Val Lee's Weblog

Val Lee's Writings

N. T. Wright – Not of God

Westminster Abbey  

I  shot this photo when my husband and I vacationed in London

I was asked a question by a theologian of the Messianic sect, why I believe N. T. Wright (Bishop of Durham) is demon persuaded. Here is my answer composed in bits and pieces with quotes:

We know Christians respond to their heavenly Father, hopefully. Christ said of the religious leaders that they were of their father the devil; John 8:44. It also states here that every lie originates with Satan. N. T. Wright continually lies about God and His inerrant Word. We know from 2 Corinthians chapter 6 that either a person follows Christ or Satan, there is no in between. This is why we cannot be bound to unbelievers. Demons listen to their commander, performing his bidding.

Demons were presenting satan’s beliefs through the religious rulers of Christ day. The Pharisees, Sadducees and Scribes appeared religious with their long robes, Scriptural teachings, etc. However, they were of their father the devil as false teachers who added their own words and traditions to true beliefs. Satan and the religious rulers were intent on destroying God the Son.

Either people hold to the teachings of the Bible or of Satan and his demons. God gives no in between roadway.

New Perspective (Wright’s movement) uplifts the religious leaders of Christ’s day as actually being the good guys in certain realms. Such beliefs represent the doctrines of demons.

New Perspective on Paul is demonic as it teaches Paul was out for his own militaristic agendas, following his own drummer. The NPP philosophies are filled with heresies straight from the pit of hell. Satan is out to discredit God’s Word and he uses his children to do so.

Wright is called the “theologian for everyone” as he attempts to tickle everyone’s ear with demonic false doctrines approving of every demonic way under the sun. He rewrites the Bible according to Wright. He has created his own false religion whereby he continually speaks out both sides of his mouth. He never makes concrete sense. Much of the time he speaks nonsense—confusion. God is not a god of confusion; Satan and his demons author confusion. It is beyond me why he is considered a great theologian.

Paul was errorless  in his teachings, as they were the Words of God. No author of the Bible wrote his own words, only what the Holy Spirit instructed him to write.

We know Christ, who is God, never had to be vindicated by the Father as Wright states below. He, like all false teachers, blends truth with error. You see this all through Calvin’s writings as well and N. T. Wright uplifts Calvin.

From N. T. Wright:
Paul, it should be remembered, is one interpretation and experience of Christianity, and while it has become the dominant view it is, again, one of many threads existing in the earliest times after Jesus. When he’s wrong, he’s wrong. When he’s right, he’s astonishing.

For example, there are a few lines that, for me, should be kept within the soul and heart of every person who finds themselves attracted to the Jesus at the center of all that has been added, chiseled and carved to become Christianity. In 2 Corinthians 4:9, Paul writes:

“We are afflicted in every way but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our bodies.”

I maintain that is inspiration at its highest, an example of Paul soaring above the confines of his own more mundane and pointed interpretations of who Jesus (or, for him, the Christ) was as a kind of cosmic figure. Is there anything else we can think of to wish for from a religion? That the world will afflict us cannot be debated. We see it every day in our lives and the lives of others. Yet, says Christianity, we can not be crushed. We read the headlines and are perplexed by what we read, from deaths in Iraq to Russia, from crime at home to the troubles of thousands. Yet, Paul maintains, in spite of all this we do not have to make the choice to be driven to despair. Certainly, there are those who are persecuted — for their religion, the color of their skin, their sexual orientation. Then again, those victims will never be forsaken. Finally, we will be struck down by life, but cannot be ultimately destroyed by circumstances and events.

Because if in our mind and through our very body we carry the death of Jesus, we cannot help but carry the life of Jesus as well. We are, as the Episcopalians say in their services, part of the mystical body of Christ which, in itself, includes Jesus and includes the very Mystery that empowered Jesus.

Jesus, I believe, went to his death expecting to be vindicated by God. If the cup could not be lifted, Jesus said, so be it. His validation would come from his death in a way that he did not know based not on dogma but, rather, on belief born out of the exquisite personal relationship he knew with God. Certainly, through Paul we see glimpses elsewhere of the fact that Jesus was a man acted upon by God. His resurrection was a visible indication of an invisible operation in the Universe, one of hope and eventual vindication and victory.
In time, then, the closeness to the Eternal that Jesus invited us to became personified as Jesus himself, the historical person. It is that language we speak today in hymns and creeds, but it points beyond itself (as Jesus demanded again and again) not to the man of Nazareth himself, but to the Transcendent which poured forth through him, the vehicle.

_________________

A lady I once knew attended a Bible-believing church where the leadership claimed to not support NT Wright, but the Sunday she visited, the pastor referred to NT Wright as one of the greatest theologians of our day. Tom Wright is leading many down a road of deception.

____________

I Know N. T. Wright is of the evil one, as he does not condemn homosexuality and sexual promiscuity. Those who are of God, His born again children, teach that premarital sex, adultery, homosexuality, etc; is sinful. The Holy Spirit within a true believer reveals that God’s Word is inerrant. This includes the fact that adulterers and fornicators God will judge, but the marriage bed is undefiled. True aged believers understand Sodom and Gomorrah and Romans chapter 1.

In What St. Paul Really Said pgs.155-157 Wright does not in any way condemn pre-marital sex, etc. Wright states on page 156 that it is not to be ignored, denied or repressed according to Paul. But we know that outside of marriage it is vile and not of God. N. T. Wright states a demonic lie.

Wright: …it would be a more authentic position, I think, to say, as an intellectually authentic position to say the New Testament says that homosexual practice is not what Christians ought to engage in but I disagree for these reasons. Now I can understand that position. I can’t actually understand a position which says the New Testament is either silent or open on the subject because, frankly, it isn’t. The other thing which comes up again and again is people say, well, all they knew about was certain types of homosexual phenomena and not at all the sort of thing that we have, to which the answer is just go and read Plato. Plato’s Symposium has a lengthy discussion of homosexual love which includes as one of the options precisely the kind of long, stable partnership that some people now are advocating. And this in fact is not new. Modern homosexuality was not invented my Michael Fuko, you know. There’s a great deal that goes back through the 18th and 19th centuries with which we’re in a continuum. This is a much deeper and harder…
___________

N. T. Wright is an Anglican bishop at Westminster Abbey—a church that believes most everyone is going to heaven. I have been there. I have heard their demonic false teachings that please every ecumenical ear. If you spend time around these bishops, you can tell they are void of the Holy Spirit. They teach the doctrines of men as the doctrines of God. They are demonic and they are doing Satan’s bidding by sending the masses to hell. They implement New Age doctrines that cause people to question God and His inerrant Word. Wright tears God’s Word apart and replaces its truth with Wright’s mentality. He is an antichrist in every sense of the word.

Wright aligns himself with the bishops in this Abbey and all Anglican bishops. They tell the tourists who come to this abbey, that all the people who buried there are in heaven and visitors must feel so proud to be amongst these great people. They lead prayer in this vein. I know most of the nobility buried here where murderers, adulterers, thieves, tyrants, etc. The bishops state all of Britain’s royalty and noble are in heaven—all the vile of the earth who are buried in this Abbey. (Of course, Wrights view of heaven is not Biblical: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA0NLb0pXGI)

I must also ask, “How can a true born again Christian preach in a church that has Mary idols placed about and all kinds of secular stupidity?” What born again Christian is going to preach in a building full of crypts that hold the remains of godless people? Who in their right mind is going to uplift kings and queens who murdered Christians? These people are continually exalted by the Abbey bishops. This was where they held Princess Diana’s funeral and countless other vile people who lived sexually promiscuous lives and did not acknowledge Christ as their Savior and LORD. The bishops will say they all went to heaven. This is Westminster Abbey and Wright’s environment that he powerfully upholds.

____________

Wright definitely is not pro-Israel. A true child of God looks toward the removal of Israel’s enemies and Christ world rule in Jerusalem.

From Article:
Just consider Wright’s most recent commentary for Newsweek’s “On Faith,” anticipating the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Remarkably, Wright sees little difference between the ideals of Western democracies and those of Islamic terrorists. “What I wish we could say to terrorists and others: Look, we take our religion seriously too, and it leads us to different conclusions from you. We might be wrong; so might you; but in the name of whichever god you invoke, would it not be a better thing for us all to talk together about the issues at the heart of our respective faiths than to try to achieve dominance by violence?” Adding to the ambiguity, he closes with this line: “Unfortunately, they could quite well come back at us and say, ‘You mean, like you westerners have been doing in Iraq and Afghanistan for the last five years?'”

We expect to hear this sophism of moral equivalence from spokesmen at Al Jazeera television or the Arab League. Yet it somehow has emerged as a central argument in Wright’s critique of the war on radical Islam.

In his first major address on terrorism, “Where is God in the War on Terror?” Wright never mentioned the activities and ambitions of Osama bin Laden and his terrorist allies. He failed to cite any government assessments of the international terrorist threat. Al Qaeda and its operatives are plotting violence in 30 to 40 countries, are actively seeking nuclear material to detonate in urban centers, and are responsible for attacks that have killed or injured thousands of civilians in the last year alone–but you’d never know it from a speech approaching 8,000 words in length.

The bishop exudes moral outrage–but not at the extremists. Wright reserves the weight of his scorn for the United States and Great Britain and their foreign policies since the attacks of 9/11.

In the address in Durham, delivered last November, Wright condemned not only the war in Iraq, but also the U.S.-led coalition that toppled the Taliban in Afghanistan–a military offensive unanimously approved by the U.N. Security Council. He compared the United States to a “rogue elephant teased by a little dog,” staggering along on a militaristic rampage and “imposing the will of the West” on hapless populations. A first century historian, Wright can’t help but regard America as ancient Rome, nurturing similar imperial dreams: “All empires claim they possess justice, freedom and peace and that they have a duty to share these things with everybody else.” Imperialism, in fact, is a recurrent theme. “We have relied on the same methods as we used in the nineteenth century,” he said. “If in doubt, send in the gunboats and teach Johnny Foreigner a lesson he won’t forget.” And, as if the imperial metaphor weren’t crude enough, Wright reached for a cartoon reference: “The Superman myth, or the Captain America complex, has been shown to underlie the implicit narratives of generation after generation of American leaders,” he claimed, “generating the belief that the hero must use redemptive violence to restore the town, the country, the world to its proper state.”

Likewise, in his recent book, Evil and the Justice of God, Wright supposedly sets out to offer a sober reflection on evil in the age of terror. Too often, however, he descends into sloganeering, revisionist history, and downright incoherence. He chastises the “dualism” of the “us-and-them disjunction” that supposedly finds no fault with Western democracy. He characterizes the U.S.-led effort against radical Islam as a “knee-jerk, unthinking, immature lashing out” against its enemies, real and imagined. “Just as you cannot eliminate evil by act of Congress or by a philosophical argument,” he writes, “so you cannot do so with high explosives.”

Wright’s straw-man arguments all ignore the character and reach of militant Islam. A serious reading of the U.S. government’s most authoritative study on terrorism, the bi-partisan 9/11 Commission Report, would correct the deficit. “Bin Laden and Islamist terrorists mean exactly what they say: to them America is the font of all evil, the ‘head of the snake,’ and it must be converted or destroyed,” the commissioners concluded. “It is not a position with which Americans can bargain or negotiate.” The most recent National Intelligence Estimate of the threat of global terrorism confirms that view. Its authors believe that “the global jihadist movement” is spreading, adapting, and plotting new attacks on civilian targets. “We judge that most jihadist groups will attempt to conduct sustained terrorist attacks in urban environments.” No wonder, then, that the 9/11 Commission Report summarized the threat of al Qaeda thus: “With it there is no common ground–not even respect for human life–on which to begin a dialogue…

_______________________

Wright follows the doctrines of demons. Every belief contrary to the Bible is a doctrine of satan. Wright would not have been accepted 50 years ago within Christendom. People today do not know their Bibles nor own the faith to believe them; they have quenched the work of the Holy Spirit. This is why Wright’s words are being received. We are in the age of the apostasy. Christians must wake up and walk by the Spirit and not the flesh. The flesh, the world and satan all function as one against God’s truths. A very wicked trio.

(Please read John Chapter 10)

Photo copyrighted by Val Lee

Advertisements

May 18, 2009 Posted by | Apostasy, Apostasy in the Church, Bible, Christianity, England, Great Britain, John Calvin, Theology, Uncategorized | | Leave a comment

G20—New World Order

Evening in London
I shot this when on the Thames River
G20 Summit is meeting by this famed runnel 
President Barack Obama – London G20 Summit:

This costly tight security is costing a massive £7.5 million to keep the streets of London safe. Political Demonstrators are expected en masse, but London Mayor, Boris Johnson, said: “The police are ready for the challenge”.

The massive security operation is called ‘Operation Glencoe’ and the City of London is expecting trouble. There is political unrest and a huge demonstration is expected to form.

The main Summit takes part in the Dockland area of the city and there are extensive searches of empty buildings taking place and a dredging of the Thames River.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-f9jcX9ao4

Please click on the link above and listen to the video. The G20 is meeting in secrecy in London and it is being declared that globalization is on its way. The New World Order is “emerging” and “Green” is a unifying factor. Britain’s Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, speaks as if it is present in conclusion of his speech. Of course, this will not occur until God allows. Some nations are balking at the idea.

G20 Center Stage for Publicity

(Another of my photos)

(Bible: 1 John 5:9-13)

April 3, 2009 Posted by | apocalypse, England, G20, Globalization, Great Britain, New World Order, Obama, Politics, President Obama, Uncategorized | , | Leave a comment

World Secrets Kept From Us

 

Secrets

 

 

Henry Kissinger is a member of the secretive organization, The Bilderberg Group. http://news.muckety.com/2008/06/12/bilderberg-friends-include-kissinger-rockefeller-perle-and-johnson/3371

 

He referred to Obama as the hope for the world. He stated he may bring in the first world order as he is loved everywhere in the world.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ADIu1pvCEk

 

http://news.muckety.com/2008/06/12/bilderberg-friends-include-kissinger-rockefeller-perle-and-johnson/3371

 

David Rockefeller is a lifetime member of Bilderberg. His net wealth is estimated at 2.9 billion dollars, ranking him within the 300 richest people in the world. He owns significant stock in Oil Companies. He is the original U.S. founding member of Bilderberg, life member, and member of the Steering Committee (1954-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_attendees

He possesses great power in World Bank and Chase Bank.  It is proven his family supported Hitler’s Third Reich through their banking ties.  Please watch the video below.  You will be very educated.   

http://hubpages.com/hub/Declassified_National_Archives_Chase_National_Bank__Jewish_Accounts__and_Nazi_Germany

   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YauM5dHLn1s

 

Wikipedia:

“In 1965, Rockefeller and other senior businessmen formed the Council of the Americas to stimulate and support economic integration in the Americas. The Council subsequently played a key role in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In 1992, at a Council sponsored forum, Rockefeller proposed a “Western Hemisphere free trade area”, which subsequently became the Free Trade Area of the Americas in a Miami summit in 1994. His and the Council’s chief liaison to President Bill Clinton in order to garner support for this initiative was through Clinton’s chief of staff, Mack McLarty, whose consultancy firm Kissinger McLarty Associates is a corporate member of the Council, while McLarty himself is on the board of directors.”

 

David Rockefeller Received the Presidential Medal of Freedom (1998) and

World Brotherhood Award, Jewish Theological Seminary (1953).

The Rockefeller family is of German decent.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9270

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-15EjHCzds

 

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke attended Bilderberg in 08.

 

If you gaze through Wikipedia’s disclosed attendees, you will be amazed at the number of elitist people in the world who have attended the Bilderberg Group; however, they never leak the group’s activities. Very amazing! Few statements and accounts have been disclosed since its commencement in 1954.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXqj9epGEas

 

Only the selected invited can enter the doors of the Bilderberg group. If anyone presses the issue, they are severely harassed.  Some reporters have attempted entry and one stated he had traveled the world and never been treated in such a horrific manner. He was greatly shocked. The Bilderberg Group is welcomed everywhere in the world or so it seems. They, like the G8, meet in closed sessions, heavily guarded. Both groups meet once a year in different places in the world. In 2008 the Bilderberg Group met in Virginia. It was America’s turn.

 

Liberal journalists are also at times invited. Peter Jennings attended in 1995.

 

Bilderberg controls the IMF, the World Bank, the UN, all the European Central Banks. Every prominent European commissioner has at one time or another attended a Bilderberger meeting. Every NATO general secretary is a Bilderberger. 

 

 

 

 “Recently, there has been much discussion about Barack Obama having possibly attended the recent Bilderberg conference in Virginia. This speculation arose when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton sneaked off for a secretive meeting while in Virginia. As the AP reported, “Reporters traveling with Obama sensed something might be happening between the pair when they arrived at DullesInternationalAirport after an event in Northern Virginia and Obama was not aboard the airplane. Asked at the time about the Illinois senator’s whereabouts, [Obama spokesman Robert] Gibbs smiled and declined to comment.

 

The press that had been traveling with Obama were not made aware of the secretive meeting until the plane that they assumed Obama would be present on was moving down the runway, prompting many angry questions from the press towards Obama’s spokesman, Robert Gibbs. One reported asked Gibbs, ‘Why were we not told about this meeting until we were on the plane, the doors were shut and the plane was about to taxi to take off?’ to which he responded, ‘Senator Obama had a desire to do some meetings, others had a desire to meet with him tonight in a private way and that is what we are doing.’ This preceded another question, ‘Is there more than one meeting, is there more than one person with whom he is meeting?’ Gibbs simply replied, ‘I am not going to get into all the details of the meeting.’ He again later repeated that, ‘There was a desire to do some meetings tonight, he was interested in doing them, others were interested in doing them, and to do them in a way that was private.’

 

On Friday, June 6, it was reported that Bilderberg tracker, Jim Tucker, called Obama’s office today to ask if he had attended Bilderberg. A campaign spokeswoman refused to discuss the matter but would not deny that Obama had attended Bilderberg.”’

http://www.bilderberg.org/bis.htm 

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55917

 

http://news.muckety.com/2008/06/12/bilderberg-friends-include-kissinger-rockefeller-perle-and-johnson/3371

 

(Please read 1 John 5:10-13 in the Bible)

 

 

 Interesting article:

 

TEN TIMES A YEAR – once a month except in August and October – a small group of well dressed men arrives in Basel, Switzerland. Carrying overnight bags and attaché cases, they discreetly check into the Euler Hotel, across from the railroad station. They have come to this sleepy city from places as disparate as Tokyo, London, and Washington, D.C., for the regular meeting of the most exclusive, secretive, and powerful supranational club in the world.

 

Each of the dozen or so visiting members has his own office at the club, with secure telephone lines to his home country. The members are fully serviced by a permanent staff of about 300, including chauffeurs, chefs, guards, messengers, translators, stenographers, secretaries, and researchers. Also at their disposal are a brilliant research unit and an ultramodern computer, as well as a secluded country club with tennis courts and a swimming pool, a few kilometres outside of Basel.

 

The membership of this club is restricted to a handful of powerful men who determine daily the interest rate, the availability of credit, and the money supply of the banks in their own countries. They include the governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the Swiss National Bank, and the German Bundesbank. The club controls a bank with a $40 billion kitty in cash, government securities, and gold that constitutes about one tenth of the world’s available foreign exchange. The profits earned just from renting out its hoard of gold (second only to that of FortKnox in value) are more than sufficient to pay for the expenses of the entire organization. And the unabashed purpose of its elite monthly meetings is to coordinate and, if possible, to control all monetary activities in the industrialized world. The place where this club meets in Basel is a unique financial institution called the Bank for International Settlements – or more simply, and appropriately, the BIS (pronounced “biz” in German).  (This Bank supplied Hitler’s German Rank.)

 

THE BIS was originally established in May 1930 by bankers and diplomats of Europe and the United States to collect and disburse Germany’s World War I reparation payments (hence its name). It was truly an extraordinary arrangement. Although the BIS was organized as a commercial bank with publicly held shares, its immunity from government interference – and taxes in both peace and war was guaranteed by an international treaty signed in The Hague in 1930. Although all its depositors are central banks, the BIS has made a profit on every transaction. And because it has been highly profitable, it has required no subsidy or aid from any government.

 

Since it also provided, in Basel, a safe and convenient repository for the gold holdings of the European central banks, it quickly evolved into the bank for central banks. As the world depression deepened in the Thirties and financial panics flared up in Austria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Germany, the governors in charge of the key central banks feared that the entire global financial system would collapse unless they could closely coordinate their rescue efforts. The obvious meeting spot for this desperately needed coordination was the BIS, where they regularly went anyway to arrange gold swaps and war-damage settlements.

 

Even though an isolationist Congress officially refused to allow the U.S. Federal Reserve to participate in the BIS, or to accept shares in it (which were instead held in trust by the First National City Bank), the chairman of the Fed quietly slipped over to Basel for important meetings. World monetary policy was evidently too important to leave to national politicians. During World War II, when the nations, if not their central banks, were belligerents, the BIS continued operating in Basel, though the monthly meetings were temporarily suspended. In 1944, following Czech accusations that the BIS was laundering gold that the Nazis had stolen from occupied Europe, the American government backed a resolution at the Bretton Woods Conference calling for the liquidation of the BIS. The naive idea was that the settlement and monetary-clearing functions it provided could be taken over by the new International Monetary Fund. What could not be replaced, however, was what existed behind the mask of an international clearing house: a supranational organization for setting and implementing global monetary strategy, which could not be accomplished by a democratic, United Nations-like international agency. The central bankers, not about to let their club be taken from them, quietly snuffed out the American resolution.

 

The Bilderberg (or BB from now on) was formed in 1954 out of the need of corporate America to ensure cohesion of purpose on the part of its European partners in the recently formed North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) – the twin aim being to facilitate the flow of American capital into the region, and to bring Germany into the Alliance (against, it should be noted, the wishes of many of its partners). That it is a group endowed with enormous political clout can be attested to by: (1) examination of the lists of committee members and conference attendees over the years – together with the gravity and importance of the subjects discussed at these conferences (NATO, understandably, being repeatedly a key subject); and (2) these conferences take place under very strict security cover supplied by the respective host countries – even though implicit within the structure of this cabal is its unaccountable, secretive nature.

 

The Trilateral Commission (or TRI from now on) was formed in 1973, its agenda determined by the corporate-funded Brookings Institute and the Kettering Foundation – with not-a-little-help from David Rockefeller of the Chase/Manhattan Bank. That its projected formation should have been so enthusiastically acclaimed by the BB Conference in Knokke (Belgium) in 1972 should cause no surprise. Both corporate-controlled organisations, with linked membership, they shared the same aim: increasing globalisation of their wealth and power. Certainly, the BB with its total lack of any ‘democratic accountability’, must be in agreement with the TRI’s declaration (published in their “The crisis of Democracy”) that what the West needs most “is a greater degree of moderation in democracy”. Though, on second thoughts, the former probably thinks the ‘the degree of moderation’ somewht understated!

 

A further examination of both graph and list of bankers’ names reveals that, of the banking organisations, the Banks for International Settlements (or BIS from now on) is self-evidently of prime importance on the international scene – not only because of its prestigious membership (embracing as it does the head bankers of the leading industrial nations) – but also because of the significance of its links with other groups. This article will focus on it, at the expense of the other better-known banking institutions, for two reasons: (1) its prime ranking in the international hierarchy; and (2) so little knowledge of it is in the public domain.

 

The BIS is the world’s oldest international financial institution, having been set up in 1930 with the twin aim of (1) coping with reparations/loans from/to a very unstable post-World War one Germany; and (2) more importantly, to act as a forum for central bankers in the future. As such, it was the epitome of supranationality – able to circumvent all those orthodox ideals that had, over the years, become synonymous with the concept of the ‘nation state’ – such as ‘love of country’, ‘patriotism’ etc., – the danger, of course, being that, in certain circumstances (such as a state of war), such circumvention of patriotism by any of its board members could lead to them being accused of treasonable offences.

In order to appreciate what followed, it is essential to offer a brief resumé of the political/economic situation at the turn of the century: the Industrial Revolution, having fostered the rapid growth of a capitalist economy, inevitably gave birth to an ideal/dogma exposing the socio-political discord inherent within that same system which was based on the concept of one comparatively small group of people garnering profit from the wealth created by the labor of a much larger group. Thus was Marxism born – leading to the Bolshevik revolution in 1917.The USSR, now perceived by the industrial nations as representing the very antithesis of capitalism, was henceforth ‘the enemy’. The ‘cold war’ had begun, and its most blatant expression was the birth of fascism in the aftermath of the Bolshevik revolution – a birth both induced and nurtured by corporations such as I.G.Farben, SKF, Ford, ITT and Du Pont – corporation which were fast becoming multi-national in nature..Enter BIS. Set up in 1930 (see above),it consisted, initially, of a group of 6 central banks and a ‘financial institution of the USA‘. Granted a constitution charter by Switzerland, it was henceforth based in that country. That America was by then a financial force to be reckoned with on the international scene is borne out by the fact that the first President appointed to the BIS was Gates W. McGarrah (ex-Chase National Bank & Federal Reserve Bank).

 

By the late 1930’s the BIS had assumed an openly pro-Nazi bias – much of it disclosed by Charles Higham in his book “Trading With the Enemy”, and years later corroborated by a BBC Timewatch film “Banking With Hitler” (broadcast in late ’98). Two examples of such bias (there were many more) were: (1) The BIS had arranged transfers into the account of the German’s Reichbank of $378 million of what was, in effect, gold looted from the coffers of the invaded countries of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Holland and Belgium; and (2) in the summer of 1942, plans for the projected American invasion of Algeria were leaked to the governor of the French National Bank, who immediately contacted his German colleague in the BIS, SS Gruppenfuehrer Baron Kurt von Schroder (of the Stein Bank of Cologne), and by transferring 9 billion gold francs to Algiers – via the BIS – the Germans and their French subsidiaries made a killing of some $175 million in this dollar-exchange scam. Given the membership of the BIS at that time, this was hardly surprising. On the board were the following high-profile representatives of the Axis powers (there were 4 others): Walther Funk (Pres. of the Reichbank); Kurt von Schroder (above); Dr. Hermann Schmitz (Jt.Chm. of I.G.Farben); Emil Puhl (V/Pres. of the Reichbank); Yoneji Yamamoto; and Dr. V. Azzolini (Gov. Bank of Italy). It should be added that, of the non-Axis members on the board, many – such as Montagu Norman (Gov. of the Bank of England) were Nazi sympathisers, and that the President of the BIS from 1939 to 1946 was Thomas McKittrick, an American corporate lawyer who had been both Director of Lee, Higginson & Co. (a company which had made substantial loans to the Third Reich) and Chairman of the British-American Chamber of Commerce in London. His continued presidency of the BIS after America‘s entry into the war in December1941 was approved by Germany and Italy with this significant addendum to their note of authorisation: “McKittrick’s opinions are safely known to us”.

 

With the above noted disclosures in mind, the policy of appeasement pursued by Britain and France towards Germany in the pre-war period can now be more readily understood. By concluding a pact with Hitler, Britain and France – in effect – gave him the green light to advance eastwards (ref. “Mein Kampf”). Furthermore, the fact that they shared his endemic anti-communism blinded them to the risk that they were running by negotiating from a position of comparative military weakness – of which Hitler was perfectly aware – and for which they paid a heavy price. It should also be added that the architect of this act of appeasement, Prime Minister Chamberlain, was a shareholder in ICI, which had ties with I.G.Farben.

 

The significance of the American’s key central role in this sequence of events is underscored by the fact that, in the aftermath of World War 2, they (the Americans) set up the Bundesbank in Frankfurt (in their zone of control), ensuring that the bank would be independent of government and follow a strict monetary policy – in effect, another Federal Reserve System. In 1948 they replaced the existing Reichmarks with approximately 11 billion Deutschmarks, and Germany‘s subsequent conduct vis-a-vis European integration must be viewed with this in mind. In any case, the fact remains that Germany‘s subsequent frequent delaying tactics enabled the dollar to consolidate its dominance.

 

In their published précis entitled “Profile of an International Organisation”, the BIS states that its “predominant tasks are summed up most succintly in part of Article 3 of its original Statutes. They are ‘to promote the co-operation of central banks and to provide additional facilities for international financial operations'”. To achieve this aim it has 3 administrative bodies: (1) a Board of Directors, comprising the Governors of the central banks of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the UK and the USA, each of whom appoints another member of the same nationality – plus the central bank Governors of Canada, Japan,Holland, Sweden and Switzerland: a total of 17. (2) A Management Board; and (3) An annual General Meeting in June of each year.

 

________

 

Paradise

 

 

February 6, 2009 Posted by | Bilderberg Group, England, Great Britain, Hitler, Holocaust, Jews, News, Obama, Politics, President Obama, Secrets, Uncategorized, World Secrets | 2 Comments

The True William Wilberforce of Amazing Grace

 

William Wilberforce of Britain stood with strict Christian morality. He stood verbally strong against lewdness, sexually impurity, immodesty, drunkenness, foul language, indecent literature—everything contrary to our most innocent and undefiled Savior; Hebrews 7:26. 

 

Concerning the epitaph of William Wilberforce, I have admired all he sought in the name of his Savior. When he became a believer in 1785, he fought to end slavery, but suffered continually under the hand of liberal persecution.  Finally, England ceased its slavery trade in 1833, three days before his death and about 30 years before America followed suit, due mainly to his voice of influence.   

 

Val Lee  (Author of Cliques in the Church, Apostasy in the Church, and Queen Esther/Looming Holocaust—see Amazon.com. These books can also be read at https://vallee7.wordpress.com/. I also write and submit photos for Lee’s Birdwatching Adventures http://leesbird.com/ “Through the Looking Glass of Val Lee”)

  

http://www.churchsociety.org/churchman/documents/Cman_108_2_Bayes.pdf

 

 William Wilberforce: His Impact on Nineteenth-Century Society Condensed

Churchman 108/2 1994

Jonathan Bayes

William Wilberforce is remembered today mainly for his long Parliamentary campaign for the abolition of the slave-trade. He look up the cause of Africa and the West Indian slaves in 1786, and the Act of Parliament for Abolition finally received the Royal Assent and became law on 25 March 1807.

 

Not that that was the end of the struggle. Wilberforce had always seen the abolition of trading in human beings as but the first step towards the ultimate goal of the outlawing of slavery itself. This objective was not attained until 1833. By then Wilberforce had been retired from the politics of Westminster for eight years, and had handed on to others the baton of the antislavery campaign. It was his joy to live just long enough to hear of the final success in the House of Commons of the Bill for the Abolition of Slavery. He died two days later.

 

His notoriety on nineteenth-century British society came not through his work on behalf of the slaves, but through the other great task to which he believed himself to be called of God. On Sunday, 28 October 1787 Wilberforce wrote in his diary: ‘God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the Slave Trade and the Reformation of Manners’, by which he meant the reform of the morals of Britain. The question of slavery, that he first voiced his personal concern to reform the morals of England.

 

Around the time when he was preparing his Bill concerning capital punishment, in 1786,Wilberforce read a book by Dr Joseph Woodward, entitled The History of the Society for the Reformation of Manners in 1692.

 

It was traditional for a new monarch to mark his accession to the throne by issuing a Proclamation for the Encouragement of Piety and Virtue, and for the Preventing of Vice, Profaneness, and Immorality.

 

At that time, corruption was rife at every rank of society. The well-to-do were notorious for their gambling, while, amongst the poorer classes, prostitution abounded. Drunkenness and foul talk were common lo all social strata.

In devising his plan to form a new Society for the Reformation of Manners, Wilberforce believed, as we have already noted, that the way to begin was by making the strict combatting of crime an effective deterrent. The Society was designed to raise the moral tone of the nation by clamping down on offences such as the publication of indecent or blasphemous literature, and the desecration of the Lord’s Day. In targeting such offences in particular, Wilberforce was giving expression to his conviction that the looseness of the nation’s morals arose from the religious apathy and skepticism

which prevailed amongst all classes. His plan was that his Society for the Reformation of Manners should serve to restore England to its Protestant faith, by standing against those moral offences which militated against Christianity. As a by-product, Wilberforce believed, there would follow a general moral improvement.

 

1787 the Preamble the King George III articulated his ‘inexpressible concern’ at ‘the rapid progress of impiety and licentiousness’, and at the deluge of ‘profaneness, immorality, and every kind of vice’, which had broken in upon this nation. He declared his royal purpose ‘to discountenance and punish all manner of vice, profaneness and immorality, in all persons, of whatsoever degree or quality, within this our realm.’

 

Wilberforce: Our dependence on our blessed Saviour, as alone the meritorious cause of our acceptance with God, . . . must be not merely formal and nominal, but real and substantial. . . . It is not an occasional invocation of His name, or a transient recognition of the authority, of Christ, that fills up the measure of the terms ‘believing in Jesus’. . . . We must be deeply conscious of our guilt and misery, heartily repenting of our sins, and firmly resolving to forsake them: and thus penitently flying for refuge to the hope set before us, we must found altogether on the merits of our crucified Redeemer our hopes of escape from their deserved punishment, and of deliverance from their enslaving power. This must be our first, our last, our only plea. The corollary of this view of salvation, Wilberforce goes on, is the recognition that real Christianity is a commitment which demands the totality of a person’s life, doing everything to the glory of God.

 

Wilberforce proclaims explicitly that nominal Christianity is not

Christianity, that the difference is not a trifling one, but that nominal Christianity lacks altogether the radical principle of Christianity, namely the remembrance that we are fallen creatures, born in sin and naturally depraved, and that we need to be born again to become Christians in a genuine sense. His final challenge is to realize that nominal Christianity in one generation will lead to absolute unbelief in the next.

 

October 30, 2008 Posted by | Amazing Grace, Christianity, England, Great Britain, Hate, Movies, Religion, Scripture, Sin, Slavery, Theology, Uncategorized, Willaim Wilberforce | , | 1 Comment