Friday, November 12, 2010

False Culture Wars and the Manhattan Declaration




Years ago, I realized they were ushering Christians into the false political and unity camp by using the "culture wars": battling carnally against "liberals": the unbelievers, atheists and secular humanists of the world, focusing on abortion [which nothing really is ever done about from so called "pro-life" politicians], 'gay marriage" [many homosexuals are not interested in the Ozzie and Harriet monogamous married life, the battle was always about who got the benefits when the partner died] and other matters. As I have outlined on this blog already, right and left are both a lie!

The "culture wars" have combined the worse Dominionist aspects in Christianity, allowed politics to co-opt many a church, and also has helped quite a bit in the ecumenical plans of Rome, after all even Moral Majority had plenty of Catholic members in 'fighting' the culture wars.

Now many of these folks are correct about the moral decline in culture, the deterioration in values, and liberals who want to take over the schools but sadly they have used the weapons of this world to do battle, instead of seeking to convert people to Jesus Christ and having change come via the Holy Spirit. This has brought endless false things into the churches and married them even more to the state. Where we have arrived at basically is at a place where the whole country, even unbelievers, recognize the inherent loathsome quest for power in the so called "Christian right".

Where we have arrived at is a place where many are refusing the Christian gospel looking at these guys thinking "Christianity" is just about rules, and people trying to control each other. This brand of "Christianity" has become more about celebrity, and the seeking of world power as well.

Chuck Colson is one big mover and shaker in the whole "culture wars"- ecumenical fest, other past names of course include Falwell, and other past politicians like Ralph Reed. Chuck Colson who is married to a Catholic wife, is a big name in seeking to unite evangelicals to the Catholic church, and bringing evangelicals and Catholics together using the "culture wars' to do so. He celebrated the last Pope as a heroic figure and promoter of Christian unity. Chuck Colson authored the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together with priest Father Richard John Neuhaus.



One of the latest documents Chuck Colson wrote with two other co-authors, Roger George--a Catholic and Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School was the Manhattan Declaration from last year. This document is another "unity" document, asking Orthodox, Catholics, and evangelicals to sign off for "unity" on the top culture wars precepts.


We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in
defending them. These truths are:

1.the sanctity of human life
2.the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3.the rights
of conscience and religious liberty.



First of all let's look at abortion, all talk and no action. Abortion often serves as a smokescreen for wicked politicians, who have used it to give themselves a veneer of "goodness". Here too, the Catholic church has used abortion as a smokescreen as well, standing supposedly for "pro-life" while behind the scenes: The Catholic Campaign for Human Development, even helped in Obama's election. This was a scandal in Catholic circles a couple years ago as well as when Notre Dame invited Obama to speak and honored him, pro-choice views, a previous speech to Planned Parenthood and all.

For 30-40 years, they have been yakking about abortion, and abortion continues. But even there, throwing people in prison, isn't going to end abortion, the feminists now have RU-486 and underground ways to complete abortions. If these Christians have focused on the Holy Spirit instead of the 'rule of law" as the only recourse, perhaps there would have been those who would have realized abortion is the ending of a human life, and would have departed from it.

Second of all marriage, here the Christian Right has beat the 'gay marriage' drumbeat over and over as if hordes of homosexuals are beating down the justice of the peace doors in every town. Most of them simply want survivors benefits, but here gay marriage has almost been promoted more simply in opposition.

The Manhattan Declaration does make a nod to the growing divorce rate, promiscuity and infidelity but here too joining with the Catholic church on this issue is odd too, given what was exposed during the Catholic church sex scandals which is the high number of homosexuals in the Catholic priesthood. More rules, and "rule of law" will not work on one's sexual more's either, one needs conviction via the Holy Spirit to live a proper life and to obey God's commandments regarding one's sexual life. This is something in other words the politicians cannot fix.

Thirdly, we see listed the "rights of conscience" and "religious liberty". The Manhattan Declaration states thusly " In recent decades a growing body of case law has paralleled the decline in respect for religious values in the media, the academy and political leadership, resulting in restrictions on the free exercise of religion". Why on earth would anyone join with Catholics or the Roman Catholic church when it comes to the matter of 'religious liberty"? Laws against heretics, are still on the canon law books. Read the parts where they mention a "just penalty" for those heretics, or schismatics, in free nations their "punishments" are more suppressed, but all one has to do is look at world history to know how the Roman Catholic church has oppressed nations for centuries. Their desire to marry church and state also contradicts with the stated desire for "religious liberty".

The document speaks of the "common good" over and over.

Like those who have gone before us in the faith, Christians today are called to proclaim the Gospel of costly grace, to protect the intrinsic dignity of the human person and to stand for the common good.

The term "common good" used over and over also is a disturbing one as well, this is a term I've seen used in Vatican circles to advance their agenda, claiming 'its good for everyone", suppressing the rights of individuals. Many do not know this, but the "common good" is a central Catholic social teaching concept. See here and scroll down. I've seen everything from a Cardinal claim that its for the "universal common good" for nation-states to give up sovereignty to the UN to Hillary Clinton shouting for the "common good". It's a rather abused term with the agenda to suppress the rights of individuals.


Biblically every evangelical who signed this document went against what the Bible says:

2Cr 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

Those who trust in this world, it's governmental system, and more to end the problems of sin, do not understand how people are convicted in the Holy Spirit to do what is right. In fact I believe all their 'culture wars" stuff has only led for unbelievers to become more entrenched in their ways, as the desire for control and for power is paramount in these circles and the so called "liberals" know it. Why convert to Jesus Christ, if you falsely see Him as the author of tyranny? [the so called Christian Right, has brought plenty of it along with the left, lest we forget such things as the Patriot Act or the endless foreign wars that have bankrupted this nation--no concern for the sanctity of human life there!]

But even worse then that, is how documents like this are working to bring Christians into the harlot, and the Roman Catholic church, they were the orginal Dominionists marrying church to state as early as Constantine and holding power over nations, and individuals. To even know that so many evangelical leaders reject biblical separation and have no problem signing a document like this along with dozens of Catholic priests, Cardinals and bishops ,including Archbishops Kurtz and Dolan, shows many do not adhere to even the most simplest of biblical precepts. Some may be knowing deceivers and others are the deceived. Just about every big name signed this document from Albert Mohler president of the Southern Baptist Conference, James Dobson, members of the BGEA organization, Josh McDowell, Joni Eareckson Tada to Ravi Zacharias.

Scroll down and see the list here [make sure you are not following any teachers who signed this declaration last year]. Frankly this would be enough to depart from any teacher. The signing of this, is joining with the world system and everything that entails.

Christians need to know that Rome is using morals, social issues, and "culture wars" to promote the ecumenical movement, and they have succeeded to a great degree. One can only ask, what was wrong with every evangelical leader that signed this document? True Christians desire to preach the gospel not form endless committees signing on to unity with the Roman Catholic church.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

By siding with Rome, they are giving Rome credibility and giving her false "gospel" credibility. By giving her false "gospel" credibility, they are denying the true Gospel and fighting against Christ with His enemies. It is putrid!

Anonymous said...

Those who criticize Rome very rarely understand Catholic doctrine. Catholics believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (see http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/SOLAFIDE.htm), and believe in a Biblical view of Scripture: it is inerrant and is useful for teaching, reproof, etc. (2 Tim 3:16). Too many so-called Christians are so busy attacking Rome that they forget that our only job is to follow Christ.

Anonymous said...

