Search Results

Prophecy often stirs up a mix of curiosity, awe, and sometimes confusion. What exactly is its role in the church community? Why does it matter so much, especially for those of us who are passionate about understanding Israel and Biblical End-time prophecy? Let’s dive deep into this topic and explore how prophecy shapes, challenges, and strengthens the faith community. What Is Prophecy in the Church ? When we talk about prophecy in the church, we’re not just referring to dramatic predictions or mysterious visions. Prophecy is a spiritual gift meant to encourage, build up, and comfort the church body. It’s a way God communicates His heart and plans to His people. Think of prophecy as a lighthouse on a foggy night. It doesn’t control the ship’s course but provides guidance and warning to keep the vessel safe. In the church community, prophecy serves a similar purpose. It helps believers stay aligned with God’s will and prepares them for what lies ahead. Prophecy is not about fortune-telling or guessing the future. Instead, it’s about revealing God’s truth in the present moment and sometimes pointing toward future events, especially those related to Israel and the end times. This is why prophecy holds a special place in churches that focus on Biblical End-time teachings. Why Prophecy Matters You might wonder, “Why should prophecy matter to me or my church?” The answer lies in its power to unite, motivate, and prepare the community. Unite : Prophecy brings people together by sharing a common vision or message from God. It creates a sense of purpose and belonging. Motivate : When prophecy reveals God’s plans, it inspires believers to live faithfully and boldly. Prepare : Especially in churches focused on Israel and End-time prophecy, prophecy helps the community stay alert and ready for what God is doing in the world. For example, a prophecy about the restoration of Israel or the coming of the Messiah can ignite hope and deepen faith. It reminds us that God’s promises are real and unfolding. How Prophecy Functions Practically in Church Life Prophecy isn’t just a lofty concept; it has practical applications that impact daily church life. Here’s how it typically works: Encouragement and Edification Prophecy often comes as words of encouragement. Imagine a member of the church sharing a message that lifts your spirit during a tough time. That’s prophecy at work—building up the community. Correction and Guidance Sometimes prophecy serves as a gentle correction. It points out areas where the church or individuals need to realign with God’s will. This keeps the community healthy and growing. Revelation of God’s Will Prophecy can reveal God’s plans for the church or individuals. This might include direction for ministry, warnings about challenges, or insights into future events. Strengthening Faith in End-time Events For churches focused on Biblical End-time prophecy, prophecy strengthens faith by confirming that God’s timeline is unfolding as promised. It helps believers stay vigilant and hopeful. In my experience, prophecy is most effective when it’s shared with humility and tested against Scripture. It’s not about personal glory but about serving the church. Prophecy and Israel: A Special Connection One cannot discuss prophecy in the church community without highlighting the unique role Israel plays. The Bible places Israel at the centre of many prophetic events, especially those concerning the end times. Churches that teach on Israel and Biblical End-time prophecy often see prophecy as a bridge connecting believers to God’s ongoing plan for His chosen people. This connection: Deepens understanding of Scripture Encourages prayer and support for Israel Prepares the church for the fulfilment of God’s promises For instance, prophetic messages about the regathering of Israel or the coming Messiah resonate deeply in these communities. They remind us that prophecy is not just about the future but about God’s faithfulness throughout h How to Discern and Use Prophecy Wisely Prophecy is powerful, but it requires wisdom. How do we discern true prophecy from mere opinion or error? Here are some practical tips: Test everything against Scripture : The Bible is the ultimate standard. If a prophecy contradicts Scripture, it’s not from God. Look for confirmation : True prophecy often aligns with God’s character and is confirmed by other believers or circumstances. Seek humility and love : Prophecy should build up, not tear down. It should be shared with a spirit of love and humility. Pray for discernment : Ask God to help you understand and apply prophecy correctly. Using prophecy wisely means it becomes a tool for growth, not confusion. It helps the church community stay focused on God’s plan and live out their faith boldly.

There can be lot of controversy, legalism, confusion & misunderstanding about this important topic. In our preaching we use mostly NKJV, Amp, ESV, NLT, NIV. Please see below a blog from Ps Mark Driscoll: (It is not that I would agree with him on everything, but he brings it across quite well) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju4dTXz5K74 If want to know more background & don't mind a bit of reading 5-10 min I posted 3 different articles: 1) The haters: The KJV only movement 2) Why are the newer translations of the Bible "missing" verses? 3) What are the most accurate translations of the Bible? 1) The Haters: The KJV Only Movement Thankfully, advocates of KJV Onlyism are not “hating” on us as frequently as they used to. I don't know if this is due to the movement dying out or due to its advocates becoming more civil (highly unlikely), but I am thankful that we do not have to deal with KJV Onlyism as much as we used to. I remember the first time I was exposed to KJV Onlyism. I thought it was utterly ridiculous. I did not know anything about the Textus Receptus, or Erasmus, or King James VI. All I knew was the idea that English speakers are required by God to use a Bible translation from 17th century England is ludicrous. As I am now much more familiar with the arguments, I am still absolutely convinced that KJV Onlyism is terribly misguided and horribly destructive to the Body of Christ. What is the true origin of KJV Onlyism? My informed speculation is that it is due to a resistance to change. In the 20th century, when English translations of the Bible other than the KJV started becoming popular, those who were used to the KJV did not want to change and relearn all the Bible verses they knew. But, they couldn't just admit, "I'm an old fuddy-duddy and don't want to change," so they began developing arguments for the KJV and against all the new translations. These arguments have been improved upon, and have gained traction, and have been passed on to new generations of English-speaking Christians. While they rarely admit it, advocates of KJV Onlyism essentially believe that God re-inspired the Bible in AD 1611. Ultimately, they have to go there because if they place their loyalty on the Textus Receptus (the Greek manuscript compilation used by the KJV translators), that would open the door to new translations being created. And, we can't have that, so, God must have perfectly superintended the KJV translators into creating a perfect representation of His Word in English. From their writings, it appears advocates of KJV Onlyism hate the NKJV, KJ21, and NKJV just as much as they hate the NIV, NASB, ESV, NLT, CSB, etc. No, in order for KJV Onlyism to be true, God had to have re-inspired the Bible through the KJV translators. Does that make any sense to you? It sure doesn't make any sense to me. Now, the more scholarly KJV Onlyites will make arguments for the superiority of the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts behind the KJV. But, if you ask them if a new translation could be created from those manuscripts, watch out. I would advise body armour and ear muffs. Others will argue against the translation methodology of the new translations. But, with the more literal modern translations, like the NASB and ESV, the translation methodology is not dissimilar from what the KJV translators employed. Still others will attack the integrity, morals, and motivations of the modern translators. So, evidently, the group of 17th century British Anglicans behind the KJV were sinless, had perfect theology, and had absolutely no ulterior motives. KJV Onlyism is a good example of Solomon's words in Ecclesiastes that there is “nothing new under the sun” ( Ecclesiastes 1:9 ). When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, he was labelled a heretic by some for daring to “change” the Bible. Centuries later, when Jerome's Latin Vulgate became nearly universally accepted in the Western church, many who dared to attempt updates were murdered. Then, when believers in Germany, England, and other countries began translating the Bible into their common languages, they were labelled heretics, and some were burned at the stake for their vulgarity. KJV Onlyism makes the exact same mistake. Instead of focusing their loyalties on the original Hebrew and Greek, they make their preferred translation of the Bible the only true Bible and persecute anyone with a different preference. There are movements similar to KJV Onlyism in other languages as well, although, thankfully, not with nearly the same followings. Don't be deceived by KJV Onlyism. God did not re-inspire the Bible in AD 1611. The King James Version is not the only Bible we can use. The new translations are not a part of a grand conspiracy to spread false doctrine. When the Bible was written, it was written in the common and current language of the people of that time. When the Bible is translated, it should be translated into the common and current language of the people. My first reaction to being exposed to KJV Onlyism was precisely correct. To force the English-speaking world to use an archaic and antiquated translation is ridiculous. The KJV Onlyites can bemoan all they want, but their concupiscence for disputation is verily brutish. 2) Why are the newer translations of the Bible missing verses? If you compare the King James and New King James Versions with the newer translations (e.g., the New International Version, English Standard Version, Christian Standard Bible, New Living Translation, etc.), you will notice that several verses are entirely missing from the newer translations. Examples of missing verses and passages are John 5:4 , Acts 8:37 , and 1 John 5:7 . Another example is Mark 16:9–20 , although that passage is always placed in the text or in footnotes. In addition to the few missing verses, there are numerous words and phrases that are missing from newer translations. Why do these translations omit these verses, phrases, and words? Are the newer translations taking verses out of the Bible, as some claim? No, the newer translations are not removing verses from the Bible. Rather, the newer translations are attempting to accurately present what the biblical writers originally wrote, and that means leaving out anything that was not part of the original text. Any content “missing” in newer translations is believed by most scholars to not have been in the Bible to begin with. The KJV was translated in AD 1611; the New Testament translators of the KJV used a Greek manuscript called the Textus Receptus . Since that time, many biblical manuscripts have been discovered that predate the Textus Receptus, and these older manuscripts, in theory, are likely to be more accurate. In their research, Bible scholars and textual critics have discovered some differences between the Textus Receptus and the older manuscripts. It seems that, over the course of 1,500 years, some words, phrases, and even sentences were added to the Bible, either intentionally or accidentally. The “missing verses” mentioned above are simply not found in some of the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. So, the newer translations remove these verses or place them in footnotes or in brackets because the translators believe they do not truly belong in the Bible. For example, John 5:4 is included in the KJV, but in the NKJV the verse has a footnote attached explaining that it is not found in many Greek texts; the NASB includes the verse in brackets; the NIV places the verse in a footnote, so John 5:4 is “missing” in the actual text. The disputed portion is this: “waiting for the moving of the waters; for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted” ( John 5:3–4, NASB ). Here is a possible explanation of how John 5:4 ended up in the Bible: a scribe is writing out John 5 , in which Jesus visits the pool of Bethesda : “Here a great number of disabled people used to lie—the blind, the lame, the paralyzed. One who was there had been an invalid for thirty-eight years” ( John 5:3–5 ). But then the scribe gets to verse 7, as Jesus speaks to the man about his desire to be healed, and the man says, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred” (verse 7). The scribe considers the man’s reference to “stirred” water as a source of possible confusion, as John does not expound on it. So the scribe writes a quick note in the margin to explain why the invalid was waiting for “stirred” water—an angel came down at certain times to make something special happen. The scribe’s notation was an attempt to aid the reader in understanding Scripture. But then, as more and more copies of that manuscript were made, the scribe’s marginal note was transferred from the margin and inserted into the actual text as part of the passage. It may be that the later copyist misconstrued the intention of the marginal note: instead of being a commentary of sorts, the note was seen as the scribe’s attempt to correct a mistake, inserting a verse he had accidentally left out. Thus, what the scribe meant as a helpful gloss resulted in John 5 expanding by one verse. It is important to remember that the verses in question are of minor significance. None of them change in any way the crucial themes of the Bible, nor do they have any impact on the Bible’s doctrines—Jesus’ death and resurrection; Christ’s being the only way of salvation; and the doctrines of heaven and hell, sin and redemption, and the nature and character of God. These doctrines are preserved intact through the work of the Holy Spirit, who safeguards the Word of God for all generations. It is not a matter of the newer translations missing verses, and it is not a matter of the KJV translators adding to the Bible. It is a matter of determining, through careful research and textual science, what content was most likely part of the original manuscripts of the Bible. 3) What is the most accurate Bible translation? Choosing the most accurate translation is difficult because it is somewhat like asking, “What is the best brand of truck?” It depends on what you plan to do with it and what criteria you are using to evaluate it. Each translation of the Bible follows certain translation principles that will affect the final work. Some translations try to be “literal,” aiming for an exact, word-for-word correspondence as much as possible. Others try to be “dynamic,” or “thought-for-thought,” providing the overall meaning of the text in modern language, not necessarily providing word-for-word correspondence. One translation might be better for study, and another might be better for public reading. Someone reading on a fifth-grade level might prefer a translation different from what a college student is reading. Translation is not an exact science. There is often no perfect one-to-one correspondence between words in different languages. Additionally, every language has idioms and figures of speech—notoriously hard to translate—as well as historical and cultural factors that may affect the connotation of words in ways that cannot be translated. An example in English will help illustrate. If you have a friend who is involved in a live theatre production, and you want to wish her well, you might say, “Break a leg,” an idiom that, in the theater world, replaces saying, “Good luck” (which is considered bad luck to say). If you translate the idiom literally, the readers may get the wrong impression if they do not understand the cultural hijinks behind the phrase. In this case, translating break a leg as “good luck” might be better. A third option might be to leave the expression intact but include an explanatory footnote about what is actually meant. As our example shows, the most literal translation may not be the most accurate. The more a translation tries to express the original meaning in contemporary language, the more subjective interpretation is introduced. Further, readability can become an issue. A very accurate “literal” translation would be very unreadable. An Interlinear New Testament gives the Greek text on one line and, under it, the approximate English word for each Greek word. If you simply read the English words, you are left, in most cases, with a confusing jumble of words. It is very literal but practically meaningless. As the translation becomes more readable in English, it will become less literal. Most translations are on a continuum between being “literal” (staying as close to the original words and literary structure as possible) and “dynamic” (communicating the meaning of the passage in a way that the modern reader will understand, even if extra words are introduced that are not in the original text). There are dozens of English translations to choose from. The best ones are done by teams of competent evangelical scholars and reviewed by others. No single individual has all the skills necessary today to produce a good translation. Below are some of the most prominent and best translations: The King James Version is the most important book in the English language, having shaped the way English was spoken for hundreds of years. Many people grew up with the King James Version and still love the style and beauty of the translation. Someone once quipped, “The King James Version is as beautiful as Shakespeare and just as simple.” For some people, the Elizabethan English might be a challenge, but there is nothing wrong with accepting a challenge. The New King James Version is a more readable version of the King James, removing many of the archaic terms and modernizing the syntax. Both the KJV and the NKJV are “literal” translations. The New American Standard Bible stays as close as possible to the literal reading of the original text, preserving the literary structure, while still being readable in English. The NASB was very popular with serious Bible students for 20–30 years, from the 1980s to the early 2000s. However, some felt that it was difficult to read, especially for more casual or beginning readers who were not interested in “studying” the Bible. The English Standard Version has since filled the place of the NASB as a “literal” but readable translation. It seems to have replaced the NASB for many who prefer a translation on the “literal” end of the continuum. The New International Version is a “dynamic” translation. The translators’ concern was communicating the meaning in a way that is easily readable in English, even if it meant a departure from the original wording. The NIV has been very successful and is currently the most popular modern English version. The New Living Translation is by far the most “dynamic” of the most popular modern translations. When first released, the NLT sold very well, and for a time it looked as though it might overtake the NIV as the most popular dynamic translation. In recent years the NLT has faded while the NIV’s sales remain strong. The New English Translation or NET Bible is an internet-based version, although it is also available in book form. The NET contains extensive notes on the translation. While other modern versions may undergo a major revision every decade or so, the NET Bible is continually updated and revised as needed. For rapid reading of the text, a more dynamic translation such as the NLT or the NIV might be helpful. For more precise study, a more literal version such as the NASB, ESV, or NET would be preferable. When studying a passage, a good practice is to read it in several versions, both literal and dynamic. If there are places where the various translations seem to go in different directions, then more study is necessary to determine what issues of translation and interpretation are in play. Of course, consulting the original languages would be advantageous at that point, but for those who are not able to do so, the NET Bible and critical commentaries are a good option. Good commentaries will not simply tell the reader what the text means but explain the evidence for the various options and why the one chosen by the commentator is best. One should avoid interpretations or points of doctrine that are based on a single translation of a single word or phrase. One must also resist the tendency to “shop” for a translation that supports his preferred interpretation of a passage. The Message by Eugene Peterson and The Living Bible by Kenneth Taylor are rather free renderings of the original text as the authors understood it. The MSG and the TLB are the works of individuals, not committees, so there is far more room for error and personal bias. They are closer to personal paraphrases than to translations. Anyone who is reading either one of these would do well to keep in mind that the words express what a single man understood the text to mean. We recommend choosing one of the other translations, above, for one’s primary Bible. The New Revised Standard Version is the most popular version among non-evangelical Bible scholars. Evangelicals tend to stay away from this translation, as the translation team included many who were not committed to the authority of the biblical text. However, they were competent scholars in the biblical languages. In the final analysis, the choice of the “most accurate” translation will be a subjective decision. For study, we recommend the NASB, ESV, and NET, and we also recommend comparison with the NIV or NLT. We also have no problem recommending the KJV or NKJV, but comparing it with other versions helps identify points of tension in need of further research. For variety, one might choose a different translation each year to read through, noting anything that sounds different or seems to give a different meaning to a text. Every translation done in good faith by competent scholars can be considered accurate and authoritative. At the same time, human scholarship is imperfect; also, translations need to be updated over time as the English language changes.

Enough with sermons crafted to be consumed instead of words that cut to the heart. Enough with pulpits that have become stages and preachers who have become performers. Where are the preachers who eat locusts and honey? Where are the ones who have been stripped by obscurity, who learned to hear God without a microphone, who were forged in prayer before they were ever trusted with a platform? The fear of the Lord has been traded for relevance, and holiness has been exchanged for popularity. And hear me friends, the Spirit of God is not impressed with our conferences, our branding, or our followings. God is not endorsing our man made structures in this hour, He is raising up men and women that are unknown, uncelebrated, yet dripping with the oil of heaven. God is dismantling pulpits He never built and exposing ministries He never commissioned. He is silencing voices that He never anointed and He is drying up wells that were fed by self promotion instead of sacrifice. God is withdrawing His breath from what He never authored. Stages will go dark. Platforms will shake. Titles will mean nothing when weighed in the balance of eternity. And in its place, the Lord is releasing wilderness voices. Unpolished. Unapologetic. Uncontrollable. Voices formed in obscurity, refined by fire, and loyal only to truth. These voices will not ask for permission. They will not bow to culture. They will not negotiate the Gospel. John the Baptist did not have a platform, he had a cry. He did not flatter kings, he confronted sin. He did not build a brand, he prepared the way of the Lord. And just like in the days of John, the wilderness voices of today will not sound smooth, they will sound dangerous. They won’t preach for affirmation, they will preach for transformation. They won’t build movements around themselves, they will point relentlessly to Jesus and say, “He must increase, and I must decrease.” The next move of God will not be flashy, it will be holy. It will not be marketed, it will be marked. It will come through preachers who smell like prayer, sound like thunder, and carry a message that costs them everything. The era of celebrity Christianity is coming to an end and the hour of the wilderness voices is here.

Two photos below showing the David Declaration Please back the David Declaration that nearly 100 national and international medical, scientific and law experts have signed Fully aligned with One Nation’s aims to bring justice to the perpetrators of what is now clearly the inhuman, fraudulent response to Covid We seek COMPENSATION from Big Pharma for all victims, whether of Covid injections & mandates or of lockdowns & unscientific restrictions We want CARE, TREATMENT & CURE for the crippling effects in many people who got the Covid spike protein injections We want restoration of CHOICE as essential for restoring ACCOUNTABILITY & thereby TRUTH & then JUSTICE We want APOLOGIES to those affected A sample of the early signatories from Australia, USA, Europe, … include eminent doctors, research scientists & statisticians across many medical fields, plus ethicists, lawyers, economists, … Prof Angus Dalgleish Emeritus Prof Wendy HoyEmeritus Prof Robert ClancyKevin McKernan Dr David J. SpeicherProf Paul E MarikProf Ian BrighthopeProf Robyn Cosford Dr Christopher Neil Kara Thomas Dr Julie Sladden Dr Duncan Syme Dr Andrew McIntyre Magnus A Mansie Dr Jessica Rose A/Prof Mark JonesProf Gigi Foster Dr Raphael LatasterJulian Gillespie Prof Augusto ZimmermannProf Gabriel Moens AM Peter Fam Katie Ashby-Koppens Prof Brendan VoteProf Paul FrijtersProf Geoff ForbesA/Prof Peter ParryA/Prof Jonathan D GilthorpeA/Prof Michael SladdenA/Prof Maarten FornerodDr Angela Jeanes Dr Jeyanthi KunadhasanDr Vibeke MannicheDr Luke McLindonDr Conny TurniDr Nicholas J. HudsonDr Astrid LefringhausenDr Andrew MadryDr Monique O’ConnorDr Shirley PragerDr Kylie O'BrienDr Matthew RoutleyDr Julian FidgeDr Sven RománDr Geoff PainDr Marcin ZiemskiDr Jeanne Annette RungbyDr Jan HeathChristof Plothe DOWilliam D H Parry  TRUTH BOMB: Peter McCullough Doesn’t Hold Back — “IT WAS NOT SAFE BY DESIGN.” @P_McCulloughMD: “The lethal part of the virus in the vaccinated, it’s circulating in the blood … It is a KILLER PROTEIN.” Bet your doctor didn’t share that LIFE-ALTERING fact with you... https://www.facebook.com/reel/663148106622210 … And a growing list of professionals internationally including us as pastors and on behalf of Harvest Church Caloundra. We as a church have taken this stand from the beginning of the so-called mandates "for our safety": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvf5yEo__ZY

During the "plandemic" the mandates, lockdowns & forced / coerced medical treatment which resulted in medical tyranny, brushing aside all democratic freedoms based on so-called "expert" & "scientific" advice  implemented (past & present) in various forms & severity around by governments & businesses / corporations has been unnecessary & even potentially harmful: https://youtu.be/cYUKR7-NgTQ?si=O6z_V2PPqudKHpyB https://youtu.be/abrIaFLExRI?si=YCjFtvUhjN38_L0m Also too harsh, extreme overreach, compassionless, unscientific, diabolical & hypocritical (bottle shops & brothels were allowed to stay open, football games continued, but church services were not allowed) , ineffective, unconstitutional (1947 Nuremburg Code) & pushed by un- elected Globalist powers & large Corporations with ulterior motives.  How terrible & heartless that people in the medical profession & firefighters who did not go along with this were not permitted to return to work, weddings & funerals could not be attended by loved ones, though even then there was enough evidence that it does not stop transmission & is not that "safe & effective".   Pastors, churches & Christian organisations at large who just used Romans 13 as a weak excuse, to obey (submission & obedience are not the same thing)  to these ungodly mandates (which are not laws)   & potentially harmful untested medications do not understand the Biblical, Historical, Prophetic & Political context and set by silently, instead of standing up & speaking out in courage.  The churches & pastors who fully obeyed these mandates allowed governments to control who could attend church & went along with segregating or even worse refusing entry for people who were conscientious objectors to certain not properly tested medical drugs & there God-given & constitutional rights & freedom, need to repent of this error. It is all about control not health: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pPHj4LuJZg4 Please also listen to an excellent & passionate speech from Pauline Hanson in parliament on 14/08/2024, the best I have heard till so far: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALdVitoNrjM There were also plenty of other sources & voices besides the MSM to make an informed decision not to along with this, which we did as a church, we are not saying this on hindsight: https://youtu.be/fvf5yEo__ZY     If this is not resolved & we "just move on" we are bound to repeat this or worse! This is unreconcilable with the Gospel we preach. Have we learned from this? This has been the greatest medical experiment unleashed on mankind & the lasting harmful effects are now starting to show, not to mention the mental & economic lasting damage on society.  More tests like this or worse are coming, be prepared. Where do you stand as a believer, pastor / leader or church?  Please take these Scriptures below to heart: 2 Peter 3:16 (Referring also to wrong interpretation of Romans 13:1-2) speaking about these things as he does in all of his letters. In which there are some things that are difficult to understand, which the untaught and unstable [who have fallen into error] twist and misinterpret, just as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. Psalm 94:20   Can a throne of destruction be allied with You, One which frames and devises mischief by decree [under the sacred name of law]? Nehemiah 9:37    Because of our sins, its abundant harvest goes to the kings you have placed over us. They rule over our bodies and our cattle as they please. We are in great distress.

If you want to know more about this "controversial" topic please also refer to my other posts: https://www.harvestministriesnz.com/post/what-to-do-if-you-miss-the-rapture https://www.harvestministriesnz.com/post/3-reasons-the-rapture-could-happen-today https://www.harvestministriesnz.com/post/fed-up-with-the-rapture-doctrine-being-mocked-attacked A few years ago I met for a coffee with a Christian brother to encourage one another in the faith. But unfortunately it turned out to be a "rapture attacking session" , even though I never brought it up. He must have figured out what I believe from other sources. He kept referring to the fact I was deceived by Darby. I have never read Darby, but some time I probably will when I will find the time. It’s the most persistent lie concerning the Rapture. I have either read or heard it more times than I can count. Though it’s been debunked countless times, a great many saints remain convinced that the doctrine of the pre-Tribulation Rapture originated with John Darby. Although they insist that no one believed in such a thing before him, it’s simply not true. Let me be clear: If anyone tells you that this teaching originated with John Darby, they are either purposely misleading you or have themselves been the victim of someone deceiving them about the origin of our “blessed hope.” If The Bible Is True, There Must Be A Rapture Regardless of the timing of the Rapture, the teaching that Jesus will someday appear and catch-up both dead and living saints to meet Him in the air is biblically-based. Scripture provides several details regarding the sequence of events that we now refer to as the “Rapture.” The late Dr. Ed Hindson, former professor at Liberty University, beloved Bible scholar, and author, put it this way: If you disagree on the timing of the rapture, please don’t tell people, “There’s never going to be a rapture.” No, there must be a rapture or the Bible is not true. There must be a time when the archangel shouts, when the trumpet sounds, and the dead in Christ are raised and the living are caught up (1 Thessalonians 4:13–18). We may differ on the timing of the rapture but not the fact of the rapture. We find references to the “Rapture” in John 14:2–3 ; 1 Corinthians 15:50–55 ; Philippians 3:20–21 ; Romans 8:23–25 ; Titus 2:11–14 ; and Colossians 3:4 . Putting these passages together, we arrive at a series of events that comprise our “blessed hope.” If the Bible is true, there must be a still future time when Jesus appears, raises the dead in Christ, and catches living believers up to meet Him in the air ( 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 ; 1 Corinthians 15:47-55 ). Since the words of these texts have never reached fulfilment anytime in the past, they point to a yet future reality, which we call the Rapture. It’s the time the Lord gives us our immortal and glorified bodies, the essence of our future experience of eternal life. Because the Bible is true, the event we now designate as the Rapture awaits a future and certain fulfilment. The Origin Of The Word Many people object to our hope of meeting Jesus in the air because the word “Rapture” doesn’t appear on the pages of Scripture. However, that’s not true; it appears in a previous version of the Bible. Long ago, it appeared in a Latin translation from about AD 400 called the Vulgate. The Vulgate used the Latin word rapturo to translate the Greek word harpazo in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 . The words “caught up” in our English translations capture the essence of the Greek harpazo in the text just as the Latin rapturo , the origin of our word “Rapture,” did when Jerome and others translated the Bible into Latin. In his book Dispensationalism Before Darby , Dr. William C. Watson lists ten instances of Bible scholars using the word the word “Rapture” beginning with Joseph Mede in 1627 through the time of Thomas Broughton, an English pastor, in 1768. In the centuries after the Reformation, the usage of the word “Rapture” to describe the event depicted below in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 became commonplace in many protestant churches. In a letter that he wrote about these verses, Joseph Mede used the word “Rapture” six times when referring to this verse. Even though Joseph Mede didn’t place Jesus’ appearing before the start of the Tribulation period, his usage of the word “Rapture” establishes a four-hundred-year history of Bible students using the word “Rapture” to refer the event that the Apostle Paul wrote about in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 . Two centuries before John Darby was born, the word “Rapture” was already commonly use in Bible-believing churches. Early Beliefs In A Rapture Before A Time Of Tribulation The belief that Jesus would take His saints out of the earth before a time of Tribulation on the earth dates back to the first centuries of the church. In AD 180, Irenaeus wrote Against Heresies to refute the errors of Gnosticism, which posed a great threat to the church at the time. In Against Heresies , Book 5, Chapter 29, he wrote: And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be Tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” In the above quote, Irenaeus used the same Greek word for “caught up,” harpazo , that Paul used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 for the Lord catching up living believers to meet Him in the air. Irenaeus specifically placed the fulfilment of this verse ahead of the time of “Tribulation” that Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:21 and thus before the Second Coming, which the Lord said would happen after this time of judgment on the earth (Matthew 247:29). This highly respected theologian of the early church envisioned a fulfilment of the harpazo followed by a time of extended Tribulation on the earth. He regarded the Rapture and Second Coming as two distinct occurrences separated by at least the second half of the seven-year Tribulation. Cyprian (AD 210-258), a bishop in the city of Carthage, guided his church through a period of intense persecution and suffering during which time he also became a martyr. In his book, Treatises of Cyprian , he wrote: We who see that terrible things have begun, and know that still more terrible things are imminent, may regard it as the greatest advantage to depart from it as quickly as possible. Do you not give God thanks, do you not congratulate yourself, that by an early departure you are taken away, and delivered from the shipwrecks and disasters that are imminent? Let us greet the day which assigns each of us to his own home, which snatches us hence, and sets us free from the snares of the world and restores us to paradise and the kingdom. Cyprian believed in “an early departure” of the Church before further disasters occurred on the earth. He believed the time of additional trouble was “imminent” and thus also a “departure.” He believed that the Lord would take believers out of the world so they wouldn’t experience the troubling times ahead for those left behind. His reference to “snatches us” sounds just like the catching up of the Church in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 . Cyprian’s beliefs signify a third century AD belief in a pre-Tribulation Rapture . Another unmistakable reference to the pre-Tribulation Rapture comes from Ephraim of Edessa (AD 306–373), who was a poet, a writer of hymns, and a preacher. The quote below comes from Ephraem’s sermon entitled “On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World.” Some historians believe someone else wrote it in AD 622 and ascribed it to Ephraem in order to lend credibility to it. Dr. Grant Jeffrey, who did extensive research on this sermon and obtained a translation of it on his own from a Greek scholar, believes it’s more likely that Ephraem himself preached the sermon sometime around AD 323, just a couple years before the Nicene church council. Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins. The above quote dates back to the early fourth century AD. Even if we concede that someone wrote this sermon in AD 622, as some maintain, we still have a definitive adherence to it a pre-Tribulation Rapture 1,200 years before the birth of John Darby! The above sampling of quotes are valid and accepted translations that clearly establish early beliefs within the church of Jesus taking His church out of the world before a time of great tribulation on the earth and returning to the earth with His saints after this time of trouble. Back To The Bible This attempt to discredit the Rapture by making it seem as though it’s a relatively new and thus an unfounded belief is an effort to divert our focus from what the Bible teaches us about our “blessed hope” ( Titus 2:11-14 ). The witness of church history confirms that the scripturally-sound doctrine of the pre-Tribulation Rapture existed in the earliest centuries of the church. More importantly than that, however, is what the Bible says. The Rapture is a clearly defined occurrence in such passages as 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11 , John 14:2–3 , 1 Corinthians 15:50–55 , Philippians 3:20–21 , Romans 8:23–25 , Titus 2:11–14 , and Colossians 3:4 . The majority of Bible-believing churches during the twentieth century not only adhered to a pre-Tribulation Rapture, but its pastors also unashamedly proclaimed it to their parishioners. The widespread popularity of this belief resulted from the biblically-sound teaching of a great many devout men of God during the late 1800s and early 1900s. John Darby was one of many who taught and wrote about our “blessed hope.”

I have written this article a while ago for our website under "Values & Absolutes" But I want to remind us that the lies & distortion is only getting worse, especially when it is regarding Israel, Trump, Islam & Immigration: We consider the Main Stream "legacy" media mostly anti-Christian, antisemitic, biased & unreliable, controlled & run by governments & corporations with left & woke ideologies, especially 'Downunder"    And they are all lying (half-truths are also lies): https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5uQqpZl2GG4 Seeing is no longer believing: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1566229504336626 A recommended alternative is:  https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sky+news+australia https://dailydeclaration.org.au/about/                                   https://harbingersdaily.com/                                                                                                                                                     https://t.me/s/beholdisraelchannel   (Am https://www.youtube.com/@TBNIsrael https://cbn.com/news https://goodsauce.news/ https://jamesmacpherson.substack.com/ https://www.youtube.com/topherfield https://www.youtube.com/@Erin_Molan/podcasts https://www.australiansagainstantisemitism.org/home https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1gxxeC0elWutUUmPEr74NA https://c4israel.com.au/articles/ https://thelightaustralia.com/ We are not necessarily agreeing with all the above resources, but you can not rely on the MSM in Australia for developing a truthful & Biblical worldview!

I have been concerned about this for many years & have warned against this for many years. When we planted & pastored our church from 1995-2000 in Maastricht, the Netherlands, we saw them already praying on the iconic bridge crossing the "Maas" river & already saw how the other major cities would soon already see a Muslim takeover. See, the strategy is all in the open, it has all been recorded in the Qur’an , and now they boldly proclaim it from many Mosques. Do I fear or should we fear? No absolutely not! The Lord God is still in control, but like Dietrich Bonhoeffer with only another handful pastors was warning against the rise of the Nazi's, we need to warn against the rise of Islam. But what have these 2 in common you could ask? Well: an intense hate against Jews, Israel, Christians & the Bible. And we can now include the extreme left, Marxists, Socialists & Communists, and trust me there is very little difference in practice between these. We can now see the allegiance between the left & Islam manifested in many western countries & cities, with New York as the most recent example. And this is also happening in Australia right in front of our eyes. Both the left / woke are now aligned with radical Islam. What a contradiction in values, but yet they are united in their hate for Jew & Christians alike! Sadly how applicable was the opening statement in the message & the message itself (14/12/25-10.00am) in the light of this terrible terrorist attack at Bondi Beach just only a few hours after: https://youtu.be/hC7I4VhIlN4 Please listen to this reel from Jack Hibbs: https://www.facebook.com/reel/1151718023387985 Derek prince warned us many years ago against the dangers of Islam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCCm8LtZMbU Also highly recommend reading this article from Derek Prince: https://www.derekprince.com/teaching/16-7 Charlie Kirk's warning to the West about radical Islam: https://www.facebook.com/reel/1588544382188989 Violent Jihad: A Perversion of Islam or a Return to Its Foundations?: https://dailydeclaration.org.au/2025/12/26/violent-jihad-islam/

Australia’s Envoy of Islamophobia has released a report with 54 recommendations on how to combat Islamophobia . [1] Islamophobia is defined as the fear, prejudice, or hatred of Muslims and Islam, often leading to discrimination and hostility. This prejudice can result in verbal and physical attacks, social marginalisation, and bias, affecting Muslims. The report highlights examples of Islamophobia and asserts that it is now widespread in Australian society. In this article I want to present a Christian perspective on responding to Islamophobia. The Islamophobia Report The report by the special envoy is, in my opinion, disturbing. James McPherson has given an excellent review of it and I report that here: Special envoy Aftab Malik wants the Australian Government to formally recognise International Day to Combat Islamophobia. Government departments are asked to hold workshops addressing unconscious bias against Islam. The Home Affairs Department is instructed to review how anti-terror laws might have unintended consequences for Muslim communities. If the envoy gets his way, schoolteachers will undergo training on Islamophobia as well as on Islamic theology. Universities would be required to incorporate modules on Islamophobia as essential components of their courses. And all Parliamentarians, and their advisers, would be made to undergo compulsory training on Islamophobia, every year. But there was one recommendation I found particularly curious. And to me, it demonstrated perfectly just how unserious this entire report was. The Albanese government’s Islamophobia envoy wants an inquiry into “anti-Palestinian racism”. Because, of course, when Australians get cranky about their CBD being shut down every weekend by marchers chanting “From the river to the sea,” it could not possibly be about the Hamas flags, the intifada slogans, or the calls to wipe out the world’s only Jewish state. No, no — Australians just woke up one morning and thought: You know what we need today? A new minority to irrationally hate. Aftab Malik says Palestinians feel unsafe expressing their identity. Possibly because their public “identity” — has, for the past two years, almost been expressed by blocking traffic, shouting for the death of Jewish soldiers, and waving banners that make ASIO twitch. But instead of telling activists to tone it down, Aftab Malik wants taxpayers to fund a Commission of Inquiry into why Australians are not applauding. It is the progressive playbook in a nutshell: do not change the behaviour — criminalise the criticism. So sure, let us have a national investigation into why Australians are not thrilled about weekly traffic jams and chants for the destruction of Israel. A sober response to this report would be that it is an attempt to subjugate all criticism of Islam. Possible Concerns about Islam Why is there a concern about Islam in the wider community? Are there valid reasons to view Islam with suspicion? I think there are: Muslims tend not to assimilate in the same manner that other migrant groups have. Muslims are often in the news for protesting issues that do not concern mainstream Australia. There are Muslim majority countries where Islam is dominant and the perception is that there is intolerance of other religions. An horrific example of Muslim aggression against Christians is seen in Nigeria where thousands of Christians have been killed by Muslim jihadists. One voice that raises these concerns is that of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She gained international attention following the murder of Theo van Gogh by an Islamist who threatened that she would be next. Her book Infidel  tells her story. [2] Raised in a strict Muslim family, Hirsi Ali survived civil war, female mutilation, brutal beatings, adolescence as a devout believer during the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, and life in four troubled, unstable countries ruled largely by despots. She escaped from a forced marriage and sought asylum in the Netherlands, where she earned a college degree in political science, tried to help her tragically depressed sister adjust to the West, and fought for the rights of Muslim women and the reform of Islam as a member of Parliament. Under constant threat, demonised by reactionary Islamists and politicians, disowned by her father, and expelled from family and clan, she refuses to be silenced. She has become a Christian and warns of the dangers of fundamentalist Islam to those who hold to Western values. Another area of concern is the teachings expounded in the Quran. The Quran is held by Muslims to be the infallible word of God. Therefore, its teachings are important for the sincere Muslim. Here is a simple outline of what the Quran has to say about the treatment of infidels or the unbeliever in three different surahs (chapters): Surah 2:191 – “slay the unbelievers.” Surah 3:28 — “Muslims must not take infidels as their friends.” Surah 47:4 — “Do not seek peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them.” There are many references in the Quran that echo the same sentiments. Disagreement is Not Hate It is important that we understand that disagreeing with a religious view or an ideology does not mean that we are embarking on hate speech. To put it simply, disagreement is not hate. If we are restricted in the ability to criticise a differing point of view, a religion, or an ideology then we are removing a fundamental human right of free speech. I do not trust our current government to act wisely in this situation. Recently $27 million has been given to an Islamic group where the Mufti associated with it has called for jihad. This is an irresponsible act on the part of our government. It seems to me that the current federal Labor government is keen to appease Muslims but not so keen to address other vital issues of discrimination. Christians are discriminated against. I hear nothing from them expressing a concern about this. They have aired some concerns about antisemitism but actions speak louder than words. They have done nothing to combat antisemitism. Rather, in my opinion they are subtly promoting it. That may be contentious but that is how I perceive their actions. I do not condone attacks on Muslim women because they wear a particular garment that identifies them as Muslim. But there are laws to prevent this and there is no need for any other laws to be implemented. If we are going to have a socially cohesive society, then we must not allow an intolerant, totalitarian ideology to determine what we are allowed to say and what we are allowed to do. Christianity and Islam are not Compatible Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on the cross for our sins, and on the third day rose again from the dead. He lives now and is fulfilling the kingdom purposes of God bringing history to an end when he returns. This is witnessed to in the Holy Scriptures and in our ancient creeds. This is in stark contrast to Islamic beliefs about Jesus. The Quran has several references to Jesus, and here I note two important ones. First, the crucifixion of Jesus is denied. [3] Second, the Quran strongly asserts that “God” does not have a son and that he is one and so denies the Trinity. [4] To question what Muslims believe and express our viewpoint is not Islamophobia. In a free society we have the right to defend our beliefs and challenge those who disagree with us. The Way Ahead The way ahead is not to allow a totalitarian, intolerant, ideology to have the final say in all areas of our society. This is what the 54 recommendations in the report would permit. The recommendations should be rejected. Therefore, there should be an encouragement to respect people, to respect our differences and allow sensible dialogue where appropriate. The acceptance of the report on Islamophobia as a basis for a policy in responding to Muslims’ beliefs and practices in our country would be a serious restriction on free speech in Australia. I point out that one of the recommendations is that the issue of r eligion should be removed from anything to do with terrorism . However, most terrorist incidents are perpetrated by radical Muslims. [5] We cannot stand against evil if we do not recognise what evil is. Conclusion The narrative associated with Islamophobia is being used to restrict sensible debate. Islamophobia is being used to identify problems that can be dealt with by laws already legislated. To cry Islamophobia when an injustice occurs and hence prescribe special treatment for Muslims is to disrupt social cohesion and it discriminates against non-Muslims.

An interview with historian Raymond Ibrahim challenges ten enduring myths about Islam, arguing historical clarity is essential amid terrorism, immigration pressures, and Western cultural self-doubt. One of the most important podcast interviews of 2025 has snuck in right at the end of the year. Academic historian, public speaker and Islamic scholar, Raymond Ibrahim spoke for over two hours on the podcast platform Triggernometry about “ The Real History of Islam “. In light of the recent Islamic terrorist attack at Bondi , the whole thing makes for required listening. What follows is a summary of some of the most salient points. In particular, debunking ten of the biggest myths relating to the religion of Islam. The list is in no way comprehensive, but my hope is that more people will take the time to benefit from the entire interview as well as Ibrahim’s internet resources and numerous books on the subject. The Ten Biggest Myths about Islam Muhammad was always convinced the revelations he received through the “angel Gabriel” were legitimate. In reality, Muhammad was initially harassed, beaten and physically assaulted. This caused him to seriously question that he was interacting with God, and he feared that it might even be the devil. Instead, he had to be convinced by his wife that the supernatural experiences and forceful messages he was receiving were indeed from ‘Allah’ and that he needed to ‘submit’. Muhammad was a man of peace and never compelled people to convert . While early on in Islamic history this was true, especially when his followers were weak and outnumbered, as his power and influence grew, so did the content of his message. In the words of Ibrahim, the founder of Islam was essentially a “war lord”, and later revelations abrogated earlier ones which called for calm. Jihad only means to “strive and struggle” against one’s own failings and has nothing to do with acts of violence. As the example of Muhammad himself clearly illustrates, military conquest was integral to Islam’s growth. That said, jihad can also take many different forms as the Jihad of the Tongue, Jihad of the Pen, Jihad of the Wealth and even Jihad of the Babies. Whatever promotes Islam contributes to the success of Islam’s “holy war” against unbelievers. The consumption of alcohol is always wrong. While that is a requirement put upon Muslims in this life, Ibrahim shows how it is strangely reversed in the next. Experiencing paradise in Islam is about indulging in “rivers of wine delicious to those who drink” (Qur’an 47:15). This comes with the added promise of never becoming drunk or having a hangover – “Their wine will not cause intoxication or headache” (Qur’an 37:47; 56:19). The Crusades were an unprovoked attack upon Muslims. The popular scholarly narrative among some historians is that before the first crusade in 1095, Muslims had lived in peaceful co-existence with Christians for five hundred years. Once again, this is patently untrue. Muslims had attacked and conquered many Christian regions such as Egypt, Syria and even where the great Augustine of Hippo once lived in north Africa (modern day Tunisia). For more on why the Crusades were seen as a moral necessity, see Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades (HarperCollins, 2009). The Crusaders were motivated by gold, fame and land. Once again, this is simply not true. Instead, the main motivation of the Crusaders was to provide protection for Christians travelling through the Holy Land on pilgrimage. There was also a concern for the overall security of the region and the increasing threat of Muslim military expansion. If anything, the Muslims were the greater fighting force, and what is remarkable is how successful the Christian crusaders ultimately were in achieving what they did, especially via the first crusade. The Spanish Inquisition was intolerant and evil. The historical context in which this practice arose is much more complicated and nuanced that many people realise. After the re-conquest of Granada in Spain, approximately 500,000 Muslims claimed to have suddenly converted to Christianity. However, they did this to deliberately deceive and undermine their new Christian rulers. As a result, church authorities had to actively discern who was genuine in their faith and who was not, lest a new form of religious jihad arise from within. Islam produced a “Golden Age” of technology and cultural development. Many of the countries that were colonised by Europeans understood what occurred, in Ibrahim’s words, as “the greatest time” in their history. This is because European colonisation brought medicine, learning, science and technology. In comparison, most of the places where Islam conquered were completely devastated. In short, Islam didn’t create civilisation, but instead cannibalised the ones which already existed after Islam conquered them by force. Islam is currently invading the West. While some might obviously think and feel this way, the mass migration of Muslims has occurred due to Western political leaders actively enabling it. Hence, what we are witnessing is not so much an invasion as an intentional invitation, which we are increasingly reaping the fruit of. What’s more, “white guilt” is a manufactured cultural cancer which is destroying the West from within. Radical Muslims are not being true to their religion. Most people consider 10% of Muslims as being “radical” in their religious beliefs. However, it is nominal Muslims who are not being faithful to the tenets of their religious beliefs. Why is that people who are serious about following Jesus forgive their enemies, whereas Muslims who follow Muhammad follow his example by slaying them? Ibrahim has written extensively on this issue from a historical perspective, especially in his latest book, The Two Swords of Christ: The Five Centuries of War between Islam and the Warrior Monks of Christendom (Simon & Schuster, 2025). Bondi Terror, Immigration, Assimilation and Western Self-Loathing The recent terrorist attack in Bondi has revealed just how serious the threat of Islamic terrorism is. It is vital that everyone understands the religious beliefs which are motivating the people who are coming in — largely unchecked — into the West. When these immigrants are unwilling to assimilate, but instead remain in smaller ghettos, extremism thrives. Ibrahim’s most provocative point, though, is that it is not Muslim people who are ultimately the problem, but the policies of politicians in the West. The self-loathing and hatred of our own country is the thing that is destroying Western civilisation the most. The religion of Islam is simply filling an ideological vacuum which Western liberalism has inflicted upon itself. Like the proverbial Trojan Horse in Greek history, what we need to understand and realise is that under the ‘gift’ of multiculturalism lies a latent danger which needs to be recognised and dealt with before it’s too late. For places such as the United Kingdom and possibly even Australia, the fighting has already begun.

The issue of “Climate Change” is one that many Christians do not know how to grapple with. Is planet Earth genuinely on a collision course with catastrophic man-made climate change, or is this another issue that requires critical and Biblical examination? 𝗦𝗖𝗜𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘 𝗚𝗢𝗧 𝗔𝗡 𝗘𝗔𝗥𝗟𝗬 𝗖𝗛𝗥𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗠𝗔𝗦 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗘𝗡𝗧 — 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗟𝗜𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗘 𝗔𝗣𝗢𝗖𝗔𝗟𝗬𝗣𝗦𝗘 𝗝𝗨𝗦𝗧 𝗚𝗢𝗧 𝗥𝗘𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗘𝗗 (26-12-25) https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1430524258632555&set=a.501955888156068 In an interview with David Fiorazo on “ Worldview Matters ,” Answers In Genesis Founder and CEO Ken Ham revealed that climate change science is rooted in more bias and corruption than many realize. “Back in the 70s, I started dealing with the creation-evolution issue in a big way. It’s really a battle to understand the difference between observational science, what you actually observe, and historical science, your beliefs and interpretations about the past when you weren’t there,” Ham stated. “Observational science is one thing. That’s the science that builds our technology. But when it comes to historical science—beliefs about the past—I want people to understand, dealing with climate change is exactly the same.” Ham highlighted that record-keeping for carbon dioxide levels goes back only 70 years and “accurate” temperature measurements a mere 40 years. “These computer models are all based on evolutionary assumptions,” he underscored, “and if those evolutionary assumptions are not true, their computer models are certainly not true.” The information the scientists are putting out, Ham noted, are actually contradictory to observational science. For example, “When it comes to carbon dioxide, they say [burning] oil and gas is increasing the temperature in the atmosphere. Actually, true observational science shows that when the temperature in the atmosphere increases, carbon dioxide levels decrease, and when the temperature decreases, carbon dioxide levels increase. So it’s totally different to what they’re saying.” Furthermore, while carbon dioxide is painted in a villainous light, Ham stressed that it is “not a pollutant.” “[Carbon dioxide] is a very important gas, and it only consists of 0.4% of our atmospheric gasses. Think about that. It’s only 0.4%. It’s a very, very small gas,” he stated, adding that there is “no proof at all human emissions are the driving force for environmental changes or climate changes.” Similar to creation scientists, numerous experts in the field have been shunned by the scientific community and censored for contradicting claims of man-made climate change. “They get all the media publicity. But you know, it’s been the same with the whole creation-evolution issue. Creationists don’t get good coverage in the media, but evolution is pushed and assumed, and people are brainwashed to believe it’s true,” Ham emphasized. Greg Wrightstone, a geologist and climate expert, who was banned from LinkedIn for questioning the climate narrative: “I posted very interesting and very scientific charts and facts on temperature data through time, [carbon dioxide’s] relationship with temperature to show that throughout geologic time, CO2 really hasn’t been the control knob of the Earth’s climate,” Wrightstone explained. “We’re dangerous. They cannot allow our factually-based presentations to get out to the public, because what we say makes sense and it’s backed up by science.” “We’re rational, thoughtful people that are scientists—that are distinguished scientists—and we’re presenting this information,” he continued, adding that people “are being lied to on a daily basis about climate change and its ramifications.” The Religion Of Climate Alarmism If solid scientific research is not the driving force behind the claims of “climate change,” what is? According to Ken Ham, examining the evidence shows that “there’s something else going on here.” “What’s going on here is the fact that the climate change movement is a religion. It’s an anti-God religion based on evolutionary assumptions. It’s a religion where man believes he will save himself and save the planet. And it’s a religion that creates fear,” he warned “Worldview Matters” listeners. “The modern climate change movement is a religion that worships man and worships the creation, and basically sees man as a blight upon the earth,” Ham described. “They let the creation have dominion over man. Their whole worldview is wrong, their interpretation of the evidence is wrong, and it’s going to have bad consequences for us.” Power-Driven False Prophets The fear-based climate religion also has a whole host of “false prophets.” “Al Gore was featured in a documentary in 2006 called Inconvenient Truth. He’s a false prophet. None of his prophecies came true. He’s prophesying again today,” Ham asserted. “Why should people even believe him?” “Man is not going to destroy the Earth. The Doomsday Clock is just not true. And again, it’s meant to create fear,” he stressed. “It all comes back to people who want control—people who want power.” “John Kerry is another false prophet,” Ham continued. “When John Kerry came back from the World Economic Forum, and this was a year or so ago, he said [that] there is an elite group of people that are going to save mankind and going to save the planet. In other words, he is saying that man is his own savior. Man is his own god, and there’s an elite group of people who are going to control everything so that they can control you. That’s really what it’s all about.” A Symptom Of Man’s Rebellion Through the Bible, we can plainly see that the claims of climate change run in direct contradiction to God. Primarily, we know that God has given man dominion over creation ( Genesis 1:26 ) and are assured that the future God has foretold regarding planet Earth does not include destruction by man-made climate catastrophe ( 2 Peter 3:7 , Revelation 21:1 ). “The climate change movement is just another symptom of man in his rebellion against God, Ham said. “That’s really what’s happening here.” “When you read Romans 1, what happens when man worships the creation instead of the Creator?” he asked. “He turns them over to foolish things, and he turns them over to perverse ways. A lot of what’s being said in regard to the climate change agenda is foolishness.” “People need to get the truth on this. Once [individuals] realize they don’t have the data, it’s all interpreted based on evolutionary assumptions, they realize how much they’ve been brainwashed and manipulated,” he urged. “When you believe God’s word, that’s when you understand the truth.” “It’s a worldview battle at a foundational level,” Ham underscored. “It’s really a [spiritual] battle between God’s Word and man’s word.”

The shooters at Bondi were motivated by their understanding of Islam and the Quran. But why is it that only one expression of religious extremism ever results in violence? Could it possibly have something to do with the Islamic religious texts themselves? Why is it that when Jews or Christians become more serious about their faith, they become better citizens and more moral, whereas when Muslims are ‘radicalised’ it routinely results in death and destruction? This is a consistent historical pattern which has occurred ever since the time of Muhammad. But it’s a reality which every honest person now recognises as being true. Especially after being confronted with the horrific terrorist attack on Jews celebrating Hanukkah at Bondi Beach . Growing Antisemitism in Australia It was only a matter of months ago that nearly a hundred thousand people marched across the Sydney Harbour Bridge — with an enormous picture of the Ayatollah leading the way — in support of Palestine. It didn’t take long for the Australian government to fall into line and recognise a Palestinian state even when ASIO reported that Iranian operatives have been actively seeking to subvert public opinion and garner political support. I wonder what the people who participated in those politically performative acts of virtue signalling think of their actions now? Do they feel any regret or remorse at all? Are they willing to even consider that their public support of Islamists might have had any connection at all to the cold-blooded murder of Jewish people having a picnic by another river to the sea? Would they be willing to walk across the bridge again in support of the innocent people who have died? I think we all know what the answer to that question is going to be. There were no starving or emaciated children to identify with this time. Only people savagely gunned down while peacefully relaxing on a Sydney summer’s Sunday afternoon. Sadly, it seems that public displays of virtue signalling are only done when there is no potential for personal risk. Or social media ‘likes’. Muslim Council of Elders Respond to Bondi Massacre While the Muslim Council of Elders immediately condemned the attacks because they were against civilians, they were just as quick to point the finger of blame elsewhere. The Media Line reported: The council urged governments and international bodies to intensify efforts to confront hate speech, extremism, and racism, describing those forces as drivers of repeated attacks on civilians worldwide. It said preventing future violence requires not only security measures but sustained work to address underlying causes through dialogue, mutual respect, and broader cooperation among societies. So, the problem according to the Muslim Council of Elders is “hate speech, extremism and racism”? Really? As I asked before, why is it that only one expression of religious extremism ever results in violence? Could it possibly have something to do with the Islamic religious texts themselves? The Qur’an and “the People of the Book” In an excellent three-part series of lectures, Dr. Mark Durie outlines the religious dimension to the conflict between Islam and what the Quran (Qur’an) calls “the People of the Book”. It makes for sobering listening but is more important now than ever. Dr Durie is one of Australia’s leading experts on Islam and has published numerous books on the topic. Significantly, Durie points out that the official constitution of Hamas — based on the traditions of Muhammad — states: The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fights the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. No amount of nuance can avoid the conclusion that the stated end goal of Hamas, and indeed the Qur’an itself, is the complete subjugation of Jews. What’s more, this has often led to Muslims who are ‘radicalised’ as committing acts of violence. Maybe this explains why none of the surrounding Islamic nations have offered asylum to any Palestinians during the recent war with Israel? Muslims would quickly object that the above quote is not from the actual Qur’an and hence doesn’t carry divine authority. However, Dr. Durie helpfully observes that the Qur’an is even more expansive and he provides following twelve-point summary. 1. The Jews are Deceivers (Q2:77) 2. The Jews have falsified the Scriptures (Q2:75 also Q5:13) 3. The Jews are cursed by God for the unbelief (Q4:46 as well as Q5:64) 4. The Jews are cursed by David and Jesus (Q5:78) 5. The Jews will be turned into apes and pigs (Q5:60, see also Q7:166; Q2:65) 6. The Jews only care about this life and not the next (Q2:96) 7. The Jews are treacherous (Q5:13) 8. The Jews are the greatest enemies of Islam (Q5:82) 9. The Jews will not love Muslims (Q2:120) 10. The Jews start wars and cause trouble (Q5:64) 11. The Jews ‘claim’ they killed Jesus (Q4:157) 12. The Jews are ‘losers’ (Q2:27) To be fair, there are some nice words about Jews in the Qur’an such as: The Jews are Allah’s only chosen people (Q2:47, 122) Allah protected the Jews when they were living as strangers in a foreign land (Q28:46) Allah chose all his prophets from the Jewish people (Q5:20) Allah would be kind to Jews (and Christians) who believed in one God and performed good works. (Q2:62) Allah would bless Jews (and Christians) who practiced the teachings of their holy books. (Q5:44, 66) In the broader context of how the Qur’an says Muslims should actually treat Jews — and also Christians — these verses do nothing to alleviate people’s fear. What’s more, according to Muslim scholarship Allah revealed these in the early days of Islam. When Muhammad’s claims and revelations were contrary to the Bible and he realized that the Jews would not accept him as the final prophet he began punishing them and dictated new revelations. Muslims deal with the contradictions by this doctrine of abrogation (referred to as ‘Naskh’), and accept the latter words as the final word to be obeyed. Which would explain why we still see a huge number of Muslims willing to kill Jews, even outside Gaza. Afterall, they’re only following the example of their Islamic founding fathers as well as the instruction of their Supreme Leader. Understanding the Qur’an in a Pluralistic Society Clearly the content of the Qur’an itself reveals a deep antipathy towards the people of Israel. This is not to say that the Jewish nation is in comparison perfect, but simply to point out that the ponging violence we’re witnessing is profoundly religious in nature. Indeed, the word ‘Hamas’ is translated as ‘violence’ in Hebrew. In a pluralistic society we must understand and appreciate the fact that people are profoundly shaped by their religious texts. Yet, too many politicians and secular journalists minimise the significance of this connection. And for Muslims in particular, the Qur’an is an extremely important document. In the coming months and days watch for a resurgence of hash tags such as #NotAllMuslims. It was why someone at Channel 9 made the decision to send a female Muslim journalist immediately to the scene. However, no amount of political posturing, media deflection or social spin can hide the fact that this is motivated by a deep religious antipathy of the Jewish people. Maybe now people in Australia will finally wake to the danger which lies hidden in our suburbs and the ongoing religiously motivated hostility for the People of the Book.