![]() |
|
STRANGE DAYSChronicles of the End of the Age |
|
| STRANGE DAYS
|
Oct 15, 2004 For over two years we have been covering the moves of Applied Digital Solutions' VeriChip implants, and it looks that what we at first surmised is turning into reality. I remember how ADS, when news first broke out, denied forcefully that their "invention" was to be implanted into people. I personally sent them an e-mail (over two years ago) to ask them this very question and they were in total denial. Well, it turns out that they were lying through their teeth since they ARE now indeed implanting it into human beings. So much for truth and honesty. Certainly, sooner or later we will arrive at the focal point of Revelation 13:17, and the latest developments point to a "sooner" rather than a "later" timing. God, in His infallible Word, foretold us that this was going to happen at a precise moment in time, warning us of the dreadful consequences which will befall those who take such mark (Please read our article THE MARK OF THE BEAST which expounds this event in depth). This "moment-in-time" has never been so close.
FDA Approves Use of Chip in Patients
Sept 8, 2004 The satellite beamed images of the Beslan school siege and ensuing bloodbath have demonstrated beyond all doubts that there is no end to human savagery and that despite all technological and financial well-being and ease of life, compared to the past, humanity continues its slide into decadence and evil. I wish I could say that from now on we could be spared this kind of barbarism but I would be lying to you. Indeed, we shall see more of it, and of a worse degree. Sadly and again, the matrix is Islamic. A noted Egyptian personality, commenting on this last obrobrium, has admitted that practically all terrorists, in whichever part of the globe, are of Islamic origin. His reflection casts a critical eye and a heavy responsibility on the fundaments of Islam. Certainly, we must recognize that NOT all Islamists are terrorists, nonetheless, and as in previous similar attacks, few are the voices among them that dare speak up against the savagery perpetrated, as in this case, against innocent and helpless men, women and children. We have all seen the brutal methods that these beasts, devoid of whatsoever trace of humanity, have been capable of. No need to comment any further. What I I ask myself, instead, is this: "What are they trying to achieve, using such tactics? Are they so deluded to think that public opinion can be changed to their favor by this callous and barbarous acts?" The answers could be many: The resonance of the Iranian happenings, and especially their challenge to America, (through the kidnapping of 66 American hostages) sent shockwaves of exaltations through a new generation of Islamists throughout the world. A new day was indeed rising for Islam and Iran, with its new hard-line interpretation of it, became a symbol of hope and to imitate, while a totally incompetent American President (Carter) remained in the sidelines unable to take the situation under control. So, this became the focal point that has lead to our present situation. Contributing to this new Moslem consciousness, was the fact that they had something that the "infidels" wanted at all costs: oil and gas needed by the industrialized countries to power their economies. We will not enter here into the abuses and schemes of the powerful oil companies, who carry enormous responsibilities on all geopolitical affairs. That will be the subject of a future article. We need only to remember that the situation is more complicated of what it appears and that the love of money does indeed make strange bedfellows. It has been said that Islam, which in its past attempt at empire did contribute to art, science and culture in the various countries under its hand, is today, confronted with a world-view which it cannot understand, absorb or permit to its members, at the risk of its very own survival. Unlike most other religious faiths, they view individual freedoms and liberties as absolutely irreconcilable with their faith. They do point out rightly to the decadence of Western society under Judeo-Christian influence, and they fear greatly the same happening to them. In this, I must say that I can appreciate this point of view, our "civilized societies having exchanged liberty for libertinage and the like. So, they worry, how shall we escape such a flood of immorality, coming in from movies, songs, art, TV, MTV, satellite, Internet and the latest break-trough of civilization, the cell phone? So, their reaction is an hysterical response to something they know deep-down that they will not be able to control. Let's not forget as well that Islam is not the monolith which appears to be, at least to the public consciousness. Apart from the great split between Shiites and Sunnis, there is a notable number of splinter groups, ranging from the Dervishes, to the Moslems in name only. All the above points have formed and encouraged an "enemy" who will stop at nothing to achieve its deluded goals. There have been intelligence reports of bigger exploits which are at various stages of preparation such as dirty bombs, suitcase nuclear bombs, the spreading of fatal diseases by self-infected terrorists and other delicacies which only a diabolical mind can conceive. Some of this may be urban legend, some may not. Enough to say that experts in this field are worried. We must accept that in our modern society it is practically impossible to stop a determined individual who decides to carry out an act of terrorism. People with this mindset, which we call terrorists know this well, and they are also very astute in using all the holes which, as in Swiss cheese, our free and open society offers. By reading some of the gruesome happenings within the Beslam school, we must awake to the fact that these people are highly demonized. At one point in time, they have accepted and embraced the darkest thoughts that evil can produce. Their conscience is seared, they are voted to Satan, however they may call him. While we are aware of the Chechnia situation, there is no excuse at all for that kind of behavior. Again: nothing, absolutely nothing can justify shooting a child in the back. "You will now them by their fruits. ..." Matthew 7:16
July 20, 2004 In the last decades, we have had so many "translations" of the Holy Scriptures that anybody living a mere 100 years ago would find this fact astonishing if not outright impossible. It would seem that publishing contemporary Bible translations has become the new sport of the high-end religious inclined. Ordinarily, we should be thankful for this overabundance of study means, but, as the proverb says, "it's not gold all that glitters." To the contrary, all this beehive of activity has prompted many stalwarts of orthodoxy to cringe in pain at every "new" version announcement. One of these days, I will post a list of all "contemporary" translations in the English language. For the moment, I am sorry to present to you the latest effort of these scholars, and I am using the term loosely. Trouble is that the leader of the Church of England has given his enthusiastic stamp of approval to this degenerate and at times, blasphemous version. Now, it's not that we are talking about a Christian of solid morals and utmost orthodoxy, if a Christian at all. It is indeed very difficult to perceive traces of genuine faith in Dr. Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury, and in his public persona. To the contrary, we can openly witness his antipathy and challenging antagonism towards biblical fundamental truths which have guided Christianity through the centuries. As a leader he has a certain influence over his flock and while the Anglican Church is far from being an earth shaking movement, it still is the home to millions of faithful, among whom, I am sure, there are true and real Christians who must be infinitely saddened of the pathetic state of their denomination.
New Bible translation promotes fornication
June 7, 2004
We avoid writing about politics like the plague, but there are exceptions. The passing to a better life of US President Ronald Reagan is one of those. You may read a lot of his incredible political and social achievements, but I would rather recall what really made him a great man. You will not read or hear articles such as the one that follows in the mass media, whose interest focuses rather on big events, big exploits, big blunders, BIG BIG. And because they avoid the small things they regularly miss it. Should they ever learn that it's those small things that make the big story and that make a man, big.
Ronald Reagan’s Rainbow
April 16, 2004
Before I move on to the "anti-Semitic" charges which from many quarters have been leveled at The Passion, I need to address one particular mail which we received on the movie, in which the writer questions the fact that a human being could impersonate Jesus Christ constitutes blasphemy. This is less trivial than it seems. I remember that in past biblical movies, extreme care was taken as not to show the face of the actor playing Jesus, like in the rightly famous and excellent Ben Hur. Then, in the sixties of our past century, a new trend started and it was no longer off limits to show the face of the actor playing Jesus. Many actors have taken the role and their faces have become iconic. We must recognize that in the last decades sensibilities and morals have changed (haven't they ever?) and things just unthinkable at former times, are now mainline, and I am not talking only about showing the face of "Jesus." Yet it remains truly incredible how the decline of our civilization can be measured by this single fact. So, I am faced with one more problem to ponder and of a very profound nature. We do live in a very visual world, where computer-aided imaginations can reproduce or fabricate otherwise unimaginable events and persons. When Jesus walked the earth, there were no technical means to immortalize His appearance and neither had the art of painting progressed to the point to leave us even a minimal reproduction of Him. Well, if God has chosen so, He must have His very good reasons, idolatry being on top of the list, probably. After all, in His Commandments, He has severely forbidden any such reproductions. The Jesus face that today we take for granted has been in the works since the Italian Renaissance, when artists, usually sponsored by the Catholic church, adapted their cultural habitat to Biblical episodes and personages, right down to the clothes and buildings. In more recent times, hyper realism in representation has taken the place of the former fantasized depiction. In the movie Jesus of Nazareth, in my opinion probably the best movie about Jesus ever shot, we get as close as possible to what may have been. Gone is the blue-eyed, blond haired Jesus of yesteryears and in trots the new model, accurately Jewish right down to the nose. The problem remains however that nobody knows how Jesus really looked like and the iconic Jesus which we have been impressed with, will cause a shock to most believers when they will see the REAL Jesus. This is why, God, in His Wisdom, has forbidden the usage of images and statues as means of representation and worship. And now let's move to the "anti-Semitic" charges. Is Mel Gibson anti-Semite? I don't know and I accept his explanation that he declares himself not to be one. However, he has been raised by a father who is indeed a blatant anti-Semite (among other weird peculiarities) and while we should not judge Mel by his father beliefs, we must also understand that being raised in such a household may produce some undesirable side effects. I have a read a scholarly review of the movie which, among other things pointed out the fact that the way the movie was assembled, borrowing from the four gospel narratives, (and apart from the Anne Catherine Emmerich true anti-Semitism) shows a deliberate manipulation of accentuating some points of the narrative over others. Borrowing from the different narratives instead of following a single one permits, even so subtly, to reach an altered result. Then, as I said above, I do believe Mel's distancing himself from the accusation, even with some reservations. Many leading Jewish associations have not lost the occasion to attack the movie and in the process, to make fools of themselves. I will even say that their loud ranting are principally responsible for the huge success of the movie, having created an oversized aura of expectation, mystery and controversy several months before the movie was even presented. I would like to remind the Jewish movers and shakers that I did NOT hear their voices of protest when blasphemous movies and plays like "The Last Temptation of Christ" or "Corpus Christi" were released, (and funded by Jewish money) but from their quarters came rather heaping praise for such filth. Now, as a Christian, I understand Israel's place in the plan of God and I do share a sincere love for the Jewish people as the Word of God in so many verses, so eloquently makes clear, and their destiny is clearly prophecied:
I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. In the book of Romans, the Word admonishes us not to underestimate Israel's position in God's Plan:
For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree, how much more will these, who are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? So, anybody who thinks otherwise toward Israel is out of sync with God. At the same time, we must acknowledge the insistent charge of anti-Semitism which is leveled against anybody who dares criticize some acts by Jewish persons, associations or by the State of Israel. This is not at all acceptable as no one, except God is above criticism. The Jews should carefully note that many otherwise supportive opinions are turned against them by their fastidious, pressing and in most cases, peregrine attacks, while, sadly, they show an utter lack of wisdom in understanding who their friends are. Are the Jews responsible for the death of Jesus?
Pilate said to them, "What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They all said to him, "Let Him be crucified!" It is an inescapable fact that that crowd, spurred by the religious leaders, pronounced the death sentence upon Jesus. But it is also a true fact that not all Jews participated to that sentence (see Luke 23:51, Luke 23:34, Acts 5:28, 1Cor. 2:8). So to the question as to whether the Jews are responsible for the death of Jesus Christ, we must answer with a resounding "Yes, they are, and so are the Romans, the Greeks, the Arabs, the Americans, the Italians, the Indians ....
March 17, 2004
After a year of controversy and not-so-veiled attacks, The Passion of the Christ movie has finally been released and it is off to a smashing start. We have received several mails about it and frankly, I am surprised by all the questions this movie is generating, notwithstanding the main one of anti-Semitism which has accompanied the movie from its very inception. I want to add a few comments to what this event (and it is an event, no less) means to Christianity, and to the world at large. I haven't seen the movie, but after having read several reviews it's practically as if I had. In all truth, I don't think I will go see it once it will show up in my part of the world, and for good reasons, the most important being that I feel very saddened whenever I read the Bible verses that describe Jesus' sufferings. I have skipped reading them for years whenever I get by them. Oh, I know perfectly well what those verses say, but I do not want to go over them again. They document such an outrageous series of cruelty and evil acts as to leave one dumbfounded as to the level of savagery to which human beings are able to fall. And to me it's incomprehensible, apart from His Love, why God allowed that to happen. So, since by all reports the movie does delve at length on the tortures inflicted to Jesus, I don't think I will go see it. But there are also other reasons. From my research, and believe me, I have done my homework, there is something positive and something negative to say about the movie, as it befalls all true events. Let's start with the good report: The movie, and this is commonly known, depicts the final 12 hours leading to and including the crucifixion death of Jesus Christ, and a brief epilogue of His Resurrection. The spoken track contains the supposedly original languages spoken at the time, but there are comforting subtitles for those who are not familiar with the events. Mel Gibson, the director and producer of the movie had originally dispensed with subtitles, since the narrative is so familiar, but distributors have their own rules and he was kind of obliged to use them. It is a no-holds-barred retelling of those events, with blood (seemingly) splattering the audience as human cruelty has rarely been so dramatically depicted. To all those accusing Mel of being a closet sadist, it should be remembered that a crucifixion was no picnic and that the Romans were no sissies when meting out corporal punishment on their enemies or supposed such. The real thing was certainly much worse than the movie's depiction. "Why is it necessary to show so much graphic details?" some have complained. My guess is since the Hollywood crowd has been "educating" us to such a preposterous level of blood and gore, anything less than that would probably not register or even be laughed at. Mel is an actor and knows his business well, so I am sure he knew what he was doing when directing the movie. It's really incredible to read how some movie critics have torn apart the movie for its purported violence, while heaping praise upon the likes of Quentin Tarantino, another director, who has made a carrier out of ultra-violent movies in which shooting and chopping up people in full living color is the main and only ingredient. Hypocrisy in action, but then expecting righteousness from Hollywood is far far out science fiction, wouldn't you agree? Then there is the charge of anti-Semitism, but I will reprise this in the next installment. The negative part of this event is that Mel has not been totally faithful to the Scriptures but he has embedded in the movie his own peculiar views which while not distracting from the main theme, do subtly mix with the Gospel Truth. For someone who has been claiming all along that his movie was to adhere strictly to the Scriptures this equalizes to manipulation, since he raises his own views to an improper level . It has emerged that Mel, a devout Catholic, subscribes to a pre-Vatican2 view of his denomination, Trydentine Mass and all, while scorning all that has happened to the Catholic Church since, including the Popes. He is very extreme in his views, and while he has every right to them, that amounts to less than honest dispatching them as gospel truth, which they are not. In one interview he expressed doubt whether his wife is saved since she does not apparently share his views, while he places the Magisterium of the Catholic Church (his brand) above all. So much for the WORD of GOD. La Hemmerich is not only that, but even worse. I have read some of her chapters and I wish I hadn't. The lurid details she narrates and the plain unbiblical statements she makes are enough to charge her with blasphemy. But, alas, Catholics seem to thrive on that stuff. I simply don't understand how can they reconcile the Bible, in which they profess to believe, with such supreme and totally errant silliness. It would seem that they are very easily fooled, but then so are the other denominations, only at different levels. This happens when the Word of God is not respected as the sole arbiter of right and wrong and when we introduce other parameters in judgment (like "tradition" for the Catholics or "experience-first" for the Pentecostals). In the next installment, in a few days, we shall examine the anti-Semitic charges.
February 10, 2004
Increasingly unmoored from clear Judeo-Christian and common law principles about what's right and wrong, our courts have become so caught up in secondary considerations about consent and the need to not judge too harshly the lifestyle choices of even the pathologically ill, that they're losing sight of the most obvious and simplest of principles, such as "Eating people is wrong." There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the point of view of the "civilized" West is fast turning amorally pagan, and again, it is not only my single perception but a fact shared by many, as the above quote by a common journalist proves. There is a quite revolution going on, whose object is to rid our societies from every trace of the Judeo-Christian ethic which, has governed and has been the underpinning of their progress, expansion and success. How sad, absurd and regrettable that we are turning against what has made us an example of freedom and of hope, all in the name of a malpracticed "freedom," ridiculous political correctness and let's say it, a pronounced hate of Christianity in particular and anything "religious" in general. Of course, once we abandon the criteria which have governed our societies for ages we find ourselves in Neverland, where all things are possible but none are sure. One case in point is the recent story about Armin Meiwes, the so-called Cannibal of Rotenburg. Surely his story has been widely told and retold to the last gruesome detail, but it's not the part that concerns me. Rather, I am pointing out two serious points about this sordid affair, one being Mr. Meiwes revelation about a network of people at some level involved with cannibalism, and two, being the total inability of the judiciary to handle the case. Please read the following report:
Sounds like a joke or a Hollywood b-movie. Actually that kind of b-movies are now full fledged A-movies, given the recent box-office success of the "Hannibal Lecter" series and given the growing decadent appetite of modern moviegoers. Well, the trial has ended and Meiwes got ONLY 8 years and some months, which with "good behavior" (meaning he will not bite anybody while behind bars) will become 4 years, after which he is free to go about society seeking whom he may devour, just like his inspirer, the devil. The legal establishment, in the spirit of the enlightened modern jurisprudence, is de-facto telling us that anything goes between consenting adults and that old standards like "Thou shall not kill" are no longer applicable in our society. The triumph of liberal rationalism and situational ethics. To me, utter stupidity and fatal blindness. Jan 14, 2004 With my first 2004 article I want first of all to review our work in the past year. We have changed the site's layout into the present one and the reactions have been totally positive. We have also decided to abandon our attempts at French, German and Portuguese translations given the lack of qualified volunteers. We have had several people come up to us asking us to translate into those languages but, other than a few sparse articles, the projects never really took off. So, unless there is a clear vision about it, I am taking it as from the Lord to not continue with that. We have continued to register increases in visitorship and we ask forgiveness for some mail which we have not been able to reply yet. We try to prioritize replies based on matter and urgency. There are three persons who attend the mail, according to the language. We would appreciate one more person for the English correspondence, which constitutes the bulk of our mail, but, thank God, basically we are fine. These are our DEC 2003 stats according to countries visitorship: Top 30 of 62 Total Countries 1 - 76.33% - Unresolved/Unknown Stats are arranged to record only a certain number of events, 30 countries out of a total of 62 in this case. Unresolved/Unknown refers basically to US addresses and agencies which do not want to disclose their source. We have thousands of visitors daily and in every slot of a 24 hour period. Peak times are around 12 noon, Pacific Standard Time (Los Angeles time , so to speak). The "Top page" requested is Strange Days, (the one you are at right now), including the older issues which can be clicked in the column at left. We are starting this new year with a new page: "Polls" in which we will present a certain number of issues of interest and ask our visitors to let us know what do they think about them. The first poll is about the time of the Rapture. We have had this poll in the past and it was very popular. The Polls page can be accessed from the Strange Days column and from the English index entrance page. And here it is:
A blessed 2004 for you all!
|