Johnny Depp, Progressive Discipline, Jesus, The Church, Rebuking, and Condemning Homosexuality

I received the following comment:

Wow... this is truly unbelievable. Seriously, I just read all these posts after reading your article and I'm astounded that you don't realize that you come off as very combative and hateful. I'm sorry, but you can talk about Jesus all day long, but the bottom line is that the people Jesus was hardest on were the Pharisees... the ones who were proud and looked down on everyone else. I can't hear your tone, and I don't know you. But just be aware that you sound very much like a Pharisee! It would've been nice to hear you speak in a loving tone... regardless of whether or not you believed you were speaking to a homoesexual. I couldn't hear your words through the loud noise of your judgement. I'm not interested in the intellectual argument anymore... at least the pastor here was loving. Don't worry, you dont' have to tell me not to come back... hopefully no one else will come back here either.

To which I replied:

Melanie of the dark side?

Have you never heard of spiritual warfare? Exactly what spirit do you think crucified Jesus? That spirit made war on Christ.

The difference between us is that I hate evil, which is the right thing to do. Anyone who doesn't hate evil is automatically evil.

You think that loving without hating evil is possible? It's not.

Being engaged in spiritual warfare and hating evil is not pride. If it were, then Jesus would have been being prideful.

You speak of the Pharisees, but you write, "I can't hear your tone...But...you sound...." You sound just like one [a Pharisee]. You're deaf to Jesus. You don't hear his voice.

Do you know what hypocrisy even means? You come here and comment: "I couldn't hear your words through the loud noise of your judgement." How is that not you judging me? You don't even know the meaning of the word in Christian terms.

You hope no one comes here because you are what, loving of men who perform anal intercourse on each other. You don't hate that? They aren't what they do? A tree is not known by its fruit? The fruit of the homosexual has been anal intercourse, which has resulted in all sorts of bad things so much so that now some resort to condoms to stop the spreading of their diseases. There are other types of disease though that their condoms don't protect against, and I do mean diseases of the soul.

Anal intercourse is a disgusting act, and you're disgusting for not saying so in no uncertain, rebuking terms. Homosexuality is disgusting.

A strong rebuke is not love to you? God has never rebuked you sternly? If so, you've never heard from him. If you think Jesus was hardest verbally on the Pharisees, then you haven't considered what he said to Peter about Peter.

You'll be judged by your words here, and I'll be judged by mine. Who's speaking truth?

So, go with the homosexuals and tell them that they don't have to listen to me because I'm too strict or harsh and not loving enough and see where that gets you.

You're not being bright at all. You're in the dark and shedding zero light.

What the homosexual so-called community wants more than anything is to silence all rebuking of their evil way. They think that doing the Carl Rove thing of attacking Christianity at its strength will work. Well, it doesn't work here.

If you want to be a weak link, that's your problem. Many fall away, and it's not prideful of me to say it. It speaking truth, with which you have a big problem.

Jesus said to rebuke. Jesus rebuked, and certainly his strongest rebuke was his physically over turning the tables in the temple and literally chasing everyone out, which put the fear of the wrath into those who were smart enough to grasp it.

Jesus didn't use "a loving tone" when he did that, Melanie. He also didn't use "a loving tone" with the Pharisees or anyone else who was refusing to hear his words from God.

Just what do you think Jesus would do to the National Cathedral in Washington DC were it loaded with homosexuals having a circle-banging tryst, which they most certainly do elsewhere and most certainly would not hesitate to do in the temple ostensibly for the worship of God were they to conclude that society has become so lackadaisical as to not only "tolerate" the effrontery of homosexual pride parades but literally to condone homosexuality by way of being seen going about chastising those who call for the cleaning of that temple and every heart by way of the example of Yahoshua Mashiyach (Jesus Christ)? It's much worse than that though.

How is it that people seek to chastise my "combative and hateful" approach while upholding Jesus cleaning the temple in such a "combative and hateful" manner as an act of God? What is this utter hypocrisy? It is the work of evil within the hypocrites. It is the work of those who have forsaken God.

Are you confused? Your confusion it due to your error: turning from clarity to a muddled approach at best.

Are you of the wrong opinion that Jesus did not condemn homosexuality? Was he for sex out of wedlock, adultery? Were homosexuals "married" in Jesus's eyes?

Do you fall for the tricks of those who try to claim that Jesus was only opposed to male temple prostitution or that Paul was not referring to homosexuals when he used the term arsenokoites (sodomites; in this case, males who engage in anal sex with each other; also though oral sex and other sexual acts) or that even in the Old Testament, the sins of Sodom did not include homosexuality, per se, but that it was, among other things, gang rape by homosexuals that reached the level of sin even though Moses himself (the very reason we have the Old Testament) said, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination" (Leviticus 18:22 KJV)?

Do you believe the early Church condoned homosexuality even though they held conferences to decide the issue of circumcision but never homosexuality that was still and remains very much against the Mosaic Law?

Was Jesus himself a homosexual, as the unrepentant homosexual predator, Elton John, has moronically concluded and stated openly even in the face of everything I've briefly mentioned above? Elton John is not a student of the Bible let alone a scholar. What he especially is not is a prophet of God.

Do you falsely believe that those who have engaged in homosexual acts cannot change from that behavior? Then who can change any behavior and why? Is God not over the flesh? Isn't the lack of general faith the reason for the retardation of healing? And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief. (Matthew 13:58 KJV)

Do you believe that homosexuality is harmless or that the sins of non-homosexuals excuse the sin of homosexuality? If it is harmless, then why is Jesus against it? If you don't take Jesus as your authority in such matters, simply consider the end results of this movement to homosexuality. It is the same with excusing greed and violence.

How is selfish lust ever without negative consequences that could be avoided by choice? How is caving into sexual stimuli and releases that run exactly contrary to procreation ever honest, and when is dishonesty within ever right and good and healthy? How is such lusting not directly related to the other selfish lusts for money or blood (violence)? They are all related in that all are selfishness above what is wholesome.

The distortions are the result of the slippery slope of "tolerance" without rebuke and casting out from those voluntary places such as your own heart and mind and the temple of God. Are you unaware of the argument inside the homosexual pride parade groups (Gay Pride) over whether or not to allow in the pedophile-pride types? You need to wake up! When those are allowed in, bestiality pride and necrophilia pride will be in line for official sanctioning. Will it stop there? It will not. All sorts of other types prideful in their anti-Christness will be in line for official sanctioning. Aleister Crowley, the 33 degree Freemason, prided himself in saying that drinking the blood of the innocent sacrificed in satanic rituals gives metaphysical power. Consider the followers of Crowley. Consider Crowley's friends and their followers. It's a huge web of deceit.

I remember Crowley's poster, with his pyramid/cone hat, on seemingly Hippy walls. It was popular. When I spoke of Jesus, I was met with the question, "What do you think of Aleister Crowley?" At the time, I did not know the depths of his depravity. I remember Crowley showing up on a Beatles cover. "Satanic Majesty's Request" is a Rolling Stones album. Black Sabbath was a very popular band. The naive and gullible were lulled. I know. I was there. "Free Love" was openly advocated by Crosby, Stills, and Nash. Their vocal harmonies and acoustic instruments created an easy sound, but they too were dupes.

It is common knowledge in certain circles within Hollywood and the music industry and elsewhere that if one will only fall down and worship Satan, the gates will open. I've been told that Johnny Depp has said openly that he knows that the dark side is responsible for his "success" — some success. If that's success, you can keep it.

Depp and Jolie

What has he said he likes about Angelina Jolie for instance? She's "dark" and "perverse." He likes it that Elizabeth Taylor "cusses like a sailor" and thinks Angelina is great for much the same reason (See: "Johnny Depp Amazed by Angelina Jolie's 'Dark' Side"). Now, you have to understand that he knows exactly what he's doing (sort of) by saying that stuff to the masses. He's part of the duped legion. He's a pied piper, as he's been called by pied pipers before him. He thinks he's going to dance off into Hell and Satan's waiting arms to be loved. He's insane. Money and fame have corrupted him. It's a shame. He also said to someone that all his characters are homosexuals. Consider all of this. If you can't see the picture unfolding, you're going to fall way down into the hole with Depp and the rest who are getting their reward for wickedness before they are presented with the huge bankrupting bill by Satan who will laugh as he shows them what torture evil is capable of.

Don't be fooled by Jolie's UN work. It looks good on its face, but she turns around and does all this dark-side work. A "house divided against itself shall not stand." (Mat 12:25) She is divided against herself. She is falling. She may be in free fall. Will she land on a protrusion on the side of the bottomless pit, or will she fall forever?

Johnny Depp and the others falsely imagine that if they only do some "humanitarian" work, everything will be fine. It doesn't work that way. Consistency in good works and belief is the key to Heaven. Depp and Angelina Jolie and Elizabeth Taylor and others make it exceedingly difficult for those of us who want to bring forth huge, good works and to do all the seemingly little goodnesses consistently. They influence people to put stock in perverseness, which means away from what is right and good. Depp enjoys deviating from what is right and good. Think of that, that he readily admits it and even lauds it and relishes finding and encouraging it in others, especially others with influence. It's very sad and sickening really.

Depp represents hundreds of millions of people to one degree or another. He is far, far, far from alone in this parade off the cliff.

It was also easy to fall into so many pits during the budding Hippy era because the fields were strewn with the words "love" and "peace" and "anti-war" and so many other good and proper words but unfortunately surrounded by other things to act as the Pied Pipers leading the innocent off into as dark a place as they were deceived into going.

The same process is very much alive now and is still manifesting itself as evidenced recently with the DADT (Don't Ask, Don't Tell) question concerning the military where supposedly anti-war types were under the strong delusion that allowing homosexuals to serve Satan openly in Satan's Military is somehow a good thing. It's good if you seek to further punish humanity, as Satan most certainly enjoys doing. Jesus takes zero pleasure in it. God takes no pleasure in it, regardless of Old Testament interpretative errors concerning God's spirit. Jesus was and is God's son. He knows God. He is "up close and personal," as they say. All offense comes from the Satanic spirit. No offense comes from God. If you are offended for being punished for wrong doing, you are nevertheless offended at the Satanic spirit that does the punishing in Hell and kills your spirit and soul. Even the Old Testament said God repented of God's plan to destroy.

These are difficult concepts for many. I can't help that. Jesus couldn't help it either.

There is one God but there are many spirits. There are rebellious spirits — spirits rebelling against righteousness, such as was Aleister Crowley and his ilk and legions of disciples, some of whom I've known intimately — may they have turned by now, although I'm not holding my breath.

Know this though that the kingdom of God is not overthrown. Hell is set apart as the purgative lake of fire burning eternally. Those who refuse righteousness burn there. How many stripes must their souls receive and how many must they inflict before they connect the dots and are free?

I don't stand on Moses without the clarification of Jesus, but I point out the illogic of those who try to twist the Old Testament so as to condone homosexuality. I don't stand on Paul but for the same reason regarding his writings or those attributed to him, as there are those who contend that he did not author or even dictate all the letters traditionally attributed to him or contend that the letters were edited to make Paul into a male chauvinist. I don't defend Paul across-the-board. I don't use Paul as a necessary authority to support the Christian Commons. It stands upon Jesus.

Nevertheless, I do not call down the wrath (as Jesus didn't call down the wrath); but it came and it will come. When it does, I will not judge God as wrong. It will be Satan loosed because you will have loosened him upon yourself. I bind him.

How is it that when you attack me for rebuking sin in a way to get the sinners attention over the mollycoddling that you are not blaspheming God and Jesus? You are. For when I am saying what they are saying and you are rebuking me for it, you are rebuking them also. That is a very dangerous and stupid thing to do. If I were not to tell you, I would not be showing the same love and compassion Jesus showed when he used a physical whip to chase them from the temple as a sign of the wrath to come, which did come and will again and through no fault of Jesus's or mine in saying what I have here.

Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. (Matthew 16:22-23 KJV)

That's what Jesus called him who rebuked Jesus. He called Peter "Satan" because Peter was not thinking on Jesus's level but contradicting Jesus. Peter couldn't see the outcome. There are those here who can't see the outcome of their mollycoddling homosexuals concerning their feelings, thoughts, words, and acts.

Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. (Luke 17:3 KJV)

A rebuke is not rewarding someone for his error. Stroking the homosexuals and making them all cozy and comfortable time after time while simply saying in sickeningly sweet words that they really shouldn't have sex in each others anuses, etc., is rewarding their behavior to the point that now there are those claiming to still be the Church of Jesus who are saying that not only is homosex not wrong but it is something to be openly celebrated and upheld and sanctified as a gift from Jesus and God. It is evil and deserves severe reproof, which I have done.

I have done it not in a spirit of bitterness but disgust, just as Jesus was disgusted with those in the temple. I have done it in the spirit of wanting those who are erring to stop and to turn and repent. If they do not, as Jesus said, how will they escape damnation; and what kind of loving person would I be if I were to be duped into mollycoddling? It is not love to take that approach endlessly, as some are advocating.

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:15-18 KJV)

This is clearly progressive discipline ending in casting out those who finally refuse. Right now, we are beyond step four.

1) Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then

2) take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them,

3) tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church,

4) let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

The unrepentant publican at step 4 is not in the body, is not at that point in or of the Church, not a child of God but a God of Satan, and may be imbued with an indelible spirit of rebellion against God, a cancer if left within. Hence, Jesus cleans the temple.

If after being cast out, that one comes to see the error of his way and returns in time, he is received again as the prodigal son was received back for having been dead but come back to life again.

And he said, A certain man had two sons: And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living. And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living. And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him. And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants. And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son. But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry. (Luke 15:11-24 KJV)

I am not lacking mercy, but who can save those who stubbornly refuse to be redeemed? Can you?

So, no, combative Melanie, the "pastor" to whom you refer is not loving. He doesn't love them enough to do what Jesus did toward those in severe error in the temple. He mollycoddles the homosexuals so that he doesn't have to hear it from the likes of you who also mollycoddles them if even that. Show me where you have rebuked them as required by Christ. Do it openly here using your full name so that all the members of the real Church may see it. Otherwise, yes, do go away.

The unrepentant are not welcome in Heaven, Melanie. Those who are not seeking truth but rather convenient obfuscation are not welcome. Those who knowingly twist and avoid the words of Jesus are not welcome. Those who are not willing to combat Satan are not welcome. Those who don't eternally hate the eternally fallen spirit of rebellion against God are not welcome. Those who do not care any further about the intellectual, who disrespect the intellect of Jesus and God, are not finally welcome.

You are wrong, Melanie. You need to stop going about feeling, thinking, saying, and doing such things against the truth. You are aiding and abetting the dark side. You came here and struggled against God, not Satan.

Perhaps though you are one of a certain type of Theosophist and Gnostic who wrongly believes Jesus is really Satan and Satan is God and there is no other. You've acted like it here.

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.