

I promise that as you obey, as you manifest faith, as you stay prayerful and desperate and close to Me, I will always give you My words.



Originally published April 1998. Updated and republished September 2012.
Read by Bethany Kelly.


1 1 Thessalonians 5:24.

2 1 Corinthians 1:27–29.

3 John 8:44.

Copyright © Fight for Your Faith