The Damnable World of Oprah Winfrey

Talk show host Oprah Winfrey is an imposter, and a dangerous one! Although she professes to be a Christian, she condemns herself by her own words, clearly revealing that she is NOT a Biblical Christian in any sense. This is how Satan operates—through deception. Oprah is very DANGEROUS!

Tragically, Oprah is leading millions of people astray from the truth with her false religion, and make no mistake, it is a religious show. Oprah speaks of prayer, spirituality, finding the light, spiritual awareness, faith and twists the Scriptures to support her New Age doctrines of devils. Her religion sounds enough like Christianity that people are buying into it; but it’s a road to Hell. Oprah can simply mention a book and it instantly becomes a New York Times Best Seller. That is power! Oprah never mentions Jesus Christ, just God and it’s not the God of the Bible.

The following is taken directly from a transcript of Oprah’s “New Earth” online class with New Age guru Eckhart Tolle:

OPRAH WINFREY (HOST): And you know, it’s been a journey to get to the place where I understand, as I said on the pre-show here, that what I believe is that Jesus came to show us Christ consciousness.

OPRAH WINFREY (HOST): That Jesus came to show us the way of the heart and that what Jesus was saying that to show us the higher consciousness that we’re all talking about here. Jesus came to say, “Look I’m going to live in the body, in the human body and I’m going to show you how it’s done.” These are some principles and some laws that you can use to live by to know that way. And when I started to recognize that, that Jesus didn’t come in my belief, even as a Christian, I don’t believe that Jesus came to start Christianity…

OPRAH WINFREY (HOST): You have a rich array of gems from which to draw illumination. The world’s religious traditional, mythology, psychology, healing methods, scientific wisdom, your own experience and that you can begin to string a necklace all your own… And so it’s really a question of… this material [which] strikes a chord within you.

OPRAH WINFREY (HOST): Something in you opens up and wants, you know, feels alive and is awakened to that. And yet there is the ideology that says what to you…

OPRAH WINFREY (HOST): Well, I am a Christian who believes that there are certainly many more paths to God other than Christianity.

OPRAH WINFREY (HOST): I’m a free-thinking Christian who believes that, who believes in my way, but I don’t believe that it’s the only way, with six billion people here on the planet.

SOURCE: A New Earth Online Class, Oprah.com, 11,12, 14 transcript on file

Clearly, Oprah DOESN’T recognize Jesus as the Christ Who came to redeem us from OUR SINS. Sadly, Oprah is unsaved and bound for the Lake of Fire. According to Oprah’s flawed thinking, a person doesn’t need to become a Christian to go to Heaven. She is a liar and an antichrist according to 1st John 2:22 because she denies that Jesus is the Savior of mankind. Oprah thinks unbelievers can find some OTHER WAY to Heaven, but John 10:1,9 plainly warns… “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber… I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.” Oprah is hellbound in her sin of unbelief. John 10:1 calls Oprah a thief and a robber. Oprah worships 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” (2nd Corinthians 11:4). Oprah is of the Devil.

The Bible clearly tells us that Christ Jesus of Nazareth is God Almighty in human flesh (1st Timothy 3:16), i.e., the Godhead incarnate (Colossians 2:9) and the totally unique—one of a kind—Son of God…

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth… No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him… Jesus said to him, Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me…  For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (John 1:1,14,18; 14:6, Colossians 2:9, King James Bible).

Oprah has sold her soul to the Devil, promoting a demonic New Age religion which has no need for Jesus Christ. She is leading people down a path of destruction… “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power” (2nd Thessalonians 1:8,9). Please don’t be a fool by following a fool… Oprah is an unbelieving fool.

Oprah Promotes New Age Heretic, Marianne Williamson!

Oprah promotes numerous New Age authors, including Marianne Williamson, a New Age minister and author. Williamson is the author of “A Return to Love”, a book in which she describes how “A Course In Miracles” (another demonically inspired book) changed her life.

In a 1992 article concerning Williamson, the Los Angeles Times wrote:

This self-described “Jewish unwed mother” has become the foremost interpreter of “A Course in Miracles,” the 1,200-page tome she first noticed on a friend’s coffee table about 15 years ago, not long after it was published. “Students” of the course, which has sold 750,000 copies, are told that it was dictated by Jesus Christ himself over a seven-year period to an emotionally tortured psychologist named Helen Schucman.
- Source: The Power, the Glory, the Glitz; Marianne Williamson, an ex-nightclub singer, has attracted many in Hollywood with her blend of new-time religion and self-help–and alienated more than a few, Los Angeles Times, Feb. 16, 1992

Here’s a few demonic teachings from the book, A COURSE IN MIRACLES, that Williamson claims changed her life…

• “There is no sin. . . ” pg. 9

• A “slain Christ has no meaning.” pg. 10

• “The journey to the cross should be the last ‘useless journey.’ ” pg. 11

• “Do not make the pathetic error of ‘clinging to the old rugged cross.’” pg. 12

• “The Name of Jesus Christ as such is but a symbol… It is a symbol that is safely used as a replacement for the many names of all the gods to which you pray.” pg. 13

• “God is in everything I see.”14

• “The recognition of God is the recognition of yourself.” pg. 15

• “The oneness of the Creator and the creation is your wholeness, your sanity and your limitless power.” pg. 16

• “The Atonement is the final lesson he [man] need learn, for it teaches him that, never having sinned, he has no need of salvation.” pg. 17

That is utter blasphemy! According to her website, “Williamson is an internationally acclaimed spiritual teacher.” Yeah, she’s a spiritual teacher going around teaching people that they’re not sinners and don’t need salvation. The Bible calls her a liar and an antichrist (1st John 2:22). Williamson is an unsaved Modernist who speaks of spiritual matters; while denying the sinfulness of mankind and the reality of the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:23). How dare anyone call clinging to the old rugged cross a “pathetic error“. There is NO salvation apart from the name of Jesus Christ…

“Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:10-12).

Beware of Marianne Williamson!

Marianne Williamson is an unsaved Modernist, a false prophet, who denies Jesus Christ (as does Oprah Winfrey). She also denies that mankind is sinful. Oprah is extremely dangerous because she introduces her viewers to Christ-rejecting, heathen authors who deny the fundamental teachings of God’s Word. In sharp contrast to New Age philosophy, the Scriptures condemn ALL MANKIND as sinners. Romans 3:23 says: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

Williamson’s bible is A Course In Miracles, which teaches on pg. 17 that man has never sinned and thus needs no salvation nor Savior. This is the doctrinal trash which Oprah promotes. Whereas the Scriptures condemn mankind as being SINFUL (Romans 3:10) and GUILTY BEFORE GOD (Romans 3:19); Oprah and her New Age heretics teach that people only make mistakes and never sin, so they don’t need to be saved. Oprah is blinded by her own wickedness and has chosen the path of darkness. Please don’t follow Marianne Williamson into hellfire.

Ms. Williamson and Oprah are giving people false hope. They are both of the Devil. There is only one way to God the father and that is through a total faith upon God the Son, i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ… “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith… For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:24,26). It’s Jesus or Hell.

Jesus Christ’s name is not a symbol, He is the way to salvation… “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43).

Without the “CROSS” there would be no payment for OUR SINS. Jesus sacrificed His literal precious blood to pay for OUR SINS… “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.” Amen!

Oprah is more dangerous than Satan worshipers because she comes across as such a good person and claims to be a Christian; but she is a phony. The Devil is a beautiful liar. The New Age gospel of Oprah which ignores man’s sin leads to eternal destruction. There can be no salvation without repentance, which requires that mankind become GUILTY before God, condemned by God’s holy Law. God will save anyone who comes as a GUILTY sinner, believing upon the Savior Jesus Christ for forgiveness.

Oprah’s Ministry of Doom

Oprah Winfrey has actually referred to her daytime talkshow as her “ministry”. I guess that makes her a sinister minister. It is not unusual for Oprah to talk of God and spirituality; but Oprah has rejected the God of the Bible. Strangely enough, there are some striking similarities between false prophets Joel Osteen and Oprah Winfrey…

Joel: Most watched TV evangelist
Oprah: Most watched TV talk show host Joel: On first name basis with audience
Oprah: On first name basis with audience

Joel: Show presented like an infomercial
Oprah: Show presented like a church service

Joel: Like watching Dr. Phil
Oprah: Created Dr. Phil

Joel: Your Best Life Now (book)
Oprah: “Live your best life” (tagline)

Joel: Practical spirituality leading to happiness
Oprah: Practical spirituality leading to happiness

Joel and Oprah are nothing but faith brands, products that sell spirituality using sophisticated marketing and branding tools. Specific among those tools are: creating a name and recognizable logo and creating a mythology around the brand. Here, too, Joel and Oprah are similar in that they present a rags-to-riches story that suggests if you follow what they present you too can be like Joel or Oprah.

Modern psychology ignores the reality of sin; therefore, it is inherently flawed through and through. Oprah’s New Age guests are all unsaved heretics who don’t believe the Scriptures concerning sin, judgment or God’s plan of redemption by way of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Here is a powerful quote from the mighty man of God, and Bible teacher, M.R. DeHaan, M.D.

“Has it ever struck you, as it has me, that the world has tried desperately hard to rid itself of even the very mention of the word sin? It has almost entirely disappeared from the world’s vocabulary. We can pick up our newspaper or magazine and read all the accounts of violence and atrocity and murder and dishonesty, but seldom are these things called “sin.” Writers talk about crime and violence and death and murder and immorality, but the word SIN is carefully avoided.

Now all of this becomes very significant, for we believe it to be an attempt, consciously or unconsciously, to get rid of the idea of sin. But sin is still sin, and until there is a revival of preaching against sin in all of its awfulness, as a filthy damning rebellion against God, which it is, there cannot be a revival, but the world will continue getting worse and more rotten and more sinful than ever. By the grace of God, we, therefore, shall lift our voice against sin, not merely as a human weakness, not merely as the mistakes of a race trying to climb upward by evolutionary process, but as that vicious, selfish, filthy thing which lies at the basis and root of all man’s troubles and trials, and which is a rebellion against a thrice-holy God, which must result in the punishment of the sinner in an eternal Hell, unless it is taken care of by the blood atonement of the Son of God. That is why we preach on the subject of the blood, the only God-given remedy for sin.”

SOURCE: M.R. DeHaan, M.D.; The Tabernacle, 1955, p. 149 (ISBN: 0-310-23491-3)

That is the message which America’s preachers need to preach today. We as a nation has become complacent concerning sins and we are heading toward the very same direction of wicked nations such as Sodom and Gomorrah.

Allah Is a Fraud!

ALLAH IS A FRAUD!

Compiled and edited by David J. Stewart

The pre-Islamic origin of “Allah”

There is absolutely no question that Allah was worshiped by the pagan Arabs as one of many polytheistic gods.

Allah was worshiped in the Kabah at Mecca before Muhammad was born. Muhammad merely proclaimed a god the Meccans were already familiar with. The pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshiped.

Many scholars say “Allah” is derived from a compound Arabic word, AL + ILAH = Allah. “Ilah” in Arabic is “God” and “Al” in Arabic is a definite article like our word “the”. So from an English equivalent “Allah” comes from “The + God”. Others, like Arthur Jeffery say, “The common theory is that it is formed from ilah, the common word for a god, and the article al-; thus al-ilah, the god,” becomes Allah, “God.” This theory, however, is untenable. In fact, the name is one of the words borrowed into the language in pre-Islamic times from Aramaic.” (Islam: Muhammad and His Religion, Arthur Jeffery, 1958, p 85)

Although “Allah” has become known as the proper name for the Muslim god, Allah is not a name, but a descriptor that means literally, “the god”. All pagan cultures have these generic terms that refer to their “top god” as “the god”. In comparison to the perfect monotheism of Judaism and Christianity, “Allah” was originally no more a proper name for the Muslim God, than the word Hebrew “elohim” (god) or Greek “theos” (god) are proper names of the one true God of the Bible. “Jehovah” is the only revealed proper name for the “Elohim” of the Old Testament ( Ex 3:13; 6:3) and “Jesus” is the only revealed proper name of “Theos” in the New Testament. (Acts 4:12) Islam has no proper name for their god, but merely transformed, by universal use and confusion, the generic Allah into a proper name. So although today, Muslims use “Allah” as a proper name, it was never used this way originally. Allah, therefore is equivalent to “elohim” and “ho theos” but not “Jehovah” or “Jesus”. Allah is not the name of the nameless Muslim God. However Muslims will claim that Allah is the name of God that corresponds to Jehovah. Both the Father and the Son are called “ho theos” (The God). Jesus is called “The God” many times in the New Testament: John 20:28; Heb 1:8. An important conclusion from this, is that the mere fact that “Allah” is equivalent to “elohim” and “ho theos” does not mean they are directly corresponded. It certainly doesn’t prove Allah is the same as the God of the Old or New Testament. It does not prove that Muslim’s worship the same God as Christians. If this correspondence proved the Muslim god was the same as the Christian God, then because pagan religions also have generics that correspond to “the god” (Allah), this correspondence would also prove that Allah is the same god as the Buddhist god, for Buddhists also refer to their god as “the god”.

What scholars say about the origin of the word “Allah”

It is not related that the Black Stone was connected with any special god. In the Ka’ba was the statue of the god Hubal who might be called the god of Mecca and of the Ka’ba. Caetani gives great prominence to the connection between the Ka’ba and Hubal. Besides him, however, al-Lat, al-`Uzza, and al-Manat were worshipped and are mentioned in the Kur’an; Hubal is never mentioned there. What position Allah held beside these is not exactly known. The Islamic tradition has certainly elevated him at the expense of other deities. It may be considered certain that the Black Stone was not the only idol in or at the Ka’ba. The Makam Ibrahim was of course a sacred stone from very early times. Its name has not been handed down. Beside it several idols are mentioned, among them the 360 statues. (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J. Brill, 1987, Islam, p. 587-591)

“The verses of the Qur’an make it clear that the very name Allah existed in the Jahiliyya or pre-Islamic Arabia. Certain pagan tribes believed in a god whom they called ‘Allah’ and whom they believed to be the creator of heaven and earth and holder of the highest rank in the hierarchy of the gods. It is well known that the Quraish as well as other tribes believed in Allah, whom they designated as the ‘Lord of the House’ (i.e., of the Ka’ba)…It is therefore clear that the Qur’anic conception of Allah is not entirely new.” (A Guide to the Contents of the Qur’an, Faruq Sherif, (Reading, 1995), pgs. 21-22., Muslim)

According to al-Masudi (Murudj, iv. 47), certain people have regarded the Ka’ba as a temple devoted to the sun, the moon and the five planets. The 36o idols placed round the Ka’ba also point in this direction. It can therefore hardly be denied that traces exist of an astral symbolism. At the same time one can safely say that there can be no question of any general conception on these lines. The cult at the Ka’ba was in the heathen period syncretic as is usual in heathenism. (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J. Brill, 1987, Islam, p. 587-591)

The name Allah, as the Qur’an itself is witness, was well known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Indeed, both it and its feminine form, Allat, are found not infrequently among the theophorous names in inscriptions from North Arabia. The common theory is that it is formed from ilah, the common word for a god, and the article al-; thus al-ilah, the god,” becomes Allah, “God.” This theory, however, is untenable. In fact, the name is one of the words borrowed into the language in pre-Islamic times from Aramaic. (Islam: Muhammad and His Religion, Arthur Jeffery, 1958, p 85)

“If a Muslim says, “Your God and our God is the same,” either he does not understand who Allah and Christ really are, or he intentionally glosses over the deep-rooted differences.” (Who Is Allah In Islam?, Abd-Al Masih, Light of Life, 1985, p. 36.)

Now there dwelt in Mecca a god called Allah. He was the provider, the most powerful of all the local deities, the one to whom every Meccan turned in time of need. But, for all his power, Allah was a remote god. At the time of Muhammad, however, he was on the ascendancy. He had replaced the moon god as lord of the Kaaba although still relegated to an inferior position below various tribal idols and three powerful goddesses: al-Manat, goddess of fate, al-Lat, mother of the gods, and al-Uzza, the planet Venus. (Islam and the Arabs, Rom Landau, 1958 p 11-21)

Muhammad no more invented Allah than he did al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat. The Cult of the deity termed simply “the god” (al-ilah) was known throughout southern Syria and northern Arabia,” and it was obviously of central importance in Mecca, where the building called the Ka’ba was indisputably his house. Indeed, the Muslim profession of faith, 11 there is no ilah except al-ilah,” attests to precisely that point: the Quraysh are being called upon to repudiate the very existence of all the other gods save this one. It seems equally certain that Allah was not merely a god in Mecca but was widely regarded as the “high god,” the chief and head of the Meccan pantheon, perhaps the result, as has been argued, of a natural progression toward henotheism or of the growing influence of Jews and Christians in the peninsula.” The most convincing piece of evidence that the latter was at work is the fact that of all the gods of Mecca, Allah alone was not represented by an idol. (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)

Allah, we can be sure, was neither an unknown nor an unimportant deity to the Quraysh when Muhammad began preaching his worship at Mecca. What is equally certain is that Allah had what the Quran disdainfully calls “associates”: other gods and goddesses who shared both his cult and his shrine. The processional chant of the pagans of the Age of Barbarism was, we are told, “Here I am, O Allah, here I am; You have no partner except such a partner as You have; You possess him and all that is his.” 103 The last clause may reflect what we have already seen was an emerging tendency toward henotheism, the recognition of Allah as the “high god” of Mecca. But it was not sufficient for Muslims, who put in its place their own manifestly monotheistic hymn: “Here I am, O Allah, here I am; You have no partner; the praise and the grace are Yours, and the empire; You have no partner.” (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)

While Allah is best known as the principal god of Mecca, he was also worshiped in other places throughout Arabia as is shown by the occurrence of the name in Sabean, Minean and particularly Libyanite inscriptions.” The Qur’an (xxix, 61) refers to the belief of the pagans in Allah as the creator of the heavens and the earth; and Muhammad’s own father bore the name of `Abd Allah or `Abdullah, meaning the slave or worshiper of this god. In Mecca, Allah was worshiped in the Ka’bah and possibly represented by the famous Black Stone in that place. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)

In Mecca, Allah was worshiped in the Ka’bah and possibly represented by the famous Black Stone in that place. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)

Prior to the rise of Islam, these three goddesses were associated with Allah as his daughters and all were worshiped at Mecca and other places in the vicinity. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)

Allah (allah, al-ilah, the god) was the principal, though not the only, deity of Makkah. The name is an ancient one. It occurs in two South Arabic inscriptions, one a Minaean found at al-’Ula and the other a Sabaean, but abounds in the form HLH in the Lihyanite inscriptions of the fifth century- B.C. Lihyan, which evidently got the god from Syria, was the first Centre of the worship of this deity in Arabia. The name occurs as Hallah in the Safa inscriptions five centuries before Islam and also in a pre-Islamic Christian Arabic inscription found in umm-al-Jimal, Syria, and ascribed to the sixth century . The name of Muhammad’s father was ‘Abd-Allah (’Abdullah, the slave or worshipper of Allah). The esteem in which Allah was held by thepre-Islamic Makkans as the creator and supreme provider and the one to be invoked in time of special peril may be inferred from such koranic passages as 31 : 24, 31; 6 : 137, 109; to : 23. Evidently he was the tribal deity of the Quraysh. (History Of The Arabs, Philip K. Hitti, 1937, p 96-101)

When Mohammed proclaimed his creed: ‘There is no God but Allah,’ he was not trying to introduce a new God. His pagan countrymen knew and acknowledged this divinity. His name, Allah, occurs already in pre-Mohammedan times, both in inscriptions and in compound personal names like Abd Allah, ’servant of Allah.’ The effective note in Mohammed’s evangelistic preaching is that he is able to accuse the pagans of acknowledging Allah as the creator of heaven and earth, and yet failing to draw the only possible conclusion from their belief; which is, to worship Allah and none else besides Him. ‘If thou ask them who hath created the Heavens and the Earth, and hath imposed laws upon the sun and the moon, they will certainly say, “Allah”. . If thou ask them who sendeth rain from Heaven, and by it quickeneth the earth after it hath been dead, they will certainly answer “Allah”‘ (Sura 29, 6 1 and 63). When in extreme danger, especially on the sea, the pagans call upon Allah (29, 65; 31, 31; 17, 69), but when they are on land again, and feel safe, they share His divine honour with other beings. Allah is supposed to have given certain commandments and taboos to men (Sura 6, 139 ff.), and the most sacred oaths are sworn in His name (Sura 3,r, 40; 16, 40). Thus, even though Allah was not worshipped as He deserved, the cult of Allah was not entirely neglected. A species of tithing, or offering of the first-fruits of grain and cattle, was offered to Allah as well as to the other gods (6, 137). But, above all, Allah was apparently regarded as ,the Lord of the Ka’ba,’ the God to whom the cult of the highest sanctuary of Central Arabia was dedicated. In one of the oldest Suras (io6) Mohammed urges his tribesmen, the Quraish, to worship ‘the Lord of this house, who allows the two annual trade caravans to be equipped, and who cares for them, and permits them to dwell in security. Concerning himself he says that he has received the commandment to worship ‘the Lord of the house,’ i.e. the Ka’ba. Apparently, then, the Prophet and his countrymen fully agree that the God who is worshipped through the ritual of the Ka’ba is Allah. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)

“The religion of the Arabs, as well as their political life, was on a thoroughly primitive level…In particular the Semites regarded trees, caves, springs, and large stones as being inhabited by spirits; like the Black Stone of Islam in a corner of the Ka’bah at Mecca, in Petra and other places in Arabia stones were venerated also…Every tribe worshipped its own god, but also recognized the power of other tribal gods in their own sphere…Three goddesses in particular had elevated themselves above the circle of the inferior demons. The goddess of fate, al-Manat, corresponding to the Tyche Soteira of the Greeks, though known in Mecca, was worshipped chiefly among the neighboring Bedouin tribes of the Hudhayl. Allat—”the Goddess,” who is Taif was called ar-Rabbah, “the Lady,” and whom Herodotus equates with Urania—corresponded to the great mother of the gods, Astarte of the northern Semites; al-‘Uzza, “the Mightiest,” worshipped in the planet Venus, was merely a variant form… In addition to all these gods and goddesses the Arabs, like many other primitive peoples, believed in a God who was creator of the world, Allah, whom the Arabs did not, as has often been thought, owe to the Jews and Christians…The more the significance of the cult declined, the greater became the value of a general religious temper associated with Allah. Among the Meccans he was already coming to take the place of the old moon-god Hubal as the lord of the Ka’bah…Allah was actually the guardian of contracts, though at first these were still settled at a special ritual locality and so subordinate to the supervision of an idol. In particular he was regarded as the guardian of the alien guest, though consideration for him still lagged behind duty to one’s kinsmen.” (History of the Islamic Peoples, Carl Brockelmann, p 8-10)

The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanuel, Israel, etc., rather than the Bapal of the northern semites proper, which was the Sun. Similarly, under Mohammed’s tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allâh, the Supreme Being. (Southern Arabia, Carleton S. Coon, Washington, D.C. Smithsonian, 1944, p.399)

“…a people of Arabia, of the race of the Joktanites…the Alilai living near the Red Sea in a district where gold is found; their name, children of the moon, so called from the worship of the moon, or Alilat.” (Gesenius Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures, translated by Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, 1979, p. 367)

Al-Kindi, one of the early Christian apologists against Islam, pointed out that Islam and its god Allah did not come from the Bible but from the paganism of the Sabeans. They did not worship the God of the Bible but the moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat, and Manat (Three Early Christian-Muslim Debates, ed. by N. A. Newman, Hatfield, PA, IBRI, 1994, pp.357, 413, 426).

“The cult of a deity termed simply “the god” (al-ilah) was known throughout southern Syria and northern Arabia in the days before Islam—Muhammad’s father was named ‘Abd Allah (”Servant of Allah”)–and was obviously of central importance in Mecca, where the building called the Ka’bah was indisputably his house. Indeed, the Muslims shahadah attests to precisely that point: the Quraysh, the paramount tribe of Mecca, were being called on by Muhammad to repudiate the very existence of all the other gods save this one. It seems equally certain that Allah was not merely a god in Mecca but was widely regarded as the “high god,” the chief and head of the Meccan pantheon, whether this was the result, as has been argued, of a natural progression toward henotheism or of the growing influence of Jews and Christians in the Arabian Peninsula…Thus Allah was neither an unknown nor an unimportant deity to the Quraysh when Muhammad began preaching his worship at Mecca.” (The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, ed. John L. Esposito, 1995, p 76-77)

“That Islam was conceived in idolatry is shown by the fact that many rituals performed in the name of Allah were connected with the pagan worship that existed before Islam. … Before Islam Allah was reported to be know as: the supreme of a pantheon of gods; the name of a god whom the Arabs worshipped; the chief god of the pantheon; Ali-ilah; the god; the supreme; the all-powerful; all-knowing; and totally unknowable; the predeterminer of everyone’s life destiny; chief of the gods; the special deity of the Quraish; having three daughters: Al Uzzah (Venus), Manah (Destiny), and Alat; having the idol temple at Mecca under his name (House of Allah).; the mate of Alat, the goddess of fate. . … Because of other Arabian history which points to heathen worship of the sun, moon, and the stars, as well as other gods, of which I believe Allah was in some way connected to. This then would prove to us that Allah is not the same as the true God of the Bible whom we worship, because God never changes.” (Is Allah The Same God As The God Of The Bible?, M. J. Afshari, p 6, 8-9)

“In pre-Islamic days, called the Days of Ignorance, the religious background of the Arabs was pagan, and basically animistic. Through wells, trees, stones, caves, springs, and other natural objects man could make contact with the deity… At Mekka, Allah was the chief of the gods and the special deity of the Quraish, the prophet’s tribe. Allah had three daughters: Al Uzzah (Venus) most revered of all and pleased with human sacrifice; Manah, the goddess of destiny, and Al Lat, the goddess of vegetable life. Hubal and more than 300 others made up the pantheon. The central shrine at Mekka was the Kaaba, a cube like stone structure which still stands though many times rebuilt. Imbedded in one corner is the black stone, probably a meteorite, the kissing of which is now an essential part of the pilgrimage.” (Meet the Arab, John Van Ess, 1943, p. 29.)

“Muslims are notoriously loathe to preserve traditions of earlier paganism and like to garble what pre-Islamic history they permit to survive in anachronistic terms” (Southern Arabia, Carleton S. Coon, Washington DC, Smithsonian, 1944, p 398)

“But history establishes beyond the shadow of doubt that even the pagan Arabs, before Muhammad’s time, knew their chief god by the name of Allah and even, in a sense, proclaimed his unity…Among the pagan Arabs this term denoted the chief god of their pantheon, the Kaaba, with its three hundred and sixty idols.” (The Moslem Doctrine of God, Samuel M. Zwemer 1905, p 24-25)

“Historians like Vaqqidi have said Allah was actually the chief of the 360 gods [one for each day of the year] being worshipped in Arabia at the time Muhammad rose to prominence. Ibn Al-Kalbi gave 27 names of pre-Islamic deities… Interestingly, not many Muslims want to accept that Allah was already being worshipped at the Ka’ba in Mecca by Arab pagans before Muhammad came. Some Muslims become angry when they are confronted with this fact. But history is not on their side. Pre-Islamic literature has proved this.” (Who Is This Allah?, G. J. O. Moshay, 1994, p 138)

“Islam also owes the term “Allah” to the heathen Arabs. We have evidence that it entered into numerous personal names in Northern Arabia and among the Nabatians. It occurred among the Arabs of later times, in theophorous names and on its own.” (Why I Am Not A Muslim, Ibn Warraq, 1995, p. 42)

“Arabia in Muhammad’s time was polytheistic in its conception of the cosmos and tribal in its social structure. Each tribe had its own god(s) and goddess(es), which were manifest in the forms of idols, stones, trees, or stars in the sky.” (Islamic Studies, A History of Religions Approach, Richard C. Martin, 2^nd Ed., p 96)

“Before Islam, the religions of the Arabic world involved the worship of many spirits, called jinn. Allah was but one of many gods worshiped in Mecca. But then Muhammad taught the worship of Allah as the only God, whom he identified as the same God worshiped by Christians and Jews.” (A Short History of Philosophy, Robert C. Solomon, p. 130)

“Allah: Originally applied to the moon; he seems to be preceded by Ilmaqah, the moon god… Allat: the female counterpart to Allah.” (A Dictionary of Non-Classical Mythology, Marian Edwardes, Lewis Spence, Allah, p. 7)

There were hundreds of such deities in pagan Arabia; the Ka’bah alone at one time housed three hundred and sixty-seven of them. Of all those mentioned in the Qur’an, four appeared to be most popularly revered on the eve of Islam, al`-Uzzah (power), al-Lat (the goddess), and Manah (fate); all three female deities, popularly worshiped by the tribes of the Hijaz, were regarded as the daughters of Allah (the god) who headed the Arabian pantheon when Muhammad began to preach. Allah, the paramount deity of pagan Arabia, was the target of worship in varying degrees of intensity from the southernmost tip of Arabia to the Mediterranean. To the Babylonians he was “Il” (god); to the Canaanites, and later the Israelites, he was “El”., the South Arabians worshipped him as “Ilah,” and the Bedouins as “al-Ilah” (the deity). With Muhammad he becomes Allah, God of the Worlds, of all believers, the one and only who admits of no associates or consorts in the worship of Him. Judaic and Christian concepts of God abetted the transformation of Allah from a pagan deity to the God of all monotheists. There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that “Allah” passed to the Muslims from Christians and Jews. (Islam, Beliefs And Observances, Caesar E. Farah, p2-7, 26-35)

Before the name [Allah] came into Islam, it had already long been part of the pre-Islamic system, and a considerably important part, too…the pagan concept of Allah, which is purely Arabian—the case in which we see the pre-Islamic Arabs themselves talking about “Allah” as they understand the word in their own peculiar way.” (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

Let us begin by remarking that the name itself of Allah is common to Jahiliyyah and Islam. When, in other words, the Koranic Revelation began to use this word, it was not introducing a new name of God, a name strange and alien to the ears of the contemporary Arabs. The first problem, then, that we must answer is: Was the Koranic concept of Allah a continuation of the pre-Islamic one, or did the former represent a complete break with the latter? Were there some essential-not accidental-ties between the two concepts signified by one and the same name? Or was it a simple matter of a common word used for two different objects? .” (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

What does this mean from the semantical point of view? What are the implications of the fact that the name of Allah was not only known to both parties but was actually used by both parties in their discussion with each other? The very fact that the name of Allah was common to both the pagan Arabs and the Muslims, particularly the fact that it gave rise to much heated discussion about the concept of God, would seem to suggest conclusively that there was some common ground of understanding between the two. parties. Otherwise there, could have been neither debate nor discussion at all. And when the Prophet addressed his adversaries in the name of Allah all, he did so simply and solely because he knew that this name meant something and something important to their minds too. If this were not, so, his activity would have been quite pointless in this respect. ” (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

As regards the ‘basic’ meaning of Allah, we may remark that many Western scholars have compared rightly -to my mind- the word in its formal aspect with the Greek “Ho Theos” which means quite simply ‘the God’. On such an abstract level the name was common to all Arab tribes. In pre-Islamic times each tribe, as a rule, had its own local god or divinity known by a proper name. So, at first, each tribe may have meant its own local divinity, when it used an expression equivalent to “the God”; this is quite probable. But the very fact that people began to designate their own local divinity by the abstract form of “the God’ must have paved, the way for the growth of an abstract notion of God without any localizing qualification and then, following this, for a belief in the supreme God common to all the tribes. We meet with similar instances all over the world. Besides, we must remember, there were the Jews and the Christians with whom the Arabs had constant opportunities of a close cultural contact. And naturally these Jews and Christians both used the same word Allah to denote their own Biblical God. This must have exerted a great influence on the development of the pre-Islamic concept of Allah among the Arabs towards a higher concept than that of a mere tribal divinity, not only among the town-dwellers but also among the pure Bedouins of the desert. However this may be, it is certain from the Koran alone, that by the time Muhammad began to preach, the pagan Arabs had come to cherish at least a vague idea, and perhaps also a vague belief, in Allah as the highest God standing above the level of local idols. This much we may reasonably assume as the ‘basic’ meaning, of the word Allah in Jahiliyah. And this much meaning, at least, must the word have carried into the Islamic system when the Koran began to use it as the name of the God of Islamic Revelation. For otherwise, as I have said, even a polemic discussion on this Islamic God could not have been possible between the Muslims and the Meccan pagans. ” (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

However, this is not the whole picture. We would commit a grave mistake if we imagined that this ‘basic’ meaning was the sole point of contact between the two conceptions of God. The thing did not occur in such a way that the pure concept of Allah with its simple ‘basic’ meaning or which is suggested by its formal structure -Allah = ho theos – came straight into the Islamic conceptual system falling down, so to speak, from some metaphysical world of pure concepts. But actually, i.e. historically, it came into the Islamic system through another system, namely, the pre-Islamic system of religious concepts, however crude the latter might have been. Before the name came into Islam, it had already long been part of the pre-Islamic system, and a considerably important part, too. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

To put it in another way, when the Islamic Revelation began, the pagan Arabs of Mecca could possibly have no other way of understanding the word Allah than by associating with it all the semantic elements that were already present in their minds. This was the first big semantic problem which faced the Prophet Muhammad when he started his prophetic career. … The chief of those objectionable elements was the idea that Allah, although admittedly the supreme God, allowed of the existence of so-called “associates” shuraka’ besides Him. But apart from this polytheistic element and some other less important points, the Koran acknowledges that the general concept of Allah entertained by the contemporary Arabs was surprisingly close to the Islamic concept of God. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

The first is the pagan concept of Allah, which is purely Arabian-the case in which we see the pre-Islamic Arabs themselves talking about “Allah” as then, understand the word in their own peculiar way … (II) The case in which we observe the Jews and the Christians of pre-Islamic times using the very word Allah in referring to their own God. In this case “Allah” means of course the God of the Bible, a typically monotheistic concept of God. Exceedingly interesting examples are found in this respect, for instance, in the work of ‘Adi b. Zayd, a, well-known Arab Christian, the Court poet of al-Hirah. (III) Lastly, the case in which we see the pagan Arabs – non-Christian, non-Jewish pure Jahili Arabs – handling the Biblical concept of God under the name of “Allah”.(God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

THE CONCEPT OF ALLAH IN ARABIAN PAGANISM

(1) Allah in this conception, is the Creator of the world. (2) He is the Giver of rain, i.e., more generally, the Giver of life to all living things on earth. (3) He is the One who presides over the most solemn oaths. (4) He is the object of what we might justly describe as “momentary?’ or “temporary” monotheism, the existence of which is evidenced by the recurrent expression in the Koran “making (momentarily) their faith pure for Him alone” (5) Finally, Allah is the Lord of Ka’bah. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

“The relation of this name, which in Babylonia and Assyrian became a generic term simply meaning ‘god’, to the Arabian Ilah familiar to us in the form Allah, which is compounded of al, the definite article, and Ilah by eliding the vowel ‘i’, is not clear. Some scholars trace the name to the South Arabian Ilah, a title of the Moon god, but this is a matter of antiquarian interest…it is clear from Nabataen and other inscriptions that Allah meant ‘the god.’ The other gods mentioned in the Quran are all female deities: Al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat, which represented the Sun, the planet Venus, and Fortune, respectively; at Mecca they were regarded as the daughters of Allah… As Allah meant ‘the god’, so Al-Lat means ‘the goddess’.” (Islam, Alfred Guillaume, 1956, p 6-7)

Apparently, then, Allah was, already in the conception of the pre-Islamic Arabs the Creator of the world and the Giver of rain, i.e., the Giver of life to all that exists on earth. The only serious complaint brought against them by the Qur’an in this respect was that the pagans failed to draw the only reasonable conclusion from the acknowledgment of Allah’s being the Creator of the heaven and the earth: that they should serve Allah alone and none else. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

It is indeed remarkable that this expression implies that in an emergency when they really felt that their own life was in mortal danger, the pagan Arabs used to have recourse to ‘temporary monotheism’ apparently without any reflection on the grave implication of such an act. That the phrase “making one’s religion pure for Allah” in contexts of this kind means what we might call ‘momentary -or temporary- monotheism’, and not simply “sincerity” or “earnestness” in one’s prayer is clearly shown by the fact that in the majority of the verses in which this expression is used the Koran adds the remark that these pagans, as soon as they reach the shore and feel sure of absolute safety, forget about all that has passed and begin again “to ascribe partners to Allah”, i.e., fall back into their original polytheism. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

“The enemies tried hard against me”, he says, “without desisting from doing anything that could harm me, by the Lord of Mecca and the ‘ Crucified”. … In this verse ‘Adi b. Zayd claims his complete innocence and says that the misunderstanding on the part of the king has been produced only by the machination of the slanderers envious of his good fortune, and in order to give special weight to this declaration he swears by the Lord of Mecca and Christ putting together the two “Lords” into a single oath. What is important to remember regarding this verse is that the poet ‘Adi b. Zayd was an Arab Christian, but he was neither a simple Arab nor an ordinary Christian. He was a man of the highest culture of his age. … The fact that this man of highest culture and education put in one of his solemn oaths the Lord of Mecca and Christ together is significant, in My view, in two different ways: it is of importance, first of all, in connection with the problem of the relational meaning of the word Allah in its purely Arabian aspect. That a highly educated Christian, not a pagan Arab, living in Hirah, away from Mecca, did use this concept of the Lord of Ka’bah in this way shows better than anything else how wide-spread and influential was this particular connotation of Allah. … The example of ‘Adi b. Zayd’s verse would seem to suggest, at least to my mind, that there was in the Christian psychology an unconscious tendency or inclination towards identifying -their Christian concept of Allah with the purely pagan Arabian concept of Allah as the Lord of the Meccan shrine. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

Both the Jews and the Christians in Arabia used Arabic as their vernacular, and, as I have pointed out earlier, referred to their Biblical God by the very word Allah, which was something quite natural seeing that the ‘basic’ meaning conveyed by this word was a very abstract one that would correspond roughly to the Greek ho theos. (God and Man in The Koran, Toshihiko Izutsu, Chapter 4: Allah, p96-119, 1980)

It is clear from the negative form of the Muslim creed, “There is no god except God,” that the existence and lordship of Allah were known and recognized in pre-Islamic Arabia. The Prophet’s mission was not to proclaim God’s existence but to deny the existence of all lesser deities. The fact that Muhammad’s own father bore the name ‘Abd-Allah, slave of God, demonstrates that God was known by that name prior to Islam. The Qur’an in many passages refers to Muhammad’s adversaries in Mecca, swearing by God, invoking Him, and recognizing His sovereignty as Creator. The name Allah is also evident in archaeological and literary remains of pre-Islamic Arabic. But the people of Mecca did not understand or allow that God alone should be worshipped. Indeed they contended against Muhammad that if God had willed it they would have refrained from believing in other deities (Surah vi. 148), clearly implying that God approved of their concurrent idolatry. (The Call of The Minaret, Kenneth Cragg, 1956, 35-41)

There can be no doubt then that the Prophet’s contemporaries knew of a Supreme Being, but He did not dominate their minds. Rather they thought more directly and frequently of the lesser gods, the daughters, perhaps even the sons, of Allah who were far more intimately related to their daily lives, their wars, their harvests, and their fertility. (The Call of The Minaret, Kenneth Cragg, 1956, 35-41)

Certain trees and stones (especially meteorites and those shaped to resemble human forms) housed spirits and divinities. (Mohammed, Maxime Rodinson, 1961, translated by Anne Carter, 1971, p 16-17)

This was especially true of Allah, ‘the God, the Divinity’, the personification of the divine world in its highest form, creator of the universe and keeper of sworn oaths. In the Hejaz three goddesses had pride of place as the ‘daughters of Allah’. The first of these was Allat, mentioned by Herodotus under the name of Alilat. Her name means simply ‘the goddess’, and she may have stood for one aspect of Venus, the morning star, although hellenized Arabs identified her with Athene. Next came Uzza, ‘the all-powerful’, whom other sources identify with Venus. The third was Manat, the goddess of fate, who held the shears which cut the thread of life and who was worshipped in a shrine on the sea-shore. The great god of Mecca was Hubal, an idol made of red cornelian. (Mohammed, Maxime Rodinson, 1961, translated by Anne Carter, 1971, p 16-17)

In recent years I have become increasingly convinced that for an adequate understanding of the career of Muhammad and the origins of Islam great importance must be attached to the existence in Mecca of belief in Allah as a ‘high god’. In a sense this is a form of paganism, but it is so different from paganism as commonly understood that it deserves separate treatment. Moreover there is much about it in the Qur’an. The first point to note is that the pagans are prepared to admit that Allah is the creator of the heavens and the earth. (Muhammad’s Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, Chapter 3: Religion In Pre-Islamic Arabia, p26-45)

The Arabic word for ‘God’, Allah, is a contraction of al-ilah, which like the Greek ho theos simply means ‘the god’ but was commonly understood as ‘the supreme god’ or ‘God’. It is possible that before the time of Muhammad the Meccan pagans used to indicate the principal deity of the Ka’bah, in the same way in which the deity worshipped at at-Ta’if was known simply as al-Lat, the goddess. If the word Allah was also used for God as acknowledged by Jews and Christians, the opportunities for confusion would be great. The probability therefore is that while some Meccans acknowledged God, they did not see that their old polytheistic beliefs were incompatible with belief in God and reject them. These premonitions of monotheism among the Arabs must have been due mainly to Christian and Jewish influences. The Arabs had many opportunities of contact with Christians and Jews. The Byzantine empire, whose power and higher civilization they greatly admired, was Christian, and so was Abyssinia. Even in the Persian empire Christianity was strong, and al-Hirah, the Persian vassal-state with which the Arabs were much in contact, was an outpost of the East Syrian or Nestorian Church. This combination of monotheism with military and political strength and a higher level of material civilization must have impressed the Arabs greatly. (Muhammad at Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, 1953, p 23-29)

All this material goes to show that among the pagans in Mecca and presumably also in the region round there was widespread recognition of Allah as high god. Such people may even have been more numerous than those who gave no special place to Allah, and they may have differed among themselves about the powers of a high god. This conclusion has been reached from a study of the Qur’an, and refers to a relatively small region during a restricted period. The study of inscriptions, however, has shown that belief in a high or supreme god was common throughout the Semitic Near East in the Greco-Roman period. It is worth quoting the conclusions of one who has made a thorough study of the inscriptions. It is worth quoting the conclusions of one who has made a thorough study of the inscriptions: “The epigraphical material reveals that the worship of a supreme god coexisted with that of other minor gods. The belief that one god is able to control all the other gods, or is supreme in that he has created and looks after the world, does not constitute monotheism. But the increasing emphasis on such beliefs is evidence of a trend towards monotheism, namely towards the exclusion of other gods’ existence.” [Javier Teixidor, The Pagan God: Popular Religion in the Greco-Roman Near East, Princeton 1977, 17.] ” The authors of the inscriptions worshipped a supreme god who was alone in possessing a power that excelled any other divine power. He was believed to be a Weather god; heaven belonged to him. Lesser gods were his messengers and ministers. As stated in the first chapter, the cult of the angels became a significant feature of the religious life of the Near East during the Persian and Hellenistic times. It gave the angels their role of messengers, but also stressed the fact that the Lord of Heaven ranked at the top of a hierarchy of divine beings. On the other hand, the religious life of the various groups whose inscriptions have been studied in the preceding pages was rooted in the traditions of the ancestors.” [Javier Teixidor, The Pagan God: Popular Religion in the Greco-Roman Near East, Princeton 1977, 161f.] In the light of this further evidence it becomes highly probable that when Muhammad began preaching the dominant view among thinking people in Mecca was the belief in Allah as high god. Pure paganism was in decline. (Muhammad’s Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, Chapter 3: Religion In Pre-Islamic Arabia, p26-45)

North Arabian deities. Among the peoples around the northern perimeter of Arabia, “god,” in the most generic sense, was El, or in a longer form of the same name, Ilah. (Britannica, Arabian Religions, p1057, 1979)

“Allah: Before the birth of Muhammad, Allah was known as a supreme, but not sole, God.” (Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, 1997, p. 48)

“Origin- Nabataean and Arabic: Derived from the western Semitic god Il. … Known period of worship: circa 300 BC until present. … The creator god of Islam. Perceived in pre-Islamic times as the creator of the earth and water” (Encyclopedia of Gods, Michael Jordan, Allah, p 12)

“Despite the prominence of the name elsewhere among Semitic peoples, the god Il (EI) appears to play a comparatively minor role in the South Arabian inscriptions. Some modem scholars have sought to explain this circumstance by equating Il with the moon god, but this opinion has not prevailed.” … “Among the peoples around the northern perimeter of Arabia, “god,” in the most generic sense, was El, or in a longer form of the same name, Ilah. (Britannica,Arabian Religions, p1057, 1979)

Allah was known to the pre-Islamic Arabs; he was one of the Meccan deities, possibly the supreme deity and certainly a creator-god (cf. Kur’an, xiii, 16; xxix, 61, 63; xxxi, 25; xxxix, 38; xliii, 87). He was already known, by antonomasia, as the God, al-Ilah (the most likely etymology; another suggestion is the Aramaic Alaha). For Allah before Islam, as shown by archaeological sources and the Kur’an, see ILAH. (The Encyclopaedia Of Islam, New Edition, Edited By B. Lewis, V. L. Menage, Ch. Pellat And J. Schacht, 1971, ALLAH, page 406)

But the vague notion of supreme (not sole) divinity, which Allah seems to have connoted in Meccan religion, was to become both universal and transcendental; it was to be turned, by the Kur’anic preaching, into the affirmation of the Living God, the Exalted One. (The Encyclopaedia Of Islam, New Edition, Edited By B. Lewis, V. L. Menage, Ch. Pellat And J. Schacht, 1971, ALLAH, page 406)

ALLAH is the proper name of God among Muslims, corresponding in usage to Jehovah (Jahweh) among the Hebrews. Thus it is not to be regarded as a common noun meaning ‘God’ (or ‘god’), and the Muslim must use another word or form if he wishes to indicate any other than his own peculiar deity. Similarly, no plural can be formed from it, and though the liberal Muslim may admit that Christians or Jews call upon Allah, he could never s Peak of the Allah of the Christians or the Allah of tire Jews. (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, Allah p 326)

“The origin of this goes back to pre-Muslim times, as Prof. Noldeke has shown” (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, Allah p 326)

Muhammad found the Meccans believing in a supreme God whom they called Allah, thus already contracted. With Allah, however, they associated other minor deities, some evidently tribal, others called daughters of Allah. Muhammad’s reform was to assert the solitary existence of Allah. The first article of the Muslim creed, therefore, La ilaha illa-llahu means only, as addressed by him to the Meccans, ‘ There exists no God except the one whom you already call Allah.’ Naturally, this precise historical origin is not clear to the Muslin exegetes and theologians. But that Allah is a proper name, applicable only to their peculiar God, they are certain, and they mostly recognize that its force as a proper name has arisen rough contraction in form and limitation in usage. (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, Allah p 326)

The preferable view is that Allah is a proper name of God and has no derivation; this he defends with arguments based on the undoubted usage of the Qur’an and the impossibility of making a common noun apply to an individual only. (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, Allah p 326)

Broadly, Allah is used of the true God only, as also, in the first instance, al-ilah ; but the latter can by extension be applied to any god, as Allah Himself applies it in the Qur’an. (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings, Allah p 326) [This, of course, is a complete reversal of the historical fact.]

“In any case it is extremely important fact that Muhammad did not find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, but contented himself with ridding the heathen Allah of his companions subjecting him to a kind of dogmatic purification.” (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, I:664.)

Comment: Allah is a term Muslims use to distinguish their moon god. The term was in existence before Muhammad was born. However it has no history of use outside the Arabic world, as Muslims claim. For example, it is not found in the Bible or in any Jewish or Christian writings. The moon god, however, does have a long history that dates back to the time of Abraham.

The final divinity to be considered is Allah who was recognized before Islam as god, and if not as the only god at least as a supreme god. The Quran makes it quite clear that he was recognized at Mecca, though belief in him was certainly more widespread .78 How is this to be explained? Earlier scholars attributed the diffusion of this belief solely to Christian and Judaic influences. But now a growing number of authors maintain that this idea had older roots in Arabia. Wellhausen’s view that Allah (al-ilah, “the god”) is a sort of abstraction which (originating in the local gods) gave rise first to a common word, then a common concept that merged the various gods into one single god has rightly been judged inadequate. One must rather see in this pre-Islamic Allah one of those great supreme gods who created the world but who plays a minor role in the actual cult. 79 If, therefore, Allah is indigenous to Arabia, one must ask further: Are there indications of a nomadic origin? I think there are, based on a comparison of the beliefs of the nomads in central and northern Asia with those of northeastern Africa. Like the supreme being of many other nomads, Allah is a god of the sky and dispenser of rain. 80 These indications might not seem sufficiently peculiar to Bedouin, for the notion of such a god might just as well have been formed by settled farming people. But one must not forget that rain is even more important for nomads. (Studies on Islam, edited by Merlin L. Swartz, Pre-Islamic Bedouin Religion, by Joseph Henninger, 1981, p 3-22)

“…the Ka’aba was dedicated to al-Ilah, the High God of the pagan Arabs, despite the presiding effigy of Hubal. By the beginning of the seventh century, al-Ilah had become more important than before in the religious life many of the Arabs. Many primitive religions develop a belief in a High God, who is sometimes called the Sky God…But they also carried on worshipping the other gods, who remained deeply important to them.” (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad, (New York: San Francisco, 1992) p. 69.)

From the Koran itself it is clear that monotheistic ideas were familiar in Western Arabia. The existence of a supreme God, Allah, is assumed as an axiom common to Mohammed and his opponents. The Koran never argues the point; what it does argue is that He is the one and only God. La ilaha illa’llah, ‘there is no god but Allah.’ Mohammedanism, An Historical Survey H.A.R. Gibb, 1950,The Koran, p 36-47

“Allah, the Supreme Being of the Mussulmans: Before Islam. That the Arabs, before the time of Muhammed, accepted and worshipped, after a fashion, a supreme god called Allah,–”the Ilah, or the god, if the form is of genuine Arabic source; if of Aramaic, from Alaha, “the god”—seems absolutely certain. Whether he was an abstraction or a development from some individual god, such as Hubal, need not here be considered…But they also recognized and tended to worship more fervently and directly other strictly subordinate gods…It is certain that they regarded particular deities (mentioned in 1iii. 19-20 are al-‘Uzza, Manat or Manah, al-Lat’; some have interpreted vii, 179 as a reference to a perversion of Allah to Allat as daughters of Allah (vi. 100; xvi, 59; xxxvii, 149; 1iii, 21); they also asserted that he had sons (vi. 100)…”There was no god save Allah”. This meant, for Muhammed and the Meccans, that of all the gods whom they worshipped, Allah was the only real deity. It took no account of the nature of God in the abstract, only of the personal position of Allah. …ilah, the common noun from which Allah is probably derived…” (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J. Brill, 1987, Islam, p. 302)

“The name Allah goes back before Muhammad” (The Facts on File Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, Anthony S. Mercatante, I:41, 1983)

SOURCE of this article (please note that I do not agree with all the teachings of this source, specifically their denial of a Biblical Pre-tribulation rapture; yet, I am grateful for their labors in the Lord).

---

Was Allah The Moon God of Ancient Arab Pagan?

By Syed Kamran Mirza

Historical evidences, impartial logic, well versed references and all available circumstantial judgments can very well prove that—(a) Allah name of deity was pre-existed much before the arrival of Islam, (b) Pre-Islamic Pagan peoples worshipped Allah as their supreme deity (moon-god). Allah’s name existed in pre-Islamic Arab. In ancient Arab the Allah was considered to be the supreme God/deity (as Moon-God) and Arab Pagans worshipped Allah before Islam arrived.

Let us examine below some valid questions and answers :

Did the Pagan Arabs in pre-Islamic times worship 360 gods? Yes

Did the pagans Arabs worship the sun, moon and the stars? Yes

Did the Arabs built temples to the Moon-god? Yes

Did different Arab tribes give the Moon-god different names/titles? Yes

What were some of the names/titles? Sin, Hubul, Ilumquh, Al-ilah.

Was the title “al-ilah” (the god) used as the Moon-god? Yes

Was the word “Allah” derived from “al-ilah?” Yes

Was the pagan “Allah” a high god in a pantheon of deities? Yes.

Was he worshipped at the Kabah? Yes.

Was Allah only one of many Meccan gods? Yes

Did they place a statue of Hubul on top of the Kabah? Yes.

At that time was Hubul considered the Moon-god? Yes.

Was the Kabah thus the “house of the Moon-god”? Yes.

Did the name “Allah” eventually replace that of Hubul as the name of the Moon god? Yes.

Did they call the Kabah the “house of Allah”?  Yes.

Were al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat called “the daughters of Allah”? Yes.

Yusuf Ali explains in fn. 5096, pg. 1445, that Lat, Uzza and Manat were known as “the daughters of God [Allah]”

Did the Qur’an at one point tell Muslims to worship al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat? Yes. In Surah 53:19-20.

Have those verses been “abrogated” out of the present Qur’an? Yes.

What were they called? “The Satanic Verses.”

The variable names (Sin, Hubul, llumquh, Al-ilah) of moon god were used by various tribes of pagan Arabs. Pagan god SIN was the name of Moon-god.

The Irony of Lordship Salvation

The Irony of Lordship Salvation

By David J. Stewart

“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” —Matthew 7:21

It is so ironic that the very false prophets running around nowadays propagating the Lordship Salvation heresy are the same false prophets spoken of in Matthew 7:21-23

“Not every one that saith unto me, LORD, LORD, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 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.“

Ray Comfort even attempts to use Matthew 7:21-23 to prove his Lordship Salvation heresy; thus corrupting the Scriptures.

On page 1197 of THE EVIDENCE BIBLE, Ray Comfort comments on Matthew 7:22,23:

“These are perhaps the most frightening verses in the Bible. Vast multitudes of professing Christians fit into the category spoken of here. They call Jesus ‘Lord,’ but they practice lawlessness. They profess faith in Jesus, but have no regard for the divine law. hey tell ‘fibs’ or ‘white’ lies, take things that belong to others, have a roaming eye for the opposite sex, etc. They are liars, thieves, and adulterers at heart, who will be cast from the gates of heaven into the jaws of hell.”

SOURCE: THE EVIDENCE BIBLE, by Ray Comfort, pg. 1197; 2003, Bridge-Logos Publishers, Orlando, Florida

Ladies and gentleman, Ray Comfort is teaching works salvation! According to what we just read by Ray Comfort, every believer who is still living in deliberate sin won’t be allowed into Heaven.

The correct interpretation of Matthew 7:22,23 must include verse 21

“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.”

What is “the will of the Father“? The answer is found in John 6:40

“And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.”

The group in Matthew 7:21-23 were unsaved because they refused to do God’s will concerning salvation. It wasn’t because they still had personal sins in their life. Every believer still has sin in their life! We all sin every day. That’s not to say that we have God’s approval to sin, God forbid (Romans 3:31). It just means that even the best of Christians are still sinners. Ray Comfort wrestles the Scriptures to his own destruction, and sadly for those who follow his false teachings.

It is not one’s unwillingness to forsake personal sins that prevents a person from being saved; but rather, one’s love for such sins. In John 5:40 Jesus said, “And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” Jesus didn’t say, “Ye cannot come.” He said, “Ye WILL NOT come.” But if such a sinner does come to Jesus, acknowledging his guilt of sin and sincerely desiring to be forgiven, the Lord will save him eternally.

John 3:20 states, “For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved” (John 3:20). Again we see that it is one’s love for sin that keeps him from coming to Jesus Christ for salvation; but the Bible does NOT say that he cannot be saved because he is unwilling to forsake his sins. Salvation is the free gift of God (Romans 5:15; 6:23), paid for by Jesus’ precious literal blood (1st Peter 1:18,19). We can do nothing to merit salvation. We do NOT have to give up our sins to be saved. To teach otherwise is works salvation. A believer gives up their sins because they are saved; NOT to get saved.

Every proponent of Lordship Salvation claims that eternal is a free gift, provided by God’s free grace, and that works are not essential to salvation; yet, they 100% contradict themselves when they require a changed life as part of saving faith. Forsaking one’s sins is the FRUIT of genuine repentance; not a prerequisite to being saved.

Jesus clearly taught that the reason why the group in Matthew 7:21-23 wasn’t saved is because they had failed to do GOD’S WILL. John 6:40 tells us that God’s will is for us to BELIEVE ON JESUS CHRIST. Ray Comfort would have us to believe that forsaking one’s sins is God’s will for salvation; but that is NOT what the Bible says at all.

Jesus said MANY will say to Him in that day (Judgment 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.” Notice the term “wonderful works” and “never knew you“, is this not the Lordship Salvation crowd? Yes, it most certainly is! John MacArthur, Paul Washer, Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort and other false prophets are running around teaching people to say, “Jesus is Lord, Jesus is Lord,” but they are still hellbound because they HAVE NOT DONE THE WILL OF THE FATHER, i.e., to solely believe on Jesus Christ for forgiveness of one’s sins (John 6:40; Acts 10:43).

Lordship Salvation is of the Devil. You don’t make Jesus Lord, He is Lord! Eternal life is a free gift (Romans 6:23), paid for by Jesus’ precious liquid blood… “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1st Peter 1:18,19). To be saved, one simply needs to acknowledge his or her GUILT of sin (Romans 3:19) and then trust upon Jesus Christ, because of the blood that He sacrificed for our sins to wash them away, “…and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1st John 1:7). We are guilty sinners, and Jesus is the precious Savior by which we can be saved simply by TRUSTING upon Him… “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43).

I find it so ironic that proponents of Lordship Salvation, i.e., heretics like Ray Comfort, would actually attempt to use Matthew 7:21-23 to justify their false gospel, when that very Scripture they are wrestling plainly condemn them as false prophets. You can make Jesus Lord/Master of your life and do many wonderful works all you want; but you will not go to Heaven (i.e. being saved) unless you DO GOD’S WILL, which is to BELIEVE SOLELY ON JESUS CHRIST “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.“

“But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.” —Ephesians 2:13

Moody Bible Institute’s Perverted Gospel

Moody Bible Institute’s Perverted Gospel
By David J. Stewart

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” —2nd Corinthians 11:3

Harry A. Ironside, who pastored Moody Memorial Church between 1930 and 1948, died of a heart attack in New Zealand in 1951. I cannot help but wonder if Dr. Ironside somehow caught a glimpse of what the Moody Bible Church is today which may cause him another heart attack. I almost had a heart attack myself when I read their plan of salvation. It’s sadly straight from the pits of Hell. The Moody church and school are today saturated with apostasy, false doctrines and a false gospels. What had happened?

I’ll tell you what happened: it’s that good-for-nothing, lousy, corrupt, piece-of-garbage, rotten, malicious, scum-filled, worthless filth called the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible. Moody church and college wouldn’t be in the mess they’re in today if they’d just remained faithful to the trustworthy King James Bible. Dwight L. Moody chose to use the King James Bible, even though he lived 300 years after the King James Bible was first published. Harry A. Ironside chose to use the King James Bible as well, hundreds of years later. Why, in just the past 30 years, have Moody Bible Church and Moody Bible Institute decided that the King James Bible isn’t good enough anymore? They’ve bought into the lie of Satan and are using a counterfeit bible.

Here is the prayer that Moody Ministries suggests for a lost sinner to pray to be saved:

“If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” Romans 10:9

God, I know that I have done things that are wrong. But I believe that Jesus died on the Cross to pay the punishment for what I’ve done. I believe that He is Your Son, the Word of God, and I want Him to be my Savior. I want Him to cleanse me of what I’ve done wrong and defeat sin for me. In His name I ask You to welcome me back to You. I know that I have followed my own rules and served my own desires. But God, I don’t want to serve myself anymore. I want to follow You. I want to spend eternity with You! Thank You for Your wonderful gift of Jesus. [emphasis added]

And then they follow with this comment:

…If you have just made a commitment to Christ, please let us know. We’d like to send you Bible study materials to help you grow in your faith. Simply complete the form below to receive these materials.” [emphasis added]

SOURCE: http://www.moodyministries.net/crp_FormGeneral.aspx?ekfrm=1246

Ladies and gentlemen, that is a false gospel. One DOESN’T have to make a commitment to Christ to be saved. Where does this false idea come from? Look no further than Romans 10:9 from the NIV which I just quoted to you from their website “If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” That is totally NOT what the Word of God says. The King James Bible correctly renders the Greek in English as:

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

There is a world of difference between “confessing the Lord Jesus” versus “confessing Jesus as Lord”. The NIV (or better yet, the HIV) teaches the malicious heresy of Lordship Salvation. The gift of eternal life (Romans 6:23) is nullified if one has to make a commitment to God to be saved, or be willing to stop living selfishly. This is exactly what Moody Ministries is teaching today. Please read, Harry A. Ironside DIDN’T Teach Lordship Salvation. Sadly, Moody Institute today does.

Moody Institute’s board of directors and ministry leaders would have us to believe that they’re still upholding the same doctrinal positions that were held back in 1928 (http://www.moodyministries.net/crp_MainPage.aspx?id=334); but nothing could be further from the truth. To realize just how messed up Moody Bible Institute is today, consider the following quote from its former pastor, Harry Ironside (1876-1951):

“When anyone comes promising salvation to those ‘who make full surrender’ of all that they have to God, and who ‘pay the price of full salvation’ he is preaching another gospel, for the price was paid on Calvary’s cross and the work that saves is finished. It was Christ Jesus who made the full surrender when He yielded His life on Calvary that saves us, not our surrender in any way to Him.”

SOURCE: Harry A. Ironside, from the Gospel tract, Another Gospel.

If Dr. Ironside was alive today, he’d likely have another heart attack!!! Woe unto Moody Bible Church, pastor Erwin Lutzer, and the Moody Bible Institute. This is such a shame. Satan has used the wagon of ecumenicalism to corrupt America’s churches and seminaries with the demonic doctrine of Lordship Salvation. Beware of Moody Bible Church and Moody Ministries, because they have turned aside after another gospel not ever taught in the Word of God at all.

Max Lucado Exposed

Max Lucado EXPOSED!

By David J. Stewart

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.” —2nd Timothy 4:3

Max Lucado is a best-selling Christian author and well-known minister. Lucado has written 60 books with over 30 million copies in print, and currently serves as senior minister at Oak Hills Church (formerly known as Oak Hills Church of Christ) in San Antonio, Texas.

Lucado was named “America’s Pastor” by Christianity Today magazine and in 2005 was named by Reader’s Digest as “The Best Preacher in America“. He has been featured on The Fox News Channel, NBC Nightly News, Larry King Live, and USA Today. His books are regularly on the New York Times Best Seller List. He has been featured speaker at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Tragically, Max Lucado is an ecumenical false prophet, who teaches the Church of Christ’s false doctrine that salvation comes only after baptism. Lucado deceitfully claims that he doesn’t believe in Baptismal Regeneration; yet he teaches that water baptism is essential to being saved.

“Baptism effectively seals our salvation.”

“In baptism God signs and seals our conversion to him.”

SOURCE: http://www.maxlucado.com/pdf/baptism.upwords.pdf

The following quote came from the Oak Hills Church of Christ official Internet web site — updated 7/15/95; copied 7/12/96; and re-verified 2/98. The Oak Hills Church pulled this statement from their web site in 1999, apparently due to complaints from evangelicals, and replaced it with a rather generic statement:

“It is necessary to respond to God’s free offer of salvation by faith, repentance, and baptism. As we confess Christ as our Lord and are baptized by immersion, God meets us, forgives our sins and gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit that empowers each of us.” (Emphases added)

This is typical Church of Christ false doctrine. Most Christians are not aware that Max Lucado is the pastor of the Oak Hills Church of Christ. Sadly, most Christians are not even aware that the Church of Christ adds water baptism to the Gospel; thus, perverting it.

Lucado falsely teaches that water baptism is an initial sign of being saved. There is NO such teaching in the Bible.

“True believers not only offer their sins, they yield their wills to Christ. Baptism is the initial test of a believing heart.”

SOURCE: http://www.maxlucado.com/pdf/baptism.upwords.pdf

1st John 5:13 tells us clearly WHY the Apostle John wrote his Epistle so that we could KNOW that we have eternal life. Interestingly, John never mentions “baptism” even once.

Max Lucado is hiding the fact that he is a Church of Christ minister.

Recently, his church, which has some 5,000 members, even changed its name from “Oak Hills Church of Christ” to simply “Oak Hills Church.”

SOURCE: http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=20752

As a result of Lucado’s deception, naive churchgoers have embraced Mr. Lucado’s heresies.

Christians of all denominations have embraced Lucado’s work. He has written more than 50 books — with more than 39 million in print — including his latest, “Come Thirsty,” (W Publishing Group) which came out last year.

SOURCE: http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=20752

Max Lucado’s teachings are dangerous. Lucado was a speaker at the 1995 Christian Booksellers Association (CBA) Convention. Lucado gave a call to unity among Christians across denominational lines. Likening Christians to sailors on the same boat with “one captain” and “one destination“, Lucado urged acceptance between Protestants and Catholics, Baptists, and Presbyterians (Reported in the 12/95, Fundamentalist Digest). Max Lucado sounds more like an unsaved ecumenical Modernist who is actively corrupting America’s churches. Any minister who promotes acceptance of the damnable Catholic religion is of the Devil. The Devil is using ecumenical ministers to promote sinful compromise between believers and the unsaved. The Word of God commands us to divide over truth, rather than being united by error (2nd Corinthians 6:14-17).

Apostate Ministers of Unrighteousness

America has been infected with dime-a-dozen, smiling, happy-go-lucky, imposters who claim to be proclaiming God’s message. In reality, they are serving themselves, making millions of dollars from the ignorant public. In John 5:39 Jesus commanded for us to “SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES“! Instead, people nowadays search for the latest New York Times Bestseller. These sinister ministers preach about love, joy, and forgiveness; BUT, they don’t mention sin, Hellfire, judgment and repentance.

We are living in a generation that wrongly preaches forgiveness without repentance. There can be no salvation without repentance. No, a person does not have to forsake their sins to be saved; but they do need to become GUILTY before God (Romans 3:19), realizing their condemnation under God’s Law as a sinner and justly deserved penalty of Hellfire. Repentance is a change of mind that causes us to turn to the Lord Jesus Christ to save us from our sins. If a person is genuinely saved, then a changed-life should follow (2nd Corinthians 5:17; James 2:18). Most people who claim to be “Christian” today are still hellbound in their sins. They have churchianity without Christ, religion without truth.

The preachers who Satan is promoting the most nowadays are the best “ear-ticklers“. 2nd Timothy 4:3 WARNS: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears” (2nd Timothy 4:3). Max Lucado is an ear-tickler, just like Joel Osteen and Rick Warren. They tell people what people want to hear, i.e. messages of health, wealth and prosperity. In Matthew 10:34 Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” What does this mean? It means that the truth hurts! It means that the truth often causes church splits, family breakups and persecution for those who uphold it. The truth has few friends these days. Modernist preachers talk much about the word “truth“; but they teach lies of deceit.

Conclusion

Max Lucado is extremely subtle. It is clear from his writings that he believes that any person who knowingly refuses to receive water baptism will not go to Heaven. He doesn’t believe that a person is saved through water baptism. He does believe that a believer who is ignorant of baptism, who hasn’t been baptized, may still go to Heaven. However, for those who do know better, and still refuse to receive water baptism, Lucado clearly believes that such a person is not saved. The truth of the matter is that water baptism has absolutely nothing to do with being saved at all. It is simply an ordinance that the Lord established; but NOT as a prerequisite for salvation. If it were a prerequisite to salvation, then the Apostle Paul and other writer’s of the New Testament Epistles to the churches would have emphasized it. They didn’t.

It is wrong for Max Lucado or anyone else to teach that baptism “seals our salvation“. Ephesians 1:13 clears this matter up, and identifies Mr. Lucado as a false prophet, “In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.” According to the Bible, each believer is sealed with the Holy Spirit after they believe. Baptism is NOT mentioned. Water baptism does not seal our salvation! The Holy Spirit, Who comes to indwell us at the time of salvation, seals us!

Do as Jesus commanded and “SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES” and you’ll never be led astray by false prophets such as Max Lucado.

John MacArthur’s Heresy on Predestination

John MacArthur’s Heresy on Predestination

By David J. Stewart

“For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” —Jude 1:4

Pastor John MacArthur is a dangerous man, because he subtly has introduced many damnable heresies into the church—none more hideous than his denial of the redeeming power of the literal physical blood of Jesus Christ. MacArthur also teaches a form of works-based salvation. And to no surprise, as a Calvinist, MacArthur teaches that a lost sinner cannot be saved unless God first chooses him or her.

In the thirteenth chapter of Acts, a most fascinating statement is found in verse 48. Paul and Barnabas ready to preach, “And when the Gentiles heard this,” that is regarding the gospel, and the gospel of salvation, “they began rejoicing and glorifying the Word of the Lord,” now note this, “and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” The only people who believe are those who have been appointed to eternal life. God only grants the gift of faith to those who are predestined to salvation. He chose us. And to those He has chosen, He gives the power to believe.

SOURCE: http://www.ondoctrine.com/2mac0032.htm

MacArthur foolishly teaches that God chooses who will get saved, and conversely, who won’t. MacArthur is dead wrong! Here is what Acts 13:48 says:

“And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”

Although at a glance, Acts 13:48 appears to teach that God chooses (i.e. appoints) people to be saved, nothing could be further from the truth, which is clearly evidenced if we compare this Scripture with other Scriptures. For example, consider the Words of John 1:12

“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.”

Clearly, salvation comes to those who RECEIVE HIM. This is the exact opposite of the garbage John MacArthur is teaching, i.e. “God only grants the gift of faith to those who are predestined to salvation. He chose us. And to those He has chosen, He gives the power to believe.” MacArthur states that God must choose us before He gives us the power to believe; BUT, in sharp contrast, John 1:12 teaches that God gives the power to be saved to those who RECEIVE HIM. That power is the Gospel (Romans 1:16). Biblically, it is us who choose God; and not God Who chooses us. MacArthur is teaching doctrines of Devils.

What Does Acts 13:48 Mean?

Again, Acts 13:48 reads, “And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”

The Greek word for “ordained” in Acts 13:48 is “tasso” and means “to appoint, arrange, order, ordain or decree.” The same exact word is used in Romans 13:1, “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” Applying the same mentality John MacArthur uses to interpret Acts 13:48 to interpret Romans 13:1, would mean that God appointed Hitler to murder 6,000,000 Jews. Do you think God chooses evil men to kill the innocent? Did God ordain Herod to murder 2,000 infants? Of course not. The correct interpretation of Romans 13:1 is that God ALLOWS men to rule over men; but this does not mean that God always approves of what men do. The Bible has plenty to say about evil rulers (e.g. Proverb 28:15). Likewise, God doesn’t choose those who will be saved; but rather, he allows us to make our own decisions.

The suggestion that “ordained” in Acts 13:48 teaches predestination to salvation goes 100% contrary to dozens of Scriptures which teach that man has a free will, and thus chooses for himself where to spend eternity. Jesus plainly stated in John 5:40 “And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” The invitation was open; but they refused. Jesus said “ye will not come“; He didn’t say “ye cannot come“.

Acts 13:48 simply means that God in His foreknowledge KNEW ahead of time, from the beginning of the world, who would be saved; BUT, God did not choose them to be saved. Carefully notice that the Greek meaning of the word “ordained” does not include the word “chose“.

They who RECEIVE JESUS are saved by the power of God “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” (John 1:12). That “power” is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Romans 1:16 states: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.”

Here are some words of wisdom by Dr. John R. Rice concerning John 1:12

“But what about those who received him? Why, very simply, based on that simple heart reception He gave them authority to become sons of God. There was no question of their merit or character of fitness, just the simple condition that any who wanted the Lord Jesus may have Him. Any who would receive Him may take Him. And those who received Him, “to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.”

Will you note that receiving and believing are the same? If any one wants to know what it means to believe on Jesus, it simply means to receive Him. That is the same kind of promise as Revelation 3:20, “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.” That is the same kind of promise of Revelation 22:17, “Let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” Instant salvation, undeserved salvation, glorious, eternal salvation to the one who receives Christ in the heart. Oh, simple, beautiful, and marvelous!

SOURCE: John, the Son of God; by John R. Rice, pgs. 28,29; ISBN: 0-87398-794-2; Sword of the Lord Publishers

Receiving Jesus and believing Jesus are the same thing! Acts 13:48 plainly evidences this fact “And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” You see, certain of the Gentiles had RECEIVED CHRIST, and were glad, and glorified the Word of God, and it was by the power of the Gospel that they were saved, just as John 1:12 teaches:

“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.”

Please understand that salvation is NOT a process. Salvation is instant. The very moment that a repentant sinner receives Jesus as their personal Saviour, they have also believed on Him in their heart. To be saved, a sinner need only to BELIEVE on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 10:43). It is Jesus’ precious blood that washes our sins away (1st Peter 1:18,19); and not our own self-righteousness (Isaiah 64:6). We need HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS (i.e. Jesus’ righteousness) to get to Heaven (Matthew 6:33; Romans 10:3,4; 2nd Corinthians 5:21). Salvation is receiving; not giving. Salvation is of God; not man. Eternal life is a free gift (Romans 6:23).

Jesus Died for the Sins of the Whole World

If, as John MacArthur and other Calvinists teach, God chooses who will and won’t be saved, then why does the Word of God repeatedly proclaim that Christ died for the WORLD?

John 3:16 proclaims:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The Bible teaches that “whosoever” may be saved, simply by trusting upon the Lord Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins. Salvation is having our sins taken away by the precious blood of Jesus Christ (1st John 1:7).

1st John 4:14 states:

“And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.”

Jesus could not be the Saviour of the world if He ordained only some to believe.

1st Timothy 4:10 states:

“For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.”

How much clearer could the Bible be? Jesus is the Saviour of all men. Jesus paid for the sins of all humanity. If you die in your sins and burn in Hellfire, it will be your own fault. Eternal life is a “free gift” (Romans 5:15). Unbelief is the only sin which can prevent a person from going to Heaven, because everyone who believes upon the Lord is going to Heaven “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43). There’s that word “whosoever” again. In the Greek that means everybody!

John 12:47 states:

“And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.”

Calvinism is of the Devil

Oh, how foolish are those men who corrupt the simplicity of the Gospel, and place heavy burdens upon sinners, grievous to be borne. Calvinism teaches that God chooses who will and won’t be saved. Consequently, Calvinism also teaches that Jesus only died for the “chosen” few (i.e. the elect). How absurd!

If MacArthur is correct, i.e. that God chooses who will get saved and who won’t, then what is the criteria by which God chooses? Are some men better, or more worthy, than others? Calvinism turns God into a respecter of persons; but Romans 2:11 states: “For there is no respect of persons with God.” Titus 2:11 clearly states: “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.” The Bible plainly teaches that the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to ALL MEN. That is, all men have the opportunity to get saved. It is man’s responsibility to desire the truth; and it is God’s responsibility to provide it. God is not obligated to provide the truth unless a man first desires to have it.

The very notion that Jesus only died for certain people is blasphemy against the character of God. Does not Romans 5:6 teach that “Christ died for the ungodly“? Yes, it does! God loves all mankind, and has manifest His unconditional love towards us by dying for our sins (Romans 5:12). To say that God chose who would be saved or lost before the world began defeats the entire purpose for which God created mankind. God created us to please Him (Revelation 4:11). Hebrews 11:6 declares that only FAITH pleases God. If God forces certain people to become Christians, then where does faith enter the picture? It doesn’t. For faith to exist, there must be the opportunity for freewill. Calvinists teach that God, through “Irresistible Grace“, forces a person to get saved. How ridiculous! God has given mankind a freewill. It is our choice whether to receive Jesus Christ, or to reject Him. God does not determine our decision NOT because He is incapable of doing so but because He does not desire to do so.

God is not willing that any should perish (2nd Peter 3:9). If MacArthur is correct, i.e. that God chose some not to be saved, then God is willing for some to perish, because He didn’t even give them a chance to get saved. There are so many loopholes in the doctrines of Calvinism. One heresy begets another and another.

Matthew 25:41 states that God created Everlasting Fire (i.e. Hell) originally for the Devil and his angels. God never intended for even one human being to burn in the fires of Hell. Yet, according to John MacArthur and other Calvinists, God only chose certain people to be saved, and others were intended to burn in Hell for all eternity. The big problem with Calvinism from every perspective is that it eliminates man’s free will to make his own choices.

Conclusion

John MacArthur is full of pudding. Faith is not a gift to those whom God has chosen to salvation, independent of their own free will. God forbid! Rather, those who freely RECEIVE Jesus Christ are saved by the power of the Gospel (John 1:12; Romans 1:16). Eternal life is a “free gift” which has been paid for by Jesus’ literal physical precious blood (Hebrews 9:12). All that God requires for salvation is that we, of our own free will, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 16:31).

“…let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” —Revelation 22:17

Don Piper: False Prophet!

Don Piper: False Prophet!

By David J. Stewart

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 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^nd Corinthians 11:3-4

Don Piper (born 1950) is a Baptist minister, who on January 18, 1989 was involved in a tragic automobile wreck with a tractor-trailer. Paramedics on the scene pronounced Piper as being dead. Piper claims to have gone to Heaven, where he was reunited with loved ones, but did not claim to have met Jesus Christ there. Within an hour after the accident, another Baptist minister reportedly came to the scene, claiming he was prompted by God to pray for Piper. Ninety minutes after dying, Don came back to life, and he faced a long, grueling recovery involving 34 surgeries. After the ordeal, Piper decided to write 90 Minutes in Heaven, a book describing his Near-Death Experience, which has become a NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER. The book has already sold over 1,600,000 copies.

On his website, Don Piper introduces himself with these words:

“Best–selling author, speaker, actor, syndicated columnist, former CBS & CBN Television network executive, former youth minister, education minister, senior adult minister, Baptist Student Ministry director, long-time single adult pastor and senior pastor…

Piper is in great demand in pulpits across the United States and around the world as a conference leader on effective prayer ministry, the reality of Heaven, single adult issues and as an evangelist. He has led revival meetings and seminars all over North America and Europe. Don Piper is a dynamic speaker and the author of New York Times bestseller, 90 Minutes in Heaven - a True Story of Death and Life…

Now in its 35th printing, 90 Minutes in Heaven has sold more than 1.6 million copies in the United States. It also is enjoying worldwide success as a bestseller in Sweden, Australia, Canada, South Africa and the United Kingdom.”

Although I certainly sympathize with Mr. Piper’s tragic accident and painful recovery period, I am compelled as a God-fearing, Bible-believing Christian to expose him for the false prophet that he is.
Don Piper’s False Gospel

Don Piper is a false prophet, just like John MacArthur, Ray Comfort, Jack Chick, Paul Washer and others who require sinners to forsake (or be willing to forsake) their sins to be saved. Here’s the sinner’s prayer Piper leads people to pray on his website:

“Dear God,

I know that I have broken your laws and my sins have separated me from you. I am truly sorry, and now I want to turn away from my past sinful life toward you. Please forgive me, and help me avoid sinning again. I believe that your son, Jesus Christ, died for my sins, was resurrected from the dead, and is alive today. I invite Jesus to become the Lord of my life, to rule and reign in my heart from this day forward. Help me to live a meaningful and purposeful life until You call me home to be with You in Heaven someday. In Jesus’ name I pray, Amen.”

SOURCE: Don Piper Ministries

Like Ray Comfort and John MacArthur, Piper leads people to make Christ the Lord of their life, to rule and to reign over them in order to be saved. This is a damnable heresy called “Lordship Salvation”. Lordship Salvation is a false gospel which requires lost sinners to surrender to Christ’s will, be willing to turn from personal sins, and make Jesus Lord of their lives as prerequisites to receiving God’s free gift of eternal life. The very definition of the word “gift” exposes the proponents of Lordship Salvation as liars and antichrists.

Hebrews 1:2 Teaches that God Speaks to us Through His Son

Hebrews 1:1-2 states: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son…” It is through the Word of God which God speaks to us, for Jesus is the Word of God (John 1:1-3,14; Revelation 19:13). Jesus is the Living Word; the Bible is the Written Word.

Don Piper is a Modernist who is out to make a buck. It’s a shame that people refuse to accept the Word of God as evidence enough of divine truth. Instead, everyone today is flocking to every nutcase who claims to see a vision, or in Piper’s case… went to Heaven. I don’t believe him at all. God allowed the Apostle Paul and the Apostle John to see things in Heaven for the purpose of writing the Scriptures, but the Bible is complete nowadays. For anyone, such as Piper, to claim to have seen such things would mean adding to the Scriptures. If Piper has indeed seen Heaven, then his experiences are inspired of God. Piper is selling the information of what he claims to have seen in Heaven. Think about that.

Certainly, Piper’s claims are very confusing to people, because many others have claimed the same type of Near Death Experiences, and offer differing accounts of Heaven. God is not the author of confusion. The Bible tells us all we need to know about Heaven.

Furthermore, there’s no way of verifying Piper’s claims. That’s the beautiful thing about the Bible. It’s all verifiable information. Historically and archeologically, the Bible is truthful. We have no way of verifying if what Piper says is true, and God would not place us into a situation where we were unable to verify the evidence. Through honest and diligent study, the Word of God can be verified from Genesis to Revelation.

Don Piper’s Heresy Concerning the Jews

Pastor Piper is way out in left-field concerning the Jews:

“Christianity would not be possible if it were not for Judaism. Jews are the chosen people of God and therefore they have a special relationship with God. We are often asked if there will be a separate judgment for Jewish people. We acknowledge it is possible.”

SOURCE: Don Piper Ministries

First of all, Judaism is a Satanic religion. Christianity owes NOTHING to the vile pagan religion of Judaism. Judaism boldly rejects Jesus Christ as the Messiah, and is largely based upon the Jewish Talmud, a sickening religious manuscript which permits sexual intercourse with 3-year old girls.

Second, both religious and political Zionism are of the Devil. Don Piper (as do John Hagee and others) teaches that Jews are treated different by God than the Gentiles; but the Bible plainly states in Romans 10:12 “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.” Again in Romans 2:11 we are told “For there is no respect of persons with God.” I don’t care if you’re 100% Jewish, you’re going to burn in the fires of Hell forever if you don’t believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to forgive your sins. Jesus is the only Messiah of this sinful world!

2nd Thessalonians 1:8,9 applies to everyone, Jews and gentiles alike “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.” Eternal life is a free gift, paid for by Jesus’ literal, physical, precious blood (1st Peter 1:18,19; Hebrews 9:12). No Jew will ever go to Heaven apart from the precious sin-cleansing blood of Jesus Christ (Acts 10:43).

For more information about the Jews and the Bible, please read: Questions and Answers Concerning Israel

---

Embraced by the Light

Few authors have changed our spiritual orientation more than Betty Eadie who wrote Embraced by the Light. During her supposed “near-death” experience (It had not been medically validated when she wrote her book) she met a loving “Jesus” who appeared “more brilliant than the sun” [Betty J. Eadie, Embraced by the Light; Placerville, CA: Gold Leaf Press, 1992, pg. 41]. With three “angels” as her guides, she was shown an occult spiritual system that fused her Mormon and Native American heritage with contemporary New Age teachings. Her supposedly “Christian” experience contradicts the Bible on every point. Who do you think was her source of “wisdom“?

Many people see near-death experiences as opportunities to preview heaven. Few know the darker side. To understand both near-death experiences and Embraced by the Light, read Doug Groothuis’ well-documented book, Deceived by the Light. In pagan cultures, shamans often “met” their personal animal spirit (spirit guide or demon) during childhood near-death experiences which opened doors to demonic spirits and visions. Apparently, Betty Eadie did. During a serious illness after her mother, a “full-blooded Sioux Indian“, had left her at a boarding school, the girl slipped into a coma. While in this trance-like state, she saw a spiritual being whose beard sparkled with light [Betty J. Eadie, Embraced by the Light; Placerville, CA: Gold Leaf Press, 1992, pg. 4-5].

“Most shamans receive an ‘initiatory call’ … during a personal illness serious enough to induce a coma (a form of trance)” [Wallace Black Elk and William S. Lyon, Black Elk: The Sacred Ways of a Lakota (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1991), xviii] wrote William Lyon in his biography of Indian shaman Black Elk.

Unlike Christian families who come under God’s protection, tribal cultures are driven by superstitions, fears, and rituals that buy protection from certain powerful spirits or demons against more frightening ones. Today the same occult rituals merge with all kinds of occult arts and teachings. “Angels are firmly rooted in the collective unconscious of the human race“, writes Geoffrey James, who looks at angels through the filter of Jungian psychology. “Their energy can be tapped by practicing the Western magickal system of Angel Magic . . . a practical application of the Cabal (or Kabbala, an ancient form of Jewish occultism), Tarot, and Astrology” (“Get the Real Story on Angel Power,” Llewellyn’s New Worlds of Mind and Spirit; October/November, 1995; pg. 24).

Evil is back by popular demand. And while, Satan, masquerading as “an angel of light” can only oppress Christians to the extent God allows (Job 1:10; Deuteronomy 23:14; Ezra 9:9; Psalm 5:11, 32:7, 91:14-15; John 17:11-15; 2nd Thessalonians 3:3; 2 Peter 2:5-10), he has all the rest of humanity to trap and train as counterfeit “ministers of righteousness” (2nd Corinthians 11:14-15). Their main work is to turn people away from God and link them to the occult. Nothing fits their plan better than “Christians” who receive their lies and proclaim them to others as prophecies from God. Most of these “ministers” fit one of the following levels of service:

1.    Pagan priests, shamans, spiritists, and New Age teachers — people who actively seek to harness occult powers and lead others into the occult.

2.    Followers and supporters — those who promote the new spirituality and participate in its rituals.

3.    The deceived masses — those who flow with the social changes and deny the realities of God.

4.    So-called Christians without a personal relationship with Christ — those who bear Christ’s name but don’t follow His ways. They serve Satan by discrediting Christ outside the church and confusing Christians inside the church (See Matthew 7:18; 13:24-40; James 3:1-12).

SOURCE: Chapter 8 – “Deliver us from evil”

---

Conclusion

Although Piper admits salvation is a gift, he contradicts himself 100% when he requires sinners to “turn away from their past sinful life.” This is pure works salvation, and a subtle corruption of the simplicity which is in Christ (2nd Corinthians 11:3). We don’t turn away from our sins in order to trust Jesus; we trust Jesus in order to be saved from our sins. God helps us to clean up our life on a daily basis, as we grow in the Lord and yield to the Holy Spirit. It sometimes takes years for believers to get to the place where they’re willing to consecrate their lives to God in service and Christian living. It doesn’t just happen overnight. The Lordship Salvation heretics are adding holy living as a prerequisite in order to be saved.

Furthermore, Piper requires sinners to make Christ the Lord of their lives, to rule and reign over their heart in order to be saved. This is NOT what the King James Bible teaches. Salvation is a free gift (Romans 6:23). If a person has to do anything to get salvation, then it is no longer a gift. Piper complicates the simplicity of the Gospel. There is nothing simple about salvation if a sinful person is required to make all sorts of changes in his/her personal life to be saved. Is there anyone without sin? No (John 8:7)! Lordship Salvationists place a heavy burden upon sinners. Only God knows how many people have refused salvation because of the false gospel of Don Piper, who requires sinners to do things that God doesn’t require to get saved. Salvation is receiving; Not giving.

I just don’t believe that God would allow anyone to see the glories of Heaven, and then come back to earth to get filthy rich selling the information. That is not the God of the Bible. Heaven is not for sale my friend. Certainly, if Jesus knew that Piper was going to see Heaven and return to tell everybody about it, He would have at least met him in person. What kind of Heaven that has no Jesus? Maybe that’s Piper’s heaven but certainly NOT the true Heaven created by God!

Again, it is disturbing that most people today refuse to believe the Bible as God’s Word. Every whacko that claims to have seen a heavenly vision becomes an instant celebrity nowadays. This is demonism folks. Hebrews 1:1-2 tells us that God speaks to us through His Son in the Word of God. Jesus commanded us in John 5:39 to “SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” It’s insane that the masses of society nowadays would rather hear Oprah talk about many paths to Heaven, or James Van Praagh, or Don Piper’s Near-Death Experience than to listen to God’s Words in the Bible.

C.S. Lewis Was No Christian!

by David J. Stewart

Clive Staples Lewis (1898-1963) was born in Belfast, Ireland, the younger of two sons. He was educated at Malvern College for a year and then privately. In 1931, after being an atheist since age 15, Lewis claimed to have been converted to Christianity. It is clear from Lewis’ own words that he was not a born-again Christian. Lewis plainly taught that water baptism and sacraments were a means to finding, what he termed as, the “Christ-life” (Mere Christianity, pp.62,63). New Agers and ecumenical compromisers love C.S. Lewis, because his philosophies attempt to yoke Christian beliefs with pagan religion.

According to Lewis’ own words, he was: “A very ordinary layman of The Church of England.” The Church of England is apostate! C.S. Lewis authored over 60 books which included poems, novels, children’s books, science fiction, theology, literary criticisms, educational philosophy, and an autobiography. Mr. Lewis was a dangerous man, and his writings ought to be burned. Mr. Lewis was certainly no Christian. He may have had churchianity; but he didn’t have Christianity.

Worldly Compromise and Ecumenism

In 1993, Christianity Today explained why C.S. Lewis is so popular among Evangelicals. Among the reasons given for his popularity was the following:

“Lewis’s … concentration on the main doctrines of the church coincided with evangelicals’ concern to avoid ecclesiastical separatism” (Christianity Today, 10/25/93).

Christianity Today magazine admits that C.S. Lewis is popular to Evangelicals today because, like then, he despised Biblical separation. Like it or not, the Word of God teaches that Christians are to separate from the unsaved (2nd Corinthians 6:14-17; and from other professed “Christians” who live in unrepentant sin (1st Corinthians 5:11).

From 1954 until his death in 1963, C.S. Lewis was professor of medieval and Renaissance English at Cambridge University. Today, C.S. Lewis is known as a distinguished literary scholar and Christian apologist. This is tragic and a further sign of the apostate condition of the church today. Mere Christianity (a book upon which the beliefs of many professing Christians are based) is considered one of the most profound and logically irrefutable writings on Christian apologetics. In reality, it is a work of garbage, filled with lies and distortions of the truth. It is in this book (on page 139) that Lewis refers to man as the “highest animal” (1st Corinthians 15:39 calls Mr. Lewis a liar). The concept of “mere Christianity” means agreeing on a small common denominator of Christian truth, while tolerating great areas of disagreement. In essence, Lewis’ book is an attempt to corrupt the church.

Apostates and False Religions Praise C.S. Lewis

In a recent issue of Christianity Today, Millet, dean of Brigham Young University, is quoted as saying that C.S. Lewis “is so well received by Latter-day Saints [Mormons] because of his broad and inclusive vision of Christianity” (John W. Kennedy, “Southern Baptists Take Up the Mormon Challenge”, Christianity Today, 6/15/98, p. 30). This fact alone ought to show you that Lewis was a heretic. I mean, Mormonism is a false religion, a perverted sex-cult, and they honor Lewis.

As an indication of Lewis’s continued popularity, annual book sales remain over two million half of which comes from The Chronicles Of Narnia series, an occult fantasy series written for children. In an article commemorating the 100th anniversary of Lewis’s birth, J.I. Packer called him “our patron saint“. Christianity Today said Lewis “has come to be the Aquinas, the Augustine, and the Aesop of contemporary Evangelicalism” (”Still Surprised by Lewis”, Christianity Today, 9/7/98). Wheaton College sponsored a lecture series on C.S. Lewis, and Eerdmans published “The Pilgrim’s Guide“ to C.S. Lewis. In April 1998, Mormon professor Robert Millet spoke at Wheaton College on the topic of C.S. Lewis. This is all so tragic!

If it is true to say that “you are what you eat“, then it is also true to say that “a Christian is what he hears and reads“, since this is how he gets his spiritual food. Thus if Christians are brought up on a diet of C.S. Lewis, it should not surprise us to find they are seeking “to continue the legacy of C.S. Lewis“. The apostle Paul said, “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (Gal. 5:9). Thus, if evangelicals read and applaud such books as Mere Christianity, it should come as no surprise if we find them “working towards a common mission” with the enemies of the gospel. The young Christian should be very careful what he reads, and those in positions of authority (pastors, teachers, parents) should be very careful what they recommend others to read (Dr. Tony Baxter, “The Enigma of C.S. Lewis,” CRN Journal, Winter 1998, Christian Research Network, Colchester, United Kingdom, p. 30).

C.S. Lewis is regarded by many as the greatest contemporary lay writer for the Christian faith. With his witty English humor, sharp and simple logic, and seeming loyalty to the tenets of the Christian faith, C.S. Lewis has won the admiration of millions of fans in England and here in the United States. Churches all across America have embraced the writings of C.S. Lewis, not realizing that the man was of the Devil.

Lewis Taught Theistic Evolution

Lewis believed that God created the universe; but then men evolved from animals.

“… for we have good reason to believe that animals existed long before men… For long centuries God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself … [Eventually,] God caused a new kind of consciousness to descend upon this organism” (The Problem of Pain, pp.133,77).

“…Man, the highest of the animals” (Mere Christianity, p.139)

“…but he (man) remains still a primate and an animal” (Reflections On The Psalms, pp.115,129)

“If … you mean simply that man is physically descended from animals, I have no objection” (The Problem of Pain, p.72)

“He made an earth at first ‘without form and void’ and brought it by degrees to its perfection” (Miracles, p.125)

Nature’s “pregnancy has been long and painful and anxious, but it has reached its climax” (Mere Christianity, p.172)

C.S. Lewis held that the Biblical Genesis account came from pagan and mythical sources.

“I have therefore no difficulty accepting, say, the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stories which were Pagan and mythical.” (Reflections On The Psalms, p.110).

How much more evidence do you need, to see that C.S. Lewis was an unsaved heretic. Lewis exploited the name of Jesus Christ, as do many Modernists today, to secure a profitable writing career. You had better get your doctrine from the Word of God; and not from the latest New York Times Bestseller! In John 5:39 Jesus said “SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES!“

Lewis Taught that Mankind is Inherently Good

As with most Modernists, Lewis saw mankind as inherently good.

“…when the consequence is drawn that, since we are totally depraved, our idea of good is worth simply nothing — may thus turn Christianity into a form of devil worship” (The Problem of Pain, pp.37-38).

The divine goodness differs:

“from ours not as white and black but as a perfect circle from a child’s first attempt to draw a wheel” (The Problem of Pain, p.39).

In other words, if we keep trying hard enough through human experience, we will attain divine perfection. Lewis likens God’s goodness as a perfect circle, and man’s imperfection as a distorted circle drawn by a child who is not very coordinated yet. Thus, as that child grows and develops, the circle eventually matches that of the divine circle. Folks, this is works salvation and New Age doctrine at its core. New Age teaches that man, through better education and rehabilitation, can “evolve” into a higher form of human culture. New Age boldly rejects the Biblical teaching that man’s heart is desperately wicked and deceitful above all else (Jeremiah 17:9).

Total depravity was rejected by Lewis.

(”I disbelieve that doctrine”) because: (1) “If we were totally depraved we could not know ourselves to be depraved”; (2) “Experience shows that there is much goodness in human nature” (The Problem of Pain, p.66).

In sharp contrast to the teachings of C.S. Lewis, Romans 3:12 states: “They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.“

Lewis Taught Baptismal Regeneration and Sacramental Salvation

Lewis believed that some people, devout members of false religions, were saved and didn’t even know it.

“There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it … For example a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ’s birth may have been in this position” (Mere Christianity, pp. 176-177).

Lies! C.S. Lewis was a Modernist (i.e. one who falsely professes to be a Christian). The world is filled with such imposters today who deceitfully speak of a god, spirituality and truth; but they exploit Christianity for their own benefit (2nd Peter 2:1-3). The name of the game is deception. The goal is to appear as “Christian”, while at the same time teaching damnable heresies and promoting cooperation between Christians (i.e. the saved) and the unsaved. Satan loves Modernists, and is making them very wealthy, because they are leading hundreds-of-millions of people into Hellfire.

Lewis also taught that water baptism and the sacraments were a means to obtaining salvation.

“There are three things that spread the Christ-life to us: baptism, belief, and that mysterious action which different Christians call by different names — Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord’s Supper” (Mere Christianity, pp.62,63).

“…this new life is spread not only by purely mental acts like belief, but by bodily acts like baptism and Holy Communion.” (Mere Christianity, pp.62,63).

In the other world “there will be every occasion for being the sort of people that we can become only as the result of doing such acts here” (Mere Christianity, p.63).

You can read a free online copy of Mere Christianity here

Clearly, Lewis was an unsaved Modernist, who catered to all the different religions. As with those trying to destroy the New Testament Church today, Lewis promoted ecumenism (i.e. the unbiblical uniting of believers with unbelievers).

Lewis wrongly taught that God would pardon man’s selfish pride which keeps him ignorance and rebellion.

God “often makes prizes of humans who have given their lives for causes He thinks bad on the monstrously sophistical ground that the humans thought them good and were following the best they knew” (The Screwtape Letters, p.26).

But God says in Proverb 14:12, “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” 2nd Thessalonians 1:8 plainly warns, “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” There will be NO exceptions! As we learned earlier, Lewis thinks that some people are saved and don’t even know it. That is unscriptural. Jesus said in John 10:27, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” A Buddhist doesn’t follow Christ; but rather, Buddha. A Catholic doesn’t follow Christ; but rather, the Catholic Church. The Bible teaches that a genuine Christian will hear the Word of God (i.e. Jesus’ Voice — Hebrews 1:1,2) and will follow Jesus Christ. Don’t be deceived by lying imposters, like C.S. Lewis, who teach that Christ can be found in all religions. No Sir! Jesus Christ cannot be found in ANY religion; but rather, ONLY in the Word of God (1st Peter 1:23).

Lewis Became a Catholic Before his Death

Lewis indicates that shortly before his death he was turning toward the Catholic Church. Lewis termed himself “very Catholic” — his prayers for the dead, belief in purgatory, and rejection of the literal resurrection of the body are serious deviations from Biblical Christianity (C.S. Lewis: A Biography, p. 234). Lewis even went to a priest for regular confession (p. 198), and received the sacrament of extreme unction on 7/16/63 (p. 301). His contention that some pagans may “belong to Christ without knowing it” is a destructive heresy (Mere Christianity, pp. 176-177), as was his statement that “Christ fulfills both Paganism and Judaism…” (Reflections on the Psalms, p. 129).

Lewis Taught Works Salvation

C.S. Lewis plainly stated that he believed a person has to work to keep salvation.

“There are people (a great many of them) who are slowly ceasing to be Christians…” (Mere Christianity, p.162).

“…a Christian can lose the Christ-life which has been put into him, and he has to make efforts to keep it” (Mere Christianity, p.49).

Lewis believed that morality and obeying God’s Law were a means to eventually being born-again.

“… ye must be born again. Till then, we have duty, morality, the Law. A schoolmaster, as St. Paul says… But the schooldays, please God, are numbered” (Letters to Malcolm, p.115). [emphasis added]

“The point is not that God will refuse you admission to His eternal world if you have not certain qualities of character: the point is that if people have not got at least the beginnings of those qualities inside them, then no possible external conditions could make a ‘Heaven’ for them …” (Mere Christianity, p.63).

In context, to be “born again” for Lewis, is somewhere down the road yet (Mere Christianity, pp.59,60). Lewis taught that a life of self-righteousness was necessary to eventually become born-again. In sharp contrast, Jesus taught that being born-again was a second birth which BEGINS the believer’s life in Christ. Lewis was a very confused and doctrinally flawed man. As a consequence, Lewis is burning in Hell today and no doubt has led many people there too.

Lewis Denied a Literal Heaven

“All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible. Musical instruments are mentioned because for many people (not all) music is the thing known in the present life which most strongly suggests ecstasy and infinity. Crowns are mentioned to suggest the fact that those who are united with God in eternity share His splendor and power and joy. Gold is mentioned to suggest the timelessness of heaven (gold does not rust) and the preciousness of it” (Mere Christianity, p.106).

Lewis Denied a Literal Hell

Lewis never believed in a literal Hell, but instead believed hell is a state of mind one chooses to possess and become — he wrote:

“…every shutting-up of the creature within the dungeon of its own mind is, in the end, Hell” (The Great Divorce, p. 65)

Lewis Claimed the Bible Contained Myths

Lewis believed the Book of Job is “unhistorical” (Reflections on the Psalms, pp. 110), and that the Bible contained “error” (pp. 110, 112) and is not divinely inspired (The Inklings, p. 175).

“I have the deepest respect for Pagan myths, still more for myths in the Holy Scriptures” (The Problem of Pain, p.71)

Conclusion

C.S. Lewis was an imposter, who corrupted the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and led multitudes of victims into Hellfire with his doctrines of devils. Lewis used profanities, told lewd stories, and frequently got drunk with his students (5/19/90, World magazine). Christians need to read more critically The Abolition of Man, The Problem of Pain, Miracles, The Great Divorce, and God in the Dock.

By the time of his death, Lewis had moved from Idealism (no idea of a personal God) to Pantheism (an impersonal God in everything) and then to Theism (the existence of God). Unfortunately, in Letters to Malcolm (p. 107), Lewis indicates that shortly before his death he was turning toward the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is NO church at all; but rather, is a prisonhouse of false religion.

J.D. Douglas, writing in Christianity Today, for December 20, 1963 (p. 27) reports the reservations of Dr. Martin Lloyd Jones of historic Westminster Chapel of London:

Dr. Lloyd Jones told Christianity Today that because C.S. Lewis was essentially a philosopher, his view of salvation was defective… Lewis was an opponent of the substitutionary and penal theory of the Atonement.

Dr. W. Wesley Shrader of the First Baptist Church of Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, wrote a letter to the editor in Christianity Today for February 28, 1964 (pp.34-35) in which he stated:

C.S. Lewis… would never embrace the (literal-infallible) view of the Bible. He would accept no theory of the “total depravity of man.” He rejected the “substitutionary theory” of the Atonement’” (F.B.F. News Bulletin, Fundamental Baptist Fellowship, March 4, 1984).

Every believer needs to shun the writings of C. S. Lewis and warn their friends and family about this wolf in sheep’s clothing (Matthew 7:15). It is sickening to hear so many professed Christians today praise and honor such a heretical man, who denied the literacy of the Scriptures and taught a bunch of wishy-washy nonsense. The writings of C.S. Lewis are nothing but a bunch of ramblings devoid of any meaningful Biblical substance. It’s a sure cure for insomnia.

The writings of C.S. Lewis are of the Devil.

Beware of James Robison’s Ministry

Beware of James Robison’s Ministry

by David J. Stewart

Perhaps you’ve seen James and Betty Robison begging for money for the poor, showing children searching in Cambodian garbage dumps for anything to make their life better. His show is Life for Today, as seen on TBN. The appeal is heart-wrenching, and the needs are real; BUT, where does all those contributions, fifty million a year, go? Well, James Robison doesn’t think it’s any of your business, so he refuses to disclose complete financial information to the Better business Bureau. Hypocritically, Robison claims on his website, “LIFE Outreach International maintains a high standard of financial responsibility and accountability.” To the contrary, LIFE Outreach International Association of Churches (LOI) FAILS to meet three of the BBB’s Standards for Charity Accountability. I did not write this article to be unkind in any way, but to WARN people that they should never give money to any “non-profit” organization which refuses to completely disclose where the contributions are being spent. The following information is provided by the Better Business Bureau (BBB: Wise Giving Alliance).

LIFE Outreach International Association of Churches	March 2006
also known as: Life Outreach International also known as: Life Today formerly known as: James Robison Evangelistic Association 1801 West Euless Boulevard Euless, TX 76040 817-267-4211 817-267-0040
www.lifetoday.org	Expiration Date: March 2008

Year, State Incorporated: 1963, Texas

Affiliates: Life for Children, Zoe Aviation and Charter Service.

Stated Purpose: “to share the life and love of Jesus Christ with hurting people worldwide by means of personal ministry, media outreach and humanitarian mission relief.”

Evaluation Conclusions

LIFE Outreach International Association of Churches (LOI) does not meet the following 3 Standards for Charity Accountability.
Standard 12: Detailed Functional Breakdown of Expenses – Include in the financial statements a breakdown of expenses (e.g., salaries, travel, postage, etc.) that shows what portion of these expenses was allocated to program, fund raising, and administrative activities. If the charity has more than one major program category, the schedule should provide a breakdown for each category. LOI does not meet this Standard because the detailed functional breakdown of expenses within the organization’s financial statements did not include a detailed breakdown of expenses for each of its major program activities (i.e. media ministries, missions outreach, and literature and tape distribution). Standard 16: Annual Report – Have an annual report available to all, on request, that includes: (a) the organization’s mission statement, (b) a summary of the past year’s program service accomplishments, (c) a roster of the officers and members of the board of directors, (d) financial information that includes (i) total income in the past fiscal year, (ii) expenses in the same program, fund raising and administrative categories as in the financial statements, and (iii) ending net assets. LOI does not meet this Standard because it did not provide a copy of an annual report. Standard 17: Web Site Disclosures – Include on any charity websites that solicit contributions, the same information that is recommended for annual reports, as well as the mailing address of the charity and electronic access to its most recent IRS Form 990. LOI does not meet this Standard because its website, www.lifetoday.org, does not include all of the recommended information for those charity websites that solicit for donations. Specifically, it does not include a board roster or financial information.
In addition, the BBB Wise Giving Alliance requested but did not receive complete information on the organization’s governance and oversight, effectiveness measures, finances, solicitation materials, donor privacy, and fundraising disclosures and is unable to verify the organization’s compliance with the following 15 Standards for Charity Accountability: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, and 20.
LIFE Outreach International Association of Churches (LOI) meets the remaining 2 Standards for Charity Accountability.

Governance

Chief Executive : James Robison, President
Compensation*: $
Chair of the Board: Not provided

Chair’s Profession / Business Affiliation: Not provided

Board Size:

Paid Staff Size:

*Compensation information was not provided.

SOURCE