Saturday, June 18, 2011

Velvet Elvis: The Reformulating of "Christianity"

I found this book "Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith" in a used book store for very cheap, it is the quintessential "Emergent" book, written by Rob Bell.

It is a few years old, but I am going to use it as a template to describe the lies that are being pushed down the throat of millions. The Emergent movement wishes to circumvent biblical Christianity in the service of Rome. While this was a "fringe" movement when the media a few years ago wrote of its darkened rooms, lava lamps, ancient church, love for liturgy and experiential worship, one can tell it's flavors have edged their way even into the more "conservative" denominations. What Rob Bell is selling in this book is being sold and push all over Christendom NOW.

As this blog entry outlines "Emergents Remind me of Unitarian Universalists" but they also remind me what the Catholic church teaches and where they desire people to go.

The cover of Velvet Elvis with no Elvis to be seen, is an interesting view, a young woman in jean jacket and white dress probably meant to symbolize purity, is FALLING through the air with streak lines right on her. It basically is a rendition of a modern "FALLEN ANGEL". My copy had a lady on it, but other versions of this book have FALLING MEN. Why is everyone falling? That is not a good sign.

Where do they want to take people in this destruction and "reformulation" [cough- REPAINTING like the title states] of Christianity that is happening now? Well this is the over all plan to bring confusion and worse to the churches, and haven't we seen this advanced all over?

1. They want people to believe the Christianity is supposed to CHANGE with the times.

The subtitle of this book points to that "The Repainting of the Christian Faith". What is repainting something but to CHANGE IT? Along with this "repainting" of Christianity is an "out with the old, in with the new and young" attitude. The concentration on rock bands and youthful things are paramount. Bell tells us of his story of a young 28 year old pastor already with his own mega-church in Grand Rapids, Michigan which he calls Mars Hill.

We are seeing that all over in the churches, with almost an over-obsession with what is "hip", "modern", and "with the times." Older people pushed aside for the glorification of "youth". Here this operates against biblical edicts for the more wise "elders" to lead the young, ever wonder why so many of the pastors are becoming younger by the day? There are other young pastors even in their late 20s being blessed with their own giant mega churches. They know the future is in deceiving the young. It's the complete opposite of what the Bible teaches:

1Pe 5:5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all [of you] be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

The theme of everything CHANGING is really brought to the forefront.

Rob Bell writes in Velvet Elvis:

"The challenge for Christians then is to live with great passion and conviction, remaining open and flexible, aware that this life is not the last painting." [p.11]

He goes on to comment about the reformation, but in a giant twist in what the Reformation was about connects it to a "changing" of the Christian faith instead of what it really was, a departure from the falsehoods of Roman Catholicism.

"But that wasn't the end of it. Luther was taking his place in a long line of people who never stopped rethinking and repainting the faith. Shedding unnecessary layers and at the same time rediscovering essentials that had been lost....[snip] Because of this movement the churches he was speaking against went through their own process of rethinking and repainting, making significant changes as well.."

In that last sentence, he obviously is referring to the Catholic counter-reformation, as something POSITIVE. Obviously we get the feeling he sees himself as part of a movement to CHANGE things.

2. They want people to reject the notion of absolute truth.

We know moral relativism is growing and situational ethics, one can find snarky anti-fundamentalist websites where they deem even belief in absolute truth as a laughable premise. That is the conclusion the world often comes to, there is no truth, and those who have arrived at the place of knowing there is absolute truth, are "bigots" meant for condemnation. Confusion, and doubt is the name of the game instead of what we are instructucted in the Bible as in Luke 4:1. "That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed." Remember 'the words have no meaning" crowd really can lob bombs of endless confusion to throw up billows of smoke and fog, to make people lose direction.

Rob Bell writes in Velvet Elvis on this theme of confusion:

"Our words aren't absolutes. Only God is absolute, and God has no intention of sharing this absoluteness with anything, especially words people have come up with to talk about him". [p.23]"

He furthers the confusion during page 26 and 27, downgrading doctrine itself saying so what if a brick or two is removed in the "doctrinal wall" so what? I am paraphrasing here, but he goes on to say...

