Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Pro-Family Warmongers, Pro-Sodomy Neocons and Pro-Sodomy Non-Neocons: What Is Worse for Christians?


Pro-Family Warmongers, Pro-Sodomy Neocons and Pro-Sodomy Non-Neocons: What Is Worse for Christians?

By Julio Severo
I was watching Franklin Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham, on the left-wing CNN (https://youtu.be/_2-ycehCnuM) wisely answering questions as the host pressed him to condemn Russian intervention in Syria. For her, this intervention was responsible for massacres, but she never mentioned that Russia was fighting Muslim rebels funded, trained and armed by the Obama administration. She never mentioned that before the Russian intervention, these rebels were torturing, raping and slaughtering Christians. She never mentioned that the real objective of the Obama intervention in Syria, especially through the U.S. State Secretary Hillary Clinton, was never to fight ISIS, but help rebels to overthrow the Syrian President Assad, who is supported by Russia.
Despite the psychological pressure, Graham did not condemn Russia.
The fact is, with Hillary, the U.S. State Department was a war machine making wars against Christians in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, etc. There is evidence that the State Secretary Clinton created and armed ISIS, which slaughtered thousands of Christians. The U.S. created a terrible mess in Iraq, in Libya, in Afghanistan and in Syria.
Also, while Muslims have represented a clear majority of immigrants being welcome and relocated in the U.S. by the State Department, Christians victims account for less than 5 per cent.
Other war fomented by the Obama State Department was the culture war on behalf of the homosexual agenda. It funded and trained homosexual activists around the world. It actively and peremptorily promoted their interests, including by naming the first global envoy for the homosexual agenda.
Hillary was a pro-sodomy neocon at the State Department.
What to expect from a Trump State Secretary? Firstly, consistency with his discourse in the campaign confronting neocons, known for their partnerships with Islamic terror against Russia, and for their openness to Islamic, not Christian, immigrants.
When Trump was considering Mitt Romney for State Secretary, it was hard not to think that the spirit of Hillary would not be continuing her mission through him, because under former Governor Romney Massachusetts was the first U.S. state to legalize homosexual “marriage.” Besides, he wanted to confront Russia in Syria and Ukraine, just as Obama was doing and just as Hillary wanted to do in her dream of a presidency.
Then Trump chose Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, for State Secretary. Tillerson has a history of good relations with Putin and Russia, but not with ISIS. And he does not seem to want wars, but good relations. This is very good sign.
Different from Hillary, who was killing Christians in Syria through Muslim rebels and ISIS and in Iraq through ISIS, Tillerson seems to understand that there is no point in supporting such unfair war and chastise Russia for its pro-Christian involvement.
Different from Hillary and Obama, hopefully Tillerson may understand that persecuted Christians, not Muslims, should be given priority for immigration.
Yet, there is a concern. Tillerson was a board member of Boy Scouts and approved its infamous decision to allow gay scout leaders. This equals him to Hillary.
However, what if Trump chose Ted Cruz? Cruz’s pro-family and pro-Israel stances are excellent. In foreign policy, he would not use the State Department to promote the homosexual agenda. But regarding Russia, he and neocons like Marco Rubio equal to Hillary: Cruz wanted a confrontation with Russia in Syria and Ukraine over Crimea, a region traditionally Russian for hundreds of years and which Russia has repossessed in 2014. His policy would be a continuation of the Hillary policy.
So, all the choices are hard. Yet, while Hillary and the Obama administration mocked and antagonized the Russian law banning homosexual propaganda to children and eventually imposed sanctions against Russia by using as an excuse the Crimea repossession, Tillerson has spoken out against such sanctions.
If he were so fixated on the gay agenda as Obama and Hillary are, he would probably speak out on behalf of such sanctions.
How to assess the differences? Christians like Ted Cruz are very good in defending life and family. They deserve to be commended for their pro-family efforts. But their neocon efforts to fight Russia while Russia fights ISIS and helps Christians in the Middle East put them on par with Hillary, whose anti-Russian policies were anti-Christian and pro-ISIS and pro-Islamic rebels.
Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and others are pro-family warmongers. Christians persecuted by Muslims in Syria and other nations would barely have some hope of being helped by their policies, and their pro-family views would be helpful only to pro-family Christians outside of zones of Islamic wars.
Romney would be a continuation of Hillary, with no benefit to pro-family Christians in the U.S. and Christians persecuted by Muslims in other nations.
Tillerson does not seem to be a warmonger. He has no history of wars, but of friendships and deals. This is real change, because the State Department has had too many warmongers for too long.
Tillerson would be perfect if he were a pro-family Christian against the gay agenda — as Ted Cruz would prefect if he were not warmonger and confrontational in a time Russia is looking for peace and partnership against the Islamic terror. Russia has the exact wish Trump showed in his campaign.
In fact, Trump said last week that only stupid people fools would see good ties with Russia as bad. This is in consistency with his campaign and with the history of Tillerson.
If Tillerson were a homosexualist militant, there would be a confrontation between him and Putin, because while he approved gay scout masters to teach homosexual propaganda to children, Putin has approved a ban against such propaganda.
As Trump, Tillerson is open to the gay agenda, but both, different from Hillary and Obama, are open to dialogue.
Yet, when assessing between pro-family warmongers, pro-sodomy neocons and pro-sodomy non-neocons, what is important? The lives of Christians persecuted by Muslims in Syria are as important as the lives of unborn babies defended by good pro-family Christians.
Any State Secretary willing to support the Russian efforts, or at least not interfere negatively as Obama and Hillary did, in Syria is helping save lives, especially Christians victimized by ISIS. In this respect, Tillerson seems to be the only hope for the State Department to stop its pro-Islamic meddling against Christians in Syria.
I hope to be right: Tillerson does not seem a neocon.
Recommended Reading:

