Imre Pallagi responded to A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada:
Render unto Cesar what is Cesar’s, render unto God what is God’s. Jesus said it best that it is not the place of religion to interfere in politics. I have not seen distinction and honesty from the Harper administration. Why should I support it? They have done nothing for the poor, the tired, the meek. It would reflect poorly on me as a christian to support the Tories.
On October 14th we elected MP’s to the house. We did not choose the Prime minister nor did we choose who was to form the Government. Harper tried to govern the house as if he had a majority and through his arrogance has incurred the wrath of the opposition. Now he must pay the price for failing to appeal to the majority of the House. I will not support his government unless he does the right thing and resigns. I support the coalition in spirit but it is up to them to succeed or fail if they form the government.
This is not a betryal of Canada nor is it meant to divide us. When the federalists are shaking hands with the seperatists there is a glimmer of hope that if they can put their differences aside perhaps Canada will become truly united.
Green Party of Canada
You are gravely mistaken, as are so many, about what Jesus’ words concerning God and Caesar meant. There are two reasons (one right and one wrong) why men advocate separation of church and state. The right reason is that corrupt religion subjugates and tyrannizes. History has taught us only too well the nature and folly of corrupt religion ruling among nations (or anywhere for that matter).
The wrong reason is that men, being the sinners they are, wish to live their lives independently of God. The heart cry of the sinner is, “You are not going to tell me what to do!” Men call God’s directives “religion” in order to circumvent Him whenever He does not suit their plans.
But men can no more circumvent God from involvement in their lives than they can exist without breathing. He created and operates in them all. He has every right everywhere and at all times to do as He pleases, being Owner of all things. Furthermore, what He gives as directives are for life, and those who refuse will learn it was only to their detriment that they did so.
So we are not talking religion, Imre, contrary to appearances. Would you be willing to be corrected in your understanding? Now exercise some patience and learn something.
Jesus said His Kingdom was not of this world. He never said, however, that those representing Him and His Kingdom would not have words of rebuke, direction, and substantive faith to speak to the kingdoms or rulers of this world, what you call “religion interfering in politics.” Many are the examples contrary to your opinion in the very Scriptures themselves, and we know that the Scriptures are God’s Authoritative Word.
For example, John the Baptist, who, according to Jesus, was the greatest of prophets, told the ruler that it was not lawful for him to take his brother’s wife. For declaring this application of God’s Law, John eventually lost his life. Was this “religion interfering in politics,” or politics interfering in religion? It was neither; it was truth ruling over lies and darkness, though for a time darkness must have its way.
It is written that Jesus Christ, Who is God Almighty from the beginning, never changes. The many recorded acts of God are all things that He, Jesus Christ, has done. He was the One Who sent Moses and Aaron to Pharaoh, the greatest ruler of the day, to tell Pharaoh to let His people, the Israelites, go. Was this “religion interfering in politics”?
We could go from one end of the Scriptures to the other and see what you call “religion interfering in politics.” According to you, therefore, God changed when He came in the flesh. But though it appears that way to you, He did not, as it is written: “I am the LORD, and I do not change” (Malachi 3:6 GNB).
So what did Jesus mean when He answered those who tempted Him with the question of paying taxes, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21 EMTV)?
What the Lord meant was this: “I, the Lord your God, rule over all realms, and have set authorities in every area, who execute My will, and whom I require you to obey except where their requirements come into conflict with Mine.” The children of the Kingdom have a higher calling, as with Peter and the apostles when they told the rulers of their people that when it came to preaching the gospel of Christ, they would obey God and not the edicts of men who would have them to cease. It is not true that the children of the Kingdom have nothing to say to the rulers, or to any others, of this world. The Lord said of His brethren:
“You are the salt of the earth...You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do men light a lamp and put it under the grain-measure, but on a lampstand. And it gives light to all who are in the house” (Matthew 5:13-16 MKJV).
There is no realm that is not under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and, by extension, His children, but we move in Him, by His will and leading, as with those I have mentioned. When we are sent by Him and declare His judgment in a matter, as we do here, you therefore cannot legitimately claim, “It is not the place of religion to interfere in politics.”
To men, God’s work and words by His sons in the world have not appeared as rulership, but do you think that Christ was not walking in the complete authority of Heaven on earth, even while paying taxes to kings or being put to an unjust and brutal death by the religious and secular/political authorities of this world? If He were but an ordinary man without such a position, why else would history be centered on Him, with all men speaking of Him to this day, His every recorded word being more well known, spoken of, and considered, than all those of the Caesars and rulers of His day, to the present, put together?
Do you really think that Christ died and rose again from the dead to keep the Truth separate from men, to permit men to continue in their lies and darkness, and to allow them to destroy themselves and this world forever? Isn’t that what man’s rulership and his kingdoms have done? Read your history! Why would Christ not address them, when He chooses, through those who are His Body, and who serve as His mouth?
He has now come to rule over all things, Imre. What will it be like when all men truly believe Him and submit to His rule instead of believing men and submitting to theirs?
When Jesus was taken by wicked men, who came to put Him away, He submitted Himself, saying, “Now My Kingdom is not from here.” He said “now” because the time would come when His Kingdom would be here, on earth, with men’s hearts turned to obey Him in truth. That is why He laid down His life and raised it from the dead – to raise us from the death of independence from God and His power of holiness.
Jesus was not without options regarding His death. He said He could have easily summoned as many angelic helpers as needed to protect Him, but only by laying down His life could He overcome the enemy within that keeps all men from having true peace and life with God. External rulership could not accomplish this. Christ died to establish the Internal rule of God, by which we may live.
The Scriptures emphatically, with many witnesses, promise that the Day would come when the kingdoms of men would become His Kingdom. We are here to announce that this Day is now.
There have been many warriors of faith and others along the way who laid down their lives to free us from the control of religious tyrants like the Catholic Church. That was the right kind of separation, because man-made religion has nothing to do with God. But He never meant for the Truth (which in our case here you call “religion”) to be separated from any aspect of our lives. How could He? The Truth is Life.
Regarding some other thoughts you express, although it appears to you that Victor’s message is one of support for the Harper administration, it is not. Read it over again carefully and consider what is being said, without adding any words to it. If you take the message at its word, it is about the intent of the coalition, which has been judged by God to be wicked and, yes, a betrayal of Canada. He is warning people not to support those who plot deceitfully, as though patriotic, when their intent is self-serving and evil. He is declaring that is the case in this instance. Why should you and Canada suffer as evildoers? You are warned so you won’t, if you believe.
As for the Prime Minister, if you disagree with Mr. Harper on a particular issue, you may well have a point in your disagreement. And there is nothing necessarily wrong with you expressing disagreement through legitimate channels, with the right attitude. I say “necessarily” because God sees your heart and the motives for whatever you do (which you do not see), and He judges you accordingly. If you are doing something right for the wrong reason, you will suffer accordingly. But if you do something wrong for the right reason, it may go well for you. He knows each and every person perfectly well and is ruling in complete sovereignty as Lord over everything, working all things together for good. There is justice. Never believe otherwise.
I warn you not to be quick to judge other men’s motives when you cannot see their hearts. You also must consider that you do not have all the facts at your disposal to know the precise circumstances in which any given decision is made by elected officials, so you need to be circumspect for this reason as well. Humility is in order, which youth does not have in great supply, not being tempered by experience to know the limitations of youth.
As for unity, the only possible unity of any lasting value will come when people are turned to God through their Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, Whom we preach to that end. He paid for us all with His blood, and He has come to redeem all that is His.
Thank you for the response. I have lived through many interpretations of scripture both Catholic and Protestant. Everybody seems to be convinced they know the absolute truth and are so blinded by this. Anyone can cherry pick the bible and come up with something to support their argument. I gave my heart to Jesus many years ago and I know only my heart and cannot claim to know what lies in the hearts of others.
I have an issue with this statement here:
"it is about the intent of the coalition, which has been judged by God to be wicked, and, yes, a betrayal of Canada."
I do not claim to speak for the Lord as I do not know what are contents of his heart are. Any cleric who claims to speak for the Lord is either a charlatan or an outright liar unless they are one of the few who can prove they are prophets and even the prophets did not know more than what God revealed to them. The Lord is the only judge, the clergy’s job is to proclaim his message not to put words in his mouth. I do not use the Lord’s name lightly nor would I pass judgment for him.
I will agree with this: "May God grant wisdom and strength to those who would govern with discretion and honesty." Although I have yet to see a politician fit the bill on either side of the house.
Oh and one more thing you did not ask for permission to publish my response. Would be so kind as to remove my letter from your website and not publish this one or any other intellectual property belonging to me without prior consent.
Are you saying we have convinced ourselves that we know what we are talking about, when we do not because it is only our personal erroneous conception that we speak? If so, what evidence do you have to prove this?
Are you saying we have “cherry-picked” Bible verses, in other words, we have twisted the Scriptures to support arguments conceived in our minds rather than from God’s? If so, what evidence do you have to prove this?
Are you saying that you gave your heart to Jesus, but He in turn did not give you His heart and mind, which go together? You say you do not know the contents of the Lord’s heart. You also say you cannot claim to know what is in another’s heart (we agree on both counts, but your experience falls short of the saints in Him). Here is what is recorded about those who receive His heart and mind:
1 Corinthians 2:9-16 MKJV
(9) But as it is written, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard," nor has it entered into the heart of man, "the things which God has prepared for those who love Him."
(10) But God has revealed them to us by His Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, yea, the deep things of God.
(11) For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of man within him? So also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
(12) But we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit from God, so that we might know the things that are freely given to us by God.
(13) These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
(14) But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
(15) But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged by no one.
(16) For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.
You say to us:
“Any cleric who claims to speak for the Lord is either a charlatan or an outright liar unless they are one of the few who can prove they are prophets and even the prophets did not know more than what God revealed to them.”
Are you saying that we are either charlatans or liars unless we prove to you, a man who admittedly does not have the heart or mind of Christ, that we speak the Words of God? There were men of like dispositions who made a similar request of Christ for proof:
“Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, Teacher, we wish to see a sign from You. But He answered and said to them, An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matthew 12:38-40 EMTV).
None of those who asked for the sign were among the 500 or so souls who saw the Lord after He was resurrected. The dead bodies of those (and/or the bodies of their children) who demanded proof of the Lord’s authority for His words (Matthew 21:23) served as proof when the Lord’s prophetic words against Jerusalem and the Temple of God were fulfilled forty years later, as were the words of the parable He spoke against them:
"He will certainly kill those evil men, they answered, and rent the vineyard out to other tenants, who will give him his share of the harvest at the right time” (Matthew 21:41 GNB).
“The Lord is the only judge, the clergy’s job is to proclaim his message not to put words in his mouth.”
Is not the preaching of the Lord’s message also the words of His mouth? The apostle Paul said this of God’s message that he was sent to preach:
“And my message and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, in order that your faith might not be in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (1 Corinthians 2:4-5 EMTV).
But you make a distinction because you speak of the clergy of men, who preach the letter of the Word with human wisdom, but not with the Spirit of God and power. Therefore they end up putting words in His mouth, teaching wrongly what they do not know or understand.
Are you declaring that we are putting words in His mouth? Do you know for certain? Can you give us sure proof? If not, why do you insinuate evil on our part? You say you do not take the Lord’s Name lightly or pass judgment for Him. The spirit in which you approach us altogether contradicts this characterization. Ought you not to be more circumspect when, by your own admission, we may be speaking His Words? Regarding your testimony of yourself and your thoughts on us, the Scriptures warn against taking the testimony of one witness.
You ask us not to publish your words. Why are you afraid to “shout what you have heard in the ear from the housetops”? Is it because you have not heard anything and would like to conceal this fact from others, rather than rejoicing that everyone can hear the truth and about God’s work of salvation as a result of your letter? Why would you not be willing to have your letter published for the sake of truth and the preaching of the Gospel? If you think we are not speaking the truth, aren’t you at least speaking it?
Of those dozens of people we have corresponded with on this matter, you are the only one to tell us he has “accepted Jesus,” yet you are also the only one who has asked us not to publish his letter. Is there a connection? Read Diabolical Doctrine: “Accepting” Jesus Christ as Your Personal Savior.
For more proof of our ministry, read the many correspondences posted on our Notice Board.
Imre, we see you trusting in your own righteousness, which is why you make unsubstantiated judgments of us and others. You write:
“I will agree with this: ‘May God grant wisdom and strength to those who would govern with discretion and honesty.‘ Although I have yet to see a politician fit the bill on either side of the house.”
Those words were spoken, not because men are righteous, but because they are not and need to avail themselves of God’s strength and wisdom to do what is honest and right in His sight for the sake of all. Who are you to say that no politician has ever availed himself of God or been granted that grace? You say you cannot see any man’s heart. How then do you know that none has ever done right? Are you not a cynic, complaining in the dark?
You have set yourself up as judge above all, trusting in your own righteousness and looking down your nose at others. You are doing the very thing you contemn and criticize of others, playing the part of God. You are a hypocrite and are in great need of humbling.
A reader's response to "A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada": Reader's response: Who is to say that Stephen Harper is so holy and virtuous to lead us? he only…
A reader's response to "A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada": Reader's response: We don't curse people as is doing so we would demean ourselves and not make…
A reader's response to "A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada": Reader's response: I must admit that this email was unnecessary and not why I subscribe. I have a right…