Lane Keister exposed
Lane Keister is a 'pastor' of a supposedly Reformed (i.e. doctrinally orthodox and non-liberal) church in a Reformed denomination who likes for people to think he is orthodox and all that. No, he's a liberal theologian just like all the rest of the seminary boys. He's recently been exposed by his inability (or refusal) to call a spade a spade regarding pot-head Doug Wilson (who is a classical counter-Reformation Beast-worshipping and Beast-serving Jesuit currently pretending to be a Protestant). Lane Keister bans hardcore Christians from his blog, and back-slaps with the likes of Doug Wilson and other liberal theologians.
That Lane Keister is petulant in pushing and defending the devil's Alexandrian manuscripts and the academic shit they call 'bibles' made from those manuscripts (NIV, ESV, NASB, NLT, et al) shouldn't surprise anyone; and that Lane Keister is a respecter of persons (so common to his class of seminary-bred morons) also shouldn't surprise. The big reason he is unable to condemn Doug Wilson is because Doug Wilson is a "pastor in good standing." So is the Roman Pope, one could point out.
God's elect have lost all patience for these church Christians. They're all liberals. They're all pushing the devil's 'bibles.' They all demand that man have authority. They can't fear God, they can't discern God's Word (or they refuse to because it convicts whereas their man-authority 'bibles' are very comfortable to their man-fearing demands they live by in their Village of Morality). We're in the end times and anti-Christ is fully in the temple.
7 Comments:
Caroline! Up to your old tricks again here, after something of a sabbatical, I see. I wanted to let you know that I posted a brief history of my acquaintance with you over on Lane's blog since he gave a link to your site. Have you been masquerading as Robert K in the meantime?
Have you made it through Scripture 7 times yet?
My dear, I trust God has mercy upon you. While I think you may have found a couple of notes in the score of God's commandments that are rarely sounded today, I am very much afraid that you have also overlooked some very plain matters in the law. May I suggest that even if it is out of order in your reading schedule that you would again prayerfully go over Hebrews 10 and 13?
You wrote:
"After reading through the Authorized Version seven times we are to expect an awakening (a la Romans 13, if I understood her correctly, and this was related to esoteric vs. exoteric knowledge). On the whole, it would seem there is very little we can do for her except pray; but our God is sovereign, and so there is nothing better we could do."
This is the common mocking of churchianity Christians towards Christians who actually value the Word of God and actually engage it as something that is above us. No, Ruben, you can read the Bible complete a thousand times and still be an unregenerated sleeping fool in willing rebellion to God. But if one is serious about the Word of God then setting an actual concrete goal to read it complete once, twice, three times, etc. (if you know of a less 'occult' number sequence maybe you can post it) is a serious thing to do.
I said to a poster on Lane Keister's blog that Lane Keister is lukewarm. I said it long ago. Now they are finding that out. You can't defend yourselves from false doctrine as comical as Federal Vision because you have abandoned the Word of God for the word of man. You put your authority in academia rather than God and His Word.
Somebody writes over at GreenBaggins:
"Are Mark Carpenter, Robert K, and Sean related?"
Mark Carpenter is a guy who writes a site called 'Outside the Camp' which calls John Calvin and Louis Berkhof heretics (i.e. as in not Calvinist enough). The churchianity/seminary Christians like to smear Christians like myself in this manner. I'm their worst nightmare. I understand Reformed Theology, can and do defend it better than they do (because I value it), I fear God only (this enrages them because they are man-fearers and they know it, and they don't like being made aware of it), I expose them in their allegiance to the devil's manuscripts and to the priesthood of academic, I expose their Roman Catholicism (ritualism, clericalism, formalism, moralism) without abandoning the Federal Theology (covenant theology) that the Word of God teaches. They are made to know - to be reminded - Christians like myself exist when I show up, i.e. a real Christian who fears only God and who is on the Way rather than sitting on one's ass, smug, in the kingdom of death Village of Morality (they don't like Bunyan or Puritans in general either).
Sorry, churchians, but we're in the end times, and sides are being taken. I'm with Jesus Christ. May the King of kings return soon. Meanwhile I'll soldier on. You have fun in your 'nuclear family' 'churches'. What did Jesus say about family...?
You can't defend yourselves from false doctrine as comical as Federal Vision because you have abandoned the Word of God for the word of man. You put your authority in academia rather than God and His Word.
I've heard White critique NPP (which is NT Wright's version of FV) in a 3 part series, showing how it doesn't square with scripture, and that no matter how erudite & respected Wright is, we can't let respect of men override our allegiance to God's word. His concerns seem *identical* to yours.
Let me ask you, if you did not disagree with him on textual criticism, would he be ok in your book?
Yes, he sounds smug and giggly and narcissistic to me, and to be honest that keeps me critical of what he says, since "he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.". Don't go after him just because he's grating.
White also broke fellowship with fakes like Paul Owen when they used their academic respectability to promote false ecumenism and postmodern haze.
I went into this over at the YouTube thread. One can know their five solas and doctrines of grace and defend them against all comers, but that is secondary if one is pushing corrupt manuscripts and the authority of man.
Jesuits love to impersonate Protestants. If they can do all the damage they need to do by simply switching for the Traditional Text Word of God corrupt manuscripts, and switching in the process for the authority of God and God's Word the authority of man then they can hold to any manner of orthodox beliefs beyond that because that alone will do all the damage anti-Christ wants and needs done.
Of course they can't defeat God's plan, but they can annoy God's plan, and the way God's plan of redemption is set up we are to defend the faith once delivered, and to defend the Word of God (and Protestants have with their very lives), and at this point White has proven to be a mocker of Christians who defend the Traditional Text Word of God and an ally of forces that desire darkness to overspread humanity just as was the case prior to the Reformation.
The Traditional Text Word of God brought the light that came after the darkness of Romanist tyranny. The Critical Text manuscripts have brought back the darkness and chaos and fear of and authority of man...except among God's elect, who can't be fooled. But it is a battle, and one that will be waged until the return of the King.
Post a Comment
<< Home