I afraid you didn't tell the whole story, and that your belief that Rome teaches the genuine Gospel reveals that you do not yourself understand the Gospel. Rome teaches that justification is a PROCESS, rather than a completed and finished work Christ did that day long ago on the cross, and that part of this process is the "grace" of the sacraments. Justification is not a process, but a completed work finished by Christ. It is for this reason as well, that Paul said in Heb. 10 that where sin has been remitted, there is no longer a sacrifice for sin. That would mean Christ is not a continuing sacrifice for sin. The cross with Christ on it cannot be re-presented as He is no longer on that cross as a sacrifice. His body was taken down, put in the tomb, and regenerated, no longer the sacrifice for sin. "By grace" Rome does not mean the grace--the mercy--of God in having provided that sacrifice that remitted sin. By "grace" Rome intends the "grace" which she dispenses in the sacraments by a priesthood that is a separate group from the laity (the Scripture describes the entire body of Christ as priests, offering the ACCEPTABLE sacrifices of praise and THANKSGIVING, NOT sin). The sacrifice for sin is not a continuing sacrifice, for Eucharist means "thanksgiving". Under the law of Moses, no thanksgiving offering could be offered as long as the sin sacrifice was still not finished. This was because no one upon whom sin was still being imputed could offer a thanksgiving offering as he was unacceptable. Therefore, as soon as the sin sacrifice was finished and completed in its effect (in their case only the outward effects of sin, and not removing the sin nature itself), THEN a new and entirely separate offering for thanksgiving was made, and was acceptable to be received. It was for this reason that the Supper was called the "Eucharist" for it is indeed a thank offering and NOT a continuing sin sacrifice. The two cannot be mixed together, for they are two entirely different things. So the imitation which Rome provides is not at all the Gospel of Scripture.

Bible Believer said...

Anon #1

I agree, they are giving the church and its false gospel credibility. This does serve to hide the true gospel from non-Christians. This watering down is what has led so many to believe the RCC is a Christian church.

Anon #2,

I was raised Roman Catholic and went to Catholic school, with daily religion classes, and have spent times studying aspects of Catholicism to write on blogs like this and am quite familiar with Catholic apologists who claim people do not understand Catholicism.

Catholics are wrong in claiming salavation by faith alone is what is taught in the RCC, I know since Vatican 2 the waters have been muddied, but even the council of trent has an edict directly against those who would teach such a thing..[section 6?] Here too, I know for a fact that the Catholic church does teach that its "sacraments are necessary for salvation" and it says directly so in it's catechism.

"1129 The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation.51 "Sacramental grace" is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament. the Spirit heals and transforms those who receive him by conforming them to the Son of God. the fruit of the sacramental life is that the Spirit of adoption makes the faithful partakers in the divine nature52 by uniting them in a living union with the only Son, the Savior."





November 12, 2010 12:43 PM
Anonymous said...
I afraid you didn't tell the whole story, and that your belief that Rome teaches the genuine Gospel reveals that you do not yourself understand the Gospel. Rome teaches that justification is a PROCESS, rather than a completed and finished work Christ did that day long ago on the cross, and that part of this process is the "grace" of the sacraments. Justification is not a process, but a completed work finished by Christ. It is for this reason as well, that Paul said in Heb. 10 that where sin has been remitted, there is no longer a sacrifice for sin. That would mean Christ is not a continuing sacrifice for sin. The cross with Christ on it cannot be re-presented as He is no longer on that cross as a sacrifice. His body was taken down, put in the tomb, and regenerated, no longer the sacrifice for sin. "By grace" Rome does not mean the grace--the mercy--of God in having provided that sacrifice that remitted sin. By "grace" Rome intends the "grace" which she dispenses in the sacraments by a priesthood that is a separate group from the laity (the Scripture describes the entire body of Christ as priests, offering the ACCEPTABLE sacrifices of praise and THANKSGIVING, NOT sin). The sacrifice for sin is not a continuing sacrifice, for Eucharist means "thanksgiving". Under the law of Moses, no thanksgiving offering could be offered as long as the sin sacrifice was still not finished. This was because no one upon whom sin was still being imputed could offer a thanksgiving offering as he was unacceptable. Therefore, as soon as the sin sacrifice was finished and completed in its effect (in their case only the outward effects of sin, and not removing the sin nature itself), THEN a new and entirely separate offering for thanksgiving was made, and was acceptable to be received. It was for this reason that the Supper was called the "Eucharist" for it is indeed a thank offering and NOT a continuing sin sacrifice. The two cannot be mixed together, for they are two entirely different things. So the imitation which Rome provides is not at all the Gospel of Scripture.

Anonymous said...

Catholicism teaches that Jesus is not enough to be saved, and that is why catholicism leads to eternal torment in the lake of fire.

Catholicism is a religion of sinful flesh, that exalts sinful flesh, and relies on and trusts in sinful flesh, and denies the completed finished work of Jesus as fully sufficient.

Bible Believer said...

Totally agree.

The more I studied Catholicism the more one realizes too, how is has married babylonianism to a veneer of "Christianity".