Voice of the Kingfisher speaks out …from a different perspective
by Elinor Montgomery
July 31, 2011
One of the most difficult jobs to do is to single out a mighty soldier of God, committed to bringing people and nations back into relationship with Him, and then level criticism at the man. The question immediately arises as to whether or not that person should be above reproach, if, though sincere in his belief and arguments, he is sincerely wrong.
I would have to argue that misinformation needs to be addressed, no matter from where it comes, if it does not line up squarely with the truth of Scripture. The Bible is the one and only plumb line for correctness.
A man that I greatly admire has written a treatise in which he has made several statements that he has used to publically give incorrect information to his many readers. I believe these statements are greatly in need of correction and, therefore, it seems reasonable to me to address them, without diminishing the importance of the work this man does to further the work of God in America.
He is a Jesus freak, like me, who begins by stating that it is a good thing He has risen from the grave, or He would most certainly be rolling over in it, because of the direction in which America is moving today. At this point, we start out together, but then he immediately launches into his Christian diatribe.
He states that Christianity is a journey, not a destination. In comparing this statement to Jesus saying, “I am the way, the truth and the life,” which sums up the journey of man from death to life, you cannot attribute a walk through the park with Christianity to the Way. It is nothing more or less than religion, divided, over and over again, into denominations of differing thought, full of various religious dogmas and doctrines.
It is a religion leading nowhere, of which it is believed that it is supplying a way to heaven, tied into works and practices, so it could be said that the destination is heaven. But the false system is not based entirely on truth, with certain denominations having no truth in them at all, in so far as they are attached to apostasy and religious practices instead of to the Word for salvation. More often than not, the word `salvation` is not mentioned in religious institutions. It would be in spite of Christianity that one might come to believe in Jesus as being the way, the truth, and the life, without religion having any part in His identity.
This man goes on to say nationality, in most cases, is determined by birth, but Christianity is a different bird; he claims that one is a Christian by choice, but never by birth. In view of the fact Christianity is a religion, it is likely to also be a family tradition, and children go, follow and accept without question where the parents take them, either to churches, synagogues or mosques, depending on religious affiliations. If one’s religion is Atheism, then parents and child usually attend none of the aforementioned for no better reason than the fact that they are all part of the same religious family into which the child has been born.
The chances of crossing over from one religious system to another, as one grows older, is considerably less likely than remaining in the same religion as that into which one was born. Being birds of tradition, we tend to pattern our lives around the same religious traditions as those within which we grew into adulthood.
On the contrary, to be born again into the true church requires a decision, which father, mother or state cannot make for anyone. It is a choice one must make for oneself, if one chooses to exit the traditional religious system in which one is raised, to participate in a non-religious newness of life in the Spirit of life. It requires a changing of the spiritual waters of one’s life, which takes one from the spiritual water of death into that of life. This is the only baptism that counts for salvation, whereas the bulk of Christian theology requires water baptism within the system for salvation.
Again, this same man says you can be an American and hate Christianity, but you cannot be a Christian and hate your fellow-man. Really! The early Christians of Romanism hated Jews and Muslims and fought and killed as many as they could get their hands on, during their crusades, which they considered to be wars fought for Christ. Now, the arguments that usually follow such criticism suggest that they were not good Christians. I would suggest to you that they were no better or worse than anyone who calls himself a Christian, which identifies him as a man of religion instead of truth.
Being Christian is not one and the same thing as being the true church of Jesus Christ, which He formed with His apostles; it does not even come close to it. Being a Christian simply means one’s spiritual foundation is one of religion instead of truth. Jesus fundamentally rejected the religion of His day, which came from a belief system that came out of Babylon. He declared that the devil was the father of the religious leaders, who claimed to be the custodians of the Scriptures. They never denied God any more than the Christians do, but like Judaism, Christianity came out of the same Babylonian system, which was the Roman Empire in the days of the early church, instead of the Babylonian Empire in the early days of Judah’s captivity.
This very decent man continues, by stating that Christianity has been hi-jacked. Quite the contrary! Christianity hi-jacked the church when, out of Rome and out of the Babylonian pagan system, Constantine established the Roman Catholic Church, making the pagan priest of Rome into the high priest of Roman Catholicism. He then, for all intents and purposes, took the place of Jesus, who is the Cornerstone and only High Priest His church will ever have.
Peter was never the high priest or cornerstone of the church. This new religious system was incorrectly referred to as the church. Yes, Jesus would have rolled over in His grave then as well, if He had been witness to Rome hi-jacking His church.
But never fear! The remnant of the true church is still alive and well within the system into which it was taken captive. However, it cannot and will not remain entombed there; for Jesus declared the gates of hell would not prevail against His church. By the writer`s own admission, the gates of hell are most definitely prevailing against the Christian institutional system, which no longer witnesses to anything coming even close to what one might call the truth.
The true church is as uncomfortable in Christianity as is the world uncomfortable with it. Like Israel, fully grown into national status within Egypt, the church, or spiritual Israel is now bursting out from within the confines of the religious system. She is ready for her own exodus, led by Jesus, just as He led His apostles out of the religion of Judaism. Both religions will be left behind to `hang out` together in their apostasy. They call it a Judeo-Christian unity of values.
He whom I admire seems to believe that to defame the name of Christianity is to defame the name of Jesus. But Jesus said that many would come in His name in these days crying out to Him and He will turn them away saying He never knew them. Does the name of Christian make them His own? He doesn’t allow us to believe it does. Are they necessarily the sheep who know His voice? It is evident by their present-day Judeo-Christian values that they are not His sheep.
The author quotes Gandhi, saying, “I like your Christ but I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Here my cohort and I agree, when he says that Gandhi was on to something. This is the very reason why a Norwegian mass murderer can call himself a Christian and still have no relationship to Jesus Christ and His church, which was never called Christian except by the mockers of the Babylonian Empire of His day. You will note Jesus did not buy into it, and Peter firmly denounced any religious activity of the church under the name of Christian.
To my amazement, the writer concluded with words that co-operate my take on Christianity. When he was confronted by a liberal Christian who was labeling him a fundamentalist, he questioned him with these words: “Are you a Christian?”
“Yes, I am. I was born a Methodist,” the liberal responded.
“No wonder you think the way you do, Pal. You need to get born again.”
The writer then declared that the liberal had no idea what he meant. Did the writer not mean that one can be born a Christian and have no choice in the matter? But one has a choice as to whether or not one will be born anew of the Spirit of life, which will take the place of the former religious spirit of birth, leading to death. In other words, he must depart from the deadly Christianity into which he was born. Does this not suggest that this good man actually is saying one thing, but believing another?
The truth of the matter is that one should be thankful for being called a fundamentalist. This is exactly where Jesus wants one to be, by trusting only in the fundamental truth of His Word. The term simply informs us that such a person is not a victim of Satan’s religious liberalism, which draws one into separation from God. The fundamentalist, standing on the truth of His inerrant Word, would rather die than submit to the satanic lure of religion, against which the church of Jesus Christ is called to witness. It is impossible for a true believer to remain in a Christian denomination without being compromised by religion.
I have no qualms about being called a radical like Jesus, who refused to bow to the religious system of the day within which He was born and raised. My ancestors were founders of the Methodist Church in North America. I thank God I was born again so it cannot lay claim to me, when Jesus returns to judge His Laodicean church and those who will go down with it because they trusted in Christianity for salvation.
For seven generations these godly ancestors were part of the Methodist religious system, and remained with the same system into which they were born throughout all those years. I believe they would be turning over in their graves if they could see the state of what they knew as the church, called Christian, compared to what we know of it, today.
I pray that this man will come to the understanding of why he is so disenchanted with Christianity. He has good reason to feel like he does about the situation. The truth of the matter is that he is a wonderful man of God who needs to not only come out of the religion of this day, but also to make a full and complete departure from it in an exodus like that of Israel, when they were required to make a full and complete departure from the religious Egyptian Empire.
You cannot be a religious man and a follower of the truth at the same time. Religion was the very thing God abhorred when He wrote the first commandment stating that He is the Lord our God and that we shall have no other gods before Him.
Be careful! For compromise with the world is the beginning of a downward spiral and separation from God. For He is the God of truth, and has zero tolerance for religious darkness, which He dispels with the light. He does not want the mark of the beast on His pure and spotless bride.
This is a man who hates what he sees in Christianity today. My response to the man is to see and know it for what it is and then separate from it. It is impossible to stand up a dying horse in revival. The best thing is to stand alone, if necessary, on the truth, which is rock solid, and cannot falter or fall before the sword of the enemy, for it is the sword of God, which slices through the enemy like a knife. Christianity will never be able to do this.