Sunday, January 08, 2017

Biased Study by Feminist Theologian Has Viralized After Being Spread by the Largest Evangelical Websites in Brazil


Biased Study by Feminist Theologian Has Viralized After Being Spread by the Largest Evangelical Websites in Brazil

Published by the largest Presbyterian university in Brazil, study by feminist theologian who left the church years ago made headlines in GospelPrime, GospelMais e Guiame, the largest evangelical websites in Brazil

By Julio Severo
In an interview last week for the Brazilian website UOL titled “‘When the church does not discuss gender, it denies human rights,’ says evangelical feminist,” Valéria Cristina Vilhena, who introduces herself as having connections to the Mackenzie Presbyterian University, said that she sees with a great distress and as deep retrocession the evangelical caucus in the Brazilian Congress taking a stand against homosexual “marriage,” abortion and gender ideology.
She said, “When the evangelical caucus preaches in their pulpits that it is in the Congress to represent God’s will or to protect the only family model, it is actually putting as a model homophobia, racism, sexism and violence inflicted because of those issues, which are also gender issues.
She complains that evangelical women “are in the spaces of service, but not of church leadership.” She also complains that “the theology being taught is the theology of wives’ submission to their husbands.”
In 2015, she founded the group Evangelicals for Gender Equality. Even though her group operates to bring gender issues into churches, Vilhena said to UOL, “I was brought up in a church where was a sin to have a haircut, to depilate, to use make-up, pants. I saw myself as a feminist since early within the church… Today I attend no church.
Even though she has disliked the Pentecostal environment of her childhood, she does not seem to be bothered by the environment in the Mackenzie Presbyterian University in São Paulo, Brazil, or in the São Paulo Methodist University, where she studied. That Methodist institution is one of the most liberal in Brazil, and warmly welcomes Liberation Theology, feminism and homosexuality.
In November 2016, Vilhena saw her study making headlines, with no credit to her name, in major Brazilian evangelical websites, spread even by prominent evangelical leaders. The study addressed the subject that “40% women who suffer domestic violence are evangelical.”
When the Mackenzie Presbyterian University published her study, prominent Brazilian evangelical websites GospelPrime, GospelMais and Guiame spread the study by crediting only the Presbyterian university. Many conservative evangelical leaders massively spread it without questioning it, trusting completely in the largest Calvinist institution in Brazil.
GospelPrime headline on November 10, 2016: “About 40% female victims of domestic violence are Christian.” The report begins, “A study by the Mackenzie Presbyterian University…
GospelMais headline on November 10, 2016: “40% women who suffer domestic violence are evangelical, a new study says.” The report says, “The find is the result of a study by the Mackenzie Presbyterian University…
Guiame headline on November 9, 2016: “About 40% female victims of domestic violence are Christian, says study.” The report says, “A study by the Mackenzie Presbyterian University indicated…
Vilhena said to UOL, “What I wrote in the study is that about 40% women assisted by Sofia House, which was my study field, declared themselves evangelical. Then, it is a study sampling. This viralized.
Actually it viralized, in the interest of the anti-Christian feminist agenda, thanks to the massive promotion by the largest Calvinist institution in Brazil and GospelPrime, GospelMais and Guiame.
Her study was totally based in the sampling of one institution: Sofia House. In contrast, when she studied another Brazilian institution, Eliane de Grammont House, the result was equally strange. Vilhena said to UOL, “The difference is that most women in Eliane de Grammont House, according to professionals, declared themselves Seicho-No-Ie.
By her study, then most Brazilian victims of domestic violence are evangelicals and Seicho-No-Ie adherents, even though Brazil is the largest Catholic nation in the world. Also, there are many Brazilians que follow pro-abortion Socialism and witchcraft. But, apparently, evangelicals and Seicho-No-Ie adherents, who have no significant demographic representation in Brazil, are the champions of domestic violence.
How explain her study? The first explanation is her militancy. She has had involvement with Catholics for a Free Choice, which invited Vilhena as a special speaker for the feminist congress “Religious Influence in the Dismantlement of Women’s Politics,” to be held next November.
Catholics for a Free Choice is not a truly Catholic group and it is not backed by the Vatican. It is a pro-abortion, pro-sodomy and feminist group that uses the label “Catholic” to deceive Catholics.
Dismantlement is Vilhena’s mission. She does not speak as an evangelical and she does not advocate evangelical values. In 2015, the São Paulo City Council held the event “Evangelicals Debate the Gender Issue in the City School Curriculum,” which addressed the introduction of the gender ideology (the gay agenda) in São Paulo City’s school curriculum.
The panelists were: Cristiano Valério, homosexual minister of the Metropolitan Community Church; José Barbosa, pro-sodomy theologian who created the Brazilian movement “Jesus Heals Homophobia”; and Valéria Vilhena, feminist theologian. All these names are committed to the homosexual agenda, and as the mission of Catholics for a Free Choice is to sabotage true Catholics, the mission of those false evangelicals is to sabotage true evangelicals.
Sabotage is already happening. The Azusa Magazine of Pentecostal Studies published an article by David Mesquiati de Oliveira, where he said, “As declared by Valéria Vilhena, the influence of a male chauvinist patriarchal and oppressing culture against women was not superseded and, in some cases, the Christian institutions themselves reproduce such institutional system.
