Should a preacher be an outspoken critic of government and politicians? Should soul winners take sides the political arena? When I first began doing it, the unanimous verdict was no. Now let me tell you an amazing story…
In 2011, I knew the greatest threat to America and the Gospel was going to come from Washington D.C. and Sacramento CA. The Holy Spirit led me to begin a blog and arm people with truth and Scriptural knowledge to combat the iron curtain that I saw coming down on our nation.
You would not believe the threats I got. Not just from left wing wackos, but from Christians. Church folk thought I was violating my calling and the left wingers said they were going to sick the IRS on me. Some leaders I really trusted blasted me for even thinking of doing this.
Seeking God about doing this blog, put me through unimaginable torment. I had to be sure I was right. My heroes, Billy Graham, Oral Roberts, Kathyrn Kuhlman, and David Wilkerson would have struggled with my decision. Then something really important dawned on me: Preachers must discern the times they live in.
Everyone one of my heroes did just that. They did things that had never been done before and they were brutally criticized for it. David Wilkerson for being photographed at a criminal trial for delinquents, Oral for going on television, Kathyrn for being a woman preacher…all of them broke new ground.
Then God gave me understanding of the time I lived in, and the ground I had to break. Let me explain it this way: say you are barbecuing in your back yard. There’s a fence between you and your neighbor. One day, after years of peaceful coexistence, your neighbor jumps the fence, and with a crazed look, charges your wife. He means harm. What do you do? Tell yourself it is unloving to attack the crazed neighbor?
Obama jumped the fence and went after the church. Now, the left never stays in their own yard. They continually attack our freedom of religion, and speech. Then I heard a life-changing phrase in my spirit: Christianity will survive without America, but America will never survive without Christianity. Now I knew my mission was to help spare America from disaster.
I also concluded that my spiritual heroes lived in an era when the church was respected, and there was civil discourse between political parties. I needed models of preachers who preached at the dawn of tyranny in their nation. I needed Dietrich Bonhoeffer from Hitler’s Germany and Watchman Nee in Mao’s china. It became undeniable what I had to do. I had total peace and confidence and began writing. However, my anxiety was only beginning.
In the first month, May 2011, only 58 people read it, by the end of the year only 2,200 people had read it. The enemy laughed at me, and told me it was a miserable failure, and the only thing I had done was to close the doors of churches. Somehow I kept trying.
The blog didn’t just face rejection from the church, it was going against the headwinds of technology. America’s attention span was shrinking fast. Experts told me I had no hope of success because no one reads long articles. If I wanted to be heard, I had to do short snappy videos. The Holy Spirit said no. I had to write the blog. Often, they’d be over a thousand words. Somehow, against all odds, I held on.
Now it was 2012 and something amazing started. By December, 300,000 people read the blog. Not only that, preachers took heart from my posts and began to boldly proclaim truth and speak out. Some of my harshest critics admitted they attacked me out of their own fear to speak out. The foundation of a new understanding, began to emerge. It turned into a groundswell.
Everywhere I traveled, people would come up to me, and tell me how much the blog meant to them. Copies appeared in the most surprising places. The heads of a large denomination gave it to their executives. It was quoted on television, radio, referred to in books, read from pulpits and even mentioned in Washington. Since then, it has been viewed in 224 nations and territories. Then at midnight last night it happened…
The blog reached 3 million views. Think of that! 3 million people have read it! This little blog, which had no chance of surviving is now the mouse that roared. Thank you to all my regular readers—some who have stood with me since the beginning—for doing something historic! And, the best is yet to come.
The only way it succeeded was because God was in it. He is the only reason it broke through all the barriers. All the glory goes to God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
The intention of the democratic party is clear: They want votes no matter what the cost. There is nothing noble about what they are doing. They don’t care about poverty, they don’t care about safety, they don’t care about equality. They are in it for votes. Period.
All their rhetoric about poverty, equality, religious freedom and human rights is pure window dressing.
They are betting that no matter how much harm comes to innocent Americans—it is worth it. No matter how much they damage cities it is worth it. No matter who, and how, anyone gets hurt, it is worth it.
The illegal vote is omnipotent to them. They will harm Americans in poverty in favor of illegals. They will break Federal Law for illegals. They will hurt their own constituents—they will abandon people who voted for them.
They have till March to deal with DACA, and Republicans have already said they want to help. It was a fight they didn’t need to start. It was grandstanding—they threw a bone to illegals. They shut down the government knowing it would cut off the money to our soldiers, children, and a host of others. The last time the government shut down it cost 24 Billion dollars.
You really believe their intentions are honorable? Having failed every demographic group, they ever swore to help—having left a trail of devastation, littered with homeless camps (see video below) and despair—they seek fresh meat—someone unfamiliar with their record of failure, someone to keep them alive.
A sanctuary city—to them—means something totally different. It means a sanctuary for career politicians to remain in power. It means sanctuary for bankrupt and failed policies.
California is now the king of poverty. Still, they pursue a course of pure madness. Businesses are already leaving California…so what do they do? After Trump lowered the corporate tax rate—California introduced a bill to take half of the money businesses will save.
“California lawmakers are targeting the expected windfall that companies in the state would see under the federal tax overhaul with a bill that would require businesses to turn over half to the state. A proposed Assembly Constitutional Amendment by Assemblymen Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, and Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, would create a tax surcharge on California companies making more than $1 million so that half of their federal tax cut would instead go to programs that benefit low-income and middle-class families.” -SF GATE
And do what with it? Actually? Fund health care for illegals. I can’t make this stuff up.
Now look at this video of Southern California, the homeless capital of America
Liberals are understandably panicked about what Donald Trump can carry out. “We have a president-elect with authoritarian tendencies assuming a presidency that has never been more powerful,” Franklin Foer wrote this past week in Slate. Trump will command not only a massive nuclear arsenal and the most robust military in history, but also the ability to wage numerous wars in secret and without congressional authorization; a ubiquitous system of electronic surveillance that can reach most forms of human communication and activity; and countless methods for shielding himself from judicial accountability, congressional oversight and the rule of law — exactly what the Constitution was created to prevent. Trump assumes the presidency “at the peak of its imperial powers,” as Foer put it.
Sen. Barack Obama certainly saw it that way when he first ran for president in 2008. Limiting executive-power abuses and protecting civil liberties were central themes of his campaign. The former law professor repeatedly railed against the Bush-Cheney template of vesting the president with unchecked authorities in the name of fighting terrorism or achieving other policy objectives. “This administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide,” he said in 2007. Listing an array of controversial Bush-Cheney policies, from warrantless domestic surveillance to due-process-free investigations and imprisonment, he vowed: “We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers.”
Yet, beginning in his first month in office and continuing through today, Obama not only continued many of the most extreme executive-power policies he once condemned, but in many cases strengthened and extended them. His administration detained terrorism suspects without due process, proposed new frameworks to keep them locked up without trial, targeted thousands of individuals (including a U.S. citizen) for execution by drone, invoked secrecy doctrines to shield torture and eavesdropping programs from judicial review, and covertly expanded the nation’s mass electronic surveillance.
Blinded by the belief that Obama was too benevolent and benign to abuse his office, and drowning in partisan loyalties at the expense of political principles, Democrats consecrated this framework with their acquiescence and, often, their explicit approval. This is the unrestrained set of powers Trump will inherit. The president-elect frightens them, so they are now alarmed. But if they want to know whom to blame, they should look in the mirror.
Obama’s approach to executive power flipped so quickly and diametrically that it is impossible to say if he ever believed his campaign-era professions of restraint. As early as May 2009, Jack Goldsmith, a Justice Department official under George W. Bush, celebrated Obama’s abandonment of his promises to rein in these authorities, writing that “the new administration has copied most of the Bush program, has expanded some of it, and has narrowed only a bit.” He added that the “Obama practices will be much closer to late Bush practices than almost anyone expected in January 2009.”
Liberals vehemently denounced these abuses during the Bush presidency. From 2001 through 2008, Democrats called them the embodiment of tyranny, an existential threat to democracy, a menacing expression of right-wing radicalism. “America’s Constitution is in grave danger,” Al Gore warned in a widely praised 2006 speech on civil liberties. Bush had become “the central threat that the founders sought to nullify in the Constitution, an all-powerful executive, too reminiscent of the king from whom they had broken free.” In one 2007 poll, 57 percent of Democrats said they wanted the Guantanamo Bay prison camp to be closed.
But after Obama took office, many liberals often tolerated — and even praised — his aggressive assertions of executive authority. It is hard to overstate how complete the Democrats’ about-face on these questions was once their own leader controlled the levers of power. According to a 2012 Washington Post-ABC News poll, 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats and 67 percent of moderate or conservative ones now supported keeping Guantanamo Bay open. After just three years of the Obama presidency, liberals sanctioned a system that allowed the president to imprison people without any trial or an ounce of due process.
In fact, a new Democratic Party orthodoxy took hold under Obama: the right of a president to detain people, or even assassinate them, without charges or a whiff of judicial oversight. This included even American citizens. “We do not believe that [Anwar] al-Aulaqi’s U.S. citizenship imposes constitutional limitations that would preclude the contemplated lethal action” by the military or the CIA, a Justice Department memo proclaimed in 2010.
Democrats (who had bitterly complained in 2005 about mere eavesdropping without court approval) not only failed to contest this assassination program but ultimately expressed their support for it. “Fully 77 percent of liberal Democrats endorse the use of drones,” according to the write-up of that 2012 Post-ABC poll. Support drops “only somewhat when respondents are asked specifically about targeting American citizens living overseas, as was the case with Anwar al-Awlaki, the Yemeni American killed in September in a drone strike in northern Yemen.”
And of course, Obama aggressively expanded the system of mass surveillance, including on U.S. soil, that had been secretly implemented by the National Security Agency after 9/11. Once Edward Snowden showed the world what had been created, many Democrats became the leaders in protecting this spying system from meaningful limits, reform or oversight. When, in the immediate aftermath of the Snowden revelations, a bipartisan coalition of House members headed by Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Justin Amash (R-Mich.) sought to impose serious limits on the NSA’s domestic spying, the White House turned to then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to lead the successful effort to stop them.
Civil liberties advocates and proponents of limited executive authority tried everything they could think of to persuade and cajole Democrats to rediscover their concerns about these abuses and once again become allies in the battle to constrain government power. But those efforts were largely futile. Partisan loyalties easily subordinated any commitment to the principles that they had purported, in the Bush years, to support.
The problem such advocates encountered was the same one they’d faced during the Bush presidency when trying (and failing) to persuade putatively small-government conservatives to oppose these expansions of presidential power: namely, many people are perfectly content to have such authority vested in leaders they trust, and fear them only when a politician from the opposing party wields them.
As such, the tactic of last resort to induce Democrats and liberals to oppose such policies was to ask them to think about how, one day, these powers could be in the hands of someone other than a benevolent, kind-hearted, trustworthy progressive like Barack Obama. Instead, Democrats were urged, imagine that a right-wing authoritarian, or a lawless demagogue, or a petty, vindictive tyrant won the presidency and inherited the framework of unrestrained, unchecked powers that Republicans implemented and Democrats expanded.
That day has arrived. With Trump looming, there is much talk of uniting across ideological and partisan lines to impose meaningful limits on executive authority, and those efforts are justified. But, as progressives were repeatedly warned, a matrix of power that has been defended and legitimized for 15 years by both parties will be very difficult to uproot.
Hillary is going to be indicted
Friday, 08 Jan 2016 04:39 PM
The FBI and intelligence community “would go ballistic” if there’s no indictment in the case of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s
A former U.S. Attorney predicts a Watergate-style showdown in the Department of Justice if Attorney General Loretta Lynch overrules a potential FBI recommendation to indict Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
“The [FBI] has so much information about criminal conduct by her and her staff that there is no way that they walk away from this,” Joseph diGenova, formerly the District of Columbia’s U.S. Attorney, told Laura Ingraham in a Tuesday radio interview. “They are going to make a recommendation that people be charged and then Loretta Lynch is going to have the decision of a lifetime.
“I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an attorney general. It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable.”
DiGenova is referring to the Watergate scandal’s “Saturday Night Massacre” Oct. 20, 1973, when President Richard Nixon sacked Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox and Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus resigned in protest.
DiGenova is well-sourced throughout the law enforcement community and his assessment has to be taken seriously. But interviews with other knowledgeable Washington insiders present a somewhat less concrete scenario developing around the former secretary of state.
At the center of Clinton’s difficulties is her use of a private email account and a home-brew server located in her New York home to conduct official business while serving as America’s chief diplomat between 2009 and 2013. Several of her closest aides also used the private server.
Clinton clearly didn’t abide by federal regulations requiring officials like her to use government computers and email accounts to conduct official business and take all of the necessary steps to preserve all such correspondence concerning official business.
As first reported by The Daily Caller News Foundation, Clinton emailed Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden Sept. 7, 2010, asking for advice on what she, President Barack Obama and Democratic campaign officials should do to prevent a Republican victory in the upcoming congressional elections.
“Do you and CAP have any ideas as to how to change the dynamic before it’s too late? Losing the House would be a disaster in every way,” Clinton told Tanden. The CAP chief responded at length with clearly partisan recommendations, noted her supposedly non-partisan think tank’s polling efforts to identify winning themes for Democrats and described her conversations relaying her advice to Obama and other senior White House officials.
On its face, the Sept. 7 Clinton email appears to be a violation of the Hatch Act, which bars partisan political activities by officials using government property while on official duty. But Clinton found a clever way to get around the law, according to a senior non-profit official with extensive experience investigating such activities. The official spoke on condition of anonymity.
First, that official said, by not preserving her email records until after she resigned as secretary of state, Clinton avoided an investigation by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which handles Hatch Act violations. The reason is simple — OSC has no authority over former federal employees in Hatch Act matters.
Second, by refusing to comply “with Federal Records Act requirements to use an approved system for preserving records, [Clinton] arguably did not engage in political activities while on official duty or while using federal resources because she communicated with a personal computer,” the official said.
In other words, “had Secretary Clinton used a State Department e-mail address and a government computer and had Secretary Clinton complied with federal record-keeping and open government laws, [her] violations would have been discoverable under the Freedom of Information Act and could have been remedied while Secretary Clinton was still in office.”
Thus, don’t expect a Clinton indictment for a Hatch Act violation.
But Clinton is far from out of the woods, according to a congressional source who is deeply involved in the multiple investigations of Clinton. This source, who also spoke only on condition of anonymity, pointed to the hundreds of Clinton emails that contained classified information.
“Her problem is the sheer volume of emails that were deemed classified,” said this source. “Her first defense was that she didn’t send any classified information in her emails. But that claim has been clearly rendered false because so many of the emails were later marked classified.”
As the Department of State has released the Clinton emails she provided after leaving office, more than a thousand were marked classified after being reviewed prior to their public release. So what about Clinton’s subsequent distinction that she sent no information in her emails that was “marked classified” when it was sent?
“The volume matters because a reasonable person knows somebody like the Secretary of State, who is allowed herself to classify materials, who has handled it for 25 years or more, at some point the law says you are responsible for recognizing classified material when you see it. That gets to the negligence issue,” the issue said.
Negligence is critical because Clinton signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement in 2009 regarding classified information that stated, among much else, that “Sensitive Compartmented Information involves or derives from intelligence sources or methods that is classified or is involved in a classification determination …”
Clinton and several of her closest aides must have read information “derived from intelligence sources or methods” on a daily or near-daily basis.
There is an ominous sentence buried in that agreement Clinton signed: “Nothing in this agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violations.”
What if Clinton is indicted for negligence in handling classified information? DiGenova predicts a showdown within a couple of months that will put Lynch in the same hot seat that prompted Nixon to fire Cox for getting too close to the truth about Watergate.
A Republican with direct knowledge of the investigation predicted political chaos if Lynch doesn’t decide to prosecute Clinton, a chaos that “would be the gift that keeps on giving right through the election.”
With or without resignations of FBI officials to protest such a decision, there would be a blizzard of news releases from congressional GOPers condemning Lynch, followed by hearings in which both the attorney general and FBI Director James Comey would be put under oath and asked about their actions.
Will 2016 be our last year as a free nation? Will Obama revoke the next election and declare himself president for life? Is God using him to punish us for our sins? Will cities go up in flames of racial war? Are the voices who pronounce doom speaking the word of God?
What was the first thing Jesus said when asked about the end of the world? Matthew 24: 3, 4 says, “Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” 4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you.”
Terrorism and the dictatorship of Obama are looming disasters. But the threat of you being deceived–deceived by a false prophet is an equal disaster. A tsunami of lies and human opinion—being pawned off as words from the Lord—is crashing into the church. I am guessing that out of the current wave of “prophetic words” almost half are utterly false—generated by greed, anger, manipulation and arrogance.
The threat posed by false prophecy is greater than you know. If you follow a false prophet you will experience misery beyond anything you could have thought possible.
Most of the readers of our blog are referred to us from Facebook. In the last few days, Facebook has been a toxic waste dump site for every kind of half-baked, unscriptural prediction of 2016. Without missing a beat—you will see juxtaposed—predictions of untold blessing and favor along with total doom. We know that they both can’t be right.
So if you are ready for an honest-to-God conversation about 2016 then start by rejecting these two popular prophetic notions:
- America is blessed and no harm will come to her.
- America must be destroyed and there is nothing we can do about it.
No one in their right mind can possibly look at a holy God and tell him we are incapable of being destroyed. The nation of 70 million abortions—the leading exporter of porn—the nation that has erased God from every institution (including the church) cannot be destroyed?
We live in a cloud of misery and grief of our own making. God did not pick Obama, Americans did. The eyes of the average American are glazed over by despair and fatigue. Our children feel old and have little or nothing to look forward to. All of this is in direct proportion to our rejection of Christ.
Will Obama try to stay in office after 2017? Of course he will. The media will continue to esteem him as president. The liberal establishment has already proven they will follow him through the flames of perdition. Obama thrives on setting aside the constitution and daring congress to stop him.
“But we will throw him out!” I hear that a lot—but, if we were going to throw him out…wouldn’t we have done it after Benghazi and a thousand other impeachable offenses?
Obama has committed more crimes than all 43 previous presidents combined. If the congress has not been able to impeach him after all of this…what makes you think they can force him out of office?
Yes, America can be destroyed. Yes, this could very well be our last year as a free nation.
It is often said that you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone. The truth is that you knew what you had; you just never thought you would lose it. Thinking we could never lose America is fastest way to lose America.
On the other hand…setting your hope on America’s destruction is insanity. That Jehovah God has intervened—in American history when things look hopeless—is a centerpiece of our history.
I was just read again about the winter in Valley Forge where George Washington saw no way to hold the Continental army together. His men were starving and freezing to death. Farmers nearby wouldn’t feed the men who were fighting for their freedom. The farmers could get a better price for their crop from the British.
And yet they did hold on and defeated the greatest military in the world. In the depths of his despair Washington wrote to his friend about why he could hold the army together…He wrote “ I knew that heaven was in our cause.”
Heaven is in the cause of every pastor who reads this and says “my church will host a true revival.” Heaven is in the cause of every Christian who says “I will heed the warnings and obey the voice of God for there is yet one more miracle left for America.
The answer is clear: 2016 will not be our last year of freedom if the “people who know their God” will truly humble themselves beneath the mighty hand of God. He stands ready to release miracles beyond our comprehension…because heaven is in our cause.
America, you are under a strong delusion. The terrifying part is who may be doing it.
by Mario Murillo
No one can explain why. Why would America veer into this mindless frenzy to pull her own greatness out by the roots?
-Why would a generation reelect a man that plunged them into poverty, violence and chaos?
-Why would a generation of black pastors trade in their Bibles to stand with the most blatantly anti-church agenda in American history?
-How can you explain a populace that gleefully opens their border to welcome murderers, rapists and drug dealers to come and ravage innocent citizens?
-Why would you aging hippies and 70’s protesters stand with a president who embodies all of the tyranny you fought against? How bizarre to end up being the anti-free speech movement.
Why, America, are you okay with a state owned media that will not investigate the crimes of Benghazi, the IRS, the Justice Department, and the NSA?
What is up when a man can steal your credit card–in history’s greatest case of identity theft– run up a $19 trillion national debt, and you still smile at him?
Why has science allowed itself to become a tool of the state? Scientists will not level with us on anything that will challenge the agenda. What will legalization of every form of sexual perversion do to children? We won’t know because it is “hateful” to ask.
What is really going on with the weather and why do you want to spend vast amounts of our hard earned money to enforce a pact with all the nations of the world? “Trust us,” they say, “we know best.”
What is this insane celebration of sexual deviance that blasphemes the civil rights movement?
Jonathan Cahn, Rabbi, Pastor, Bible teacher and author of “The Harbinger” and “The Mystery of the Shemitah,” says the June 26 Supreme Court ruling that legalized gay marriage in all 50 states marks the formal end to Christian America. Barring a “miracle of God,” he says in the 4th of July message, “the die has been cast.”
What drug was the Supreme Court on when it violated every oath it had ever taken to ramrod Gay Marriage on all Americans? They created a law even though the constitution declares that they do not have that power. They even admitted that they created a precedent that will bring polygamy and adult/child marriage to the court.
Why would we declare war on Jesus Christ and protect the images of Mohammed? What form of mad double-mindedness denounces the church as hateful while it protects Islamic extremists?
There is only one explanation: America, you are under a strong mass delusion. No nation willfully abandons its greatness in exchange for perversion, poverty and misery unless there has been a spirit of delusion unleashed in the land.
Stella Morabito said, “In fact, many newly propagandized ideas seem to have taken America by storm just in the past decade or so. Same-sex marriage is only one of those ideas. Transgenderism is now eclipsing that notion, and its propaganda techniques—wrapped in the language of civil rights—are getting Americans on board with the idea of erasing all sex distinctions in law, including their own. It’s as though Americans are buying into a fast-talking sales pitch without being allowed to read the print, whether it’s large print or small.”
But it is even worse than she says. Not only are Americans deluded, they disconnect from their own suffering in order to keep the lie alive. I give money to the homeless a lot. Try this… ask the next panhandler who they voted for in the last two elections. See if they remember having to beg before this presidency. Ask them if there is any regret. The befuddled look you get will say it all.
There are ways to measure a generation’s decline. Peter Marshall, the legendary Chaplain of the United States Senate, once drew a comparison between the sinking of the Titanic in 1912 and the sinking of the Athenia in 1939.
As the Titanic sank, the men on board sang the hymn Nearer my God to Thee. The men on board the Athenia sang Roll out the barrel, we’ll have a barrel of fun. Peter Marshall said, “You can see what has happened to a nation’s faith – you can see what has happened to the faith of people in thirty years, can’t you? Facing eternity, to the strains of the beer-barrel polka, what a commentary, upon the faith, of immortal souls.”
THE MEN ON THE TITANIC SANG THE HYMN “NEARER MY GOD TO THEE” WHILE THE MEN ON THE ATHENIA SANG “THE BEER BARREL POLKA”
But what would Peter Marshall think of us now? What would he say about this comparison? In 1976, a generation declares Bruce Jenner a national hero for winning the Olympic Decathlon. “Jenner is twirling the nation like a baton; he and his wife, Chrystie, are so high up on the pedestal of American heroism, it would take a crane to get them down,” wrote Tony Kornheiser in The New York Times in 1977.
Now we contrast that with 39 years later. A generation hails him as a hero for becoming a woman. Our president leads the cheer saying, “It takes courage.” This is our new definition of courage…this is our new heroism.
2 Thessalonians 2:11,12 declares, “And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
There is one very big question to answer. Is our mass delusion leading to the judgment of God or is the mass delusion judgment in itself? It is chilling to consider. We have always assumed that America’s plunge into moral insanity was the work of the devil.
If you think that Satan can send delusion, think about what God can do to delude minds into destroying themselves. Is this the first stage of our judgment?
What if God has turned America over to a strong delusion in order to get her to believe a lie? Masses of Americans have come to believe that the most absurd, destructive and mindless way to live is okay with them. How could they do this without a spirit of delusion? How could they keep going unless they were catatonic zombies marching to the beat of a national hallucination?
What if that delusion extends to the church? Is mass delusion the reason for the apathy and silence of American Christians? Doesn’t delusion explain how we can have giddy Christian gatherings in the face of certain national doom?
Why is your pastor not crying out to the nation to repent? Why is there no chorus of prayer asking for a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit? How can any voice enter a pulpit at this time without a sense of urgency? Is it because a spirit is on them that holds them in denial?
We have every reason to believe that prior generations of Christians would be staging mass rallies, crying out with fasting and prayer. If you announce such a thing today, believers will not show up.
American Christians binge on flattering sermons and exotic emotionalism. Some are even getting drunk and carousing while the nation burns. How can they do that without a strong delusion?
America, it feels intelligent to bask in this new agenda. You can feel hip legalizing everything while making God illegal. Take a closer look. Your heart, mind and emotions are deteriorating under the influence of the culture. You are losing your children, your free time, independent thought and even logic to this horrific lie.
You know that when you invited God out, you invited misery in. You know that One Nation under God was not just a motto; it was a catalyst to prosperity, justice and happiness. That is what getting right with God does.
Yet, the delusion runs so deep that we cannot see the next step in our destruction is Hillary Clinton. She has already screamed at us that Benghazi does not matter. She has already surpassed Obama avoiding questions and hiding her true intentions.
Peter stood before Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost and cried out, “Save yourself from this perverse generation (Act 2:40).” It was a call to escape mass delusion.
There may be a thread of mercy in all of this. Like the father, wanting to make his son stop smoking, made him smoke a whole pack of cigarettes until the boy threw up. Maybe God is letting us overdose in this swamp in the hopes that we will vomit out this insanity before it is too late.
On the other hand…what if we are under judgment and have been turned over to mass delusion for our destruction? In either case, why would you read this, walk away and not repent? Isn’t that proof of delusion? Right now, kneel and pray and tell God that you choose life.