A BBC Interview with The Rev and the Rt Hon. the Lord Bannside.

A BBC programme lasting about an hour with Eamonn Mallie and The Rev and the Rt Hon. the Lord Bannside in an interview about some important issues in Northern Ireland in the past years.

(Below are excerpts taken from WikiPedia website.)
Ian Richard Kyle Paisley, Lord Bannside.
In 1951, a congregation of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland was forbidden by denominational authorities to hold a meeting in their own church hall at which Paisley was to be the speaker. In response, the leaders of that congregation left the PCI and began a new denomination, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster. Paisley soon became the moderator of this denomination and was re-elected every year, except one, for 57 years.

The Free Presbyterian Church has a fundamentalist orientation, requiring strict separation from "any church which has departed from the fundamental doctrines of the Word of God." At the time of the 1991 census, the denomination included about 12,000 people, less than 1% of the Northern Ireland population.

He has preached against homosexuality and supports laws criminalising its practice. Intertwining his religious and political views, "Save Ulster from Sodomy" was a campaign launched by Paisley in 1977, in opposition to the Campaign for Homosexual Law Reform (Northern Ireland), established in 1974. Paisley's campaign sought to prevent the extension to Northern Ireland of the Sexual Offences Act 1967, which had decriminalised homosexual acts between males over 21 years of age in England and Wales. The campaign failed when legislation was passed in 1982 as a result of the previous year's ruling by the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Dudgeon v United Kingdom.

Paisley promotes a form of Biblical literalism and Anti-Catholicism, which he describes as "Bible Protestantism". The website of Paisley's public relations arm, the European Institute of Protestant Studies, describes the institute's purpose as to "expound the Bible, expose the Papacy, and to promote, defend and maintain Bible Protestantism in Europe and further afield."Paisley's website describes a number of doctrinal areas in which he believes that the "Roman church" (which he termed Popery) has deviated from the Bible and thus from true Christianity.

In the 1960s, Paisley developed a relationship with the fundamentalist Bob Jones University located in Greenville, South Carolina. In 1966, he received an honorary doctorate of divinity from the institution and subsequently served on its board of trustees. This relationship later led to the establishment of the Free Presbyterian Church of North America in 1977.

In 1988, when Pope John Paul II delivered a speech to the European Parliament, Paisley shouted "I denounce you as the Antichrist!" and held up a red poster reading "Pope John Paul II ANTICHRIST" in black letters. John Paul continued with his address after Paisley was ejected from the hemicycle by fellow MEPs. Some reports claimed that other MEPs, including Otto von Habsburg, assisted in expelling him from the chamber,and that Paisley was booed and struck by other MEPs, who also hurled objects at him, leading to his hospitalisation.

Paisley continued to denounce the Catholic Church and the Pope after the incident. In a television interview for The Unquiet Man, a 2001 documentary on Paisley's life, he expressed his pride at being "the only person to have the courage to denounce the Pope".[citation needed] After the death of Pope John Paul II in 2005, Paisley expressed sympathy for Catholics stating "We can understand how Roman Catholics feel at the death of the Pope and we would want in no way to interfere with their expression of sorrow and grief at this time."This was in contrast to Paisley's reaction to the death of Pope John XXIII in June 1963, when Paisley organised protests against the lowering of flags in public buildings after the death of the Pope.

He has claimed in an article that the seat no. 666 in the European Parliament is reserved for the Antichrist. Seat no. 666 is, in actual fact, occupied; at present, following the 2009 European parliamentary election, it is the seat of Conservative Polish MEP Elżbieta Łukacijewska.

He and his organisation have publicly spoken out against what he views to be blasphemy in popular culture, including criticism of the stage productions Jesus Christ Superstar and Jerry Springer: The Opera, as well as being strongly anti abortion.

Although at political odds with the Republic of Ireland, he has some religious followers in two counties (County Donegal and County Monaghan). It was specifically in his religious capacity that he first agreed to meet the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern.[citation needed] Paisley revised this stance in September 2004, when he agreed to meet Ahern in his political capacity as leader of the Democratic Unionist Party.[citation needed] Known for a sense of humour, at an early meeting with Ahern at the Irish embassy in London, Paisley requested breakfast and asked for boiled eggs; when Ahern asked him why he had wanted boiled eggs, Paisley quipped "it would be hard for you to poison them".

Interview - Gordon Comstock & Darryl Eberhart - The Jesuit's New World Order

The “Jesuit Conspiracy” refers to the conspiracy theory in regards to the priests of the Society of Jesus (Jesuit) of the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican. This sinister branch of the New World Order control the religious aspect of their dark agendas. The Pope being the Dom of the religious sect, so to speak. In the video presentation below, Gordon Comstock’ interview with author Darryl Eberhart. Darryl discusses the Vatican in politics today with the numerous Military Orders or Knights who fill government positions, as well as the corporate world, often called the New World Order or Globalism.

Topics discussed in this interview are:
* The Jesuit General
* Knights of Malta
* Knights of Columbus
* Teutonic Knights (Nazis)
* Freemasons
* World War II
* The Holocaust & Inquisitions

Although not entirely Catholic these Knights all answer by chain of-command to the Jesuit General or Vatican and the Pope for the NWO as declared origins on the back of the U.S. Dollar in Latin with Roman numerals 1776.(More related stories here.)

The Unregenerate are Under the Power of Satan

Mankind apart from Christ is enslaved to the god of darkness and lives, breathes and thinks in terms of the great satanic lie that sin and idolatry are true freedom. “But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them” (2 Cor. 4:3-4). “You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do….When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. But because I tell you the truth, you do not believe Me” (Jn. 8:44, 45). “I [Jesus Christ] will deliver you [the Apostle Paul] from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you, to open their eyes in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me” (Ac. 26:17-18). 

If man is bound by his sinful flesh to the prince of darkness and is blinded by Satan, then obviously his will is not free. Men who have “been taken captive by him [Satan] to do his will” (2 Tim. 2:26) can only be set free by someone stronger than Satan—Jesus Christ and His Spirit (Mt. 12:29). Because “the whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 Jn. 5:19) and all unbelievers are children of the devil who do not practice righteousness (1 Jn. 3:10) and everyone walks “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2) we can only be liberated by the almighty power of the Holy Spirit sent by the victorious Mediator at the right hand of power. Thus of Jesus we read: “Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb. 2:14).  

(Extracted from  "Man’s Need of Salvation: Total Depravity and Man’s Inability" by Brian Schwertley. You can READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE by clicking HERE.)

What Does the Phrase 'Dead in Sin" Mean? by John Hendryx

"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins" - Ephesians 2:1
"Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)" - Ephesians 2:5

"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses" - Colossians 2:13

What does the phrase 'dead in sin" mean? What does it mean to be spiritual dead? And how did these simple concepts become so convoluted?

Arminian or synergistic arguments against the Calvinist interpretation 'dead in sin' usually go something like this: There is no Scriptural evidence for the mistaken calvinistic notion that spiritual death means to be like a physically dead corpse and so nonresponsive and unable to believe the gospel. the Reformed view of "spiritually dead" or "dead in sin", they claim, refers to dead spirit of man, that (the inner spirit) is what is dead. Therefore the Calvinist comparison of a dead body’s inability to respond with a dead spirit’s ability to respond is fundamentally flawed...and that if the Bible says unsaved humans are “dead in our sin” this alone is insufficient for making deductions about the dead spirit’s inability to choose Christ. If that is the case, they reason, then spiritually dead people should not be able to do anything more than corpses can do, which want to show is plainly absurd. An often used example:

To prove the Calvinist view of "dead in sin" is wrong, notice the Bible plainly teaches that those who are dead in sin can resist the Holy Spirit. Now have you ever seen a corpse resist something? Of course not. So if we adopt the implications of the Calvinistic definition of “dead in sin” then we must deny that anyone who is dead in sin can resist the Holy Spirit or reject the gospel (Acts 7:51; 2 Thess. 2:10; 1 John 4:10; Rom. 10:21). Corpses can’t resist or reject anything any more than they can see or hear anything. This, they reason, shows that Calvinists have misinterpreted the meaning of dead in sin.
Dead is dead, right?, they say. “How do men “dead to sin” choose pornography, marital infidelity, etc.? In other words, they reason that Calvinists take the phrase “dead in sin” too far. Arminians will propose that “dead in sin” means something less than living “as a walking cadaver in a spiritual graveyard” whose “ear is deaf to any word from heaven” (Sproul). They will say they have read Calvinistic articles that argue things like man is no more capable of responding to God’s offer of salvation than a corpse is of responding to an offer of a fine meal. But man can respond, they say.

So what do Arminians claim that “dead in sin” really means?
In the context of a series of verses that like Ephesians 2:1-3, Paul says that the Gentiles are “excluded from the life of God” (Ephesians 4:18). “Excluded” could also be translated “alienated.” Arminians usually propose that “dead to sin” means that man is alienated, hostile, separated from God, and void of eternal life. To be dead in sin means to be separated from God (and, thus, His life). But it does not mean he is incapable of responding to the gospel.. Death is separation, Arminians argue, not simply a termination or cessation of life. Physical death is the separation of spirit from body. The body ceases to live and decay begins, but the spirit continues to exist.
When Paul says, “The wages of sin is death,” he is not simply referring to the cessation of corporeal existence, the Arminian argues. Therefore, to the Arminian, spiritual death for the natural man is better understood as separation from God and not in terms like, “spiritual cadaver” or “spiritual corpse.” If you use terms like that, then you have to refer to a “walking cadaver.” In other words, you’ve got to have a cadaver who still functions somehow. It’s better to just go with “separation from God.” Again Arminians will argue that if unregenerate man is cadaver-like and incapable of hearing from God and believing in Him, then, they reason, why aren’t regenerate men cadaver-like with respect to sin, Satan, and this world?


Response: All of these arguments actually reveal a fundamental misconception of what is meant by Calvinists when they use the biblical phrase "dead in sin" to refer to man's spiritual inability to respond to the gospel. Furthermore, I believe I can fully demonstrate that classic Arminians believe almost exactly the same thing as Calvinists with regard to man's natural condition apart from the Holy Spirit.

Stay with me here because I believe a lot of unnecessary ink has been spilled over this issue. Scripturally speaking, "Spiritually dead" refers to the idea that the unregenerate man (that is, the person without the Holy Spirit) is dead to spiritual things. His utter inability to respond the spiritual truth is due to the fact that he is unspiritual, of the flesh. Jesus said, "that which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of Spirit is Spirit... The Spirit gives life but the flesh counts for nothing...that is why I told you that no one can come to me unless God grants it" (John 3:3, 6; 6:63,65) The person who is flesh is unregenerate and therefore dead in sin or spiritually dead. He is dead to spiritual things BUT IS ALIVE TO THE FLESH. That is why he can love sin and resist the Holy Spirit. Notice in the three quotes from Ephesians and Colossians at the top of this article... in each instance, quickening or regeneration is the solution to the problem of being dead in sin. What is that? It is the work of the Holy Spirit. That is, apart from regeneration, the sinner remains dead in sin or in his natural condition of original sin. To drive home the point, lets ask, can a person come to Christ apart from any help from the Spirit?

The Scripture says that "no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except in the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor 12:3) So "spiritually dead" does not mean man has a dead spirit, but rather is void of the Holy Spirit and therefore is dead to spiritual things. Paul said, "For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness" (Rom 6:20).

Again, in another critical passage on the subject, Paul said,

"But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God... these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For ...no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, THAT WE MIGHT UNDERSTAND the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. The NATURAL PERSON does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is NOT ABLE to understand them because they are SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED." (1 Cor 2:7; 10-14) (emphasis mine)
Spiritual truth spoken to an unregenerate man is not discerned, foolish and unacceptable unless God reveals it to us by his Spirit, and he gave His Spirit that we might understand, as the text says. What is ironic about this whole thing is that the very Arminians who spill so much ink refuting this actually believe this very same thing. I would like to issue the following challenge to any Arminian or synergist: Can a natural person, left to themselves, even lift a finger toward their own salvation? or have any response whatsoever to the gospel APART FROM the work of the Holy Spirit? No, in fact traditional Arminianism teaches that unless the Holy Spirit grants "prevenient grace" then there is not even the possibility of any response. So frankly I am baffled as to why Arminians would spend time writing countless articles in an attempt to refute something which they themselves already affirm. The very necessity of prevenient grace to the Arminian excludes the possibility of a response by those dead in sin, and demonstrates beyond any further question, that they fully embrace the term "spiritually dead" in the exact same way as the traditional Calvinist. This is not where these to camps differ. The difference is whether this working of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the unbeliever prior to salvation is monergistic or synergistic....whether it effectually accomplishes God's intended design or whether such grace can be resisted by man. That is really where we differ, not over the meaning of the phrase "dead in sin". At least the concept of total inability to respond is precisely the same apart from grace.

To review, man's natural condition is that we have no spiritual life in us and are therefore dead to the things of God. By nature we have a moral inability an thus no inclination to believe the Christ of the Gospel. Prior to being born from above were are in bondage to our sinful impulses, unless and until the Spirit first opens our blind eyes, deaf ears and stony hearts to the gospel.

But lest there be any misunderstanding, lets be clear, the Apostle Paul wrote that even though the natural man is 'dead in sin', that 'faith comes by hearing, and hearing the word of God.'(Rom 10:17). No one is saved apart from believing the gospel. But Paul also teaches that the word must be accompanied by the Holy Spirit or it will fall on deaf ears. In 1 Thess 1: 4,5 he says,

"For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction."
He knows they are chosen by God because the gospel he preached was impressed upon their renewed hearts by the Spirit, without which, he could preach till he is blue in the face and they would never respond. In a like manner, a farmer can do all the things necessary to plant crops, but unless God blesses his work with rain from above, the farmer's work will not be productive. Our job, the scripture teaches, is to preach the gospel, declaring to the world the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ (John 5:24). We plant and water, but God alone causes the growth and opens the heart.
Paul said that we are to 'persuade' unbelievers, and to 'reason' with them, and this was his own practice. Now why would Paul write and practice this if he knew people are as dead as Lazarus and incapable of believing or hearing the truth? Because it is only through the proclaimed gospel accompanied by the effectual working of the Holy Spirit to change a heart of stone to a heart of flesh that one believes in Jesus. So yes, Jesus is asking us to do what is impossible. He asks us to preach to those dead in sin... to people who cannot and will not respond. But being impossibe should never stop us from obeying and being used as a means to accomplish Jesus’ end, because "what is impossible with man [faith and repentance] is possible with God." So we do not let the fact that we can’t cause the new birth stop us from heralding the gospel to all creatures. That is, in fact, how people are born again, through the good news of Jesus Christ as the Holy Spirit opens their ears to it.

So I believe this clearly demonstrates that this whole argument against the Calvinist understanding of "spiritually dead" does not make sense because, apart from Arminian prevenient grace, they believe the same thing about the natural state man. Where we differ is over the nature of saving grace ... not over our inability believe or respond apart from the work of the Holy Spirit.

DECEITFULNESS OF SIN

by Archibald Alexander

All sin takes its origin from false views of things. Our first parents would never have sinned--had they not been deceived by the tempter. Eve saw that the forbidden fruit was beautiful, and she was persuaded also good for food, that is, pleasant to the taste and nutritious. Here was a deception. This fruit was never intended for nourishment, whatever might have been its flavor. It was intended for trial, and not for food.

But the greatest deception practiced on our first mother by the arch deceiver was, that the eating of this food would make her wise to know good and evil, even as it is known to God. The deceitful words of the tempter wrought this unfounded persuasion in her mind. The desire of knowledge is natural, a part of man's original constitution, as well as the appetite for food; but these natural propensities are not to be indulged by every means, and gratified on all occasions, but should be kept under the government of reason and conscience. The brutes were made to be governed by appetite and instinct; but man is the subject of law, and he cannot but feel the binding obligation of law. He is a moral agent, and may properly be subjected to a trial whether he will obey the law of his Creator.

How widely different does sin appear after it is committed--from what it did before. Passion or craving appetite creates a false medium by which the unwary soul is deceived, and led into transgression. After our first parents sinned, "their eyes were opened." A sense of guilt unknown before now seized them, and this was like a new vision—not of beauty, but odious deformity. Innocence was lost. Shame and confusion take the place of peace and purity. Unhappy change! The guilty pair are now sensible of their great mistake, of their guilty act, of their disgraceful condition, of their ruined state. Their whole race is ruined! What will they do when their Creator shall make his usual visit—heretofore so delightful and instructive? Hark, he comes—his voice is heard in the garden. The wretched culprits are seized with terror and consternation. Guilt causes them to flee from the presence of the best and kindest of fathers. They try to hide themselves. They run into the densest thickets of the trees of the garden. But they cannot conceal themselves from the eye of Omniscience. They cannot escape from the arm of the Almighty, much less resist his power.

Behold, the Creator not finding his creature man in his proper place, sends forth a voice, which must have been like the most terrible thunder, when the awful sound penetrated his ear, and resounded through his whole soul: "Adam, where are you?" Trembling, the guilty pair come forth to meet the frowns of a displeased and righteous Judge. We need pursue the interesting history no farther at present.

From this first transgression, by which sin entered into the world, we may form some idea of its deceitful nature. This first sin is a sort of example of all other sins. As they flow from this as streams from a fountain, they all partake of the poison of their origin. In all sin there is some bait—some apparent good—some expectation of pleasure or profit from unlawful indulgence. In all sin the mind is under a delusive influence. Right thoughts and motives are for the moment forgotten or overborne; the attention, like the eye of a beguiled bird, is fixed on a point from which it cannot be withdrawn. The enticement prevails, and guilt is contracted.