It's very easy, churchians, to prove me wrong

Prove me wrong, churchians; it's very easy. Show me a gathering where the Word of God is being proclaimed. The simple, unadorned Word of God. Not the word of scholars, not the word of man, the Word of God.

You can't do that. No more than pharaoh could let the Israelites go.

You disdain the Word of God. You disdain the authority of God. When you aren't blathering from your own mind you are reciting from satanic modern version bible products.

Churchians, listen carefully: you can't even say Jesus is God come in the flesh.

Proof that you can't?

You've taken 'God' out of 1 Timothy 3:16.

And you live with that every day of your life. You approve of it. You have to. The spirit of disobedience in you would do nothing else.

Even when in rebellion the unregenerate still fear Jehovah

I get real joy when I see modern day churchianity leaders and theologians disdain to write or say the name Jehovah. Even when they mouth 'God' it comes out twisted. It's usually pronounced Gode, or the 'g' gets stuck in their throat. Their unregenerate being is not allowing them to even say God. But it's their disdain of the name Jehovah that gives me even more pleasure. It tells me God is having influence on their unregenerate hearts. Their scholar authorities tell them to not even go near the name Jehovah. They have given them an alternative. This watered-down, fay construction: 'Yahweh.'

Republication of the Covenant of Works on Sinai

This subject of the republication (as opposed to the reestablishment) of the Covenant of Works on Sinai is rather easy to understand if you have a basic understanding of Federal Theology to begin with. People who can't see it tend to be a bit dense or just lazy. The others though who fulminate against it very well understand it, but don't want anybody else to understand it *because* they are false teachers.

False teachers these days *love* biblical theology as opposed to systematic theology. They *love* covenant theology as opposed to Federal Theology. Why? Because when they are able to stay in the mush of biblical/covenant theology and keep their audience forever in the 'forever learning/never coming to understanding' biblical/covenant theology they are able to have endless cover for the tripe that is their various false teachings.

*They don't want you to know that Federal Theology is classical Covenant Theology systematized.*

They despise Federal Theology because *it is apostolic biblical doctrine.*

Notice how they *love* to continually change the terminology of covenant theology. They want to keep covenant theology eternally unsettled. Mush. Their personal playground giving them cover for whatever new false teaching they want to promote.

The Covenant of Works made in the Garden with pre-fall Adam was *republished* on Sinai (the Mosaic Covenant) because Jesus needed to be born under the law, and he needed the law to be known and present in the minds of National Israel (and the world generally) to be able to fulfill what the first Adam failed to fulfill. Ask yourself: was Jesus supposed to 'not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil'?

Jesus - the second Adam - accomplished what Adam in the garden failed to accomplish. Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the Covenant of Works. *Only* Jesus could fulfill the Covenant of Works *after the fall.*

There is *one* way to be saved: works. Either your own (good luck if you rely on your own) or Jesus', appropriated by faith.

Jesus fulfilled the Covenant of Works. All that that was given to Moses by God on Sinai. Jesus was born under that law and fulfilled that law *to a 't'.*

The first Adam was told to not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The law on Sinai is an elaboration of that law. We see that even where Jesus was being tempted by the devil that there is more involved - there is not an exact symmetry - than how the devil tempted Eve and Adam. Special revelation itself as it appears in time (and culminates in the closed canon) is all about elaboration and increasing fullness of revealing.

Another foundational aspect of this *that nobody talks about*: National Israel is as unique a player in God's plan of redemption as pre-fall Adam and Jesus Himself.

For salvation the Israelites were in our position. Only faith in the coming Messiah saved them (as for us only faith in the Saviour already come saves us). But beyond that National Israel was a type for Jesus Christ. They were the bloodline from Adam as well. They were also unique in that they were the actual *material* of the Word of God. Their history is the substance of special revelation, the Old and New Testaments. They followed the laws on Sinai as a type for Jesus following that law. They couldn't follow it perfectly anymore than we can today, but they - and we - *were taught this by their example* (it becoming the very Word of God itself), and eventually Jesus would come and *would* follow it perfectly.

The biography of Jesus mirrors the history of the Israelites. National Israel was a type for Jesus.

The two Adams *are the spine* of Federal Theology. *False teachers despise Federal Theology* because Federal Theology is apostolic biblical doctrine and *convicts* them and their satanic demands and schemes and false teachings.

There is 'disingenuous bewilderment' in the pious fulminating you hear against any notion of a republication of the Covenant of Works on Sinai. There is also, as stated, genuine ignorance of the subject (if not terminal denseness). The objectors who are false teachers should be easy to discern though. If you have the Spirit of Discernment which only comes from having the Holy Spirit in you.

And their eager use of the name Kline as a swear/scare word gives them away as having the usual theonomic/Federal Vision influence, (but those schools are pretty much generic false biblical teaching by this time, a say-anything catch-all sewer of our modern times for people who have the spirit of false teaching in them to begin with.)

Isaiah 53: something Christians refuse to accept

Jesus is said, in Isaiah 53, to have no form nor comeliness. This is something a worldly Christian (there are no other kind in our day, or really any other day) can't accept.

Just as when a modern day churchian reads what Jesus has to say about family they can't accept it, it's the same when they read the Word of God telling them that Jesus was without form or comeliness. No way, they say to themselves, Jesus was 'acceptable' looking.

If you want an illustration of how you, modern day churchian, would have reacted towards Jesus here it is: it's just as when you happen to see a homeless man walking down the street. Oh, my, you think. Gross. Get a razor, dude. Take a bath. What is that you're wearing? How many diseases do you have? Call the police.

Just the homeless man's *separation from the world itself* is abomination to you, as it would be if you were to see Jesus Himself walking the earth two thousand years ago.

This verse as well goes over your heads:

"The Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart." (1 Samuel 16:7)

Oh, my, you say, but it's depressing when people don't look good and acceptable! Don't look...normal. Like...normal people, that you hang out with. You know.

Like the people you want in your churches, churchian? With their families?

Look at even a John Gill desperately trying to explain the Word of Scripture away:

he hath no form nor comeliness; like a poor plant or shrub just crept out of the ground, in a dry and barren soil, ready to wither away as soon as up; has no strength nor straightness, of body; without verdure, leaves, blossom, and fruit things which make plants comely and beautiful. This regards not the countenance of Christ, which probably was comely, as were his types Moses and David; since he is said to be "fairer than the children of men";

No, John, the Words of Scripture are explicit:

Isa 53:2 ...he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

The Jews of the day judged on outward appearance and said: this can't be *our* king. He's ugly. He doesn't look impressive. What possibly could he have going for him? He's a joke. He's disgusting.

So you make your images of Jesus making him look like a bearded rock star. You cast shallow actors with 'looks' to play him in movies.

If you actually saw Jesus on the street you'd reactively swerve your family van or SUV to hit him, or to just make that gesture, and probably give him the finger as you re-composed yourself and putted on down the street to your 'church.'

An internet forum run like a typical man-fearing church

I couldn't pass this up. This is a 'notice' from one of the 'cardinal-level' moderators of the 'Puritan'Board. I will fisk it (I have experience with these inane people; so, unfortunately, do all Christians in all eras of the history of redemption)...

>I'm not trying to suggest that any of us are beyond any reproach to how we handle things here but this board has nearly 3000 members.

Yes of course you are wanting to suggest just that. Attempting to inoculate yourself just gives you away. And those 3000 members? Maybe. Only about 40 or 50 do all the actual posting (if that). And of those 40 or 50 any of them who actually had anything interesting to say were long ago banned or left the building on their own. The ones left have either been made moderators (which means they are inane yes-men with not much to contribute) or are people who like being treated like three-year-olds, often scolded, told to shut up (those nice little messages meant to chill discussion), having their thread put on 'lock-down.' Then they usually post a thread saying something like: "I would just like to thank the moderators for the wonderful - and very difficult and self-sacrificing - job that they do here! Thank you!!!"

>It is not an easy task to keep up with the strong opinions that exist across the spectrum we represent on this Board.

The only 'strong opinions' left on the PuritanBoard are strong opinions about tea and cookies and Hollywood movies and TV shows and "What kind of pen do you like to take Bible notes with?!?" and "Let's not forget to celebrate our selfless moderators, guys! We are so blessed!!" and ...you get the picture. They've even locked-down the Translations and Manuscripts forum (by uniquely moderating it) to keep all the people who actually value that 'strange' and 'vaguely creepy' *Authorized Version* (you know, that Bible of Christians of yore that actually has the authority of God and not man in it?) from influencing the little ones in the midst of their various cookie and television parties.

>We do our best to allow differing views while trying to keep up with some of the excessive rhetoric here.

Look at that language. 'Allow' differing views. It's a *forum.* One long-time member who finally left tried to explain to the dumb moderators that a forum is a forum, not a church. The moderators think everytime somebody like that leaves a moderator gets a brownie point from God. I suppose. I don't know. They just seem to be typical dumb churchians. They fear and revere man and when they get power they demand fear and reverence from the minions they control (those who never do anything to get banned and who never leave).

>As we have noted previously, if you have a problem with a particular post then report the post using the link in the upper right of each post that allows a user to express a complaint.

This East German style of informing on fellow citizens gives the moderators police state type power. Everything is kept in secrecy. If anyone complains it means they are 'against the state' or whatever. When I was banned their policy was written out explicitly. No one will be banned without being contacted by one of the moderators and having a discussion, etc., etc. I was banned without hearing anything from anybody. When I pointed this out through email to the moderator who banned me he basically didn't have a defense. He later resigned in a bit of an emotional breakdown. Of course, I'm thinking, guys, if you just saw this as an *internet forum* and not some heavily policed 'church' you wouldn't be exposing yourself to such moral failures and emotional distraught (those of you who are capable of feeling those things that is).

>We will review and try to moderate fairly but can never promise that everyone's sense of propriety will be satisfied.

This sentence is so dishonest and empty. They shut down *every* thread that has *any* heat or any disagreement or that is on any subject that is outside the interest or above the understanding of the typically dumb moderators.

>If you post a complaint about moderation in the threads it will be deleted not because we loathe criticism but because it assumes moderating authority that the poster does not possess.

What? I guess if you smell like shit you'd better have a rule that nobody can publicly say that you smell like shit or else it will be in the open that you smell like shit. Guess what: you still smell like shit.

This forum, the PuritanBoard, is why Jesus Christ, King, Lord, Savior, who is despised by all churchians, said: "I hate people who lord it over my people in assembly."

Listen carefully, Marine, lawyer, whatever the fuck you churchians are: no real Christian wants to be in an environment where the fear of man is enforced and where respecting of persons is practiced and where followers of Jesus Christ - prophets, priests, and kings - are treated like slaves of a police state or children in a nursery.

God's elect are not walking through the doors of your filthy 'churches', and never will. Jesus *says* directly in the book of Revelation He - hates - you, and that is something you need to ponder long and hard.

Wake up, and, no, you don't know who you are

At this point reading the Bible complete for purposes of spiritual warfare is the only practical thing to do.

Unregenerate dupes leading the churches. Devils in the seminaries and universities. Meanwhile the devil's offspring are pushing global tyranny at a level this world has never seen prior. I say that as one who knows history. Especially the history modern day 'educated' people have no clue of: 20th century history.

If you call yourself a Christian and you are either a 'liberal' or to any degree sympathetic to the left in the world today then you have no discernment for good and evil that can only come from the Holy Spirit: i.e. you are not a regenerate Christian.

If you deem yourself 'indifferent' to the leftist movements occurring now, or in any way above it, or if you - more likely - mock any concern over it you are a dupe of the devil and living snugly and comfortably in the devil's kindgom.

There of course is no left and right in politics or this world in general: there is only down and up. There is only tyranny and liberty. Liberty comes from God. It was a myth of the Soviet/Nazi era that there is only left and right (left being Communism and right being Fascism). The purpose of this myth was to make you think there were only two choices: *both tyrannous.*

There is only liberty and tyranny. Classical liberalism is *conservatism.* Valuing freedom, light, and life over tyranny, darkness, and death.

Dumb Christians lean back in their lazy boys smoking a cigar like an undergraduate saying: God said what He created was good. Sex is good. Cigars and fine brandy are good, brother. Don't be so dour.

God said what He created was good *before the fall.* Nature fell, the world fell, along with man.

Put your inane cigar down and the glass of alcohol you don't even like the taste of, and become a man of God. The Bible teaches you to disdain this world. This world holds *nothing* for you.

This world is a battleground though. One can build oneself in the faith in spiritual battle with this world, and the devil, and one's inner Old Man.

My 7th complete reading of the Bible

I've begun my 7th complete reading of the Bible.

I am in danger of mechanical mode with these complete readings now.

Though with the first several there was a real, noticeable increase of understanding of what was being read. The history books can be a jumble, the prophetic books as well. The strange genres of the Bible alone are difficult to 'see', but with each repeated complete reading they all came into sharper focus by degree, and that was noticeable at the time it happened.

But I also notice that my 5th and 6th complete readings may have been too much in the mechanical category. Certainly the last.

So for the 7th I'm using the analogy of classical music. I used to listen to classical music to a great extent. Actually I was a 'completist.' I had to hear everything. Every composer, every era, every work, and every great or unique recording of every work.

There is a difference between hearing classical music in a background sense and really getting a complete work into your memory where you can draw it up from memory and hear it in your mind. Really getting to know a particular work. Seeing it in a 'whole cosmos' sense as well. Parts in relation to the whole understanding.

So for the 7th complete reading of the Bible I am treating each of the 66 Books as individual works like works of classical music. When I think of Zephaniah I will draw its basic content to mind like I can draw the musical phrases and themes and movements of a Mozart symphony or a Beethoven string quartet to mind.

The Bible is living language and just getting the language into you is powerful and effective in ways you can't know at the time you are doing it. So just reading it is the rule of the day. Yet if you have done that, and done it a lot, then one needs to go to a deeper level, and can afford to.

Getting each book down in memory first. Then each chapter of each book. *From the Bible itself.* Not from outlines or commentaries. (I've always found the use of outlines to be a sterile approach. I think the Holy Spirit rewards effort, and when you use other people's outlines you are not making an effort. Zeal is rewarded too methinks.)

This really is still just *parts* as opposed to the whole. I think one can really only get the whole from works of doctrine (with the strong caveat that complete Bible readings are also *necessary* to be able to see not only what is taught in the great works of doctrine, but to be on-the-mark with it). I believe that. I have to say it because honestly I don't think I could get Federal Theology including the Covenant of Redemption from the Bible alone on my own. Yet I see it in Scripture once I have the whole from works of doctrine. Perhaps I am under-estimating what can be achieved with real effort and with the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps I could get it alone from the Bible if I were alone on an island with no works of doctrine. But then you are in the realm of re-inventing the wheel, and if you are the first you don't have the advantage of speed and accuracy that comes from tapping in to the teachings that exists in time.

Anyway, I see the 'whole' and getting the parts in memory to a greater degree can only strengthen and increase understanding of the whole.

I'm not reading each of the 66 Books consecutively this time. Don't need to this time. I actually didn't with my very first complete reading either. 2,3,4,5, and 6 were consecutive, Genesis through Revelation, readings though.

POSTSCRIPT: I should have mentioned the phenomenon where once you've 'downloaded' the complete Word of God into you, thoroughly, it comes back to you in moments when you need it. I.e. when you think it's not in memory it actually is. Not to mention it gives you what you need to discern what is on-the-mark vs. off-the-mark. This is not exclusively an intellectual manifestation, but emotional, intuitive, etc.

Matthew 10:28 - fear of man vs. fear of God

Mat 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Here is John Calvin on this verse: (Not just the 'the dread of tyrants' but of man as well. The world. The opinion of the world. The daggers the world can send your way especially when you are in a state of innocence, of learning, of awakening. This is when they strike the deepest.)

28. And fear not those who kill the body... To excite his disciples to despise death, Christ employs the very powerful argument, that this frail and perishing life ought to be little regarded by men who have been created for a heavenly immortality. The statement amounts to this, that if believers will consider for what purpose they were born, and what is their condition, they will have no reason to be so earnest in desiring an earthly life. But the words have still a richer and fuller meaning: for we are here taught by Christ that the fear of God is dead in those men who, through dread of tyrants, fall from a confession of their faith, and that a brutish stupidity reigns in the hearts of those who, through dread of death, do not hesitate to abandon that confession.

We must attend to the distinction between the two opposite kinds of fear. If the fear of God is extinguished by the dread of men, is it not evident that we pay greater deference to them than to God himself? Hence it follows, that when we have abandoned the heavenly and eternal life, we reserve nothing more for ourselves than to be like the beasts that perish, (Psa_49:12.) God alone has the power of bestowing eternal life, or of inflicting eternal death. We forget God, because we are hurried away by the dread of men. Is it not very evident that we set a higher value on the shadowy life of the body than on the eternal condition of the soul; or rather, that the heavenly kingdom of God is of no estimation with us, in comparison of the fleeting and vanishing shadow of the present life?

These words of Christ ought therefore to be explained in this manner: “Acknowledge that you have received immortal souls, which are subject to the disposal of God alone, and do not come into the power of men. The consequence will be, that no terrors or alarms which men may employ will shake your faith. “For how comes it that the dread of men prevails in the struggle, but because the body is preferred to the soul, and immortality is less valued than a perishing life?”

A question and answer from a forum on the presence of God

A question was put on a forum:

Hey guys,

Well I have 2 questions to ask you all....

1) Do you subjectively experience the presence of God on a regular basis?
2) If you answer yes to the above, how is this done?

Please don't give a simple answer like "bible reading and prayer or going to church", go in depth, how do you prepare yourself, what sort of things do you go through in prayer? what approach do you take to the bible to have this experiential communion with God?

The predictable response:

[U]ntil one more experienced and able comes along, I hope this suggestion will suffice: consider the words of Paul to the Corinthians -- "We walk by faith, and not by sight." Though the term "presence of God" could be taken in diverse senses, it is too much connected with Charismatic and "non-ordinary means" understandings. The fact of the matter is that Christ has ascended into heaven, and it is now through the bond of the Spirit that we now have fellowship or communion with him. We do not seek a visual ("by sight" -- or any other senses, for that matter) encounter with God, but we seek him through his Word and his other ordinary means, whether Public or Private (prayer and the sacraments), wherein he hear his Word and receive it in faith. We should not be seeking some mysterious "presence" of him apart from this.

Once regenerated we have the Holy Spirit in us, yet we grieve the Holy Spirit. This is because we can't handle having the Holy Spirit in us beyond our very limited capacity. Only Jesus was given the Spirit "without measure." He could handle it. You see from this that there is *degree* regarding having the Holy Spirit within you.

When Muslims pray five times a day what do they do afterwards? They emerge on the streets really, really angry. Pumping fists in the air, declaring jihad against...whatever. They then go home and beat up women.

This happens to most everybody who practices the presense of God, by whatever name, to whatever degree.

That is, until you increase your limits.

But you have to provoke your limits to then be able to make efforts to increase your limits.

No getting around a certain amount of out-of-control behavior. Just ask God for guidance while you're in the training wheels stage.

So how is it done?

The practice of presence. Presence itself. In the Old Testament a person of God would say: "I am here." Or: "Here I am." They would say this when in or coming into the presence of God. It is simple presence.

One has to have a basic level of self-observation in your inner being to be able to effect it, but one supposes regeneration gives this to one. An observing 'I'.

Practically speaking 1.) it involves a kind of divided attention where one is aware of an object, a thing, an event, and one is also at the same time aware of oneself *being aware* of that thing. Whether it's external to you or internal. When a cat is looking at a mouse it is only aware of the mouse, one direction. If the cat suddenly becomes aware of itself being aware of the mouse then that is a different state. Two directions of consciousness. The former is a state of identification; the latter is a state of non-identification. In biblical terms the fear of man vs. the fear of God (I know that sounds completely out of left field, yet I'll keep it in anyway).

Practically speaking 2.) it involves a higher-perspective 'I am here' type of *feeling.* Like when sometimes you get a feeling as if you are in your body for the first time. "Hey, I'm in a body..." Or when you ponder death, or your own death. Or galaxies. Or sometimes when you are in completely new surroundings, like when a tourist in a different country (it wears off pretty quick, but for a while you will feel this that I'm describing). Something that takes you out of the mundane impressions all around you and gives you a higher perspective in time and space and everything else.

Practically speaking 3.) it involves an awareness of one's body and five senses and one's surroundings. Here I am, in this street (in this room, walking to the store, talking to this person, etc.).

Basically being awake in the moment in an 'I am here' sense while also not being in a state of identification with your surroundings, which is our normal state, which is waking sleep.

What this practice does (if you can do it first, then hold it for any amount of time) is it accumulates a more refined energy into you. Higher impressions, higher influence, higher energy. This higher energy is more flammable than what one is use to operating with. If you're still a crude engine this more refined fuel will eventually explode in flames inside you. Now you know your limit.

Be careful practicing this. Don't get yourself in a prison cell. If you think it's evil, it's probably not for you. Because it could very well be.

Real practitioners of it will tell you (often from hard-earned trial and fail) that prayer is a necessary part of it. Provoking your limits is provoking your limits though, and if you want to extend your limits you have to provoke your limits, but you can ask God to help you and give you guidance and to mitigate your failures and so on. Keep you out of trouble. It's a battlefield, and if you're not use to the spiritual battlefield you will find yourself naked (no armor) and naive and ignorant and weak on the battlefield. The truth is only God can protect you and get you through the beginning stages anyway. But being aware of that is helpful in and of itself.

You practice this presence for duration, depth, and frequency.

You can really only know what it is by seeing its opposite which is, again, waking sleep. Human beings' normal state. I.e. you have to make an aim to be awake. Then once you inevitably fall back into a state of waking sleep you then will eventually remember the aim you made, and it is *then* that you can see what waking sleep really is. It's where you were when you forgot your aim. Like, "I'm going to be awake as I walk to the store." Then, four hours later, it comes to you that you totally forgot your aim, and that you fell back into waking sleep somewhere in the midst of that walk to the store. Now you know what your normal state is and how hard it is to be awake. Be present.

I've spoken too much because one needs a lot of knowledge of themselves to do this. Yet one can read my book lists in the margin and see which one stands out (what doesn't belong?).

. . .

Oh, *why* would one practice such a thing? One wouldn't, generally. One doesn't, usually. But if one is going to be an effective spiritual warriour; and if one is going to truly be able to *stand* on that evil day (your physical death, or even every moment of your life) then increasing your limits (increasing level of being) is what a soldier, a warrior, of Christ does. A prophet, priest, and king.

Presence is an eschatological act. A vertical connection with God in the moment. It's a conscious shock. It's unusual. You practice it to raise your normal level (waking sleep) to a conscious level. If that sounds new agey, just entertain the possibility that not everything that sounds new agey is actually new agey. Calvin was a bare foot mystic compared to modern Reformed seminary graduates.

Atheists are feeling the swelling spirit of the devil in these times we live in; it's making them brave (but no less shallow)

JOHN (responding to an atheist):

"But that's all a distraction, anyhow, for you never did answer about Stalin. Or Lenin. Or Trotsky, Mao, Ho Chi Min, Robespierre, the Paris Comunards, the homocidal regimes of eastern Germany and communist Romania, the anticlerical killers from the Mexican Revolution and Spanish Revolution. All the other folks who, after liberating people from the shackles of religion, proceeded to kill them by the thousands and millions. Like I said, when you have a near total correlation, causation becomes a moot point.

And yet there is a causation. All the killers of the modern age sought to transform their societies in a non-religious context. All of them used a utilitarian "greater good" rationalization unchecked by any sense of value found in human life mandated by Christian teachings. In short, they all killed to create an earthly paradise in lieu of a Heavenly one."

ME (writing to John):

John, your writing is a bit above the level of Ent. the Atheist.

Atheists in general are shallow. When you make the denial of anything metaphysical a mark of intelligence you are deathly shallow.

I often like to ask atheists what their favorite books are. They can't help but expose their shallowness in answering that question. Ask them what their favorite composers are. They have to fearfully avoid the names Bach, Handel, Palestrina, et al... Artists? They'll pass on that. Scientists? They love the current crowd of politically-correct little 'afraid of losing their grants' suck-ups to the leftist thought-police. But all the Christian scientists just since the Reformation they are a bit hazy about. Can't recollect them very well. Shoulders, standing on, all that...it's a blank spot in their minds.

Inspiration and the Authorized Version

This was written to a forum of Christians who are being worn down by their fear of man (critical text scholars in this case), and are starting to state publicly that they no longer consider the Authorized Version 1611 to be inspired. They are confused. I wrote what is below for them. It contains a striking and very accurate analogy that you will see no where else...

+ + +

Note on inspiration. If you all had (or had more) experience with great literature - secular - you would understand what inspired means. Some works can be discerned to have been shepherded into time, into their form, by higher forces. Secular works. A handful. Once you are able to discern this in the realm of secular literature it is not difficult to discern it regarding the English Bible, the crown of which is the Authorized Version 1611.

The very fact that the great English Bible is the necessary foundation for all the modern garbage versions of scholars is telling. Without it their versions would be babble. If they didn't have the English Bible to follow and deviate from *they wouldn't even know the meanings of half the words in the Holy Canon.*

The Homeric epics are inspired in a way Milton's Paradise Lost isn't. The works of Shakespeare are inspired in a way the plays of Eugine O'Neill aren't. Many works of classical historians are inspired. Etc. That *means* they have unique and unusual provenance and level of influence; and *stand out* in this sense. The same can be discerned when one leaves these summit works and moves on to the beyond-summit work that is the Word of God. The AV1611 is inspired in a way the NLT, NASB, NIV ESV et al. are not.

You may prefer Milton to Homer, but just don't claim that they are equal. Milton himself wouldn't, and didn't. He had discernment for such things.

To use the epic analogy further: the AV1611 is an organic epic, emerging from realms not accessable to individual man, over time. The modern versions are 'literary epics', constructed by individual man, usually *always* basing themselves - just as literary epics such as Virgil's and Milton's did - on the *real thing.* The real thing in the realm of epic poems being the Homeric epics; the real thing regarding the Word of God being the crown of the English Bible the Authorized Version 1611.

A passage from Kline's Kingdom Prologue on what triggers the end of history

In Kline's Kingdom Prologue there is a striking passage (which I can't copy from the PDF) where he states what triggers the end of history. It involves common grace. The children of the devil have always been permitted by God to live if they recognize coexistence with the children of God. When the children of the devil, though, begin to assert a claim to total domination of this world then God's common grace for them ends. They cut off the branch they are sitting on.

You see this happening today. In the end days the devil deceives the nations which means all the devil's peoples the world over (which is unique) unite against the people of God. Iran's crazy leader back slaps with Venezuela's crazy leader saying they will destroy America. Islam proclaims they will take over Europe. Etc.

If you have discernment for good and evil you see this.

Of course these things happen in other eras, but the question is is it different today due to the world-wide nature of it? It probably is. America was a safe place for Christians to take refuge in. Now America has been breached by the devil's children in a unique way as never before with the fall of the two towers.

The new global leftist schemes to create global tyranny are part of it (the craziness of climate change treaties are just a part of this but representative). The note is on 'global.' Total domination. *No where to run, nowhere to hide.* No refuge for God's pilgrims. No right to exist without capitulating to the great anti-Christ idol.

In demanding sole dominion on this planet the devil and his followers are sowing their own destruction.

This is part of the anti-Christ crisis Kline outlines. It happens prior to the flood as well. When it happens now it triggers the end of history.

Go to this link and read from page 214 (the actual page number in the book) starting at the heading 'A. Anti-Christ Crisis', and read that 'A.' section through page 216. It's very short, and the language is worth engaging.

This is an example of the kind of insights Kline's works provide that are unique in mainstream theology.