Does New Immigration Law Open Brazil’s Borders to Islamic Invasion and Drug Trafficking?

By Julio Severo

Brazilian conservatives are expressing worry that Brazil is facing the threat of Islamization with its New Law of Immigration, approved by the Brazilian Senate and sent for presidential signing. This law follows the deterioration of the political landscape of Brazil with its endemic corruption.

During an Islamic conference in Chicago in 2008, an Imam described how Brazil would become an Islamic nation within 50 years. Even though the U.S. and especially Europe are facing a massive influx Muslims and their destructive religion, why would Brazil be of interest for Muslims?

In 2014 Turkey held an Islamic summit attended by 76 Islamic leaders from 40 countries. Latin America was represented by Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Suriname, Uruguay, Paraguay, Nicaragua, Panama, Colombia, Bolivia, the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Ecuador, Jamaica and Haiti. Turkey is the only Islamic nation in the NATO and a U.S. ally that is, as reported by WND, “perhaps the biggest al-Qaida base in the world.”

In the summit, Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that Islamic sailors found the New World in 1178. He said, “Muslims discovered America in 1178, not Christopher Columbus.”

He and other Islamic leaders want Latin America.

Brazil has been of interest because it is larger than the U.S. without Alaska and it is the powerhouse of South America not just due to its size but also due to the size of its economy and influence. It is said that where Brazil goes so goes South America.  Indeed.

Brazil’s contact with Islamic radicalism is not new.

During the military rule, Brazil opened the first diplomatic office of PLO, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, an Islamic terrorist organization, in 1979. Besides, the military administration was a prominent seller of arms to Islamic nations in the Middle East.

In the past decade, the socialist Lula administration helped fund the Palestinian Authority.

More recently, the mayor of São Paulo, João Doria, a Social Democrat, sold municipal assets under the excuse that he wants to improve services. Where did he go to advertise them? To the Gulf countries. He is a strong presidential candidate for the elections next year.

The prospects are not good, but the Brazilian bad example has not been worse than the American bad example. Under President Donald Trump, the U.S. government has increased its funding of the Palestinian Authority and CIA has rewarded Saudi Arabia, the main sponsor of the global Islamic terrorism, for “fighting terrorism.”

If where Brazil goes, so goes South America, where America goes, so goes Brazil.

Most of the Left in Brazil is anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and Pro-Palestinian. Add to the equation the fact that the Brazilian Left loves the U.S. Left’s infatuation with Islam. Because Brazil is the largest Catholic nation in the world, add also the inherent and historic animosity of the Catholic customs and traditions against Jews and Israel, and you have a perfect receipt for left-wingers to open the Brazilian doors to Muslims.

Since the late 1990s Saudi Arabia has been supporting the building of mosques and madrassas in Brazil, even though the number of Muslims remains small (official records mention fewer than 100,000 whereas Islamic leaders mention two million).

Saudi Arabia is the main Islamic ally of the United States in the Middle East, and this alliance has facilitated the Saudi expansion of a radical form of Islam, including in Brazil.

There has been an increase in the number of visits by Islamic leaders to government officials at municipal, state and federal levels in Brazil. There has also been increasing activity involving public safety, including the arrest of several Muslims accused of terror plots.

But Islam has not made an impact on the local population as its leaders would like. The only way for a faster growth is by fostering Muslim immigration to Brazil. There has been a concerted effort linking government officials, NGOs (including U.S. groups as the Ford Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, etc.), Christian groups and Islamic leaders to open the doors for more immigrants and refugees. All of them have supported the New Law of Immigration, which has been criticized by Brazilian conservatives.

Why would Christian groups have an interest in Islamic immigration?

Catholic writer Cliff Kincaid said, “According to their financial statement for 2014, the latest year for which figures are available, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops received over $79 million in government grants to provide benefits to refugees.”

He added that the U.S. government gave more than $1.5 billion to several other Catholic organizations over the past two years.

So Christian groups, especially the Catholic Church, are paid millions in dollars to facilitate invasion of Islamic immigrants in the U.S.

Would Christian groups in Brazil have different interests and profits?

In Brazil, among Catholics, the most prominent institution defending the New Law of Immigration is the traditionally left-wing powerful Catholic National Conference of Bishops of Brazil. Among Protestants, ANAJURE has issued a public manifesto defending the new law.

ANAJURE’s manifesto has no mention of Christians or Christianity and, considering that its director, Uziel Santana, visited a mosque for a meeting with Islamic leaders and a partnership with Muslim groups, what is the interest in its advocacy of the New Law of Immigration?

Yet, VINACC, which was instrumental in the foundation of ANAJURE, has strongly criticized the new law.

Senator Aloysio Nunes, himself a former communist guerrilla fighter, now Minister of Foreign Affairs, is the author of the New Law of Immigration that, among other things, open Brazil’s borders.

This law, in practical terms, leaves Brazilian migration policy in the hands of international organizations, especially the United Nations, without limiting the number of immigrants coming to Brazil. As the Minister of Justice said: There may be one thousand, ten thousand, one hundred thousand per year, everyone is welcome. It turns out that Brazil cannot provide for its people, with tens of millions living in poverty. How can it provide for “one hundred thousand refugees per year”?

Brazil is facing confrontations of the worst kind. A crisis of confidence, a moral crisis, an economic crisis, unemployment with tens of millions of unemployed people, an overloading of social security, a serious crisis in its public health system, and an excessive tax burden that hampers economic prosperity. There are 60,000 murders per year, 38,000 rapes, and 7.6 million illegal weapons crossing Brazilian borders, and an undisputed level of power for organized crime and drug traffickers.

Considering that the European Union has already expressed its interest in relocating Muslim refugees outside of Europe, is Brazil in danger of becoming the Islamic sewer of the European Union?

Will the New Law of Immigration facilitate the Islamic ambitions of Saudi Arabia and Turkey?

With information from Israel, Islam and End Times.

Portuguese version of this article: Nova Lei de Migração abre fronteiras do Brasil para a invasão islâmica e tráfico de drogas?

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Immigration: A Weapon of Mass Cultural Destruction in Liberal Hands

Rising Turkish Menace: U.S. and NATO Ally Wants Islamic Advance in Latin America

CIA Rewards Saudi Arabia for Fighting Islamic Terror

Catholic Church Paid Millions in Dollars to Facilitate Immigrant Invasion in U.S.

If Brazilian Immigrants in the U.S. Are Accused of Being “Pigs,” Why Blame Trump?

“Palestinian Messengers”: How Christ and Christians Are Used for the Palestinian Cause

By Julio Severo

Last Christmas, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Jesus was a “Palestinian” messenger.

Even though Jesus was never a Palestinian or an advocate of a Palestinian cause, Abbas and his Muslim colleagues want to use Him to “ecumenically” unify Christians and Muslims to secure their cause.

Christ has never been a Palestinian messenger, but there has been a number of Christian individuals and groups associating themselves with a Palestinian message. Knowingly or not, they have been used as Palestinian messengers.

WCC and Liberation Theology

The most notorious group is the World Council of Churches (WCC), which espouses Liberation Theology, which “portrays Israel as the colonial oppressor and the Palestinians as the victim of imperialism.” Its ecumenical meeting in Brazil in 2006 “ecumenically” gathered together gay, witchcraft and Palestinian activists.

Ecumencial WCC meeting in Brazil in 2006: witches with gay activists

Rev. Walter Altmann, the Moderator of the WCC Central Committee, is an example of the WCC radicalism. He said, “A particular interest of mine has been to seek convergences between the theology of the Reformation and liberation theology.”

Rev. Walter Altmann at WCC

Altmann, a Brazilian, is former president of the Evangelical Church of the Lutheran Confession in Brazil, the biggest Lutheran synod in Brazil (700,000 members). Though significant, its numbers pale in comparison to other groups in the Brazilian evangelical world. According to “The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements: Revised and Expanded Edition” (Zondervan 2010), Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals account for more than 45,000,000 members in Brazil.

Ecumencial WCC meeting in Brazil in 2006: Palestinian banners

Altmann’s Lutheran Church is mostly ecumenical, pro-Palestine, anti-Israel and liberal. In 2006, its most prominent seminary had Luiz Mott, the father of the homosexual movement in Brazil, as a main speaker. In stark contrast, Brazilian Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal churches, staunchly pro-Israel and generally anti-ecumenical, have been at risk of being defiled by the theological influence of Protestant denominations which promote Liberation Theology, as exposed in my e-book “Theology of Liberation versus Theology of Prosperity,” available free of charge here: http://bit.ly/15AJmMC

Prominent gay activist Luiz Mott in the largest Lutheran theological seminary in Brazil

In a WCC interview, Altmann noted “the growth of Pentecostal churches” and lamented that “many of the new churches reject ecumenism and campaign against it.” Ecumenism, which goes hand in hand with the Palestinian cause, has been supported by the political and theological Left. WCC and its ecumenism have depended primarily on money from the decaying and leftist old-line Protestant denominations of North America and Western Europe.

Altmann celebrated that Liberation Theology had strongly influenced the ecumenical movement and the WCC during the 1970s and 1980s.

In Brazil, Pentecostalism and orthodox Roman Catholicism are hostile to Liberation Theology, ecumenism and the Palestinian cause. In contrast, old mainline Protestant denominations, like the Lutheran Church in Brazil, which was headed by Rev. Altmann, embrace Liberation Theology, Palestinian activism and leftist political involvement.

When Cuban tyrant Fidel Castro hailed Jesus as a “great social revolutionary” to Altmann in 1999, the Lutheran minister, who had several dinners with Castro, saw no problem. Why, then, would the WCC see any problem with Abbas saying that Jesus was a “Palestinian messenger”?

Under ecumenism, it is very easy to accept Jesus as a “great social revolutionary” or “Palestinian messenger.”

Bethlehem Bible College and “Christ at the CheckPoint”

Under ecumenism, Christian-Muslim efforts have been developed by the World Council of Churches, the Vatican and the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA), as noted by the “WEA Theological News” (October 2012 Vol 41 No 4). Some of these efforts involve Palestinian Protestants who are adherents of Palestinian Liberation Theology.

Under the headline “Promoting Biblical Truth by Networking Theologians,” “WEA Theological News” highlights Bethlehem Bible College and its founder and president, Bishara Awad, in a very positive light, for propaganda purposes.

Bethlehem Bible College hosts the “Christ at the CheckPoint” conferences, partly to advance Christian-Muslim relations. Many of its speakers are prominent Western leftist Protestant leaders and Palestinian prelates adherent to Palestinian Liberation Theology.

In his article “Countering Anti-Israel Evangelism,” Mark Tooley writes:

“The last several years anti-Israel evangelicals have hosted a ‘Christ at the Checkpoint’ conference in Bethlehem featuring some prominent U.S. evangelicals. Last year's included evangelist Tony Campolo, a spiritual counselor to President Bill Clinton, and Florida mega church pastor Joel Hunter, a spiritual counselor to President Barack Obama. The next ‘Christ at the Checkpoint’ is March 2014 and will feature Geoff Tunnicliffe, head of the World Evangelical Alliance. There will also be a Dallas Southern Baptist pastor, despite his denomination's strong support for Israel. Additionally speaking is Gary Burge of Wheaton College, himself a prominent author critical of Israel who teaches at America’s most prestigious evangelical college. Anti-Israel sentiment among evangelical elites is strongest in academia and in international relief and missions groups.”

Bishara Awad, founder of the Bethlehem Bible College

British writer Paul Wilkinson, who attended it as an observer, noted:

“That movement has developed a staggering, frightening pace in recent years. I was in Bethlehem March 2012, at an evangelical conference called the Christ at the Checkpoint Conference. Over 700 evangelicals, all the names I’ve mentioned already, Gary Burge [and] Stephen Sizer were there; there was Joel Hunter, who’s one of the spiritual advisors to Barack Obama; Tony Campolo, the chairman of the World Evangelical Alliance was there, the head of the Lausanne Movement was there, all giving support to the Palestinians, all condemning the Israeli occupation.”

Another World Evangelical Alliance leader involved in “Christ at the Checkpoint” is Thomas Schirrmacher, who was a speaker at this conference in 2012. Schirrmacher rejects the charge that “Christ at the Checkpoint” is anti-Israel. Instead, he argues, it is about “reconciliation.”

Messianic Jews Reject “Christ at the Checkpoint”

His view is a far cry from the official view of conservative Jews. Leaders of the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America, Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, International Messianic Jewish Alliance and the International Alliance of Messianic Congregations and Synagogues, representing the mainstream Messianic Jewish movement, issued a joint statement prior to the 2012 Christ at the Checkpoint conference. They declared the following, “The conference claims to seek peace and reconciliation, but reflects biblical interpretations that deny the ongoing validity of God’s covenants with the Jewish people… We recognize and are deeply concerned with the struggle of Palestinian Christians. What we object to is a conference that is explicitly pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel, which seeks to promote itself as a conference on peace and reconciliation.”

Their statement also said:

“The Messianic Jewish community worldwide, standing in the place of our forefathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets and apostles who authored the Scriptures, view the modern re-emergence of supersessionism/replacement theology as a serious theological error, which has fueled anti-Semitism throughout history. It needs to be exposed and rejected by Christians worldwide. This theology, if left unchallenged, will eventually result in the continued suffering and persecution of our Jewish people, whether inside or outside Israel. Any effort for peace and reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles, even within the Yeshua-believing community, must recognize that the gifts and calling of God toward our Jewish people are irrevocable and still in effect today.”

Stephen Sizer: Churches that Side with Israel Are an “Abomination”

Even though Schirrmacher chose not to listen to these conservative Jews, there were other red flags. The Jerusalem Post reported: “Among the speakers was Rev. Stephen Sizer, a British minister who has spoken out harshly against Israel and met with radical Muslims, including Hezbollah.” Sizer is not alone in championing the cause of Palestinian liberation theology throughout the Muslim world. Two of his closest friends and colleagues within the anti-Israel ecumenical movement are Gary Burge and Donald Wagner, one of whom was also a speaker at “Christ at the CheckPoint.” Burge and Wagner are ordained ministers within the Presbyterian Church (USA), the world’s biggest pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality Presbyterian denomination, which has called for boycotts against Israel. They have been very active in the ecumenical Evangelical Christian-Muslim Dialogue.

Yasser Arafat and Stephen Sizer

In his personal blog, Sizer signed and published a document entitled “Joint Declaration by Christian Leaders on Israel’s 60th Anniversary.” The declaration decries the situation of Palestinians, then appeals to a kind of reconciliation:

“Let us commit ourselves in prophetic word and practical deed to a courageous settlement whose details will honour both peoples’ shared love for the land, and protect the individual and collective rights of Jews and Palestinians in the Holy Land.”

The original, supreme Declaration on Israel, the Bible, makes no provision for joint possession of the Holy Land by Jews and Romans, Jews and Canaanites, Jews and Palestinians, etc. Such joint possession violates the original and only intent of Israel’s Creator. On the contrary, His promises for Israel throughout the Bible, even in the New Testament, have no room for a joint venture between Jews and Palestinian-Arab-Muslims or Liberation Theology Christians.

Even so, Sizer’s Declaration was signed by many Calvinists and other traditional Protestants, including Geoff Tunnicliffe, General Secretary of World Evangelical Alliance. Although the Declaration and Sizer seem to defend “reconciliation,” there other motivations. The Rosh Pina Project said, “If you are a Messianic Jew or Israeli Arab Christian who support the government of Israel, which is inherently Zionist by its very history and nature,” Sizer says:

“There are certainly churches in Israel/Palestine that side with the occupation, that side with Zionism. One of my burdens is to challenge them theologically and show that they’ve repudiated Jesus, they’ve repudiated the Bible, and they are an abomination.”

According to the Rosh Pina Project, in a November 2013 telephone debate between Messianic Jewish scholar Michael Brown, who is an American Pentecostal leader, and Stephen Sizer hosted by Moody Radio asking if Christian Zionism is Christian, Brown at 50:20 minutes challenges Sizer about claiming Jewish and Arab Israeli followers of Jesus who support their nation, Israel, are an abomination. Initially Sizer flat-out denies he even said it. Brown provides the quote that the Rosh Pina Project broke in 2011, Sizer accepts he said it, but he added that he was “comfortable” with it being a true quote.

Is Thomas Schirrmacher “comfortable” with this liberal gang? Schirrmacher is a Calvinist and director of the Martin Bucer Theological Seminary in Europe. Yet, just because Burge and Wagner are also Calvinists, should he close his eyes to be with them as a speaker in a Palestinian event dominated by Palestinian Theology Liberation adherents?

Walid Shoebat, Palestinian and Former Muslim Brotherhood Member

Palestinian Christian Walid Shoebat, in a piece in WorldNetDaily entitled “Evangelicals for Hamas,” has also denounced “Christ at the CheckPoint,” whose motto is “resistance against the Israeli Zionist occupation.” He has denounced specifically the relationship of this conference with Hamas. According to International Christian Concern (ICC), “Hamas, in association with the Muslim Brotherhood, is controlling the Gaza Strip by force of arms, and is cracking down on Christians and restricting their freedom of worship. It is also trying to force them to abandon Christianity and convert to Islam.” ICC also explains that “there are ongoing attacks on churches and Christians in the Gaza Strip because Hamas considers Christians ‘infidels.’”

According to Shoebat, a former Muslim Brotherhood member:

“Christians are declining in Palestinian controlled areas. Bethlehem was 80 percent Christian and today it is less then 1 percent. Yet Israel is blamed even though the decline has not affected Muslims, while the Christian population in Israel has not declined a single percentage point. The Christian emigration is a result of persecution by Muslim Hamas and the Palestinian Authority that began their program of intimidation and land grabs, including Christian centers that were turned into headquarters for terrorists and thugs. In Gaza, the only Christian bookstore was closed and its owner, Rami Ayyad, was shot in the head by a Hamas fanatic. The birthplace of Christ, Joseph’s Tomb, and Joshua’s grave were all desecrated by Muslim terrorists.”

Christians and even Muslims in Israel are not immigrating to “Palestine.” But, if given the opportunity, Christians (and even Muslims) in the lands occupied by the Palestinian Authority would immigrate to Israel.

Shoebat says:

“Historically and biblically, there was never a Palestinian civilization or culture. Yet this is the core of the Bethlehem Bible College doctrine. Palestinianism, including the twisted brand of Christianity it incorporates, is designed to eradicate the Jewish presence and nothing more. This theology supports a divided state solution for Israel and even supports recognition of the Hamas terrorist organization as the ‘legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.’ Hamas is a terrorist group which seeks the destruction of Israel. According to the United States government, Hamas is considered a terrorist group.”

Shoebat also explains what students are taught in Bethlehem Bible College, founded by Bishara Awad:

“So how does the Awads view Zionism? Yousef Ijha, a graduate from Bethlehem Bible College (Awad and Ijha can be seen [here]), presented his dissertation titled Study on Christian Zionism which was accepted for his graduation. He writes in his dissertation: ‘Herzl established the first Zionist Congress in 1897, and succeeded in gathering the Jews of the world around him including the shrewdest of Jews to issue forth the most dangerous plan in the history of the world The Protocols of the Elders of Zion derived from sacred Jewish teaching.’ All that, while ignoring that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a fraudulent document.”

Not only fraudulent, but probably the main tool used by the KGB to spread anti-Israel hatred in Muslim nations. According to Daily Mail:

“The Protocols book, Pacepa claims, became ‘the basis for much of Hitler’s anti-Semitic philosophy.’ The KGB, he writes, disseminated ‘thousands of copies’ in Muslim countries during the 1970s.”

“Christ at the CheckPoint” and Its Propaganda against the Israeli Wall

Obviously, its dissemination was not designed to bring “reconciliation” between Israel and Palestinians. So why did Bethlehem Bible College never repudiate it? In fact, why does Bethlehem Bible College portray the Israeli Wall, even in its “Christ at the CheckPoint” propaganda, as an “apartheid wall”?

A Gatestone Institute report demolishes the false propaganda by saying:

“In 2005, a young Palestinian woman called Wafa al-Biss was badly burned in a domestic fire, taken to Israel’s Soroka Hospital, and treated there for months. When discharged, she was given a permit to return as an out-patient. Some time later she headed for the hospital wearing a suicide belt with the aim of exploding it among the doctors and nurses who had treated her, as well as however many children she could find. She was caught at a checkpoint and imprisoned. Earlier this year she was released as part of a prisoner release agreement [under US pressure]. Within hours she was speaking to Palestinian children, urging them to put on suicide vests and kill as many Jews as possible. And some people wonder why the Israelis need a security barrier.”

The Gatestone Institute report also says:

“It is a lie to say that Israel is an apartheid state and that the wall is an apartheid wall. It is a security barrier, just like dozens of others around the world, none of which is ever called an ‘apartheid wall.’”

Yet, Bethlehem Bible College and its founder, Bishara Awad, insist on depicting the Israeli checkpoints, not the radical Muslim Palestinians, as the real problem.

Thomas Schirrmacher and Confusion in Brazil

If Thomas Schirrmacher believes that “reconciliation” is a key component of “Christ at the CheckPoint” conferences, and its efforts to overthrow the Israeli wall, how will he be able to counter the liberal, Marxist and anti-Israel orientations in the ecumenical movement? How will he be able to see anti-Israel feelings in Burge and Wagner, who were his comrades and speakers at “Christ at the CheckPoint”?

His personal website has an exclusive ecumenical page and has also a page devoted to “Christ at the CheckPoint,” and Paul Wilkinson, in his booklet “The Church at Christ’s CheckPoint,” exposes the true agenda behind this conference. He quotes Schirrmacher saying:

“The WEA [World Evangelical Alliance] is ‘willing to do everything,’ including co-operate with the Palestinian Authority.”

Schirrmacher is scheduled to be a main speaker in the first International Congress on Fundamental Civil Freedoms in Brazil. The congress will be held in March in Brasilia by ANAJURE. What will he bring to ANAJURE? More from his ecumenical experiences? Will these experiences include “reconciliation” efforts?

ANAJURE has had enough problems. In fact, the most important test for ANAJURE, founded in 2012, and its interest to defend fundamental civil freedoms was when Congressman Marco Feliciano, who is also a Pentecostal minister opposed to abortion and the gay agenda, was viciously attacked by the powerful Brazilian Left because he had been appointed to head the Human Rights Committee in the Brazilian Congress in March 2013. In a press release, the ANAJURE president did not defend him, but questioned his appointment and personal motivations. In an exclusive interview, Congressman Feliciano explained that he was betrayed by ANAJURE.

ANAJURE has had enough problems. Its event with Schirrmacher has been propagandized by Ultimato, an old Protestant Liberation Theology magazine founded by Presbyterians in Brazil. Its positions on Israel are similar to Sizer’s views, focusing on “reconciliation.”

How then would Schirrmacher’s “reconciliation” views help ANAJURE and Brazil? How would his pro-Palestinian-Arab-Muslim ecumenical experiences help ANAJURE and Brazil?

Brazil has had enough of pro-Palestinian-Arab-Muslim and anti-Israel sentiment in its socialist government and many of its Protestant leaders, including Walter Altmann.

I hope Schirrmacher’s participation in an ANAJURE congress will not undermine the important Pentecostal resistance to the leftist Protestants’ overture to Liberation Theology, including its Palestinian-Arab version, and to anti-Israel sentiment, allegedly in the name of “reconciliation.”

Schirrmacher has been involved in high-profile Christian-Muslim ecumenical efforts with the Vatican and the World Council of Churches. In fact, he has been a speaker at WCC events.

Under the banner of ecumenism, it is very easy to embrace replacement theology, which says that Israel was replaced by the Church and all God’s promises to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are now invalid for Israel. Some high-ranking Calvinist theologians in ANAJURE espouse this stance. These theologians are from the Mackenzie Presbyterian University. In fact, the main sponsor of the ANAJURE event is Mackenzie. You can learn more about this Calvinist university here and here and here.

Mainline Protestant churches and members are the main victims of ecumenism and its apostasies. In 2008, then US State Secretary Condoleezza Rice, the famous daughter of an American Presbyterian minister, visited Brazil. Her Israeli-Palestinian politics were guided by her Calvinist replacement theology. She came to Brazil to strengthen the roots of the Afro-Brazilian religions, which are considered “witchcraft” by the Bible.

Brazilian sorceress and Condoleezza Rice

There is no contradiction for Calvinist Rice and other liberal Protestants to strengthen witchcraft, gay activism and Palestine and, at the same time, to weaken Israel. WCC is just an example of such apostasy.

Ecumenism Fosters Palestinian Cause

Ecumenism has been a catalyst for the Palestinian cause. The Lutheran Church of Altmann and other mainline Protestant denominations played a major role in the “World Social Forum - Free Palestine” in 2012. This event, held in Brazil, was the world’s biggest pro-Palestine socialist event.

Palestinian Liberation Theology adherents and Latin American Liberation Theology Protestants and Catholics gathered together, in their common leftist faith, to advocate their common Palestinian cause.

In May 2013, Bishara Awad, the Palestinian activist behind “Christ at the CheckPoint,” visited Brazil and some of its churches. He was the main speaker at Open Doors and at a major ministers’ meeting, under the ecumenical cloak of “reconciliation.”

The Brazilian socialist government sees the socialist and Palestinian claims as legitimate, including any reference to Jesus as a “great social revolutionary” or “Palestinian” messenger. The “World Social Forum - Free Palestine” had the same view. Of course, Awad and his “Christ at the CheckPoint” colleagues just would agree too. As to Schirrmacher, does he see just “reconciliation” in all of this?

Excepting for Altmann and his mainline Protestant comrades (who have become socialist and Palestinian messengers), Brazilian evangelicals, who are mostly Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals, have resisted the ecumenical efforts to align themselves with the socialist political view and the Liberation Theology view of Jesus being a “great social revolutionary” or “Palestinian” messenger.

I am indebted to three articles by Dr. Mark Tooley as sources for my article. I am indebted also to Paul Wilkinson, James Sundquist, Don Hank, Ingo Haake and to Walid Shoebat and their documentation.

Portuguese version of this article: “Mensageiros palestinos”: Como Cristo e os cristãos são usados para promover a causa palestina

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Recommended Reading:

Anti-Israel Activist Speaks at Open Doors Brazil

A Charismatic Response to “The Growing Crisis Behind Brazil’s Evangelical Success Story”

Brazil to Host World’s Biggest Pro-Palestine Event

Palestinian Gays Want World Boycotts against Israel

What every Christian should know about Israel

Julio Severo Interviews Brazilian Congressman Marco Feliciano: How Massive Homosexualist Opposition Has Skyrocketed His Name into Fame, Making Him the Most Prominent Evangelical Politician in Brazil

By Julio Severo

Marco Feliciano has become the most prominent evangelical leader in Brazilian politics. His fame came involuntarily. As a Congressman, he was appointed chairman of the Human Rights Committee in the Brazilian House of Representatives last March. Immediately, all the Brazilian Left began a massive campaign against his appointment. Artists, politicians and even ministers in the socialist administration of President Dilma Rousseff wanted him out of this committee chairmanship.

Marco Feliciano

Even among evangelical leaders, there was fierce opposition. Two important leftist Reformed ministers in Brazil, Rev. Marcos Amaral and Rev. Ariovaldo Ramos, took part in national efforts to remove Feliciano.

In the face of such fierce opposition, the chances for Feliciano to remain in office were slim to none. No one was willing to side with him.

I was among the tiny minority of Christian leaders supporting him, in spite of his past. As Ariovaldo Ramos and many leftist evangelicals and Catholics, Feliciano had supported the election of socialist President Rousseff. But my Catholic pro-life contacts assured me that he was instrumental in many pro-life battles in the Brazilian Congress. Besides, these sources told me his support for socialist Rousseff was based on pure naiveté. Unlike Ramos and Amaral, who are ideological militants and supported Hugo Chavez and socialist administrations in Brazil, continuing to support them even after they began to promote abortion and homosexuality, Feliciano withdrew his support of Rousseff over these issues. In fact, the massive opposition to his appointment was over his solid stances against abortion and homosexuality.

Marco Feliciano is the president of Catedral do Avivamento (Revival Cathedral), a church connected to the Assemblies of God denomination in Brazil. His fame has skyrocketed because, in spite of systematic socialist hostility, he has remained as the chairman of the Human Rights Commission in the Brazilian House of Representatives.

Before his appointment, this committee, which was controlled by powerful socialists, had for many years approved grants to homosexual groups. Since 2010, over 100,000 dollars were allocated to the gay agenda. With Feliciano in office, these massive financial resources are being earmarked for legitimate human rights needs.

Leftist groups throughout the Brazilian society are furious about the losses to the homosexual agenda. But true human rights have won.

I am privileged to have interviewed Congressman Marco Feliciano to inform you of his colossal battle to uphold pro-family values in Brazilian politics — which is dominated by socialists bent on foisting the culture of death on Brazil.

Julio Severo: Your appointment as Chair of the Human Rights Committee (HRC) in the Brazilian House of Representatives provoked indignation in the ruling Workers’ Party (whose Portuguese acronym is PT) and the Left. I have never seen an evangelical politician so attacked as you were. Why did PT and the Left do it?

Marco Feliciano: The Brazilian Left hates everything and everybody hindering their nefarious progressive plans. Since my election in 2010, honoring the votes of the Christian population, I have paid special attention to major issues and I was surprised to find about 200 bills turning homosexuals into a super-race. Today, on close examination, I found more than 900 bills before the House of Representatives which harm the traditional family, church and free speech. I have become a kind of “bodyguard” for family. Long before HRC I had, for example, petitioned for the impeachment of a justice in the Brazilian Supreme Court because he disclosed beforehand his vote for the abortion of anencephalic babies. I did it with the assistance of the late Catholic Bishop Bergonzini, Bishop of São Paulo. I had several battles in House committees and on the floor when the subject was sexual orientation, and from that time on, they made me a public enemy. When my name was nominated for the HRC chairmanship, the opposition went crazy. After all, I was, for them, basically a rightwinger chairing a committee created exclusively by and for the Left.

Marco Feliciano with Catholic pro-life leaders

Julio Severo: Rev. Ariovaldo Ramos, Rev. Marcos Amaral and other representatives of the evangelical Left joined together to protests against you. Why did they do protest you, but never the pro-abortion and pro-homosexualist policies of the ruling Workers’ Party?

Marco Feliciano: One fine day I received a call from someone connected to Ariovaldo, saying that he wanted to talk to me before issuing a declaration. I admit, I had never heard of him before. I obeyed the Bible command: “Strive for peace with everyone.” I met with him, and he was accompanied by several other leaders comprising the Board of Directors of the Evangelical Alliance. For over an hour I provided my explanations, denounced how bills are processed in the Brazilian Congress, mentioned hundreds of bills threatening the freedom of worship and the destruction of the traditional family, etc. Yet, I was questioned about how I would conduct myself before the demands from Indians, the poor, social issues, and then I perceived that these leaders, friends of the leftist Rousseff administration, had no concern at all with the threats I had exposed. They were activists, worried about provoking a holy “war,” advising me not to be intolerant, lecturing me about the perfect Lula administration (the predecessor of socialist Rousseff)… Anyway, before this meeting, Ariovaldo had already signed a public document denouncing me.

Julio Severo: In your desperation, you contacted ANAJURE, a Christian organization recently founded to defend civil rights of Christians, for help. What was their answer?

Marco Feliciano: I was really desperate. For 30 days, I was under cross fire and a very few people helped me. I remembered ANAJURE. I remembered also the desperate request these noble “Christian” lawyers made to the Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus saying that ANAJURE could not be recognized unless evangelical parliamentarians gave them their seal of approval. After all, this group was being created for the express purpose of protecting evangelical parliamentarians in their struggle to defend religious freedom and family. I called the ANAJURE president* who was in France. I talked to him more than once, and he told that he was on my side and that ANAJURE would legally defend me. Idle talk! Nonsense! Some days later a note by these holy lawyers attacked me and advised me to leave HRC because I was not qualified. After this episode, ANAJURE lost some of its most important founding members, including our faith warrior in Brasilia, Dr. Damares Alves.

Julio Severo: In the heat of persecution, the ANAJURE president issued a press release warning that your presence in the Human Rights Committee was going to “divide the evangelical church even further… Just because personal projects are above the values of the Truth of the Gospel of Christ.” Why, instead of helping you, did the ANAJURE president decide to issue this press release?

Marco Feliciano: Out of cowardice, because it was not convenient to combine the image of his organization with a “leprous dog” like me at that time. I was an offense to them. Very few people believed that I would be able to withstand the pressure. He was sure that I would leave, that I would fall. But the Lord, through the prayers of the church, has sustained me.

Julio Severo: What did you go through as a result of the massive opposition, coming especially from the media and the secular and evangelical Left?

Marco Feliciano: Persecution, death threats, physical ailments and public humiliation. My wife suffered a psychosomatic illness. My younger daughters (10 and 11) needed psychological support, because in a worship service gay activists climbed on my car, exposed their genitals, shouted loudly, swearing and spitting when my small daughters were in the car crying. I lost 22 pounds, because I was unable to eat and sleep properly. The media were cruel, editing sermons I had preached 15 years ago and showing them daily in their news and TV reports. The social media were disgusting. Gay activists vandalized our churches and campaigned at the doors of some churches hindering members from entering. In some small cities the battling was so great that church members were afraid to attend worship services, because when they came they met gay activists smoking, drugging themselves, drinking and dancing half-naked.

Protest against Marco Feliciano

Julio Severo: Has the homosexualist pressure affected your daily life? And if so, how?

Marco Feliciano: Yes. Today, rarely I go to public places. When I do, if someone calls my name, or comes near abruptly, I get worried, because I do not know what is going to happen and what this individual’s intent is. This is why I avoid going to restaurants and malls.

Julio Severo: Have your family suffered threats because of homosexualist pressures?

Marco Feliciano: My oldest daughter, 18, had to discontinue her studies in Brazil, because her surname, Feliciano, was a burden. I had to send her to study in the United States.

Julio Severo: Gay militants have called you names and threatened you? Have you called them names and threatened them too?

Marco Feliciano: My profile is peaceful and calm. I have emotional health. I never use abusive language. I never threaten. Even when I have legal grounds to file a legal action, I do not do it. I am a Christian, not just nominal, but practicing.

Julio Severo: What do you think about homosexual behavior? Is it medically healthy? Is it morally healthy?

Marco Feliciano: It is a behavioral phenomenon beyond comprehension. It is an issue that should be studied, but gay militants have pressured psychologists to abandon the topic and never discuss it. This is deplorable and even criminal. They have turned it into a “trendy” thing, and the next generations will pay the consequences for it. Gay behavior results in confusion, distress, and desperation. I am sorry for them.

Julio Severo: What do you think about God’s condemnation of homosexual behavior in the Bible?

Marco Feliciano: I do not question God or his thoughts. The Old Testament had prohibitions aimed at preserving our species. For example, circumcision, bans on foods like pork or seafood. Today we know how these dietary rules and circumcision increased the people’s lifespan. It was intended to keep them healthy. I see the condemnation by God of the homosexual act in several respects, the preservation of species. If you put 500 homosexuals on an island for 70 years, it will eventually be uninhabited. Anal copulation is unsanitary. Diseases like HPV and AIDS spread easily among GLBTT people, and there is the issue of sin, which is everything offending God and making Him sad. But remember that the condemnations were from the Old Testament, in the Dispensation of the Law. With Christ in the New Testament, the condemnation is spiritual, it is about eternity. The eye-for-an-eye law was changed to “Love your neighbor as yourself.” So I love homosexuals, but I abhor the homosexual act.

Marco Feliciano receives support from March for Family in June

Julio Severo: What do you think about PLC 122, the Brazilian bill criminalizing “homophobia”?

Marco Feliciano: PLC 122 is the padlock that swill forever lock up free speech and severely chastise the Christian Church.

Julio Severo: Do you agree with the government’s attitude, with media complicity, of forcing children and adolescents to be exposed to homosexual indoctrination in schools and other settings?

Marco Feliciano: I am opposed to it and I pay a high cost for that. The so called “new family structure” is dishonest, macabre, putrid, wretched and implacable! Parents, beware for your children!

Julio Severo: Before your term, what was happening in the Human Rights Committee? Is it true that much money was channeled to fund homosexual projects?

Marco Feliciano: HRC was created about 20 years ago and was used as a visibility platform for the LGBTT movement. In the past 18 years it is estimated that over 100,000 dollars were earmarked for them.

Julio Severo: What about now under your chairmanship? How does the Human Rights Committee channel resources? Where is people’s money going to?

Marco Feliciano: A House committee cannot send money, but it stipulates where the grants are to be employed. It happens at the end of the year. I have not done it yet, but when I do it, don’t worry, because I will allot it to people in real need.

Julio Severo: Do you think that the massive indignation of the gay militancy against your chairmanship in the Human Rights Committee has to do with the multi-million loss of resources that the gay movement has suffered?

Marco Feliciano: Of course.

Julio Severo: In the past, you supported politically socialists Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff, of the Workers’ Party. What has made you change your mind? In the choice between ethical values, especially opposition to abortion and homosexuality, and support to the Workers’ Party of Lula and Rousseff, why did you lean toward ethical values?

Marco Feliciano: In the 2010 Brazilian presidential election, we were in a tight spot. On one side, there was PSDB (a social democratic party) and its candidate José Serra, who said openly that he supported abortion. On the other side, there was Rousseff, who signed a public document saying that she was against abortion and that in her administration she would not approve it. What would you do? I chose the lesser evil, the candidate who had a document that could be used to hold her feet to the fire. I supported Rousseff. I have repented. To the ruling Left, “values” means money.

Julio Severo: Why did Ariovaldo Ramos and other representatives of the evangelical Left, who also supported Lula and Rousseff, prefer to join the Workers’ Party and the militant homosexuals in opposing your chairmanship of the Human Rights Committee? Do not ethical values, especially against abortion and homosexuality, matter to them?

Marco Feliciano: Who knows? Certainly, there must be some special benefit that we do not know about. An ancient poet said “Between heaven and earth there are more mysteries than our vain philosophy of life”… I cannot believe in a church that prefers error over truth. I cannot understand what leads a minister to support a wicked system, but to fail to support a simple, weak brother. I really do not understand.

Brazilian Congress

Julio Severo: You have gone through a major trial by fire. With the massive opposition to your appointment for the Human Rights Committee chairmanship, it seemed that you were not going to holdout for long. How was your experience with God during that time?

Marco Feliciano: I do not remember being so near to God before. It was profound. Dependency on Him was total. Prayer had a pure focus. I had heard about Him before, but then I knew Him in truth. After 40 days I saw Christians arising to help me. Evangelicals, Catholics and, amazingly, even spiritualists and conservative atheists joined in on the internet, in the streets, in prayer, in TV and radio shows. The rally promoted by Rev. Silas Malafaia in Brasília was a blessing. I saw God moving the Christian nation to prayer.

Julio Severo: Following this huge opposition, your stay in the chairmanship of the Human Rights Committee is a miracle. Do you feel that God had this purpose for you? Jean Wyllys, the homosexualist congressman in Brazil, says that he was put in the politics by African deities. What about you? Have you a calling from God for politics?

Marco Feliciano: When I became a candidate for the Brazilian House of Representatives, many were shocked. A very small number of people understood what I did at that time. I had a spiritual dream. I was moved by God to politics. My life in Brazilian politics awakened many in the Brazilian Church. I demonstrated that it is possible to be a politician and stay filled with the Holy Spirit. I continue being a minister and preacher. My principles remain intact. Next year the Brazilian Church will show her power at the polls. I am sure that God is in this business. I believe that God still has “Josephs and Daniels” in government. Let’s remember that the Old Testament prophet was the political conscience of kings.

Marco Feliciano

Julio Severo: Many would like to vote for you for president of Brazil next year, because possibly all the candidates will be pro-abortion and homosexualists. Even socialist evangelical Marina Silva, who is looking for evangelical votes, is not trustworthy on these issues. She is supported by many leftists, including evangelicals, who made consistent opposition to you. You would be the only electoral option for Christians. Why don’t you run for president of Brazil?

Marco Feliciano: I was also disappointed with our “sister” Marina. Marina is so leftist that even the Workers’ Party was not radical enough for her. Look at the people who are with her building the new party Rede, and you will understand what I am talking about. If a party owning an electoral TV spot adopted me, I would become a candidate with no fear. If not now, perhaps the next time around. I am in prayer. I have to learn many things. I am 40 years old and beginning my political life. I have the conviction that I am not 100% prepared, but there are advisers, etc. It is a dream. Let’s dream.

* Uziel Santana.

For international readers unfamiliar with the evangelical Left in Brazil, I recommend my recent e-book, available here free of charge: http://bit.ly/1a6brwP

Reviewed by Don Hank.

Portuguese version of this article: Julio Severo entrevista Dep. Marco Feliciano: Como uma oposição gayzista colossal catapultou o nome dele à fama, tornando-o o político evangélico mais proeminente do Brasil

Spanish version of this article: Julio Severo entrevista al diputado brasileño Marco Feliciano: De cómo una colosal oposición gay catapultó su nombre a la fama, por lo que ahora él es el político evangélico más prominente de Brasil

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Recommended Reading:

“What does ANAJURE exist for?” The Marco Feliciano case

Gay militant Jean Wyllys at Brazilian Presbyterian University

The fight of Julio Severo against anti-homophobia bills in Brazil

Liberation Theology and Neo-Pentecostalism: A Leading Challenge to the Evangelical Churches in Brazil