It still amazes me how those in "churchdom" cannot see or figure out what is REALLY going on. What do I mean by that? To be specific, I am referring to the 1st Amendment. I'm sure you may have heard it or be familiar with. To refresh ones's memory it is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

It's pretty simple. Even the "church" understands it. Did you know that the "church" is a tax exempt entity? If you do not know what that means, a study on your part would be good (hint, hint). 

Recently, with the veto of the bill in Georgia, people are crying out that the "church's" 1st Amendment right is being violated. When in fact, for the most part, the "church" by and large waved their 1st Amendment rights for the 501(c)3 privileges. What? You read that right. The "church", mostly out of ignorance, went to the government and asked to become a non-profit corporation and receive benefits from the government. The "church" made a "covenant", an agreement to abide by government rules so they can be a non-profit corporation. Therefore, the "church" has left their status under the 1st Amendment to receive the governments 501(c)3 status.

So the "church" must abide by what the government declares as except-able, like LGTB movement and their marriage. My blog post on 3/26/16 has shown a number of things that the "church" must abide by in order to remain compliant and not receive penalties like fines, jail time and even revocation of their non-profit status.

Why then do "churches" remain under the sanctions of the government through the 501(c)3? That is a good question! The answer will vary, but I have found that one reason is because of ignorance. They simply do not understand that they are not considered a "church" since the day they submitted to the government to be a non-profit corporation. Another reason I have found personally is money. Yes, money. Will the preacher have to get a "real" job now to support himself? Will they be able to pay the mortgage on the building? Will people stop giving if it doesn't show on their W2's? You can see why money is an issue.

Yet, what would Jesus do? Did He go to Caesar to build His "church"? No. Do we read in the book of Acts that Paul established the "church" in each community by going to the government , filling out forms, etc.? No. 

So, where does your "church" stand? If you are a non-profit, you are not really being persecuted. You are being disciplined be the government for not abiding by the agreement that you made with them. Preachers often sight Romans 13 as why we are to obey the government. They also like to use Acts 5:29 when they refuse to abide by the agreement. If your "church" would wake up and see the "truth" of their status as a non-profit corporation and NOT as a "church" you would think that they would get out of it. If they don't you will have to question why. Think of the spiritual implications. What is pleasing before God? What will you and your "church" do?

If you would like to learn more, you can read my blog post on 3/26/16 for starters.

A week ago I sent out a link to a  "preacher"  friend mine to read that was concise and informative. The reason I sent it was because all week long he had a rant going on about the direction of this nation. I did make a comment about his ignorance on the matter and that of his friends that were praising him. One person responded to me with the same gibberish. In which I replied back and that was it. Then my "preacher" friend made a new post "I wanted to be Joshua, Gideon, David or Nehemiah but I'm Jeremiah! cry emoticon ‪#‎weepingprophet‬". Therefore I sent him a link to help open his eyes on what is wrong with our culture and "church". He has yet to even acknowledge it. Anyway, I share with you the link and a follow up letter I had prepared (with a few modifications to help the readers of this blog).

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/501-church.html

You spoke about being like unto the prophet Jeremiah. I know you, I understand that. Yet there is another prophet that come to my mind when thinking of the "churches" spiritual condition and it may come as a surprise to you. That prophet is none other than Balaam!

You know the story how Moab tried to get Balaam to curse God's people, yet all he ever did was bless them! Yet, Balaam was greedy for gain and came up with a plan for the king to get God's people to sin through idolatry and fornication.

 14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. (KJV) Rev. 2:14

Yet, the "church" and her preachers have committed spiritual adultery with the world by joining herself with a wicked multitude, according to the arrangement and order of the government in the form of a 501(c)3.

 4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. (KJV) James 4:4

2889 ko,smoj kosmos {kos'-mos}

Meaning: 1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government 2) ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3 3) the world, the universe 4) the circle of the earth, the earth 5) the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race 6) the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ 7) world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly 7a) the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ 8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort 8a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc) 8a) of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19
Origin: probably from the base of 2865; TDNT - 3:868,459; n m
Usage: AV - world 186, adorning 1; 187

Do you realize that by being a 501(c)3 you have joined yourself to all kinds of wickedness? Look at the list of others that are also 501(c)3's. All kinds of false religions! Are we to be unequally yoked with them? Are we to have communion (joint participation) with them? Are we not called to be separate from them?

 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
  7:1 Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. (KJV) 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1

From the article I shared with you "The Truth About Church Incorporation", you should be able to see the spiritual adultery connection. Yet, I am reminded of other passages of Scripture where we are told to beware that we are not lead away from the truth unto something other than we learned from Christ. Remember the slogan "All things Bible"?

 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (KJV) Col. 2:8

Do you know the difference between what is lawful and was is legal? That which is lawful comes from God. That which is legal originates from man. Therefore the whole 501(c)3 is not lawful, but rather legal! Remember that Jesus told Pilate that His "kingdom is not of this world"? (Jn. 18:36)

Speaking of legal, let me ask you some questions.

1. Where in Scripture do you see the "church" going to Caesar to start a "church"? I don't remember Paul doing this on his missionary journeys.
2. Where in Scripture to we see that the giving of the saints, some refer to it as tithing, doesn't belong to the "church", rather the government, which is it's head?
3. Where do we find that the preacher needs to be licensed (ordained) by the government to be able to conduct business?

Question one, you should have receive enough information in the article I sent you to answer that. But how about number two? The article touched on it some, but I wanted to add a little more to it.
Now if people are bringing all their tithe into the storehouse (Mal. 3:10), where do we find in Scripture that they get some of their tithe back every year? If you are a 501(c)3 state "church" you get a portion of your tithe back every year! Remember "All things Bible"! So because they are bringing all their tithe into the storehouse and not robing God, the government rewards their faithfulness by giving some of it back?! How does not letting your left hand know what your right hand is doing (Mt. 6:3) apply, since all contributions are recorded, and that record is given back to them so they can prove to the government that they gave to a certain corporation ("church") that they may get some of it back? Do they have to do this? No! But most do for the money and, or on account of their ignorance on this matter. Remember, "All things Bible"!

I also like what former IRS commissioner Roscoe Edgar said, "The IRS for many years has had the right to examine church records, because churches have been collecting taxes for many years for the government; the churches therefore hold in trust that which belongs to the government. We have a right to examine church records to see if the churches are handling funds properly."

Well, how about that. I am quite sure the former commissioner knows what he's talking about. That also reminds me of something else. Why is it that so many "church" buildings are used for government elections? Could it be that they have a license from the government to conduct business? Hmm.

Where in Scripture do we find that a preacher or the school of their education is licensed or state accredited? I "searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so". (Acts 17:11) Truly, it's our Lord that gives us gifts to minister (Rom. 12, 1 Cor. 12, Eph. 4). Yet, for example, by whose authority do you marry a couple? By God's or by man? Do you sign, seal, a government marriage license? By whose authority do you join that couple together by? By man's of course!

 23 And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?
 24 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.
 25 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
 26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.
 27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. (KJV) Mt. 21:23-27

The following are some requirements for 501(c)3's that can be found in the Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service Publication 1826 (9-94) Cat. no. 21096G, that a 501(c)3 must observe:

1.  Have a recognized creed and IRS approved form of worship.
2.  Have IRS approved code of doctrine and discipline.
3.  Have ordained ministers educated in State accredited colleges.
4.  Pastor must answer to the IRS as to daily activities of the church.
5. The IRS must be privy to all financial transactions of the church.
6.  Pastor must supply names of all donors – make books, records available.
7. Be neutral on political issues.
8. Be engaged in activities furthering exclusively public purposes.
9. Open its services to the public.
10. Submit names of all church workers; pastors, teachers, clerks, counselors, educational directors, office help, associates, and maintenance personnel.
11. Not publicly oppose licensing of church ministries.
12. Give unlimited submission to civil magistrates pertaining to all laws – federal, state, and local – including public policy.
13.  May only use IRS approved fundraising methods.

All things Bible, right! So by whose authority do you choose to function by? If you are a 501(c)3, or a licensed preacher, or have an approved degree from an state accredited institution; then your authority is by your sovereign, the state and not Jesus Christ! You may say that Jesus is the head of the body you belong to, but that doesn't make it so. You chose to leave Jesus as your head and chose the state to be your head instead.

Back in colonial times there were preachers like Isaac Backus and John Leland who had a significant impact on the matters of Church and State relations. Leland for example believed that the "Government has no more to do with religious opinions of men than it has with principles of mathematics".

In 1785, a bill came up in the Virginia Legislature to tax the people to pay pastors. The Hanover Presbyterians opposed the bill in a memorial.

Throughout James Madison's life he fought against taxing people to support pastors and against "church" incorporation. In the debate on the infamous "Religious Assessments Bill" he noted a list of the evils that would follow assessments and "church" incorporation. He believed that:

1. Regulation of religion is not within civil power,
2. Religion needs no 'artifical props'.
3. History proves religious Establishments were detrimental, and
4. These benefits would 'entangle the state' in determining which were Christian and which were heretical.

So even in Colonial America there was a push to have "churches" incorporate, yet many resisted the temptation. Why today are people so comfortable in their 501(c)3's? Knowing that it's not necessary for any "church" to go to the government to come under the umbrella of it's favors with a 501(c)3 status? So why would Jesus' disciples want to grant their jurisdiction to the IRS?  In the words of a former IRS Senior Revenue Officer, Steve Nestor:

“I am not the only IRS employee who’s wondered why churches go to the government and seek permission to be exempted from a tax they didn’t owe to begin with, and to seek a tax deductible status that they’ve always had anyway.  Many of us have marveled at how church leaders want to be regulated and controlled by an agency of government that most Americans have prayed would just get out of their lives.  Churches are in an amazingly unique position, but they don’t seem to know or appreciate the implications of what it would mean to be free of government control.”  From the Forward of In Caesar’s Grip, by Peter Kershaw

I wondered that too! Yet, I also wonder why would a "church" would want to remain in Caesar's grip. Remember, all things Bible! Who are you a slave, a servant to? God? Or rather to the dictates of man? Do you honestly believe that God is pleased that you sought out someone else to be your head. A way to conduct business (the Lord's work) in a manner or pattern that you have not learned of Him from the Scriptures? Do you acknowledge God in all your ways? (Prov. 3:6)

You are one who weeps over the sins of the nation and the Lord's "church", yet you will not separate yourself from the wickedness of the 501(c)3? Examine yourself. (2 Cor. 13:5) Will you, or will you not come out? I have talked with a number of preachers about this and they all pretty much answer the same, "not now, only when we are forced to". It is my duty to share. What you do, is your choice.

Well, there is the follow up letter that I never sent due to the fact my friend didn't correspond with me on the link. To add to this topic is a list that Texe Marrs of Power of Prophecy put out in a "special report" (something that I have kept on file) from his then Living Truth Ministries which it is no longer referred to by due to it being incorporated. His new ministry no longer has attachment to the government. In this report he lists "35 prohibitions on churches and ministries" which are as follows:

1. Expose conspiracies.

2. Criticize the New World Order

3. Say or publish anything negative about ANY politician, Republican or Democrat.

4. Criticize government agencies and bureaus – the IRS, FBI, BATF, CIA, EPA, DEA, OSHA, DOJ, etc. 

5. Criticize an institution of government such as the White House, the Congress, the Federal Reserve Board (even though this is a PRIVATE corporation) or the Supreme Court.

6. Encourage citizens to call or write their congressman, senator, governor, mayor, or other public official.

7. Criticize any proposed or pending bill or legislation that would take away the rights and freedoms of the people.

8. Make disparaging remarks about, or criticize, any other faith group, cult, or religion.

9. Expose or criticize the New Age Movement.

10. Support or encourage a law-abiding citizen’s militia (even though this is constitutional).

11. Support or encourage the Second Amendment, the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

12. Discourage young women from getting an abortion, or endorse the pro-life movement.

13. Teach that abortion, especially partial birth abortion, is murder and is the killing of innocent babies.

14. Identify homosexuality as a sin and an abomination to God.

15. Express an opinion on any subject or issue.

16. Appeal to peoples’ emotions by employing an evangelization method (such as “fire and brimstone” preaching) not considered a “reasoned approach” by the IRS.

17. Discuss or identify threats to Christianity.

18. Discuss subjects or topics the IRS deems “sensationalist.”

19. Criticize well-known public figures or institutions the IRS deems “worthy,” such as the super-rich elite, international bankers, the Hollywood movie industry, etc.

20. Publish or broadcast information on any topic without giving credence to the opposing viewpoints of Christ’s enemies.

21. Publish and offer books, tapes, or products that expose the elitist plot against humanity and God.

22. Criticize the Pope or the Vatican, or contrast the New Catholic Catechism with the truths found in the Holy Bible.  (Note: only liberal churches are permitted by the IRS to criticize the Catholic Church).

23. Criticize the United Nations or such globalist groups as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderbergers, and the Trilateral Commission.

24. Criticize the Masonic Lodge, the Order of Skull & Bones, or other Secret societies.

25. Highlight or otherwise bring attention to immorality of public officials or corruption in government.

26. Complain of government wrongdoing or injustice, such as happened at Waco, Ruby Ridge, and elsewhere.

27. Criticize the Jewish ADL or other Jewish lobby groups.

28. Say anything positive about the “religious right” or the “patriot movement.”

29. Support home schooling, home churches, or unregistered churches.

30. Spend money on missionary projects or charitable causes not approved by the IRS.

31. Promote or encourage alternative healthcare (herbs, vitamins, etc.).

32. Expose false teachings of any kind by anyone.

33. Support or encourage persecuted Christians suffering under anti-Christian regimes in Red China, Cuba, Russia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and elsewhere.

34. Ordain a pastor whose training or qualifications are not approved by the  IRS.

35. Advocate or teach any Bible doctrine that is politically or religiously incorrect, or is inconsistent with any “public policy” (abortion, feminism, gay rights, etc.) currently being enforced by the IRS.

I can't help but note that in December of 1997 the IRS visited his ministry to investigate. You can learn more about that from his program titled "Is The Government Using the IRS to Takeover and ControlAmerica's Churches?" (program number 4398). Later, on a program, some time after September of 2004, titled Queers, Masons, Illuminati Con Men, And Other Televangelists (program number 4104) he made some interesting comments about his ministry saying:

"See friends, this is why Power of Prophecy does not have 501(c)3 privileges. We have never gone to the IRS and said 'please give us tax exempt status'..." then he rants on about it for a moment then again states "No, we have never done that."

Why he doesn't tell his audience that he was once a 501(c)3 on that program, but actually denies it is beyond me.

Well, that is the end of this blog. Much reading for sure, with the link, the letter, and extra. Time will tell if I revisit this article. Until next time.

I'm sure some of you have heard about Alabama Governor Robert Bently admitting that he made sexual comments to an adviser. If not, here is link:

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2016/03/gov_bentley_admits_he_made_sex.html

Why do I bring this up? This is something that happens everyday right? True, it does, but I thought it would be good to look at this because of something that Gov. Bently said. What could that be? I the above link you can find it, but I will share it here with you. First, the news article noted that "his inappropriate comments to Mason were as far as it went." Mason being the married woman he made the comments to. He only talked dirty to her, never touched her physically. 

Bently also said, "I want everyone to know though that I have never had a physical affair with Mrs. Mason. I can assure the people of Alabama I have never done anything illegal. I have never asked any member of my staff or any cabinet member to lie despite what the former ALEA secretary said today." Notice he said that he didn't do "anything illegal". That right there is what is wrong with our society, our culture, our nation today! Do you follow what I am saying? Let me explain it more clearly. “Legal” looks more to the letter [form/appearance], and “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law. So, there is a difference between "legal" and "lawful". We see Jesus do this in the Book  of Matthew:

Matthew 5:21-28

 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

 23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

 25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

 27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (KJV)

The last couple verses are more relevant for this topic. Jesus said that if you look at someone else to lust after them you have committed adultery already in your heart. You may never physically do the act, but entertaining the thoughts are as equal as committing the act. So Bently, apparently entertained such thoughts. As followers of Christ we are to be 'Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ". (2 Cor. 10:5) God does know our thoughts:

Prov. 15:11

 11 Hell and destruction are before the LORD: how much more then the hearts of the children of men? (KJV)

Jer. 17:10

 10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings. (KJV)

In any case, we know that Bently spoke inappropriate things to Mrs. Mason. Scripture tells us that we will be judged by our words:

Matthew 12:36-37

 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (KJV)

Yet the Lord gives us much instruction on how we are to speak. The following are some examples:

Eph. 4:29

 29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. (KJV)

Col. 3:8-9

 8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.

 9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; (KJV)

Eph. 5:1-6

 1 Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;

 2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.

 3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

 4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

 5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

 6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. (KJV)

Notice that the wrath of God is coming for such. They are referred to as "children of disobedience". Yes, Jesus is coming again and will judge us.

Ecc. 12:13-14

 13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. (KJV)

many in our nation 

2 Cor. 5:10

 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. (KJV)

Acts 17:30-31

 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. (KJV)

Therefore, we see that Bently's admission doesn't mean that he has done nothing wrong, God's Word shows us otherwise. The governor's mindset is much like many in our nation today. A "heart that deviseth wicked imaginations" is an abomination to God (Prov. 6:16-18). Don't think that you are getting off the hook when you let your imagination run wild with wicked thought! God Knows your thoughts and will judge you! He even knows every word you speak, type or text and you will have to give an account of them!

So Gov. Robert Bently is an example to us  Are you examining yourself, whether you are in the faith? You should be!

2 Cor. 13:

 5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? (KJV)

#alabamagovernorbently

Have you ever asked, "Where did the doctrine of the pretribulation rapture come from?", or did you just assume that it came from the pages of Scripture? The following is an article from an old acquaintance that will reveal the origin of this doctrine. It is rather a new, man-made doctrine as you shall soon see.

X-RAYING MARGARET

by
Dave MacPherson

---

(For several decades some pretrib leaders have deceitfully isolated Margaret Macdonald's posttrib-resembling statement "The trial of the Church is from Antichrist" to try to establish that she was posttrib. I have in mind leaders like R. A. Huebner, Charles Ryrie, Thomas Ice, and Frank Marotta. Like terrorists who destructively orchestrate mass confusion so that they can personally benefit, they had to have known that partial rapturism----Margaret's view----sees a pretrib rapture of PART of the church while also seeing the REST of the church enduring a future tribulation. The following "X-ray" is found on pp. 169-174 in my 1983 book The Great Rapture Hoax.)

Professor Ryrie wonders how Margaret can declare that "the trial of the Church is from Antichrist" (lines 85-86) and speak of "the fiery trial which is to try us" (line 65) if the Church will "be caught up" before Antichrist arrives (lines 39-40). Apparently he's unaware of the terminology used by Partial Rapturists.

First of all, "Church" can denote the sum total of true believers on earth at any given moment. (Actually, in a larger sense, it refers to all such believers who are to live diuring the Church age. Conceivably most of the Church is now with the Lord; they are the dead in Christ who will also participate in the catching up.) Margaret has a message for all of the Church of her time (note "all" in line 14): some will be Spirit-filled and raptured, while others will be left on earth. She thus divides the Church; those left behind are properly called "Church." She even divides the ones left behind, for "many" (lines 62, 71) will fall away and there will be "stony-ground hearers" (line 71).

Margaret uses "us" and "we" in her second division (after the catching up) in an identifying, compassionate way----and not in a self-involving way. Again she states that "all should be filled" (line 93), but she knows that some, including possibly her friends, will be "turning from Jesus" (line 94), "not entering in" (line 95), "passing the cross" (line 97), "looking from the cross" (line 100), and so on. Although she is sympathetic towards those who won't be raptured (and doesn't really know who will be raptured), she herself wants to be in the Rapture and prays for it (lines 113-115); she doesn't expect to be left behind. (Even Hal Lindsey can use "we" while not including himself! See The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon, pp. 28, 32. Is he himself a farmer? Has he himself seen a UFO?)

Although Margaret employs "us" and "we" and "our" in a self-involving way in parts of her revelation, she stands back and uses detached expressions more frequently when referring to Christians: all, men, his people, those who have the light of God, those that are alive in him, spiritual temple, his body, the church, candlestick, temple, bride, she, the people of God, man, those who were filled with the Spirit, the one taken, the very elect, the real members of the body of Jesus, those...counted worthy to stand before the Son of man, the body, the servants of God, and so on. (Even in her second division she uses detached terms more frequently than "us" and "we."

What about "Church"? Can Partial Rapturists use this term when describing those left behind after a Rapture?

We've already noted the June, 1831 article by "Fidus" in The Morning Watch. He spoke of a first-stage catching up, then mentioned  (p. 277) "the people of God who are left, and who alone shall know the event happened to their brethren...." On page 280, while referring to the seven churches of Revelation, he mentioned "all the churches, all the seven, the complete church of Christ." (Even Laodicea, the group left behind, is part of the Church.) In the December, 1831 issue of the same journal, the same writer, speaking about the reign of Antichrist, declared on page 277: "That a part of the church shall be so tried, I believe." (Those left behind are Church members.)

When Margaret uses "Church" in her second division, she means part of the Church----the part left behind. Do later Partial Rapturists connect "Church" with those left behind? Does later Partial Rapturism see the "Church" on earth when the Matthew 24 coming arrives?

In an article entitled "Seven Prophetic Parables and Seven Churches" which appeared in the June, 1888 issue of The Prophetic News and Israel's Watchman, G. H. Pember wrote on p. 175: "Philadelphia, then, is taken away, but Laodicea is spued out of Christ's mouth and left behind....The Lord is not in the midst of this fallen church; He has moved outside. Yet He lingers, and knocks at the door, if, perchance, any man----not the whole Church----should hear His voice."

Robert Govett, whom John Walvoord mentions in his latest book, included similar reasoning in his book Christ the Head; the Church His Body (1890). On pp. 194-195 he said: "'Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man, coming in the clouds of heaven.' 'Then ye also shall be manifested together with Him in glory.' This appearing of Christ ends the Church, considered as a body under trial on the earth." (The Church, then, is still on earth after the first-stage coming, according to Partial Rapturists. And Margaret properly used "Church" when she described true believers left behind.)

Even Walvoord unwittingly adds fuel to the fire in The Rapture Question (Revised). On p. 97 he says that Partial Rapturism teaches that only the faithful of the Church will be in the Rapture, while the rest will be raptured later on. The rest of what? Although he doesn't say it, the answer can only be the rest of the Church! If the ones left behind are the only part of the Church on earth after the Rapture, they can be described properly as the Church----the term Margaret and other Partial Rapturists have used.
On the same page Walvoord also refers to Partial Rapturists as Pre-Tribs (Pre-Tribs who see part of the Church raptured in a first-stage coming instead of all of the Church). If today's Partial Rapturism can be labeled Pre-Trib, as Walvoord labels it, even though the earliest Partial Rapturists taught a much smaller gap than Partial Rapturists teach today, it isn't difficult to believe that Walvoord's brand of Pre-Trib also had the same small gap in its earliest days, which is exactly what we've discovered.

Margaret and the Irvingites influenced Darby and the Brethren far more than the latter influenced the former. As we've seen, the former came up with the framework of Pre-Trib much sooner than the latter did. It isn't surprising then to find out that the earliest Brethren (and even Darby) were influenced during their initial development by Partial Rapturism!

Although he doesn't go into much detail, Harold Rowdon's The Origins of the Brethren does reveal several early Brethren who, at the first, were under the spell of the Partial Rapturistic Irvingites; Rowdon includes (see primarily his third chapter) H. B. Bulteel, a Mr. Douglas, Captain Percy Hall (who taught a secret Rapture in 1831 at Plymouth), A. N. Groves, Lord Congleton (John Parnell), G. V. Wigram, a Mr. Clarke, J. B. Stoney----and Darby himself! (I find myself writing these words on April 29, 1982----the 100th anniversary of Darby's death.)

Darby's Letters reveal the impression Partial Rapturism made on himself and other early Brethren. In a letter dated August 19, 1833 (Vol. 1, pp. 22-24), he mentioned that a Rev. Hardman had been promoting such a view; Hardman believed that Philadelphia would be raptured away and that Laodicea would be left behind. Darby summarizes Hardman's view of Laodicea by writing: "And then the church left in its Laodicean state...." (Note that Darby refers to those left behind as the "church"----the term Margaret and others used.) Referring again to Partial Rapturism, Darby says: "It is an important consideration in the present state of things. It commends itself morally to one's mind." Near the end of the letter Darby writes: "He will surely draw substantially His saints together before the end come, though there may be some left in...."

In the same volume (p. 58), Darby comments on the Tribulation in an 1843 letter: "It may be some will pass through, but I am more than ever confirmed that it is not presented to our faith, but the contrary, and that the faithful will be kept from it." In the next sentence, while using the same language employed by Partial Rapturists today, he speaks of "greater faithfulness which made us escape it." In a letter written on May 1, 1848 (same source, p. 132) Darby declares: "Signs, I judge, are for those who have not been faithful enough to keep or find the bride's position...." (Note the stress on faithfulness----a Partial Rapturistic works principle.)

In lines 82-83 Margaret misquoted part of Luke 21:36, a verse that is often used by today's Partial Rapturists. Note that she didn't use it in the usual Partial Rapturistic manner, although the Irvingites often did in The Morning Watch; "Fidus," for example, did so on p. 280 in the December, 1831 issue. In later decades many others were touched by this viewpoint. A. B.Simpson was one. In his "Queries" column (The Christian Alliance, December 7, 1894), Simpson quoted this verse and then added:    

"It would seem perfectly clear, from these words, that those who watch and pray shall prevail to escape the Tribulation, and shall be caught up to stand before the Son of man. We cannot help believing that there will be a portion of God's true people in a state of readiness for His coming, and there will be other Christians, like the 'foolish virgins,' found unprepared, and excluded from the first and highest place in connection with His Millennial Kingdom." (Note the word "portion.")

Today's Pre-Trib Rapture view actually sprang from a crude form of Partial Rapturism; Margaret Macdonald was followed by the Irvingites and then by the Plymouth Brethren during their early days. A person can truthfully say that gold has been discovered in a certain place even if the first gold is mixed with some silver; it's still called a gold strike. All Darby did later on was mill out the "silver"----and Pre-Trib teachers have been coming up with "pure gold" since then. (Those who reject this explanation would do well to remember that even Walvoord's latest book classifies Partial Rapturists as Pre-Tribs. Indeed, both schools of thought flow from the same headwaters.)

Easter

As the time for the observance of Easter, by some, approaches, I thought that I would investigate some things concerning one of the holiest days of the year for Christianity. My aim is to make this as short and brief as possible.

One has to start by asking if Easter is even Scriptural. Is it something that we see the "church" observing? We do find the word Easter in some translations:

Acts 12:4

And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

On appearance it seems that Easter is in Scripture, yet if we look at the Greek we discover that the word Easter is a mistranslation. In fact, it is referring to the "Jewish" holy day of Passover.

3957 pa,sca pascha {pas'-khah}
Meaning: 1) the paschal sacrifice (which was accustomed to be offered for the people's deliverance of old from Egypt) 2) the paschal lamb, i.e. the lamb the Israelites were accustomed to slay and eat on the fourteenth day of the month of Nisan (the first month of their year) in memory of the day on which their fathers, preparing to depart from Egypt, were bidden by God to slay and eat a lamb, and to sprinkle their door posts with its blood, that the destroying angel, seeing the blood, might pass over their dwellings; Christ crucified is likened to the slain paschal lamb 3) the paschal supper 4) the paschal feast, the feast of the Passover, extending from the 14th to the 20th day of the month Nisan
Origin: of Aramaic origin cf 06453; TDNT - 5:896,797; n n
Usage: AV - Passover 28, Easter 1; 29

Therefore Easter is not actually found in Scripture.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary Easter had a pre-"Christian" origin, namely a festival in honor of Eostre, the Teutonic dawn-goddess, as well as the goddess of fertility. Also known as:

• Eostre, Eastre, Eostra, or Ostara
• Eos, the Greek dawn goddess
• Usha or Ushas, the Hindu dawn goddess
• Ishtar of Assyia
• Astarte, Ashtaroh, Ashtoreth and the queen of heaven.

Of interesting note, the Scriptures to mention the queen of heaven. The book of Jeremiah has some things to say about the queen of heaven and those that worship her. It's not a pretty picture.

Jer. 7:16-21

 16 Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee.
 17 Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem?
 18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.
 19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces?
 20 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched.
 21 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.

Jer. 44:16-23

 16 As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the LORD, we will not hearken unto thee.
 17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.
 18 But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.
 19 And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men?
 20 Then Jeremiah said unto all the people, to the men, and to the women, and to all the people which had given him that answer, saying,
 21 The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, ye, and your fathers, your kings, and your princes, and the people of the land, did not the LORD remember them, and came it not into his mind?
 22 So that the LORD could no longer bear, because of the evil of your doings, and because of the abominations which ye have committed; therefore is your land a desolation, and an astonishment, and a curse, without an inhabitant, as at this day.
 23 Because ye have burned incense, and because ye have sinned against the LORD, and have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, nor walked in his law, nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies; therefore this evil is happened unto you, as at this day.

We see in these passages that God sent the prophet Jeremiah to warn God's people against worshiping the queen of heaven. Yet they did not obey the voice of the Lord and continued to worship the queen of heaven, which is part of the reason God led them away to be captives of the Babylonians. If God was displeased with it then, do you think that He would be okay with it now?

How about those Easter eggs? It wouldn't be Easter without them right? The rabbit, hare, or bunny was associated with the pagan goddess of Ishtar in her captivity as Aphrodite. It was a symbol of productivity and fertility. (Briannnica 14th Ed.)

Of interesting note even the Catholic Encyclopedia, the 1909 Edition, states that "A great may pagan customs, celebrating the return of spring, gravitated to Easter. The egg is the emblem of the germinating life of early spring...The rabbit is a pagan symbol and has always been a symbol of fertility."

According to Funk and Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend; "Children roll pasach eggs in England. Everywhere they hunt the many-colored Easter eggs, brought by the Easter rabbit. This is not mere child's play, but the vestige of a fertility rite, the eggs and the rabbit both symbolizing fertility. Furthermore, the rabbit was the escort of the Germanic Goddess Ostara who gave the name to the festival by way of the German Ostern" (1949 Ed.)

There are MANY more references I could share but I think you get the picture.

How about sunrise service? Well, as already noted above Easter is derived from dawn goddesses, so a sunrise service should be of no surprise. We have already read in the Scriptures of the queen of heaven and Tammuz. We see that God's people worshiped Tammuz at the rising of the sun. God called it an abomination.

Eze. 8:15-16

 15 Then said he unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations than these.
 16 And he brought me into the inner court of the LORD'S house, and, behold, at the door of the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the altar, were about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple of the LORD, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east.

This ties in with the Easter hams. Tammuz was killed by a bore (pig), though I won't get into that here. The pig was was sacred to the goddess Demeter, the corn goddess, a diety of abundance and fertility - a counterpart of Astarte or Easter. According to The Golden Bough, "The pig was sacred to her; in art she was represented carrying or accompanied by a pig; and the pig was regularly sacrificed in her mysteries...originally the pig was an embodiment of the corn-goddess herself"

Pigs and cakes of dough were traditionally thrown into the chasms of two similar gods, Demeter and Proerpine, which appear to have been sacred caverns or vaults. The heathens believed that by eating what represented and embodied their god - in this case swine- they were literally partaking of their god.

Notice the cakes? In Jeremiah we see that they made cakes to the queen of heaven. Because these cakes were made to the queen of heaven, they were marked with a cross, symbol for woman and also signifying life in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics. Hmmm. Hot cross buns!

Please forgive me for not speaking on Lent or Good Friday. I shared some information, even some tidbits to stir up your own appetite for study. What are we to do as followers of Christ? Be like a noble Berean (Acts 17:11), that you may be approved unto God (2 T. 2:15!

2 Cor. 6:14-7:1

 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

 7:1 Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

 1 Corinthians 8:1-13

 1 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.
 2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
 3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.
 4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
 5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
 7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
 8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
 9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
 10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
 11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
 12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
 13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

Until the next blog, grace and peace to you!

What a special day! Thought that I would post two blogs today! Have you ever wondered as you go to "church" how it got it's form or do you just go without a care in the world as to how the "church" became what you know (?) and love (?) today? Today, another history lesson to wet your appetite for more. Before I begin, did you notice that I italicized the word "church"  and placed it between quote marks? Well, I will get into that in another blog. Today, though we begin with the origin of "Sunday school".

The Origin Of Sunday School

Have you ever wondered were Sunday school originated? In this article I will give you a brief history on the origin of Sunday schools.

Sunday schools began as schools for the poor. They were created in England around the year 1780. The schools provided rudimentary instruction to working people on their free day. By the 1790’s there were several of these schools in the United States.

The Philadelphia schools were organized for the benefit of such persons of either sex (and of any age) as cannot afford to educate themselves, were run by the First Day Society, which paid teachers to instruct pupils in reading and copying from the Bible. [Thomas Laquer, Religion and Respectability: The English Sunday School and the Formation of a Respectable Working Class (New Haven 1977); Edwin Wilbur Rice, The Sunday-School Movement, 1780-1917 and the American Sunday-School Union, 1817-1917 (Philadelphia 1917)]

These schools had the additional purpose of controlling children’s activities. Employment of children in industries had brought together youth of similar ages who worked together on weekdays and spent their Sundays playing in alleys and wharves, to the great disturbance of the families in the vicinity of such places, and the profanation of the day. [Albert Matthews, Early Sunday Schools in Boston, (1919) p 280]

Sunday schools provided an alternative to Sunday rowdiness. The schools would also teach proper behavior, enforcing cleanliness, providing Sunday clothing, and reprimanding children for lying, swearing, talking in an indecent manner, or other misbehavior. [First Day Society Rules, in Board of Visitors Minutes, February 1, 1791, Presbyterian Historical Society.]

For the next three decades, Sunday schools were part of an informal network of free schools operated by various religious and philanthropic groups to provide rudimentary education to children of the poor. Depending on their sponsorship and frequency of meeting, these schools placed more or less emphasis on religious and moral instruction. Schools run by the New York Free School Society, for example, combined daily academic instruction with Sunday attendance at Sunday schools. In October 1811, Presbyterian missionary Robert May opened an evening Sunday school in Philadelphia in which, unlike previous free schools, he taught religious doctrine solely and without remuneration. Schools resembling May’s became increasingly common during the decade 1810-1820 as young, newly converted Protestants turned Sunday teaching as a means of expressing their newfound convictions. By 1820, there were several hundred Sunday schools in the United States. All emphasized religious instruction over reading and writing, although most taught the later subjects as a means of inculcating the former. Many Sunday school organizers, in fact, began lobbying for extension of a system of free daily schools so that they would be free to teach religion alone on Sundays. [Robert May Sunday School Minutebook, 1811-1812, Presbyterian Historical Society.]

Sunday schools then aimed at teaching basic Protestantism to children of the unchurched poor. The Bible provided the text for teaching the truths of the Gospel, a knowledge of which, Protestants believed, was essential for moral living and good citizenship. Knowledge of the Bible, they felt, would teach pupils the duty required of them as social, rational and accountable beings. [Kensington Sunday School Association Minutes, Constitution, 1817, Presbyterian Historical Society.]

Students busied themselves memorizing prescribed portions of the Old and New Testaments, and vying with each other for weekly prizes awarded those who memorized the largest number of verses. Grounding the memorization practice on the principle that so much Divine Truth lodged in the mind cannot fail of good effort, teachers encouraged students to commit to memory large portions of the Bible. [Buffalo Sunday School Union, Religious Intelligencer 4 (September 25, 1819): 270-271.]

Many schools used a ticket reward system whereby students received one blue ticket for every ten verses memorized, traded six blue tickets for one red, and eventually cashed in the red tickets at a value of one-half cent each toward purchasing Sunday school books or tracts. [Rice, Sunday-School Movement, p. 297; Frank Glenn Lankard, A History of the American Sunday School Curriculum (New York and Cincinnati, 1927), p.134.]

The assumptions behind memorization were soon challenged. Teachers quickly realized that pupils were often more motivated by a desire for red tickets than by a thirst for Bible knowledge. The heart is left unimproved by moral truth, complained a typical critic of the memorization-reward system (perhaps he had had to listen while an eager student recited the begats). Emphasizing the importance of understanding what one learned, Sunday school organizers began actively discouraging random memorization of Bible verses. [The Reward System, American Sunday School Magazine 5 (November, 1828): 322.]

This the season for some, therefore I thought that this week I would blog an old article I had done on the festival named after a man named Patrick.

St. Patrick's Day St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, the only definite statement to be made about his birthplace is that it was not in Ireland. He is said to have been born at Kilpatrick, near Dumbarton, Scotland; in a village close to Glastonbury, England; in Monmouthshire, England; in Tours, France; and in Wales. In his Confession, he tells us he was born at Bannavem Taberniae, but just where that was we do not know. He was, as far as anyone has been able to determine, a Britannic Celt, raised a Roman Catholic. The year of his birth is equally confused; A.D. 373, 386, 387, 389, 395, and sometime early in the fifth century have all been advanced as possible birth dates. He seems to have died in either 461 or about 492. One Irish legend states that he died at the age of one hundred twenty, as Moses did. Some scholars believe that there must have been at least two St. Patricks whose deeds have been ascribed to one man. According to them, this would also account for the long life span. The Irish scholar James Carney discounts this theory, holding that St. Patrick arrived in Ireland in 461 and not in the widely accepted 432. He says that "the Patrick of 432-461 is. . . merely a chronological phantom." Neither is it known whether March 17 was the birth or the death date of St. Patrick; it may in fact be neither. What we know of his life is taken from his two works: the Confession, a justification to his ecclesiastical superiors of his actions; and the public letter which he addressed to Coroticus, a British chief who raided Ireland, killing and enslaving Christian converts. His family was well respected. His father, Calpurnius, was the son of a priest, Potitus. Calpurnius was a deacon himself and also a member of the municipal council. At the age of sixteen Patrick was captured by Gaels and taken by boat to Ireland where he was sold as a slave. His six years of captivity were spent tending flocks. During this time he experienced a spiritual awakening and began to have dreams and visions which he considered to be divinely inspired. One of these dreams contained a message to escape, telling him that a ship would be lying ready for him. He made his escape and traveled two hundred miles to find his expected ship. Three days later he landed in either Britain or Brittany. Wandering through the barren countryside, Patrick and the crew avoided starvation when a herd of wild pigs appeared in answer to Patrick's prayers. He returned to his home, but once more the course of his life was directed by a dream. He saw a man approaching him, bearing a letter from the people of Ireland which urged him to free them from slavery; "We beseech thee, holy youth, to come and walk once more amongst us." The years preceding Patrick's election to the episcopate are not well documented. He is said to have studied at erins, the island monastery off southern France founded by St. Honoratus. He was a pupil of St. Germain of Auxerre, and in Auxerre he was ordained deacon by Bishop Amator. In the year 431, some say, he was a candidate for the vacancy in the Irish episcopate. However, a friend who had formerly wanted Patrick's election to this post revealed an unknown sin from Patrick's past which, with accusations of his lack of learning, was sufficient to deprive him of the job. Instead Palladius was ordained the first bishop of Ireland by Pope Celestine I. Palladius died the following year and Patrick was immediately made a priest and then a bishop. He went to Ireland and spent the rest of his life there. Many thousands of Irishmen were converted through his labors. He founded churches and schools, at least one college, and generally organized the Church of Ireland. St. Patrick and the Druids Missionaries had been to Ireland before him, but the country was still primarily ruled by the Druids. Though St. Patrick never claimed the performance of a miracle in his own writing, tales of his miraculous exploits against the troublesome Druids abound. Once, at Tara, he disrupted the pagan springtime New Year festival. All fires had been extinguished as the people waited for the High King Loaghaire to kindle the New Fire which they would take to their houses. St. Patrick seems to have appropriated the pagan custom and inaugurated the Easter fire in its stead, for he set his fire on the hill of Slane opposite the hill of Tara where the king would light his. The Druids complained to Loaghaire that the fire, lighted in defiance of his royal edict, would blaze forever there unless they extinguished it that very night. Nine chariots were sent against the saint, circling counter to the sun's path. But they were unable to prevail against the power of his holy fire. A torunament of miracles followed, reminiscent of Moses' contest with the Pharaoh's magicians. In dealing with the Druids, St. Patrick fought them with their own methods. He was forced, in his own words, "to curse their fertile lands, so that they became dreary bogs; to curse their rivers, so that they produced no fish; to curse their very kettles, so that with no amount of fire and patience could they ever be made to boil; and, as a last resort, to curse the Druids themselves, so that the earth opened and swallowed them up." His victory won him the right to preach Christianity throughout the land. The Shamrock and the Trinity One of the stories concerning St. Patrick which is often judged authentic, probably because of its simplicity and basis in human ingenuity, is the tale of the shamrock and the Trinity. The doctrine of Three Gods in One, each separate and distinct, yet each totally God, is claimed by Christians to be a mystery and is accepted on faith. In trying to teach his converts about the Trinity, St. Patrick held up a shamrock explaining that the three leaves represented the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, while the stem was the Godhead itself from which they proceeded. This is said to be the origin of the use of the Shamrock which is customarily worn on St. Patrick's Day. Scholars have discovered that the shamrock, or trefoil, was initially used in ancient Celtic fertility rites. It represented a triad of goddesses and its green leaves were burned and the ashes sprinkled over the fields to promote growth. Driving the Snakes Out of Ireland The expulsion of all the snakes from Ireland is certainly the most popular of the stories told about St. Patrick. Accompanied by the furious rat-a-tatting of a big drum, St. Patrick arrived at the hill from which he was going to banish the reptiles. The people who had gahtered to watch the spectacle cried out when the drum broke, because they believed St. Patrick's magic power wad dependent on it. A huge black snake slithered down the hill, laughing to see the saint so suddenly powerless. But just then an angel appeared and mended the drum. The drum was sounded and St. Patrick preached the sermon that drove the snakes and vermin from Ireland. Two stories are told about the last snake in Ireland. An old serpent who lived in Lake Dilveen gave St. Patrick such trouble that he was left in the lake with the promise that the bishop would return "on Monday" to destroy him. St. Patrick entirely forgot about him and the serpent is said to be still alive in Lake Dilveen. Every Monday he comes to the surface, looks about questioningly, and says, "It's been a long Monday, Patrick." According to the other story, the last snake refused to be driven away. St. Patrick had a box made and told the serpent to get in. "No," said the serpent, "it's too small." "Nonsense," said St. Patrick, "it's just your size, try it and see." "Very well," said the serpent, "I'll show you it's to small." So he crawled in, and sly St. Patrick snapped the lid shut and plunged the snake into the sea. Many other miracles were ascribed to St. Patrick. He was said to have raise his father and several other people from the dead. He burned snow to make a fire; caused demons in the shape of vultures to die int he sea; fooled the Druids by accepting wine they had poisoned, froze it, poured off the poison then melted the wine and drank it. His staff was supposed to have been given to him by Christ in a vision; it was a miraculous instrument and never left his side. A staff that was reported to be his was kept in the church at Armagh until the veneration rendered to it was thought to be superstition by the Protestants who burned it in the sixteenth century. Another tradition says that St. Patrick was granted by God the right to judge the Irish at the final judgment. After a life of strenuous missionary activity, St. Patrick died in either 461 or 492. His place of death is uncertain, although Saul-not far from Downpatrick-is usually named. His body was thought to have been buried under the Abbey of Downpatrick, in a shroud made for him by St. Brigid (who is also buied under the Abbey). A modern stone marks the spot. **Note: Taken from "Celebrations, The Complete Book of American Holidays" by Robert J. Myers.

Recently, I seen a discussion on euphemisms. One that came to the forefront was "OMG" Most that I seen in the discussion admitted to using it and didn't see anything wrong and seemed to have fun with it. It reminded me of several Scriptures such as James chapter 3, Mt. 12:34-37 as well as:

Prov. 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Prov. 14:9 Fools make a mock at sin: but among the righteous there is favour.

Prov. 10:19 In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin: but he that refraineth his lips is wise.

Prov. 18:21 Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.

Prov. 30: 11 There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother.

 12 There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.

It also brought to my remember an article by the late Harold Buckles on this subject 35 years ago!

CUSSERS AND CUSSING

 34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

 35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (KJV) Mt. 12:34-37

 29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. (KJV) Eph. 4:29

Have you ever heard of the great American SLANGUAGE? If you are one who uses slang or swear words, be sure to read this article. Maybe you are forced to be around this "blue air", either at home or at work. Perhaps you can gain something helpful here. Come alive!

"Less Brains Than A Fish"

If you "cuss", you have less brains than a fish! How do I know that? Ever sin the devil tempts men with is "baited" in one way or another - except cursing. If a man steals, he has a plan as to how he will use his ill gotten gains. Boozers are promised a feeling of security by the devil, some form of "high". BUT - what are CUSSERS offered? NOTHING! One man told me, "It helps to let off steam". I told him I knew that was just another of the devil's lies. See - I just used to hang around the CESS-pool halls. I've heard them cuss and then turn around and curse their own curse words. Cussers bite the devil's UNBAITED hook. Even a fish has more brains than to bite an unbaited hook!!

Cursing...A DEFINITION 

Just what is cursing? It has been defined as "a feeble mind attempting to express itself". Reader, if you have ever been afflicted with this asisnine, ungodly, wicked habit, you KNOW that we write the truth. One man defended his swearing by saying it was "just a habit. I don't mean anything by it". But this is excatly what God says is wrong with such speach.  7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Ex. 20:7 If you use the expression, "Oh God", and you don't mean it, you have taken His name in vain. Vain means empty, or without meaning.

One man swore in my presence and I rebuked him for it. He said, "Oh pardon me, I forgot you were a preacher". I told him he owed GOD an apology, not me, for it was HIS name which he had desecrated.

MINCED OATHS - By Words and Slang

You are PROFANE if you use sacred things in a meaningless, irreverent, or blasphemous way. A euphemism is the use of a less offensive word in place of an offensive one. Webster's Dictionary defines "Gosh" as a euphemism for God. This is a SOFTENED form of "God", used as a mild oath. You don't believe me? Look the following up for yourself:

1. Golly. A euphemistic substitute for God. (Webster's)

2. Heck. Slang. A euphemism for hell. (Webster's)

3. Darn. It means damn. (Funk and Wagnel's)

4. What the duce. Really means, what the devil. (Webster's)

5. Gee. Euphemistic contraction of Jesus. (Webster's)

Here are some others for you to check up on: Goh; Egad; Dickens; Goodness Gracious; My Goodness; For Goodness Sake; Zounds; My Heavens; or For Heaven's Sake.

Many who would not think of cursing, openly use slang words which are very closely akin. A large majority of the Christians I know use one or more of these "parlor forms of cussing", and think nothing of it! Such forms of "Slanguage" should be rigidly excluded from our speech.

Jesus said say "yes" or "no", and mean it, without any additions to make it STRONGER. He said that anything more comes from EVIL (Mt. 5:37) Any CHRISTIAN'S "yes" and "no" should be sufficient for his life backs up what he says.

"CUSS LIKE A MAN!"

The Catholic soft ball team was playing the Christ of Christ. Some of the Catholic boys were taking God's name in vain and using other forms of foul language. The Church of Christ preacher stepped out on the field saying since this was a CHURCH league game, he would take his team and go if any more foul language was used. The game turned and the Church of Christ fellows were losing. They began using slang words (some were listed earlier) with the same tone of voice the Catholics had used in swearing. One of the Catholic boys walked out on the field and said, "you little milk and water 'Christians', if you're going to cuss, why don't you cuss like men and use the real thing?"

In this ungodly age in which we live, women are becoming more and more brazen in their profane cussing. In my short life-time, I can remember when a man would not swear in the presence of a woman. But - "you've come a long way, baby". In one secular job I worked at a few years back, the two most profane "loud mouths" on the job were women! Such be-nighted souls only think they've been liberated.Yes, we've even had Presidents who were profane cussers. And it was so very nicely tape recorded so everyone could realize the extent of contamination in high places. But that"Expletive" was finally DELETED. 

Modern sprts seems to be honey combed with profanity. One high school coach I've known cursed the players roughly. Cursing in any form is NOT harmless.

The Cause and The Cure for Cussing

Jesus said that "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Mt. 12:34). Some swear to add "flavor" to their speech. But God has said, "let no corrupt speech proceed out of your mouth" (Eph 4:29). It is evident that God doesn't favor that flavor! Some curse when they are angry. One man said, "I never swear, except when I am angry". He was told that he may as well have said, "I never kill anyone, unless I am angry".

Only Christ can clean up a sinner's HEART. With the heart man believers unto righteousness, and then he can use his mouth the right way, to confess Christ (Rom. 10:9, 10). Once you are truly converted to Christ, baptized for the remission of your sins, you will want to say only what Christ wants you to say (cf. Acts 26:19, 20).

Here are some charges against profanity:

1. It sets a bad example for everyone.

2. It destroys the character of the one who swears, and pollutes the minds of the hearers.

3. It dishonors God, who created all things.

4. It destroys reverence for God.

5. Nothing good, helpful, or noble ever came from swearing.

6. Swearing does not encourage anyone to do what is right.

7. Swearing is a contempt for law, both God's and man's.

YOUR SPEECH

Become a true Christian. "Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man" (Col. 4:6).

Peter was asked if he was a follower of Christ (Mt. 26:71-74). He cursed and swore, saying "I know not the man". You don't have to say that you aren't a Christian. Just cuss, and everyone will know you are not one!

God made man's mouth (Ex. 4:11). God expects us to use that ability to praise Him! (Heb. 13:15) Do it.

Harold Buckles

Taken from:

GOOD READING - Volume 15 No. 4 - April - 1981