Pope: Fundamentalists ‘a Scourge’

Pope Francis

Smile when you call millions of Christians “a scourge.”

What with all the hoopla over the fake “impeachment” last month, I never spotted this, er, development until just yesterday.

In a Nov. 18 speech, the Red Pope called “fundamentalists”–his definition of the word is not the same as ours–“a scourge” (https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2019/11/19/pope-francis-warns-fundamentalism-is-a-plague/).

“Beware of fundamentalists,” he said. “Everyone has his own. In Argentina there is a little fundamentalist corner. Fundamentalism is a scourge, and all religions have some kind of fundamentalist first cousin…”

A few points to ponder:

If “fundamentalists” have any influence on events in Argentina, it’s virtually undetectable. Downright microscopic.

He separates “fundamentalists” from “religions,” which makes us wonder what he means by “religion.”

Mr. Inclusive excludes millions of Christians from “religion.”

He seems to think all “fundamentalists” are violent. Sort of an obstacle to setting up a nice cozy world government and world religion, with everybody saying and doing and thinking exactly the same thing at the same time. He would call it “diversity.”

For the record, a Christian fundamentalist is one who takes the Bible seriously and believes what it says. That would include “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” wouldn’t it? Somehow the pope objects to that?

What portions of the Bible does he think are wrong, weird, or toxic? ‘Cause if he accepts and believes in the whole Bible…well, then he’d be a fundamentalist.

The Pope Is Wrong (So What Else Is New?)

See the source image

It’s Greek to him!

When he’s not busy shilling for the Climate Change cult, Pope Francis likes to tinker with the Bible.

Recently he authorized a change, an editorial emendation, to the Lord’s Prayer: from “lead us not into temptation” to “do not let us fall into temptation” (https://www.foxnews.com/world/pope-francis-lords-prayer-our-father-change)–because, he ‘splained, God is our father and He would never actually lead us into temptation, and what we’ve just put in must be a lot closer to the original intent of the prayer, etc.

Let’s go to the original Scripture, written in Greek. It’s possible Jesus first spoke it in Aramaic, but we have it written down in Greek, which every educated person in the Mediterranean world spoke in the First Century.

The Greek word translated as “lead into” is eisphero, meaning (according to Strong’s Concordance), “to bring or lead into,” “to carry inward.”

So the Pope is simply wrong. Not only in changing the meaning of a word, but also wrong in the sense that someone who doesn’t know what else is in the Bible is likely to be wrong in interpreting one of the few details of Scripture with which he has a nodding acquaintance.

The truth is that God does lead certain individuals into evil. Did He not harden Pharaoh’s heart, so that He could display His power against Egypt: so that the whole world could see that He is truly God? And in 1 Kings 22, to accomplish the destruction of wicked King Ahab, God put a lying spirit in the mouths of Ahab’s prophets, urging him out to battle. But because God is not a man, that He should lie, He did allow one prophet to tell the truth to Ahab–the whole truth, even that part about the lying spirit. And Ahab didn’t believe the honest prophet, and went to war, and was killed.

Not to mention 2 Thessalonians 2:11, “And for this cause [they refused to hear the truth] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.”

But then when you’re as busy as the Red Pope is, trying to establish “open borders” and lock up Climate Change deniers, it’s hard to devote a lot attention to God’s Word. He doesn’t have time to excommunicate Catholic politicians who vote for abortion, either.

If he’s a Bible scholar, I’m Spartacus.

Brexit Do-Over Coming?

See the source image

I think she heard that.

It’s hard for an American to make much sense of British politics; but for what it’s worth, Prime Minister Theresa May has resigned, effective June 7, they’re gonna need a new one, they still haven’t figured out exactly how they’re supposed to secede from the European Union–and assorted UK politicians are clamoring for a “second referendum” on leaving the E.U. (https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/05/28/labour-diane-abbott-calls-second-referendum/)

They didn’t like the way the first one turned out.

Meanwhile, in the E.U. elections just concluded, the “Brexit Party” won big in Britain. Any  indication that the government is serious about a do-over is sure to raise hell. The Labour Party of course wants one, but we are told that there’s a major conflict over that within Labour’s ranks.

You think we have trouble with just two political parties. The Brits have a whole raft of them.

The problem is that when they held the first referendum, “Remain” was supposed to win–sort of like Hillary Clinton was supposed to win here, in 2016–so the globalists never bothered to draw up a workable plan to carry out the people’s wishes if they voted to leave the E.U. But they did. And one wonders whether the government ever had any intention of abiding by the result of the referendum. Globalists don’t much care for referendums that don’t go their way.

In fact, throughout Europe, the globalists fared very badly in the elections, with patriotic national parties regaining lost ground–enough so that the Red Pope is calling everybody racists and biggits for wanting to preserve their own countries. How would he fare, do you think, if they held a referendum on his papacy?

There is only one Person who has the right to govern the world, and that is Jesus Christ. Until He sets His throne upon the earth, God has given us nations as a protection against any power-mad cabal that seeks to dominate the whole shebang. A world government would be a global tyranny.

Latest Papal Shenanigans: ‘No Hell’

Image result for images of crazy pope francis i

You never know what to expect from the Red Pope, Francis I. He comes up with some doozies, and this latest one takes the cake.

Interviewed by “his long-time atheist friend,” the Pope said there’s no Hell and that condemned souls “just disappear” (https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/pope-francis-there-no-hell). Am I the only one who thinks it may not be appropriate for the Pope to buddy up with atheists? But wait, there’s more!

Wrote the atheist interviewer, “In our previous meeting you told me that our species will disappear in a certain moment and that God… will create new species.”

What? You mean Christ died for a species that God’s gonna erase anyway? What Bible did he get that out of? I guess the same Bible that says there’s no Hell, thus refuting official Roman Catholic doctrine. Am I the only one who thinks it’s not appropriate for a Pope to be refuting Catholic doctrine?

According to the interviewer, the Pope also said, “It is an honor to be called revolutionary.” This guy’s something else.

The Vatican has officially disavowed the interview, saying it wasn’t a formal interview at all and that these aren’t genuine quotes–just a “reconstruction” by the Pope’s long-time atheist friend. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Persecuted Prophets

adImage result for images of raymond burke and peter akinola

I was distressed to learn from Phoebe this morning that Cardinal Raymond Burke, who was kicked upstairs to the Vatican some years ago after he refused to allow abortion-happy Democrat politicians to take communion in his church, was this year demoted about as far down the ladder as they could push him.

It shouldn’t surprise us. There’s no way a faithful servant of God can prosper under the Red Pope, Francis I. Cardinal Burke had several times publicly rebuked the pope for his habit of playing hooky from orthodox Catholic teaching–and from the Word of God itself, as given to us in the Bible. Burke has always stood tall for the Bible. Especially on issues of sexual morality, where the Red Pope is infamously wobbly.

The good news is that Cardinal Burke is down but not out. He refuses to keep silence, and European newspapers seek him out for views and comments. In other words, he’d better watch his topknot.

A similar fate overtook another hero of the church, Peter Akinola, former head of the Anglican Communion in Nigeria, former Archbishop of Abuja. For years, Archbishop Akinola fought for God’s law as more and more of the Anglican Communion plunged itself into rebellion against the Lord for the benefit of sodomy, preferring to seek the favor of this world. In 2009 Archbishop Akinola was one of a multitude of Christian leaders who signed the Manhattan Declaration–for obedience to God’s word, against obedience to the world’s drive for “inclusion” and “affirmation.” In 2010 he was “retired” from all his leadership positions within the church.

Image result for images of peter akinola

Lest we Protestants sneer at Catholics and Anglicans for punishing their prophets for speaking truth instead of lies, we ought to inquire more closely into the workings of our own flatline denominations. Check out what our seminaries are getting up to: inventing new “theologies” by the day, and thumbing their noses at the Bible. Drop in on the next Presbyterian Church USA General Assembly–we never know what to expect from one of those.

When the Son of Man returns, will He find faith in the Earth?

Depends on where you look, O Lord. It depends on where you look.

Red Pope: Reality-Challenged

Image result for images of pope francis i

Some years ago I was on the phone with a liberal, trying to convince him that public school “sex education” had gone a lot farther than he thought, as exemplified by a certain book used in the curriculum at many schools. His clever riposte was to deny the book existed. “But I have it right here on the table, right in front of me,” I said. No dice. “There’s no such book. You’re making it up.”

Lately I’ve noticed that the flat-out denial of reality is increasingly a feature of “progressive” discourse. Just a few days ago Pope Francis I, the Red Pope, demonstrated exactly what I mean by asserting that Muslim terrorism “does not exist” ( http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/pope-francis-says-muslim-terrorism-not-exist-asserts-climate-change-real/ ).

Well, all right, he doesn’t have time for trivial problems like people getting their heads blown off by the Allahu akbar crowd. He’s too busy trying to sell Climate Change as the greatest-ever excuse for growing government and making it more powerful. He warns us to remember “what happens when we deny science and disregard the voice of nature.”

Sheesh. What ever happened to “Thus saith the Lord”? But this guy has no time for that. He’s too busy listening to “our Sister Mother Earth.”

I’m not Catholic, but I grieve for the Roman Catholic Church, saddled with a man like this for its spiritual leader.

May the Lord rebuke him.

But good!

Fictional Characters as Real People

We haven’t been talking much about fantasy-writing on this fantasy-writing blog. Oh, we discuss plenty of out-and-out fantasy–like the campus rape culture, Global Warming, microaggression, income equality achieved by the brute force of government: stuff that has no basis in reality whatsoever. Why, just today, one of the Red Pope’s henchmen blasted “Climate Change deniers.”

Sometimes I just can’t stand it anymore. So on to something more constructive.

The picture above (if it comes out!) is from The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm, showing Jakob Grimm (Laurence Harvey) sick in bed, to the point of death, being visited by all the characters in his fairy tales. This is what I’m getting at today.

If you’re writing a fantasy (or any other kind of story) that you want your readers to believe in, you have to believe in it. And the thing that makes any novel fly is characters. You have to believe in your characters.

Teach yourself to see each and every one of them as a real person–someone who has a whole life in addition to the tiny bit of it that you’re writing about.

That does not mean you have to map out a cradle-to-grave biography for every walk-on character. That’s a primitive technique that can easily lead to overloading a story with irrelevant information. You don’t have to actually know that character’s whole life: just be fully aware that he or she has one.

The needs of the plot, if you allow it, will generate characters as needed. They come walking into your story from Character-Land, ready and willing to do a piece of work for you.

For instance, in my just-started book, The Throne, I needed a new commander of the Thunder King’s bodyguard–and in walked a big, fierce, superstitious lout named Bassas, fast with his fists, greedy for gold, but with no real idea of how to spend it, and some small scrap of honor left in his soul. I already know I’m gonna love this guy!

True, this is not the easiest thing in the world to do. It takes years and years of practice.

But once you’re able to do it–boy, can you have fun writing!