Daily Archives: May 20, 2019

May 20 In Times of Trial

Scripture Reading: Psalm 25:1–7

Key Verse: Psalm 25:1

To You, O Lord, I lift up my soul.

No matter whether you are saved or unsaved, you can be certain that you will face problems in life. Because we live in a fallen world, we can expect trouble. But once you become a child of God, you have the tremendous asset of a loving heavenly Father to guide you. He will strengthen you to face any problem you will encounter.

Since you do not know what the future holds, perhaps the best way to prepare for a crisis is to seek the Lord when your life is problem free. When you become accustomed to seeking God during the good times, then your first response to a problem will become, “Father …” Calling out to the Lord during both ups and downs reminds us of our position as children of God.

So many people make the mistake of deciding on a course of action before praying to discover the mind of God. Bad choices can be easily avoided by going to our heavenly Father first. We should never let anyone push us into moving forward until we have heard from God. And we can be sure that when we call upon the Lord, He will be faithful to answer.

Sometimes His answer will come in a personal revelation or through godly teaching. Or it could come in the form of advice from a Christian friend. But most often, God reveals His will to us through His Word.

Are you facing a trial? Release it to the Lord in prayer, and He will help you overcome it.

Lord, Your will is a mystery that becomes clearer when I spend time in Your presence. Help me to seek Your counsel in good times, so that I recognize it in difficult ones.[1]

[1] Stanley, C. F. (2006). Pathways to his presence (p. 147). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

May 20 Renewing Your Mind

Scripture Reading: Romans 12:1–2

Key Verse: Colossians 2:15

Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.

In his letter to the Romans, Paul addressed believers from diverse backgrounds. Many had been involved in pagan cults. They had accepted Christ as their Savior, but they still fought intense battles within their minds.

Satan’s number one target is your mind. He wants you to think negatively, feel insecure, and run from where God has placed you.

Studies show morality and hope are at an all-time low in our age. But it should be just the opposite for believers. We have everything to live for, not because of who we are, but because of whom we contain—Jesus Christ.

You renew your mind by committing yourself to thinking and viewing life from God’s perspective. More than likely, you will have to ask God to help you make this change. It may also mean cutting off Satan’s access to certain areas of your life. Run a check on all that you read, listen to, and watch on television.

Ask God to show you what needs to go. Anything that conflicts with His truth is Satan’s ploy to sidetrack you. However, the real battle for the mind is fought in the will. God will renew your thinking, but you must be willing. Choose purity over evil, truth over a lie.

Master, help me change my thinking. I want to think Your thoughts and view things from Your perspective. Reveal any area of my life where I need to cut off Satan’s access.[1]

[1] Stanley, C. F. (1999). On holy ground (p. 147). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

WATCH: Oxford Professor John Lennox Says Science Cannot Bury God, But It Can Bury Atheism — BCNN1 – Black Christian News Network


Science cannot bury God, as some atheists claim, but it can bury atheism, according to an emeritus professor at Oxford University with a Ph.D. in mathematics.

Gathered before hundreds at the Museum of the Bible Thursday for a Socrates in the City event hosted by author Eric Metaxas in the lead-up to Colson Center’s annual Wilberforce Weekend, Irish mathematician John Lennox engaged the question: Has science buried God?

Atheism, theism, pantheism have been around for millennia, Lennox said, when asked by Metaxas about when the idea crept into to mainstream Western thought that science and Christian faith were at odds.

Isaac Newton “laid out the universe beautifully in terms of mathematics and discovered that mathematics gave a brilliant description of how things work, and it led to the idea that the universe was essentially a mechanical artifact. And then people began to think ‘Well, it seems to run very well on its own and we are able to research it without referring to any concept of someone who set it going.’ So the idea of God setting it going started to recede into the past,” he said.

By the 18th century, deism — the belief that God exists but He is largely uninvolved in the affairs of humanity — was prevalent and subsequently followed by the Enlightenment, where the thinkers of the day replaced God with human reason.

“The social situation in England was such that when you got to the time of [Charles] Darwin and [Aldous] Huxley it was more to it than simply using science to bury God. Huxley, who was very famous, he was furious at the existence of amateur scientists, some of them were very brilliant … who challenged him.”

Huxley’s idea was to have the church scientific and change churches into where they would worship “Sophia,” the goddess of wisdom, Lennox continued.

But the shift away from a God-centered view of the cosmos at that time in the West was compounded by a professing Christian church that had no reality and was compromised morally, he went on to say.

“And that turned the tables very rapidly, I think,” he said.

The thinking then became that God was fine for a while but He is no longer necessary, Lennox explained, as Steven Hawking asserted in his book The Grand Design.

The notion that as science increases God decreases is inadequate, he said, and that results in the “God of the gaps” fallacy, which is intellectually lazy: “I can’t explain it, therefore, God did it.”

“And that is a profound misunderstanding of the nature of explanation. Explaining explanation is a very important thing,” Lennox said.

“The mistake that is made, and [atheist author] Richard Dawkins pushed this, is that God and science compete as explanations, so you have to choose between them.”

Click here to read more.

SOURCE: Christian Post, Brandon Showalter

via WATCH: Oxford Professor John Lennox Says Science Cannot Bury God, But It Can Bury Atheism — BCNN1 – Black Christian News Network

Stalin Would be Proud: Feds in SDNY Examining Tens of Thousands of Trump Inauguration Documents — The Gateway Pundit

Federal prosecutors have found their man (Trump) – and now they’re searching for a crime.

Stalin would be proud.

Federal prosecutors in New York are examining tens of thousands of Trump inauguration documents in search of a crime to pin on the President.

President Trump’s inaugural committee handed over a trove of documents in response to a February subpoena seeking records and communications related to Trump’s inaugural donors and activities — in other words, more opposition research.

According to a new report by CNN, the last tranche of documents was produced within the last month and feds in the SDNY are now combing through tens of thousands of documents.

CNN also (reluctantly) reported that the feds have found no damaging information in the documents.

Here’s the backstory: 

In December it was reported that New York federal prosecutors were investigating Trump’s inauguration spending.

Then-President elect Donald Trump received $107 million in donations to his inaugural committee and the feds launched a fishing expedition to see if the funds were misspent.

This investigation into Trump’s inauguration committee stems from the April 2018 FBI raid of Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen’s home and office.

Feds are concerned with the ‘foreign guests’ who were present at Donald Trump’s inaugural event — there is nothing out of the ordinary about foreigners attending a US presidential inauguration but, Orange Man bad.

One guest in particular the feds, and Mueller were interested in is of course a Russian — Russian billionaire Viktor Vekselberg was questioned about donating money to Trump through his company’s US affiliate, Columbus Nova, to Michael Cohen.

Of course that was fake news — Vekselberg never made a contribution to Trump’s inauguration.

In reality, Viktor Vekselberg’s cousin, Andrew Intrater, an AMERICAN citizen made $300,000 in donations to Trump’s campaign and inaugural fund, but the liars in the media needed their ‘Trump-Russia’ headlines.

Viktor Vekselberg is now on the Treasury Department’s list of sanctioned Russian oligarchs.

Last year, Mueller and his team of angry Democrats questioned several witnesses about millions in donations from donors with connections to Russia, Saudi Arabia and Qatar and zeroed in on Sam Patten, a political consultant who revealed, as part of a plea deal that he took $50,000 to buy tickets for a Ukrainian businessman who wanted to attend Trump’s inauguration.

Wow, so scandalous.

In other words, Mueller and the feds have NOTHING, yet they will seek to indict more of Trump’s associates on process crimes.

via Stalin Would be Proud: Feds in SDNY Examining Tens of Thousands of Trump Inauguration Documents — The Gateway Pundit

Actor James Woods & Several Others Have Their Social Media Shut For Sharing Their Opinion

Article Image
• By Arjun Walia Collective Evolution

For a very long time, “the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses” has been “an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”

This secret government has been discussed by multiple politicians and presidents around the world for decades. The quote above comes from Edward Bernays (Propaganda 1928), and we talk about this “secret government” in a recent episode on CETV discussing the black budget. We provide multiple examples in there of the “invisible government” that owes “no allegiance” and acknowledges “no responsibility” to the people. (Roosevelt)

This article is about the censoring of opinion and information that’s currently taking place. One of these ‘fake news’  watchdogs is NewsGuard, and they are aiming to hold independent media accountable for their stories. Funded by Clinton donors and big pharma, with ties to the CFR, NewsGuard seems to have a clear agenda in favour of mainstream media. You can read more about that story here.

This is exactly why we created CETV, because we’ve been demonetized on Youtube, and our other revenue streams have greatly decreased due to the massive amount of internet censorship that’s taking place. The elite have labelled credible information as ‘fake news,’ and have decided to determine for the people what is real and what is fake. CETV is our platform to combat this censorship.

Since when does anybody have the right to censor information? Why can’t the people be allowed to decide for themselves what’s real and what’s not by examining sources and doing their own research? Why should we give our minds away to the powerful people who are now determining what one can say, what one can’t say, what’s real, and what’s not real?

This fake news effort is not really an attempt to vet the news, which has become clear to most. With this effort, the elite have exposed themselves even more by shutting down any information or narrative, no matter how credible, that seems to threaten specific political and corporate agenda’s as well as profits. The voice of opposition has become extremely threatening, and as a result they are trying to shut down our ability to even question certain things like vaccine safety or genetically modified foods, for example.

The Similarities Between Declining Rome and the Modern US | The Daily Signal

Sometime around A.D. 60, in the age of Emperor Nero, a Roman court insider named Gaius Petronius wrote a satirical Latin novel, “The Satyricon,” about moral corruption in Imperial Rome. The novel’s general landscape was Rome’s transition from an agrarian republic to a globalized multicultural superpower.

The novel survives only in a series of extended fragments. But there are enough chapters for critics to agree that the high-living Petronius, nicknamed the “Judge of Elegance,” was a brilliant cynic. He often mocked the cultural consequences of the sudden and disruptive influx of money and strangers from elsewhere in the Mediterranean region into a once-traditional Roman society.

The novel plots the wandering odyssey of three lazy, overeducated, and mostly underemployed single young Greeks: Encolpius, Ascyltos, and Giton. They aimlessly mosey around southern Italy. They panhandle and mooch off the nouveau riche. They mock traditional Roman customs. The three and their friends live it up amid the culinary, cultural, and sexual excesses in the age of Nero.

Certain themes in “The Satyricon” are timeless and still resonate today.

The abrupt transition from a society of rural homesteaders into metropolitan coastal hubs had created two Romes. One world was a sophisticated and cosmopolitan network of traders, schemers, investors, academics, and deep-state imperial cronies. Their seaside corridors were not so much Roman as Mediterranean. And they saw themselves more as “citizens of the world” than as mere Roman citizens.

In the novel, vast, unprecedented wealth had produced license. On-the-make urbanites suck up and flatter the childless rich in hopes of being given estates rather than earning their own money.

The rich in turn exploit the young sexually and emotionally by offering them false hopes of landing an inheritance.

Petronius seems to mock the very world in which he indulged.

His novel’s accepted norms are pornography, gratuitous violence, sexual promiscuity, transgenderism, delayed marriage, childlessness, fear of aging, homelessness, social climbing, ostentatious materialism, prolonged adolescence, and scamming and conning in lieu of working.

The characters are fixated on expensive fashion, exotic foods, and pretentious name-dropping. They are the lucky inheritors of a dynamic Roman infrastructure that had globalized three continents. Rome had incorporated the shores of the Mediterranean under uniform law, science, institutions—all kept in check by Roman bureaucracy and the overwhelming power of the legions, many of them populated by non-Romans.

Never in the history of civilization had a generation become so wealthy and leisured, so eager to gratify every conceivable appetite—and yet so bored and unhappy.

But there was also a second Rome in the shadows. Occasionally the hipster antiheroes of the novel bump into old-fashioned rustics, shopkeepers, and legionaries. They are what we might now call the ridiculed “deplorables” and “clingers.”

Even Petronius suggests that these rougher sorts built and maintained the vast Roman Empire. They are caricatured as bumpkins and yet admired as simple, sturdy folk without the pretensions and decadence of the novel’s urban drones.

Petronius is too skilled a satirist to paint a black-and-white picture of good old traditional Romans versus their corrupt urban successors. His point is subtler.

Globalization had enriched and united non-Romans into a world culture. That was an admirable feat. But such homogenization also attenuated the very customs, traditions, and values that had led to such astounding Roman success in the first place.

The multiculturalism, urbanism, and cosmopolitanism of “The Satyricon” reflected an exciting Roman mishmash of diverse languages, habits, and lifestyles drawn from northern and Western Europe, Asia, and Africa.

But the new empire also diluted a noble and unique Roman agrarianism. It eroded nationalism and patriotism. The empire’s wealth, size, and lack of cohesion ultimately diminished Roman unity, as well as traditional marriage, child-bearing, and autonomy.

Education likewise was seen as ambiguous. In the novel, wide reading ensures erudition and sophistication, and helps science supplant superstition. But sometimes education is also ambiguous. Students become idle, pretentious loafers. Professors are no different from loud pedants. Writers are trite and boring. Elite pundits sound like gasbags.

Petronius seems to imply that whatever the Rome of his time was, it was likely not sustainable—but would at least be quite exciting in its splendid decline.

Petronius also argues that with too much rapid material progress comes moral regress. His final warning might be especially troubling for the current generation of Western Europeans and Americans. Even as we brag of globalizing the world and enriching the West materially and culturally, we are losing our soul in the process.

Getting married, raising families, staying in one place, still working with our hands, and postponing gratification may be seen as boring and out of date. But nearly 2,000 years later, all of that is what still keeps civilization alive.


Source: The Similarities Between Declining Rome and the Modern US

Chicago Radio Host & a Former Bodyguard Say James MacDonald Asked Them to Arrange Murders — Julie Roys

Chicago radio personality, Mancow Muller, says disgraced megachurch pastor, James MacDonald, asked him to find a hitman to kill someone. MacDonald’s former bodyguard is making a similar claim.

Muller said MacDonald— a celebrity pastor who was fired from Harvest Bible Chapel in February—asked him at least twice in 2018 if Muller knew a hitman MacDonald could hire. Muller said he thought MacDonald was joking at first. But during a conversation in December, Muller said it became clear to him that MacDonald was “really serious.”

Similarly, Emmanuel “Manny” Bucur, a deacon at Harvest and former confidant and volunteer bodyguard of MacDonald’s, said MacDonald asked him in 2015 to kill MacDonald’s former son-in-law. Bucur added that MacDonald offered to help him dispose of the body.

Bucur said he was upset by the request but didn’t report it because he figured MacDonald had spoken in anger and simply had a momentary lapse in judgment. Plus, Bucur said he has four daughters and understood MacDonald’s rage toward a man who had allegedly hurt his daughter.

Bucur agreed to tell his story anonymously on a podcast of Muller’s, which was recorded on Thursday but has not yet aired. Bucur said during the recording session, he heard Muller’s story for the first time and hours later, decided to go on the record with me.

“When I heard that (MacDonald) was crazy enough to ask someone else to basically do the same thing . . . I figured, okay, this guy’s unhinged.”

“When I heard that (MacDonald) was crazy enough to ask someone else to basically do the same thing . . . I figured, okay, this guy’s unhinged,” Bucur said. “This is a problem. It’s a pattern here.”

Muller told me he doesn’t know the identity of the person MacDonald allegedly wanted to kill in December. Muller said he got the impression that the person was a rival who was bad-mouthing MacDonald and perhaps “snooping around.” Muller said he definitely didn’t think it was MacDonald’s former son-in-law. Muller said he urged MacDonald to leave vengeance to God, “who punishes worse than man.”

I repeatedly called and texted MacDonald over the weekend to comment on both Bucur’s and Muller’s accounts, but he did not respond.

Muller began attending Harvest in 2014 and became friends with MacDonald in 2016. That friendship ended earlier this year when Muller’s view of Harvest and his former pastor soured. Muller now accuses MacDonald of stealing millions from congregants and calls Harvest a “cult.” In February, Muller aired vulgar comments by MacDonald that were recorded on a hot mic and MacDonald was fired the same day.

Nathan Murray, an Indiana pastor who says he’s been a friend and spiritual mentor of Muller’s for more than 10 years, said Muller told him in January about MacDonald’s alleged murderous request. Murray said Muller was “freaked out about it” and in a “kind of Jim Jones shock.” Murray said he recognizes that Muller is a “shock-jock” who “exaggerates for a living.” But Murray said he can tell when his friend is serious, and Muller “was pretty dead serious about it.”

Muller said on Thursday he filed a report with police where he lives in Wilmette, Illinois. He added that he’s terrified of MacDonald, who he believes is “dangerous” and may be targeting him. Muller said police are increasing patrols around his house and Muller also has hired private security.

Wilmette Deputy Police Chief Pat Collins told me that Muller came into the station on Thursday and said there is an active investigation. Collins would not comment on the subject of the investigation. But he said my open-records request for Muller’s police report about MacDonald was denied and that police are not releasing Muller’s report until after the investigation is complete.

Bucur told me that on Thursday, he also gave a statement about MacDonald to police in Bartlett, Illinois. According to Bucur, Bartlett police called him on Friday and said they had talked to Wilmette police, who confirmed that Wilmette Police are investigating MacDonald. Bucur said Bartlett police said they would not be opening a separate investigation, but instead would allow Wilmette to handle the case. I called Bartlett police for further clarification, but they declined to comment.

According to Illinois law, a person who requests or encourages someone to murder another person is guilty of solicitation of murder—a Class X felony carrying a sentence of 15-30 years in prison.

Read more: Chicago Radio Host & a Former Bodyguard Say James MacDonald Asked Them to Arrange Murders — Julie Roys