The Book of Revelation is not an Outlier - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-----------------------

Our interest in end-times folly has been re-aroused recently, and today's post is pursuant to that. Elizabeth Prata makes some astonishing claims about the end times.
-----------------

People think the Bible is the Bible, except for that weird book at the end, Revelation. (?? No, they don't. Everyone acknowledges the presence of Revelation in the Bible.)

Admittedly, Revelation (not ‘Revelations) is a highly symbolic book in places. But it isn’t totally filled with symbolism as people think. People avoid the book anyway, which is a shame…because:

In Revelation 1:3, right off the bat, it begins with a blessing!

Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.

If you read the book, you receive a blessing. If you hear what is in the book, you receive a blessing. If you keep what is in the book, you receive a blessing. Keep means to guard what is in the book or heed what is in the book. That means, be involved with what is in the book of Revelation. It’s not an outlier, it’s integral to God’s plan, so much so, He blesses those who take time to learn its message. (We are happy indeed that the author explained the Greek meaning of "keep." Now she should consider explaining "near." John tells us the time is near. "Near" is 

ἐγγύς (eggus), concerning things imminent and soon to come to pass... 

It's the same word used in Jn. 7:2: 

But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near...

John repeats the word at the end of Revelation. Re. 22:10:

Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near." 

It seems to us that if the author believes that Revelation ...isn’t totally filled with symbolism as people think..., then the meaning of "near" isn't also symbolic of something happening 2000 years later, either. If it does mean a tribulation to come, then she needs to explain why this one word is symbolic in an otherwise literal sentence.)

Steven Furtick Says it’s Impossible to Believe Jesus is Lord Without a Doubt, Tells Staff Never to Say it - By JEFF MAPLES

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-------------------

This author has appeared on our blog before. His rhetorical tactics are inevitably scorched earth.

Our intent is not to defend Steven Furtick. We shall occupy ourselves with examining the author's presentation.
------------------

Steven Furtick is more than just a false teacher. He is a demonic liar, a deceiver, and if anything, more like Satan than any angel of light he masquerades as — and he think’s he’s Jesus. (We do not accept documentation that is the author's own commentary. 

Further, we certainly do not desire to critique two of the author's screeds at once, yet we will briefly detour. Furtick did not indicate he was Jesus. He joked about injuring his heel as he figuratively stomped on Satan's head. 

This is not automatically outside biblical orthodoxy: Ro. 16:20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.)

What is binding and loosing?

We have been pursuing our Doctrinal Rethink for some time now. In the process of engaging it we have begun to question certain beliefs, church structures, and practices of the western church. Too often we have discovered unbiblical doctrines and activities. This causes us concern.

Why do churches do what they do? What is the biblical basis of church leadership structure? Why do certain traditions get entrenched? How did we arrive at our doctrines?

Today we will examine the idea of binding and loosing. Is binding and loosing a general activity in which Christians should engage, that is, the binding and loosing of spiritual things? Charismatics would call this "spiritual warfare." Non-charismatics would likely reject the idea entirely.

PBS show advocates for mask - breath "cloud" smaller - FB conversation

I posted this on FB:

Just saw a propaganda video on PBS explaining why masks are good. They showed how masks keep the air movement from our coughing from going as far.

This presumes that everyone is always stationary. But people cannot social distance from other peoples' "wake". That cloud of COVID you expired doesn't follow you, it hangs in the air, until the next person walks through your cloud.

Paul: But on the other hand, the mask drastically slows or even captures the larger droplets which can contain the virus. A lot of what is shown escaping the masks in that video is vapor and not condensed liquid, right? There is absolutely no doubt that the virus is able to be spread by someone wearing a mask. It is also true that a mask inhibits a person's ability to spread the virus. If I walk by someone who has the virus and sneezes, I'd much prefer that they were where wearing a mask than that I get sprayed directly in the face! Once again, anything that minimizes contact with virus laden mucous or saliva seems like a good idea to me.

Me: Yes, the risk is lower. The government tells us that risk is acceptable, but people will die. Isn't that the criteria, that people will die? Why are those deaths acceptable?

The problem with Vimes' boot theory of economics

A FB friend posted this:

Transcript:

No economist will ever come up with a better description of why being poor is so expensive Than Terry Pratchett. Such a great quote.

Take boots for example. He earned thirty·eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh·Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for yeas and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. 

This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socio-economic unfairness.
**

It may be a great quote for those who believe that the poor are being oppressed, but as far as being logical, well, we find the example unconvincing.

Converting the 4L60e Tailshaft Housing to a Mechanical Speedo Drive - bonus episode

Episode one, purchase and bodywork.

Episode two, mechanicals and interior.

Episode three, final details and the finished car.

Bonus episode, LS conversion.

Double bonus episode, converting the 4L60e tailshaft housing to a mechanical speedo drive.

Triple bonus episode, the details leading up to the purchase of this car and what it meant.

-------------------

My decision to do an LS swap on my 1967 Camaro convertible (the rest of the swap is covered here) brings up a number of challenges. One of those is the electronic speedometer drive on the 4L60e. The 4L60e has a reluctor wheel on the transmission output shaft which signals the PCM for shifting and for speed. I wanted to use my original speedometer, so I needed to convert it to a mechanical drive.

There are people on eBay and elsewhere who will convert your housing for $350, or sell you a converted housing for even more. I'm too cheap, so I wondered if I could do it myself. After studying the issue and doing some measuring, I decided I could.

This is the task that is been the hardest part of the LS conversion so far. I searched the internet quite a bit for someone who had done this conversion and lived to tell the tale, but couldn't find anyone. It may very well be that I am the very first to chronicle the process. A real living legend.

Actually, I did the task twice, once without the reluctor wheel and once with it. I thought the reluctor wheel wasn't needed, but I discovered it also is used to tell the transmission when it should shift. 

I figure that if it's worth doing, it's worth doing twice...

Resource: A glossary of New Apostolic Reformation terminology. - by Rick Becker

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-------------------

NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) is the description of a movement in the church, a phrase coined by C. Peter Wagner in the late 80s to describe what he viewed an imminent reformation of the Church. He believed that God was in the process of reforming the church's structure and mission. One of those ways was to return apostles to their position in the Church.

Nowadays, however, it is a pejorative descriptor used by the Doctrinal Police to brand anyone who differs from their doctrine in the slightest. The NAR is very nearly an obsession to these folks. They seem to think that there are NAR operatives everywhere. And any church that hints of charismatic practices or terminology is questionable and possibly teaching false doctrine.

Thus the Doctrinal Police intend to instill suspicion and distrust in people by counseling them to listen for certain telltale words that might be spoken in their churches. 84 possible words, any of which will allow a person to brand a person or a church as NAR. That apparently is sufficient evidence to blow up a church. 

Today's post is to review and critique a glossary by Rick Becker. We cannot address every definition he gives, but we will attempt to establish that what he has done here is misleading at best, or dishonest at worst.

Mostly we will do this by citing biblical examples. 

We should note that we are not defending the "NAR" perspective, nor are we agreeing that the author's definitions are accurate. We are simply offering biblical evidence that the author's perspective is flawed.

----------------

The Frappuccino False Prophet - Bible Mangling with Two Pumps of Heresy - by Rev. Anthony Wade

Found here. Our comments in bold.

------------------

Our ever-inflammatory Rev. Wade has returned, and he is no more thoughtful now than he has been before. In today's article he expends 1467 words (not including quotes) lambasting someone named Jared Laskey. We have taken up the habit of using MS Word to count the number of words for the simple purpose of establishing that Rev. Wade expends a lot of words to teach or explain absolutely nothing. 

Today is a slight exception. He makes a superficial effort to explain John 10:1-6, but does not reference or document any of his claims. He would not be interested in such an undertaking because his principal aim is to lambaste, mock, and impugn.

Nor does he quote or reference a single Scripture, except the opening one.

We should note that we are not here to defend Mr. Laskey. Our intent is to analyze Rev. Wade's assertions.

--------------

The Real Choice: Social Control or Social Investment -by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.
--------------------

The doctrinaire leftist Dr. Reich engages in his typical obfuscation. It very nearly astonishing how perfectly he parrots the leftist narrative. But this is typical for him. He's a "Bernie socialist," and socialists will say just about anything for the purpose of advancing the agenda. This is known as agitprop, and Dr. Reich lays it on thick.
------------------

Answering Reader Question: What are we to think of the “Let Us Worship” tour? - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------

This is the moral and doctrinal bankruptcy of the Doctrinal Police. Sean Feucht is leading worship gatherings, and rather than honor his courage, celebrate the worship, or give praise to God for the salvations, well, the author slams him.

And she can't even manage to fight her way out of the rhetorical paper bag. This may be one of the most inept polemics we have ever read. And we have read some sorry ones in our time.

*Update* Hundreds coming to be baptized. Satanist saved. 

------------------