Oliveira is introduced as an Assemblies of God minister in Vitória, Brazil, and member of RELEP (Red Latinoamericana de Estudios Pentecostales [Latin American Network of Pentecostal Studies]) and FPLyC (Foro Pentecostal Latinoamericano y Caribeño [Pentecostal Latin American and Caribbean Forum]). He is a master of divinity by the Higher School of Theology in Brazil, one of the most liberal Lutheran institutions in the world and which has the only homossexualist theologian in Brazil. Oliveira is the author of the book “Missão, cultura e transformação” (Mission, Culture and Transformation), published by Sinodal, a Brazilian liberal Lutheran publishing house that publishes books advocating Marxism, feminism and gender ideology.
Oliveira is a Pentecostal activist citing a feminist activist, from the Mackenzie Presbyterian University, who attends no church.
Vilhena is an activist against Christian values and, with her study, she tried to portray evangelical churches as producers or facilitators of domestic violence in need of feminist or state intervention.
How explain that GospelPrime, GospelMais and Guiame, the most prominent evangelical websites in Brazil, have greatly spread her biased study without questioning her motivation, but crediting exclusively the Mackenzie Presbyterian University, institution where Vilhena has connections? Without perceiving, they, specially the Presbyterian university, helped promote a perverted propaganda that exploited the problem of domestic violence in the interest of the feminist sham.
Mackenzie Presbyterian University has been involved also in other scandals for hiring pro-abortion, Marxist and homosexualist professors.
How explain Vilhena’s sampling showing that evangelicals are almost 50% of victims of domestic violence? Of course, it is biased.
For some years, I was a leader of a church. Most attendees were new converts or people in need of conversion. There were women who were attending the services because they had domestic problems. If a poll asked in this point if they were evangelicals, they would answer positively. They had not a long evangelical history. Most them had husbands who were not Christian and they sought a church because of several problems: husband’s alcoholism, domestic violence, unemployment, drug problems in their children, etc.
In 2006, I knew an evangelical NGO in Rio de Janeiro that gave room to a women’s organization that made a community work of awareness against domestic violence. Women in the poor community who suffered such violence came to the group to be “counseled” and much of this work was made in the facility of the evangelical NGO.
I made a small investigation, and I found that the women’s group not only received state grants in its feminist objectives, but also it appeared in a list of many other feminist groups that, on March 18, demanded in the State Legislature the legalization of abortion as a fundamental women’s right.
I talked then to the director of the evangelical NGO and I explained that the facility of her organization was being used for feminist recruitment and indoctrination of poor women, who were seduced by the appeal of solution for “domestic violence,” a work that ultimately strengthened the state power and interventionism in families and also strengthened feminist strategists’ pro-abortion objectives.
The evangelical NGO’s director thanked me and eliminated the room for the women’s group. She had never imagined that a group supposedly fighting domestic violence had much more sinister motivations and ambitions. This case helped her not to trust in facades
So cases of domestic violence (which the Bible does not approve) eventually become an excuse and maneuver recourse for feminists and the State to intervene to destroy the role of a husband as head of his family and demand the right of women to abort their unborn children. The husband who slaps his wife becomes a criminal, but the woman who cowardly kills her children through abortion has committed no crime: she is just exercising a legal right! The woman goes from “oppressed” to oppressor and murderer of her own children.
Valéria Cristina Vilhena says that she attends no church, but she uses a facade of “theologian” to advance her feminism among Brazilian evangelicals. Yet, the incompatibility between feminism and the Gospel is vast.
Last December, a 23 year old woman was raped and murdered at a bar in São Paulo, Brazil. She spent the night in a nightclub with friends and at dawn, she went with a young man to a bar, where both used drugs and where she was raped and murdered. The Brazilian press identified her as an “evangelical feminist.”
She was the mother of two small children, but she was hanging about in nightclubs and bars.
Even though nightclubs and bars are a perfect environment for the depraved life of feminists, they are not an environment for mothers, much less evangelicals.
Undoubtedly, the death of that young woman is regrettable, but if she occupied herself with her mission as a mother, she would not spend the night in a nightclub or use drugs in a bar. If she occupied herself with the Gospel, which should be the mission of every evangelical, she would not waste her life in feminism, which rapes and exploits the women’s cause and even the Gospel in the interest of charlatans’ depraved agenda.
GospelPrime, GospelMais, Guiame and Brazilian conservative evangelical leaders should watch and pray, so that they may not fall into temptations of academic studies from the Mackenzie Presbyterian University and other institutions that have an evangelical name, but do not honor the Gospel. One of those studies came directly from Valéria Cristina Vilhena, who wants to advance feminism in the Brazilian evangelical churches.
While Vilhena wants to transmit the idea that the evangelical culture provokes or facilitates domestic violence, the fact is that women with domestic violence problems seek evangelical churches because the government or feminist answer always brings more problems.
Meanwhile, evangelical young women deceived by feminism search for satisfaction in nightclubs and die drugged in bars.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, January 03, 2017

Pope appoints Presbyterian minister to lead Vatican newspaper in Argentina


Pope appoints Presbyterian minister to lead Vatican newspaper in Argentina

By Julio Severo
Pope Francis has appointed a Protestant pastor as the editor of the new Argentinian version of the Vatican’s Catholic newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano.
Pope Francis and Marcelo Figueroa
“We want to spread Francis’ universal, pastoral work, in a way that reaches every Argentine,” said Marcelo Figueroa, a Presbyterian minister who is the former head of Argentina’s Bible Society. 
The Presbyterian leader also said that the Argentinian edition of L’Osservatore will include not only prominent Catholic figures such as Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández, rector of Argentina’s Catholic University, but also members of other religions, highlighting Francis’s ecumenical and interreligious efforts.
“I believe that those who want to listen to the pope’s voice, following his pastoral work, with some additional commentary, will be enriched by our edition,” Figueroa said. “I believe it’ll be good for the soul of every Argentine, to follow carefully the voice of who today is the world’s most relevant spiritual leader.”
Figueroa is a friend of Francis. In the spring of 2015, when he had to undergo a delicate surgical operation back in Argentina, Francis stayed close to him with continual telephone calls and letters. After he recovered, in September of the same year the pope gave a long interview to him for FM Milennium 106.7, a Buenos Aires radio station. And a year later, he even promoted him not only as director of the Argentine weekly edition of L’Osservatore Romano, but even as a columnist for the bigger daily edition.
The two worked on an ecumenical television show together when Pope Francis was an archbishop in Argentina.
What does the pope intend by appointing a Presbyterian minister? To draw the attention of U.S. President Donald Trump, who is a Presbyterian? Both are in a conflict since February 2016 when Francis said that it was not right Trump’s attitude of surrounding the United States with a wall preventing the entry of illegal immigrants.
But is right to appoint a Presbyterian minister for a Catholic post?
According to the Catholic news site LifeSiteNews, “Catholics and Protestants disagree about what is required for salvation, the authority of the pope, various Marian teachings such as whether Mary was perpetually a virgin, the Mass, and other major facets of Christian life.”
LifeSiteNews is correct. It is not proper for a Presbyterian or other Protestant to lead a Catholic group, and it would be equally improper for a Catholic to lead a Protestant group. Can they be friends? Of course. But friendship or partnership in pro-family and pro-life causes should never be equal to ecumenism.
When possible, there should be unity among Christians for the common good, to fight abortion, the homosexual agenda, Islamic fanaticism and to support Israel.
But spiritual unity is impossible. Catholic doctrines require Mary and determined saints to be intercessors between God and man while Protestant doctrines teach that Jesus is fully enough for mediation and intercession.
Francis and the Presbyterian minister should separate their friendship from their religious obligations.
At least, the pope did not appoint a pro-abortion and pro-sodomy man. In contrast, the most prominent Presbyterian university in Brazil has hired Marxist, pro-abortion and pro-sodomy professors.
Even so, Catholics are very discontent with the pope’s appointment. And why should evangelicals be content?
It is correct to say that Francis is a great pro-family leader. But it is very problematic for a former head of Argentina’s Bible Society to say the Francis is “the world’s most relevant spiritual leader.”
With information from LifeSiNews, EWTN and Cruxnow.
Recommended Reading:

Monday, January 02, 2017

Christians Are the Most Persecuted Religious Group in the World


Christians Are the Most Persecuted Religious Group in the World

By Julio Severo
Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world, according to the Centre for Global Christianity.
Speaking on Vatican Radio, Massimo Introvigne, Director of the Centre for Studies on New Religions, said that around half a billion Christians in the world are unable to express their faith completely freely — with around 90,000 Christians who were killed for their faith in 2016 alone, which is the equivalent of one Christian being martyred every six minutes.
In March, the Chaldean Bishop of Aleppo reported that in just five years of conflict, the Christian population of Syria has been reduced by two thirds from 1.5 million to just 500,000, according to a Breitbart report
Many Syrian Christians were killed by ISIS, founded by Hillary Clinton, or by Syrian rebels, funded, armed and trained by the Obama administration. While the Syrian government was fighting ISIS, the Obama administration was helping Islamic rebels who were essentially damaging the Syrian government’s war against ISIS.
Such reality puts the U.S. behind Islamic persecution of Christians. In fact, according to the 2016 World Watch List, published by Open Doors USA, even though North Korea is the number one in Christian persecution, the other countries that ranked highest on such persecution were Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.
This is very bad news for the U.S., which has been militarily interfering in Syria and which invaded and intervened in Afghanistan and Iraq. The results are obviously appalling, at least for Christians.
In 2014, Raymond Ibrahim, author of the bestselling book “Crucified Again,” said in his article “Confirmed: U.S. Chief Facilitator of Christian Persecution”:
Whenever the U.S. intervenes in an Islamic nation, Islamists come to power. This is well demonstrated by the other three nations to which the U.S. brought “democracy” and where Christian minorities suffer “extreme persecution”:
Afghanistan: The supposedly “moderate” Karzai government installed by the U.S. upholds many of the draconian laws enforced by the Taliban—including the apostasy law, fiercely persecuting those who seek to convert to Christianity—and, in 2011, under U.S. auspices, it destroyed Afghanistan’s last Christian church.
Iraq: After the U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein, Christian minorities were savagely attacked and slaughtered, and dozens of their churches were bombed (see here for graphic images). Christians have been terrorized into near-extinction, with well over half of them fleeing Iraq.
Libya: Ever since U.S.-backed, al-Qaeda-linked terrorists overthrew Qaddafi, Christians—including Americans—have indeed suffered extreme persecution. Churches have been bombed; Christians have been tortured and killed (including for refusing to convert); and nuns have been threatened.
Surely a common theme emerges here: Where the U.S. works to oust secular autocrats, the quality of life for Christians and other minorities takes a major nosedive. Under Saddam, Qaddafi, and Assad, Christians and their churches were largely protected.
Ibrahim then says, “Prominent indicators confirm that the U.S. is the chief facilitator of the persecution of Christians around the world today.”
During his campaign, Donald Trump said that the administration of former President George W. Bush lied about his reasons to invade Iraq. Trump said that he opposed such invasion. Christians in Iraq took a very heavy toll for Bush’s bad decision. The Iraqi Christian community, which was over 2 million before the U.S. invasion, is now less than 400,000.
Under Bush and Obama, while Muslims in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq had facilitated immigration to the U.S., Christians were essentially banned. Oppressors in, victims out. During his campaign, Trump promised to correct this incredible immigratory inconsistency by favoring Christian victims, not Islamic oppressors.
The U.S., founded by Christians, more specifically by Protestants, should give priority to persecuted Christian immigrants, but since some thirty years ago it has been giving priority to Muslims.
While Christians are the most persecuted religious group on the earth, Muslims are the main persecutors of Christians in the world. Why grant visas to persecutors, not their victims?
Let us pray that Trump may stop the trend of brutal persecution of Christians in the trail of U.S. interventions in Islamic nations.
With information from CBN and ChristianHeadlines.
Recommended Reading:

Friday, December 30, 2016

Obama Abuses Russia, Which Does Not Repay in Kind


Obama Abuses Russia, Which Does Not Repay in Kind

By Julio Severo
As a tenant who trashes everything when evicted, U.S. President Barack Obama took several offensive actions against Israel and Russia recently, apparently seeking to hit the new White House tenant, President-elect Donald Trump, especially because for Obama, Trump would not have won the U.S. election without Russia’s assistance.
Stung by new punishments by the Obama administration — the closing of two Russian compounds and the expelling of 35 Russian diplomats from the U.S. —, Russia did not react in kind and did not expel 35 Americans diplomats. On the contrary, Russian President Vladimir Putin invited the kids of all U.S. diplomats to the Kremlin’s New Year’s and Christmas parties. In Russia, Christmas happens in January.
Rev. Franklin Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham and chosen to pray officially for Trump in his inaugural, said, “Has Russian President Vladimir Putin been reading his Bible? Is he turning the other cheek? I don’t know, but I find it interesting that he’s not going to retaliate against President Obama whose administration has just ordered 35 Russian diplomats to leave this country and two of their U.S. compounds to close.”
Putin’s answer was actually praiseworthy, recognized even by Trump, who said, “Great move… I always knew he was very smart!”
Trump’s move to side with Putin over Obama has been offensive to the left-wing billionaire George Soros and other socialists.
Soros, who supported Hillary Clinton’s candidacy as well as other liberal causes worldwide, says that the rise of Trump and his affinity for Putin threaten the “democratic” model championed by the European Union.
He remarked that Putin helped Trump win the U.S. election by utilizing social media to disseminate fake news stories, and he is moving against it.
He said that the Russian leader is now using the same tactic to advance European right-wing groups and undermine left-wing governments throughout the EU.
Even though Trump seems to side with Putin, there are uncertainties about how he will actually act on Russia once he takes office Jan. 20. Though he’s praised Putin as a strong leader and said it would be ideal for the U.S. and Russia to join forces against ISIS, warmongering Republicans, who did not support Trump before the election, have for years argued Obama wasn’t tough enough against Russia and the U.S. needs a president to increase pressure on Russia.
“We intend to lead the effort in the new Congress to impose stronger sanctions on Russia,” said neocon Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
Enraging these neocon Republicans, Trump has praised Putin and chosen Rex Tillerson for secretary of state and Lt. Gen Michael Flynn for national security adviser. Both are seen as friendly to Russia.
Throughout his campaign, Trump denounced neocons and promised to fight them. Whether he will prevail or not over them will be one of his major tests.
With information from DailyMail and Associated Press.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Dr. Jean Garton, a Lutheran Pro-Life Model


Dr. Jean Garton, a Lutheran Pro-Life Model

By Julio Severo
Dr. Jean Garton, who was instrumental in the formation of Lutherans For Life in 1978 and was its first president, died on December 23, 2016 at the age of 87.
Jean Garton
After the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United Sates in 1973, she became a leader in advocating respect and protection for every human being.
God used her to be a world-renowned expert on pro-life issues. He provided her with opportunities to testify before the U.S. Congress and state legislatures concerning life issues. Her writings include books such as “Who Broke the Baby?” (published by Bethany House Publishers), scripts for documentary videos, and daily radio commentaries for five years, plus countless articles on numerous topics. She traveled the world speaking before royalty and government leaders as well as at small gatherings of three or four to deliver the message God had entrusted to her.
She led an energetic presentation at the Lutherans For Life National Conference this past October based on the theme “Here We Stand” and there received the Dominus Vitae award in honor of her lifelong, Gospel-motivated labors to affirm God’s gift of life.
She served as national president of Lutherans For Life for 17 years. She was a frequent and popular guest of “Focus on the Family” with Dr. James Dobson and chaired the Declaration Committee for the World Congress of Families when it was held in Prague, Geneva, and Mexico City.
Even with all of Jean’s accomplishments, at the end, what mattered most to her was the knowledge that eternity was secure not because of all she had done but by the blood of her Savior, Jesus Christ. In Him all her sins were forgiven. Through Him, she, her family and many friends, and all others who place their confidence in Him will rise from the dead when He returns. It is then she will hear her Lord say, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant.”
My first contact with Jean was two decades ago, and I received from her and Lutherans for Life many books and materials to equip ministers and other leaders in Brazil.
She and her husband of sixty-two years, the late Reverend Horace “Chic” Garton, were blessed with four children, seven grandchildren, and seven great-grandchildren.
Portuguese version of this article: Dra. Jean Garton, um modelo pró-vida luterano

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Why Judge Silas Malafaia?


Why Judge Silas Malafaia?

By Julio Severo
The name of Silas Malafaia, a famous minister who is the founder and president of Victory in Christ Assemblies of God in Brazil, has been involved days ago in an alleged scandal of “money laundering,” as if he had business with corrupt individuals with the intent of getting deliberately dirty money.
Silas Malafaia
The scandal has even been “reported” in Charisma, the biggest Pentecostal magazine in the world. Sadly, the famous American magazine sided with the view of the secular media, which is persuaded that Malafaia is involved in corruption.
Malafaia, who is so prominent in Brazil that he has already been interviewed in 2011 by the New York Times, one of the biggest U.S. newspapers, explained that there was no money laundering. Famous Brazilian journalist Reinaldo Azevedo, whom I disagree strongly on homosexual issues, wrote that what the Brazilian federal police did to Malafaia was illegal by including his name just because he received a donation from an individual involved in the federal investigation.  
Even son, many Protestants do not want give Malafaia the benefit of the doubt. Others have just labeled him guilty and convicted, because he received a voluntary donation from a source involved in corruption.
Now, does it mean that if I receive a major donation from a sorcerer or a member of the Mafia, that I have culpability in all of its crimes? Of course, not. A sorcerer and a member of the Mafia are free to come to me, hear the Gospel and give a donation, and I am free to accept or not such donation.
Jesus’s parents, Joseph and Mary, were poor and accepted a major donation from a group of sorcerers and astrologers who came because they were trying to understand God’s signs. Joseph and Mary were free to accept or not such donation. But they accepted, and the major donation was exactly what they needed to cover high expenses for an international trip to flee for Egypt and stay there for some time.
God could have sent gold directly from the sky to Joseph and Mary. But He chose to use sorcerers. Instead of letting Joseph and Mary have the sacrifice of fleeing for Egypt with a baby to escape King Herod, God could have eliminated the bloody king, who was determined to kill baby Jesus. But God did not eliminate the child-killing king.
Or, instead of sending sorcerers, He could have sent Jewish prophets and priests. But there were not anymore prophets in Israel and the priests were corrupt. They were corrupt knowing God’s Word. The sorcerers who made the donation to Jesus showed an open heart that God used. They were not Jewish. They were corrupt, but they did not know God’s Word the Jewish priests knew.
Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary, of J. D. Douglas, says: “The MAGI from the east mentioned in Matt. 2:1 (magos G3407) were high-ranking Persian priests expert in ASTROLOGY and other occult arts.”
Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, of Chad Brand, says in the entry “magi,” in reference to Matthew 2:1: “Eastern wise men, priests, and astrologers expert in interpreting dreams and other ‘magic arts.’”
To earn money at the expense of astrology and occultism is, in the Bible, sheer corruption. In the case of the magi in the Bible, they earned much money. They had gold.
It not common to see wealthy sorcerers giving a donation of gold and jewels to a poor family who worship God. But God works wonders!
Jewish theologians did not know how to recognize God sending baby Jesus. Therefore, they could not help his needful parents. God needed to bring sorcerers and astrologers from far away to supply the necessary resources. It is not by chance that He is called God of impossible. In fact, He works impossible things. What eyes have not seen and what human minds have never imagined, this is what God does.
God used those sorcerers in that determined time, and after this they were never heard of again.
Some theologians today, who follow a heresy called cessationism, would doubt dreams and revelations from Joseph and Mary, with angel visitations. And if Joseph and Mary said, “God confirmed the dreams and revelations by bringing Satanists to give us a donation of gold!” cessationist theologians would say: “It is confirmed! All of this is from the devil! Everything: your dreams, revelations and angel visitations.”
God has no partnership with the devil, but when God commands, even the devil obeys. When God instructs, even devil’s servants obey.
Only God knows how the wealthy sorcerers got their gold, but one thing is sure: sorcery and honesty do not walk hand in hand! In contrast, sorcery and corruption are always partners.
One thing is for you, as a man or woman of God, to get involved in the business of sorcerers and take a part in their morally illicit riches. Other thing is for them to give voluntarily their gold as a donation to you.
Can you then accuse Joseph and Mary of involvement with sorcery, occultism, astrology and satanism just because they received gold from sorcerers?
If no one, for 2,000 years, has ever judged Joseph and Mary for receiving a major donation of gold from astrologers and sorcerers, why judge Silas Malafaia for receiving a major donation from a man involved in corruption?
Joseph and Mary were poor and they were not corrupt. You cannot say the same thing about the sorcerers and astrologers who gave them the major donation.
Malafaia has committed big mistakes in the past: he supported the election and reelection of Lula (the Brazilian Obama), in spite of all the clear evidence that Lula was pro-abortion and pro-sodomy. But today Malafaia has been a highly important voice against the homosexualist, left-wing and pro-abortion agenda in Brazil.
No one among Brazilian Christians has been so vocal and clear, in TV and radio shows and even in the hearings at the Brazilian Congress, on the defense of life and family as he is. He has become a symbol of pro-family counter-attack. All the Brazilian Left hates him. Therefore, it is not correct to judge him and convict him hastily, moved out of envy or religious hatred.
It is not prudent also to judge a Christian couple that, as Joseph and Mary, needs to receive a donation of gold from sorcerers and astrologers to escape persecution from a pro-abortion Herod and flee for an Egypt.
No one had ever given gold to the poor couple Joseph and Mary. Satanists were the only ones God used for such assistance.
God knows if it is right or wrong to accept a donation from sorcerers, astrologers, satanists and corrupts.
Only He is the Judge.
Joseph and Mary accepted a donation from corrupts, and God did not judge them for this. Jesus and his apostles never said that Jesus’s parents were involved in satanism and astrology just for accepting gold from corrupts.
The difference between Jesus’s parents and Malafaia is that Joseph and Mary were poor, and Malafaia is wealthy.
Yet, who are we to judge him because of a donation?
Portuguese version of this article: Por que julgar Silas Malafaia?
Recommended Reading: