This is a pretty good, thorough article(although I have a few issues with Ian Paisley). Some comments...
(2) Constant emphasis of the social Gospel.
The world sees the church as a place to do good in such areas as Refugee help and working amongst the deprived. Whilst we acknowledge the necessity for concern for those who have need, we would question whether this is the prime consideration of the Christian church.
The socialist society has brought about the present Drug Culture and tbe ****ographic explosion with its violent attitude.
This is how the whole Sunday School movement got started - thinking they can "deliver" kids living in poverty in cities, so they ended up compromising the gospel. Even worse, the SSM eventually lead to the national public school system.
(3) The many "goals" propagated by the false sects.
The Jehovah' s Witnesses, Mormons and the Christian Scientists still seek a hearing upon our streets, together with the proliferation of the many New Age brainwashing movements.
Speaking of church buildings - if anything, this church buildings agenda has conditioned people to believe that ANY "worship" building is good, which is why I and my family ended up falling for Christian Science briefly 5 years ago(when we went to Boston, the home of its founder Mary Baker Eddy). CS was another form of mind control, New Age brainwashing.
(5) The superficial attitude of Evangelicals.
We as Evangelicals have shut our eyes to what is happening around us and become insular in our work for God.
Yep, it's as if the modern-day attitude of Christians is that if they attend church, pay attention to the sermon, read their "devotionals" daily, and pay their "tithe", everything will be fine.
These seem to be fine words at first glance that all of us could accept and applaud. However, the WCC issues a clarification document (page 182):
(a) That the foundation is not a touchstone, where the faith of Churches or persons can be judged.
(b) That the World Council of Churches does not concern itself with the manner in which the Churches will interpret the foundation.
(c) That it is left to the responsibility of every Church to decide whether it will co-operate on this basis.
Yeah, this seems to be the attitude of modern-day pastors - when you want to expose evil and wickedness, they have this "don't judge" attitude.
(a) Baptism: The commission have already concluded that all who have a 'valid' baptism word be regarded as children of God and be able to participate in a future one-World Church.
Even though the modern-day church doesn't exactly have the RCC view of baptism, nonetheless they will make a HUGE deal out of it(ie-if you are a new believer and want to be a member of these churches, then you have to be baptized). And FWIW - 501c3 churches get tax benefits when they do baptisms.
(2) The Charismatic Movement
The whole Christian Rock/CCM movement is also part of the RCC/Charismatic movement meant to break down the walls. Now churches in America by and large have embraced this.
(3) The Evangelicals and Catholics Together Movement
ECT is a new movement to promote an understanding between Evangelicals and Catholics so that they can work together towards a common mission. Encouraged to forget the past, to recognise what they have in common and to concentrate on evangelising a secular society together. These seem to be fine words and have been welcomed universally by many. The Vatican is said to have welcomed the movement with enthusiasm, as well it might.
It seems like 90% of churches you go to nowdays, the pastors are praising the Pope, attending RCC worship services, attending ecumenical/interfaith meetings, etc. It's as if they really believe the RCC are our brothers in Christ. Talk about delusional!
Dr Jim Packer, a leading evangelical theologian and one of the endorsers of the CCT document, states: "Things are not as they were", and concludes: "ECT is a good beginning. I stand with it, I cannot do otherwise, and I thank God. Now I wait to see what God will do with it." The beginning of the movement is described as "peeping behind each other's doors". Gerald Coates, evangelical house church leader, declares: "We must stop fighting the battles of the past; it is time for Evangelicals and Catholics to get together to explore what God might have in mind for us." Charles Colson, one of the instigators of the new movement and one of the writers in the book defending the position of ECT, speaking for Evangelicals, says: "The divisions between us are not the battle of the hour."
Another reason why churches in America have gotten so bad - they're using rotten bibles like the NIV, that they don't have the proper sword as a defense(but instead a wet noodle-arm), that ultimately they end up turning to "prominent" men like Chuck Colson for answers, who themselves don't point you to the word of God.
There was a common acceptance the Christian culture was no longer an influence on modern society, that envy, greed and hatred rules people's lives and that crime without conscience has caused violence to increase to alarming proportions. To add to this, religion had become an irrelevancy to the majority of people. Charles Colson points out that Christians are losing the battle against the contemptuous media, an unrestrained consumerism, sexual libertinism, a hostile academia and the omnipresent hedonistic entertainment industry. He concludes: "Christians are both surrounded and outnumbered." In 1986 Neuhaus published his book The Naked Public Square which describes a sick society without an answer to its dilemma. George Wiegel, Roman Catholic President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington DC, suggests that there are "substantive reasons why the attempt to reclothe the naked public square is a joint task for Evangelicals and Catholics".
And that's what these ecumenical leaders have done - pick a few hot button topics like abortion, gay marriage, violence in the media, etc, and end up using them to stir up and manipulate the emotions of their flock. For example, you saw it after the Columbine shootings - they started making a huge fuss over violence in the media. Yes, it was all and good that they exposed it, but 1) Not once of using this situation to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with others, and 2) NOT a word about these poisonous SSRI drugs that these school shooters were taking(which also has darn tremendous harm to the youth as well).
The Drafting Committee of the ECT document was made up of George Weigel, the Lay Catholic Theologian; Kent Hill, President of Eastern Nazarene College; Charles Colson; and Richard Neuhaus. The final document was approved in March 1994 and endorsed by a wider number of people a little later on. Besides the leading Catholic participants and endorsers we find the names of many so-called Evangelicals: Charles Colson, Prison Fellowship; Dr Hill, Nazarene College; Dr Land and Dr Lewis from the Southern Baptist Convention; Dr Miranda, Assemblies of God; Mr Brian O'Connell, World Evangelical Fellowship; Dr John White, National Association of Evangelicals; Dr Bill Bright, Campus Crusade for Christ; Bishop Frey, Trinity Episcopal School; Ralph Martin, Renewal Ministries; Dr Mouw Fuller, Theological Seminary; Dr Noll, Wheaton College; Dr Packer, Regent College; and Rev Pat Robertson, Regent University. There are many more that these who enthusiastically wished to add their names as endorsers.
When I got saved in 2006(or I thought I was saved at the time), I started reading a lot of "Christian" books - one pattern I noticed was that there were some that edified with scripture about what the Christian faith is, and would warn about these "prophets" like Pat Robertson who made so many false predictions, but nonetheless their attitude was like, "Yeah, Robertson was wrong, and I'm warning you, but he's still a brother in Christ".
The Picket Lines
Evangelicals have already acted together over many religious and social concerns. The persecuted church in the communist countries, children's rights, anti-abortion, a pro-life ecumenism, euthanasia, embryo experimentation and human rights are some of the issues on which, protesting vigorously, Evangelicals and Catholics have worked together.
And not a word about these SSRI Big Pharma drugs, nor forced vaccinations.
The Billy Graham Contribution
In the 1960's, Graham started his co-operative evangelicalism, with Catholics making up a considerable portion of those who attend his meetings and who if they make a response are sent back to the Catholic Church for counselling. A crusade was held in American Catholics' most hallowed location - the football stadium of Notre Dame University, in 1977, where Graham received a doctorate. He was entertained by the Abbot of the Shrine of the Black Madonna in Poland in 1978, and in 1981 Pope John Paul II granted him an audience at the Vatican.
And to boot - Graham and his son Franklin played the role of "good cop" since the "religious right" came about in 1980's. While the RR had the appearance of being "bullies"(this whole "culture wars" was by design to polarize the country), the Grahams acted like they were friends to everyone. No wonder why they were very popular among the heathen world.
Great names of the past are quoted as if they were in favour of a united front with Rome. These include John Calvin, John Wesley and Gresham Machen. Even Martin Luther is called in a Catholic book, a reformer of the Church. They speak in a derisory manner of Fundamentalism in 1890 as a mainstream, but in the 1990's as marginal.
To be frank, I figured - for the most part, Wesley was very highly regarded among mainline Churchianity(as was Matthew Henry, Calvin, Luther, etc). To be frank, I don't even recall the heathen world saying bad things about them(although they never said good things). And Wesley helped pushed the whole Sunday School Movement in the Methodist Church.
Also, Henry and Wesley held to this RCC Historicism eschatology belief - which is NOT the proper 7 year trib end times view(but instead somehow, Revelation is interpreted symbolically, Rev 13 was a system that came to pass a long time ago, and its prophecies came to pass gradually). Even former Catholic Charles Spurgeon held to this view(another "prominent" evangelist).
FWIW, I used to think that we needed to respect those who have different eschatology beliefs(except for Preterism) - but THIS TOO is a heresy b/c from my experiences, those with different eschatology beliefs different from the proper future, end times view are also messed up doctrinally.(ie-for the most part, they scoff at end times prophecies)
Ultimately, even though Spurgeon, Henry, Wesley, Luther, and some of these "prominent" evangelists held to and defended the KJB, it wouldn't surprise me if they themselves are Vatican agents.
The mission must have a gospel to proclaim - but which gospel? Is it to be the Catholic gospel of works, merit and gained righteousness? The Bible tells us that our salvation is not of works, "lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:9). Elsewhere Paul reminds us that in the flesh "dwelleth no good thing" (Rom. 7:18). Writing to the Philippians, he tells them to have "no confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:3); yet Rome teaches baptism and faith and works and obedience to the church as the way of being saved.
And it's this way in the modern-day churches as well - saying stuff how we need to be there all day on Sundays and then on Wed nights. Saying how we need to give full attention in Sunday School and or the pastor's sermon, otherwise we're letting the devil harass us. Saying how we need to "tithe". The list goes on.
We conclude by giving a strong warning that the "Evangelicals and Catholics Together" movement is another guise of the Devil, the angel of light, to distort, deceive and damage the work of the true Church of Jesus Christ.
Modern-day churches don't even know how the devil operates.
