Deliberate Childlessness: Moral Rebellion With a New Face

According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Joe and Deb Schum of Atlanta aren’t worried about baby proofing their house or buying a car seat. As a matter of fact, the couple doesn’t ever intend to have children and they are proud of their childlessness. According to the newspaper’s report, “the Schums are part of a growing number of couples across the country for whom kids don’t factor in the marriage equation.”

The paper also pointed to the fact the nation’s birthrate fell last year to an historic low of 66.9 births per 1,000 women age 15-44. That represents a decline of 43% since just 1960. “Many childless couples,” according to the report, “revel in their decision, despite badgering from baffled mothers and friends. Others struggle with the choice before keeping the house kid-free.”

The Schums just don’t want kids to get in the way of their lifestyle. They enjoy cruising to the Georgia mountains on their matching Harley-Davidson motorcycles. They love their gourmet kitchen, outfitted with the very latest stainless steel appliances and trendy countertops. Deb Schum explains, “if we had kids, we would need a table where the kids could do homework.” Clearly, children aren’t a part of their interior design plan.

This pattern of childlessness has caught the attention of others in the media. The left-wing internet site Salon.com actually published a series of articles entitled, “To Breed or Not to Breed.” This series of articles featured couples and individuals who have decided that children are not a part of their chosen lifestyle.

One woman wrote that parenthood just isn’t a part of her plan, regardless of cultural expectations to the contrary. Motherhood just doesn’t fit her self-image or her schedule. “I compete in triathlons; my husband practices martial arts; we both have fulfilling careers; we travel the world … we enjoy family and friends; we have a fun, intimate relationship.”

For others, the bottom line is simply financial. One woman asked: “What would the return be on the investment? Are there any laws that would require my children to pay for my nursing home when I am old? Are they going to be a sufficient hedge against poverty and loneliness?” A return on investment?

Some who have chosen to be childless have actually formed organizations in order to band together. The group “No Kidding” was formed in Atlanta four years ago as a social outlet for couples choosing to have no children. Traci Swartz, an occupational therapist in her thirties, joined “No Kidding” with her husband Jeremy, a 32 year old computer analyst. “When you don’t have children, you are not involved in any activities like a lot of other people, like soccer and ballet,” said Traci.

She explained that “No Kidding” members are more likely to talk about pets, travel, or other common interests. Kids rarely come up as a topic of conversation. “People think we sit around and talk about how we hate kids, but we almost never mention kids,” Traci explained. No wonder.

Another woman in the Atlanta group explained, “you focus those motherly feelings elsewhere. For us, our dogs get all that love.” That worldview is sick, but more and more common.

Christians must recognize that this rebellion against parenthood represents nothing less than an absolute revolt against God’s design. The Scripture points to barrenness as a great curse and children as a divine gift. The Psalmist declared: “Behold, children are a gift of the Lord, the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, so are the children of one’s youth. How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them; they will not be ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate.” [Psalm 127: 3-5]

Morally speaking, the epidemic in this regard has nothing to do with those married couples who desire children but are for any reason unable to have them, but in those who are fully capable of having children but reject this intrusion in their lifestyle.

The motto of this new movement of chosen childlessness could be encapsulated by the bumper sticker put out by the Zero Population Growth group in the 1970s: “MAKE LOVE, NOT BABIES.” This is the precise worldview the Scripture rejects. Marriage, sex, and children are part of one package. To deny any part of this wholeness is to reject God’s intention in creation–and His mandate revealed in the Bible.

The sexual revolution has had many manifestations, but we can now see that modern Americans are determined not only to liberate sex for marriage [and even from gender], but also from procreation.

The Scripture does not even envision married couples who choose not to have children. The shocking reality is that some Christians have bought into this lifestyle and claim childlessness as a legitimate option. The rise of modern contraceptives has made this technologically possible. But the fact remains that though childlessness may be made possible by the contraceptive revolution, it remains a form of rebellion against God’s design and order.

Couples are not given the option of chosen childlessness in the biblical revelation. To the contrary, we are commanded to receive children with joy as God’s gifts, and to raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. We are to find many of our deepest joys and satisfactions in the raising of children within the context of the family. Those who reject children want to have the joys of sex and marital companionship without the responsibilities of parenthood. They rely on others to produce and sustain the generations to come.

This epidemic of chosen childlessness will not be corrected by secular rethinking. In an effort to separate the pleasure of sex from the power of procreation, modern Americans think that sex totally free from constraint or conception is their right. Children, of course, do represent a serious constraint on the life of parents. Parenthood is not a hobby, but represents one of the most crucial opportunities for the making of saints found in this life.

The culture is clearly buying into this concept. Legal fights over apartment complexes and other accommodations come down to the claim that adults ought to be able to live in a child-free environment. Others claim that too much tax money and public attention is given to children, and that this is an unfair imposition upon those who choose not to “breed.” Of course, the very use of this terminology betrays the rebellion in this argument. Animals breed. Human beings procreate and raise children to the glory of God.

Without doubt, children do impose themselves upon our creature comforts, waking us up in the middle of the night with demanding needs and inconvenient interruptions. Parents learn all too quickly that children are not only the smiling cherub sleeping in the crib, but also the dirty-faced preschooler, the headstrong teenager, and the boisterous grade-schooler.

The church should insist that the biblical formula calls for adulthood to mean marriage and marriage to mean children. This reminds us of our responsibility to raise boys to be husbands and fathers and girls to be wives and mothers. God’s glory is seen in this, for the family is a critical arena where the glory of God is either displayed or denied. It is just as simple as that.

The church must help this society regain its sanity on the gift of children. Willful barrenness and chosen childlessness must be named as moral rebellion. To demand that marriage means sex–but not children–is to defraud the creator of His joy and pleasure in seeing the saints raising His children. That is just the way it is. No kidding.

Deliberate Childlessness: Moral Rebellion With a New Face

THE “WANTS” KEEP MANY WOMEN AWAY FROM HOME

The other day on Facebook, I posted a tweet comparing the cost of living in the 1970s compared to now. Homes are much larger now. Most families own two cars which are expensive with the upkeep and insurance, whereas they used to own one. More women are using daycare rather than staying home with their children. There was no cell phones and limited cable. People didn’t eat out like they do now and vacations weren’t often. The needs were much simpler in the 1970s. There also weren’t children’s sports that cost a fortune.

At the end of the tweet, I asked, “There needs to be two incomes for mothers to stay home, why?” Here are some of the best comments under this tweet:

“I get to stay home. It is all about priorities. We have two cars, a 1500 sq. ft. home, one vacation (if lucky), two cellphones, one TV, one maybe two dinners out a month, and no daycare. We could even be more frugal, but it’s surprising the money you save when cooking at home, having time to garden and can, and providing for your family even without a ‘job.’ I am so thankful I get to do what I do.”“We have two cars both paid off that are 20 and 18 years old. Our home is 860 square feet. We have had one vacation in 8 years. We do have cell phone but no home phone. We do not have cable. We get take out about two times a month. I am a SAHM so no daycare. These things aren’t necessarily wrong. But we need to put God first in all we do. Honor God and our husbands and be proud keepers of our home.”“I had the advantage of an extremely financially poor childhood, so I was accustomed to living a frugal life. When I married and we had one average middle class salary, I found it easy to stay at home, raise the kids, and manage on one income! I had many friends who would insist you ‘had to have two incomes’ to survive. I was completely confused. I analyzed the difference in our lives. They had new cars; I drove the same one for 13 years. They had more STUFF, and we had more PEACE. I would be beyond depressed if I had traded those days of raising our children for STUFF. None of which they still have. I have all the memories, and they don’t after going to work and being too tired to love and care for my family.”“I have two cars both paid with cash. Two phones for me and my husband. Building our own house hopefully out of pocket (thanks to milling our own lumber and my husband is a plumber by trade. We barter out plumbing work for what we won’t be able to do with our friends in a different trade.) We haven’t had a vacation since 2014 and don’t want one. We are homebodies. We don’t have cable but love old-fashioned movies. We have kids at home on one income.We also farm. We spend a lot of time together and wouldn’t have it any other way.”“One income. 3,200 sq. ft. home. One car. Five kids at home. No daycare. No cable. Two cell phones. One vacation every other year. We eat out one to two times a week. It’s about priorities. I know couples with no kids that are ‘barely making it’ on an income much more than ours.”“There ‘needs’ to be two incomes for mom to stay home because many have bought into the lie that they ‘need’ more to survive. The focus is no longer on what is best for the long-term growth and development of the children but rather, “How can we make and amass more money so we can provide a ‘better’ life and buy more ‘things’?” Contentment has gone out of the window. We want more. But more is not always better.“Exactly. When we broke down the financial cost of me working, paired with the emotional cost of me not being as available to my kids and husband, it wasn’t worth it. Childcare, quick meals, cleaning services, etc. added up quickly.”“I’ve never understood people that basically work for the cost of child care and gas. Like, what are you gaining? All you’re doing is losing time with your children.”But godliness with contentment is great gain.
1 Timothy 6:6

https://thetransformedwife.com/the-wants-keep-many-women-away-from-home/

Hollywood’s Home Movies Portray Jewish Nightmare

The studio sold this movie with the tagline:
 “This is the way we all are.”
 
Judd Apatow mainstreams the dysfunction 
of Hollywood Jews, the only people he knows. 

Since [Luciferians think] man is an animal with no divine soul, there is no need to restrain his basest appetites and functions. (That would be “repression.”)  Therefore “comedy” no longer is defined as being “funny” but as being disgusting. Since man cannot aspire to be godlike, all that remains is a race to the bottom.  

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

There is a special schadenfreude 
you get from watching other people degrade themselves. 

Judd Apatow’s productions which include the HBO series “Girls” and movies like “Knocked Up” (2007) and “This is Forty” (2012) specialize in this kind of train-wreck voyeurism. In 2007, I wrote“Knocked Up” is a trip down a psychic rabbit hole populated by perverts, creeps and losers. Hollywood wants us to emulate them. Judging from the rave reviews, we are  willing to oblige.”

apatow1.jpg

( Mogul Judd Apatow) 

It is no exaggeration to call This is Forty “a home movie.”  Apatow wrote and directed it. Although Paul Rudd plays Apatow’s character “Pete”, Apatow’s wife, Leslie Mann plays wife “Debbie”, and his two daughters, Maude and Iris, play the children. As Malcolm Forbes said, “There is nothing wrong with nepotism as long as you keep it in the family.” 

Leslie Mann actually turned 40 in 2012 and this movie obviously was lifted from Apatow’s domestic life, including what passes for witty pillow talk. The only fictional element concerns the family facing financial distress. 

Before I get to the family dysfunction, let me harp one more time on Apatow’s vulgarity and adolescent obsession with bodily functions. As I have said, the Luciferian defines “courage” not in terms of standing for truth and justice, but in breaking norms of decorum, good taste and style. 

LUCIFERIAN VISION OF MAN 

Since man is an animal with no divine soul, there is no need to restrain his basest appetites and functions. (That would be “repression.”)  Therefore “comedy” no longer is defined as being “funny” but as being disgusting. Since man cannot aspire to be godlike, all that remains is a race to the bottom.  

hemeroids.jpg

The litany of vulgarity and tastelessness crammed into the first hour of this movie include Pete sitting on the toilet, Pete getting a colonoscopy, Pete farting in bed, Pete examining his hemorrhoids in a mirror, Pete looking up an woman’s skirt.  

Apatow has a woman expatiate for five minutes on how her vagina is numb from an operation and two gays talking about blowjobs.  Apatow displays his wife’s breasts, has her feel Megan Fox’s breasts (to see if they are real,)  give Rudd a blowjob and get a vaginal exam. Mercifully, he doesn’t reference his daughters’ genitals this time around.

After an hour of cataloging bodily functions, the film settles down to an inventory of dysfunction facing rich Hollywood families. These include foul mouthed children who defy their parents and take their cues from social media instead; parents of parents who start second families when they are too old and poor; people living way beyond their means and feeling life is a treadmill, and a general inner emptiness which defies definition or solution. Gatherings with family and friends are toxic with everyone starved for a crumb of encouragement or, failing that, a chance for recrimination. 

The problem is the abdication of the father. The father fails to set down the law. Thus the family is in a state of anarchy. 
Rudd’s portray of Apatow is of a weak man who is lost in the world. His record company is floundering. He can’t keep his diet. He can’t control himself so how can he control his family? Debbie is the usual melange of insecurities and they bicker constantly. 

m&r1.jpg

(Rudd looks and acts like oldest son)

“What are we even doing?” Debbie says. “This is not making me happy. You’re not happy. You don’t like me. I can feel that. I’m not blind. Jesus. We’re like business associates. We’re like brother and sister. There’s no passion there.” 

The problem is not passion, it is power. Pete has to take possession of his wife and children. They have to obey him. He is the leader. He must have a vision. When the man is emasculated by the wife, the result is anarchy. 

PETE- “Don’t be such a ball buster.” 
DEBBIE- I am not a ball buster. You make me one! I am a fun girl! I am fun-loving! I am a good time Sally! I dance hip-hop. I cannot believe I’ve wasted my whole life busting the balls of people who have no balls. I am the only one here who has any balls.” 

Hollywood Jews are very good at creating and spreading dysfunction but they never present the solution. For them, the human condition is to wallow in sickness and derive consolation from self pity or sentimentality.  Imagine if this story were about the husband reasserting his authority and his wife supporting him? But that would be “sexist.” 

In general, Hollywood was hydrochloric acid to Christian civilization. It corroded every form of social coherence: marriage and the nuclear family,  racial homogeneity, and religion. It promoted homosexuality. Now all that is left to destroy is human dignity and self respect. 

Why are there so few movies that uplift and inform, that make us feel good about being human? Why do the vast majority focus on 
human sickness and depravity in one form or another? (There are some exceptions.)  Hollywood is run by the Illuminati, a Cabalist satanic cult. Its goal is overturn the natural and spiritual order so it can replace God on top.  

Mankind is under occult attack. Art and entertainment have become a psy-op.

—-
This is Forty – The Script 

Related –

Makow –Hollywood’s Sabbatean Sex Propaganda
——— Dog’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s
——— Henry Blodgett: Why Do People Hate Jews?
——— HBO’s Girls Celebrates Dysfunction
——— Hollywood Hypes Lesbian Jewish Parable

https://www.henrymakow.com/2013/09/hollywood-home-movie-nightmare.html

Talmudic Jews control 7 of the eight Ivy League colleges, and Talmudic Jewish children are vastly over represented in the nations colleges

Talmudic Jewish children have access to elite colleges that the rest of the population does not have access to. No surprise because their parents control the money supply of the entire world.

As American academia finishes transitioning into an even more intellectually repressive nightmare, talented professors are quitting and the value of a college education has plummeted.

Ivy League schools naturally set the tempo for less prestigious colleges. Gender ideology and critical race theory begins to metastasize once the factories churning out tomorrow’s elites institutionally embrace such rubbish.

The broader social ramifications of corrupting higher learning means future FBI agents, law partners, bankers, politicians and media makers learn to hate and discriminate against white people in their professional lives.

Bari Weiss, who quit the New York Timesbecause it wasn’t Jewish enough, released an article earlier in the month that has enjoyed heavy circulation. The piece, titled “The Miseducation of America’s Elites,” details the anti-white racial abuse wealthy parents subject their children to at exclusive private schools in an ends-justify-the-means attempt to get them into Harvard and Yale.

When the choice is the dignity of their children versus promises of money, power and prestige, the bourgeoisie opts for the latter.

But Weiss, who is promoted as a warrior against the Woke, spends a lot of time describing the trappings of the problem without giving satisfying answers as to its origins and standard bearers.

Institutional ideologies are not virus’ that emerge from nature. They are ideas, created and imposed by men, who have agendas and motives.

We know, thanks to Weiss, what America’s rich are willing to do to reach the carrot, but whose wielding the stick?

Cursory research done by National Justicefinds a crisis of nepotism at our Ivy League schools. Seven out of eight presidents of these universities are Jewish, despite being a miniscule 2% of the national population.

They are as follows,

Even Dartmouth’s Philip J. Hanlon, who does not appear to be a Jew, was inaugurated as president by a invocationled by the school’s Hillel Rabbi. No other religious figures participated in the event.

The concentration of Jews as gatekeepers means that Jewish values and prejudices end up trickling down into every facet of our lives.

At Harvard, Lawrence Bacow (among others) has led an expensive legal war to resist the Trump administration’s demand that it stop racially discriminating against white and Asian students.

Bacow, who in 2018 became the second Jew named Lawrence to lead Harvard in recent years, claims that racially excluding qualified white students is important for fostering a diverse learning environment. The quotas don’t seem to impact his own group. 53% of Harvard’s Grad students are Jewish.

Peter Salovey of Yale has joined the fray and turned what was one of the best research universities on the planet into a hyper politicized anti-white base of society wrecking conspiracies.

In an announcement last October, Salovey announced that he would put his school’s limitless resources and influence behind things like “The Center For Law and Racial Justice,” which trains students to use the law as an instrument to oppress white people, and a “new program to encourage diversity in Yale’s senior leadership” that apparently excludes the prospect of him resigning and giving his position to a non-white.

At Columbia, Lee Bollinger proclaimed the riots over the summer a “new Civil Rights movement” and announced radical reforms to curriculum and campus life intended to increase pressure on non-Jewish white students. Bollinger has also vowed to decrease and weaken the presence of campus police, even though students attending his university are regularly assaulted, robbed and even murdered by blacks that live in surrounding areas.

All the other presidents have overseen similar changes, revealing the lack of diversity not only of race, but also of thought and educational philosophy in institutes of higher learning.

While some will try to argue that Jews control the Ivy Leagues because of merit, as if merit is even part of our national vocabulary anymore, the actual selection process for presidents is decided by a board of trustees. Trustees are often inactive people who donate a lot of money to influence the schools or have high level political connections.

These trustees are disproportionately Jewish. Discounting ethnocentrism and shared ethnic interests as playing a role in their decisions when a clear pattern is present would be irrational and unscientific.

Conservatives will often excuse the behavior of these administrators by claiming they are “cowards” being “bullied” by leftist student groups, but this is not true. In response to a referendum where 69% of students voted to stop Brown from funding the Israeli genocide of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, the Jew Christina Paxson wrote an indignant refusal letter, asserting that “Brown’s endowment is not a political instrument!

While all of these schools fought tooth and nail to fight the government’s lawsuit to prevent race discrimination against white students, none of the schools have challenged Trump’s executive order essentially outlawing criticism of Israel on campus. The order is unconstitutional and students have complained that it silences Palestinian advocates, but administrators appear to agree with Trump on this issue.

If America’s power dispensaries are so concerned with diversity and racism, perhaps they should select somebody who isn’t Jewish to lead their operations for a change.

The problem isn’t radical students or liberal self-hatred. The rot corroding our institutions of higher learning, like many other failing American institutions, is Jewish racial dominance.(Republished from National Justice by permission of author or representative)

https://www.unz.com/estriker/whos-miseducating-americas-elites/

Henry Blodget : “Why do People Hate Jews?”

macy&allen.jpg

(left. Scene from 1998 movie “Pleasantville” made by Red Diaper baby Gary Ross. Learn the shocking reason David’s mom is in color but his dad is in black & white.) 

The reason they want to sever our connection to God is they intend to take His place.

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

Last week, the editor of Business Digest.com, Henry Blodget stimulated discussion by asking the question, “Why do people hate Jews?”

He noticed that Goldman Sachs’ activity had created anti-Semitism; Blodget wanted to give the subject an airing.

But the largely negative reaction made Blodget amend the question to “some” people and then to “What are the sources of anti-Semitism?” 

Finally he issued a retraction:   

“Some people I like and respect told me they felt insulted by and uncomfortable with the post…I am very sorry to anyone I offended. I sincerely apologize.” 

In an article, “Does Henry Blodget Hate Jews?” Jewish writer Foster Kamer commented: 

blodget.jpeg

(Henry Blodget, left)

“The only possible motivation for writing a headline like that is to attract attention, and page views, and it … will only inflame parties on all sides (be they Jews, Jew Haters, Self-Loathing Jews, and so on). You can rest assured that whatever genuine intellectual curiosity Blodget has about this issue–and compassion towards marginalized and/or persecuted peoples, …was made a moot point by that headline. And as a Jew, I can tell Blodget, this does not necessarily help our cause.”

Stereotypically, Kamer thinks this discussion is about “helping the Jewish cause.” His reply reflects the Jewish delusion that they are “marginalized and/or persecuted” rather than dominant and exclusive. He thinks any Jew who is self-critical must be “self loathing” – an attitude indicative of a closed, authoritarian society.  

DISTINCTIONS

The reason for anti-Semitism is that Illuminati Jews and their Masonic minions usurp control of society. They tend to monopolize business, politics, media and culture. (For example, are there any significant anti-Zionist politicians or media? Why are 4 of nine US Supreme Court judges Illuminati Jews? Why do Illuminati Jews run the IMF and US Treasury? ) 

They deliberately subvert European Christian nations by promoting pornography, promiscuity, immigration, multiculturalism, feminism and homosexuality under the rubric of Communism, liberalism and socialism.   (See also “Liberal Jews Carry Luciferian Banner”

The harsh truth is that Judaism is a satanic cult masquerading as a religion and most Jews are dupes. 

Members of a satanic cult are never told the real agenda; they are manipulated instead. Now, by extension, most of humanity is in this position. i.e. unwitting inductees in a satanic cult.  

Judaism has two sets of books. 

Ordinary Jews and the general public see the Old Testament. (Even there the depiction of God is not credible because it is tribal and not universal.)

Only the initiates see the real agenda: the Talmud & the Cabala. The Cabalists (i.e. Illuminati) are dedicated to creating a “New World Order” through the destruction of everything that is decent and good. The Talmud envisages Jews as a master race and preaches hate against non-Jews. 

In contrast, true religion is dedicated to revealing the inherent design of Creation and following it. This is called, obeying God

A satanic cult denies the inherent Design (God); it turns Reality on its head. Evil is good. Lies are truth. Through their control of government credit, the Illuminati cult controls pretty much everything. Mankind is satanically possessed by them and their minions. 

God is Ultimate Reality. Reality consists of moral absolutes: truth, goodness, love, peace, beauty, justice. 

The Illuminati replace this with a solipsism, i.e. whatever they say is true or good. This is why always their first priority is securing a monopoly of the mass media and education.  

Modern culture is a solipsism.  It denies the soul and spiritual ideals. It denies God, ( i.e. perfection) the principle of our development. The reason they want to sever our connection to God is they want to take His place

Modern culture eschews what is universal and true. Instead, it purveys what is personal, subjective and often sick. It makes a god of man, and defines him in terms of self-interest and bodily appetites.

PLEASANTVILLE


The 1998 movie “Pleasantville” illustrates that secular humanism is occultism. Writer and director Gary Ross illustrates the harm Jewish liberal crusaders do while imagining they are our benefactors.  His father, the screenwriter Arthur Ross, was a Communist blacklisted during the 1940s and 1950s.  

Gary Ross recently co-wrote and directed the Illuminati film, “The Hunger Games.” (Communism is an Illuminati creation.) 

Pleasantville is Luciferian propaganda in the form of science fiction.  David and his sister Jennifer are transplanted from 1998 into an 1950’s American idyll like “Father’s Knows Best” or “Ozzie and Harriet.”  

fiftiesrobotons.jpg

(left. sheltered White conservative robotniks waiting to be liberated by Illuminati Jews)

The tagline of the movie is “Nothing is as Simple as Black and White.” In other words, there are no moral absolutes. This is Satanism (secular humanism.) 

The two streetwise teenagers introduce promiscuous sex, modern art, jazz  and literature to the sheltered robotic denizens of Pleasantville, who resemble Christian Conservatives.

As these innocent White robots are exposed to the wonders of modern CULT – ure, they change from black and white into color. This is especially true when they partake in sex

first.JPG

David’s “mom” changes into color after she is taught to masturbate BY HER CHILDREN. We see mom masturbating in the bathtub; it is portrayed like the Second Coming.  This film was rated “Parental Guidance.”

Remember when “as American as mom’s apple pie” denoted goodness and innocence?  

Mom immediately rejects her role as housewife and enters into an illicit relationship with the soda fountain owner who takes up impressionist art.
Needless to say all these black and white people are now seen in living color.

Meanwhile dad is like the Exercizer bunny in black and white repeating “Where’s my dinner?”  

There is a conservative “authoritarian” reaction but David soon quells it with breathless talk of “kids making out in the streets” and“women working and men staying home to cook.”

pv.jpg

(left. Illuminism is a sex cult. Sexual promiscuity is fatal for women. Men will not bond with them.)

Can you see how these Illuminati Jews are Luciferians, and reverse good and evil? Metaphysical misfits, they wage relentless war on what is innocent, natural and healthy. Can you see how they preach rebellion?  How they spread their dysfunction? (See also, “Hollywood Hypes Lesbian Jewish Parable” 

The irony is Gary Ross yearned for a “normal life” like the ones he witnessed on TV.

“My ’50s were different than other people’s ’50s,” Ross says. “The myth didn’t permeate our world, ‘Donna Reed’ and all that. I longed for that, I wanted to be like other normal families on TV.”

Yet the first thing he does is destroy that vision.

CONCLUSION

Mankind is the target of an ongoing satanic multi-generational attack designed to enslave it.  

Jews are “hated” because for centuries Illuminati (Masonic) Jewry  has served as agents of this central banker agenda. They and their Freemason proxies have been at the forefront of this war against Christian nations. But like all Luciferians, they are adept at making darkness appear to be light, attacker appear as victim, hater appeared to be wrongly hated.  

If the world descends into chaos, I expect Illuminati Jews will shift the blame onto Jews in general. They have fomented anti Semitism throughout history and are largely responsible for instigating the holocaust to justify Israel.  

Ordinary Jews are as duped and manipulated as ordinary Americans whose taxes fund Illuminati wars. Both are controlled by the Illuminati bankers and their Masonic minions.  

Ordinary Jews can do two things. 

1) Recognize that Anti-Semitism is not “irrational hate.” It is largely justified by the role Illuminati (Cabalist) and Pharisee Jews have played throughout history. Organized Jewry is not on the side of the angels. 

2. Jews must stop serving as a Trojan Horse for Illuminati Jews and taking the blame for them. Illuminati Jews aren’t even real Jews. They intermarry with other generational Satanists (Freemasons) who reach into every  organization.  

Instead of human shields, Jews should join with their non-Jewish neighbors in opposing this diabolical conspiracy that has engulfed mankind. 

——

Adorno’s Bastards and the Frankfurt School   by Kevin Beary 

Related by Makow – 

Do Jews Suffer from a False Identity?

Our Illuminati Reality Bubble

Jewish Conspiracy – Last Moment of Lucidity

The Riddle of Anti-Semitism

Film Exposes Anti-Semitism Racket

Zionism’s Historic Partnership with Anti-Semites

Nazis Funded Nacent Israeli Army

https://www.henrymakow.com/pleasantville.html

Betty Friedan: How Jewish Dysfunction Became Universal

 
The truth stares us in the face but we are blinded by mental conditioning.

Cabalist Judaism is a satanic cultwhich subverts its members by 

promoting promiscuity and gender confusion. First, it made some Jews sick 

and through them (and Freemasons) it has subverted the planet. 

They “corrupt in order to rule.” They control us by making us sick, physically or psychologically. This is satanic possession. Sin is their MO.  Illuminati Jews and top Freemasons (Hollywood, etc.) are Satan’s missionaries. The goyim have been trained like Pavlov’s Dogs to eschew anything that smacks of “anti Semitism.” But to identify a pernicious influence is not the same as condemning all Jews. 

Related- How American Communism Created Feminism 

———Lena Dunham – Another example of How Illuminati Jews Normalize Dysfunction

———– Hollywood’s Home Movies Portray Jewish Nightmare 

———– Hollywood Jews Preach Sex and Degeneration to Goyim

———– Liberal Jews,Sex & the New Satanic Order 

By Henry Makow Ph.D. 
(Slightly revised from April 21, 2007) 

sofar.jpg

In the 1950’s, the founder of modern feminism had a serious inferiority complex. At parties she would introduce herself: “I’m Betty Friedan — and I graduated Summa Cum Laude from Smith.” 

Friedan’s mother had made her feel inadequate as a female. In her candid autobiography, “My Life So Far” (2000) Friedan (born, Betty Naomi Goldstein) says that no matter what she did, her mother made her feel “messy, clumsy, inadequate, bad, naughty, ugly.” (26) 

Friedan spent years in psychoanalysis “talking endlessly about how I hated my mother and how she had killed my father.” (121) 

“All mothers should be drowned at birth,” she used to say in her 20’s. (131) 

ugly.jpg

Isn’t this a precursor of feminism? 

Her mother, Miriam Horowitz Goldstein was the spoiled daughter of a doctor who at 20 made a loveless marriage to “an older Jewish businessman” a jeweller almost twice her age. She was ashamed he had “no formal American education and a heavy Jewish accent.” He could do nothing right either. (17) 

But instead of seeing that her parent’s marriage was the problem, Betty Friedan attributed her mother’s unloving behavior to her lack of a satisfying career. She compensated for a weak father figure by becoming masculine herself and pursuing male glory. 

Ostracized by her classmates for being inept and ugly, Friedan vowed that “they may not like me” but one day “they are going to have to look up to me.” (25) 

In other words, Friedan was a classic Jewish social misfit, the kind that the elite use to undermine society. 

Fame and fortune came her way with her book “The Feminine Mystique,” (1963) which devalued the traditional feminine role and stripped femininity of its “mystique.” 

Husband and children need the love of a gracious young wife or mother. This nurturing feminine charm was a woman’s “mystique.” In her book, Friedan said family-oriented women were parasites  who had no identity of their own. She compared a housewife to an inmate in “a comfortable concentration camp.” A psychological stormtroopers, She devalued the countless priceless things a real woman does for her children and husband. 

With the help of the elite media, Friedan convinced women to deny their natural identity as wife and mother and seek it from jobs and employers. 
Rather than recognize that she was bent, Friedan made other women conform to her, at incalculable cost to society. 

FRIEDAN’S MARRIAGE 

In her autobiography, Friedan portrays herself as a devoted housewife who wanted to avoid her own mother’s mistakes. But in fact she emulated her mother and threatened to castrate her husband.

When she claimed to be “a battered wife,” her ex, Carl Friedan, started a web site (now discontinued) to give his side of the story. He was convinced to take it down. 

Mystique-Cover-2.xxxlarge.jpg

He said Friedan was unstable and often attacked him. Her bruises were due to his self-defense. His injuries were worse. He even cites a police report as proof. In another case, he writes: [WARNING FOUL LANGUAGE] 

” Quite vivid in my mind is a midnight in about 1967 – a year or so 
before Betty and I separated for good. We were living at our Dakota 
apartment then – Betty disagreed with something I said (that’s all it 
took), went into one of her raging uncontrollable fits, screaming, her 
face twisted in hate and insane anger, “You fucking no good prick you, 
you no-good bastard, you fucking bastard, ” meanwhile sprinting into the 
kitchen. Back she came straight at me brandishing two large kitchen 
knives. “You fucking Goddamn sonuvabitch, I’m going to cut your fucking 
cock off – your big cock it doesn’t mean a thing to me.” At this, I 
calmly picked up a kitchen chair, nailed her to the wall like a 

carl.jpg

lion-tamer and took the knives away. And that was just a minor incident during that period when her explosive personality was further inflamed  by amphetamines she was taking for weight loss, reinforced by alcohol.” 

Carl Friedan, who had an advertising agency told a newspaper that Betty’s image as a typical housewife was a ruse: 

“She didn’t know what I was doing,” he claimed. “I won prizes and had full-page ads in all the New York papers. She didn’t care.” 

According to Carl, Betty was no stay-at-home mom. 

(left, Carl, Betty and oldest son)

“We had a full-time maid during our entire [19-year] marriage. That’s who took care of the [three] kids, cooked – everything,” he said. “I would say as a housewife, on a scale of 0 to 10, she was a 2.” 

Carl Friedan’s memories are not motivated by politics. He is proud of his ex-wife’s accomplishments: “She changed the course of history almost single-handedly. It took a driven, super-aggressive, egocentric, almost lunatic dynamo to rock the world the way she did. Unfortunately, she was that same person at home, where that kind of conduct doesn’t work. She simply never understood this.” 



OTHER SOURCES: FRIEDAN’S “JUDAISM” AND COMMUNISM 

When Betty was preparing for her “Bat Mitzvah” (like a Confirmation) at age 13, she confessed to her Reform rabbi that she did not believe in God. 

Instead of giving his young ward a sense of what God is, this impostor said: “All right, but keep it to yourself until after confirmation.” (22) 

Friedan’s Judaism amounts to a sense that “I have to use my life to make the world better, have to protest, step off the sidewalk and march against injustice.” 

Because she was rejected as a Jew by the rich country club set in her hometown of Peoria, she “now identified with the working class, also oppressed by the masters of the universe…”(71) 

People like Friedan prefer to “change the world” than heal themselves. Do they realize that “change the world” is code for Luciferian world government tyranny? 

They tend to do very well by “doing good.” While writing this book, she received a one-million-dollar grant from the Illuminati Ford Foundation. Aren’t they the “masters of the universe?” The Friedans of this world are members of this club. 

Doesn’t it occur to these socialists, feminists and communists that if they were really a threat to the establishment, they wouldn’t be hauling in $150,000 salaries as full professors? Don’t they realize they are brainwashing the young, destabilizing society and setting the stage for a totalitarian state? 

Friedan was a lifelong Communist. In the book, she tries to distance herself from Communism, describing it in terms of youthful idealism. In fact she was a conscious agent.  She knew Kurt Lewinwho had been in charge of social engineering at Tavistock. (45)  

Friedan became famous because the Lucifer-loving bankers wanted women to have jobs instead of families. Jewish misfits become role models in a satanic dispensation. Friedan destroyed for everyone what she didn’t have, the “Feminine Mystique.” She poisoned the well of femininity and sent the family into a death spiral. . 

In an occult-controlled society, perverts, failures and crazies become prophets. 

— 

See also “Betty Friedan: Mommie was a Commie”

————– Lena Dunham – Another example of How Illuminati Jews Normalize Dysfunction

https://www.savethemales.ca/001995.html

THE HIGH COST OF FEMINISM

Written By Michael Foster on Twitter

In 1963 Betty Friedan wrote the The Feminine Mystique. It described a widespread discontent among women. She concludes her first chapter with: “We can no longer ignore that voice within women that says: ‘I want something more than my husband and my children and my home.’”

What was the “something more?” Friedan claimed it was a career. “The problem that has no name” stemmed for a woman’s single path of fulfillment namely being a wife, mother, and a keeper of the home. This, argued Friedan, didn’t allow women to grown full humanity.

For a woman to become, she must liberate herself from the “conventional picture of femininity.” Only then will she “finally [begin] to enjoy being a woman.” They must pursue the “creativity” that allows them to find their potential or they’ll remain “less than fully human.”

This was a lie. Friedan wasn’t your average housewife. She was leftist radical involved in union activities in 40s-50s. Even during her marriage, she had a part-time career as a traveling freelance journalist. She wasn’t some chained-down housemother. That was a marketing ploy.

Also, this “widespread discontent” could be better be described as the discontent present among some college-educated, white, middle-to-upper class who found conventional femininity boring. Friedan was trying to mainstream her discontent. Misery loves company.

Much of Friedan’s argument relies on other discredited intellectuals of her time. For example, she pulls much from Margaret Mead’s “Coming of Age in Samoa” to argue for a nascent version of sexual fluidity (aka sex is nurture, not nature). But, much like Friedan, Mead lied.

Friedan’s vision has largely come to past. All career paths are open to women. Work force integration is a reality. It isn’t the “career woman” that is looked down upon. It’s the “poor” housewife and mother. All that discontent should be declining, right?

It shouldn’t surprise us that alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and mental illness is exploding disproportionately among women.

Women are unhappy. The easy way to manage this unhappiness is to medicate and deny.

Reality is “hurtful.”
The pain is too much.

Friedan lied. Feminism lied. Feminism failed. It didn’t lead to freedom but a prison. Anyone seeking to wake women up and help them to face the reality of their situation will be resisted and demonized.

God’s design is the surest path to happiness. Marriage and motherhood are good. Men aren’t the competition. The sexes exist as a complement to each other. Don’t kick the can down the road. Embrace the goodness of femininity now. You can miss out and you don’t want that.

Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
1 Timothy 2:15

The High Cost of Feminism

Illuminati Vowed in 1969: “Travel Will Be More Difficult”

960x0.jpg

Wake up, folks. The coronavirus is a hoax, a pretext for the radical undemocratic reorganization of society. 1969:
” Travel … would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn’t have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID… later on, some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual.” 


Updated from Nov 12, 2010 & August 15, 2020
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
  

Like sheep, humanity had better adjust to constant harassment as long as it tolerates Illuminati control of all important government and social institutions. 

On March 20, 1969, Rockefeller Insider Dr. Richard Day (1905-1989) gave a speech to the Pittsburgh division of the American Medical Association in which he predicted:
” Travel … would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn’t have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID… later on some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual.”  (Tape two)
Although prohibited, Dr. Lawrence Dunegan made notes and related the contents of the speech to Randy Engel who made them available on tape. 
Dr. Dunegan reveals not just “WHAT” is intended for America and all people in the world, but “HOW” the controllers intend to carry out their plan. 

r-day.jpg

Dr. Day, left, said — “Everything is in place and nobody can stop us now . . .”
“Some of you will think I’m talking about Communism. Well, what I’m talking about is much bigger than Communism!” “Everything has two purposes. One is the ostensible purpose which will make it acceptable to people; and second, is the real purpose which would further the goals of establishing the new system and having it.”NEW DIFFICULT-TO-DIAGNOSE AND UNTREATABLE DISEASES Next heading to talk about is HEALTH & DISEASE. He said there would be new diseases to appear which had not ever been seen before. Would be very difficult to diagnose and be untreatable — at least for a long time.”
 No elaboration was made on this, but I remember, not long after hearing this presentation, when I had a puzzling diagnosis to make, I would be wondering, 
“Is this … was what he was talking about? Is this a case of what he was talking about?”. Some years later, as AIDS ultimately developed, I think AIDS was at least one example of what he was talking about. I now think that AIDS probably was a manufactured disease.”

Day also covered topics such as:
People will have to get used to change – everything will change, constantlyThe REAL and the “STATED” goalsPopulation ControlPermission to have babiesRedirecting the purpose of sex – sex without reproduction and reproduction without sexSex education as a tool of World GovernmentEncouraging homosexuality… Sex, anything goesEuthanasia and the “Demise Pill”Limiting access to affordable medical care makes eliminating the elderly easierPlanning the control over medicineElimination of private doctorsSuppressing cancer cures as a means of population control.
Inducing heart attacks as a form of assassinationEducation as a tool for accelerating the onset of puberty and pushing evolution and MUCH, MUCH MORE
The complete transcript of these tapes are available here.  

DENIAL

As long as the masses refuse to acknowledge the Illuminati conspiracy, they will continue to be complicit in their own destruction. 

For the last six months (in 2010), we have been bombarded with propaganda about the Swine Flu. Millions have been vaccinated. Billions of profits have been made. These vaccines might have been harmless. Who knows about the next? What we do know is that, generally speaking, Swine Flu proved to be less dangerous than seasonal flu. 

Then, recently for over a week, we were bombarded with hysteria about weather change (aka “climate change.”)  The Club of Rome concocted this bogeyman back in the 1980s. 

We must regard official society as a brainwashing chamber where we are being subjected to trauma-based mind control. Other traumatic events from the last decade include 9-11, the Tsunami, Hurricane Katerina, the great Northeastern power black-outs, the financial meltdown, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

It’s been a good decade for the Illuminati. Society is far more fearful and pessimistic, far more willing to accept totalitarian control. 

THE KEY TO OUR EXASPERATION


In the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the author writes that their goal is: “To wear everyone out by dissensions, animosities, feuds, famine, inoculation of diseases, want, until the Gentiles sees no other way of escape except by appeal to our money and our power.” (Protocol 10) 

“We will so wear out and exhaust the Gentiles by all this that they will be compelled to offer us an international authority, which by its position will enable us to absorb without disturbance all the governmental forces of the world and thus form a super-government.” (Protocol 5) 

Harold Rosenthal who was a member of this cabal boasted that they even implanted a “guilt complex” over the holocaust and anti-Semitism that prevents society from addressing the threat. 

Through control of banking, they acquired a total monopoly of “the movie industry, the radio networks and the newly developing television media…we took over the publication of all school materials… Even your music! We censor the songs released for publication long before they reach the publishers…we will have complete control of your thinking.”

We “have put issue upon issue to the American people. Then we promote both sides of the issue as confusion reigns. With their eyes fixed on the issues, they fail to see who is behind every scene. We, Jews, toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse.”

It would be great if the problem could be confined to “Jews” but literally everyone who advances the New World Order agenda wittingly or unwittingly is implicated, and that is, millions of people, i.e. the “Establishment.”

SOCIETY OFSHILLS

The Illuminati central banking cartel controls government credit, media, banking, corporations, education, professional associations, justice, military ..you name it. They use Freemasonry as their instrument. Recently, I posted an article about how they control the US Black community using the Masonic “Boule.” The same principle applies everywhere.  

Society operates on two rails. The formal–the image of a democracy ruled by law that dupes the masses and ensures their cooperation. The informal– the Illuminati club, which actually makes the decisions regardless of what’s happening on the formal level. The informal infiltrates the formal until the latter is merely a mask for the former.

Want to succeed? Join the club of secret Satan worshipers. That’s what Barack Obama did.
In a post May 29, 2009, Emily Gyde, an Illuminati defector who claims to be the real author of the Harry Potter series, says Obama told her this:

“I remember PRESIDENT OBAMA talking to me about how he had joined the ILL CULT – he didn’t want to – but he described himself as just an ordinary guy who wanted to take a wage packet home…that is how it was…he didn’t want to end up on the streets…at the end of the day, it was all about money…you had to have it to live…if he hadn’t joined the ILL CULT…he would have been disbarred…he wouldn’t have got a job…wouldn’t have been able to live…that’s how a lot of people get conned into joining the ILL. You are young, you want to prove yourself in life – you are told that you will ‘never get a job’ if you don’t…the ILL prove how powerful they are.” 

CONCLUSION

When I was a sixties radical, we used to think people who worked for the Establishment had sold their souls to the devil. I didn’t imagine it was literally true, as the Illuminati are Satan worshippers, so you’re unwittingly working for his disciples. 

The world has been colonized by this Satanic cult. What we are experiencing, while trying to maintain some civilized traditions over Christmas, is their relentless attempt to induct us into their cult as mind-controlled servants. 

—-

Thanks to JP for the reminder!Related Conspirator’s Hierarchy Pdf – John Coleman (Main points below)
Dr. John Coleman, November 1991 From the Book … … What are the goals of the secret elite group, the inheritors of Illuminism (Moriah Conquering Wind), the Cult of Dionysius, the Cult of Isis, Catharism, Bogomilism? This elite group that also calls itself the OLYMPIANS (they truly believe they are equal in power and stature to the legendary gods of Olympus, who have, like Lucifer their god, set themselves above our true God) absolutely believe they have been charged with implementing the following by divine right:
(1) A-One World Government-New World Order with a unified church and monetary system under their direction. Not many people are aware that the One World Government began setting up its “church” in the 1920’s/1930s, for they realized the need for a religious belief inherent in mankind to have an outlet and, therefore, set up a “church” body to channel that belief in the direction they desired.
(2) The utter destruction of all national identity and national pride.
(3) The destruction of religion and more especially the Christian religion, with the one exception, their own creation mentioned above.
(4) Control of each and every person through means of mind control and what Brzezinski call “Technotronic” which would create human-like robots and a system of terror beside which Felix Dzerzinski’s Red Terror will look like children at play.
(5) An end to all industrialization and the production of nuclear-generated electric power in what they call “the post-industrial zero-growth society.” Exempted are the computer and service industries. United States industries that remain will be exported to countries such as Mexico where abundant slave labor is available. Unemployables in the wake of industrial destruction will either become opium-heroin and or cocaine addicts or become statistics in the elimination process we know today as Global 2000.
(6) Legalization of drugs and pornography.
(7) Depopulation of large cities according to the trial run carried out by the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia. It is interesting to note that Pol Pot’s genocidal plans were drawn up here in the United States by one of the Club of Rome’s research foundations. It is also interesting that the Committee is presently seeking to reinstate the Pol Pot butchers in Cambodia.
(8) Suppression of all scientific development except for those deemed beneficial by the Committee. Especially targeted is nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Particularly hated are the fusion experiments presently being scorned and ridiculed by the Committee and its jackals of the press. The development of the fusion torch would blow the Committee’s conception of “limited natural resources” right out of the window. A fusion torch properly used could create unlimited untapped natural resources from the most ordinary substances. Fusion torch uses are legion and would benefit mankind in a manner that is as yet not even remotely comprehended by the public.
(9) Cause by means of limited wars in the advanced countries, and by means of starvation and diseases in Third World countries, the death of 3 billion people by the year 2000, people they call “useless eaters.” The Committee of 300 commissioned Cyrus Vance to write a paper on this subject of how best to bring about such genocide. The paper was produced under the title the “Global 2000 Report” and was accepted and approved for action by President Carter, for and on behalf of the U.S. Government, and accepted by Edwin Muskie, then Secretary of State. Under the terms of the Global 2000 Report, the population of the United States is to be reduced by 100 million by the year 2050.
(10)To weaken the moral fiber of the nation and to demoralize workers in the labor class by creating mass unemployment. As jobs dwindle due to the post-industrial zero growth policies introduced by the Club of Rome, demoralized and discouraged workers will resort to alcohol and drugs. The youth of the land will be encouraged by means of rock music and drugs to rebel against the status quo, thus undermining and eventually destroying the family unit. In this regard The Committee of 300 commissioned Tavistock Institute to prepare a blueprint as to how this could be achieved. Tavistock directed Stanford Research to undertake the work under the direction of Professor Willis Harmon. This work later became known as “The Aquarian Conspiracy.”
(11)To keep people everywhere from deciding their own destinies by means of one created crisis after another and then “managing” such crises. This will confuse and demoralize the population to the extent where faced with too many choices, apathy on a massive scale will result. In the case of the United States, an agency for crisis management is already in place. It is called the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), whose existence I first disclosed in 1980. There will be more on FEMA as we proceed.
(12)To introduce new cults and continue to boost those already functioning which includes rock “music” gangsters such as the filthy, degenerate Mick Jagger’s “Rolling Stones” (a gangster group much favored by European Black Nobility) and all of the Tavistock-created “rock” groups which began with “The Beatles.” To continue to build up the cult of Christian fundamentalism begun by the British East India Company’s servant, Darby, which will be misused to strengthen the Zionist state of Israel through identifying with the Jews through the myth of “God’s Chosen People” and by donating very substantial amounts of money to what they mistakenly believe is a religious cause in the furtherance of Christianity.
(14)To press for the spread of religious cults such as the Moslem Brotherhood, Moslem fundamentalism, the Sikhs, and to carry out experiments of the Jim Jones and “Son of Sam” type of murders. It is worth noting that the late Ayatollah Khomeini was a creation of British Intelligence Military Intelligence Division 6, commonly known as M16, as I reported in my 1985 work, “What Really Happened In Iran.”
(15)To export “religious liberation” ideas around the world so as to undermine all existing religions but more especially the Christian religion. This began with “Jesuit Liberation Theology” which brought about the downfall of the Somoza family rule in Nicaragua and which is today destroying EI Salvador, now 25 years into a “civil war,” Costa Rica and Honduras. One very active entity engaged in so-called liberation theology is the Communist oriented Mary Knoll Mission. This accounts for the extensive media attention to the murder of four of Mary Knoll’s so-called nuns in EI Salvador a few years ago. The four nuns were Communist subversive agents and their activities were widely documented by the government of EI Salvador. The United States press and news media refused to give any space or coverage to the mass of documentation in possession of the Salvadorian government, documentation which proves what the Mary Knoll Mission nuns were doing in the country. Mary Knoll is in service in many countries and played a leading role in bringing Communism to Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola and South Africa.
(16)To cause a total collapse of the world’s economies and engender total political chaos.
(17)To take control of all Foreign and domestic policies of the United States.
(18)To give the fullest support to supranational institutions such as the United Nations (UN), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the World Court and, as far as possible, make local institutions of lesser effect by gradually phasing them out or bringing them under the mantle of the United Nations.
(19)Penetrate and subvert all governments, and work from within them to destroy the sovereign integrity of nations represented by them.
(20)Organize a world-wide terrorist apparatus and negotiate with terrorists whenever terrorist activities take place. It will be recalled that it was Bettino Craxi who persuaded the Italian and U.S. governments to negotiate with the Red Brigades kidnapers of Prime Minister Moro and General Dozier. As an aside, General Dozier is under orders not to talk about what happened to him. Should he break that silence, he will no doubt be made “a horrible example of” in the manner in which Kissinger dealt with Aldo Moro, Ali Bhutto and General Zia ul Haq.
(21)Take control of education in America with the intent and purpose of utterly and completely destroying it. Much of these goals, which I first enumerated in 1969, have since been achieved or are well on their way to being achieved. Of special interest in the Committee of 300 program is the core of their economic policy, which is largely based on the teachings of Malthus, the son of an English country parson who was pushed to prominence by the British East India Company upon which the Committee of 300 is modeled.

https://www.henrymakow.com

HOW DOES GOD SPEAK TO US TODAY?

Preached By Justin Peters at Grace Community Church

Hearing from Heaven. Hearing from Heaven. How does God speak to us today? Undoubtedly, you have heard people say this: “Well, God has spoken to me and He’s told me that you are to do such and such. Pastor, God has spoken to me and He’s told me to tell you that our church needs to go this direction.” And it is just ubiquitous out there in the evangelical world – whatever evangelical means nowadays – that God speaks to people in still, small voices, maybe audible voices, dreams, visions, hunches, all of these things; and you hear this so commonly.

Has it ever made you stop and wonder, “What’s wrong with me? Why don’t I hear God speak to me that way? Is there something wrong with me? Is there something wrong with my relationship with the Lord? Do these people have a closer walk with God than I do? What’s wrong with me?” And if you have ever had those thoughts, I hope that this session will be an encouragement to you as we look at how God does and does not speak to us today.

Now as we begin, I want to define a couple of terms, because these are widely misunderstood. Revelation. Revelation refers to God revealing new information that has been previously hidden. So God revealing new information that up until this point has previously been hidden.

Revelation is not happening anymore today. You hear people say this all the time: “Well, God gave me revelation on this.” Well, no He didn’t, because God is not revealing anything new that has not already been revealed in Scripture. Now what may have happened to you is illumination. Illumination refers to the enabling work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers in order to understand and appropriate the truths of Scripture. Revelation is not happening anymore today; illumination, however, is. Illumination should be a regular part, in fact, of the Christian’s life, as the Holy Spirit helps us to understand and appropriate the written Word of God.

This notion of God speaking today outside of the confines of Scripture can be traced back to a movement known as pietism – and there’s a lot that could be said about this. But pietism was a reaction to what was at least perceived to be a highly intellectualized, almost cold orthodoxy coming out of the Protestant Reformation. It was anything but. But some people perceived it to be rather too intellectualized. And so in the late 1600s, early to mid 1700s, this movement became known as pietism. Philip Spener was the father of pietism, and he was no heretic, but he began to deviate just a little bit from the sufficiency of God’s Word. And as pietism grew, as is the case, error always begets more error. And then you get to men like Count Nikolaus von Zinzendorf who we could say was a heretic. But this kind of goes back to the movement known as pietism.

In a more modern version, divine revelation knowledge – you’ve probably heard of this term. The term was first coined by Essek W. Kenyon. Kenyon is the grandfather of what we call today the Word of Faith movement, New Apostolic Reformation. He’s the one that first coined this term. Kenyon believed in two different types knowledge. The first of these is sensory knowledge, that which we get through our five senses: sight, sound, taste, smell, and touch. The other kind of knowledge is revelation knowledge, and this is supernatural knowledge that comes only from God.

Now according to Kenyon, the catch to this is that these two spheres of knowledge are mutually exclusive, and what that means is is that reasoning or logical thought is of no value. So if you really want to go deep with God, if you want to get to the deep, secret, hidden things of God, you’ve got to disengage your mind, put the old noodle in park. I’m going to show you some more modern expressions of this.

You may have heard of the practice known as Lectio Divina. This is a practice that was endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI in 2005. This is a Catholic discipline – highly, highly mystical, very unbiblical. Lectio Divina’s been practiced by some modern evangelical names. We’ll talk about these, one of which is Beth Moore.

Now let me say in the onset, in this presentation I’m going to show you a lot of clips from a lot of different people, very wide spectrum of modern evangelical preachers. Some of the clips are from rank charlatans and heretics. Some of the clips are from people that we would not put in that basket. And I’m doing this not to lump everybody in this presentation in the same basket, I purposefully have a wide range here to show you how you ubiquitous this belief is that God speaks today outside of Scripture.

Beth Moore: very, very troublesome teacher. Unfortunately, a lot could be said of her. But Beth Moore, I want to read this quote to you from her book Praying God’s Word. She says, “What little I know I want others to know. Before God tells me a secret,” – now if He’s telling you a secret – and she says – “He knows up front I’m going to tell it,” so I’m not sure how secretive that is. But she says, “By and large, that’s our deal.” So Beth Moore has this secret deal with God. This is Gnosticism. This is a modern-day version of the ancient heresy of Gnosticism.

Also from Beth Moore in her book entitled When Godly People Do Ungodly Things, and this is rather ironically subtitled, Arming Yourself in an Age of Seduction. But Beth Moore says this. She says, “I heard the voice of God speak to my heart, ‘Come and play.’ I love that He said, ‘Come,’ not go, ‘Come.’ That meant He was already there. I also love how I could tell by the sweet tone of His silent voice,” – I’m not sure how a silent voice has a tone. But she said, “I could tell by the sweet tone of His silent voice that He was smiling. I could have outlined His expression with my finger.”

Now other than that just being a little bit weird, she goes on and she says, “I built a snowman. I laughed with God, He laughed with me. I am so in love with Him. I am so in love with Him.” Beth Moore wants you to believe that she has such an intimate relationship with Jesus that she not only hears Him, but can even see the expression that is apparently on His face; and Jesus wanted her to go and play with Him, so they built snowmen together. You see, Beth Moore has such a deep relationship with Christ, far deeper, of course, than what you have. This is a modern-day version of the ancient heresy known as Gnosticism.

Now a few clips. Watch this from Rick Warren. [Video starts] “Last week we began a new miniseries on “Understanding How to Hear the Voice of God.” Very few things are more important than this because you can’t have a relationship to God if you can’t hear God. If all you do is ever talk to Him in prayer and you never hear God speak to you, that’s a one-way relationship, that isn’t much of a relationship.” [Video ends]

So if you never hear God speak to you, then you really don’t have much of a relationship with God. This from Priscilla Shirer. [Video starts] “Hi, I’m Priscilla Shirer, and I’m hoping that you’ll join me for a six-week journey as we talk about how we can hear and discern the voice of God in our lives. Do you really expect and anticipate that the divine voice of God can be heard by you? Do you really think that He loved you enough to die for you but doesn’t love you enough to then talk to you?” [Video ends]

“Do you really think that He loves you enough to die for you but does not love you enough to talk to you?” What an insult. What a slight to the Word of God. God speaks to us today all the time through the Scriptures. Now she may not have meant it that way. And I want to say that the sincerity of these individuals is not what I’m calling into question. Sincerity is not what matters, truth matters.

Now this from Charles Stanley. [Video starts] “So are you asking if God speaks specifically, and the answer is yes, He does. Let me give you two or three examples. Speaking about buying groceries. On a particular day I had a very short period of time, and so I wanted to buy a turkey for Thanksgiving. My time was really running out and I thought, ‘Well, I shouldn’t do this now.’ I said, ‘God, just show me what to do.’ It’s like God said, ‘Go to this store, buy the turkey now.’ Against sort of my will, I went. I walked right in, straight to the right place, the right pound of turkey, walked right out, paid and got back in the car in less than about 25 minutes. Did God tell me to go? Yes, He did.” [Video ends] So close is Charles Stanley’s relationship with God that God even tells him where to go to buy his Thanksgiving Day turkey.

Now I’m guessing that probably most of us in here God’s never told us where to buy our turkeys. But you see, this is how close he is with the Lord. And they buttress themselves, they use these claims to lift themselves up. Whether knowingly or unknowingly, they do it to lift themselves up to let you know just how close of a relationship with God they have. And if you don’t have that kind of relationship, if you don’t have that kind of intimacy with God, then there’s something wrong in your relationship with Him.

Now Sam Storms is someone who would share our view of soteriology, a more reformed view of soteriology. But Sam Storms is also a continuous charismatic. I want to read you this out of his book Practicing the Power. Sam Storm says this: “To be the recipient of prophetic revelation from God whether in dreams, impressions, trances, visions, or words of knowledge and words of wisdom can be nothing short of euphoric. The experience brings feelings of nearness to God and a heightened sense of spiritual intimacy that isn’t often the case with the other of the charismata. This is an unfortunate denigration of the non-apostolic gifts: the gifts of teaching, mercy, administration, exhortation, hospitality, the gift of giving. All of these gifts as card-carrying cessationists, all of us would affirm those gifts. But those gifts are somehow lesser. And if you don’t experience the apostolic gifts, the sign gifts, if you don’t experience those gifts, then you just don’t have the same nearness with God as you’re supposed to.”

This is a very unfortunate degradation of the more normative gifts, the non-apostolic gifts. And this goes against Scripture of course. This goes against what Paul says, teaches in 1 Corinthians chapter 12. Again, this is a modern-day version of Gnosticism. So if you are someone who gets dreams and visions and you hear still, small voices, and God speaks to you maybe even audibly, you’re a have. But if you’re one of these poor souls and all you have is the Bible and you’re indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God, well, then you’re just a have not. You’re just not as spiritual. You just don’t have the same nearness with God as the haves do. This is Gnosticism.

I would submit to you that the resource, the book that is singularly most responsible for introducing charismatic theology into at least theoretically non-charismatic churches is Experiencing God by Henry Blackaby that came out in 1991. If you go back before 1991, at least in non-charismatic churches, almost everyone would have understood that God speaks to us through the Bible, we speak to Him in prayer. Today hardly anybody understands that; and I believe experiencing God is singularly most responsible for introducing these notions into non-charismatic churches.

Experiencing God, Henry Blackaby says this: “If you have troubling hearing God speak, you are in trouble at the very heart of your Christian experience.” So this is very, very important, “You should be hearing God speak to you regularly, and if you don’t then you’re in trouble at the very heart of your Christian experience.”

Now I’m going to show you a videoclip of a man named Sid Roth, and I want to offer you a disclaimer before I do. I just want you to brace yourself, because what you’re about to see is one of the most disturbing, one of the most shocking videos that I’ve ever come across – and that’s saying a lot given what I spend a lot of time in study. But this is shocking. But I want to show you just how far this can go. Okay, watch this from Sid Roth. His television show entitled It’s Supernatural that appears on TBN. Watch this.

[Video starts] “Hello, Sid Roth here. Welcome to my world where it’s naturally supernatural. I have read of the great men and women of faith. One in particular intrigues me so much. His name: Smith Wigglesworth. He had some of the most outrageous miracles I ever heard of in my life. Let me give you one example.

“Some parents had a two-month-old baby dying in the hospital. The parents kidnapped the child, took the child to a Smith Wigglesworth meeting; and Smith looks at the child, looks at the parents, and said, ‘Can I do what God tells me to do?’ Well, what would you do if you were the parent? The child’s dying anyway, right? He takes the baby, two-month-old, throws the baby against a wall – the baby. Then the baby’s on the floor. Have you ever seen someone play soccer? Have you ever seen them kick a soccer ball? He does that with the baby. The baby falls into the congregation. No crying. Is it dead? One hundred percent healed, no crying.” [Video ends]

Is that not shocking? Friends, this went out on worldwide television. And lest you think that, “Oh, nobody would believe that,” the very fact that they put it on worldwide television is self-evident proof that people do believe this. And let’s keep in mind that one of the charismatic mantras is this: “Well, what God does for one, He’ll do for you.” And people are sitting at home and they’re watching this, and these people, they claim to hear from God. And a person’s sitting at home and he’s thinking, “Wow, well God told Smith Wigglesworth to throw a sick baby against a wall. My kid’s sick. My neighbor’s kid is sick. What God does for one, He’ll do for you.”

The very fact that they aired this on worldwide television is self-evident proof that people are dumb enough to believe this. It’s a very dangerous thing to say, “Go told me to do such and such.” You see how extreme this can get.

How do you know God told you to do that? Well, Henry Blackaby says, “I sensed God’s call. I prayed and sensed God wanted me to. I began to sense a great urgency. We began to sense God leading us. Our church sensed God wanted us to do such and such. One of our members felt led to do this.” Same verbiage that the charismatic movement uses.

Well, how do you know this? When God speaks, what does that sense feel like? Well, we’re never really told. This from Bill Hybels. Bill Hybels, up until about a year or so ago was a pastor, wrote this book The Power of a Whisper, and he says this in his book. He says, “Without a hint of exaggeration, I can boldly declare that God’s low-volume whispers have saved me from a life of sure boredom and self-destruction.”

It’s a very ironic statement for him to make, given what has happened with Bill Hybels. God says in Jeremiah, “Is not My word like a fire,” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer which shatters a rock?” Doesn’t sound very boring to me. You see, this is a denigration of the authority and the sufficiency of God’s Word. Now they would not say that in so many words, but that is exactly what it is.

This from Robert Morris. Robert Morris tells us that prayer is a two-way street. So when we pray, we are to pray to God, and then we are to listen for Him to talk back to us. Watch this from Robert Morris.

[Video starts] “You know, if we said we’re going to have a class on prayer, you’d say, ‘I need that.’ And even the disciples said, ‘Teach us to pray.’ But let me remind you that hearing God is the second half of prayer, because if you can’t hear God, why would you pray? Now one reason is to make our requests and petitions be known to God. But God never intended prayer to be a giving of our to-do list to Him every morning. He intended prayer to be communication between a Father and His children. And if you’ll just take some time and start to listen, you’ll be amazed that He’ll speak.” [Video ends]

This is ubiquitous. We hear this all the time that prayer is a two-way street. “We are to pray to God and then we are to listen for Him to talk back to us.” And maybe you have done this before; and I don’t mean to mock here. I know a lot of people are very sincere when they do this – very misguided, but very sincere. But we hear this.

And so, you hear this and you’ve got something going on in your life. You’ve got some crisis situation, you’ve got a decision to make, and you’re not real sure what to do. You really feel like you need some direction from the Lord, and so you go to the Lord. You’re very sincere. The TV – you turn the TV off, the kids are in bed, and you sit down at your kitchen table or your study or wherever you do your praying, and you sit down and you pray and you go to the Lord and you tell the Lord what’s going on in your life.

You say, “Lord, this is what I’m facing; I’m not sure what to do. Lord, speak to me, I’m listening,” and you get real still and you listen real hard. And then after just a few seconds, what happens? A thought, right, just kind of flashes through our minds, and we think, “Oh, was that You, Lord, or was that me? Was that God or was that the pizza I ate tonight? How do you know when it’s God speaking to you? How do you know that that still small voice is really of God if God is supposed to be speaking back to us when we pray?”

You remember what the disciples asked Jesus in Luke chapter 11? “Lord, teach us to pray.” The ball is sitting on the proverbial tee waiting for Jesus to knock it out of the park and affirm what Robert Morris and the vast majority of evangelicals believe today, that prayer is a two-way street.

“Lord, teach us to pray.” What did Jesus say? “Okay, here’s how you do it. You talk to God, and then you get real quiet and you listen for that still small voice.” Is that what He said? No, He didn’t say that at all. He said, “When you pray, say this: ‘Lord, hallowed by Thy name,’” nothing about listening for some still small voice, nothing about listening for God to speak back to you. So this whole notion of prayer being a two-way street, that is foreign to the Word of God. There’s nothing in the Bible about that at all.

So what of this still small voice? We hear this all the time: “God speaks to us in quiet whispers and still small voices.” One example of this: this is a tweet from Beth Moore. Beth Moore says, “There’s a time to give up and a time to keep trying. Sometimes the time to keep trying feels a whole lot like the time to give up. The only difference is the still small voice of the Holy Spirit within you saying, ‘Try again.’ It’s not the same old Monday if they’re brand new mercies.”

So you’ve got to listen for this little still small voice. And where does this still small voice come from? It comes from 1 Kings chapter 19, let’s look at it, 1 Kings 19; this is the King James Version. “And He said, ‘Go forth and stand upon the mount before the Lord.’ And behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind which rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.” Literally in the Hebrew, “The sound of a quiet whisper.”

“And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, ‘What doest thou here, Elijah?’” This is where the still small voice comes from. Dear friends, the still small voice was not some inner impression inside Elijah’s head. It was not internal to him, it was external to him. Notice it says that he went out of the cave to the entrance, and there he clearly heard the voice of God.

So it’s not something internal, it’s not some notion inside of his head; it was an external voice. So can we please do away with this whole still small voice thing? It was never intended to be some inside impression; it was external, not internal. But this is something that has worked its way into our evangelical lingo, and few people understand what this really is. It’s a terrible misuse of it.

Speaking of terrible misuses, “My sheep hear My voice.” Watch this from Robert Morris. [Video starts] “So John chapter 10, look at verse 1. We’re talking about we’re sheep and we can hear God. ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens,’ – now watch this carefully – ‘and the sheep’ – watch – ‘hear his voice.’ Can you just say those three words? ‘Hear his voice.’”

“So John 10:27 to me is the most concise and comprehensive verse in Scripture about hearing God. It is when Jesus says, ‘My sheep hear My voice, I know them, and they follow Me.’”

Practically every single book, every sermon that is out there about how to hear the voice of God cites John 10:27. This is the go-to text for God speaking to you somehow inside your head in some inner impression, “My sheep hear My voice.” Well, let’s look at this.

John 10:27, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.” This is universally used as the proof text that God speaks to us today outside of the confines of Scripture: “My sheep hear My voice.” But let’s look at it in context, beginning in verse 26.

Jesus says, “But you do not believe,” – why? – “because you’re not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.” We see right there that the voice of the shepherd is connected to believing in the shepherd. And look at verse 28: “And I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.”

Dear friends, this is not talking about God telling you where to go to have lunch one day or where to go buy your Thanksgiving Day turkey. This is salvation; this is regeneration; this is the effectual call. “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give eternal life to them.”

Before you and I came to Christ, we were lost sheep, lost sheep wandering around out in the pasture of life, grazing, minding in our own business. But all of a sudden we hear a voice, and we lift our heads up, and we see the shepherd, and we go to Him. What a terrible trivialization of such a majestic, beautiful passage of Scripture of the Good Shepherd giving life to His sheep, not telling them where to go have lunch one day. This is a terrible trivialization of such a beautiful, deep, majestic passage of Scripture.

“I give eternal life to them; they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of My hand.” The Shepherd holds His sheep in His hand. If you’ve ever wondered about eternal security, dear friends, if you are His sheep, He is holding you in His hand, and you’re not getting out of that.

And as if that were not enough – and it is – but as if it were not enough, look at what Jesus says in verse 29. He says, “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.” As if His hand was not enough – and it is – but as if it wasn’t, He wraps, as it were, the Father’s hand around that of His own. What a beautiful passage, and what a terrible trivialization to reduce this text to something like God telling you where to go to get your Thanksgiving Day turkey.

Uh-oh. Jesus Calling, by Sarah Young. Jesus Calling is the hottest-selling devotional book on the market anywhere, and it has been for seven years now. It is lightyears ahead of everything else out there, lightyears ahead of it. This is no ordinary devotional book. Now I’m going to show you excerpts from Jesus Calling. I’ve copied and pasted word-for-word, no edits on my part here, straight out of Jesus Calling, straight out of the introduction of Jesus Calling.

Sarah Young says this. She says, “During the same year in ‘92 I began reading God Calling, a devotional book by two anonymous listeners. These women practiced waiting quietly in God’s presence, pencils and papers in hand, recording the messages they receive from Him. God Calling is indeed a book. I have one on my shelf. It was written back in the 1930s by two anonymous female mystics. We don’t know who these ladies were, but two anonymous ladies. But these ladies claimed to practice waiting in the presence of God, practicing hearing God’s voice; and with more practice, it’s like they tuned in to just the right frequency; and when they hit just the right frequency, God started calling them, and they began to write down what He said.

This was Sarah Young’s inspiration for Jesus Calling. Sarah Young says this: “I knew that God communicated with me through the Bible, but I yearned for more.” You see, the Bible just was not enough for Sarah Young. And you know what? That is the mindset of the vast majority of professing Christians today. The Bible just is not enough for most people, we’ve got to have something more. “I yearned for more.”

Anytime I hear somebody say, “Well, yeah, I know God speaks in the Bible and I know that’s His Word, but I need something more,” here’s my question, here’s my question: “Have you mastered this Book? From Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21, you have completely mastered it; there is nothing else that you can glean from this Book, no more drops of truth you could possibly squeeze out of its pages; you have mastered it from cover to cover?” If the answer to that question is no – and it is – then please don’t tell me the Bible’s not enough. You don’t even understand what you have in black and white right in front of you. Please don’t tell me the Bible’s not enough.

But it wasn’t enough for Sarah Young, and sadly, it is not enough for the vast majority of professing believers today. Sarah Young says this: “I decided to listen to God with pen in hand, writing down whatever I believed He was saying.” Houston, we have a problem. Just like the ladies who wrote God Calling, and they wrote down what He said, Sarah Young tuned into just the right frequency; and when she hit just the right frequency, Jesus started calling her and she began to write down what He said.

And if you have a copy of this book, I should say – well, I started to say read it. Don’t read it. But if you happen to have one, you might notice that all of the devotionals in there, 365 of them, all of them are written in the first person for Jesus Christ: “I Jesus am such and such. I will do this, I will do that.” They’re all written in the first person for Jesus. If Jesus really is calling Sarah Young and she is writing down what He is saying, you know what she’s doing? She’s writing Scripture. That’s what she’s doing, she’s writing Scripture, because God cannot speak less authoritatively on one occasion than He does on another. Friends, if God is speaking, God is speaking, and whatever He says carries the exact same authority as does John 3:16 or Romans 10:9 and 10.

And it’s not just Jesus Calling, but every time someone says, “God spoke to me and said, quote, ‘Da-da-da-da-da,’” then whatever’s inside those quotation marks, that has just as much authority theoretically as any verse in Scripture. And so, you know what we ought to do? We ought to add that to this Book, because it should have the same authority. We should add it to this Book. There’s just one problem with that: this Book says, “Do not add to this Book.”

This from Beth Moore. [Video starts] “What God began to say to me about five years ago – and I’m telling you, it sent me on such a trek with Him, that my head is still whirling over it. He began to say to me, ‘I’m going to tell you something right now, Beth. And boy, you write this one down, and you say it as often as I give you utterance to say it: My bride is paralyzed by unbelief. My bride is paralyzed by unbelief.’” [Video ends]

“My bride is paralyzed by unbelief.” Did you know that? I didn’t know that. But apparently it must be. The bride of Christ, the church, is paralyzed by unbelief. Never mind that the Bible itself says, “The gates of hell will not prevail against it.” But apparently, the church is paralyzed by unbelief. This is new information, new information, because it is not recorded anywhere Scripture. But it must be true because God told her to tell us that. Not only did He tell Beth Moore to tell us that, but He actually told her to write it down.

This is not an isolated statement, by the way, from Beth Moore. It’s not an isolated statement. Her book When Godly People Do Ungodly Things, Beth Moore says this. She says, “I am being as honest as I know how to be when I say that I did not write these pages by simple preference. I wrote them, because had I not, the rocks in my yard would have cried out. What God does with what He has promised is His business. I entrust this message entirely to the One who delivered it while I sat bug-eyed.”

So if we are to believe Beth Moore, then she was just this passive recipient. She emptied her mind, and God began to speak to her, and God delivered this message to her while she sat bug-eyed. And had she not done it, the rocks in her yard would have cried out. Nothing like applying that text to yourself. Unbelievable. Unbelievable. This is very common. This is, as I’ve said, ubiquitous in the evangelical world.

Now watch this clip from Matt Chandler. [Video starts] “So let’s talk about what prophecy is and what prophecy isn’t. The ‘thus sayeth the Lord’ – look right at me – is over. Look at me. When this text is talking about prophecy, it’s not talking about the way Jeremiah prophesied or Isaiah prophesied. No, no, no. That’s closed, that’s canonized, so you will never prophesy in a way that’s on par, equal to, anywhere near the inerrant, infallible Word of God. That’s closed, shut. And so the best you’ve got, the best you’ve got is the humility to say, ‘I think the Lord would have me lay this before you.’” [Video ends]

A couple points to be made in this passage. Now I will say, this sermon, this particular sermon as I watched it, Matt Chandler, to his credit, did begin by saying, “I don’t want you to rely on me for your church. If you’d don’t go to this church,” he said, “I want you to go to your local church, and that’s important. And basically, don’t just rely on TV preachers for your church.” And that is commendable in and of itself. But this is full of error.

He says that when God – he affirms that God speaks to us today, but he says, “It’s not as inspired as Scripture is. It’s not like what God said to Jeremiah. It’s not like what God said to Isaiah. That’s canonized, that’s closed. But God still speaks to us today.” That is a false dichotomy. That makes no sense. As I said, dear friends, if God is speaking, God is speaking; and whatever He says should be just as authoritative as any verse in the Book. God cannot speak less authoritatively on one occasion than He does another. God cannot speak in the Bible and really, really, really mean it. But when He speaks to us today outside of the Bible, He still means it, but He doesn’t mean it quite as much as He meant it here. How does that work? If God is speaking, God is speaking. This is a degradation of the authority, and especially the sufficiency of Scripture.

Sam Storms, his book entitled Practicing the Power, the foreword, interesting, was written by Matt Chandler. But notice how Matt Chandler says, “The best we can do today is say, ‘I feel like the Lord is saying such and such.’” Sam Storms picks up on this. He says, “Dramatic pronouncement aren’t helpful. Avoid saying things like, ‘Thus sayeth the Lord,’ or, ‘This is the word of the Lord for your life.’” He says, “Avoid those things; they aren’t helpful. We have found that it is better to introduce prophetic utterances with statements such as, ‘I have a strong inner impression that I believe is from the Lord. I had a sense from the Holy Spirit,’ or, I had a dream which involved several of you.’ So we shouldn’t say things like, ‘Thus sayeth the Lord, we should say instead, ‘Well, I feel like the Lord is saying such and such.’”

This whole premise rests on a fatally flawed assumption that somehow prophecy in the New Testament is a degraded version of prophecy in the Old Testament. They all have to affirm that Old Testament prophets were held to a standard of 100 percent perfection in what they spoke. And if any prophet, so-called prophet spoke something that was not from the Lord, well, we all know what was called upon to do to that so-called prophet; he was to be put to death. And so, they’ve got to somehow degrade New Testament prophecy, and they say, “It’s just not the same. We’re not held to the same standard.” But there’s nothing in Scripture to indicate that that is the case. New Testament prophets were held to the same standard as Old Testament prophets. There’s no degration in the gift of prophecy from Old Testament to New Testament.

But what of this whole notion that, “I feel like the Lord said to me, I feel like the Lord said this to me”? Well, let’s look in Scripture. “The word of the Lord came to Abram. The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah. The word of the Lord came to Ezekiel. The word of the Lord came to Elijah.” Even in the New Testament, when the Holy Spirit spoke, He spoke very clearly, very precisely: “Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”

“I feel like the Lord might have said to me to tell you,” said nobody in the Bible ever. That is not something that you’ll find anywhere in the Scriptures. Dear friends, if you have to wonder whether or not God spoke to you, He didn’t. If you have to wonder whether or not God spoke to you, He didn’t. When God spoke in the Bible – and it wasn’t nearly as often as what a lot of people think. Some people had this idea that God was just speaking all the time, everywhere, and all throughout the Bible to everyone. He really wasn’t. There were major characters in the Bible who went their entire lives, never heard God say anything. Nehemiah never heard God say anything. But when God did speak, it was crystal clear.

There was no ambiguity about what God said. There was none of this, “Was that You, Lord, or was that me?” You won’t find that modeled anywhere in Scripture. Whenever God spoke, people knew exactly what He said, and they knew exactly who was who said it. The only exception to that was the boy Samuel when he heard God calling him by name three times. But even at that, Samuel still knew exactly what God said, he just was a little unclear first who it was who said it. But he knew exactly what he said. But he was just a boy. Nowhere in the Bible will you find anyone saying something like, “I think the Lord might be trying to tell us such and such.” That is a concept that is absolutely foreign to the Word of God.

Now, have you ever thought about this? All of these books on how to hear the voice of God – The Power of a Whisper, Robert Morris’ book Frequency, Priscilla Shirer’s book Knowing the Voice of God – all of these books, I mean, bookshelves in Christian bookstores practically sag under the weight of books telling you seven easy steps to know the voice of God. Have you ever wondered if hearing the voice of God was so vitally important for us as New Testament believers, why are there absolutely no instructions anywhere in the New Testament about how to actually hear the voice of God? You ever wondered that?

In the four Gospels, we have the record of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. In the book of Acts, we have a record of the early church in the spread of the gospel. In the pastoral epistles, we have loads of instructions about doctrine, about theology, about church polity, about the qualifications for elders, about how to resolve conflict amongst believers. We have loads of instructions about this. We have lots of information about eschatology in the future events in the end times, all these things. But there is nothing in the New Testament about how to hear the voice of God, nothing. If this was such a vitally important part of the life of the believer, don’t you think there would be something in the New Testament telling us how to actually hear the voice of God?

It’s not in there. Why isn’t it in there? Because it’s not necessary. It’s not necessary. Number one, God is only speaking to us today in the Bible. Number two, when God did speak in the biblical days, everybody knew exactly what He said; no need for instructions on how to hear the voice of God.

There are warnings about adding to or taking away from Scripture, Old and New Testaments. Take your pick. “Oh, yeah, but that instruction in Revelation 22, that warning there about adding to the word of this book, that’s just talking about the book of Revelation. We can add to other books, that’s okay.” No, we believe in what is called the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture: if you add to one book, you have added to them all.

We are not to add to nor take away anything from the Word of God; and yet this whole notion of, “God spoke to me and He said, quote, ‘Da-da-da-da-da,’” then what you are doing, you are adding to the Word of God. You may not admit that that’s what you’re doing; but theoretically, that is exactly what you’re doing; and the Bible warns us not to do that.

Watch this clip from Matt Chandler. This clip really made the rounds about a year or so ago. Watch this.

[Video starts] “What I’m asking you to do is be brave. Ask, hear, step out, approach, and just say, ‘Hey, while I was praying, the Lord brought you to my mind, and even if it sounds crazy to you, just trust Him.’ Just going, ‘Okay, Danny, let’s do it. Lord, what would you want me to encourage Danny with?’ And then I’m quiet again, trying to listen. And then automatically in my head there’s a picture of a ship, a pirate ship. And then there’s like cannons on the pirate ship, and there’s a shark chasing the pirate ship. Now at that point you’re like, ‘Nope. No, not gonna happen!’ Right?

“And here’s what I want you to do. I want you just to step out, and you can even admit, like we’re growing together and we’re going to fail, and this is going to get weird. It’s going to be awesome. Like I’m just going to go to Danny and I’m going to be like, ‘Hey, brother, you heard my sermon. I was praying. Danny, it was a pirate ship, it’s a shark chasing it with cannons.’

“I’m not going to interpret that for him. I’m not going to be like, ‘What I think that means is that maybe you’re stealing some stuff from people, and Jesus is the shark, and you need to repent.’ I’m not going to interpret that for him. I’m just going to go in a great deal of humility. I’m just going to be, ‘Does that makes any sense to you?’” [Video ends] No, it doesn’t make any sense at all, on any level does that make any sense.

You know, every time we have a dream, every time we see something that may be a little bit off, you know, we think, “Oh, that’s – ooh, I wonder if God’s trying to tell me something here.” Bill Hybels writes in his book The Power of a Whisper how he was seeking a word from the Lord, and how God wasn’t speaking to him. But he was out fishing one day, and there was a Bud Light beer can that literally floated by his boat, and he says in his book, he said, “I sat there staring at the can.” He said, “I wondered, is this a message from God? If so, what does it mean? Am I supposed to drink Bud Light?” He says, “Am I supposed to tell my people not to drink Bud Light?” And then he says, “Is there a message inside the can?”

This was a pastor, and he thinks God’s trying to give him messages through Bud Light beer cans floating past his boat. How are we supposed to make sense out of any of this? No, it doesn’t make any sense.

This from Lou Engle, sitting on the stage of Bill Johnson and Benny Hinn. [Video starts] “You know, the last day’s language of the Holy Spirit is dreams. We say, ‘Well, it was just a dream.’ What do you mean just a dream? Who knows what angels had to fight through to break into your world to give you their thoughts, and you just say, ‘It’s just a dream.’ I think the church needs to stop saying, ‘It’s just a dream.’” [Video ends]

But dear friends, that is exactly what it is: it’s just a dream. There are no significance to your dreams, they’re just dreams. I dreamed one time that I was being chased around a Kentucky Fried Chicken by four tornados. My doctor may tell me not to go to KFC, but I don’t think that was God trying to tell me not to go to KFC.

So how does God speak to us today? Let’s go to the text. Hebrews 1:1 and 2, “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days He has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.” The writer of Hebrews says that in the old days, in the days of the prophets, in the Old Testament, God spoke in a lot of different ways. Indeed, He did. God spoke to Moses up on the mountain through a storm and thunder. God spoke to Elijah through that still small voice, which was an external voice – audible, external voice. In Numbers chapter 22, God even made a donkey talk. So God did indeed speak in many different portions and in many different ways.

“But in these last days,” – says the writer of Hebrews – “He has spoken to us in His Son.” Friends, Jesus is the final speaking of God, the final speaking of God. Everything that God has to say He has said to us in His Son Jesus Christ; and we have a perfect, inerrant, infallible, all-sufficient record of that in His Word. Jesus is the final speaking of God.

Now I don’t want you to misunderstand. I don’t want you to think, “Oh, well Justin says that God doesn’t speak to us anymore today.” Yes, He does. God speaks to us right here. This is how God speaks to us.

“Well, Justin, I’ve had these dreams. I’ve had these dreams and they came true. What do you make of that? I’ve had these experiences, Justin. I was driving, and I always turn left on this particular road, every day I always turn left. But something just told me, no, to take a right. And I turned right and ran into someone who needed my help. How do you make sense of that?” I can’t exegete your experiences, all I can do is exegete Scripture.

But speaking of experiences, let’s look at one such experience; Peter writes about it. Second Peter chapter 1, Peter says, “For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. But we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.” This is the transfiguration, Matthew 17. “For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, ‘This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased’ – and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.”

This was the transfiguration. This was Peter, James and John, and they were there; and Jesus, before their very eyes, was transfigured with Moses and Elijah. The veil of His flesh was peeled back and they saw the majestic glory, Jesus transfigured in His full glory. What an experience. What did Peter say about this? He said, “But we have the prophetic word made more sure,” made more certain. What’s the prophetic word? This is the prophetic word: “The written Word of God was more certain than that.”

And I don’t doubt that many of you here or are watching have had some experiences, I don’t doubt that. But whatever you think your experience may or may not have been, no matter if God woke you up at 3:00 in the morning to pray for someone; turns out that person needed prayer at 3:00 in the morning; you know, whatever your experience was – and I’m not doubting God’s providence in all of our experiences – but whatever your experience was, I guarantee you one thing: your experience didn’t approach what Peter experienced. God waking you up at 3:00 in the morning to pray for someone, that doesn’t begin to approach what Peter, James and John experienced. And if they could say of the written Word of God that the written Word of God is more certain than that, I can promise you it’s more certain than anything you think you may or may not have experienced. The Word of God is more certain than anything that we could experience. We cannot exegete experiences, we can only exegete the Word of God.

And dear friends, no matter how real experiences may seem to us, if that experience does not plumb with the Word of God, then we have done exactly what Paul told us not to do in 1 Corinthians 4:6. He says, “Do not exceed what is written.” When we exceed what is written, when we exceed biblical parameters, we are actually opening ourselves up to demonic influence and demonic suggestion. We cannot interpret the Bible by what we experience, we must interpret our experiences by the Bible, by the prophetic word made more sure.

Well, the Bible doesn’t tell me where to go to college. The Bible doesn’t tell me who to marry. It tells you to marry a believer, but it doesn’t really tell me who to marry. The Bible doesn’t tell me what job to take or what house to buy or which car I should by. The Bible doesn’t tell me, “Should I be an engineer or a dentist?”

How do I know God’s will for my life? How do I know God’s will for my life? Here’s how you know God’s will for your life. Read, study, and obey God’s Word. Read, study, and obey God’s Word. If you’re not doing that, then nothing else matters anyway. Read, study, and obey God’s Word.

And then if you’ve got some situation in your life, you’ve got some decision to make and you’re not real sure what it is to do, some crisis and you’re not sure the right thing to do, or you want to know God’s will for a particular thing that’s going on in your life or in your church or whatever, read, studying God’s Word, obey God’s Word. Pray for wisdom. James tell us that: “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God.”

Now if you’re not reading and studying and obeying God’s Word, then don’t bother praying for wisdom, He’s not going to give it to you. But if you are, pray for wisdom. And then, seek godly counsel. The Bible says there is wisdom, there’s safety in a multitude of counselors. And if I’ve got something going on in my life or my ministry and I’m not sure what to do, you know what I’m going to do? I’m going to seek godly counsel. The first person I’m going to go to is my wife Kathy and talk about it with her first. And if both of us together decide, you know, we need some other voices on this, I’ve got some men in my life that I go to from time to time; and I’ll say, “Brothers, this is what’s going on in my life, this is what’s going on in the ministry. Give me your counsel. What do you think?” There’s wisdom in doing that.

So read, study, and obey God’s Word; pray for wisdom, seek godly counsel; and then Proverbs 3:5 and 6 it: “Trust in the Lord with all of your heart, lean not unto your own understanding. But in all of your ways acknowledge Him, and” – He might direct your paths; He’ll direct your paths if He’s got nothing better to do – “He will direct your paths.” How does God do that? I don’t have the slightest idea, I just know He does.

Friends, He spoke the universe into existence; I think He can direct our paths. You don’t have to worry, “Oh, well if I choose this when I really should have chosen this, everything’s just going to fall apart and unravel like a row of dominoes.” Relax. Relax. He spoke the universe into existence; He can certainly direct your paths.

Read, study, and obey God’s Word. Pray for wisdom. Seek godly counsel. And then, make a wise informed decision; trust the providence of God and do whatever you want to do. You don’t have to seek a special word of knowledge or will for your particular life or your situation. In fact, we don’t even see anyone in the New Testament doing this. We see the apostles just doing things.

Look as a couple of examples. Paul writes in Titus. Paul says, “I have decided to spend the winter at Nicopolis.” Paul didn’t say, “I prayed and asked the Lord to give me a word of knowledge of where I should spend the winter.” “I decided to spend the winter in Nicopolis.” Paul stayed in Athens by himself and he sent Timothy because, “We thought it best. We thought it best to do it.”

You just see the apostles doing things. And on occasion, like in Acts chapter 16, you see God’s providence hindering them from doing things that they had planned on doing. Like Paul wanted to go into Asia, and the Spirit of Christ hindered him, closed that door. So Paul went to Europe and Turkey, modern-day Turkey, and the gospel leaped from one continent to the next, and Lydia was converted. So you see God occasionally just providentially altering their paths, but you don’t see the apostles, “Lord, show me Your will for my life”; they just did things. They went out and they preached the gospel. They did things.

And dear friends, Paul makes a beautiful statement to the Colossians. He says this in Colossians chapter 3. He says, “Let the word of Christ dwell richly within you. Let the word of Christ dwell richly within you.” The more the word of Christ, this Book, dwells richly within us, the more that our thinking, the more that our decision-making will just be naturally conformed into what God would have us to do. So let the word of Christ dwell richly within you. Read, study, and obey God’s Word, and you will be making wise, God-honoring decisions.

In closing, these things cannot coexist. These things cannot coexist: a belief that God still speaks today outside of Scripture and a belief, an affirmation of a closed Canon of Scripture. Those two things cannot exist. If God is still speaking today outside of Scripture, then whatever He says is just as authoritative as any verse in this Book, and so we should add it to this Book; and so we have an open Canon of Scripture. If God is still speaking outside of Scripture, then this is not closed, this is still an open Canon. You cannot have your canonical cake and eat it too.

This cannot coexist: a continuest position on the apostolic gifts and the sufficiency of Scripture. You cannot hold to a continuest position on the apostolic gifts: the gifts of prophecy in the sense of foretelling the future, the gift of miracles and healing, the gift of tongues, interpretation of tongues – those apostolic gifts. If you believe that all of those apostolic gifts, sign gifts continue today, those sign gifts are by nature revelatory. They are revelatory in their nature. So if those gifts continue, then you cannot also affirm the sufficiency of Scripture; they are mutually exclusive positions. And even the most careful, quote-unquote, of “charismatics” cannot with a clear conscience in the logical consistency hold to the sufficiency of Scripture. They are mutually exclusive positions. Once you take a continuous position on the apostolic gifts, then the sufficiency of Scripture’s out the window, it’s gone, it’s gone. They’re mutually exclusive.

Does God speak to us? Or, you know, you hear people say, “Well, God gave me a burden for so and so. God laid you on my heart.” We hear that kind of lingo. Can God do these things? It’s not a matter of whether or not He can do anything. God could do it, of course. God can do whatever He wants to do. God could put a leprechaun in my refrigerator if He wanted to, but I’ve got no reason to think that He will, and an awful lot of reasons to think that He won’t. It’s not a matter of God’s ability, okay.

And I hear, “Oh, well you’re putting God in a box. You’re saying God can’t speak.” I’m not saying He can’t. It’s not that He lacks the ability. The question is whether or not He is. In Hebrews 1:1 and 2, Romans 10, all these things, very clear that God speaks to us in His Word, not outside of Scripture. It’s not a matter of His ability. “But God laid you on my heart.”

To give you an example: I grew up in Mississippi, and one of my good childhood friends, a man named Chad. And Chad still lives in Mississippi, Kathy and I live in Montana; I hardly ever see Chad anymore. But from time to time, you know, I’ll be doing whatever during the day, and I might think about Chad; and you know, maybe I’ll pray for Chad. Did God bring Chad in my remembrance? I don’t know; maybe I just thought about Chad.

We don’t have any mechanism to know when God may or may not be laying someone on our heart – to use that lingo. We have no mechanism to know that, so it’s really a moot point, it doesn’t matter. Just do like the apostles and just do things. Read, study, and obey God’s Word.

This from Spurgeon. Spurgeon says, “I have little confidence in those persons who speak of having direct revelations from the Lord as though He appeared otherwise than by and through the gospel. His Word is so full, so perfect that for God to make any fresh revelation to you or to me is quite needless. To do so would be to put a dishonor upon the perfection of that Word indeed.”

Dear friends, if you want to hear God speak to you, there’s one way I guarantee you you will hear God speak: read your Bible. If you want to hear God speak to you audibly, read it out loud. One hundred percent guaranteed, He will speak; you will hear Him speak.

“How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord, is laid for your faith in – what? – in His excellent Word. What more can He say than to you He hath said, to you who for refuge to Jesus have fled.” What more can He say to us, dear ones, than what He has already said in His Word? God’s Word is sufficient. Let’s close in a word of prayer.

Father, what a – just an unspeakable comfort it is to us to know that You are sovereign, that You have provided for us Your Word that is not only inerrant and that is not only infallible; it is also sufficient, that it is everything that we need to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. It’s everything that we need pertaining to life and godliness. Father, restore in us a confidence in the sufficiency of Your Word, for the glory of Christ our King. It’s in His name we pray. Amen.

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Hebrews 4:12