The Subliminal Deception Within Modern Christianity:- The Teachings Of Jesuit Theology And Its Influence Upon Bible Prophecy

Submitted by Terence Blackett

JesuitsBy 1540, the Society of Jesus or the Jesuits as they are called were established with the principal function to win back the Protestant countries of Europe by any religio-political means necessary and to bring the World Order under the aegis of Vatican rule.

The underhanded working of the “Black Prince” became diabolically subterranean and sinister. In its ethos, where its reach has now been felt for the last 460 years the “dark forces” of the underworld planned, schemed, concocted and spun a web of lying intrigue and subterfuge to mask their evil deeds of deception. We know however that these malignant powers have been at work for thousands of years, mangling the world in its tentacles even long before this Order came of age.

The sinister timeline of Jesuit theology and its influence has been such that it has infected every nation, kindred, tongue and people. It has created storm clouds of the magnitude that 2 major world wars have been fought in its name resulting in what Edmond Paris describes as:

“A great accumulation of clouds, where lightning is powerful and the storm is bound to break out… Between 1939 and 1945, the storm killed 57 million souls ravaging and ruining Europe. We must be on our guard; another and even worse catastrophe may lie hidden in these same clouds; lighting may strike again, throwing the world into “abysses human wisdom can foresee”, but out of which, if it had the misfortune to let itself be thrown into, no power (on earth) could rescue it.” [Emphasis supplied is mine].

Modern Christianity has largely forgotten the importance of the Protestant Reformation of the 1500’s. Moreover, its resemblance to the church set up by Christ at His ascension pales in comparison today for what passes off as the Christian faith.

After 1260 years of papal oppression, the church awoke after a deep, dense, dark night of sleep to realize that superstition was rife and the witness for Biblical truth that was slain and martyred was left for dead, lying in the streets in an age of reason – a Renaissance bolstered by a move away from feudalism to modernity. But the dawn of the light of the Reformation meant that the opening of prophetic revelation (once sealed up) had finally been opened.

On the scene of action came Martin Luther. It has been said that the Reformation first discovered Jesus Christ, and then, in the blazing light of Christ, it discovered the Antichrist. This mighty, Spirit-filled movement, for Christ and against the Antichrist, shook the world.

H. Grattan Guinness wrote these memorable words: “From the first, and throughout, that movement [the Reformation] was energized and guided by the prophetic word. Luther never felt strong and free to war against the Papal apostasy till he recognized the pope as Antichrist. It was then that he burned the Papal bull (shit*) [Emphasis supplied is mine].

But the Jesuits answered!

“In the reaction that followed, all the powers of hell seemed to be let loose upon the adherents of the Reformation. War followed war: tortures, burnings, and massacres were multiplied.”

So in 1545 the Council of Trent was set up to counter the Reformation and ending its 3rd session in 1563 where the Catholic Church hierarchy gave the Jesuits the specific assignment of destroying Protestantism and bringing people back to the Mother Church. This was to be done not only through the Inquisition and through torture, but also through insidious and pervasive theology.

At the Council of Trent, the Jesuits were commissioned by the Pope to develop a new interpretation of Scripture that would counteract the Protestant application of the Bible’s Antichrist prophecies to the Roman Catholic Church. Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), a brilliant Jesuit priest and doctor of theology from Spain published a commentary on Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. According to concocted Jesuit theology – The Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem at the end of time.

Ribera’s antithesis on the Protestant Scriptural Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2) as seated in the church of God —asserted by Augustine, Jerome, Luther and many reformers was now dispelled and they set up an infidel Antichrist, outside the church of God. “The result of his work [Ribera’s] was a twisting and maligning of prophetic truth.”

On the heels of Ribera was Jesuit scholar, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621). The (Futurism) teachings of these Jesuits has paved the way for much of present day Christian eschatology especially of the role that the Antichrist will play in world events in the Last Days – a damnable “LIE” perpetrated against the Holy Writ – Scriptures which clearly states that the “spirit” of Antichrist has always been in the world and Paul acknowledges that the “man of sin” would be revealed in the Apocalyptic discourse.

So Jesuit Futurism swept 1,500 years of prophetic history under the proverbial carpet by inserting its infamous “GAP” theory – a heresy which teaches that when Rome fell, prophecy stopped, only to continue again right around the time of the Rapture, thus the “gap” was created. The ten horns, the little horn, the Beast, and the Antichrist have nothing to do with Christians until this “last-day Antichrist” should appear. According to this viewpoint, there were no prophecies being fulfilled during the 1260 years of the Dark Ages!

However, it was during the 19th century that this Jesuit form of theology took on a spurious global dimension where the likes of Dr. Samuel Roffey Maitland (1792-1866), a lawyer and Bible scholar, became a librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury and found Ribera doctrines and began to widely publish and advocate these deceptive teachings.

After Dr. Maitland came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). Newman soon became a full Roman Catholic, and later even a highly honored Cardinal. Then came the much-respected Scottish Presbyterian minister, Edward Irving (1792-1834), the acknowledged forerunner of both the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. When Irving turned to the prophecies, he eventually accepted the one-man Antichrist idea of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, yet he went a step further. Somewhere around 1830, Edward Irving began to teach the unique idea of a two-phase return of Christ, the first phase being a “SECRET RAPTURE” prior to the rise of the Antichrist.

Then came John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) – a brilliant lawyer, pastor, and theologian, who wrote more than 53 books on Bible subjects and is credited as the father of Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism is the theory that God deals with mankind in major dispensations or periods. Darby’s contribution to the development of evangelical theology has been so great that he like Edward Irving also became a strong promoter of a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by a one-man Antichrist. In fact, this teaching has become a hallmark of Dispensationalism. John Nelson Darby laid much of the foundation for the present popular removal of Daniel’s 70th week away from history and from Jesus Christ in favor of applying it to a future Tribulation after the Rapture.

The greatest of all these Jesuits subliminal adherents was Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), a Kansas lawyer who was greatly influenced by the writings of Darby. In 1909, Scofield published the first edition of his famous Scofield Reference Bible. In the early 1900s, this Bible became so popular in American Protestant Bible schools that it was necessary to print literally millions of copies. This was the beginning of the end of American Protestant Christianity and a proper exegetical understanding of prophecy and the Scripture.

The Moody Bible Institute and the Dallas Theological Seminary have strongly supported the teachings of John Nelson Darby, and this has continued to fuel Futurism’s growth. Then in the 1970s, Pastor Hal Lindsey, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, released his blockbuster book The Late Great Planet Earth. This 177-page, easy-to-read volume brought Futurism to the masses of American Christianity, and beyond. 30 million copies later and in over 30 languages. Through The Late Great Planet Earth, Jesuit Futurism took a strong hold over the Protestant Christian world.

So in the 1990s, Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins took the future one-man Antichrist idea of Scofield, Darby, Irving, Newman, Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, and turned it into Blockbuster books and movies like Left Behind produced by Jack Van Impe, Peter and Paul Lalonde, and John Hagee. This has been the direction of American Protestant theology which has been pervasive across the globe for the last 30 years.

“The proper eschatological term for the view most widely taught today is futurism which fuels the confusion of Dispensationalism. The futuristic school of Bible prophecy came from the Roman Catholic Church, specifically her Jesuit theologians.”

Who has the right theology—those who were burned at the stake for Jesus Christ, or those who lit the fires? Who has the true Bible doctrine—the martyrs or their persecutors? Who has the correct interpretation of the Antichrist—those who died trusting in the blood of Christ, or those who shed the blood of God’s dear saints? This is the real issue today in Christianity…

You be the judge!

(Much thanks to my friend Pastor Steve for his wonderful insightful knowledge and his literary references, contributions and wisdom).

Tags: , ,

209 Comments on “The Subliminal Deception Within Modern Christianity:- The Teachings Of Jesuit Theology And Its Influence Upon Bible Prophecy”

  1. Anon December 18, 2009 at 2:27 PM #

    Look, Tech, GP, Pat and Halsall need to amalgamate. Wunnah makes BU a PLEASURE to read – not forgetting you, David.

    But, muh bros and sisters, yuh see the blasted (they call it in the UK) “C U Next Tuesday” from Zoe, that jackass Blackett and our “lovely” friend whose monniker starts with ZED (but not as in Zepplin) but most especially our friend, the “Wikepedia” Pictionary?

    Man, these dudes/dames GOT to get a life!!!!! They mad as C U Next Tuesday!!!!!! MEDICATION CAN BE FUN!!!!!!!


  2. Technician December 18, 2009 at 2:57 PM #

    @ GP….

    I am behaving now…
    I just trying to learn something new from now on.
    I am not on D..just waiting for PROOF than CAN NOT BE REFUTED!!
    See….I am learning 😉


  3. Georgie Porgie December 18, 2009 at 3:21 PM #


    Were you at BFS in the days of Bran? What was your era again?

    I only went 1961-62. But as a Ch Ch dweller with nuff BFS boys in the area, and associating with BFS boys and GFS girls ever weekend at choir practice, church and sunday school (and sitting sometimes with the ex BFS-ers in the old Gerorge Chanellor stand) I up on my BFS- history! LOL

    There was also a tall man called Archer.
    His brother used to be on our garbage truck.