"But if the whole faith falls apart when we reexamine and rethink one spring then it wasn't that strong in the first place was it?"

"This is because a brick is fixed in size. It can't flex or change size, because if it does then it can't fit into the wall. What happens then is that the wall becomes the sum total of the beliefs and God becomes as big as the wall. But God is bigger then any wall. God is bigger then any religion. God is bigger then any worldview. God is bigger then the Christian faith."

This goes against teachings about biblical doctrine in the Bible and against God's absolute truths:

Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

The "God is bigger then that" word game, is one I have heard myself in many places, it is just the typical promoting the "god" of all religions stuff where they want to supplant trust and belief in God's Word. It basically means "God" operates in other places which would mean other religions and other religious books. It reminds me of this cartoon I saw the other day, on a more liberal preacher's website.

Click on this one to make it bigger, you will note that this cartoon is a slam against those who point to God's truth and revelation in His Word. The little person is squeezing a figure of "jesus" into the Bible, shouting, "Come on God! You just HAVE to fit in there! The message is, How dare you try to squeeze "God" in to the Bible? Which brings me to the next point....

3. They want to bring doubt regarding God's Word, and to teach that truth and revelation can come from other places.

We see this all over the place, belief in God's Word is relegated to the fringes called "fundamentalist" in a derogatory way as people are marched off to seek "truth" in many other places. The Bible is to be tossed aside or its importance diminished, while people seek after "God" every other place.

Rob Bell writes in Velvet Elvis this humdinger:

"Which for me raises one huge question: Is the Bible the best God can do?" [p. 44]

This particular chapter is full of endless confusion, he goes on about how people misinterpret the Bible which really is no evidence of his claims. One thing I noticed was the absence of the mention of the Holy Spirit teaching the Christian believer. He goes on about the "word" love and debates the many different ways it is defined. and tells us on page 46,

"and that's because the Bible is open ended"

Debating the meaning of words--remember what I said about the "words have no meaning" crowd?

He states his point again on page 46,

"once again the Bible is open ended, it has to be interpreted", he then goes on to bring up rabbis and their quibbles about scripture which he favors, and comes to this odd conclusion:

"Notice what Jesus says in the book of Matthew, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven"

What he is doing here is significant. He is giving his followers the authority to make new interpretations of the Bible. He is giving them permission to say, "Hey we think we missed it before on that verse, and we've recently come to the conclusion that this is what it actually means."

God's Word says differently...

1Th 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received [it] not [as] the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

This reminds me of my days on Catholic and Christian message boards, the Catholics would tell us, "Call no man Father" and rather direct messages from the Bible really did not mean what they said, so we know this one definitely can be used to bring in nothing but confusion. As I read this chapter, still no mention of the Holy Spirit. Also note how this ties into the change theme. Christians have the Holy Spirit to teach them, they do not need false preachers with their new supposedly "improved" and "changed" religion to offer.

1Jo 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

The quibbles about the "meaning of words" are all the same lies I was told in the Catholic church, just reformulated for the young evangelical hordes.

After all isn't scripture alone vilified in the Roman Catholic church? Well he manages to do that too just as strongly as any gung-ho Jesuit could manage on page 67:

"This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that "Scripture alone", is our guide. It sounds nice, but is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is"

One thing to note here he defines "church" in a way that includes the Catholic church, all through out this book, including implying on page 172, that the true Christian church was behind the Inquisitions.

4. They want people to see God as a "force" not as having personhood.

This flavor is all over this book, "God" is seen as a "force" and promoted as a force permeating all things and "creation" itself. To advance the "god" of all religions, the personhood of God, is something that gets in the way for these types. There is even other stuff, with that pantheistic New Age flavor tossed in within the book. Focusing on the idea that "something holds this all together" he speaks of a couple he is friends with getting married and sums it up as a "picture of something much bigger" [p.77]

"I then asked, so today, your wedding is about something more significant than just the two of you become husband and wife"? They then said they would call this glue, this force, "God".

5. They want people to see truth in other religions in support of the one world religion.

We know that is happening all over the place, churches pointing to Allah as "God", pluralism, interfaithism. The Catholic agenda for the one world church, they know they must get the evangelicals on board and the Emergents have helped this along. This too includes seeking for truth in OTHER PLACES and moral relativism themes.

Rob Bell in Velvet Elvis writes...

"So as a Christian, I am free to claim, the good, the true, the holy, wherever and whenever I can find it. I live with the understanding that truth is bigger then any religion and the world is God's and everything in it." [p. 80]

This of course goes along with the 'Anonymous Christian" theme I wrote about here where "God" is deemed present even among those who know nothing of Jesus Christ, and they are supposedly "Christians" without knowing it. This too ties into the Catholic program of joining all world religions under the "cosmic christ".

"I would ask them if people in China and India and Chicago are eating and laughing and enjoying things and generally being held together? Because if they are, then Jesus, in a way that is difficult to articulate, is already present there." [p.88]

This book is one example meant to instill a new world view, and its out there. Published in 2005, with the views more on the fringe, 6 years later, many of the so called conservative evangelicals have adopted them. I suppose even with Bell's new "universalism" and "no hell" message that given enough time, that poison will infuse further. This is how it works. I will be doing essays on other books in the future meant to "influence evangelicals". This one definitely has done a number on especially young people and one can see the themes advanced for what they are. I certainly did not have the room or space to point out everything false in this book, but wanted to show the general agenda. This agenda is being played out in many other avenues. "Christianity" is indeed being reformulated and REPAINTED.


Anonymous said...

It's all encapsulated in this one statement:

Yea, did God really say...?

It is Satan's voice and the same ole message he has spewed upon the world since the beginning.

And another thing. The Body of Christ are not "bricks". That's the tower of Babel. They are stones, not stones that man has hewn, but as the I AM has made them--in His image, in the image of the perfect man--Jesus Christ.

And some of that stuff is pure catholicism. He sounds to me as yet another Jesuit implant. He's a filthy wolf, who is made to be destroyed, speaking of things he has no knowledge about and blaspheming the I AM and His Word. May the Sovereign of our Salvation rebuke him. Thanks for that, BB. Anon. #1

Anonymous said...

This guy is Jesuit-speak continually. This is their game, deny the Bible alone as Scripture, and push people in the catholic direction (without saying it explicitly, of course).

And about this nonsense of "the church that gave us the Bible". Total nonsense. The Bible was complete in 96AD, and that is it. Catholicism didn't exist for over 200 years later, and it rejected the Bible from the get go.

Anonymous said...

about the false and easily impeachable opposition to Catholicism, did it ever occur to anyone to read the catholic viewpoint on how and why they reject spiritual truth? I have, and have found that if the information is coming from a liar (poisoned well, they will reject any real truth and view it as lies, take jack chick for instance, here is what the Catholics say about him...

In time, the art in the tracts received an upgrade—not because Chick changed his own style of drawing but because he hired an artist with much better skills. Yet he did not announce this fact and did not put the new artist’s name on the works he produced. Instead, they continued to carry the credit "by Jack T. Chick" or simply "by J.T.C." The difference between the two drawing styles was so dramatic that it was immediately noticed by readers, and rumors circulated about who the "good artist" might be. It would be some time before Chick disclosed that the man’s name was Fred Carter.

In 1972, he hired Fred Carter, an African-American painter and illustrator from Danville, Illinois, who had studied at Chicago’s American Academy of Art. Carter’s realistic illustrations and distinctive inking style made him a perfect fit for the [Crusaders comic book] series’ action sequences and exotic locales. Witch burnings and ritual murders are captured in gleefully visceral detail, while the books’ sexual overtones—as well as scantily clad biblical sirens like Eve, Delilah, and Semiramis—have led critics to describe Carter’s work as "spiritual porn."

I have seen the a fore mentioned comic books and have to tell you they are racy, and if anyone knows racy its the catholic church...

Acrobats strip for Pope Benedict XVI, perform topless in Vatican

here is the catholic answers website that exposes jack chic and rivera

i personally believe that chick was created to be a false and impeachable opposition to catholocism, his work is also of the tractarianism style of information dissemination

the oxford movement

i am sorry to post this here but have just put the pieces together and thought the readers here would like to examine this more in depth

Anonymous said...

The oxford group

and the orange papers need to be examined, of interest is bill wilson's vison of God and how the oxford thing ties into it ...

Anonymous said...

here are two links to chapters in the orange files, there are so many chapters one could get lost...

The Religious Roots of Alcoholics Anonymous
and the Twelve Steps
by A. Orange

Chapter 9:
The Oxford Group Morphs Into Moral Re-Armament

The Religious Roots of Alcoholics Anonymous
and the Twelve Steps
by A. Orange

Chapter 26:
Bill Wilson Gets Religion (And Drugs) And Sees God

Anonymous said...

The Oxford Group Movement
Is It Scriptural?
by H. A. Ironside, Litt. D.

Bible Believer said...

Anon, Oh Catholics can't stand Jack Chick...just using a tract online, with them is enough to get a group of angry Catholics.

One thing while I like a lot about Jack Chick, there are things I strongly disagree with, the belief in the rapture, Christian Zionism, the choice of some teachers he has aligned himself with--Rebecca Brown has always been one that has bothered me. No one is perfect, even the Zionism thing took me a few years to get where they were pointing to the secular nation of Israel instead of spiritual Israel but I have wondered about this stuff.

One thing interesting about Chick is he does recognize the Pope as the antichrist.

I have seen the comic books too, there are some things I find dubious as well, thinking maybe things could have been scaled back a bit, like having a "sexy" woman hung upside down by her ankles in one of the ones about the Inquisition, but not sure how much of that is the artist thinking they will draw more eyeballs in that way but still think a lot was over the top. I do not mind that they tell the truth about Rome, even if there are negative or "darker" things shown but there is a line not to be cross. That said you are right the Catholic church is disingenous, about complaining about these comics, when they are the home of everything "racy".

So you believe that Chick is false opposition? Maybe explain that more. I am not sure what to think about that, but share what you are thinking. I would like to think he is the real deal, he is one of the rare ones, that openly confronts Rome. His tracts have been very useful, I know some of his tracts helped to wake me up, and have talked about this on this website. He does confront many false things like the recent tract on Freemasonry...

Thanks for link on the Oxford movement.

One thing, I guess I could see tracts as necessarily not a bad thing. There are many tracts passed out that are not Chick's that have God's word on them and more but I didn't know about the Oxford group and their relation to tracts. Tracts were useful to me even in learning the gospel, so have to think about that one too.

Bible Believer said...

Earlier Anon,

I agree it is all encapsulated in the statement...

"Yea, did God really say...?"

It is the same message and thanks for picking out the "bricks" vs "stones" thing. The book is full of endless layers of deceptions, many I couldn't even get into, due to space and length, praise of false early church fathers, insidious things, like praising "bricks" and other mentions. What is interesting is this is one of the head speakers at The Wild Goose festival along with the priest that sells the "cosmic christ" all for the antichrist.
The book is FULL of catholicism delivered in a subtle fashion. He sounded like a Jesuit implant to me.

Anonymous said...

The way jack chick hid the new artist smacks of the same thing ellen g white did when she plagiarized, and like you said he is a proponent of the pre trib rapture, christian zionism, rebecca brown and other false teachers he has aligned himself with, and remember a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

"sex sells" everything today, this is lasciviousness and is to be avoided as much as possible, God's Word has never been dependent on titillation. The "sex sells" aspect is unnecessary and un Holy, it is worldly and we are to be followers of Jesus and not the world.

For these reasons i see chick as a poisoned well. and we are called upon to be perfect, sinless and holy, no one can be perfect, but we are to strive every day to follow Jesus, fight the good fight daily, and contend for the truth, which means actually fighting for truth.

God has saved you, woken you up, edified you, through the workings of His Holy Spirit, God may have used chick tracts to get your attention, He works in mysterious ways, we should not dwell in the infancy of our awakening. We are to progress from being a baby christian to an adult whom can be fed on the meat of His Word.

Tracts of themselves are not evil, but a whole society that has the attention span of a cheap ham radio that hops station to station is evil. Think about how tracts often only give a select few facts and not the whole truth, this is lying by omission and training people to have a short attention span, and oftentimes to forget what they just heard/learned. TV is an example of this, it is chunks of 30 to 60 minutes, information bites, interspersed with 30 to 60 second commercials, TV is tractarian, people who can concentrate on a subject for more than a few minutes are becoming rare, as everywhere this type of information consumption for the masses exists.

I see tracts as thought stopping, they oversimplify things, to me they are much like junk food, addictive, and not to be consumed to excess because people loose their health by over consumption of these.

I remember sharing my new understanding with my mom and sisters whom are catholic, i used "A Woman Rides the Besat" video with dave hunt and they used that same website exposing chick tracts to show me dave hunt was incorrect in many things he said, and they won the debate, i looked the fool and an ignorant one at that.
As it turns out dave hunt is a CFR member

If you use a poisoned well to give someone a drink and they smell the poison ... will they not think you stupid and unbalanced and turn on you? It is like getting into a debate with a jehovas witness or mormon who has memorized more Bible verses than you and totally owns you in the debate. It has happened to many true Christians much to their chagrin.
This is a war for souls, and i understand that the Holy Spirit does the growing of the true faith once a person plants the seed, yet i cant help but wonder and worry that i could contribute to the derision of good Christians by way of looking like a fraud with some second rate information from a false opposition plant, or causing a weaker brother to stumble by the same way.

I am extremely sorry if any of what i wrote pinches some nerves, i do not like being hurtful to bring truth, yet i understand that cowards have no place in the kingdom of God, nor the fearful.
this is to me the debriding of wounds, this involved the removal of dead tissue which is a necessary pain, i can not chicken out on the truth, if i learned to do this then how could i endure torture or refuse the mark of the beast?

as always i pray God Blesses you and all on here and we get a total understanding of this octopus of worldwide deception.

Anonymous said...

my earlier post "disappeared" lol ...

so to make it short and sweet, if a person or thing is found to contain lies and heresies than the truth be not in them, a little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump. Sex is being used to sell everything today, that is the way of the world, we are called to be separate from the world, God has not had to use lasciviousness to spread His Gospel. Why would someone lead others to drink from a poisoned well? Jack Chick is easily impeachable by catholics themselves, yet his tracts are used to bring catholics out of babylon?

This blog heavily endorses roger oakland who endorses chris pinto and radio liberty, and stanley montieth whom is a longtime guest and friend of constance cumby whom defends the catholic church ... we could play the 6 degrees of laurel canyon with that group of people, but my post will probably "somehow dissapear"

Bible Believer said...

I went to go find your post, I did not erase it, I have to check the spam file because sometimes things will go in there. You are right about the concerns about Jack Chick. One thing about me, you will discover, present me evidence I will look at it, I am not a blind follower of man, of course I will check out what I hear too. There are things I have worried about with Jack Chick, and really have pondered so you did not upset me with bringing them up. There is a line of where humans make mistakes or simply do not know something--I only had the HOly Spirit show me the truth about Christian Zionism in the last few years but when I find out a teacher, such as Missler is associated with groups like CNP, and I and others have posted on this before, I stand up and do ask WHY?

You are right, the tracts do cross a line. One I am thinking of goes way over the top definitely even if message about homosexuality is true. So yes if something is dependent on titillation there is a problem. This is where the seeking to entertain will cause problems. So with Chick...I am open to your opinions having had some of the same worries and concerns myself. I know I have my positive views left over from reading Jack Chick tracts earlier in life. As you know with Tracts I do worry with SOME of them about the easy belivism stuff, I wrote about with Billy Graham, where some may think they say a prayer and that's it and they are done. No biblical repentance or truly becoming born again.

I do agree, this society everything is in sound bites, perhaps even Christians have gotten too dependent on the need to entertain. I worry about "Christianity" TM sold as a "product rather then God's living truth.
I think TV has affected people's attention spans in many ways as well...


Bible Believer said...

You are right to be concerned about the tracts oversimplifying things.

Read this blog entry, you will see how this has been an ongoing concern of mine...

It does happen via the tracts too.

With Dave Hunt, I have some concerns, I have not gotten into on this blog, though this article may show you to degree what those are.

I went to look at your link...

Thanks for that link by the way..

it says "David A. Hunt"

I am not sure of Hunt's middle intial. It is a common enough name, that it could be another Hunt but hey, after what I have found out about some religious leaders and their dubious connections, I have learned not to be too trusting. Finding out so many are involved in the CNP group with Knights of Malta/Reverend Moon membership and all was enough right there.

I do not mind your questions about Chick, I have them myself. One thing in discovering the "octupus" myself, some of the deceptions go so deep, I know there are always new things to learn or God to show a person.

Bible Believer said...

As for Roger Oakland, I am willing to understand someone having past associations in a church they just left out of. Roger Oakland is warning about things happening in Calvary Chapel that I agree with, and have touched on myself. So why not show his articles? I am sure there are many upset with someone like that who is going so directly against Jesuit infiltration and other happenings in Calvary Chapel.

There is not many who are exposing Calvary Chapel out there. with the Monteith thing...I mean that is something I just happened to stumble across myself some years ago. I do remember wondering why the Vatican's role was mentioned so little. Cumbey has fooled 90% of the evangelicals out there, warning about the New Age. Some are still in shock when I tell them the real deal with her. I thought maybe she just didn't know, gave benefit of doubt [just typical evangelical-lite who didnt know better] but had my own run-ins on her blog myself, where telling the truth about the Catholic was massively censored. Many follow Cumbey without knowing. Some of these are good people but do not understand how disinformation works, tons of truth, but injecting lies, and look over here instead kind of things. THere are tons of websites who have made an art of covering up for Rome.

With Chris Pinto, I just know very little about him, doesnt he show occult connections to Wash DC? Radio Liberty I am familar with them. I used to read their articles, until I figured out the Monteith CNP connections. I always felt like parts of the story were left out and you are right Constance Cumbey has been invited on there, as well as EWTN plenty of times.

For some people and evangelicals I can understand a few being ignorant of Cumbey's Pope praising ways, they may simply not know better, but it seems people at the higher levels couldnt have missed it, as her praises for the Pope have been made public and more. It is wily stuff, her website on the surface, seems deep into exposing some of the worse nwo stuff but it's what is missing that counts.

I wrote about Cumbey here...

One thing, all of us know unbelievers [guilt by association is a place where people need to tread carefully, but when sharing a stage like Rick Warren and Chuck Smith did or a radio program or membership in a group with high level Vatican connected Catholics, yeah questions should be asked. Cumbey plays cover for the Vatican.

One thing, in this world, we need to trust God only totally. There is a lot of crazy stuff out there.

I do not know if you are the poster who claimed Roger Oakland was still speaking at Calvary Chapels or not. I remember asking you to send me a link, but you could be someone new too. I have to check my recent email as well.

Anonymous said...

I don't agree about tracts, chick or alberto rivera. And I'm sure not going to consult a catholic website for 'truth' of alberto!!

Where is that posters proof that the David A. Hunt of the CFR is Dave Hunt? If that poster is the one who claims that Roger Oakland is still speaking at calvary chapels, where is the proof?

Let me make it clear. I am not a follower of any man. Neither am I interested in raw allegations about anything without supporting evidence from credible sources.

Anonymous said...

Chris Pinto produces documentaries on the evidence of the occult influence in the setting up of this country, exposing the false idea that it was set up as a Christian nation. He interviewed anyone who also had information and talks about his work with anyone who invites him to.

Roger Oakland has spent the last many years exposing the new age, emergent, catholic infiltration of the churches. He exposes the jesuit operation to take the country under the papal authority.

If we don't have the discernment to weigh their material for ourselves, we have a problem.

To the poster who has a beef with all these people, it looks like you are out to discredit their work and create confusion. If so, why?

Bible Believer said...

The Catholic church has many websites about Rivera, I'm not going to beleive them either. Still remember being told that Mary Ann Collins did not realy exist when I had emailed the lady for acouple of years.

Dave Hunt is a common name, I would like the proof that is the same guy too.

Bible Believer said...

That one poster seems to want to create confusion, hey why not when it comes to those exposing the machinations of Rome, they will do anything to shut people up. I weight whatever information comes in too and what evidence there is. Are there disinformationists out there, some that even expose Rome? Sure. But one can tell when there is a honest conversation and someone just playing games.