Another NZ Cult: The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church (Exclusive Brethren offshoot)

     Previously in this blog, I have written about two cults that exist in New Zealand: Destiny Church and Gloriavale. Well another prominent cult that we have here is the Exclusive Brethren, and more specifically a hardline branch of it called the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church (hereinafter PBCC). Unlike Destiny Church or Gloriavale, this cult is not "native" to New Zealand (it didn't start here). But it is quite active in this country. A day or two ago, a detailed report about them was issued by Radio New Zealand (it has also been picked up by other major media outlets here). It is by Ruth Hill, and you can check it out here. Four different former members of the PBCC relate their experiences. I am not going to go over all the details of what they went through. Read the article I linked to for the full story. What I am going to do however is quote some key sentences from the article that demonstrate very clearly how this church is indeed a cult.

    "The Doctrine of Separation means godly Brethren must hold themselves apart from the sinful world.

    This includes members of their own families who leave the church - or are thrown out.

    Hales' word is law. His sermons are regularly published in "white papers" and distributed to 50,000 Brethren world-wide." (My emphasis)

    The "Hales" being referred to in that paragraph is Bruce Hales, who is described in the RNZ report as "the church's world leader" (so basically its pope) and a "Sydney furniture salesman". Separation is particularly dear to the Exclusive Brethren generally, and especially to the PBCC. In fact, it was a major reason why the Exclusives split from the Open Brethren (which nowadays represents the mainstream of Brethren belief) in 1848. The Open Brethren were willing to let anyone who attended their church partake in their communion provided they were born again, whereas the Exclusive Brethren believed communion should only be for members of the local assembly (as they like to call their churches) or a Brethren assembly generally, hence exclusive and separate from other churches. John Nelson Darby, who founded the Plymouth Brethren initially, led the Exclusive breakaway group. To begin with, they were relatively sound, but got progressively more extreme as time went on. While many Exclusive Brethren branches actually have reasonably similar theology to their Open counterparts, the PBCC has gone in a particularly hardline and extreme direction. Their ideas of separation are an example of their extremism. Notice how it says that they "must hold themselves apart from the sinful world". This means removing themselves from the world as far as possible and living in their own little separate space, but this is actually something the Bible tells us NOT to do:

    "I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world." (1 Corinthians 5:9-10)

    Biblical separation is a thing (for example, we should separate from those who preach false doctrines and remove wicked things from our lives), but this separation is not isolation, and this is where cults like Gloriavale and the PBCC go astray. We're not meant to live completely cloistered lives. The Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles didn't shut themselves away. They were very much involved with the world around them, although they didn't partake in the world's wicked deeds. So they were separate in that sense. But not in the sense of living a life of total isolation. Moreover, that isolation actually allows wickedness to flourish, especially evils like sexual abuse. (What could be better for a predator than to have a victim that is shut off from most or all people who could help them, and who is moreover scared to talk to the outside world for fear of being damned for all eternity?) Which is exactly why sexual abuse is common in such environments.

    To be fair to the PBCC, here is their own definition of the Doctrine of Separation. On the surface, it sounds quite Biblical. For example, they say, "Separation represents a moral distinction between what is right and what is wrong, what is righteous and what is unrighteous." That is, on the surface at least, correct. The thing with cults though is that they tend to use their own dictionary. So they say one thing, but secretly mean something else. In the case of the PBCC, they don't define what's right and wrong by the Bible, but by the words of Bruce Hales (and his own particular interpretations of the Bible). They also claim that "Our practice of separation does not preclude interaction in the broader community", and that may be true up to a point, but it's pretty obvious from the testimonies of these people and other former leavers that interaction with those the PBCC deem unbelievers is pretty limited.

    Notice also that the word of Bruce Hales is law in the PBCC. Just like Neville Cooper's word was law in Gloriavale before he died. This is another classic hallmark of a cult. Instead of living by the commandments of God, people in cults live by the commandments of men who pretend to represent God. "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Matthew 15:9) This is exactly how the Roman Catholic Church, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Gloriavale and many, many others operate. Indeed, Hales' "white papers" would be pretty much on a par with a Papal encyclical if you're part of the PBCC. In other words, they're held in the same sort of esteem, and certainly given far more weight in these institutions than the Word of God. OK, on to the next excerpt.

    "Simmons said that was the moment when he realised he could no longer believe in Hales, who is venerated by church members as 'The Elect Vessel'."

    How is this any different to the way the Catholic Church venerates the Pope as the so-called "Vicar of Christ"? The fact is that it's not. And by the way, a common meaning of "venerate" is "worship". The two words are virtually synonyms. So whether they admit it or not, the PBCC members basically worship Bruce Hales. They hold him in the exact same esteem that Catholics do the Pope, or Mormons their "prophets", and so on. This type of man-worship is very, very typical of cults. We are meant to worship God alone, not men. In fact, here is what Peter (the so-called "first Pope") did when someone tried to worship him: "And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man." (Acts 10:25-26) Peter knew the First and Second Commandments, and he also knew full well that he was not God, but a mere man and therefore not to be worshipped. Just four chapters later, people also tried to worship Paul and Barnabas, but they too would have none of it:

    "And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker. Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people. Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out, And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein" (Acts 14:11-15)

    So it is completely wrong to worship sinful men instead of God, but every time you come across a cult, some sinful man (or group of men) or woman is elevated above all the rest and treated with the sort of reverence that should be reserved for God alone. This results in them lording it over their followers, which is something else the Bible forbids Christian leaders to do:

    "But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." (Matthew 20:25-28)

    "And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth." (Luke 22:24-27)

    "The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:1-3)

    The word "Gentiles" is often used to represent unbelievers, and indeed is used interchangeably with "heathen" in the King James Bible. What the Word of God teaches us here is that controlling and dominating other people is something that the unsaved do. Born-again Christians who want to have a leading role in their church need to have a servant mindset. People like Bruce Hales, Neville Cooper, the Pope of Rome and their ilk are like Diotrephes, mentioned in John's third epistle: "I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not." (3 John 9) Diotrephes loved to be the top dog. And as the next verse shows, he also loved to lord it over his flock: "Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church." (3 John 10) Notice that Diotrephes' weapon of choice was excommunication. If people didn't do what he told them, he kicked them out. This exact same tactic is used by the PBCC (and indeed, many cults) when people refuse to submit to their control. Much of the Radio New Zealand report deals with this, in fact. Not only the excommunication either, but the way those on the outer are treated.

    Some more from the RNZ article now:

    "'The Doctrine of Separation is undoubtedly a theology and a principle that is taught and maintained by the church and their leaders, whom they believe are the infallible manifestation of God.

    'It's a complete myth to say it's the individual's choice.

     'Yes, the individuals have chosen to practice that separation and enforce it. But they do so because their entire environment has conditioned them that outsiders are a threat, and family members who leave are a threat, and must be cut off - or their own eternal salvation is in question.'" (Emphasis mine)

    They are quoting one of the former members, Lindy Jacomb. The above quote is all her words. Notice that word "infallible" - the Catholic Church teaches papal infallibility. So again, there's a parallel. Just as Roman Catholicism teaches that the Pope is infallible, the Exclusive Brethren teach that their "Elect Vessel" is infallible (along with perhaps other senior leaders). They do this because they of the exact same spirit as Catholicism. This spirit is not the Spirit of God, but the spirit of antichrist (and note that in the last days, the final Antichrist will also be a man who sets himself up to be worshipped as God - see how it fits the pattern?). Any time that a man or woman is being treated like God, or a god, and lording it over their flock and demanding or expecting worship, the spirit of antichrist is at work.

    Another classic characteristic of cults is that they teach works salvation. Hand-in-hand with works salvation is the heresy of conditional security - the notion that you can lose your salvation. If you can't be saved by works, you certainly can't keep or lose your salvation by works either! Funnily enough, one way you can "lose salvation" in a cult is by leaving, or by associating with those who have (because the cult's Diotrephes forbids it). It's a great way to keep control of people, which is always, without fail, one of a cult's main aims.

    The article goes on to report that Jacomb started asking questions (always a risky move in a cult). Which leads me to the next relevant quote:

    "Unable to find satisfying answers to her questions, she started reading the Bible - something Brethren are not encouraged to do.

While they go to church meetings every night and several times on Sunday, the focus is on the teachings of Hales.

However, scripture only made her more confused because it seemed to contradict how the Brethren lived." (My emphasis)

     What kind of "Christian" organisation discourages its members from reading the Bible? One that is of the spirit of antichrist. Guess what other organisation has an extensive track record of discouraging and even outright prohibiting the reading of the Bible among its members? Yes, the Roman Catholic Church. So another startling (or maybe not so startling) parallel. Same spirit behind them, same evil tactics. Notice also how the focus of PBCC meetings is on the teachings of Bruce Hales. Many other Exclusive Brethren branches (and a lot of Open Brethren ones too) set great store by the teachings of John Nelson Darby. The same pattern is evident in many other cults (e.g. Mormons revere the teachings of Joseph Smith, Seventh-Day Adventists set great store by the teachings of Ellen G. White, and on it goes). The doctrines and commandments of men are held in greater esteem in these institutions than the doctrines of God.

    I'm going to finish up with a couple of comments by another former member, Peter Hart (as quoted in the RNZ article):

     "You can't speak out, you can't speak your mind and it's a real strain because that's your whole life: the Brethren are your only friends, your only social life - it's very intense."

    "Hart said everyone was 'terrified' of Hales, and he doubted anyone would do anything significant - like take legal action against an ex-member - without his blessing. [...] 'You're not allowed to think for yourself. One saying in there is from the leadership: "You do the doing, we'll do the thinking".'" 

    A very common tactic of abusers is to isolate their victims. They don't usually do it by force (outright prohibition) but cunning manipulation (e.g. "Those people don't understand us - you'd really be better off without them" or "They might not believe in you, but I do, so why keep bothering with them?" and so on). Cults operate in much the same way. "Forget about those people in the outside world, they're just evil and against us. We'll look after you." "You want to go to Heaven, don't you? Stick with us, then." The purpose of such isolation is not protection, but control. When you're isolated, the abuser or cult has you exactly where they want you. This is why many people struggle to leave cults - because they know it will likely mean losing all the relationships they have built up inside the cult over the years. And that can be an extremely tough thing to face.

    The remark about people being "terrified" of Bruce Hales highlights another key characteristic of cults, which is that they operate by the fear of man. "The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe." (Proverbs 29:25) And one of the worst nightmares for the leader(s) of a cult is when people start thinking for themselves. By the way, God is all for us thinking for ourselves. That is why He has given us the ability to reason. In fact, he even invites us to reason with Him! "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." (Isaiah 1:18) And in the New Testament, we are commanded to prove all things: "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21) You can't do that without thinking for yourself. Accepting everything you are told at face value, without questioning anything, is a recipe for deception, and also for being controlled. "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going." (Proverbs 14:15) "Simple" is regularly used in the Bible to mean someone who lacks discernment or understanding.

     That about covers the Radio NZ report. There is quite a lot more to it, so do click the above link and read the whole thing for yourself. I just wanted to focus on some specific points that illustrate ways in which the PBCC can justifiably be termed a cult. Before closing though, I'd like to look at a couple of things on their own site. First, their official "gospel". They put a lot of emphasis on street preaching (nothing wrong with that in itself), and on their page about it, they give this summary of their gospel: "Eternal Salvation is held out to all men, simply by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord; “If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God has raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” (Romans 10 v 9)" Notice a very important thing missing here: repentance. Before you can truly believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, you must repent - grieve over your sin and be sorry to God for the sins you have committed against Him. "Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21) "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Luke 5:32) "For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death." (2 Corinthians 7:10) Godly sorrow is repentance towards God. The sorrow of the world, on the other hand, is sorrow towards yourself or other men. Judas had worldly sorrow after he betrayed Christ: "Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself." (Matthew 27:3-5) So we see here that Judas felt repentant over his sin. He felt bad for his treachery. There was just one problem: his repentance was not towards God. If he had repented towards God, he would have confessed his sin directly to God and asked God for forgiveness. Instead of that though, he went to men (priests, no less!) and confessed his sin to them instead! That is a perfect picture of worldly rather than godly sorrow. The repentance of Judas was horizontal rather than vertical. Notice also the final outcome of his worldly sorrow: he committed suicide. Now not everyone who experiences worldly sorrow over something will kill themselves. However, this can be a root cause of suicide. But I digress. The reason why repentance towards God is so important is because it results in a humble heart. It's hard to remain proud when you confront the full awful reality of your wickedness and how deserving you are of judgment for your transgressions of God's law. God has no time for the proud in heart. But when you truly humble yourself before Him in repentance, you are ready to be saved. "For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones." (Isaiah 57:15) "But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble." (James 4:6) "The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit." (Psalm 34:18) "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." (Psalm 51:17) The only way that you can have a broken and contrite heart over your sins is if you repent towards God. The PBCC miss this. Other cults miss this. In fact, even so-called mainstream Christian churches often miss this, which is why there are a lot of false converts walking around who may believe a lot of right things, but lack repentance. That is why you can come across a lot of professing Christians who are full of pride like the Pharisees of old. (I used to be that type of "Christian" myself.) It is also why the PBCC leadership behave as they do. They have never repented towards God, they have never humbled themselves before Him, and therefore they have never been born again, because their hearts have never been in the right condition to receive God's grace.

     Incidentally, believing on Jesus Christ does not merely mean accepting Him as Lord, so the PBCC are off on that as well. (In any case, the reality of joining the PBCC is accepting Bruce Hales as lord.) It means believing that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again on the third day. "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). It also means understanding that He shed His blood for us. "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission." (Hebrews 9:22) "In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" (Colossians 1:14) "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." (Romans 5:9) There is nothing you can do to save yourself - no works of righteousness that you can bring. All God requires of you is a truly repentant and humble heart, and faith in Jesus Christ. "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away." (Isaiah 64:6) "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9) 

    So that's how to really get saved. To confess that Jesus Christ is Lord but have no repentance or humility in your heart over your sins will be about as much use to you as converting to some other false religion. Just acknowledging who Jesus is simply isn't enough, because even the devils know Him: "And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ." (Luke 4:41) "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble." (James 2:19)

    So even going by their own Web site, where of course they downplay the role Bruce Hales has, it is still clear that the PBCC preaches a false gospel. One other thing about them is that despite using the King James Bible for most of their Scripture quotes, they actually prefer another version. They prefer John Nelson Darby's translation of the Bible, even though it uses corrupt texts like the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and not the Textus Receptus (Received Text) on which the King James Bible is based. They state, "While they piously respect the King James Authorized Version, and any other decent translation, they believe that the translations made by John Nelson Darby (JND) (1800-1882) are more accurate." And they acknowledge the texts he used for his translation: "For the New Testament, he translated from the texts agreed by the great nineteenth century Editors of the Greek text: Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf and Tregelles. Where the editors differed in their judgement as to the correct reading in a particular passage, JND consulted the texts of the original Greek manuscripts: Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, Ephraemi, Bezae etc." (Emphasis mine)

    So, not only do they have a corrupt gospel, but they use a corrupt Bible version. That said, the Bible version you use does not have a bearing on your salvation. Gloriavale is a cult like the PBCC, but Gloriavale uses the KJV. Still, a corrupt Bible version just lends itself that much more readily to corrupt doctrines.

    One thing the PBCC has in common with Gloriavale is the forcible separation of families when people depart from it. There is a world of difference between family leaving you or maybe casting you out when you become a Christian, and being forcibly separated by a cult that wants to keep control of its members at all costs. My heart really does break for the people who have to go through this sort of thing.

    In conclusion then, the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church is like all other cults in that it preaches a false gospel and is ultimately centred on a man and not God. It has the exact same spirit of antichrist that all cults and false religions do. Doubtless it has its good points, but it is not something that truly born-again believers should be having anything to do with (although by all means take an opportunity to share the real Gospel with any PBCC members you may come across, and remember to be gracious to them). Soon I hope to finish and publish my big study on the characteristics all cults have in common. Keep an eye out for that some time this month.

UFOs: The Next Great Deception?

     The world has been full of many deceptions since almost the beginning of time, but we are living in an age when some truly colossal deceptions are being perpetrated on mankind. Examples include evolution, Critical Race Theory, homosexuality being an "in-born trait", cross-dressers "being born in the wrong body", climate change (well, this one has some grains of truth mixed with a lot of exaggeration and outright lies to create mass hysteria) and on it goes. These lies have been spun by cunning and crafty men (and women) who know exactly how to use good words and fair speeches to deceive the hearts of the simple (i.e. people who lack discernment - see Romans 16:18). They have been pushed through books, TV shows, movies, songs, political campaigns and the like. They are accepted by "the majority", who pride themselves on their "intelligence" and "rationality" in "trusting the science". "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22). Those who do not follow the multitude (Exodus 23:2) in swallowing these wicked lies are branded "crazy", "irrational", "bigots", "haters" and quite simply Unfit for Polite Society. Forget about truth, just go along with what everybody else thinks to keep the peace. Rather like Sledge Hammer in the old 1980s TV show, the peddlers of these hoaxes say, "Trust us, we know what we're doing". And in a way, they do. They know how to manipulate you into believing whatever narrative they want you to believe at any given time.

    What the aforementioned deceptions all have in common, however, is that they constitute an attack on the Word of God. The theory of evolution is an attack on the Genesis account of God creating the world in six days. In fact, it is an attack on the concept of creation, full stop. It all started with a Big Bang, by some fluke accident, no rhyme or reason to it, so we're supposed to think. Just happened by magic, basically. Critical Race Theory seeks to sow hatred and division between people of different skin colours by artificially making some "oppressors" and others "oppressed", whereas the Bible tells us to love our neighbour (see for instance Galatians 5:14), show no partiality (e.g. Deuteronomy 16:19) and also says that we are of one blood (Acts 17:26). The myth of homosexuals being "born that way" is flagrant defiance of the Bible's express prohibition against and condemnation of a practice that it calls an abomination. It is teaching a lie that homosexuals can't help their behaviour, but the Bible is clear that ALL sin is a choice. There is no Biblical prohibition however against those things that really ARE in-born traits (like eye colour, hair colour, skin colour and so on). We cannot choose those things, but we can choose our sexual partners (except in cases of rape, obviously, but God does not hold people accountable when they are forced against their will - see Deuteronomy 22:25-27). This applies to heterosexual relations as well. People are not born as fornicators or adulterers - they choose to commit those sins. The whole transgender movement is an attack on not only God's prohibition against cross-dressing (Deuteronomy 22:5) but the fact (stated in Genesis and affirmed by Christ in the New Testament) that God has made us male and female. Those are the only two biological genders. There are no others. If you were born a male, it's because God meant for you to be a male. If you were born a female, it's because God wanted you to be a female. You were born that way, you see. (It's funny in a way how people use the "born that way" argument to justify homosexual sin, but when it comes to changing their gender, suddenly "born that way" no longer applies!) Finally, lies about climate change also attack the Bible, such as God's promise that there will always be summer and winter for as long as the earth exists (Genesis 8:22) and His promise never to flood the earth again (Genesis 9:11-15). Every time you see a rainbow, that is God's reminder of this promise. So all those stories about the sea levels rising and flooding the world are so much bunk. Moreover the Bible clearly states in a number of places that God is in control of the climate. So man's attempts to "fight climate change" are really just another way of fighting God. (That said, I have no issue with reasonable efforts to reduce air and water pollution - not for their supposed effects on the climate, but simply because of their impact on human health. Such pollution is moreover man-made, so this is something we can and should try to deal with.)

     These are just some of the immense deceptions that we live with on a daily basis. (Of course, there is some truth around in the world as well, but the amount of deception nowadays is truly mindblowing.) Well, now it appears as though another great deception might be around the corner. There is a good chance, in fact, that it will be unleashed within the next few months. It is a deception for which science fiction novels and movies have been conditioning us for decades (in fact, more than a century now). You can probably guess where I'm going with this. Aliens. UFOs. The Little Green Men are coming in their flying saucers. Aha, aha, yep-yep-yep-yep-yep (yes, I was imitating the Martian characters on Sesame Street). The conditioning for this deception starts with young children, who see funny and cute characters like the Sesame Street Martians and the cartoon character Marvin the Martian, and progresses to the science fiction and fantasy books, TV shows and films enjoyed by many teenagers and adults. (Science fiction has never been my cup of tea, but I have seen the odd TV show in the genre and can remember watching ALF quite regularly back in the day. ALF stood for Alien Life Form.) People are being conditioned to believe that there is life on other planets - or at least be open to the idea.

    Until now however, the concept of aliens in flying saucers coming to either invade Earth for a hostile takeover or pay us a friendly visit has been seen by most as the domain of science FICTION. They regard it as merely the stuff of entertainment and don't take it seriously. At this point in time, most scientists and academics (the same people, ironically, who promote the evolution lie) scoff at such ideas. Of course, there are also a number of "true believers". They sincerely believe that there are indeed extraterrestrial beings out there. In fact, some believe that They Are Already Among Us, hiding in plain sight. A common denominator with many such people is that they are involved in the occult on some level or other. That is quite significant, for reasons I'll explain shortly.

     On 1 June (or possibly earlier), the Pentagon is set to declassify a number of its real-life "X-files" relating to reports about UFO encounters experienced by the US military. A task force will present a report to the US Congress during the month of June. In just this past week, as reported across many media outlets, the Pentagon confirmed that a video purporting to show UFOs shaped like pyramids or triangles buzzing a US Navy exercise was legitimate, as were Navy photos showing other objects shaped like a blimp, acorn and sphere. Now it is important to note that they said the video was legitimate (and ditto the photos). They did NOT say that the UFOs were real alien spacecraft. All they said was that the video was real and not something that somebody had just decided to make up for a laugh. Incidentally, another name for UFOs nowadays is UAPs (unidentified aerial phenomena).

     Apart from these startling revelations by the Pentagon, NASA has currently got a space probe on Mars and has been busy flying a miniature helicopter around on the Red Planet. (This was quite historic, being the first controlled flight undertaken on a different planet, apparently.) Naturally, they are keen to find signs of life while they are there, but so far (surprise, surprise) they have been unsuccessful in this quest. But who is to say that they won't spot something that looks ever so vaguely lifelike (e.g. a rock shaped like a hand) and declare that this is Definitive Proof for the existence of Martians? Aha, aha, yep-yep-yep-yep-yep. (I have this silly image in my mind now of the Sesame Street Martians looking at the NASA helicopter and exclaiming to each other, "Ooh, UFO! Yep-yep-yep!")

     So one way or another, this just might be the year when we are told that there is evidence of alien life forms visiting us. Only it will be a deception, and here's why. Remember that the primary motivation for the world's greatest deceptions is to cast doubt on, or largely destroy the credibility of the Bible. If there were supposed "proof" that creatures from other planets were visiting us, it would cast doubt on the Bible, which declares that Earth is the only planet on which life exists. It makes no mention of any other civilisations on other planets. However, the Bible nonetheless makes it clear that we are not alone in the universe. Because apart from us human beings and other creatures that dwell on the earth, there is a whole spirit world that our natural senses cannot detect. This world is inhabited by God, His angels, and Satan and his fallen angels (also known as devils). And the Bible records a good number of encounters, in both the Old and New Testaments, between human beings and angels of God. Sometimes these angels were obviously supernatural, while at other times they took the form of men (like the two angels who visited Lot when he still lived in Sodom). They were still supernatural, but were able to assume human form. Another thing we learn is that there are supernatural vehicles, such as the chariot of fire that took Elijah to heaven in 2 Kings 2:11. Meanwhile, Ezekiel 10 describes a fascinating encounter that the prophet Ezekiel has with cherubim (a type of angel), and they seem to have "wheels" that they use to move about in. "And when the cherubims went, the wheels went by them: and when the cherubims lifted up their wings to mount up from the earth, the same wheels also turned not from beside them. When they stood, these stood; and when they were lifted up, these lifted up themselves also: for the spirit of the living creature was in them." (Ezekiel 10:16-17)

     Now, God and His angels are at war with Satan and his devils, who have rebelled against God because Satan wants to take His place (see Isaiah 14:12-15). The war has been raging ever since the creation of Adam and Eve. What is at stake in this war is the souls of every man and woman. Whether we realise it or not, we humans are involved in this war too. Those who are born again are on God's side, while those who are not saved are in Satan's camp (unwittingly in most cases). The way God's people fight the war is through things like Bible study, prayer, preaching the Gospel and earnestly contending for the faith (Jude 3) to help people distinguish truth from deception. Truth is of the utmost importance in this fight. Satan, on the other hand, uses deception as one of his primary tools (see John 8:44). He wants to take as many people with him as possible to the eternal torments of the Lake of Fire that have been reserved for him and his angels. But to achieve that, he has to trick them in every which way he can. If people can be fooled into thinking that God either isn't real or isn't what the Bible says He is, and thus into thinking they are not in any danger of judgment for their sins, then Satan has them right where he wants them.

     A lot of the time, Satan uses human agents to spread his deception. Hence all the barefaced lies we read and hear on a daily basis. However, he is also quite well able to use supernatural means to fool people. And this is where so-called UFOs come in. The Bible makes it clear that one way in which Satan operates is to use signs and lying wonders (2 Thessalonians 2:9). He can create supernatural wonders and even do miracles, as can the fallen angels who serve him (see Revelation 16:14). Many of his human servants use these false signs and wonders with supernatural assistance. "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Matthew 24:24, and see also Mark 13:22). Any Pentecostal readers who love signs and wonders should give careful consideration to these verses. Satan and his devils are able to imitate a number of God's supernatural actions. Read the seventh and eighth chapters of Exodus to see how the Egyptian magicians used "enchantments" (witchcraft, and in particular spells) to imitate some of the plagues that God brought upon Egypt when the Pharaoh was refusing to let the Israelites go. Moses and Aaron did not use enchantments, but simply obeyed the commands God gave them. (That's a really important difference.) But these chapters show the reality of not only God's power, but Satan's. God has far, far greater power than Satan (infinitely greater, in fact), but the latter's power is still formidable and not to be underestimated (indeed, it is far too strong for us frail humans, which is why so many people are so easily deceived, but also why Christians can do nothing without God helping us).

     Given that the forces of darkness (Satan and his devils) have all this supernatural power, and given that they can use counterfeit signs and wonders to deceive people, then it would not really be all that difficult for them to create sights in the sky that might look like UFOs. And just as the angels of God can appear to people, devils can do likewise. They could assume a form that appears like an "alien". The verse in Revelation that I referenced in the previous paragraph describes evil spirits that look like frogs. (Actually, that's in the verse immediately prior to it, i.e. Revelation 16:13.) Some pictures of "aliens" I have seen (which people drew or described after "encounters" with them) look a bit frog-like, especially with their big bug-eyes and the general shape of their face. It is also worth noting that Satan is a cherub, as revealed in the book of Ezekiel: "Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." (Ezekiel 28:14-15) Now, if Satan is a cherub, it is more than likely that some of the devils who have rebelled with him are cherubs too. Which means they likely still have those "wheels" to move about in. Significantly, a great many UFO sightings, especially over the last 70-80 years, have been of disc-shaped objects. And discs are round, just like wheels.

    In short, when people see UFOs, or even have an "alien encounter", what they are really seeing is a demonic illusion. In other words, they are not encountering aliens from outer space. They are seeing lying signs and wonders and communing with devils. A great many people who have had UFO encounters, and especially ones who have had direct experiences with "aliens", have a prior history of involvement in the occult. Getting involved in things like witchcraft, or divination, or necromancy etc. can open you up to all sorts of creepy supernatural encounters, which is one reason why God tells us in no uncertain terms to stay away from such things.

    Could these demonic apparitions appear on video? Well, why not? After all, the Bible calls Satan the prince of the power of the air (Ephesians 2:2), among other things. So devils could, if they so chose, make their apparitions manifest on screen. Incidentally, some useful thoughts about UFO encounters can be found in this short article on The Berean Call Web site. (There are several other articles about the subject on there as well.) And if they are getting ready to launch a major deception offensive, then we could expect the number of videos featuring so-called UFOs to increase. Or, as we are about to see, existing videos and photos are set to be declassified.

     So what would be the purpose of persuading the world that UFOs are real? Well as I said above, to lure people away from the Word of God. Make people doubt the Bible or disbelieve it outright. Another purpose might be to tie in with existing evolutionary theory. After all, according to the logic of evolution, if life only started here by pure chance, it could also start by chance somewhere else in the universe. And perhaps our "extraterrestrial friends" might want to help us become more "evolved" like them? Perhaps even achieve the ultimate dream of mankind: to become as gods? Just like the serpent said the Eve in the Garden of Eden: "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." (Genesis 3:4-5) It was a lie, but a very enticing one, and this same enticing lie is still seducing people today. Sometimes this lie is told in some form by so-called "aliens" that people encounter. "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils" (1 Timothy 4:1) Such seducing spirits are already around, but they could also take the form of "aliens" if they so chose. Whatever "advice" they give mankind will be the "doctrines of devils", quite simply because they ARE devils.

     In conclusion, you may rest assured that there are no alien life forms on other planets. We don't have to worry about Little Green Men as such. However, there are evil spirits that are very real, and they can produce supernatural manifestations that could look like UFOs or "aliens". So UFOs or UAPs are not real in the sense of being alien spacecraft. But as demonic apparitions, they ARE real in that sense. And if, as I suspect, we are about to be presented with "hard evidence" for the existence of UFOs, you can expect that the spiritual war that is ever raging, and which already seems to have gone up several notches since the 2020s began, will increase to a white-hot intensity as the level of satanic deception increases even more. This is why we who are born again must stay firmly grounded in the Word of God and resist the lies we will be told about this just as we now resist the lies already abounding in this present world. The truth is not "out there". It is IN there - i.e. in the Holy Bible.

UPDATE (15/5/21): Another US Navy video of a UFO has been declared authentic by the Pentagon. As with the videos I mentioned in the original post, the video has been declared authentic. That doesn't mean the UFO is authentic. As is so often the case with these videos, it is very grainy. Some kind of dark round object is clearly visible. It is moving in a rather unusual fashion - definitely not obeying the laws of natural physics. (But then, a supernatural object, which this could be, would obey completely different laws of motion.) After doing some "manoeuvres", it disappears into the ocean.

    Now, this might be a demonic apparition, or it might be some kind of strange aberration that could somehow be explained by natural means. It is certainly not an alien spaceship. Whatever the thing is, this kind of footage is part of a growing collection of "declassified" UFO videos that are probably leading up to something much bigger - the kind of major deception I speculated on in the original post.

    Normally, the conservative media are a bastion of common sense and defenders of truth that is being increasingly rejected by those on the left, but when it comes to UFOs, the conservative media actually seem to be leading the charge insofar as reporting UFO-related developments this year is concerned (although the mainstream media are also keenly interested). It is important to remember that most people who work in the conservative media are just as lost as their liberal counterparts. Some may profess to be Christians, but they're often false converts. So from a spiritual standpoint, they are actually on the same team as the liberal left-wing media, and we may well see the conservative media uniting with the liberal media in the great UFO deception that I suspect could be on its way as early as next month (when the Pentagon declassifies many more of its "X-files"). Ultimately, our trust needs to be in God, and not Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Alan Jones, Rowan Dean and others of a similar persuasion (even if they can sometimes say some very helpful things and be a breath of fresh air after the utter insanity that passes for mainstream news and opinions nowadays). The Word of God is the perfect antidote to all the world's lies, including lies about flying saucers and aliens.

UPDATE 2 (19/5/21): As June gets closer, media reporting about UFOs is ramping up. For instance, here is a report by 60 Minutes (the US version, made by CBS) about US Navy pilots who have had "close encounters". Click here to watch bonus footage from the original report. Obviously, I don't endorse either of these videos; I'm just showing you a recent example of how the mainstream media is starting to push the UFO narrative that much more aggressively. Watch at your discretion. To be fair to CBS though, this report is not outright suggesting that we are being visited by aliens from outer space. That would be a bit much right now. People are not yet ready to receive that. It is simply stressing the fact that members of the US military have encountered objects that do not behave the way normal aircraft do. The people interviewed are not really promoting any alien theories themselves. In fact, they suggest a number of different possible explanations, some of which are natural or even mundane. Still, a report like this helps to plant a few seeds in people's minds. It is rare for a deception to be promoted openly - at least, to begin with. Such things tend to come in by subtlety and stealth. They creep in unawares. Once enough seeds have been planted in enough people's minds, then they can be "watered" and start to blossom into full-blown false doctrines. It is Satan's counterfeit of the way people receive the Gospel - one preacher plants the seed (preaches the Gospel message). Another one waters the seed that has taken root in the heart and then, if the seed has fallen on "good ground", it bears fruit. (see for instance Matthew 13:8 and 1 Corinthians 3:6).

    Before people can accept a lie however, they firstly have to be conditioned to it. That is what happened, for instance, with the myth that homosexuals are "born that way". It was a gradual process that was carried out over the course of 40-50 years. When it comes to so-called UFOs, people's minds have already been conditioned by the science fiction genre, but even so, they're not quite ready to accept the lie that aliens are here. That is still regarded as the stuff of fantasy (and rightly so). Even next month's big report to Congress may not actually push that idea too much further. But it will likely go into a lot more detail about other "close encounters" and thereby plant more seeds in people's minds and hearts. Speaking of planting seeds, former US President Barack Obama has weighed in on the UFO subject on The Late Late Show with James Corden. Obama, who was President of the United States from 2009-2017, stated, "What is true, and I'm actually being serious here, is that there is footage and records of objects in the skies that we don't know exactly what they are [...] We can't explain how they move, their trajectory[.] They did not have an easily explainable pattern. And so I think that people still take seriously, trying to investigate and figure out what that is." So like the 60 Minutes report, Obama's comments are concentrating on the mystery objects and not on who or what might be controlling them. But by the time you have a former President entering into serious discussion about UFOs, it is obvious that, as Sherlock Holmes was fond of exclaiming, "The game's afoot!". The media are clearly trying to make the general populace take UFOs seriously.

    Far from challenging this report by one of the mainstream, left-wing American TV networks, the conservative media are marching in lock-step with them on this matter. For example, here is an item by prominent FOX News commentator Tucker Carlson. As mentioned in the item, Carlson has been talking about UFOs for several years now, and has perhaps been one of the leading voices in the conservative media to promote this narrative. To be fair to Mr Carlson however, he is not suggesting that aliens are visiting us, just as CBS and Barack Obama were not directly suggesting that. His concern seems to be more about possible security threats that the alleged UFOs might pose. He also understandably wonders why the Pentagon and US military have stayed silent for years and are only now admitting these sightings. (I wonder that too. But it may just be that society has accepted so many other massive deceptions that it is now primed for one about "aliens".) Given that people have been seeing purported UFOs for decades, I don't think we need worry about any security threat. The threat is rather a spiritual one. Not only to the United States, but the whole world. The spiritual threat being the deception I have talked about earlier in this post.

UPDATE 3 (25/5/21): The mainstream media's new acceptance of UFOs continues to pick up steam with this Washington Post article that has been published on the Stuff NZ site. The Stuff version of the article includes a video with a panel discussion broadcast on FOX 26 in Houston. All the participants in that discussion say things like it's "arrogant" to assume we're the only life form in the universe and one even says that there is "no doubt" of there being life on other planets. Remember, this is Fox, the right-wing conservative network in the United States. However, The Washington Post certainly cannot be accused of being right-wing or conservative. It is so far-left nowadays that they really should rename it The Washington Pravda. Anyway, the article explains how the Pentagon first began to take UFOs/UAPs more seriously back in 2007, when then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asked them to investigate all the sightings. He got support from Ted Stevens and Daniel Inouye, who "controlled funding for supersecret Pentagon operations". (Funnily enough, both those men have since had airports named after them: Ted Stevens International in Anchorage, Alaska, and Daniel K. Inouye International in Honolulu, Hawaii.) The article notes that now in 2021, "official Washington is swirling with chatter – among top senators, Pentagon insiders and former CIA directors – about UFOs. What was once a ticket to the political loony bin has leapt off Hollywood screens and out of science-fiction novels and into the national conversation". (Emphasis mine)

    You know you're reading a left-wing publication when you see a phrase like "national conversation". But I digress. Notice how there has been a progression from science fiction movies and novels to serious consideration of UFOs at top government level in the US. As I said in the original post, these movies and books have been conditioning us for what we can see beginning to unfold now. 

    The move to declassify government material about UFOs/UAPs was made under Donald Trump's presidency. Yes, that Donald Trump, the Saviour of America if you believe the QAnon narrative. But not even "Q" picked that Trump is not only going to save America from the loony left, but the Martians too! (Or maybe they're one and the same? Either way, I'm sure Donald's got them covered.) And it was made in a rather strange way: "[A]s part of president Donald Trump's spending and pandemic relief package, the Senate Intelligence Committee, led by Democratic Senator Mark Warner, included a provision calling for the director of national intelligence to help produce an unclassified report on everything government agencies know about UFOs, including scores of unusual sightings reported by military pilots" (My emphasis) Quite what the COVID-19 pandemic has to do with UFOs, I'm not quite sure (perhaps it came from Mars rather than China?), but there you go.

    The article goes on to quote a couple of former CIA directors who are now being open about their belief in UFOs and life on other planets, and refer to some of the recently declassified video footage. John Brennan, one of the former CIA directors cited, has this to say about the footage: "I think some of the phenomena we're going to be seeing continues to be unexplained and might, in fact, be some type of phenomenon that is the result of something that we don't yet understand and that could involve some type of activity that some might say constitutes a different form of life". (Emphasis mine) Aha, aha, yep-yep-yep-yep-yep-yep. It could be, some might say, but the seeds most assuredly continue to be planted.

    Then we read about a time when flying saucers supposedly did a fly-past of Washington, D.C. in 1952 and also learn of some past Presidents' experiences with UFOs, including Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter (who both occupied the White House in the 1970s). Ford did not actually see a UFO, but wanted them investigated, while Carter and some friends did see one that allegedly gave off a white light which then turned blue, red and back to white again. Following that, we return to Harry Reid. Seeds were planted in his own mind when he attended a UFO conference in the mid-1990s. His decision to talk with Ted Stevens and Daniel Inouye was prompted by a call from a Defense Intelligence Agency official who wanted to visit a ranch in Utah where there were all kinds of weird happenings like cattle mysteriously vanishing and UFO sightings. (Incidentally, remember that strange phenomenon last year with the mysterious monoliths? The first of those was discovered in the Utah desert. I don't think anyone ever worked out how it got there or what it was for. The remaining ones were probably placed by pranksters.) 

    The article concludes with some quotes by Luis Elizondo, who it says "ran the Defence Department unit that emerged from the secret meeting held in the Capitol building". Elizondo acknowledges that it all sounds "wacky", but also insists that "it's real". Perhaps the most interesting thing Elizondo says is this: "We're seeing these things on a daily basis. The longer we keep a lid on it, the more problematic it becomes. It actually works against our interests to keep a cork on this". (My emphasis) So these apparitions, which is what they really are, now manifest themselves to people every day. Which means that the demonic forces behind these "UAPs" are getting into high gear. And it would seem they have convinced Mr Elizondo and others that it is now in people's "best interests" to starting foisting this new deceptive narrative on an already thoroughly-deceived world.

UPDATE 4 (27/5/21): Found this interesting little montage of UFO reports (most of them recent) in the mainstream media. What is particularly intriguing about this montage is how many of the reports shown were made on FOX channels (at least half, by my estimation). So once again, it is the right-wing conservative media leading the charge here. One narrative that is clearly being promoted is that we are not alone. If these people read and believed their Bibles, they would know that already. However, they reject God and the supernatural generally, but on some level, their consciences tell them that we are not truly alone here. Having turned their backs on God though, they have to come up with some other explanation, and so we get aliens in flying saucers, a theory to which Satan and his devils can lend support with a few supernatural signs and wonders in the form of apparent UFOs. The montage also features a rather elderly gentleman saying that there are dimensions beyond ours. Indeed there are, because there is an entire supernatural realm, as I talked about in the original post. The Bible makes it plain that supernatural beings like angels operate according to very different laws of motion to what we do in our present natural state. So what he says is not news. And evil spirits creating UFO apparitions can quite easily cause them to move in all sorts of strange ways and then vanish away whenever they feel like it.

    There is no question that there has been a sea change in the way the media covers UFOs. This shift in their approach has been especially noticeable this month. There was a time when UFOs would be just something to bring up once in a while. They were often good fodder for a slow news day. There would usually be someone who wanted to talk about a "close encounter" or a local eccentric or two who would be interviewed about their beliefs. Such stories were normally treated as a bit of light-hearted fun. Of course, there were exceptions like the famous Roswell incident, but for the most part, UFO stories were just something to fill in some air time when not much else of interest was happening. Now however, the coverage has become absolutely serious. Now, all of a sudden, UFOs are no longer seen by the media as something to snigger at. We are now being conditioned to believe that they are the Real Deal. And June is almost here, so grab your tinfoil hats (better still, grab your Bible, because we are going to need the truth of the Word more than ever!) and get ready for even more intensive coverage as the Pentagon's "X-files" are declassified and the task force's report is made to the US Congress.

Christopher Luxon Preaches Another Jesus

    "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." (2 Corinthians 11:4)

    On Wednesday (24 March 2021), National Party MP Christopher Luxon gave his maiden speech in the 53rd New Zealand Parliament. You can read the full transcript of his speech on the official NZ Parliament site here. A former CEO of Air New Zealand, Mr Luxon is regarded as a future leader of the National Party and has made no secret of his ambitions. He is a professing Christian and devoted three paragraphs of his speech to talking about his faith. Naturally, the mainstream media in NZ cared far more about that than just about anything else he said in his speech. I shall quote the relevant paragraphs here and then discuss them further. A particular point I want to examine is whether the Jesus that Mr Luxon professes is actually the true Jesus of the Bible or another Jesus of his imagination. Anyway, here now are the paragraphs in question:

"It seems it has become acceptable to stereotype those who have a Christian faith in public life as being extreme; so I will say a little about my Christian faith. It has anchored me, given my life purpose, and shaped my values, and it puts me in the context of something bigger than myself. My faith has a strong influence on who I am and how I relate to people. I see Jesus showing compassion, tolerance, and care for others. He doesn't judge, discriminate, or reject people; he loves unconditionally.

"Through history, we have seen Christians making a huge difference by entering public life. Christian abolitionists fought against slavery; others educated the poor and challenged the rich to share their wealth and help others less fortunate. The world is a better place for Christians like William Wilberforce, Martin Luther King, and Kate Sheppard contributing to public life.

"My faith is personal to me. It is not in itself a political agenda. I believe no religion should dictate to the State, and no politician should use the political platform they have to force their beliefs on others. As MPs, we serve the common cause of all New Zealanders; not one religion, not one group, not one interest. A person should not be elected because of their faith, nor should they be rejected because of it. Democracy thrives on diverse thinking and different world views." 

    The first thing that stands out to me is that Mr Luxon gives no indication of having ever repented of his sins and been born again. Nor does he actually appear to have a personal relationship with Christ. He quotes no Scriptures either. I don't think he quotes the Bible at any point in his speech. You would think that someone who had been born again in Christ would want to preach the Word at least a little bit. But I do not believe that Mr Luxon has been born again. The Bible says that we can know when someone is a true Christian (who has repented of their sins and believed on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation) and when they are not. Now let's examine these three paragraphs in a bit more detail.

    Mr Luxon observes, accurately enough, that Christians, especially those in public life, are stereotyped as extreme. Certainly, the mainstream media, Hollywood and other branches of the entertainment industry do their utmost to paint Christians and Christianity in as negative a light as possible. There's a reason for that though. The world (people who are still lost in their sins) hates the Lord Jesus Christ (the real Christ of the Bible, that is) and also hates those who are born again believers:

    "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also." (John 15:18-20)

     "I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world." (John 17:14)

     "Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous. Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you." (1 John 3:12-13)

     Mr Luxon then goes on to talk about what his Christian faith has done for him, but he does not say what Jesus Christ has done for him. And frankly, what he says about his professed faith doesn't sound much different to what a Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or whoever might say about theirs. When he says his faith has "given his life purpose", it makes me wonder if he could a follower, or at least a fan, of Rick Warren (a false teacher who's very big on the so-called "purpose-driven life"). However, that is just speculation on my part. He says his faith influences who he is and how he relates to others. Again, anybody professing any type of religious belief could say the same. Indeed, even an atheist could probably say these things too (perhaps with one or two minor adjustments).

    Now let's get on to what Mr Luxon actually says about Jesus. Here at least, he sounds a little different to what someone of another religious faith would. But is the Jesus of Chris Luxon the Christ of the Bible? Or "another Jesus" as mentioned in the Scripture at the start of this post?

    He starts by saying that Jesus shows compassion, tolerance and care for others. Certainly, there are many examples in the Gospel of Jesus showing compassion and care for others. But as for "tolerance", it depends on how you define it. For example, if you define "tolerance" as being OK with sin, then Jesus was most definitely not tolerant. He once drove money-changers out of the Temple with a whip (not very tolerant!) and frequently upbraided the Pharisees, religious leaders of His day, for their hypocrisy (again, not a lot of tolerance there!). On the other hand, if you define tolerance as something more like enduring hardship and persecution without retaliation, then Jesus was tolerant in that sense. "Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously" (2 Peter 2:23) I'm sure Mr Luxon would know how most of his colleagues would define tolerance, regardless of their party affiliation. (They would favour "politically correct" tolerance that accepts sin.)

     But now comes the real kicker: Mr Luxon's "Jesus" is someone who "doesn't judge, discriminate or reject people; he loves unconditionally". This is NOT the Jesus we see in the Bible. Just read Matthew 23 for instance, particularly from Verse 13 onwards. There's an awful lot of judging going on there! In fact, Jesus Christ has the authority to judge the whole world: "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son" (John 5:22) "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." (John 5:30) "And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead." (Acts 10:42) "In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel." (Romans 2:16) There is much more Scriptural evidence besides to show that Jesus Christ does indeed judge, so Mr Luxon's non-judging Jesus is a false Christ.

    As for the word "discriminate", that can mean a few things. If Mr Luxon means treating some people worse than others on the basis of race or nationality, then in that sense, Jesus most assuredly does not discriminate. For example, in John 4, He speaks with a Samaritan woman, even though He was a Jew and the Jews normally had nothing to do with the Samaritans (as explained in Verse 9). However, He does discriminate between the saved and the lost, such as in John 2:23-25, "Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did. But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man."

    Now, not only is Jesus discriminating here against people who professed to believe on Him (not because of their outward appearance, but because He knew their true hearts), but He is also rejecting them by not committing Himself to them. And there will be those who come to Christ on the very Day of Judgment and find themselves being rejected:

    "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." (Matthew 7:22-23)

    "Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels." (Mark 8:38)

    So the true Jesus Christ of the Bible does reject people - specifically, unrepentant sinners. (Note also how those people in the Matthew passage above are boasting about THEIR WORKS. They are relying on THEIR WORKS to get into Heaven.) However, He does accept all who come to Him in true repentance and faith:

    "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." (John 6:37)

    "Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." (Acts 20:21)

     The evidence of Scripture very clearly shows that the "Jesus" Mr Luxon believes in is not the Jesus Christ of the Bible. All that's needed is to look at his words, then search the Scriptures and compare the things Mr Luxon says with what the Bible says, and it becomes readily apparent that Mr Luxon serves "another Jesus".

    In the next paragraph, Mr Luxon talks about the differences Christians have made in the world. Notice, however, that he makes no mention whatsoever of souls being saved. He does not, for instance, say something like this:

    "To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by the faith that is in me." (Acts 26:18) 

    This was the commission Jesus Christ gave to Paul during his conversion on the road to Damascus, and this is what He would have all Christians everywhere do (through the preaching of the Gospel). But Mr Luxon has no interest in that. Instead, he is focussed entirely on social justice. He names three people who were prominent in various social justice movements and who professed to be Christians: William Wilberforce (a former British Prime Minister who fought against the slave trade), Martin Luther King, Jr. (a prominent civil rights activist in the US, especially in the 1950s and 1960s) and Kate Sheppard (who fought for women's suffrage in New Zealand).

     Now, William Wilberforce may well have been a bona fide Christian (i.e. born again). Some primary historical documents about him are available on Project Gutenberg. For instance, there is a discussion about real vs. false Christianity here. Then there is a large amount of his private correspondence with various people, which you can read here. Last but certainly not least, there is a detailed paper in which he lays out his case against slavery, which you can check out here. 

    Martin Luther King, Jr., however, was NOT a born-again Christian. Christopher J.E. Johnson has made a detailed examination of King's faulty doctrines and his lifestyle, which included fornication with multiple women, and you can read that here. Another Christian writer who has examined King in some detail is Dave Mallinak, who writes "The Village Smithy" blog. He is somewhat more favourable in his view of King than Mr Johnson, but also acknowledges that King was both immoral and a heretic. Read Mr Mallinak's post about King here. So he is not such a great model of Christian for Mr Luxon to be citing.

    As for Kate Sheppard, renowned for being an early feminist (red flag right there), there is no evidence that she had a saving faith in Christ. Moreover, like Martin Luther King, Jr. she is much-loved by the world (and specifically, modern feminists and leftists in NZ). Had she been a true Christian, the world would have hated her. About the only evidence of Kate Sheppard having any kind of Christian belief is her involvement in the Women's Christian Temperance Union (read their page about her here). The only quote by Sheppard they mention is this: "All that separates, whether of race, class, creed, or sex, is inhuman, and must be overcome". That sounds nice, but when you look at it closely, it's actually rather vague (what exactly is her concept of separation?) and certainly doesn't give any indication of a saving faith. It is also noteworthy that the WTCU wanted to create a "a just society within the ideals of Christian socialism". Christian socialism has about as much to do with Biblical Christianity as Christian rock music (that's a topic for another day). So once again, Mr Luxon has not chosen a very good example. Although if he's only interested in "social justice Christians" and not born-again Christians who want to preach the Gospel (though there is certainly a place in Biblical Christianity for doing charitable works or speaking up for the oppressed), it could be said he's chosen well on that front.

     We can see than that not only does Chris Luxon plainly believe in a different Jesus to the Jesus of the Bible, but at least two of the three people he cites as examples of Christians were actually not born again believers.

    So then we come to the third paragraph (and the last one in which Mr Luxon mentions his beliefs). In this, he refers to his faith, but makes no mention of Jesus Christ. Whereas if you read the writings of the apostles in the New Testament, they talk about Jesus Christ all the time. He describes his faith as personal to him and "not in itself a political agenda". Something Mr Luxon doesn't mention in his speech is his opposition to abortion. Now while I am glad Mr Luxon opposes abortion, it is a political issue (though first and foremost, a spiritual one) and it is rather difficult, if not impossible, for your faith not to influence your politics when it comes to that sort of matter. He says "no religion should dictate to the State". That's a nice idea in principle, but in practice, many laws have been passed or changed because of a certain religious belief or opposition to it. So even if a religion does not directly dictate to the State, it still has considerable influence on at least some of the laws passed. Mr Luxon next days that politicians should not use their political platform to force their beliefs on others. By "beliefs", I assume he means religious beliefs, because there are other kinds of beliefs you can have (like political beliefs). There will be some people though who would vote for a National Party led by Mr Luxon in the hope that he might take New Zealand's laws in a more Christian direction. He would surely be aware of that.

     I would agree that our MPs serve (or should serve) the common cause of all New Zealanders. People should be treated with fairness and impartiality. It's interesting that Mr Luxon then says that someone should not be elected because of their faith or rejected because of it. Again, there is a Christian voter base out there who would vote for Mr Luxon precisely because of his faith, and if he becomes leader, he and the more evangelical wing of the National Party would surely look to appeal to that voter base. Also, there are people who, whether he likes it or not, would probably reject him on the basis of his faith (even such a watered-down, "inoffensive" faith as he seems to hold).

    A bit later in his speech, Mr Luxon says that he is "a proud member of the National Party" and proud to work with Judith Collins as his leader (even though he hopes to replace her in that role before the next election - not that he made any mention of his leadership ambitions in this speech). Now while it is a fairly standard expression to say you're "proud of/about" something, the fact is, the Bible has nothing good to say about pride. It is better to say that you're happy or pleased about something than that you're proud about it. While these particular remarks by Mr Luxon are not that big a deal, they do perhaps give another indication (though more subtle) about the state of his heart.

    As I said earlier, all that you need to do to determine the Biblical accuracy of Christopher Luxon's "Jesus" is compare what he says with what the Bible says about Jesus. When the light of Scripture is shone on what he says about Jesus, it is very clear indeed that Mr Luxon believes in "another Jesus", in other words, a counterfeit Christ that bears no relation (or at best, only a passing resemblance) to the Jesus Christ of the Bible. So if you think that voting National will get you a more Christian government if Mr Luxon becomes its leader, you are likely to be sorely disappointed. He may have one or two more right beliefs than Jacinda Ardern or Judith Collins, but he is no more born again than they are (although Ms Collins made much of her own supposed Christian beliefs during last year's election campaign). At the end of the day, Mr Luxon is a politician, and like many politicians, he likes to be pragmatic and not "rock the boat" too much. He may have a few more Biblically correct beliefs than what he let on in his speech (such as his known opposition to abortion), but if so, why hide those under a bushel? Because he knows that he would lose votes. "Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." (John 12:42-43) Nearly every "Christian" politician is like those chief rulers. They love the praise of men (and in a way, being voted for is a form of praise) rather than the praise of God (living to please Him and rejecting the flatteries and praises of the world). And sadly, like Christopher Luxon, most such politicians, for all that they might sometimes have a few more morally right policies, are every bit as lost as their more socially liberal and generally secular counterparts.

    I pray that Chris Luxon will one day come to true repentance and faith in Christ, and that if he is still in politics when that happens, that he might use his genuine faith to make real and beneficial change. But even if that somehow does happen, Christians need to put their trust and hope in God, not politicians who claim to be Christian but in reality are just pandering to a particular voter base (which Donald Trump and other Republican candidates before him have also done in America). Even if a politician is somehow born again, we still need to put our trust in God and not that mere man. As the prophet Jeremiah says:

    "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." (Jeremiah 17:5)

    "Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is." (Jeremiah 17:7)