BALLS, Get Some – Be A Man of GOD

Grow some spiritual balls

The terms “grow some balls” or grow a pair are often used in the context of toughening up, Manning Up and being strong and not being passive. “Growing spiritual balls is hardening up to you’re true purpose. The flesh is yoked to the world and Satan is the god of this world. So all one has to do to not be filled with the Spirit is to be in the flesh; as a result, you will remain a servant of Satan. God’s authority in the Earth flows down through men and to women in order to keep the children in obedience producing a Godly seed (Genesis 18:19; Malachi 2:15; I Timothy 3:4-5, 12; Titus 1:6).

Ball sports are not sports in the true sense, but are instead considered to be games. These ball games can be grouped by the general objective of the game, sometimes indicating a common origin either of a game itself or of its basic idea:

If you don’t have any balls the only thing you can do is play with balls – Gary Price
http://omegaministries.org/

BALLS – Part Two

BALLS – Part One

What It Means To Be A Man Of God

Bible teaching by Derek Prince. God’s heart for men is to see them walking out the destinies He has created for them. But before that can happen, they need to understand the primary roles God has assigned to them. Discover man’s true calling—and learn how to fulfill it.
http://www.derekprince.com/

Tenet: a principle, belief, or doctrine generally held to be true; especially : one held in common by members of an organization, movement, or profession.

Tenet 1. God made man in His image and imparted life into man personally marking him as God’s genetic offspring. (Genesis 2:7,Genesis 1:26-27, Luke 3:38)

Tenet 2. Men are responsible for governing God’s creation under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit who establishes communion with a man’s spiritual authority, Jesus Christ. (1 Corinthians 11:3)

Tenet 3. Men are responsible for establishing the foundation for civilization which is the nuclear family composed of father, mother and children. (Ephesians 5:25-33)

Tenet 4. Men are responsible for governing God’s nuclear family on the earth known as the Church of Jesus Christ, governing the Church by displaying selfless love, humility and the fruit of the Holy Spirit. Men are also responsible for protecting the Church from the attacks of Satan, the enemy of God.
(1 Timothy 3:1-16, 1 Peter 5:1-8)

Tenet 5. Men are responsible for leading and conducting a spiritual war against God’s spiritual adversaries, Satan, fallen angels and demons. (Ephesians 6:10-20, 2 Corinthians 10:3-6)

Tenet 6. Men are responsible for leading and conducting a spiritual war against God’s spiritual adversaries, Satan, fallen angels and demons. (Ephesians 6:10-20, 2 Corinthians 10:3-6)

Tenet 7. Homosexuality is a sin against God, against nature, against civilization, against natural order and against God’s creation.(Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:27, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10)

Tenet 8. Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world and salvation is not available through any other religious source or pathway. Mankind has only two choices, come to Jesus Christ in humble submission through repentance from sin or be damned eternally in a lake of fire for refusing to do so. (Acts 4:12, Mark 16:15-16, Romans 1:16)

Man up Manifesto

MAN UP Manifesto PDF 

Balls – Man Up

I was recently asked why there does not seem to be many messages directed towards men about standing up to be men of God.

First, let me say that we cannot buy into a tit for tat mentality. If a message is targeted to women, there is no obligation to then give a message that deals with men. Let us all – men and women – simply be at God’s disposal. If a word comes forth with deals with us – receive it, repent, and change. If a word is not for us, then pray for those to whom it pertains and move on. Let us not look to the left nor to the right, but keep our eyes on Jesus and let the Father mold us as He sees fit.

Okay, that said, the following is a message by Pastor Gary C. Price as he teaches a message called, “Balls“. In it, he speaks about the necessity for men to loose themselves from that which disempowers them and take their place in the spiritual war against wickedness.

The woman is an extension of man

We must study the word of God without contamination from our own preconceived notions or definitions of the world. The woman is an extension of man, which is why she is suitable to be a help meet for man.
In order to receive the Kingdom of God, one must receive the Holy Spirit. God the Father wills a thing, Jesus speaks it, and the Holy Spirit performs it. There are only 3 blockages that can prevent one from receiving the Holy Spirit: the flesh, the world, and Satan.

The flesh is yoked to the world and Satan is the god of this world. So all one has to do to not be filled with the Spirit is to be in the flesh; as a result, you will remain a servant of Satan.
The first mission of God when He made man was to make man like Himself.
The image of man created by God was male and female, and such was necessary for the procreation of the race. If that image (male & female) is marred, then it no longer reflects what God created, but becomes an avenue for satanic expression.

Homosexuality

Since God created man as male and female, we can know that He did not create homosexuality, transgenderism, lesbianism, bisexuality, etc. Such is not the creation of God but a Satanic mutation of the life God initially created. Instead of getting offended, turn on that demonic invasion, ask God to deliver you from that spirit so that you may be made whole.

Leviticus 18:22 ESV /

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Spirits are genderless, but the spirit governs the tabernacle to which God assigns you and allows you to have fellowship with Him. Without the governance of the spirit, It is man’s soul that rises up against his spirit – not liking the government of God – in an attempt to usurp control of the body and indulge the desires of the flesh. Unless the soul is brought under subjection to the spirit (I Corinthians 9:27), Satan is able to infuse with the rebellious soul and mold you into his image.

Satan is a soul man or a soul dweller

Satan is a soul man or a soul dweller. This is why the false church runs on soul power.
The mutated image of Satan is the fallen nature of man. A soul man – a man’s mind detached from God and ruled by his soulish flesh – is the beast.

If you are ruled by your soul then you will also rebel against all types of authority, including the reflection of God’s authority in the Earth which flows down through men and to women in order to keep the children in obedience producing a Godly seed (Genesis 18:19; Malachi 2:15; I Timothy 3:4-5, 12; Titus 1:6).

Man is a reflection of God. The woman is designed to be a reflection of the man; thereby also reflecting the image of God (I Corinthians 11:7). When there are a lot of loose, whorish women soliciting lust from the men, it is only because men have abdicated their authority in God.
Women are by nature feminine. However an effeminate man is abnormal and reflects one who is outwardly a man, but inwardly has characteristics of a female. Such is a castrated man who has no strength to stand or fight; he has no balls. These eunuchs then become the reflection of other men, having “man crushes” or “bromances” on the men they idolize (sports figures, entertainers, politicians, etc.). We are witnessing the homosexualization of men, not only in the expression of full-blown homosexuality, but in the castration of men through uncontrolled lusts.

Satan is after Adam,

Satan is after Adam, but he must use Eve to emasculate him. By getting access to Adam, Satan could pervert the entire race of man (Romans 5:12).
Satan is a sodomite;  he is the King of Sodom (Genesis Chapter 14). Therefore, those who have been mutated into his image share that sodomite nature.

The only way a man can be a man is to stand on the truth – against what is wrong – and not buckle. You must personally represent God yourself. You must be responsible. You must be what God created man to be in the beginning.

A woman who fights against this is ruled by the same satanic, sodomite spirit. This is why many women prefer to be around effeminate men and raise their boys to be effeminate. They are offended by a normal man.

A castrated man bleeds lust

A castrated man bleeds lust. If a man is lusting after you, then you can know you are looking at a guy who is inwardly a girl.

When a man’s heart turns towards God again, he will not worship you, he will worship God, but he will love you. Pastor Gary C. Price
http://omegaministries.org/

Former Black Panther Eldridge Cleaver Conversion

Former atheist, Marxist & Black Panther

In 1981, former Black Panther Eldridge Cleaver spoke at the BYU Freedom Festival about his conversion from being the Marxist, atheist, spokesman for the Black Panther’s party, to being a Christian, freedom loving, Founding Father appreciating, patriotic American. It’s an amazing journey Eldridge took and an important one for us to learn from.

The Black Panther Party (originally the Black Panther Party for Self-Defence) was an African-American revolutionary socialist organization active in the United States from 1966 until 1982. The Black Panther Party achieved national and international notoriety through its involvement in the Black Power movement and U.S. politics of the 1960s and 1970s

Founded in Oakland, California by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale on October 15, 1966, the organization initially set forth a doctrine calling primarily for the protection of African-American neighbourhoods from police brutality. The leaders of the organization espoused socialist and Marxist doctrines; however, the Party’s early Black Nationalist reputation attracted a diverse membership. The Black Panther Party’s objectives and philosophy expanded and evolved rapidly during the party’s existence, making ideological consensus within the party difficult to achieve, and causing some prominent members to openly disagree with the views of the leaders.

The organization’s official newspaper, The Black Panther, was first circulated in 1967

His Journey from an atheist to being a Christian

(born 1935, Wabbaseka, near Little Rock, Ark., U.S.—died May 1, 1998, Pomona, Calif.) American black militant whose autobiographical volume Soul on Ice (1968) is a classic statement of black alienation in the United States. Cleaver was an inmate of correctional institutions in California almost constantly from his junior high school days until 1966 for crimes ranging from possession of marijuana to assault with intent to murder. While in prison, he supplemented his incomplete education with wide reading and became a follower of the Black Muslim separatist Malcolm X.

He also began writing the essays that would eventually be collected in Soul on Ice, and whose publication in Ramparts magazine helped him win parole in 1966. After being paroled, Cleaver met Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, who had just founded the Black Panther Party in Oakland, Calif. Cleaver soon became the party’s minister of information. The publication in 1968 of Soul on Ice, a collection of angry memoirs in which Cleaver traced his political evolution while denouncing American racism, made him a leading black radical spokesman. In April 1968, however, he was involved in a shoot-out in Oakland between Black Panthers and police that left one Panther dead and Cleaver and two police officers wounded.

Faced with re-imprisonment after the shoot-out, Cleaver jumped bail in November 1968 and fled first to Cuba and then to Algeria. Having broken with the Panthers in 1971 and grown disillusioned with communism, Cleaver returned voluntarily to the United States in 1975. The charges against him were dropped in 1979 when he pled guilty to assault in connection with the 1968 shoot-out and was put on five years’ probation. In his later years Cleaver proclaimed himself a born-again Christian and a Republican, engaged in various business ventures, and struggled with an addiction to cocaine.

A 1982 interview with Eldridge Cleaver by David Mill

In 1982 I interviewed Eldridge Cleaver, former “Minister of Information” for the Black Panther Party. He had come to the University of Maryland on a lecture tour. The one-time gun-toting Marxist revolutionary was now a Reagan Republican and a fan of Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church. Which made for a lively conversation.

I have no romantic attachment to the Panthers. In fact, I resent the simple-minded glorification of violent black radicalism. If Mr. Cleaver’s recollections can be trusted, my resentment is justified.

Cleaver died in 1998 at the age of 62. He certainly lived an interesting life, including seven years of exile in Cuba, France and Algeria (after a gun battle with Oakland police). This three-part interview covers a lot of ground. Stick with it till the end of pt. 3 and you’ll see perhaps the weirdest thing anyone ever said to me during an interview.

DAVID MILLS: It seems quite a change of heart you’ve had over 15 years. During the Black Power movement, you thought the primary crisis we faced was the American system. Now you say it’s the Communist threat.

ELDRIDGE CLEAVER: It’s not a total change, because the stuff I was preoccupied with in the ’60s is still true. American history is American history. I’m not trying to say America is utopia. Far from it. But I think that in the past I was oblivious to what was going on in Communist countries, or I didn’t believe what was said against the Communists.

”…We used to say that America’s enemies are our friends…”

I was really favorable toward the Communists because they made such a strong critique of capitalism and America. They were opposed to America systematically, so I viewed that as a source of strength or a source of alliances. Many people do this. We used to say that America’s enemies are our friends. …

What changed my whole point of view was that I had a chance to leave America and go live in Communist countries and see what was going on there. Without having that experience, I probably would still, like a lot of other people, be running around pushing the same line.

We have many problems in America, and some of them are absolutely outrageous. But with all our problems, we have more freedom in this country than any of those Communist countries.

So what I say today is we need to be more precise in what’s wrong with America. In the past we just used the shotgun approach, and just said burn it down, destroy it, overthrow it, that sort of stuff. Well, that’s very dangerous thinking. It’s not even thinking. It’s sloganizing.

Everybody admits that we have a huge economic problem, but the question becomes what do we do about it? Just close the curtain down, you know? Stop the show, change all the furniture around on the stage, and then let the show go on?

That’s one of my gripes with revolutionaries. Most of these revolutionary scenarios call for exactly that. But it’s like changing a tire on a moving vehicle; we have to figure out how to solve these problems while the thing’s in motion. So that means being very precise about what’s wrong.

MILLS: Let’s backtrack, because it’s ironic. Do you think that during the Panther movement when you were advocating revolution, that you and the Black Panthers were being used by the Communists?

CLEAVER: At different stages, you could say that. The Communists did not summon us into being. We grew up in our own community around our own issues and, as a matter of fact, against the activity of the Communists. They weren’t happy to see us come along because we were organizing people outside of their fold. They also had an attitude toward armed struggle that was more conservative than ours.

At a certain point, the Communists recognized that we were the ones having impact in the community. So they came to us. They offered us free legal representation – we always needed lawyers – and they would contribute finances to us. And we wanted to do this, because we were Marxists ourselves.

I think at a certain point, the Black Panther Party became the driving engine for a whole phase of the [Communist] movement. So in that sense, the Communists used us. On a worldwide basis, they used us propaganda-wise.

MILLS: What’s ironic about that is that was the FBI’s excuse to go after the Panthers, wasn’t it? That you were tools of the Communists?

CLEAVER: Well, it’s not against the law to be a Communist. But when you advocate the violent overthrow of the government, or when you practice it –

You know, many people lie about what they’re doing. And we used to lie, use falsehood, when we were describing our own activity. For instance, we would go out and ambush the police. Then, if we got caught, we’d say they shot at us first.

MILLS: And that was not true?

CLEAVER: It wasn’t always true. There were many times when we would shoot first.

And I say this because it illustrates the distortions that get involved when the people hate the police because they always see the police making trouble. But a lot of times, the police are not wrong. A lot of times, people did exactly what police said they did, but then they lie about it.

I think we were in that situation in the ’60s with the FBI. The FBI investigated us and came to the conclusion that we were a dangerous group.

MILLS: Was the FBI right?

”… I think it was right…”

CLEAVER: I think it was right. See, the problem gets into what does the FBI have a right to do to you? Once they make the decision that you are an enemy of America, then they consider you outside the law, so they use all their dirty tricks on you.

This got them into a lot of trouble. If they could have proven that we were systematically engaging in armed struggle, then they would have had less trouble with the public over what they were doing.

The whole thing is a mixture, because we were not always wrong. And we didn’t start out actually shooting at the cops. We were rebelling against a routine. We were rebelling against a whole history. We were rejecting America, America’s laws, everything like that.

MILLS: So the case could be made that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were justified in going after the Black Panther Party?

CLEAVER: I think a case could be made on the following points: that the FBI was not always wrong; that many of their accusations were accurate when it came to our use of violence, our use of bombs, our use of ambush tactics.

So if I would fault the FBI at all, it would be in its overzealousness in using CIA tactics on the American people. I say this because they did this to people who were not Black Panthers, or who were not involved in that kind of activity. Just people who dissented.

MILLS: There is still that kind of dissent in America. Why do you think that is?

CLEAVER: To really understand it, you have to go back to the Second World War. The Second World War was considered a patriotic war. America was solidly behind it.

But from that time on, there was a new kind of struggle, very controversial, with a new kind of political party which was not well understood, an international party coming in trying to change the government. That started the Cold War and what you call the “struggle for the minds of men.”

From that time on, we have had in America a preachment against the government, condemning the government, condemning the activity of the government in foreign countries – in Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, all over the world. It was a whole period of decolonization that took place.

So we have in America a couple of generations of people who have grown up just hearing negative about America. This is amazing because it has a distorting impact. I think Americans have been bombarded with very powerful negative propaganda. … It has a brainwashing effect on people.

MILLS: What about black Americans? There’s nothing new about black dissatisfaction with America.

”…Blacks generally don’t feel part of America…”

CLEAVER: I think this is one of the very serious constituents of the black identity crisis. Blacks generally don’t feel part of America. I call it a fence-straddling mentality.

Even though you don’t have a strong “back-to-Africa” movement, you do have that theme that floats around in the community. The consequence is that you have people paralyzed on the fence. They neither go back to Africa nor do they participate fully in America. So you have millions and millions of blacks who are in a kind of catatonic trance over what to do.

The strong condemnation of America, the constant criticism of America, this has fixed a certain mindset. This is the mindset I have broken with, and it’s the mindset I encounter almost universally among middle-class blacks, which is what you find mostly on college campuses: America not being their home, or America being the worst country in the world, or everything being racist. Just racism, racism, everywhere is racism – not being able to draw some distinctions and to see some good in America as well as the bad.

Here’s more of my 1982 conversation with Eldridge Cleaver. This portion tracks his evolution as a radical.
DAVID MILLS: You have led a very dramatic life. I’d like to walk you through it, if you don’t mind, because it’s so fascinating and because of your new perspective on things.

Let’s start with your childhood. What were your feelings about race and America while growing up in Arkansas?

ELDRIDGE CLEAVER: I didn’t stay there long enough to get deep impressions. I left Arkansas when I was about 10 years old, so my memory of Arkansas is really about learning how to hunt with my dog, chasing rabbits, things like that.

MILLS: After moving to California, what kind of things influenced your political development?

CLEAVER: In growing up in L.A., I realized the existence of the white world, the black world and the Chicano world. I grew up in a neighborhood that was predominately Chicano, and the Chicanos, particularly at that time, had their own subculture which totally rejected white America.

I spent a lot of my time – my early years – as part of that view. And I think that had something to do with the strong withdrawal and rejection [of America] that I experienced.

MILLS: If you had grown up in a predominately black neighborhood, you might not have been so anti-American?

CLEAVER: I think so. And I say that because hanging out with the Chicano guys as a choice was, in itself, a rejection of what the blacks were doing – going along with the program.

In the ’40s, the Chicanos were involved in kind of a war in L.A. against the establishment, against the police. It was a very powerful reality in your life. The cops were always chasing them, they were outlaws. Living in that neighborhood helped sow the seeds of rebellion.

My parents wanted to guide me into being a minister. This was something that was really square as far as I could see, so I chose a rebellious direction.

MILLS: How many years of your life have you spent locked up?

CLEAVER: I add it up to be about 15.

I was sentenced to prison twice: once for possession of marijuana, and once for assault with a deadly weapon – not, as many people think, for rape.

When I was in prison, I wrote a book [“Soul on Ice”]. One section of the book dealt with the subject of rape, and I described some activity that I was involved in. And the way the press took it up, it was just sort of assumed that I was sentenced to prison for rape.

I was sentenced to prison for possession of marijuana, and I served two and a half years for that, then I was sentenced to prison for assault charges, and I stayed in there for 10 years.

MILLS: The first time you went to prison, how did that affect you?

CLEAVER: Well, I had some prior training for that by going to juvenile hall and the youth authority. So on that level I was already broken in to prison. But I think it had the effect of powerfully fixing my rebellious path.

I went to prison when I was 18 years old, and that’s a very delicate age for a young man. It’s an age when your sap is beginning to flow. And being locked up at that point is really one of the worst kinds of experiences.

That’s when I really began to be filled with hatred, and I think I became much more violent in prison. I believe that prisons, in that sense, are schools for crime.

I became a Communist in prison. I studied Marxism in prison.

MILLS: When you came out after that first term, you spent about a year on the outside before your second conviction. And during that time, as you revealed in “Soul on Ice,” you set about raping white women as a principle of black rebellion.

CLEAVER: I wrote this in prison. And I wrote this because I was trying to describe my own feelings, my own attitudes, and the attitudes of a lot of black men. At that time, this was something that was not really written about, talked about. It was kind of scandalous. There was a lot of denial in blacks who had these feelings.

MILLS: What feelings? Sexual attraction to white women?

”… interracial relationships were rising…”

CLEAVER: People used to deny that. The whole phenomenon was raging at that time because this whole black consciousness thing was coming in, interracial relationships were rising.

One of the old bugaboos of race relations in America has been black rape. It has been a big problem down through history and continues to be a problem. For my own part, I think there is often a lot of denial in that. But I think the facts will support a case that there is quite a bit of black rape.

MILLS: How come?

CLEAVER: Well, it has to do with social dynamics – I’ve said what I have to say about that subject in “Soul on Ice.”

MILLS: Looking back on that period now, how do you feel about your own activity?

CLEAVER: What I would do if I wrote about that again would be to put it in a larger context. At that point, I was trying to describe the motivations of the black rapist – what goes on inside his head, what he was thinking – whereas today I am very concerned about male violence against women. That was not what I was addressing in my essay. I would not repeat today what I said 20 years ago because the context is different.

MILLS: You have said that your affiliation with the Black Muslims and the solidarity of that group kept you going while in prison.

CLEAVER: I think it was very important in prison because everybody is organizing, like little armies, for survival. Racial tensions were really high in prison because of things that were going on outside. Consequently, we had a lot of riots in prison.

The prisons in California used to be segregated, and there were struggles inside the prison to break up some of those traditional practices. So there was a lot of motivation for people joining together in these kinds of groups. And the one that appealed to me was the Black Muslims.

You had the Mau-Mau, the Blood Brothers, just little cliques of people taking different names. But I had liked the concern of the Black Muslim organization, and the fact that it was an organization that was more legitimate than some of the cutthroat activity.

MILLS: But all during that time, you didn’t accept the Black Muslim philosophy that all white people were devils, correct?

”…Elijah Muhammad was just full of that demonology…”

CLEAVER: That’s why Malcolm X appealed to me, because Malcolm was more political. He had more of an economic analysis, whereas Elijah Muhammad was just full of that demonology.

Sometimes we would really wonder about the truth of Elijah’s teachings, because it was very easy to believe the whites were devils, particularly the way the information was organized. And it was very appealing to believe that. One man said that it was necessary to teach the black that the white man is the devil in order to get him to stop believing that the white man is God.

MILLS: After leaving prison in 1967, what attracted you to the Black Panthers?

CLEAVER: The fact that they were armed. When I left prison, I didn’t know anything about the Black Panther Party. But I left with the conviction that blacks had to take up guns.

The civil rights movement was turning violent already. I was still in prison when Watts went up in rebellion, and all the major cities across the country were experiencing those rebellions. So what I was aware of in prison was a lot of black people were being killed. And police were using police dogs, cattle prods, water hoses, all these things on the people. We in prison used to look at that news.

And we were already violent people. We were in prison for involving ourselves in criminal violence, nothing political. So it was very easy to transfer those attitudes. You began to just live for the day when you could get out and get involved.

One of the first things I did when I got out was to get some guns. And shortly thereafter, I met the Black Panthers at a meeting. When they came into this meeting, they had their guns. It was like love at first sight.

MILLS: What did you think of Martin Luther King during this period?

”….I actually sort of hated Martin Luther King…”

CLEAVER: At that time, I was very negative. I actually sort of hated Martin Luther King for preaching non-violence, and for being a Christian preacher. Martin Luther King to me was the embodiment of a lot of problems for black people.

”I used to want to kill Martin Luther King…”

I used to want to kill Martin Luther King. I thought it would be good if he was out of the way. I thought he was holding up the movement. Non-violence was never popular among the majority of black Americans from the very beginning. …

MILLS: Looking back now, what do you think of Dr. King?

CLEAVER: Well, looking back, for a long time, I have come to really admire him. When Martin Luther King was assassinated, I got busted two days later [in Oakland]. The gunfight I was involved in was part of the whole atmosphere that was reacting to his assassination.

When Martin Luther King was still alive, we were sort of waiting in the wings impatiently because we saw that non-violence was on the way out. Non-violence worked mostly in the South. When things moved toward the North, they became violent immediately. …

I remember when the media was anti-NAACP. They thought the NAACP were the most extreme people to come along, and they were for a while. But after a while, the media started loving the NAACP.

That’s because each extreme point, calibrated on a spectrum, tends to legitimize the ones it has eclipsed, if that makes sense. Like Martin Luther King and his direct-action movement, even though it was non-violent, eclipsed the NAACP’s legalistic tactics.

And when Martin Luther King came along, he started getting busted and going to jail, and the NAACP started getting invited to the White House. Then, when more violent people came along, Martin Luther King started getting invited to the White House.

Here is the last of my 1982 conversation with former Black Panther Eldridge Cleaver. (I had saved my question about “the pants” for the very end.)

I interviewed Cleaver at the University of Maryland before he gave a speech. During that speech, Cleaver got heckled. It didn’t surprise him. He had been getting that a lot on his college tour…

DAVID MILLS: Kwame Toure – whom you knew as Stokely Carmichael – has come to this campus a few times. He was sponsored by the Black Student Union, which I would guess sympathizes more with his pan-Africanist philosophy than with your conservatism.

ELDRIDGE CLEAVER: I would guess so too.

MILLS: What do you think of that?

”…a lot of them think I’m an FBI agent or a CIA agent…”

CLEAVER: This is a problem I’m working on. First of all, I don’t think [black students] have heard what I’ve got to say. But there have been very powerful condemnations of me. Probably a lot of them think I’m an FBI agent or a CIA agent.

When I show up [at a college], they think I’m the one on the spot. But I show up with the understanding that they’re the ones on the spot. They’re often surprised because they think they’re on such solid ground. And it’s because they’ve been exposed to that kind of emotional rhetoric.

At the time the Black Power movement came into being, I think it was a very positive movement. I think it did a lot of good for black people and white people. But like many other things, it runs its course, and there are extremes.

It’s very appealing to black students to be told that they’re great, and that black is beautiful, and to have a whole cosmos of black interests spelled out in a way that is very ego-satisfying to them, and to condemn the white man.

MILLS: So how have black students reacted to your message?

CLEAVER: I’ve experienced all kinds of reactions. The one that I find unacceptable is the one that tries to stop me from talking by hissing, running commentary – I find the communists do this and some of Stokely’s people do this. Just being very emotional and shouting.

All I want is the opportunity to express my point of view.

MILLS: Is it true that in California during the ’60s, when you started speaking out against the Vietnam War and for revolution, Gov. Ronald Reagan got the parole officials to harass you to make you shut up?

CLEAVER: There’s no doubt about that.

I was chosen by students to be a lecturer at Berkeley. And as governor, Ronald Reagan was on the board of regents of the University of California system. He used to try to prevent me from speaking on campuses.

We referred to Ronald Reagan as the father of the Black Panther Party. It started under his administration. Reagan was always trying to get me off the streets. They were always trying to revoke my parole.

MILLS: How do you feel about Reagan as president?

CLEAVER: I voted for him. I supported him over Jimmy Carter in 1980.

I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976, but I was completely upset by his performance. One of the things that had me upset was his very weak foreign policy, his weak way of dealing with every problem that we had, from Iran to the Soviet Union, Afghanistan, stuff that was jumping off in Latin America.

I felt that I had seen enough of Carter’s policies to recognize that he was basically accommodating America to the expansion of Communism in the world. So when it came to the election, I chose Ronald Reagan because I felt he would give the country a very strong foreign policy, and I had no doubt that he would do the things he was talking about to the economy. I still feel this.

MILLS: You’ve been an atheist, a Black Muslim, a born-again Christian. What is your current religious status?

”…I’m not a member of any church…”

CLEAVER: I don’t know how to describe my own religious status. I’m not a member of any church, but I’m someone who’s convinced that none of our problems can be solved without addressing the spiritual element.

MILLS: Are you a follower of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon?

”…Rev. Moon’s teachings. I’m not a follower…”

I’m not a member of the church…”

CLEAVER: Rev. Moon to me is one of the most significant religious and spiritual leaders in the history of the whole world. That’s saying a lot. I have been helped to a great extent by studying Rev. Moon’s teachings. I’m not a follower in the sense that I’m not a member of the church.

I started studying the Unification Church’s teachings in 1979, so I’ve had quite a bit of time to consider it and ponder it. The world is going through a lot of changes about Rev. Moon, but I do believe that in time they’ll be able to view him objectively.

MILLS: A few years ago, you were in the news for designing pants for men with a pouch in front to contain the genitals. Whatever became of those pants?

CLEAVER: As far as a business venture? I’m not a businessman so I wasn’t able to do any spectacular business. I lost money. But from an aesthetic point of view, from the point of view of clothing, I think this whole thing has been misunderstood.

”…the clothing industry is dominated by homosexuals…”

”…They want men and women to look basically the same…”

My design had to do with an argument against what’s being done with our clothing. Who controls our clothing? If you notice, the clothing industry is dominated by homosexuals. They want men and women to look basically the same.

There are a lot of problems involved in the design of men’s clothing. The way our clothing is designed right now requires a man to wear his genitals in either his right or his left pants leg. There are a lot of implications to that. Scientifically, it’s been determined that that structure generates a lot of heat that has a decomposing effect on sperm. There’s a whole warping effect that comes from wearing your genitals in your pants leg.

There’s a lot of evil in society that comes from clothing. Most of us are completely ignorant of this. One of the things that distinguishes us from animals is that we have the control of our second skin. This is a great power, because we can go underwater, we can go to the moon, we can go to the desert, to Alaska, because we just don’t have scales or hair. We have a technology where we manage our second skin.

This is a sacred responsibility, yet like many other things it is dealt with frivolously. And one of the most obnoxious things that is happening today is what the homosexuals are doing to our clothing.

If you view your pants as an extension of the fig leaf – which is what clothing really is, symbolically speaking – you begin to see that this is very intimately connected with the whole condition of man in the world. Scripturally, the fig leaf came about as a fallout from the fall of man. And I think from that point on, we’ve made a lot of trouble for ourselves by the way we handle our clothing.

KATHLEEN NEAL CLEAVER

Former wife of Eldridge Cleaver

The Christmas Tree In The Garden – 3 Wishes

The Sun god Lawless Delusion – Mark of the Beast

Demons: Distributors of fortune

1 John 2:16King (KJV)

16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

The Three wishes or sins are:

1. The lust of the flesh

2. The lust of the eyes

3. The pride of life

Jeremiah 10 (KJV)

10 Hear ye the word which the Lord speaketh unto you, O house of Israel:

Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.

For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.

They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.

Luke 8 Possessed with demon – the word means to be crazy or insane. Someone not taking the instruction of God.

When Jesus cast the demons out, he cast it out of the self of man. Demon comes from daiblo – to distribute fortune, a god that would distribute fortunes, a deity. It all started in the garden. Diablos mean to cast out. Eve cast out God’s instructions.

MARK OF THE BEAST – THE TREE IN THE GARDEN – 3 WISHES

Daemon is the Greek word for Demon and it means to distribute. In the ancient world Daemon were departed ancestors who either distributed fortunes or brought evil. Daemons were associated with tree worship, Venus, Asteroth, Easter, Ishtar, Semiramis, Baal, Tammuz. Tree worship extends all the way back to the Garden and the goddess of fertility or queen of heaven is a perversion of Eve.

Mark of the beast

Charagma – Rev:13: The word mark it means etching. An etching is a character. This is the same word as name, same meaning onoma. Onoma means character or authority. Your character is what you are. Your reputation is what people think you are.

There are none good, Romans 3.

Charax means a stake on a boundary, on a boundary line. Rev:13 the beast world system verse Rev 13.2 verse Rev 13.11 the second beast who speaks for the world beast system. George Bush Sr. spoke of a new world order.

Image created to the beast. The word image is icon, it means likeness. The likeness of the world beast system is Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome, the RCC system. Tolerance, politically correct is the beast system.

Babylon started in Gen 11. But the Babylon system was a reproduction of the garden where it started. The mark of the best then has to be found in the garden. The system of self.

Rev 13.15:  likeness of the beast is it character. Rom 8:29 same word. Likeness, not statue, likeness.
Rev 13.16: receive a Charagma. The mark shows who you serve. Deu 6:8 the sign (mark) defined.
Rev 13.17: mark or name. Or means to say

Evil | Good
Fulfill self | Die to self.

The world beast system will be a system of tolerance. Rev 17:5 Babylon mother of all idolatry. Gen 4 – 5 the lineage of Seth or Abel. Babylon was not he origin of sin, the garden was. Eve said Cain was virgin born.

God has a character and the beast has a character. The beast is not a man it is a system.

Rev 13:2: His is the word autos can be masc or neuter gender. But you have to follow the gender of the antecedent. The antecedent is the noun that his refers back to. The beat is also neuter gender so all the he’s and him are neuter gender therefore it reads its.

Is there a character (mark) of Satan in the garden? Yes.

There is a tree in the middle of the garden. God say you can eat of all trees, but not of the one in the midst of it. Stan tell eve to go into the garden and fulfill self.

All in the world John stated this. 1 Jn 2.16 buying and selling; lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes and the pride of life.

Gen 3:6

Good for Food – fulfills the lust of the flesh – corrupts body
Pleasant to the eyes – lust of the eye – corrupts mind
Tree to be desired to make one wise – pride or life (wisdom) – corrupts spirit or the soul of man.

When you go after the world it corrupts a man, self will.

Adam was not deceived, Eve was.

Diamon is going after the world, distributing of fortunes.

Tree of life Tree of knowledge of good and evil

Mythic poem the battle of the trees or Cad Goddeu in Welsh, sometimes called the battle of Achern or Ochren is an alternative name of the Welch underworld.The battle was fought to secure three things for human kind. 1. Dogs, 2. Deer, 3. Lap Wing

In the ancient world this was about food. Getting through the winter.

Eden you have the battle of the trees. Serpent ruling the garden Nachash – to make feel god, to enchant.

1 John 3.4: The best common definition for sin in bible. Sin is the transgression of the law.

Sin = (is) transgression of the law.

Sin – hamartia – comes from the word maros – in peculiar, a portion.

hamartia mean to miss the mark.

Eat of the legal tree is maros a portion to eat of.

Eat of good and evil ( self fulfilled ) no portion of God (hamartia).

by Jim Brown of Grace and Truth Ministries

1. Early Christians had a soft spot for pagans

It’s a mistake to say that our modern Christmas traditions come directly from pre-Christian paganism, said Ronald Hutton, a historian at Bristol University in the United Kingdom. However, he said, you’d be equally wrong to believe that Christmas is a modern phenomenon. As Christians spread their religion into Europe in the first centuries A.D., they ran into people living by a variety of local and regional religious creeds.

Christian missionaries lumped all of these people together under the umbrella term “pagan,” said Philip Shaw, who researches early Germanic languages and Old English at Leicester University in the U.K. The term is related to the Latin word meaning “field,” Shaw told LiveScience. The lingual link makes sense, he said, because early European Christianity was an urban phenomenon, while paganism persisted longer in rustic areas.

Early Christians wanted to convert pagans, Shaw said, but they were also fascinated by their traditions.

“Christians of that period are quite interested in paganism,” he said. “It’s obviously something they think is a bad thing, but it’s also something they think is worth remembering. It’s what their ancestors did.”

Perhaps that’s why pagan traditions remained even as Christianity took hold. The Christmas tree is a 17th-century German invention, University of Bristol’s Hutton told LiveScience, but it clearly derives from the pagan practice of bringing greenery indoors to decorate in midwinter. The modern Santa Claus is a direct descendent of England’s Father Christmas, who was not originally a gift-giver. However, Father Christmas and his other European variations are modern incarnations of old pagan ideas about spirits who traveled the sky in midwinter, Hutton said.

2. We all want that warm Christmas glow

But why this fixation on partying in midwinter, anyway? According to historians, it’s a natural time for a feast. In an agricultural society, the harvest work is done for the year, and there’s nothing left to be done in the fields.

“It’s a time when you have some time to devote to your religious life,” said Shaw. “But also it’s a period when, frankly, everyone needs cheering up.”

The dark days that culminate with the shortest day of the year ­— the winter solstice — could be lightened with feasts and decorations, Hutton said.

“If you happen to live in a region in which midwinter brings striking darkness and cold and hunger, then the urge to have a celebration at the very heart of it to avoid going mad or falling into deep depression is very, very strong,” he said.

Stephen Nissenbaum, author of the Pulitzer Prize finalist “The Battle for Christmas” (Vintage, 1997), agreed.

“Even now when solstice means not all that much because you can get rid of the darkness with the flick of an electric light switch, even now, it’s a very powerful season,” he told LIveScience.

3. The Church was slow to embrace Christmas

Despite the spread of Christianity, midwinter festivals did not become Christmas for hundreds of years. The Bible gives no reference to when Jesus was born, which wasn’t a problem for early Christians, Nissenbaum said.

“It never occurred to them that they needed to celebrate his birthday,” he said.

With no Biblical directive to do so and no mention in the Gospels of the correct date, it wasn’t until the fourth century that church leaders in Rome embraced the holiday. At this time, Nissenbaum said, many people had turned to a belief the Church found heretical: That Jesus had never existed as a man, but as a sort of spiritual entity.

“If you want to show that Jesus was a real human being just like every other human being, not just somebody who appeared like a hologram, then what better way to think of him being born in a normal, humble human way than to celebrate his birth?” Nissenbaum said.

Midwinter festivals, with their pagan roots, were already widely celebrated, Nissenbaum said. And the date had a pleasing philosophical fit with festivals celebrating the lengthening days after the winter solstice (which fell on Dec. 21 this year). “O, how wonderfully acted Providence that on that day on which that Sun was born … Christ should be born,” one Cyprian text read.

4. The Puritans hated the holiday

But if the Catholic Church gradually came to embrace Christmas, the Protestant Reformation gave the holiday a good knock on the chin. In the 16th century, Christmas became a casualty of this church schism, with reformist-minded Protestants considering it little better than paganism, Nissenbaum said. This likely had something to do with the “raucous, rowdy and sometimes bawdy fashion” in which Christmas was celebrated, he added.

In England under Oliver Cromwell, Christmas and other saints’ days were banned, and in New England it was illegal to celebrate Christmas for about 25 years in the 1600s, Nissenbaum said. Forget people saying, “Happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas,” he said.

“If you want to look at a real ‘War on Christmas,’ you’ve got to look at the Puritans,” he said. “They banned it!” Stephanie Pappas

Before Genesis: Lucifer- Satan’s Fall -Is this Atlantis?

This teaching uses the Bible the explain what happend before Genesis took place. It deals with angels, what they are, Lucifer and his fall, how he works, and different occurances of Satan in the Bible.

I will climb to the highest heavens and be like the Most High.Helel, Ben-ShacharIsaiah 14:14Lucifer in the Bible – Helel Ben Shachar

In the Bible, the Hebraic text in Isaiah 14:2 refers to Helel Ben Shachar or Heylel Ben-Shachar (הילל בן שחר). Helel Ben-Schachar is translated into English as “O shining star, son of the dawn!” The name Lucifer is a translation of Helel Ben-Shachar into Latin by St. Jerome in the fourth century. Lucifer derives from two Latin words, lux (light) and fero (to bear–to bring), meaning light-bearer, light-bringer. The Bible identifies Lucifer as Devil,Satan, serpent, dragon, dweller of hell and other names.

Lucifer is the Latin translation of the Hebrew name Helel Ben-Shachar

The name Satan

Satan is a Hebrew word meaning “adversary,” as “one to lie in wait”; hence, “the snares of the devil.” In the New Testament, Satan is referred to under the name “Devil” (Greek: diabolos), meaning “accuser, slanderer.” In Hebrew שׂטן satan or śāṭān, or Aramaic שׂטנא satana means “accuser, adversary.”). Satan plays various roles in the Hebrew Bible, the Apocrypha and the New Testament. In the Hebrew Bible Satan is presented as an angel (messenger) sent by God to test mankind; in the Apocrypha and New Testament Satan is portrayed as an evil rebellious demon who is the enemy of God and mankind.

Satan is the central embodiment of evil. Satan is also commonly known as the Devil, the “Prince of Darkness”, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, Lucifer, and Rachelle. In the Talmud and some works of Kabbalah Satan is sometimes called Samael ; however most Jewish literature is of the opinion that Samael is a separate angel. In the fields of angelology and demonology these different names sometimes refer to a number of different angels and demons. In Islam, Satan is known as Iblis, who was the chief of the angels until he disobeyed Allah by refusing to prostrate himself before Adam.

The name Devil

The word “Devil” is not used in the Old Testament. It is Abaddon in Hebrew, Apollyon in Greek, meaning “destroyer.” The Devil is the name given to a supernatural entity who, in most Western religions, is the central embodiment of evil. This entity is also commonly referred to by a variety of names, including Satan, Lucifer, Mephistopheles and Beelzebub. In classic demonology, these alternate names sometime refer to a separate supernatural entities or personalities.

“Satan” and “Devil” are two names used in the Scriptures, but there are a great number of others familiar to all Bible readers, namely: “the accuser of our brethren,” “the evil one,” “deceiver,” “murderer,” “father of lies,” “Beelzebub,” “Belial,” “tempter,” “great dragon,” “serpent,” “prince of demons,” and at least forty such titles are attributed to the fallen angel Lucifer.

The place of Hell

Hell is place defined in the Bible, about the afterlife, and is a place of torment, great weeping and gnashing of teeth. The Judeo-Christian term hell comes from the Hebrew word “Gehinnom”, which technically means landfill, the use of the word “hell” in Bible translation, Collier’s Encyclopedia says: “Gehinnom” in Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word ‘hell,’ as understood today, is not a happy translation.” The confusion over what this word actually means stems from the fact that the ancient Hebrews apparently didn’t believe in immortality of the “soul”.

Hebrew landfills were very unsanitary and unpleasant when compared to modern landfills; these places were filled with rotting garbage and the Hebrews would periodically burn them down, however by that point they were generally so large that they would burn for weeks or even months. In other words they were fiery mountains of garbage. In The New Testament the word “Gehenna” refers to one such landfill, the valley of Hinnom.

The Hebrew Sheol was translated in the Septuagint as ‘Hades’, another the name for the underworld. The New Testament uses this word, but it also uses the word ‘Gehenna’, from the valley of Ge-Hinnom, a valley near Jerusalem in which in ancient times garbage was burned. The early Christian teaching was that the damned would be burnt in the valley just as the garbage was. Punishment for the damned and reward for the saved is a central theme of early Christianity.

A word about Latin

Latin was the lanuguage originally spoken in the region around Rome. It gained great importance as the formal language of the Roman Empire. All Romance languages, such as Italian, Spanish and French, descend from a Latin and many words based on Latin are found in other modern languages such as English. In the Western world, Latin was a lingua franca, the learned language for scientific and political affairs, for more than a thousand years, being eventually replaced by French in the 18th century and English in the late 19th. Latin remains the formal language of the Roman Catholic Church to this day, which includes being the official national language of the Vatican. It is also still used, along with Greek, to furnish the names used in the scientific classification of living things.

Intelligence & Beauty

“Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty” Ezekiel 28:12.

Arrogance & Pride

‘Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness” (Ezekiel 28:17).

Misleading the World

Satan deceives the whole world (Rev 12:9), and “The whole world lieth in the evil one” (I John 5:19).

Satan forced from Heaven

“And there was war in heaven. Michael and the angels under his command fought the dragon and his angels. And the dragon lost the battle and was forced out of heaven. ” (Rev 12:7).

Satan deceives and battles

“Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle” (Rev 20:7,8).

Satan revealed – overthrown by Jesus

And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie. (2 Thess 2:2-11)

Judgment of God against Satan

“I, myself, have risen against him! I will destroy his children and his children’s children, so they can never sit on his throne. I will make Babylon into a desolate land, a place of porcupines, filled with swamps and marches. I will sweep the land with the broom of destruction. I, the Lord Almighty, have spoken!”

Isaiah 14:22

The Real Atlantis – LUCIFER Rising

The REAL ATLANTIS & LUCIFER RISING

Is this Atlantis?

These are the images which could show the fabled sunken city of Atlantis.

allthechildrenoflight-atlantisgooglemaps    allthechildrenoflight-underwateratlantis allthechildrenoflight-googlemaps2    allthechildrenoflight-googlemaps

It shows a perfect rectangle the size of Wales lying on the bed of the Atlantic Ocean nearly 3½ miles down.

A host of criss-crossing lines, looking like a map of a vast metropolis, are enclosed by the boundary.

They seem too vast and organised to be caused naturally.

And last night the possibility of an extraordinary discovery had oceanographers and geophysicists captivated.

The site lies 620 miles off the west coast of Africa near the Canary Islands — a location for Atlantis seemingly suggested by the ancient philosopher Plato.

He believed it was an island civilisation sunk by an earthquake and floods around 9,700BC — nearly 12,000 years ago.

The “grid” showed up on Google Ocean, a Google Earth extension that uses a combination of satellite images and marine surveys.

Last night Dr Charles Orser, curator of historical archaeology at New York State University — and one of the world’s leading authorities on Atlantis — called it “fascinating”.

He said: “The site is one of the most prominent places for the proposed location of Atlantis, as described by Plato. Even if it turns out to be geographical, this definitely deserves a closer look.”

The legend of Atlantis has captured the imagination of scholars for centuries.

And in the 1970s it spawned a hit TV series, Man From Atlantis, in which Patrick Duffy played a webbed hero who could live underwater.

Situated in an area called the Madeira Abyssal Plane, the grid was spotted by aeronautical engineer Bernie Bamford as he browsed through Google Ocean.

Bernie, 38, of Chester, said: “It looks like an aerial map of Milton Keynes. It must be man-made.”

Google today claimed the criss-crossing lines were sonar data collected as boats mapped the ocean floor.

But the internet giant said “blank spots” within the lines could not be explained.

A spokeswoman said: “Bathymetric (or sea floor terrain) data is often collected from boats using sonar to take measurements of the sea floor.

“The lines reflect the path of the boat as it gathers the data.

“The fact that there are blank spots between each of these lines is a sign of how little we really know about the world’s ocean