Social Justice and an Earthly Kingdom

By Brnnon Howse

On my radio program on 8-30 and 31, 2010, I predicted that Rev. Jim Wallis and Glenn Beck could actually find common ground because they share many of the same philosophies whether they knew it or not. However, I never expected that Wallis would release an open letter to Glenn Beck in less than a week that would acknowledge how close these two really are in their worldviews.

I told my radio audience that the thesis and antithesis of the Hegelian Dialectic Process had been set up between Beck and Wallis and all we need is for the two to synthesis their two worldviews together through the shared ideas of paganism, humanism and good-works, among other ideas, and then a new thesis would be created. I never thought it would only take five days for Wallis to admit how much he and Beck agree and to request that a dialogue begin.

Even if Beck and Wallis do not get together for a formal meeting, the bridge that is possible has been acknowledged and many will jump on this idea in their own minds because of their hunger for unity. This also confirms my prediction that in the coming days this merger will occur whether with or without Beck and Wallis.

Here is part of what Wallis said in his open letter to Beck:

I think we got off on the wrong foot. I listened to your speech last Saturday and heard a lot of things that we agree on. In fact, I have used some of the same language of our need to turn to God, and the values of "faith, hope, and charity" (love). What I would like to find out, and others would too, is what you mean by that language. Until last weekend, you have consistently described yourself primarily as an entertainer, and the public has known you as a talk show host. But last Saturday, you sounded more like an evangelist or revivalist on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. I know we disagree significantly on many issues of public policy, but you said that people can disagree on politics and still agree on basic values and try to come together. Maybe we should test that. Instead of my being up on your blackboard and a regular target of your show's rhetoric, why don't we finally have that civil dialogue I invited you to months ago? Your speech on the Mall suggested and even promised a change of heart on your part, so why don't we talk? Here are a few things I think we could talk about.

First, I've been askedby people in the media if it matters that you are a Mormon.  I unequivocally answer, no, it does not. We don't want more anti-Mormon bigotry any more than we want the anti-Muslim bigotry now rising up across the country. By the way, you should speak to that (against it). On Saturday you talked about the fact that our nation has some scars in our past. I think one of those scars is the historical persecution and bigotry that many Mormons have faced, as well as Catholics, Jews, and Muslims. But, as you said, instead of dwelling on the bad things of the past, we need to learn from them and look to the future. The best way to do that is to make sure we all stand for religious liberty and tolerance, and are careful not to denigrate anybody else's faith tradition, experience, or language. If you are ever in need of an evangelical Christian to speak out against anti-Mormon sentiment directed at you or others, I am here to help.

Glenn Beck's Divine Destiny

By Brannon S. Howse

Understanding the end-time beliefs of the Mormon Church and their view of America and the Constitution may help us better understand "Glenn Beck's Divine Destiny". Brannon's guest on his radio program today was Ed Decker, a former Mormon for twenty years before becoming Christian. On today's program Brannon plays sound bites of a speech given by Mormon President Ezra Taft Benson entitled "Our Divine Constitution" and Ed responds. Please remember that Glenn has said that he is a Mormon and to our knowledge has never publically renounced his Mormon religion.

Glenn Beck said on his TV program on August 26, 2010, that the event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday August 28, 2010, will not be a political event. A few days before this Glenn said the event will not be a Christian event but a God event. What God are we talking about? Is Glenn acknowledging that it is indeed all about a spiritual agenda that has been well laid out by leading Mormon leaders including the now deceased President of the Mormon Church, Ezra Taft Benson? Glenn said that the money for this event was raised months ago. Did the Mormon Church assist in covering the costs for this event and if so for what purpose? Here are the sound bites we played on the radio program today from the speech given by Ezra Taft Benson.

Mormon, Ezra Taft Benson: I reverence the Constitution of the United States as a sacred document. To me its words are akin to the revelations of God, for God has placed His stamp of approval upon it. I testify that the God of heaven sent some of His choicest spirits to lay the foundation of this government, and He has now sent other choice spirits to help preserve it.

Brannon Howse: This is out right heresy! We are told in Deuteronomy 4:2 not to "add to the word which I commanded you, nor take from it." Saying the Constitution is "akin to the revelation of God" is adding to the Bible and is for sure lowering the supremacy of the Word of God and thus heresy. If the Constitution is akin to the Word of God, why has it been changed so many times? Notice also that Taft says that God "sent some of His choicest spirits to lay the foundation of this government." Understand that Mormons believe that God, who was once a man, has eternal sex with his goddess wives and sends spirit babies to earth and the founders were some of "His choicest spirits."

Dumbing Down Darwin

By Stephen R. Phinney
Founder, IOM E-Community

Intellectual theory is always birthed out of a religious experience - or lack of it.  Robert Darwin, Charles father, was a free-spirited rebel when it came to religious matters.  His mother was a Unitarian, which was where Charles attended "church" with his mother.  His father was an active mover and shaker of the liberal "enlightenment movement" within the Anglican "church."  It was in his Unitarian experience that Charles developed a taste for natural history.  After his mother died, his father required him and his siblings to attend the Anglican church and to be schooled by them in 1817.

What exactly do the Unitarians and Anglicans believe?  Unitarians believe that God is one single unit - no Jesus Christ or Holy Spirit, at least as a godhead.  They support the deist beliefs of God using the "bang" theory to form matter, then left the rest to mankind to do as he pleases with it.  Anglicanism was formed by the mixture of Protestantism, Roman Catholicism and Mystical Eastern Orthodoxy.  The Anglicans were considered the first movement to blend humanism, enlightenment (intellectualism)  and religion.  This is why the "state" considered it safe to adopt this blended lukewarm church as their official state church - which is the case to this day. 

While his father continued in the "enlightenment movement" within the Anglican church, he relentlessly applied pressure for Charles to become a priest of the Anglican's new reform - instead becoming a taxidermist.  Charles maintained that the leaders of the Anglican church were hypocritical and at best - intellectually warm.  He found more and more acceptance in following naturalist and collecting beetles.  It was in this "beetle juice" stuff that launched him into his assumptive theories.

So there you have it - Darwinism is a pure mixture of Unitarianism (big bang), Anglicanism (enlightenment) and Naturalism (study of plants and animals).  As in most cases, a man's beliefs are birthed through his bitterness toward, or, his devote love for his father.  In Darwin's case, he spent his whole life trying to gain the respect of his father but ended up dishonoring him by refusing to join his father's mission.  The sad part is - his father got what he wanted, deism in the world of science. 

The IOM E-Community has a defined burden for unveiling the Truth behind the post-modern movement of evolution, old earth and humanism. Creationism is the Biblical Worldview belief that humanity, life, the earth, and the universe (as God sees it) are the creation of a supernatural agency - the God of Abraham. In the 1900's, British geologists and other non-Christian scientists argued that the world was considerably older than they previously been taught, scripture-based calculation of less than six thousand years. In the United States the apparent discrepancies between science and Biblical Worldview were "seized upon and amplified" in a historically know "cultural war" over whether humanistic (man based) science or Biblical documentation (God Based) could provide the most accurate and provable text for education. By the early 1920s, the Christian church realized the traditional beliefs of creationism, commonly accepted by mankind, were being questioned due to their new "age of enlightenment" movement of scientific humanism. Shortly after this "wake-up call," they soon realized their view of Biblical creationism had become "the standard alternative" to humanism based "scientific" explanations of the biosphere (ecosystem) - instead of being the primary view.

Critical Note: The humanistic view of "global ecological system" believes that the integration of all living beings and their relationships, including their interacting with the elements of the lithosphere (outermost planetary shell), hydrosphere (water) and atmosphere (gas planetary layer) is all based on the subjective data of evolution. The man-formed view of the biosphere postulates that it all evolved through a process they call biogenesis (life-forms producing life-forms) and biopoesis (life-form from inanimate matter).

Spiritual Formation - Imitating Christianity

By Stephen R. Phinney

If your church, school or “spiritual leader” starts using the term Spiritual Formation, you might want to prepare an exit plan.

The spiritual formation movement, popularized by emergent leaders Rob Bell and Tony Compolo, teaches that if people practice certain disciplines of mysticism, they can become like Jesus or any other leader of choice.

Recently I went through a series of meetings with a predominate “Christian” educator who was detailing his plan of converting to Spiritual Formation —yet to be revealed to the public. After hearing some of the details, I asked what his definition of spiritual formation was. His response? “It is a simple plan that allows the students to form their own spirituality.” Further discussions revealed that the institute was in need of getting away from negative terms such as discipleship, sinner, repentance, eternal damnation and hell. Even though it appeared that my words fell on “deaf ears,” I explained how there is a MAJOR difference between “Christian Worldview” and Biblical Worldview. And that the first is based on interpretive definitions of the word “Christian”—Mormon, JW’s, Unification, Christian Science, Catholic, Seventh Day, plus another 300 groups, all claiming to be “Christian” but none believe in the indwelling life of Christ in the human body. The 2nd is based on doctrines found in the absolutes of God’s Word—the Bible.

Those who practice Spiritual Formation openly state that a born again experience and having the indwelling life of Christ is not a prerequisite. They further state that phrases like receiving Christ as Lord and absolute Savior are too narrow and restrictive. Herein lies the problem: The individual that God has drawn to the church to confess their depraved state of being a sinner on their way to hell, ends up enveloped in a seeker friendly service that makes him feel good about his sinful state and that God loves him no matter how he acts. They forget that God’s love also includes allowing people to go to hell if they don't choose to respond to His convicting touch. Needless to say, from that day forward, the potential convert is rarely exposed to the “negative” doctrines of the indwelling life of Christ, repentance, rebirth, eternal damnation or the loving judgment of God. Rather, he will be taught techniques and vain philosophies to imitate intimacy with God. One of those techniques most commonly used in the Spiritual Formation movement is meditation, which produces a wellness feeling of euphoria—thus mistaking this feeling for the presence of “god.” And I did say “god” NOT Jesus Christ. Spiritual Formation followers stray from using the name of Jesus Christ. It is a part of their “formation” plan—it simply allows students to form their own god. So many are fooled by this “god” talk. They assume when “god” is mentioned in conversations, lectures, talk shows, books etc.—that they are referencing true Christianity. This, in my mind, is one of Satan’s most cleaver accomplishments to date.

The followers of this movement are building their houses on sand NOT on, and through, Jesus Christ and the absolutes of the Word of God, but rather on this non-confrontive, feel good, self formed religion called Spiritual Formation. This explains why so many teachers of Jesus), or Christian, within their formation plan. They are apt to avoid teachers and preachers who cling to the absolutes of God and might consider them to be harsh, judgmental and condemning. These leaders often reject the “Law being a tutor to lead others to Christ (Gal. 3:24).” My experience is that their bottom-line is usually about prosperity and fame. It is statistically proven that the emergent movement of Spiritual Formation produces many followers and imitators of Christ but FEW actual born-again, Christ indwelt, conservative followers of Jesus. And as a consultant, I know those numbers translate out as recruits and recruits equal dollars.


So there you have it, the difference between a true Christian and an emergent Christ-follower. A person who is a true born-again, has Jesus Christ indwelling them—Jesus actually leading and living through the person from the inside out. And they experientially understand that it is Christ Jesus Himself IN them that gives them the power to walk after the Spirit, which reveals how much they are like Christ. No imitations—only the real deal.