    One day my little brother called him Archer instead of Mr Archer, and my father soaked his tail!

    Told him Mr Archer is A MAN FIRST! And must be addressed as a man. MR ARCHER TO YOU! Nothing to do with his occupation.

    Tell you the truth I have never forgotten that lesson. Have taken it with me all through life. You see those so called “nobody’s” have always been the salt of our society. But now we so “big up” we look down on such.

    But I will tell you a secret Techie. I have found that it is the big ups and those with such aspirations as the greatest pain up in the “shelves of Houston”!

    You guys can google good! So go look see where those shelves are! LOL

    You will find halall in that general area!


  4. Technician December 18, 2009 at 3:24 PM #


    I was At Foundation from ’82-’87.

    I will digest all you wrote above, have a train to catch and it is freezing, will get back to you later.


  5. Anonymous(2) December 18, 2009 at 3:28 PM #

    Hopi, you are a classic example of how a “little bit” of knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
    Henry VIII was not the head of the Anglican Church as the Anglican Church was not formed during his reign. Henry VIII was mostly in private a practicing Catholic but was open minded to the Protestant faith. He was greatly influenced by his chief advisor, Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury who sought to bring England to the Protestant Faith.
    It was only after Henry VIII’s death and during the reign of Elizabeth I, that the two faiths (Catholic and Protestant) were cobbled together into a “one size fits all” faith that we now know as Anglican.


  6. Georgie Porgie December 18, 2009 at 3:44 PM #

    The Scout opined thus on // December 16, 2009 at 7:41 AM
    I’ve dedicated the rest of my life to living even closer to the principles of God than I was living before. In so doing I live by the simple method of love for God and my neighbour. The reason why this world is in crisis right now is just greed and unless we get back to Godly principles, it will get worse. We have too many academically educated people in this world but few with common sense.

    Well Mr Scout we have no choice but to agree with you. You got it right Sir! Jesus actually did teach L:OVE GOD & LOVE NEIGHBOUR.
    As a teenager at Sunday School in the Baptist church we used to sing a chorus JESUS & OTHERS & YOU what a wonderful way to spell JOY! But it aint easy Mr Scout. But we can only try, cause YOU CAN NOT DO THAT ON YOUR OWN AS EASY AS IT SOUNDS. YOU NEED THE HOLY SPIRIT. The reason why the OT Jews could not keep the law. Most of them were practicing a religion, and not obeying God and seeking his will.

    But it aint easy Mr Scout, especially when you come in here on BU and have to deal with Pat and Techie, and Hopi and NS and BAFBFP and a certain fella who attended Cawmere whose name I wont call.

    [You will notice that I don’t notice those who want to be noticed by posting with their picture and who post verbal diarhoea! LOL ROTFLMAO]

    Techie, watch that certain fella who attended Cawmere whose name I wont call, come for my tail now.

    He can say what he like, but he is my boy although he like to cuss me every now and again, when he get up on de wrong side or don’t get no antibiotics. (not Pen- V though, but something rhyming with JU- C!.. LOL ROTFLMAO

    I learn about that antibiotic while teaching Pharm to some medical students about 5 years ago


  7. Georgie Porgie December 18, 2009 at 3:52 PM #

    Anonymous(2) // December 18, 2009 at 3:28 PM

    Actually, Hopi is correct and you are wrong!

    Ding dong! You’re wrong!

    Henry VIII was INDEED the head of the Anglican Church and the Anglican Church was INDEED formed during his reign.

    Henry VIII was INDEED mostly in private a practicing Catholic but was open minded to the Protestant faith.

    Poor Cranmer had to do as he was told, and fight the Pope so that Henry could get his divorce.

    The two faiths (Catholic and Anglican) are basically very similar, but there are not now, and never were a “one size fits all” faith that we now know as Anglican.
    Go get a proper text of Church History Sir.

    As the great apostasy in Christendom approaches RRC’s and Anglicans and others will indeed become a “one size fits all” faith.

    It is true that Hopi does talk a lot of cow’s wallop on BU, but when she right and telling the truth she must be defended, just as I would defendthe men from the “bat cave.” LOL ROFLMAO


  8. Anonymous(2) December 18, 2009 at 5:35 PM #

    Actually, GP, whilst you may be some sort of expert on theology you are not an expert in history. I suggest you go back and read some history books, it might make a nice change from that dry Bible stuff.


  9. kiki December 18, 2009 at 5:38 PM #

    My Opinion


  10. Dictionary December 18, 2009 at 5:57 PM #


    It was you who first used the metaphor of an accused in court.

    I simply pointed out, using your analogy as a point of reference, the summary of well known facts that SH had (i) gained power by murder in a party meeting — it is on videotape and sometimes plays on TV, (ii) sustained power by internal mass murder and terror, (iii) set out on aggression against neighbours, including Iran and Kuwait most plainly, (iv) had and USED WMD’s externally and internally [remember the gassed Kurd civilians?], (v) was known to be seeking nuclear weapons and missile delivery systems as early as the turn of he 1980’s, hence the Israeli raid of 1981 [which bough the world what turned out to be a crucial 10 years set-back:1981 + 10 = 1991], (vi) As the inspection process post first campaign showed, he had and continued to be developing such weapons up to and after the campaign, (vii) he kept on evading inspections imposed as armistice terms, (viii) he submitrted useless informaiton on having a UNSC mandate to do so or face consequences.

    The burden of proof was on SH, not the world; especially as at he point where armistice terms were in effect with disarmament terms, i.e. 1991.

    He willfully failed to comply with the armistice and brought down on his head the renewal of military operations under said terms.

    What you have tried to do is to ex post facto switch around burdens of proof the better to set up and knock over strawmen; and exert selective hyperskepticism which tries to exploit he fact that deductive proofs beyond rational dispute are not in the province of the world of fact and experience. the resulting inconsistencies in your reasoning on matters of fact show the fundamentally fallacious and irrational nature of such selective hyperskepticism.

    When such an irresponsible stance on international affairs contributes to an opinion climate in which aggressors with the sort of track record described are enabled, and it results in the all too predictable horrendous consequences, let the record show that you were a part of the problem, not the solution.

    And it is high tome to refocus on the main point of this blog thread.

    Good day.



  11. Georgie Porgie December 18, 2009 at 6:14 PM #


    I am not an expert on history but I have read several texts on CHURCH HISTORY! Actually got an A in Church History in my MDiv.

    And the Bible is not at all dry to those who find great excitement in discovering nuances in the use of exact and specific words in the Greek or Hebrew

    The Anglican church was born ONLY because Henry 8th wanted a divorce. Not only did I read that in at least 4 Church History texts but I learned that in high school in British History class (as we were then taught!)

    You may run in again and try another ad hominem. It wont change the fact that Hopi was correct!


  12. Anonymous(2) December 18, 2009 at 7:19 PM #

    Below is a direct quote from The Church of England website: It is not good enough GP to be partially correct. You either get it right or it is wrong.

    “Under his son, Edward VI, more Protestant-influenced forms of worship were adopted. Under the leadership of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, a more radical reformation proceeded. A new pattern of worship was set out in the Book of Common Prayer (1549 and 1552). These were based on the older liturgy but influenced by Protestant principles. The confession of the new reformed church was set out in the Forty-two Articles (later revised to thirty-nine). The reformation however was cut short by the death of the king. Queen Mary I, who succeeded him, returned England again to the authority of the Pope, thereby ending the first attempt at an independent Church of England. During Mary’s reign, many leaders and common people were burnt for their refusal to recant of their reformed faith. These are known as the Marian martyrs and the persecution has led to her nickname of “Bloody Mary”.

    Mary also died childless and so it was left to the new regime of her half-sister Elizabeth to resolve the direction of the church. The settlement under Elizabeth I (from 1558), known as the Elizabethan settlement, developed the via media (middle way) character of the Church of England, a church moderately Reformed in doctrine, as expressed in the Thirty-nine Articles, but also emphasising continuity with the Catholic and Apostolic traditions of the Church Fathers. It was also an established church (constitutionally established by the state with the head of state as its supreme governor). The exact nature of the relationship between church and state would be a source of continued friction into the next century.”


  13. Georgie Porgie December 18, 2009 at 9:51 PM #

    I dont care two hoots what the Anglican website says man.

    They are splitting hairs man. Every one also read and learned the history you quote. Despite the fact that Mary Queen of Scots or Bloody Mary tried to return the English to the RC church, the FACTS are that the English FIRST MOVED AWAY FROM THE RC organization inthe reign of King Henry 8th over the fact that the Pope would not grant him a divorce! Hopi isright and you are wrong! Ding dong! You are wrong.

    Didnt you learn that in school? It was taught by Anglican priests and staunch Anglicans in the days when the Anglican church still controlled the school system in Bim, and when Anglican hymns were sung and Anglican prayers read in both primary and secondary school. Ah lie? At least this is what happened at the schools I attended. LOL

    These facts were taught in British History at school and still is taught in every Church History Course in Theological Seminaries using the most popular text books of Church History.

    What you expect the Anglican website to say! Eh?

    My texts are in Bim, else Id scanned them for you.LOL


  14. Anonymous(2) December 18, 2009 at 9:58 PM #

    You can squawk and ruffle up your feathers all you want GP but it does not change the fact that The Anglican Faith was not enacted as the official religion of The Church of England until the reign of Queen Elizabeth I.


  15. Georgie Porgie December 18, 2009 at 10:25 PM #

    LOL I aint ruffling up my feathers Sir

    The Anglican Faith MAY HAVE BEEN t enacted as the official religion of The Church of England until the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, BUT IT MOVED AWAY FROM THE RC CHURCH IN THE REIGN OF HENRY 8th! His first daughter Mary remained faithful to Rome and sought to reinstate the RC church, then Elizabeth 1 came and did what she did BUT HOPI IS RIGHT!

    Under Henry 8th the English started their move from the RC over Henry’s divorce. If he had got the divorce, there would not have been an Anglican church ever!

    And I not squawking and ruffling up my feathers . I telling you what I learned at school and in Theological School.

    You want to unlearn me? ROTFLMAO! LOL

    You are splitting hairs. I can split hairs too, and I can also detect splitting of the heart sounds too! (Which you cant!) ROTFLMAO! LOL


  16. Technician December 19, 2009 at 1:00 AM #

    Oh me Oh my….
    Here is where I will bow out of this discussion with you…dont have the testicular fortitude to continue in this vein.
    I humbly agree to disagree .


  17. Technician December 19, 2009 at 1:01 AM #


    Continue with the history lesson please.


  18. kiki December 19, 2009 at 4:39 AM #

    There are lots of different mindsets from blogging on BU. Nobody ever changes their opinions they just become more extreme…


  19. kiki December 19, 2009 at 4:43 AM #

    Chant Down Babylon

    Beat Down Babylon

    Chant down Babylon


  20. kiki December 19, 2009 at 6:16 AM #

    Youths of today


  21. Amused December 19, 2009 at 7:44 AM #

    GB, you sure that it was only to do with Henry VIII’s divorce? Remember that England had been under attack from other mainland European countries for centuries. It was also trying to claim Normandy and France (a very Catholic country) really objected to that.

    The Popes in those days used to broker power and would go with which ever was the greatest power that had the military to protect the Vatican. So, as England was far from the Vatican and there were other nations closer that could do damage to the Papacy, England was really the low man on the totem pole of Papal benefits. Also, the one likely to be most threatened by Papal aggression.

    I realize that the attempted reintroduction of the RC church during the reign of Bloody Queen Mary, to fuel which she carried out over 300 executions by burning at the stake in the precursor to the Auto de Fe of the Spanish Inquisition. However, the whole process of the Church of England was relatively easy, considering. Indeed, Elizabeth I had no option but to enfrachise the C of E, as without its legitimacy, her own would not have existed. Indeed, had she alligned herself to RC, likely she would have been betrayed and removed and replaced by her cousin Mary, the wife of Fracois of France, who is, of course, best known as Mary Queen of Scots.

    The English really embraced the C of E, despite what their monarchs themselves felt, because of the immunity it gave them from the dictates of Rome and its favourites. Charles I was RC and Charles II, while paying lip service to the C of E, was always thought to secretly attend RC mass. His brother James II was definitely RC and that was a reason he was kicked off the throne in favour of his own daughter, Mary, and her very protestant husband, William of Orange. Then there was his other protestant daughter who succeeded the childless William and Mary, Anne. Anne was married to George of Denmark – and he too was protestant.

    It was in 1701 by the Act of Settlement that, for reasons, not of conscience, but of state, the English throne was settled on the Electress Sofia of Hanover and her heirs and the first one of the Hanovarians to reign was George I.

    So, I wonder how much it all had to do with divorce and religeous conviction and how much it had to do with politics.

    Take one island separated from the mainland by an almost uncrossable (militarily) strip of water, on the other side of which there are a while lot of nations any one of which (or maybe all) might be mobilized into a sort of Papal “jihad”. It could not resist such armies if they managed to land and it would also have probably had a population problem in that many would have felt that they must obey the Papal edict and support the invaders.

    So, I have always suspected that Henry’s desire to jump Ann Boleyn’s bones, while a major concern, was fortuitous and used for window dressing to cover other agendas.

    Nothing in life is ever pure or simple – and because of the C of E, the Armada of Spain (with a lot of support from France) which had Papal blessing and support, failed. Later, against Napoleon and then Hitler, that strip of water for many years protected the rest of the free world. It meant that, while Britain was unconquered and ruled the seas, we Bajans of African ancestry would not be re-enslaved or, as we were not Aryan, end up in camps like Auschwitz and end our lives choking on poison gas.

    Anyway, I am rambling and thinking out loud. But you are right, the C of E was not enfranchised until the reign of Elizabeth I.

    I do think that what it all shows, however, is the inability of the State to render unto God…. AND the total inability of any organized religeon to even attempt to render unto Caesar – after all, organized religeon wants it all and as we have seen in this thread and others, will adopt every crack-pot, archaic “competative edge” that it can, while eschewing and denying anything in its Bible (including murder, rape and torture, not to mention slavery) that might not reflect too well on it.

    My view is that I need no intermediary to speak to my God, I can do that directly. And I strongly believe that it is time to cut out the self-appointed middle man viz. organized religeon.


  22. michael December 19, 2009 at 8:12 AM #

    @ anonymous 2 can you tell British historians that you would like to rewrite their history according to Anglican church web site (LOL )you are just a distraction


  23. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 9:43 AM #


    Your post is extremely interesting and presents a lot of reasoned and reasonable information for further thought!

    The divorce is in the history and church history texts, but your account of the fact of the papal control of Europe is not an unreasonable consideration. Thanks for your thoughts.


  24. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 12:53 PM #

    Lets talk a little about Church History

    The Reformation began on Oct. 31, 1517, when the German monk Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany.

    Luther was born on Nov. 10, 1483, and died on Feb. 18, 1546. Luther was one of the greatest men that ever lived. He led the world in its break for freedom at the end of the Dark Ages. When summoned to appear before the Emperor at the Diet of Worms to answer for his writings; Luther gave his timeless reply:

    I cannot submit my faith either to the Pope or to the Councils, because it is clear as day they have frequently erred and contradicted each other. Unless therefore, I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture . . . I can and will not retract . . . Here I stand, I can do no other. So help me God, Amen!!

    The 4 Pillars of the Reformation were:

    Christ Alone!
    The Bible Alone!
    Faith Alone!
    Grace Alone!

    All of these planks are indeed Scriptural.

    Unfortunately, the theological debate between the different positions in the Church that triggered and followed the Reformation did not continue once the formal breaks were made.

    Each body sought to build up and solidify its kingdom and the links between the members of the Body became weak or non-existent.
    The body’s became COMPETITIVE rather than COMPLEMENTARY .This has occured both WITHIN denominations and across denominatins as well!

    It is not only interesting but instructive to note where the major Christian bodies have the most difficulty within their own ranks. If Christian families disagree, not with each other but within themselves, where is this most noticeable?

    Calvinists normally fight about theology, rather than liturgy, and when there is a disagreement over the faith a new church is formed.

    Lutherans disagree about matters of piety and the way we ought to express our faith in the world, and so foster many different schools of pietism.

    Romanists tend to focus on the magisterium of the church as preserving catholic faith and order, and so struggles often centre on the powers of the papacy and appointments.

    And Anglicans argue most over worship and our proper response to the catholic faith in the way we approach God.

    And then came the Evangelicals!

    These are natural areas of tension within each of our traditions and we should not expect it to be otherwise.

    Each tradition ought to have had a great contribution to make towards the life of the Church and also undergoes the greatest suffering for its particular gifts, so that it might be offered to Christ in His Church universal.

    So where does that leave us now? We have the remnants of these confessing bodies, the old theological schools, still with us today in the various churches.


  25. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:06 PM #

    The Church of England, like the Romanists retained the catholic order of the Church, but like the Lutherans, came up with a series of Articles of Religion.

    In 1571 the number was finalized at Thirty-Nine.
    The Church of England or Anglican Church therefore did not change its doctrinal position. The Anglican Church began as an act of rebellion by a selfish king—there was no reformation based on a doctrinal position or a Biblio- centric or Christo-centric experience.

    The Anglican church is therefore still a good example of dead orthodoxy; there is a form of godliness which denies the power thereof. Their theology is Prayer Book based rather than Bible based. Few Anglicans know the Bible except for some psalms, those passages appointed to be read in the liturgal calendar as the epistle and gospel for a particular Sunday and any theology expressed in many of the doctrinally sound hymns in Hymns Ancient & Modern which is incorporated in the Book of Common Prayer.

    Because her theology and worship were contained within a book of common prayer, the Church of England guaranteed that the debates of the Reformation would stay alive, so long as the worship of the English Church was retained.

    The METHODISTS led by Wesley evolved from out of the Anglican Church.

    The Brethren Church has also emerged out of the Anglican Church led by John Nelson Darby.

    Baptists will tell you that they are NOT protestants, since they did not protest anything. Books like The Traol of Blood and The Faithful Baptist Witness, will trace Baptist hisory from the NT church to their undergound and precarious existence until they came to be called “Anabnaptists” because they stressed baptism by immersion- which is the only way taught for baptism in the NT!

    Baptists will trace their history through groups like the Lollards, Waldensians, Petrobuchians etc etc

    THe SDA’s & JW’s are out shoots from the Baptists.

    One of the interesting things in common with the cultic denominations is that they all claim that thier leaders writings are on par with or might even be replced with the Bible.

    They also tend to have in common thier founders having had somestrange vision from God to do ……..whatever.


  26. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:19 PM #

    In each of the major schools of reformation thought we can see the same movement, structure and object.

    They all began with God as He is in Himself, move to our need and His revelation of Himself in Jesus Christ, then to Christ’s Body the Church and her authority to rule the household of faith, and finally to particular points of interest which arise from their understanding of the primary matters of the faith.

    All of the churches (the schools of reformation thought) agreed with each other in holding the classical and western Christian understandings of God, Christ, the Trinity, in redemption, the Bible as the revealed Word of God, and the Church as the Body of Christ and channel of grace.

    Where they differed was in their interpretation of the means of grace, how the Sacraments work, the authority of the Church and the way that authority may be discerned and exercised.

    In other words, they basically had all of the essential Christian teachings in common and disagreed only on how these teachings are to be applied in the life of the Church.

    Many departed from thier original stance. This has caused confusion within and without the church and within the denominations also

    The Reformation was not just an unfortunate mistake.

    “The Reformed” Church not need to throw out thier confessional documents but rather return to them, so that everyone can better understand each other, and selves, and the correct relation to the whole Church of God.

    The church is thus now in a precarious situation. Attempting only superficial kinds of reform (as in uniting our ecclesiastical hierarchies; and as occured in the reformation) we shall fail and be seen by all to fail miserably.

    Now is the time for the church to cling fiercely to Christ and to teach people to do the same, to confess our faults and accept our callings, whatever they might be.

    With the current break up of the institutional churches we have the opportunity to pick up the debate where it was left off, (hopefully having learnt something in the intervening 450 years!) and, freed from the husks of the old denominationalism, seek our spiritual union together in Christ.

    We may just find, if we once again take seriously those old, tried and trusty, confessional documents, that they will breathe new life and vigour into our tired churches and the fresh spirit of the faith once delivered to the saints will equip us for the call to present the gospel afresh to our day and age.

    Such a departure from many of the older denominations is being witnessed in Bim and other countries with the advent of “community churches” etc which often emerge from good “cell groups.”


  27. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:25 PM #

    We could learn a valuable lesson from God’s chosen people about Reformation .

    Remember how God told the Israelites to conquer their new land, killing all the Canaanites? Remember after a while how they gave up the conquest? Remember how the Israelites fell short of fulfilling God’s command to rid the country of the heathen people? Remember how they were sure that they could withstand the influences of their enemies?

    But the Bible records:
    “After that generation . . . another generation grew up who knew neither the Lord nor what he had done for Israel.” They had succumbed. False gods were worshiped. The Book of the Law was hidden in the temple.

    Then, generations later, King Josiah stumbled upon this Book of the Law, read it, and could not believe that their worship, what they thought was the worship of the true God passed on by their fathers, was so far from what God commanded in his Law. (Read 2 Kings 22, 23 or 2 Chronicles 34, 35).

    Taking a lesson from King Josiah and the people of Judah, hadn’t we better find the hidden Book of the Law for our lives? Where is your Bible? Is it still in the same box in which you received it for your confirmation?

    King Josiah led his people through a reformation. False gods were destroyed, altars were burned, all the detestable things were done away with so that the people could once again worship the true God.

    In October 1517, , the church was in a detestable state. God saw fit to lead a 16th-century Josiah to reform the church, getting rid of the false gods and false altars. Luther was that Josiah of his day. Today we need to continue that reformation in our church and our lives.

    Think for one moment how false gods and false altars have come to be almost everyday parts of our lives and let’s remember the past with its many glorious reformers, and let’s continue our reformation.

    Turn to the clear, crisp words of our God. They refresh, they renew, they reform!


  28. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:33 PM #

    I. Background to the Reformation

    The Reformation, like the Renaissance, was born in the fold of little states. Indeed, without them, it could not have survived, nor could it have survived without the rivalry of Spain and France.

    Like the humanists, the Reformers were opposed to the cloister and were thoroughly committed to life in the world. The culture roughly described as humanist, and the Reformation, arose as papal vitality ebbed.

    Both movements were movements of emancipation, drawing their inspiration and their legitimacy from an earlier period. In their recasting of values, and their attempt to shape new views of man, the humanists and Reformers were akin, but their visions of life and of human capacity and their sources of authority were quite different.

    The Reformers were guided by early Christian authority rather than pagan classics. They were less Greek and Roman than Hebrew. While the humanists satirized the abuses of the Church, the Reformers denounced them; the one group tolerated the papacy and concentrated its scorn on superstitions and on the medieval religious orders; the other was alienated by the practice and pretension of the Renaissance papacy.

    It was not simply that Renaissance popes had been derelict in their duty to cure souls, or that they were politically minded and materialistic, and often guilty of gross nepotism and flagrant immorality.

    What mattered was the abuse of the spiritual office of the Pope. And the abuse rested on claims that became the focus of the intellectual and theological grievances of the Reformers. By and large the humanists had assumed that they knew the way to salvation and devoted themselves to enriching the possibilities of life, while the Reformers were seeking new avenues of assurance.

    Behind this quest lay a deep soul-sickness or, perhaps, sensitivity that had continued in Northern Europe alongside the Renaissance. It existed in the country rather than in the gay and elegant court and it shook the middle and lower orders more than the aristocracy.

    A sense of doom had lingered long after the Plague. Even during the Plague the reaction in the North had been more hysterical and ghoulish than in the South. Dancing frenzies and flagellations were less frequent in Italy. And one is tempted to attribute this to climate.

    Throughout the 15th century the North was preoccupied with death, judgment, and hell fire, and an abiding pessimism about man.s fate runs through its prose and poetry.

    A peculiarly macabre dance fashion cropped up, performed by men with skeletons. The dance was intended to remind watchers of their mortality and their equality before the relentless swathe of time’ Woodcuts popularized the steps and stages of it.

    Also, a spate of the early printed pamphlets dealt with the art of dying. In art, morbid undertones took on a bizarre realism. Van Eyck’s The Last Judgment portrayed the subterranean horror to which the evil were to be committed.

    Bosch’s strange sermons in paint are inhabited by wild, nightmarish creatures. Even Durer, the realist, flanks his righteous Christian knight on his way to a “city on a hill” with a figure of death holding an hourglass, and a monstrous devil–half wolf, half pig.

    Similarly, Schöngauer’s St. Anthony Tormented by Demons crawls with hobgoblins and foul friends. Luther believed deeply in the reality and power of Satan and his demons.

    As somber as the Northern climate may be, it was also the proximity to death and the frequency of it that kept morbid pessimism alive.

    In France and Burgundy, for instance, the desolation of the Hundred Years War was followed by decimation between rival factions, not to mention recurrences of the Plague. So, from the time of the Plague, through wars, famines, and civil wars, there had been no respite from the threat of death and no guarantee against the onset of disaster.

    A high level of death-consciousness was fertile soil for the Reformation, and offers insight into Luther’s unusually persistent concern about salvation. For it was the terror of death that sent him into an Augustinian monastery.

    Born the son of a miner and foundry owner, at Eisleben in Saxony (1483). He did so well in school that his father urged him to become a jurist. He studied arts at the University of Erfurt for four years until, in 1505, a flash of lightning struck him to the ground in a thunderstorm.

    Without consulting his father he abandoned his intention to go on to law for the robe and cowl. A psychologist, interested in history, has called this Luther’s ”identity crisis.” Then he began to seek a new ”life style.” These phrases are ways of describing the mystery of conversion.

    In the monastery the earlier terror of death became a fearfulness and trembling before God. And his inner torment was not eased by the fact that his father disapproved of his course’ Had he done wrong? He felt inadequate to meet the demands of the Mosaic code, let alone Christ’s new commandment. The law condemned him. He was a worm in the dust; how could he stand before the Omnipotent Judge? He underwent vigorous austerities to make himself holier, and could not find assurance. An errand to Rome shook him further. He did not notice the glories of the Renaissance or the reminders of antiquity: instead, he saw the worldliness and levity of the clergy, both high and low. He climbed the Scala Sancta, 28 stairs, with a Pater Noster and a kiss on each in order to release a soul from purgatory, and at the top he found his faith in the indulgence clouded by doubt.

    His doubt redoubled on his return. Confession of particular sins seemed inadequate for man’s plight. The whole man needed release from total inner corruption. Piece by piece and doubt by doubt, Luther came to view the all-pervasiveness of sin and the only solution that could satisfy his wounded conscience. Since man was too deeply sunk in sin to do anything for his own salvation, he had to be saved, or justified, by faith alone!


  29. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:37 PM #

    At the beginning of the sixteenth century, the Catholic church, modeled upon the bureaucratic structure of the Holy Roman Empire, had become extremely powerful, but internally corrupt.

    From early in the twelfth century onward there are calls for reform. Between 1215 and 1545 nine church-councils are held with church reforms as their primary intent. The councils all fail to reach significant accord.

    The clergy is unable to live according to church doctrine, and the abuse of church ceremonies and practices continues.

    In the first half of the sixteenth century western Europe experiences a wide range of social, artistic, and geo-political changes as the result of a conflict within the Catholic church.

    This conflict is called the Protestant Reformation, and the Catholic response to it is called the Counter-Reformation.

    The Reformation movement begins in 1517 when a German Augustinian friar named Martin Luther posts a list of grievances, called the Ninety-Five Theses, against the Roman Catholic Church.

    As the spirit of reform spreads other leaders appear: Ulrich Zwingli in Switzerland, French-born John Calvin who settles in Geneva, and John Knox who carries Calvin’s teachings to Scotland.

    In the Roman church a series of powerful popes including Leo X and Paul III will respond to reform demands in various ways.

    Mendicant orders such as the Jesuits are formed to reinforce Catholic doctrine, and the Church will continue to be supported by the major European monarchies.

    Ultimately, the Reformation creates a north-south split in Europe. In general the northern countries become Protestant while the south remains Catholic.

    The Reformation and Art

    Protestant reformers reject the use of visual arts in the church. A wave of iconoclasm sweeps through the north. Stained glass windows are broken, images of the saints are destroyed, and pipe organs are removed from churches.

    The Catholic churches respond to this iconoclasm with an exuberant style of art and architecture called the baroque. The baroque is in ideological opposition to Protestant severity. Not until the Neoclassical style of the eighteenth century will there be an effective attempt to re solve this dichotomy.

    The theatrical designs of Saint Peter”s and the Gesù in Rome are a triumphant symbol of the Roman Catholic church’s belief in itself and its history. The plain churches of the north are reminders of Protestant beliefs.


  30. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:39 PM #

    Martin Luther (1483-1546) while studying law at the University of Erfurt in Germany experiences a spiritual conversion.

    He joins a monastic order, the Augustinians, and is eventually assigned as a lecturer at the University of Wittenberg.

    While working as a parish priest, Luther becomes disgusted by the Catholic Church’s practice of selling indulgences. The purchase of an indulgence assures the buyer a remission of sins and thus a shorter period in purgatory. The selling of indulgences is a papal privilege which has been worked to the breaking point.

    In 1517 a jubilee indulgence is being preached near Wittenberg to generate funds for the building of Saint Peter”s in Rome. Luther uses this opportunity to draw up a list of church activities for which he demands resolution and change.

    This list, the Ninety-Five Theses is centered around a call to eliminate the sale of indulgences. The Church demands that he retract a number of his protests. Luther refuses.

    Luther is summoned to an imperial Diet in Augsburg in 1518. Retribution for his crime should have fallen rapidly, but the election of a new emperor, Charles V (1500-1558), slows the justice system. Luther uses his time to plan a complete reform program for the church. His reforms include:

    •1. national, rather than Roman, control of church finances,
    •2. permission for the clergy to marry,
    •3. a series of sacramental reforms which reduce the sacraments to Baptism, a reformed Mass, and the Holy Eucharist.

    Due to the invention of the printing press, Luther”s reforms are quickly spread through Europe bringing much support. However, Luther is condemned as a heretic by Pope Leo X in the Edict of Worms. He is is forced to escape and live for a year in h iding, but his reforms have taken root. The split in the Roman Church is now irreconcilable.


  31. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 1:49 PM #

    @ annymous 2
    Some good history

    The English Reformation


    •1531: Henry VIII is recognized as Supreme Head of the Church in England.
    •1533: Henry VIII marries Anne Boleyn.
    •1534: The Act of Supremacy: The King is declared head of the Church in England.
    •1535: Thomas More is executed for refusing to take the oath of the King’s Supremacy.
    •1536: Henry VIII dissolves 376 monasteries and nuneries.
    •1539: The Six Articles.
    •1547: Edward VI (r. 1546-1553) becomes King of England.
    •1549: Thomas Cranmer issues the Book of Common Prayer.
    •1553: Mary I (r. 1553-1558) becomes Queen of England.
    •1554: The Catholic Church is restored in England.
    •1556: Thomas Cranmer is burned at the stake.
    •1558: Elizabeth I (r. 1558-1603) becomes Queen of England.
    •1559: Elizabethan “Book of Common Prayer” issued.


  32. Straight talk December 19, 2009 at 6:25 PM #

    Why is the christian religion so complex?

    Different interpretations (divisions ) of the divine word as described by different interpretors.

    If one was to divide say a Harry Potter novel, would the scholarship necessary to disseminate Rowling’s work make the meaning not as written, but as opaque as the dividers
    assume through their due diligence,
    and extensive study, assume it to be.

    Division, it seems to me, is an arbitrary effort to make the facts fit the reality, or faith in that reality.

    Scholarly research into the Greek roots of the original text illuminate the contradictions and therefore validity of the King James “version” of God’s word.

    “God said this , but he really meant that” type of convenient truths to live your life by.

    Treating the bible as a puzzle to be solved before we quit this mortal coil
    is not living, it is a time consuming, life squandering, obsession.


  33. Hopi December 19, 2009 at 6:50 PM #

    @Anonymous [2]……Have you ever heard this brilliant piece ‘Touch not God’s Anointed nor do his…… harm?’ Hahahah! Ooohh lalala!

    You see how the head of the BU Trinity with whom I usually disagree, used his historical ‘WISDOM’ in my defence because he knows very well that it was that same cow wallops that nurtured him. You think he got ‘G’ in GP for fun?

    Why look to the Anglican to find out their dirty little secrets? If you were a thief would you let people know?

    Thanks GP!


  34. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 6:59 PM #

    Even though we always disagree, when you are correct you must be defended. LOL

    But I didnt defend you because you were a prophet though…..Ooohh lalala!


  35. Georgie Porgie December 19, 2009 at 8:33 PM #

    @ Straight talk
    Re Why is the christian religion so complex?

    Christianity is really quite simple! In a nut shell HAVE FAITH IN CHRIST & BE FAITHFUL TO CHRIST’S CALL ON YOUR LIFE

    Re Different interpretations (divisions ) of the divine word as described by different interpretors.


    Re Division, it seems to me, is an arbitrary effort to make the facts fit the reality, or faith in that reality.

    The key words in your sentence are “it seems to me, “

    2 Timothy 2:15 states very clearly STUDY to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be afraid RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.
    In John 5:39, Jesus said Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
    Jesus said SEARCH the scriptures……because they testify of him!

    RE Scholarly research into the Greek roots of the original text illuminate the contradictions and therefore validity of the King James “version” of God’s word.

    the King James “version” of God’s word. Is the RESULT OF A TRANSLATION.

    The OT was written in Hebrew and the NT in koine GREEK, which was the language spoken by the then world . The English language was not then even invented!. Where as the Greek Latin are very EXACT languages, English is not!

    E.g What does the English word “dear” mean? Or “honey? Or “tire” or “lead” and we can go on. With out context you are lost.

    Theologians therefore study language, historical backgrounds, manners and customs etc to facilitate the correct interpretation or better interpretation.

    What does Jesus needs go through Samaria mean in I John 4 for example? Studying the historical background allows you to understand that needs means that he had a specific purpose in going there , i.e to meet the Samaritan women at the well. There were actually other ways to get to his destination, so he did not NEED to go through Samaria. In fact Jews because of their hatred for the Samaritans went a much longer route!

    Similarly in the Hebrew. E.g read Genesis 4:7 “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door

    Did you know that the SAME Hebrew word translated SIN is also used to mean SIN OFFERING? Read the text with sin offering instead of sin, and see if it does not make more sense.

    Re “God said this , but he really meant that” type of convenient truths to live your life by.

    This statement is bred in deep ignorance also. God said exactly what he wanted to say in the original languages, and it is a joy to discover and understand this. Such an understanding is facilitated by the use of certain books like String’s concordance which not only lists the words used but issues a number besides the verses so that you can know when a different Hebrew or Greek word is used in the original text, but translated by the same English word.

    Idiots on this forum have condemned the use of such a book in their pride and ignorance because they think they understand the Word better than anyone else by just reading it. FOOLISHNESS!

    Men have devoted their entire lives to studying Shakespeare. Some have devoted theirs to studying the Word, and the origin and etymology of words used in the Bible to help others understand the word better.

    Re Treating the bible as a puzzle to be solved before we quit this mortal coil
    is not living, it is a time consuming, life squandering, obsession.

    Some men like walking behind a white ball; some men run behind a red one. Some drink til they get drunk, some womenize. Some read fiction; some love porn . Are these not time consuming, life squandering, obsession also

    Some men spit in the air and the spittle falls back in their faces as they pretend to have sense.


  36. Bush Tea December 19, 2009 at 9:03 PM #

    @ GP
    Re Why is the christian religion so complex?

    Christianity is really quite simple!
    May I humbly differ sir?

    It is likely complex and confusing because God made it so…. at least, that is according to what I saw in my bible when I used to read it…

    “Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? Them that are weaned from the milk. and drawn from the breast?

    For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line; line upon line; here a little; there a little.

    For with stammering lips and a strange tongue will he speak to this people….”

    As I have previously explained to you at great length, Jesus operated in exact like manner by speaking to ALL except his disciples in parables which were DESIGNED to ensure that those folks DID NOT UNDERSTAND what he was talking about……
    …well at least that is what Jesus said when asked by the disciples in private why he spoke in parables…

    I know it dosn’t fit well into your theological reality GP, but that is what is written.


  37. Terence M. Blackett December 19, 2009 at 9:18 PM #

    On the issue of how deep the Jesuit influence runs – GREG SZYMANSKI WAS ASKED THE QUESTION:

    “Is it true that many of the world’s leaders from dictators to presidents have been trained by Jesuits and if so could you tell us some of the people in positions of power that have been trained by Jesuits?

    Yes. The list is huge. Here are a few.

    Marx was tutored by Jesuits in the British Museum for nearly thirty years; Lenin and Mussolini were both trained by Jesuits when in Geneva—the Order’s international banking haven for which reason Switzerland never goes to war; Stalin was trained by Jesuits while in the Tiflis Orthodox Seminary in Georgia – openly admitted by “Koba” himself to journalist and Masonic Jew Emil Ludwig (Cohen).

    Fidel Castro was trained by Jesuits for seven years in Cuba, was put in power by the CIA, and advised by a Jesuit, Fr. Armando Llorente, during the revolution.

    Masonic Douglas MacArthur was trained by Jesuits according to an Army Colonel who personally knew him.

    Masonic Lyndon Johnson was trained by Jesuits at Georgetown University for a time, as was “the graduate” President Bill Clinton.

    Don Shula of the Miami Dolphins was Jesuit-trained along with Denzel Washington, that traitor to his own Black people.

    The star of Mash was Jesuit-trained while Martin Sheen (who changed his name after the name of Cold Warrior Bishop Fulton Sheen) has taken Loyola’s Spiritual Exercises and recently dedicated a new library at the Order’s Marquette University.

    John C. Gannon, the real father of the Order’s Department of Homeland Security (our American Gestapo) was a member of the Jesuit Volunteer Corps and is affiliated with Georgetown University while an ex-CIA officer and CFR member.

    Pat Buchanan, a Knight of Malta (SMOM), is affiliated with Jesuit John McLaughlin of the McLaughlin Group, and was Jesuit-trained at Georgetown, as was SMOM and former CIA Director, Geoge J. Tenet – the man in charge of bringing down the WTC and attack on the Pentagon via a Cruise missile. This is one of the connections, along with SMOM Rudolf Giuliani, that enables us to connect the Archbishop of New York, Edward Cardinal Egan, to 911 and thus Bush’s “War on Terror.”

    Chris Matthews of Hardball was Jesuit-trained at College of the Holy Cross, he serving for many years as the assistant for another Jesuit-trained Coadjutor and Kennedy assassin, Speaker of the House and Jesuit Boston College trustee, Thomas “Tip” O’Neill.

    The head of the Pope’s Federal Reserve Bank of New York—where all of the nation’s gold is in storage thanks to FDR’s gift of our Ft. Knox gold to the Fed according to “the man who opened Ft. Knox,” the late Roman Catholic Washington attorney Dr. Peter Beter – is CFR President Peter G. Peterson, holding an honorary doctorate from Georgetown University.

    Even JFK attended Georgetown for a while as well as the Order’s Fabian Socialist London School of Economics. (The Order prepared him for the presidency, obtained his “election,” and then killed him for being a disobedient “tyrant and a usurper.”)

    Indeed, the Jesuits train or influence those who will rule on their behalf.

    The State Department is full of those having graduated from the Order’s School of Foreign Service started by Jesuit Edmund A. Walsh – the master of both military tribunals after WWII and backer of Jesuit-trained inquisitor Joseph McCarthy. Again Wylie writes on p. 388:

    “Wherever the Jesuits have planted missions, opened seminaries, and established colleges, they have been careful to inculcate these principles in the minds of the youth; thus sowing the seeds of future tumults, revolutions [the Black Civil Rights movement], regicides [the murder of JFK], and wars [the Vietnam War].”

    Read the whole excerpt:

    It is remarkable for any intellectually honest person to disavow knowledge of Keynes’ Jesuit affiliation, training and association – same thing for Isaac Newton (already documented in 17th century research materials)…

    Equally, John Maynard Keynes associations within the FABIAN SOCIETY* ran deep – re:

    When Newton’s work was discovered 300 years after his death it was probably the greatest find in modern academic history. For in the million or so words penned by “hand” (by quill) – Newton discoveries outside of PHYSICS, ALCHEMY, LAWS OF GRAVITY & MATHEMATICS was dwarfed by his real passion in life – THE UNFOLDING OF THE REVELATIONS OF DANIEL & THE REVELATION…

    The religious collections of Newton’s work not seen by the world which sat in the home of the DUKE OF Portsmouth for well over 200 years which was bought by the late Jesuit trained Jewish scholar, collector and Cabbalist Abraham Yehuda, an Iraqi professor of Semetic Languages where upon his death left the documents to the State of Israel’s Jewish National Library preserved in Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Newton’s more secretive Biblical discoveries which are still kept under lock and key in Jerusalem (the world only seeing what needs to be seen) was haggled over by the Kabbalah since the mid 90’s, knowing the importance of prophecy to the existence of Israel as a nation in the Diaspora awaiting their ultimate amalgamation as a nation based on the prophecies of Jeremiah.

    For many, DENIAL is still the best form of defense….


  38. Georgie Porgie December 20, 2009 at 12:12 AM #


    @ GP
    Re Why is the christian religion so complex?

    Christianity is really quite simple!
    May I humbly differ sir?


    Do not think that I dont understand what you are saying, and that I deny that there is much merit in your arguement. But you obviously understand MUCH. So it can be understood and simplified.

    You admit to having read the Bible, which partly accounts for your understanding, since you cant begin to undrrstand that which you have not read.

    To those who have read more, they might understand more, and thus with the aid of their indwelling Resident Tutor understand more.

    Now few church goers of ALL denominations scarcely read their Bibles. So how can they put precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line; line upon line; here a little; there a little?

    Now the verse you quote from Isaiah mirrors the two major NT truths that I quoted about STUDYING & SEARCHING.

    You study and search and master a line or precept, piece by piece and if you continue in that vein for lonfg enough it starts to fit together like a jig saw puzzle. If you have hood teachers, books and study guides, you facilitate and speed up the process.

    I hope that this helps to clarify my position on the simplicity.

    Let me give you a little puzzle. The concept about the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life comes towards the end of the Bible in 1 John 2:16; but we get the account of our forpartents disobeying these precepts in Genesis 3; and the Lord Jesus whom Joghn says did no sin passing the same tests when put to him by the same devil in Mathew 4 and Luke 4.

    Such a connection is not readily made; unless you have read the passages and understood each of them, then, and only then can you put precept upon precpt upon precept and line upon line.


    I stand on my view that the devil makes the process harder by propmoting men who terach false doctrine and muddy up the waters- making it even harder especially for those who neither SEARCH or STUDY.

    BT trust me. I know of what I speak.


  39. Georgie Porgie December 20, 2009 at 12:14 AM #

    i obviously need a new key board lol


  40. Bush Tea December 20, 2009 at 8:10 AM #

    @ GP
    Yours is tenuous and far-fetched explanation I would suggest. The idea of studying long and hard with good teachers goes directly AGAINST your much touted phylosophy of salvation by grace and not by works.
    It places unfair and unreasonable bias against dummies like Bush Tea who did not make it to HC (thank God) and generally does not fit into any logcal basis of intelligent design.

    For example, I am pretty sure that MME would not design a system like that.

    Interestingly, I note that you steered clear of Jesus’s position with respect to parables. I really LOVE Jesus – the man was just tight then. You check how plainly he answered the question of why he spoke in parables?

    “Because it is given to YOU to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it IS NOT GIVEN”

    ….can anyone be clearer than that?!!

    Man what devil what GP?!?


  41. Dictionary December 20, 2009 at 8:59 AM #


    Been busy with a web page update, related to what I am seeing here in this thread [also see this].

    1: On Bible matters,

    I simply strongly recommend that you download the eSWORD resource, freely available here, and with a wealth of onward resources, e.g. try D Cox. (Or if you want an easier all at once go for the Word English package here.)

    The wealth of resources accessible though such free materials will enable a deep and comprehensive study, with all the original language inputs a layman would want.

    2: The Jesuits . ..

    TB, I see the cluster of claims and links.

    Comes across as a little overdone [and not with first rank sources], e.g. when he came to the UK Marx was already a PhD philosopher and established journalist. He had already written on Fuerbach, in which e.g. here, one can find the germs of all his main ideas.

    Similarly, since Jesuits have long been established in education at secondary and tertiary levels, it is not hard to find a long list of prominent statesmen etc who have been trained by Jesuits.

    And, the days in which the Jesuits served as spies, assassins etc for the Vatican state are long past.


    As I have pointed out, secularist humanist internationalism developing from progressivist Victorian era imperialism is a far more clear case of dominant — ands in significant parts dangerous — influences in our day.




  42. Georgie Porgie December 20, 2009 at 9:26 AM #

    Bush Tea

    Dealing with you can sometimes be very tedious and like pulling teeth.

    My explanation is neither far fetched or tenuous.

    Salvation by grace and not by works HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE AT HAND SIR..

    The Apostle Paul certainly studied long and hard with good teachers and he is the major teacher of salvation by grace and not by works in the NT. He himself admits to studying hard and long under Gamaliel. Remember?

    Furthermore, I can present to you several pastors in Barbados who neither attended HC or Cawmere, and who teach the Word very well. I was blessed sitting under the ministry of two such men who helped to disciple me. NEITHER OF THEM EVEN WENT TO SECONDARY SCHOOL AT ALL!

    In my travels in the islands and elsewhere, I have met several men, who though not attending the prestigious schools in their islands or even SECONDARY SCHOOL AT ALL, teach the Word and present the Gospel extremely well! In fact men like Dictionary and I are a rarer breed, especially as the islands get smaller, and the populations smaller.

    In fact it has probably always been so. NO wonder in 1 Corinthians 1 26 Paul writes not MANY mighty, not MANY noble are called. The early church was not filled with men like Paul and Dr Luke, but ordinary fisher men also taught the word—although it is true that unlike contemporary jokers they would have been well versed in the OT, as part of their culture. This is evident as when their eyes and hearts were opened, they quoted the OT scriptures appropriately.

    There was no need to talk about Jesus and his parables- which seem to be all you know. I love Jesus too. He is the main character of the ENTIRE BIBLE. He is there first as creator and then in type and Christophany, before appearing as the Word made flesh.

    I also like his teachings, and I also under stand that he often but NOT always spoke in parables. And yes Jesus did say “Because it is given to YOU to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it IS NOT GIVEN”

    The Word also says in Hebrews 11: 6b for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

    This not only corroborates that phrase which you hang on to as if it is all the truth on the subject. The SAME Jesus in John 5:39 said SEARCH the scriptures, and the HC type Paul said STUDY. ….can anything be clearer than that?!! That is what is called RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH. That is the meaning of the text in 2 Peter 1:20 that is very germane to this argument Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

    Which basically means that YOU MUST USE SCRIPTURE TO INTEPRET SCRIPTURE. You must understand what scripture x says to facilitate your understanding of passage b. You cant build a teaching on one verse that you like to hang on to.

    This is why there are cults and divisions in the church; and the DEVIL is behind it all- whether you like it or not! The devil is the author of confusion and false teaching especially for those who refuse to SEARCH and STUDY the scriptures for them selves whether with or without teachers or texts or approved tomes!

    1- JESUS
    2- PAUL in Acts 20:28-30 for example
    3= PETER
    5- JOHN
    That false teachers would arise.

    With all due respect BT you need to do some more SEARCHING & STUDYING before you contradict me ALL THE TIME about things about which I have a sound grasp, and stop holding on to a few passages that you understand or think you understand. The purpose of SEARCHING & STUDYING is to better understand the WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD!

    The devil is very important in this matter because
    1- THE SAME JESUS TAUGHT IN THE PARABLES that the wicked one comes to snatch away the SEED (of the Word) when it is sown
    2- He keeps folk away from SEARCHING & STUDYING so that they may better understand the WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD!
    3- He promotes those who WRONGLY DIVIDE THE WORD for their own personal gain as taught by Peter in I Peter 5 and 2 Peter 2
    4- He robs local churches of tithes and offerings that might better be deployed, that is sent to EVIL MEN on radio and tv who are daily BEGGING FOR MONEY and begging folk to sow seed into their ministries i.e their personal pockets.

    The devil and men are thus involved in making the teaching of the Word MORE DIFFICULT! For those of us who have sought to know, and better understand the WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD, SEARCHING & STUDYING has helped a lot.!

    I rest my case………….for now!

    You see BT I am not a fanatic. Just slow sound steadfast and thus sure. LOL ROTFLMAO!


  43. Bush Tea December 20, 2009 at 9:52 AM #

    ME contradict you GP?!! the very thought!!!
    Bush Tea has nothing but respect for your knowledge and learning. It is only with your understanding that I have some small issues…

    …seems to me that the guilty contradictor is JC.

    You are obviously one of those people who start a discussion from the premise that you are absolutely correct, and that the only challenge is to drag the ignorant masses into proper understanding. (a common trait of ‘bright’ folks.

    …in short, you are sadly misguided.

    You say Paul studied long an hard? ..and he probably did (who cares?) Was this before or after he was struck by the blinding light and CHOSEN to do the mission assigned him..?


  44. Georgie Porgie December 20, 2009 at 3:05 PM #

    You say Paul studied long an hard? ..and he probably did (who cares?) Was this before or after he was struck by the blinding light and CHOSEN to do the mission assigned him..?

    We must care that Paul studied hard.
    God chose Paul to write most of the NT along with Luke…………and ………..the Holy Spirit instructed himto teach us to STUDY!

    Clearly Paul had studied BEFORE he saw the light, and he continued no doubt to study thereafter. He no doubt obeyed Jesus’ command in John 8:31 TO CONTINUE IN HIS WORD.

    Thats why he wrote in Colossians 1:23 If ye CONTINUE in the faith grounded and settled, and [be] not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

    re seems to me that the guilty contradictor is JC.

    NO Jesus does not contradict anything.

    How could he? He knew the beginning from the end. He knew what was already said AND WHAT WOULD BE SAID.

    IT is YOU that can NOT get past one litle concept that you understand, and tenaciously hold on to.

    Open your mind man. STUDY SEARCH and LEARN.

    Re You are obviously one of those people who start a discussion from the premise that you are absolutely correct, and that the only challenge is to drag the ignorant masses into proper understanding. (a common trait of ‘bright’ folks.



    And one of the things that I KNOW well is that it is VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE to drag the ignorant masses into a proper understanding of anything……..because it is very clear to me that the ignorant masses are content to remain in thier ignorance.

    I opine on BU in the hope that many in cyberspace who want to learn might indeed learn something.

    I KNOW too BT that certainly cant teach you anything …. because you apparently THINK you know it all.

    Meanwhile, I will continue searching and studying, because there are places that I teach, and persons that I teach who want to know more than they already know.

    Do have a nice holiday season Sir


  45. Georgie Porgie December 20, 2009 at 3:10 PM #

    Oh by the way BT……. “THE FAITH” in the Collosians reference is “pistis” in the greek, and it refers to THAT BODY OF INFORMATION GIVEN TO US TO STUDY, SEARCH, AND HENCE BELIEVE.

    We are reminded in Romans 10:17 that faith cometh by hearing the word of God


  46. Bush Tea December 20, 2009 at 10:15 PM #

    @ GP
    I rest my case!
    It is not your fault though – that HC attitude….

    It looks like I will have to fall back to my last resort for you- Plan C.
    I gwine have to pray for you. I apologize in advance. You need to know that I ALWAYS get what I pray for….
    My prayer will be that you not continue to be so blind that you would not see…

    Cud Dear Man!
    1-Paul used to study a lot – and terrorize christians.
    2- He got struck down by a blinding light – and saw the light of the holy spirit
    3- He continued to study (you guess) – and becomes a leading minister of the Gospel

    …. and you conclude that the critical factor here is study???!!??

    Man GP, what study what! the key is the holy spirit.


  47. Georgie Porgie December 21, 2009 at 12:32 AM #


    1- Does it really matter that much that I attended HC? What HC attitude what!?

    2- Don’t pray for me BT. I might just turn out to be an idiot! I am happy in my blindness. OK?

    3- Yes Paul had studied the OT and like many of his peers did not understand who Jesus was. They could not understand how the Messiah could be a suffering savior. That is one of the nuances of the OT that escaped the Jews. So in his ignorance he did indeed terrorize Christians as you say.

    However, when the glorious light of the gospel shone into his heart and with the Holy Spirit of Truth, who guides into all truth; and who is also the Indwelling Resident Tutor he BETTER UNDERSTODD WHAT HE HAD STUDIED.

    How do I know that? Because he quotes from the OT repeatedly in his writings.

    Read Romans 9-11 and see how many times he quotes from Deuteronomy. (Also a favorite book of Jesus).

    The Holy Spirit does NOT impart knowledge to folk who do not study.

    How can you know unless you study? I didn’t learn Medicine by sitting on the beach or somewhere, and having the information enter my brain by osmosis, or by aerosolization or by droplet spread. I actually STUDIED! You might be surprised to learn that.

    I didn’t learn BIOCHEMISTRY OR PHARMACOLOGY by sitting on the beach or somewhere, and having the information enter my brain by osmosis, or by aeroloization or by droplet spread. I actually STUDIED! I bet you didn’t know that.

    I didn’t learn the BIBLE that way either. I STUDIED, and as I did so the HOLY SPIRIT INTERPRETED and facilitated my understanding; just as he did for the many persons who taught me face to face, or by listening on tv or radio or via the good books that I have read.

    Yes the HOLY SPIRIT IS THE KEY, but he only comes into play when you obey the WORD that HE DIRECTED THE WRITING THEREOF.

    And in that word he directed John to record the fact that JESUS HIMSELF taught us to SEARCH THE SCRITURE.

    The Holy Spirit directed Paul to write in 2 Tim 2 :15 to command believers ( and note the VERB IS IN THE IMPERATIVE IN THE GREEK)


    The same HOLY SPIRIT directed Peter in 1 Peter 2:2 to command us ( and note again the VERB IS IN THE IMPERATIVE IN THE GREEK)


    Don’t pray for me BT.

    I have been well taught……..and I DID NOT LEARN BIBLE AT HC!

    And I don’t think that you can teach me much or anything about the Bible, that I have not or will not learn from much better sources.



    Any one and everyone that I know who knows anything well that I have met in my life HAS ATTAINED THAT KNOWLEDGE BY STUDY OF SOME SORT.

    And I am mortally afraid of miracle workers, as my understanding is that the next real miracle worker will be ANTICHRIST.

    So please don’t pray for me BT. I beg you please. OK? Thank you Sir!


  48. John December 21, 2009 at 11:08 AM #

    I “found” Handel’s Messiah this Christmas.

    I am beginning to understand what the composer was trying to express and just can’t get some of it out of my head.

    I survived Music Appreciation at Harrison College with Mr. Billington although I grasped the pinciples he attempted to teach us dull laggards and could actually pick out the major musical instruments in an orchestra.

    Solos in classical music I used to find boring and never listenend so never heard the message.

    In my day at school if you showed even the slightest tendency to appreciate any classical music you were considered weird.

    Nowadays it is routine for schools to have orchestras.

    Classical music is way beyond me but I listened at a performance of the Messiah, first to the music of the orchestra as it brought back boyhood memories of Music Appreciation …. and then to the words of the soloists and choir.

    I was fortunate the program itemised each section and for the first time I grasped that there was a whole made up of many parts.

    I understood for the first time that the music and words tell a story and for the first time I begun to understand what they were all about.

    The Bible is in some ways like Classical music.

    Attitudes toward it are learnt in youth and often die hard.


  49. Georgie Porgie December 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM #


    I am happy to hear that you “found” Handel’s Messiah this Christmas, and that you were able to understood for the first time that the music and words tell a story and for the first time I begun to understand what they were all about. PRAISE GOD!

    Unlike you, Mr. Billington’s era and the classical musical renaissance at HC started by “Tank” (whose dad who I understand was at one time organist at St Mathias church) was too late for folk like me to benefit therefrom at HC. So my love for classical music and classical music of the Handel’s Messiah genre ( as was my love for and knowledge of the Bible) did not begin at HC either, but at home and in that great Christ Church Parish Church Choir of the 60’s. under Winston Hackett in the rectorship of AI Johnson.

    And you are absolute right when you state that “The Bible is in some ways like Classical music. Attitudes toward it are learnt in youth and often die hard.”

    I first heard Handel’s Messiah as an eight year old boy in my home, when my father incessantly played a set of records on one of his trips to the UK.I would later sing parts of it as a treble boy in the Christ Church Parish Church Choir. And as I learned the Word in my teens I was able to recognize that the words that are sung are ALL taken directly from the Scriptures! And RELEVANT SCRIPTURES TOO.

    Do you know why in ALL performances of this great work that it is tradiotional for the audience to stand during the performance of the most popular and simplest of the choruses in this three part Cantata or Oratorio?

    Well it is because during its very first public performance before the then King of England, when the chorus swelled at KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS, the mere mortal King recognized his relatively lowly status in comparison to the KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS, of whom the following is said in Philippians 2;9-11.

    Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth; And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father

    May the God of Heaven hasten the day of his exaltation!


  50. Terence M. Blackett December 21, 2009 at 9:44 PM #

    Bill Clinton’s Jesuit professor at Georgetown University, Carrol Quigley, writes that the purpose of the capitalistic forces has been “nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.”

    For anyone who has been asleep – “Money is power.”

    Today we see this has materialized.

    The banks, especially the big banks will be paying out huge bonuses this week (just before XMAS),and these are mainly privately owned, and nations having great economic problems borrow money from these bastard entities because where else can they go.

    Several nations, like the USA, Canada, Sweden and others have such large loans that they hardly know how to remedy the situation (all under the aegis of their CENTRAL BANKS)*.

    They have become slaves to the money-barons, as well as a tool in the hands of the power elite, who then can influence and control the nations as they want.

    Those who have the money are often important members in one or more of the international, secret societies or are simply JESUITS*.

    They rule much of the things going on in the world by finance.

    A common currency and the central bank are factors the Europeans and the global elite use, in order to bind up the world.

    That is in part due to the process which leads to the dialectic that more and more power is transferred from the national government to the international bureaucracy.

    So the same manifestation is going on in the parallel universe of modern Christianity where within the religious field there is a centralization going on – bishops and priests have made their own system, a hierarchical system, where new guidelines are elucidated by the religious power elite, through the big church councils like the World Alliance, the Lutheran World Association, the World Council of Churches and others.

    They try to unite through “buzz words” like ecumenic, solidarity, charismatic, mutual divine services, prayer meetings, an ecumenical/Catholic Communion, new theological songbooks and a never-ending list of which most well-meaning Christians have never even heard of…

    For a long time they have tried to find common profession of faith, that frequently is not a “thus saith the Lord!”.

    Points of belief upon which they cannot agree, even if it is a clear Biblical teaching, they just let it be.

    In all this ecumenical furor we witness how the walls of Protestantism are breached and broken down, and little by little give way to Catholicism.

    This is not the unity that Jesus talks about. True Christian unity is built on all that Jesus stood for and preached both in His life and His teachings.

    Ecumenism and Catholicism are something completely different from Biblical unity.

    In reality they are obstacles in the way to TRUE Christian unity, teaching and practice.

    Jeremiah ask the question in chapter 5 and the last verse – “But what will you do in the end?”

    Something we will all have to ask ourselves!!!


  51. michael December 22, 2009 at 10:58 AM #

    In the uk some of those with financial and political power are declaring they allegiance to the roman catholic church,The church of England (Anglican)don’t know where their are going talking about ordaining women, unable to say that homosexuality is wrong i even think Rowan Williams said he is a druid ,he has even claimed that muslims and Christians pray to the same God and yet we know this to be false because 1 Timothy ch 2 v5-7 states other wise i would like to know what your thoughts are on this especially with regards to muslims faith I may be wrong but it seems to me after they Fridays prays it is time for killing in the name of their god ..bro, D ,GP,TB,ZOE


  52. Zoe December 22, 2009 at 6:02 PM #

    @Terence, My brother, while much of this ‘Jesuit’ meandering through the halls of the ‘elite’ World Order intelligentsia, and their wicked, evil plans to control EVERYTHING, is true, it will NOT have anything to do with, contrary to your ‘denominational’ persuasion of ‘Sabbath’ keeping, vs Sunday Worship, that the SDA believe, will ultimately be enforced via Blue Law imperative, by the same World Order, Antichrist, End TIME One World Government.

    So, Terence, let us get to the bottom of what you are really driving at!


  53. Georgie Porgie December 22, 2009 at 9:42 PM #


    Is essentially saying much of what Hal Lindsey say he has witnessed on US University campuses starting in the 60’s.

    It has certainly borne fruit the seeds that were sown.



  54. Angel December 23, 2009 at 6:20 PM #

    Want to see the seamy side of pretrib dispensationalism? Google or Yahoo or MSN “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty.” Now you know what Christ had in mind when He said that many would come in His name and deceive many! Angel


  55. Terence M. Blackett December 24, 2009 at 5:21 AM #


    WERE NOT THOSE DAYS SHORTENED….((just up ahead)

    If it were “POSSIBLE” the every ELECT* would be deceived…

    What about the rest of humanity?

    Lord have mercy!!!


  56. Dictionary December 29, 2009 at 2:47 AM #

    Footnote: read Mark Steyn here.


  57. Victoria December 31, 2009 at 1:27 AM #

    And for dessert allow me to serve up “Pretrib Rapture – Hidden Facts” and “Pretrib Expert John Walvoord Melts Ice” which Google provided for me – and you!


  58. olorAttribution' June 24, 2014 at 7:15 AM #

    I just couldn’t ggo away your webszite prior to suggesting hat I really enjoyed thhe stanrard information ann
    individual prrovide foor yor guests? Is going to be again steadily tto insperct new posts


  59. George May October 8, 2014 at 7:51 PM #

    Counteracting all cults is by the presuppositions of God’s Word. Paul has stated that the true Israelite is one who believes in the righteousness of Christ alone. I agree with your historical analysis and conclusion.


Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: