Monday, July 06, 2015

Brazil, the Next (Regional or Global) Threat to the U.S. Economic Supremacy?


Brazil, the Next (Regional or Global) Threat to the U.S. Economic Supremacy?

What Chuck Pierce saw about the U.S. and Brazil

By Julio Severo
In 2008, I met Chuck Pierce. He told me and a group of evangelical leaders in Brazil that God had removed his national anointing from the U.S. in 2008. For me, the confirmation came next year, when Obama (a pro-Islam, pro-sodomy and pro-abortion creature) became the U.S. president. Under his presidency, the U.S. has become the biggest exporter of the homosexual ideology in the world.
Pierce also said that God was looking for another nation to grant this anointing. He told that if Brazil got closer to Israel, God was going to give the anointing to Brazil. Then he had a vision about what would happen if Brazil began to develop into an international power: He saw the U.S. government encircling and stifling Brazil economically and militarily. He saw the U.S. filled with envy. He saw the U.S. totally determined to hinder Brazil’s economic rise.
What I understood from his vision is that the U.S., as the only superpower today, will not accept the rise of any other nation to rival its hegemony. The development of every nation is to be under the submission of U.S. interests, and these are wicked interests, because the U.S. government has abandoned the Lord long ago. The U.S. sees the economic rise of other nations as competing with its power.
I highly doubt that God is going to give his special national anointing to Brazil, my nation, because Brazil has not gotten closer to Israel. But I do not doubt that the U.S. has lost, or rejected, this anointing. As the anointing-less Saul, it will try, moved by envy, to do everything in its power to hinder and weaken any nation resembling an emergent, anointed David.
If Pierce’s prophecy is correct, God will look for another nation, not Brazil. Yet, if Brazil really changes its ways and gets closer to Israel, honoring the Jewish nation, which has always been the most honored nation by God, Brazil will prosper and rise to a superpower status, not to smash nations for economic ambitions, but to protect and honor Israel.
Probably, God will have to raise another nation, because currently Brazil is a strong moral ally of the U.S., always supporting the U.S. in every anti-family agenda in the UN system. Sadly, on abortion and sodomy, the U.S. can always count on Brazilian support. If over these reasons the U.S. lost its anointing, Brazil will not need to worry about losing what it has never gotten.
As Mary, Jesus’ mother, I kept Pierce’s vision and words in my heart, wondering if he was right about Brazil, about a U.S. envy against a possible future Brazilian rise in the global power stage, etc. Then, in 2011, George Friedman launched his book “The Next Decade: What the World Will Look Like,” by Knopf Doubleday.
Friedman is the founder of Stratfor, a Texas-based global intelligence company whose members have intelligence and military experience. With such experience, Stratfor makes strategic forecasting.
While Pierce saw America’s and Brazil’s future and their turbulences (America as an envious superpower and Brazil being stifled by her) by spiritual revelation, Friedman “saw” the future by sheer technical analysis of current events and behaviors, with U.S. intelligence data.
Pierce saw the U.S. feeling threatened by Brazil as an emerging a global superpower. Friedman saw the U.S. need to contain the rise of Brazil as a regional power.
Friedman saw no need to forecast about Brazil rising as a global superpower, because, in this respect, Brazil represents no immediate threat to U.S. interests.
Actually, only God can raise Brazil as a global superpower.
So, as forecasted by Friedman, if the U.S. should get prepared against just a regional power, what would the U.S. be capable of doing against an emerging global superpower?
Friedman’s strategic forecasting vindicates Pierce’s prophecy. Therefore, I mention several excerpts of Friedman’s book, where he says:
What happens in Latin America is of marginal importance to the United States, and the region has rarely held a significant place in American thinking.
During the Cold War, the United States became genuinely concerned about Soviet influence in the region and intervened on occasion to block it. But neither the Germans nor the Soviets made a serious strategic effort to dominate South America, because they understood that in most senses the continent was irrelevant to U.S. interests. Instead, their efforts were designed merely to irritate Washington and divert American resources.
There is only one Latin American country with the potential to emerge as a competitor to the United States in its own right, and that is Brazil. It is the first significant, independent economic and potentially global power to develop in the history of Latin America,
Right now Brazil is not a power that is particularly threatening or important to the United States, nor does the United States represent a challenge to Brazil. There is minimal economic friction, and geography prevents Brazil from easily challenging the United States.
The only challenge that Brazil could pose to the United States would be if its economic expansion continued enough for it to develop sufficient air and naval power to dominate the Atlantic between its coast and West Africa, a region not heavily patrolled by the United States.
Even though Brazil is not yet in any way a threat to American interests, the underlying American strategy of creating and maintaining balances of power in all areas requires that the United States begin working now to create a countervailing power. There is no rush in completing the strategy, but there is an interest in beginning it. In the next decade, while maintaining friendly relations with Brazil, the United States should also do everything it can to strengthen Argentina, the one country that could serve as a counterweight.
The American goal should be to slowly strengthen Argentina’s economic and political capabilities so that over the next twenty to thirty years, should Brazil begin to emerge as a potential threat to the United States, Argentina’s growth rivals Brazil’s.
The United States also should be prepared to draw the American military closer to the Argentine military, but through the civilian government, so as not to incite fears that the U.S. is favoring the Argentine military as a force in the country’s domestic politics. The American president must be careful not to show his true intentions in this, and not to rush. A unique program for Argentina could generate a premature Brazilian response, so Brazil should be included in any American program, if it wishes to participate. If necessary, this entire goodwill effort can be presented as an attempt to contain [socialist bolivarianism] in Venezuela. It will all cost money, but it will be much cheaper, in every sense, than confronting Brazil in the 2030s or 2040s over control of the South Atlantic.
The American relation with the hemisphere divides into three parts: Brazil, Canada, and Mexico. Brazil is far away and isolated. The United States can shape a long-term strategy of containment, but it is not pressing.
The United States has a secure position in the hemisphere. The sign of an empire is its security in its region, with conflicts occurring far away without threat to the homeland. The United States has, on the whole, achieved this.
Above all else, hemispheric governments must not perceive the United States as meddling in their affairs, a perception that sets in motion anti-American sentiment, which can be troublesome. Of course the United States will be engaged in meddling in Latin American affairs, particularly in Argentina. But this must be embedded in an endless discussion of human rights and social progress. In fact, particularly in the case of Argentina, both will be promoted. It is the motive vis-à-vis Brazil that needs to be hidden. But then, all presidents must in all things hide their true motives and vigorously deny the truth when someone recognizes what they are up to.
Brazil must be worked with and long-term plans for containment must, if necessary, be laid.
By Friedman’s analysis, Latin America represents no threat to U.S. interests today. By his forecasting, Brazil could, in the long run, represent some threat. Yet, by Pierce’s prophecy, it is certain that if God raises Brazil after Brazilian leaders embrace Israel, the U.S. will see Brazil as a threat to be immediately contained.
Israel is very important to God. When Bush was insisting in a two-state plan against Israel (the illegal and immoral division of the Promised Land), Pierce was guided by God’s voice to go to Louisiana and release God’s judgment. After a few months, came Hurricane Katrina, with devastating consequences.
Those, even superpowers, who confront God’s plan for Israel suffer the consequences.
Those who embrace and honor Israel are blessed, even with a superpower status blessing.
I envision a nation getting this status after its leaders fully recognize Israel and Jerusalem as its capital, make many friendship agreements with Israel, reject the two-state plan against Israel and, officially, recognize “Palestine” as a terrorist entity putting in peril the Jewish state.
Recommended Reading:

Thursday, July 02, 2015

Conservative Russians Give Moral Lesson to Facebook’s Homosexual Propaganda


Conservative Russians Give Moral Lesson to Facebook’s Homosexual Propaganda

By Julio Severo
In celebration of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling favoring homosexual “marriage” last week, Facebook launched an app called “Let’s Celebrate Pride,” which allowed users to overlay an image of the homosexual rainbow over their profile picture.
Facebook expected many millions of its users to celebrate, but from its 1.44 billion users, just 26 million did — less than 2 per cent. The fact is, the absolute majority of Facebook users did not want to get involved in the Facebook’s homosexual propaganda.
Compounding the failure, there was an international reaction to this propaganda.
The strongest reaction came from conservative Russians who overlaid an image of the colors of their country’s flag — white, blue and red — over their profile picture.
Russian users have also countered the homosexual #LoveWins hashtag with #pridetobestraight and #pridetoberussian.
In recent years, Russia has had a strong stance in defense of traditional family values. In June 2013, Russia passed the federal law for the “Purpose of Protecting Children from Information Advocating for a Denial of Traditional Family Values,” or what is commonly referred to as the law against gay propaganda. It bans homosexual groups and individuals from giving children information about homosexuality. Violators face hefty fines and arrest. The government has also banned LGBT pride events and public rallies. And it regularly jails insolent demonstrators.
The Russian Orthodox Church has been particularly outspoken on the issue. Vsevolod Chaplin, a spokesperson for the church, called the Supreme Court’s ruling last week “godless and sinful.”
“People who like ‘American-style democracy’ and try to reconcile it with traditional values need to have a long, hard think after this decision,” he said. In part, he is right. Yet, the original American democracy was not made for homosexuality and its ideological activism.
John Adams (1735-1826), second U.S. president, wisely said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” America under Adams had a largely Protestant and moral population. Today, America has a government and big companies (Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc.) that totally hate Protestantism and morality and totally love immorality and homosexuality.
Some Americans answered Facebook’s homosexual propaganda by overlaying an image of the American flag over their profile picture.
With information from HuffingtonPost, Mashable and Mirror.
Recommended Reading:

Wednesday, July 01, 2015

In the Leftist Black List, Again


In the Leftist Black List, Again

By Julio Severo
Right Wing Watch, a major American socialist group, has again “exposed” me to its U.S. leftist audience for politically incorrect views. 
Right Wing Watch “exposed”:
Julio Severo warns that “homosexuality brought destruction to Sodom, and it will bring destruction to any city or superpower embracing it. A remnant of Christians faithful to God should warn about the danger of sodomy and support efforts to protect children and their families from it.” (June 30, 2015)
Right Wing Watch exposed, at the same time, Glenn Beck, Mychal Massie, Michael Peroutka and Jim Bakker just for expressing conservative views hated by the U.S. left.
They read my view on Barbwire, a major U.S. conservative website, where I am a columnist.
Recently, in June 18, Right Wing Watch again “exposed” me by saying:
Finally, Julio Severo wants to see Scott Lively appointed “as a U.S. Special Envoy for the Human Rights of Children and their Protection against the LGBT Agenda.”
Again, Right Wing Watch read my politically incorrect view on Barbwire.
Named in the “exposé” are also the Southern Baptist Convention and Phyllis Schlafly for their conservatism.
What does Right Wing Watch, which is owned by People for the American Way, want?
According to WND, People for the American Way (PFAW) is “an atheist socialist organization which, through publications like its ‘Right Wing Watch,’ dedicates itself to the destruction of conservatives in general.”
According to its website, Right Wing Watch has a special mission to attack conservatives opposed to the gay agenda, abortion and Muslim ideology.
Right Wing Watch has “exposed” my view other times too, and I answered here: “People for the American Way’s Leftist Diatribe Against a Brazilian Conservative.”
What do they intend to do?
In 2011, WND had reported on surveillance by the Homeland Security Department against my blog. What did they intend to do?
In the same year, WND reported in a headline on PayPal cutting my account after a campaign by a U.S. homosexual organization.
Why is Goliath (Right Wing Watch, Homeland Security Department, etc.) monitoring and worried about a small David?
Portuguese version of this article: Na lista negra da esquerda, de novo
Recommended Reading:

Monday, June 29, 2015

U.S. Homosexual “Marriage” Will Affect Other Countries


U.S. Homosexual “Marriage” Will Affect Other Countries

But in a strange cover-up, big leftist media denies that the U.S. is the leader of the global homosexual movement

By Julio Severo
Because of the U.S. global cultural hegemony, the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of homosexual “marriage” will affect other nations, and homosexual activists in many parts of the world are excited in their expectation to use the court ruling to advance their cause, according an Associated Press report.
Even though large U.S. companies (Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc.) and even the U.S. government have greatly incited the trend toward legal acceptance of homosexual “marriage,” the Associated Press, whose reports are blatantly pro-homosexuality, has been quick to detach the U.S. from the leadership role by saying “The U.S. is [not the] leader in this movement,” ignoring that the U.S. was the first nation to appoint a global homosexual envoy for the homosexual ideology and that the State Department and USAID have been funding and training homosexual organizations in other nations.
AP’s attempts to dismiss the U.S. leadership in the international homosexual movement pointed that other nations, as Argentine, had gay “marriage” before the U.S.
Brazil, the largest Catholic nation in the world, had effectively passed gay “marriage” in 2013, before the U.S., but homosexual activists involved in this campaign were heavily involved with U.S. homosexual activists and their “Brazilian” propaganda was heavily dependent on data and expertise from their U.S. counterparts.
Because Brazil has no global cultural hegemony, its gay “marriage” has not affected other nations. When the U.S. Supreme Court legalized homosexual “marriage,” the Palácio do Planalto (the Brazilian White House) and the Brazilian Department of Education websites displayed the homosexual rainbow — a homosexual celebration that the Brazilian government did not hold even in the Brazilian legalization of homosexual “marriage.”
Even though Brazil and the U.S. are antagonistic in some economic issues, they have had an undeniable, vibrant and incredible brotherhood in the homosexual agenda.
Similarly, the Argentinian homosexual “marriage” has produced no international effect, because Argentine has no global cultural hegemony. Yet, it is very unlikely that Argentinian homosexual activists involved in this campaign were not heavily involved with U.S. homosexual activists and that their “Argentinian” propaganda was not heavily dependent on data and expertise from their U.S. counterparts.
“The U.S. decision will have a big impact in other countries,” said Esteban Paulon, president of the Argentine Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transsexuals, adding that his organization contributed documentation to U.S. legal groups arguing the case before the Supreme Court.
This is an old trick. It is the same modus operandi of U.S. pro-abortion groups and foundations. They fund and train activists in the developing world, and when necessary these activists are used as a showcase to advocate, in a Third World voice, exactly what U.S. pro-abortion groups and foundations want. They present their trained Third World voice in the UN system and international forums on abortion and population control and say, “Are you seeing? They want abortion and population control and they want our help to do it!”
The motivation behind these efforts is everything, except good-hearted.
The United States National Security Council, the highest decision-making body on foreign policy in the United States, promulgated a top secret document entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200), also called The Kissinger Report. Its subject was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published on December 10, 1974, during a Republican administration, was the result of collaboration between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
According to Dr. Brian Clowes, a population control specialist at Human Life International, “NSSM 200 continues to be the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government. It therefore continues to represent official United States policy on population control… The primary purpose of U.S.-funded population control efforts is to maintain access to… resources of less-developed countries.”
NSSM 200 is the most important population control document by the U.S. government. But there was an effort to deny that the U.S. has been the leader in the global population control movement.
Clowes explains that nations would never be able to pinpoint the dirty work of the U.S. population control efforts as direct U.S. responsibility because there was a strategy involved to escape this accusation. He said, “NSSM 200 also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations — specifically the Pathfinder Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) and the Population Council — to do its dirty work.”
USAID, which was involved with the CIA in the NSSM 200, has been using its large population control experience and sophistry to promote the homosexual agenda around the world.
Last year, USAID and the U.S. Department of State hosted the third Conference to Advance the Human Rights of and Promote Inclusive Development for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Persons in Washington, D.C.
Leading U.S. government officials spoke at the event.
The conference brought together government officials, private funders, business leaders, scholars and homosexual activists from more than 30 countries to increase coordination, cooperation and resources dedicated to promoting the homosexual agenda around the world, and to ensure full inclusion of homosexual activists in political power structures.
The conference focused on diplomatic and foreign assistance strategies to address homosexual issues around the world. It also discussed the best ways to engage faith communities to support the homosexual agenda and to integrate it into development programs.
In spite of this massive U.S. involvement in the global homosexual agenda, the U.S. big leftist media, including AP, wants to cover up the U.S. leadership in this movement.
This cover-up is also happening through diplomatic strategies.
The U.S. global homosexual envoy recently visited Brazil and other nations to garner their homosexual experiences and use them to give the impression that his dirty work is not to advance the homosexualist ambitions of the Obama administration. Even though the funding, expertise and inspiration come from U.S. homosexual groups, everything will be done allegedly for the sake of homosexual groups’ wishes from Brazil, Argentine and even Africa!
Twenty-one countries now impose gay “marriage.” In most of those countries, well-organized, funded and trained homosexual groups are lobbying for expanding gay “marriage” rights, especially adoption.
These movements, which have received funds and training from the U.S., including from the State Department and USAID, are getting a real boost from the legal gay “marriage” in the U.S., according to the AP report. They will use the U.S. experience to advance their cause (“Hey, the most advanced nation in the world has advanced gay laws, and we should imitate”) and U.S. homosexual groups will in their turn use their experience for more and more (“Hey, even Third World nations are embracing the homosexual agenda. Why should we refrain from advancing more?”)
All of them are involved in a vicious circle of dirty works. But what will make the ultimate difference is cultural hegemony.
In his 1997 book “The Grand Chessboard,” Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the most trusted foreign policy advisers in the U.S. government (from Carter to Obama), argued that the U.S. have a worldwide hegemony in the main domains. He said,
“America stands supreme in the four decisive domains of global power: militarily… economically… technologically… and culturally.”
The Brazilian and Argentinian homosexual “marriage” and other gay agendas have had no effect on other nations. But if the U.S. wants to use them, they will surely make a global critical impact.
The powerful U.S. hegemony is now in the service of its own homosexual agenda and the homosexual agenda of international homosexual groups that USAID and the State Department have been training and funding.
The answer to this pro-homosexuality hegemonic power is pockets of conservative resistance in the U.S. and an international conservative resistance to repulse the homosexual imperialism promoted by the U.S. government and big companies.
Homosexuality brought destruction to Sodom, and it will bring destruction to any city or superpower embracing it. A remnant of Christians faithful to God should warn about the danger of sodomy and support efforts to protect children and their families from it.
“What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities near them is an example for us of the punishment of eternal fire. The people of these cities suffered the same fate that God’s people and the angels did, because they committed sexual sins and engaged in homosexual activities.” (Jude 1:7 GWV)
Marriage is the union between a man and a woman. To defend this original and real marriage against a fake “marriage” of two men will not save the eternal souls of people. But it will save children, families and society from psychological, moral and physical destruction.
To preach the Gospel and to make it clear that Jesus Christ saves, heals and delivers will make the ultimate difference among sinners who love homosexual sins and among nations that love to promote and impose these sins. They will have a chance to be saved, healed and delivered.
If they do not want the Gospel, Christians should act prophetically, especially in the case of a nation that began with the Gospel, was champion at exporting the Gospel and impacted many nations for the Gospel and now finishes with sodomy, as a champion at exporting sodomy and affecting many nations in this sin.
With information from the Associated Press.
Recommended Reading:

Thursday, June 25, 2015

Racist flag and Constitution?


Racist flag and Constitution?

By Julio Severo
It is trendy today to ban the Confederate flag in the U.S., but strangely there is no effort to ban Islamic flags and symbols.
Allegedly, the Confederate flag is racist — because a deranged man, in very isolated case, killed some black evangelicals in a church, while Muslims slaughter plenty of Christians a day.
Do you know what? One of these days it will be discovered that the U.S. flag — yes, the Old Glory — was made by Anglo-Saxon whites. It will be also discovered the U.S. Constitution was made by Anglo-Saxon whites.
What about then? Thence, it will become trendy to see the U.S. flag and Constitution as “racist,” and they will want to produce a flag and Constitution with the joint participation of blacks, Indians, Chinese, whites, etc.
Next, it will be discovered that the U.S. flag was made only by people who were not homosexual. It will be also discovered the U.S. Constitution was made only by people who were not homosexual.
To cease this historical “discrimination,” they will want to produce a flag and Constitution with the joint participation of homosexuals, bisexuals, metrosexuals and other strange LGBTWYDXTZYSKS creatures.
Next, it will be discovered that the U.S. flag was made by mostly Protestant men. It will be also discovered the U.S. Constitution was made by mostly Protestant men.
To exterminate this historical “inequality,” they will want to produce a flag and Constitution with the joint participation of Muslims, Hindus, sorcerers, etc.
Please, do not ask me how the new U.S. flag and Constitution will be!
Recommended Reading:

Monday, June 22, 2015

Billy Graham’s Grandson Tullian Tchividjian Resigns as Coral Ridge Presbyterian Pastor After Admitting Affair


Billy Graham’s Grandson Tullian Tchividjian Resigns as Coral Ridge Presbyterian Pastor After Admitting Affair

Stoyan Zaimov
Preface by Julio Severo: The Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, under the leadership of D. James Kenney, had active participation in the 1980s and 1990s in the conservative movement, fighting wicked agendas, including abortion and homosexuality. After his death, Tullian Tchividjian, a Billy Graham’s grandson, took over the leadership, withdrawing Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church from the cultural wars. According to Gleanings:
Tchividjian’s tenure at Coral Ridge had been troubled from the start. In the spring of 2009, the church named the then-36-year-old as its senior pastor. Founded by famed preacher D. James Kennedy, Coral Ridge had once drawn as many as 7,000 worshipers. But it had been in decline following Kennedy’s death in 2006. Church elders hoped that Tchividjian’s youth, vision, and name could revive the fortunes of the aging congregation. Instead they got chaos. Within six months, a group of church members led by Kennedy’s daughter, Jennifer, called for Tchividjian’s ouster. Those dissidents were banned by the church. At issue were a change in worship style and Tchividjian’s rejection of culture war politics.
Tchividjian’s decision to ban conservative members, including a Kennedy’s daughter, because they wanted to continue Coral Ridge’s tradition of involvement in cultural wars was an unfortunate decision. His attitude of shunning from cultural wars has nothing to do with the Graham family. Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham and president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, has been very active in the cultural wars.
Tullian Tchividjian
The affairs of the Tchividjian couple are an issue only between them and God and their church. But Tchividjian’s decision to ban conservative activism from his church was a disaster.
Yet, his decision of resigning was appropriate. May he keep this decision and shun the behavior of some who later repent of their resignation and want desperately the pulpit spotlight back.
As to the secular media, they are not attacking him and his family. This is no surprise: Because he shunned cultural wars, the media is giving him a bonus. If he were involved in cultural wars, the national and international headline would explode, “Prominent Anti-Gay and Anti-Abortion Minister Gets Involved in Sexual Scandals!” followed by a text riddled with acid diatribe.
Tchividjian family
Now, what should we conservative Christians do? Pray for the Tchividjian family, because not only the gay agenda, but also adultery and divorce are a threat to marriage and family.
Here is the full report by the Christian Post:
Tullian Tchividjian, the pastor of Coral Ridge Presbyterian church in Florida, has resigned from his position after admitting to an affair. Billy Graham's grandson said that he has been experiencing ongoing marital issues.
"I resigned from my position at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church today due to ongoing marital issues. As many of you know, I returned from a trip a few months back and discovered that my wife was having an affair. Heartbroken and devastated, I informed our church leadership and requested a sabbatical to focus exclusively on my marriage and family," Tchividjian revealed in a statement to The Washington Post.
"As her affair continued, we separated. Sadly and embarrassingly, I subsequently sought comfort in a friend and developed an inappropriate relationship myself. Last week I was approached by our church leaders and they asked me about my own affair. I admitted to it and it was decided that the best course of action would be for me to resign."
The pastor adds that both he and his wife, Kim, are "heartbroken" over their actions, and are asking God to give them "the grace we need to weather this heart wrenching storm."
Kim Tchividjian said in a follow-up message to WP, however, that "the statement reflected my husband's opinions but not my own."
"Please respect the privacy of my family at this time, thank you. I do thank everyone for the outpouring of love for my family as well during this difficult time and we appreciate all the prayers and support we are receiving," she added.
Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, which was officially chartered in 1960, installed Tchividjian as senior pastor in 2009.
"Several days ago, pastor Tullian admitted to moral failure, acknowledging his actions disqualify him from continuing to serve as senior pastor or preach from the pulpit, and resigned — effective immediately," revealed Rob Pacienza, executive pastor of Coral Ridge.
"We are saddened by this news, but are working with and assisting pastor Tullian and his family to help them through this difficult time, and asking people to join us in praying that God will bring restoration through this process and healing to all involved."
Tchividjian, who has three children with Kim, has also written columns that've been published in The Christian Post. He has spoken out on a number of issues over the years, and back in December claimed that evangelicals' involvement in the conservative political movement has damaged Christianity.
"Over the course of the last 20 or 30 years, evangelicalism, specifically their association with the religious right and conservative politics, has done more damage to the brand of Christianity than just about anything else," the pastor said in an interview.
"That's not to say that Christian people don't have opinions on social issues and we shouldn't speak those opinions, but Sunday morning from behind the pulpit is not the place," he added.
Recommended Reading:

Sunday, June 21, 2015

Karl Marx’s Spirit in Lausanne: Theology of Integral Mission


Karl Marx’s Spirit in Lausanne: Theology of Integral Mission

René Padilla: Lausanne upheld Theology of Integral Mission as the mission of the church

By Julio Severo
Karl Marx was in Lausanne in 1867, for an international Marxist congress.
One century later, another international congress drew attention in Lausanne. It was not a Marxist congress. It was an evangelical congress on evangelization. Yet, it gave a fantastic spotlight for Latin American proponents of TIM (Theology of Integral Mission), which, according to its Brazilian proponents, is the Protestant version of the Marxist Liberation Theology. One of them is Ariovaldo Ramos, who has praised Hugo Chavez. Ramos is the director of the Brazilian branch of World Vision.
It was the Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization,1974, where one of its theologians, René Padilla, was one of the most prominent TIM advocates in Latin America.
So Karl Marx was present also, spiritually, at the Lausanne congress, through his ideology, which was receiving evangelical clothes.
Beautiful clothes disguise an ugly and deceptive ideology.
So there is an effort by TIM proponents to hijack the purpose of major evangelical conferences by exploiting any statement resembling TIM’s socialist feelings. In his paper “Integral Mission and its Historical Development,” Padilla made his case for TIM by listing a number of previous evangelical conferences as allegedly supporting it.
I will use Padilla’s paper as reference to address TIM in Lausanne.
Regarding the Congress on the World Mission of the Church (Wheaton 1966), Padilla said:
The Wheaton Declaration confessed the ‘failure to apply scriptural principles to such problems as racism, war, population explosion, poverty, family disintegration, social revolution, and communism.’”
“Population explosion” was a common subject and obsession among Western elites in the 1960s and 1970s and it should have been addressed by responsible and capable Christian leaders not according to elites’ wishes, which led to abortion legalization in the U.S., the largest Protestant nation in the world, and later radical societal homosexualization. “Population explosion” is a myth and rhetorical strategy that disguise population control efforts that include family planning and are responsible today for the deluge of “homosexual rights” to the detriment of rights and well-being of children and their families. If this myth had been debunked by Christian leaders in that time, it could have averted abortion legalization in the United States, which happened in 1973, with a massive toll today of over 50 million innocent unborn victims.
Concerning social revolution and communism, whatever interpretation Padilla might try to give, it is obvious that TIM, in its Latin American practice, was never a foe for him and his liberal theological colleagues.
Padilla wonders on Wheaton 1966:
“How such a document could come out of a mission conference held in the United States at a time when evangelicalism in that country was simply not interested in social change or social activism.”
Yet, a socialist gospel was not a strange reality in America. Apparently, Padilla is ignorant of the Social Gospel movement, which was born in America in the 1870s. Socialism in the American society and among its churches was a so serious threat that “The Fundamentals,” a theological paper organized by R.A. Torrey and published in 1915, had a whole chapter against Marxism and socialism.
Socialism, disguised as an interest in social change or social activism, is an old problem in the American churches.
The old Social Gospel movement dispels the myth that the U.S. evangelicalism had not been involved in “social change or social activism.” And there are significant signs that the most important theological liberalism in Latin America was influenced by it.
Theology of Integral Mission, or even Liberation Theology, may be the Social Gospel’s most important offshoot.
A Presbyterian missionary from the Social Gospel movement came to Brazil in 1952 and spent one decade teaching theology in the most prominent Presbyterian theological institution in Brazil. His name was Rev. Richard Shaull, and he was involved in several Marxist and communist causes in Brazil. The birth of the Theology of Integral Mission (TIM) ideas in Brazil is traced and credited to him.
In the 1950s he already said what Liberation Theology and TIM proponents would be saying in the 1980s and 1990s and decades to come. Shaull’s disciple Rubem Alves, initially a theologian in the Presbyterian Church of Brazil and later an agnostic, advocated Liberation Theology ideas before its official launch.
Even though TIM is labeled as the Protestant version of Liberation Theology, TIM was born before Liberation Theology. For more information, download my free e-book here: http://bit.ly/15AJmMC
Padilla tried give TIM a nobler birth by using major evangelical conferences, including the World Congress on Evangelism (Berlin 1966), as alleged precursors.
In his opening address at the Berlin Conference, Billy Graham reaffirmed his conviction that “if the church went back to its main task of proclaiming the Gospel and people converted to Christ, it would have a far greater impact on the social, moral, and psychological needs of men than it could achieve through any other thing it could possibly do.”
Nevertheless, Padilla used this conference as a major TIM precursor. He said,
“With all these antecedents, no one should have been surprised that the International Congress on World Evangelization (Lausanne 1974) would turn out to be a definitive step in affirming integral mission as the mission of the church. In view of the deep mark that it left in the life and mission of the evangelical movement around the world, the Lausanne Congress may be regarded as the most important worldwide evangelical gathering of the twentieth century.”
For Padilla, Lausanne established Theology of Integral Mission as the mission of the church. So, with TIM at Lausanne, socialism became the mission of the church.
Because of the leftist influence of Padilla and other Latin American theologians,the Lausanne Covenant said, “we affirm that evangelism and socio-political involvement are both part of our Christian duty.” The Lausanne Covenant basically equaled evangelism with leftist political action, a profane union never done by the Gospel or Jesus.
The central personality in the 1st Lausanne Congress was Billy Graham. Without him, there would have been no Lausanne, but even he did not expect repercussion on an ideological level. When Graham perceived that the Protestant Left was trying to co-opt everything, he stopped funding Lausanne, and it displeased Brazilian Marxist Anglican Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti, an old columnist of the Brazilian leftist Presbyterian magazine Ultimato, who openly accused that Lausanne was under a “hegemony from a conservative, white, anti-WCC (World Council of Churches) and anti-socialist group,” etc. (Poor Graham: white, Anglo-Saxon, conservative, etc!)
Cavalcanti wanted Graham to continue in the Lausanne movement to raise funds to advance a TIM revolution. This revolution has been happening, but without Graham’s money and participation. Valdir Steuernagel, a TIM leader, has said that today Lausanne is much more TIM than ever. It is not, therefore, a movement with the Gospel’s face, but with the face of an ideology masking itself as the Gospel.
Padilla remarked on the results he helped to produce in this TIM covenant by saying, “The Lausanne Covenant not only expressed penitence for the neglect of social action, but it also acknowledged that socio-political involvement was, together with evangelism, an essential aspect of the Christian mission. In so doing it gave a death blow on attempts to reduce mission to the multiplication of Christians and churches through evangelism.”
Yet, “social action” and “socio-political involvement” as “an essential aspect of the Christian mission” have never been, in view of Padilla and other TIM adherents, conservative activism. They have always been socialist activism.
Padilla stresses the same point when he says:
“If both evangelism and social action are so intimately related that their partnership is ‘in reality, a marriage,’ it is obvious that the primacy of evangelism does not mean that evangelism should always and everywhere be considered more important than its partner. If that were the case, something would be wrong with the marriage!… Concept of mission as a marriage in which the two partners – word and action – are ‘equal but separable.’”
So for Padilla, social action — in truth, socialist action — is as important as the Gospel is. This is a profane union that Jesus and his apostles never preached or knew it.
Padilla tries to make TIM opponents look like upper-class evangelicals in North America opposing poor Latin American ministers who have embraced a theology to help the poor. He said:
“In spite of its opponents, most of them identified with the North American missionary establishment, integral mission continued to find support among evangelicals, especially in the Two-Thirds World.”
Yet, he did not inform his readers that TIM preachers in Latin America are equally upper-middle class Lutherans, Presbyterians and Baptists, often graduated in European and U.S. universities, who clash with usually poor charismatic, Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal preachers who help the poor in their own poor communities, but without TIM. They help the poor by preaching the Gospel without socialism. They encourage their audiences to seek prosperity, healing, health and salvation from God. They pray for the sick and expel demons. This is a Gospel massively unknown by TIM adherents.
So there are clashes between them. When the Lausanne Movement met in Brazil in 2014 to discuss Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal “problems,” the leader of the meeting was Rev. Steuernagel, a non-charismatic minister.
Because Padilla has no Bible support for uniting the Gospel with leftist political action, he has to use major evangelical conferences and their ambivalent or vague language or even Lausanne, whose language had his active participation.
Besides, intentionally or not, Padilla overlooked conservative opposition in Lausanne to his efforts to make Lausanne more leftist. The leader of this opposition was C. Peter Wagner, who was a missionary in Latin America and knew very well the TIM advocates. He accused TIM of being left-wing.
Also, Padilla never mentioned that in Lausanne evangelical leaders from Latin America are not representative of the explosive Pentecostalism in that region. For example, Rev. Valdir Steurnagel, a Lausanne Movement leader today, is a minister in the Evangelical Church of Lutheran Confession in the Brazil (ECLCB). A former president of this Lutheran denomination, Walter Altmann, is a World Council of Churches moderator and an active Liberation Theology proponent. Many others in this denomination are prominent advocates of Liberation Theology and TIM. The largest ECLCB theological institution in Brazil has a theology professor, Rev. André Sidnei Musskopf, who is not only openly homosexual, but an active homosexual militant and author.
Hardcore Marxist Liberation Theology in ECLCB makes TIM look like, in it “softcore” socialism, “conservative” or even “right-wing”!  Yet, as the example of Rev. Musskopf shows, both theologies facilitate the acceptance and expansion of gay theology.
Steuernagel’s upper class status and his higher theological experiences in no way reflect the experience of the predominant Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal churches in Brazil, whose congregations often are composed by members poorer than the Lutheran congregations, which usually are middle class and higher. ECLCB, which has embraced Liberation Theology and TIM, is no representative of the Evangelical Church profile in Brazil.
Padilla also recognizes Steuernagel’s influence in Lausanne by saying:
“But the lack of adequate attention to the question of justice during the Congress was clearly articulated by Valdir Steuernagel from Brazil in a ten minute speech that he was allowed to give to the plenary at the very end of the Congress.”
Similarly, other Brazilian theologians do not speak for the Brazilian Church when they talk about her to First World audiences and international evangelical conferences.
Paul Freston, a naturalized Brazilian who has books published in English about the Brazilian Church, has a story of socialist involvements in Brazil and he is a key figure in TIM events in Brazil.
Another TIM proponent is Rev. Alexandre Brasil, a Brazilian Presbyterian minister who has delivered speeches in Calvinist institution in the U.S. about the situation of the Evangelical Church in Brazil. Rev. Brasil has kept a high-paid job as a consultant for the Brazilian presidency in the current socialist administration.
All of them are upper class Brazilians addressing poverty issues largely not experienced by their Protestant segment, but by Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal segments.
Nevertheless, Lausanne has been a platform for these not poor theologians to promote their Marxist ideas in the name of the Gospel — which has already abundant assistance for the poor, without socialism.
If spiritual curses can affect spiritually sick Christians, could the Marxist meeting of Karl Marx in Lausanne in 1867 and its dark spiritual influences have affected an evangelical meeting 100 years later?
The responsibility of a Christian is to preach the Gospel to every creature, including Marxists, socialists and communists. To inoculate the Gospel with Marxism, communism or socialism is not God’s plan.
To preach socialism masked as a “Christian” social responsibility or as “married” to the Gospel to every Christian is not what Jesus commanded. He commanded Christians to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom of God and heal de sick and expel demons — presumably, even demonic ideologies among Christians. Sign and wonders, or healing and demon expelling, are married to the original and first Gospel.
If given the opportunity, the Holy Spirit could have manifested himself in Lausanne and other similar evangelical conferences. Instead, Karl Marx’s spirit made its Protestant manifestations in Lausanne, which, according to Padilla, established TIM as “the mission of the church,” leading evangelicals to embrace and help an ideology that makes the State replace the Gospel in the capacity to help the poor, heal the sick and expel demons through its social services, funded not by the pockets of its political rulers, but by the pockets of its exploited citizens.
Why does no one dare to call TIM another gospel and another spirit?
Recommended Reading: