Monday, January 08, 2007

The Next Nuclear War

Many have been sounding the alarm in recent years that radical Islamofascists are close to obtaining nuclear weapons. Of course, the fear is that they would them use them – most probably against their most hated enemies, Israel or America.

There are any number of scenarios that could potentially set this chain of events off. For instance, a coup d’etat in Pakistan could remove the current regime and restore those elements who helped put the Taliban in power in neighboring Afghanistan. This is hardly far-fetched, as there have been numerous attempts on the life of Pakistani President Musharif. Should it occur, not only would India have reason to fear its ancient enemies, but Israel would also have reason for trepidation. Pakistan has dozens of nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them to India and Israel.

Another scenario, even more likely in the current climate, is that North Korea launches a desperate invasion into South Korea – a last ditch effort to secure its survival. This would inevitably lead to, or begin with, nuclear strikes against Japan, or the Philippines, or other areas of United States military interests. Perhaps even Hawaii is vulnerable now, and the West Coast will be in short order.

A bit less likely is the possibility that the remnants of Saddam’s research and arsenal – which many believe to have been secreted away to Syria – will be used in Lebanon, or perhaps against Israel in renewed conflict with Hezbollah. That could easily draw Iran into direct war with Israel. That is decidedly NOT unlikely.

The most plausible and unfortunately likely scenario is that Iran succeeds in developing its own nuclear arsenal. At most, that’s only 2-3 years away. It could happen by spring. The United Nations is impotent (and unwilling) to prevent it. The United States, with its newly minted Democratic Congressional majority has no stomach for military adventures, instead choosing preemptive surrender and ignominious defeat. All in the name of diplomacy and peace, of course.

I wouldn’t expect, however, that Iran will be the first to actually launch a nuclear strike on its enemies. Oh, it’s certainly possible. They would if they got half a chance. But I’m willing to bet it won’t come to that. Not to begin with anyway.

My bet? Israel takes out Iran’s nuke program before they have a chance to use their weapons. The only way they could do that would be to use tactical nukes of their own. And the nature of that kind of an attack would be extensive. And it would take help. Help that only the United States could offer.

Reports from Israel, denied by officials of course, have already said that the IDF Air Force is practicing such an attack. United States officials deny aiding them, but they cannot deny sharing important and sensitive intelligence that would be imperative to such a mission. And in this case, the Congress could not stop the President from helping our allies in Israel. At least, not BEFORE such a mission is launched. They might find reasons to impeach him following such a mission.

Still, Israel isn’t worried about the politics of the situation. They don’t care about the ramifications as much as they do about doing nothing. Should Iran develop nukes, their fate is sealed. Should Israel preemptively knock out Iran’s nukes, at least they stand a fighting chance against the combined armies of the Islamofascist states. They’ve defeated those armies and air forces four or five times before. Times may have changed, but Israel’s resolve to survive, when their backs are literally up against a wall, should not be shrugged off.

The most dangerous result of this next nuclear war scenario is that, as a result of Israel’s “aggression,” the powers that be in the United States, will seek to cut ties. Perhaps the President is impeached, or in 2008 the Democrats capture the White House. Maybe a coalition forms that disowns the ‘troublesome ally’ and deems them a nuisance. It certainly is possible. Anti-Semitism is growing not only around the world or in Europe, but right here in America.

In that case, I don’t fear so much for Israel as I do for America. Those who oppose and seek the destruction of Israel will not face just political consequences. There are profound, spiritual and eternal consequences. Those who bless you I will bless; Those who curse you I will curse…(Genesis 12:1-3).

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Let's Bash Other Believers! An Example...

I Saw this posted on a forum I frequent. See my comments below the article....

But Southern Baptists Say Ok To “Bishop” T.D. Jakes

By Ken Silva

Apprising Ministries

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? [1]

The Youngs Father And Son Share A Podium

Those who have been following recent events here at Apprising Ministries will know that I have been led of the Lord to begin exposing contemplative mysticism and the deep penetration of the neo-liberal cult of the Emergent Church into the Southern Baptist Convention. As I have been researching I found myself uncovering a little event put on by Ed Young, Jr. of Creative Pastors: Life & Leadership Resources With Ed Young.

I must admit that even I was shocked to see who would be sharing the platform for this upcoming “Christian” conference. So get ready and hold on tight because here comes Creative Church Conference 2007 [2] aka C3 2007. O yeah, now we can wipe out all doctrinal distinctives! C3 2007 we’re told is all about “turning WHAT IF into WHAT IS”...well, actually an abomination in the Lord’s sight.

Even so, we’re told at the website, “Each year, thousands of pastors and leaders from across the country and around the world converge on Fellowship Church for the Creative Church Conference – a conference that promises to challenge your imagination, encourage your heart and stretch your leadership in ways you never dreamed possible.” You bet it will. Just look who’s sharing the platform here with Ed Young, Jr.

First there’s his dad Dr. Ed Young [3] former president of the Southern Baptist Convention. His Mega Second Baptist Church also happens to be having a big Grand Opening of their West Campus [4] in January of 2007. In her recent post Circus Maximus: More Mega-Madness on Slice of Laodicea Ingrid Schlueter correctly points out:

At the core of the megachurch foolishness is, of course, a wrong view of God and the Gospel. Big churches need big buildings, so these people take their wrong view of God and the Gospel and work it into every aspect of church life. In short, like the ancient Roman government, the church becomes the purveyor of “bread and circuses” to keep the restless masses happy.

If you have huge buildings and lavish facilities, it is only natural that you are going to want to use them. Second Baptist Church in Houston has five "campuses". They are just holding a “Grand Opening” of 200,000 square feet of new building space. [5]

So after all of the festivities Dr. Ed Young should be plenty revved up for C3 2007. But wait, it gets even better…or worse…depending on whether or not you’re a Christian who loves our Lord’s Church. There’s “ex”-Emergent–maybe I am, or maybe I’m not– Mark Driscoll [6] who’s slated among the stellar “special guests” as well.

The Ecumenical Church Of Deceit Grows A Little Closer

And in addition there happens to be one other rather interesting, “Ministerial and business visionary, entrepreneurial trailblazer, altruistic philanthropist, and spiritual shepherd to millions around the globe” who is going to be on that same platform. At C3 2007 we also see a certain Word Faith Oneness Pentecostal heretic by the name of “Bishop” T.D. Jakes. [7] That’s right. Dr. Ed Young, twice president of the SBC is currently billed right below a man who actually denies the very nature of the God he says he serves.

So now what do you think about that? As I showed in my article Faith Forward Straight Into the Worship of Man the lines are rapidly blurring in the Ecumenical Church of Deceit. And in this case we have T.D. Jakes who denies the Holy Trinity accepted as a brother in Christ by a former two time president of the SBC. Y’know just maybe Steve Camp is onto something with his Reclaiming a Reverence for God in Ministry – a clarion call for reformation when he says:

It is no secret, the current state of evangelicalism moving away from biblical truth is eroding dramatically almost monthly with no corrective in sight. There needs to be a clarion call for action in evangelicalism today that I am now reoffering
The 107 THESES as one such call.

No one today, and I mean no one of any evangelical note of leadership, is willing to risk their current book deals, contracts, public standing in the marketplace, or radio positioning to confront the theological/biblical corrosion of modern day evangelicalism head on. [8]

Is the SBC finally going to draw a line somewhere in all of this? But as the C3 2007 website says: “After experiencing these two days, you and your team will walk away with a new sense of what church is and should be.” Indeed you will, apparently now it’s a free for all with absolutely no spiritual backbone whatsoever. I’m certainly not Christ but this even makes me want to spew.


2 Corinthians 6:14-15, ESV.

[2], 12/29/06.

[3], 12/29/06.

[4], 12/29/06.

[5], 12/29/06.

[6], 12/29/06.

[7], 12/29/06.

[8] ... 06/12/reclaiming_a_re.php, 12/29/06.

Distributed by
My Turn:
I have followed the ministries of Ed Young Sr. -- and Ed Young Jr. -- for a long time. I've read about T.D. Jakes, and I teach adjunct at a predominately African-American Bible College where most hold Jakes in high regard, though he is not in their denomination.

Now, certainly, I don't agree with these men on every issue which they speak, nor every doctrine which they hold. However, after reading the article posted above, my observations aren't so much about the subjects addressed, as about the "writer" and "ministry" that addresses them.

First, WHO is Ken Silva and WHAT is Apprising Ministries?

Second, WHY does he believe God has called him "to begin exposing contemplative mysticism and the deep penetration of the neo-liberal cult of the Emergent Church into the Southern Baptist Convention"?

Third, just what IS "contemplative mysticism" and "the neo-liberal cult" according to Silva -- other than a club with which to publicly flog Southern Baptists and other Christians? (If they ARE Christians of course -- which Silva concludes they are not...)

Fourth, why does he have a problem with Ed Young Sr. pastoring a MegaChurch? I mean, why is the MegaChurch "evil," as he claims? Is it wrong for the Church to provide entertainment and recreation for its members -- or is that a sin too? And would Silva feel better if 2nd Baptist Church Houston only ran 200 or so? WOuld he feel better if HE pastored 2nd Baptist? WOuld the numbers be alright then? Would he have condemned the Jerusalem Church in 30 AD for being a MegaChurch too? After all, they had a membership of over 3,000 in their FIRST DAY! And within a few years, they'd added at least 5,000 more men, not counting women and children! (those Apostles...they should have read Silva's newsletter).

But my final observation is the one that bothers me the most. Among Fundamentalists and some Conservative Evangelicals, it is better to separate than to unify. It is better to condemn than to commend. It is better to trash people than to talk to them. Silva, apparently, fits into this category.

Responsible Disciples seek a Biblical balance that brings about TRUE UNITY. This unity allows us to "speak the truth in love." It does NOT bring about uniformity. It brings FREEDOM, not fear. Dr. Robertson McQuilkin rightly says, "It is easier to go to a consistent extreme than to stay at the center of Biblical tension." Silva has found the ditch. Hopefully most of us won't blindly follow him there.