Jesus WAS the Messiah the FIRST time on Earth – Contrary to Hagee’s Message

2008 February 9

Filed in:

– Which of These Things is Not Like The Other? (Heresy)


I have to say in no uncertain terms that to deny the Messiahship of Jesus, IN THE FIRST coming, is completely unbiblical.

Messiah is Kingship. Messiah is also a person not just his place as king. He was to be the one to fight for and win Israels’s peace.

Jesus directly told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah. Simon Peter’s heaven sent “from the father” confession was this:


(Note that Both MESSIAH and SON OF GOD, are terms for the King of Israel in Psalm 2 – you will read the word “messiah” as “anointed one.”)

He processed into the city of David on a donkey, amidst palm waving, and was robed in a kings garment of purple and wore a kings crown (thorns). The charge and complaint of the Jews was EXACTLY that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, King of Israel. and was “exalted” (lifted up on the cross) under a sign in three languages that said, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.”

In FACT, the name “Christ” is Greek for “Messiah.” His most common appelation in the epistles is “Jesus the Messiah.”

His full and permanent earthly/heavenly reign has nothing to do with the question of whether he WAS ALREADY anointed to be KING.

David was anointed LONG before he ruled. He was already MESSIAH before he reigned. But, as soon as he was anointed, it was an obvious sin to fight against God’s chosen servant.

Jesus directly claims messiahship several times, and his followers almost always refer to him in this way. Hagee says that Israel cannot be said to have rejected His Messiahship (anointing) because he never in any way (“word or deed”) claimed to be Messiah.

This is either ignorance or a lie from Hagee, a man who should know better.

He DID claim it. And the DID reject him FOR EXACTLY the reason that HE CLAIMED TO BE MESSIAH.

Paul says that the GOSPEL is specifically that the resurrection and lineage from David prove Jesus to be Messiah (Romans 1.1-6).

For Paul, Belief that Jesus is already LORD/Son of David/Messiah [all Ps 2 and Ps 89 references), and is RAISED from the dead are the two prongs of the Gospel:

-Rom 1.1-6

1Paul, a servant of the MESSIAH Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for THE GOSPEL of God— 2 THE GOSPEL he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a DESCENDANT OF DAVID, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the SON OF GOD [“messiah” title in Ps 2 and in Ps 89] by his RESURRECTION from the dead: Jesus THE MESSIAH our Lord. 5 Through him and for his name’s sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith. 6 And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus the MESSIAH.

2 Timothy 2.8

Remember Jesus THE MESSIAH, RAISED from the dead, DESCENDED FROM DAVID. This is my gospel[.]

Rom 10.9

That if you confess allegiance with your mouth, saying, “Jesus is LORD,” and believe in your heart that God RAISED him from the dead, you will be saved.


Response to Presiding Bishop Inhibiting San Joaquin Bishop

2008 January 16

Filed in:

– Which of These Things is Not Like The Other? (Heresy)


Printer Friendly

Following is the Diocese of San Joaquin’s statement in response to a letter sent to Bishop Schofield by Bishop Schori of The Episcopal Church.


The Episcopal Church’s assertion that Bishop Schofield has abandoned the communion of this Church is an admission that TEC rejects the historical Anglican faith. This is why The Diocese of San Joaquin appealed to the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone of South America for emergency and temporary protection. The majority of the other provinces of the Anglican Communion hold to the traditional faith. It is the primary duty of bishops to guard the faith and Bishop Schofield has been continually discriminated against for having done so while Bishops and Archbishops around the world have affirmed not only his stance but the move to the Southern Cone. Bishop Schofield is currently a member of both the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church and the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone, not prohibited by either house.

Governing documents of TEC do not prohibit relationships between different members of the Anglican Communion, rather they encourage it. TEC’s action demonstrates that there is an enormous difference between their church and most of the Anglican Communion. Again, this action is a demonstration that TEC is walking apart from the faith and its expression in morality held by the rest of the Anglican Communion. The Episcopal Church’s own identity is dependent upon its relationship with the whole Anglican Communion. TEC should consider whether it is imperiling that relationship by taking such punitive actions.

How is it that over 60 million Anglicans worldwide can be wrong and a few hundred thousand in the American Church can claim to be right?

Point of Clarification

As a point of clarification, there is no confusion on the part of the Bishop of San Joaquin or the clergy, people, leadership, and convention of the Diocese of San Joaquin of their status.

The claims of The Episcopal Church to have oversight or jurisdiction are not correct. The fact is that neither the Diocese nor Bishop John-David Schofield are part of The Episcopal Church. The Bishop is a member of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone as of December 8th, 2007. The Diocese is a part of the Southern Cone. Neither the Presiding Bishop or the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church have any further jurisdiction. Bishop Schofield is no longer a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church.

Following is a statement from The Most Reverend Gregory Venables (Archbishop of the Province of the Southern Cone of South America) dated January 11, 2008:

“As of December the 8th, 2007 Bishop John-David Schofield is not under the authority or jurisdiction of The Episcopal Church or the Presiding Bishop. He is, therefore, not answerable to their national canon law but is a member of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone and under our authority.

Huckabee is OUT!! : Support of John Hagee is Intolerable

2007 December 25

Filed in:

– Which of These Things is Not Like The Other? (Heresy)



Whether you are a Christian or not, this Huckabee-Hagee allegiance should make you drop him from your vote options.

Taking a break from the Iowa campaign trail, Huckabee delivered a Christmas season sermon at Cornerstone about Christ’s birth and embraced Hagee, calling him “one of the great Christian leaders of our nation.”


 Hagee is a fiery preacher best known for his writings on the Middle East, where he reads contemporary events as unfolding Biblical prophecy. He is staunchly pro-Israel, saying that God had made his love for the land and its people clear.


The Catholic League says Hagee is virulently anti-Catholic — a charge he denies — and it is getting the word out that Huckabee is rubbing shoulders with an anti-Vatican figure.


There are two MAJOR reasons that Mike Huckabee’s connection yesterday to John Hagee SHOULD ALARM US: 1) Dishonesty or 2) International Political Danger

[DISHONESTY] – Huckabee cannot knowingly assert christian teaching, and at the same time befriend Hagee

John Hagee is a HERETIC. He teaches that Jesus was NOT Messiah, and did not claim to be. This is the heart of Christian teaching – either these men fatally disagree, or do agree and are neither one teaching Christianity.

But Huckabee seems to be a standard Christian, so he should think Hagee to be antichristian in teaching.

What are the possible scenarios here?


[scenario 1] – ignorant but willing to lie about knowledge for votes

IN SCENARIO 1 – Mike Huckabee DOES NOT KNOW what John Hagee believes but still says “Hagee is one of the great Christian leaders of our nation” – a claim to know what Hagee teaches and how he directs people. Therefore – he is lying and making a deceitful political grab.


[scenario 2] – knowledgeable but willing to lie about agreement for votes

IN SCENARIO 2 – Mike Huckabee DOES know what John Hagee believes and hates his theology but is willing to ignore it, and lie about agreeing with it in a deceitful political grab.


[scenario 3] – Huckabee isn’t lying – he is simply a dangerous theopolitical aberrant.

Mike Huckabee does know what John Hagee believes and AGREES.


[INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL DISASTER] – Israel supported at all costs based on bizarre, uncontrolled sub-biblical views of prophecy.

John Hagee has longtime backed extreme support for National Israel based on crazy and non-historical readings of the Bible. ATTN: If you are not a Christian or a bible reader – PLEASE, BE ALERTED: Hagee’s prophetic views are NOT NORMATIVE to Christian teaching.


1] If this is what Huckabee DOES agree with, then we are being led into a terrible Israel policy based on unfounded and abnormal views.
2] If Huckabee DOESN’T agree, then we are being asked to vote for a man who will side with whomever will give the most votes.

Peter Akinola Pushing Forward for Realignment

2007 November 8

Filed in:

– Which of These Things is Not Like The Other? (Heresy)


Akinola 1

Read the WHOLE article by clicking here (Anglican Mainstream).

An open letter from Archbishop of Nigeria to other primates to gather together for action [excerpts here]:


Although they have variously been described as “interventions” “boundary crossing” or “incursions” — they are a direct and natural consequence of the decision by The Episcopal Church (TEC) to follow the path that it has now chosen.

These pastoral initiatives undertaken to keep faithful Anglicans within our Anglican family has been at a considerable cost of crucial resources to our province. There is no moral equivalence between them and the actions taken by TEC. They are a heartfelt response to cries for help. We acted in accordance with the Gospel mandate. Had TEC, against all godly warnings, not taken actions that tore the fabric of our beloved Communion there would be no need for hundreds indeed, thousands of its members to seek pastoral, episcopal and now primatial care elsewhere…


Akinola 2Of course there is value to preserving Anglican structures but we must never do so at the expense of the people for whom our Lord Jesus the Christ gave his life.

Until the Communion summons the courage to tackle that issue headlong and resolve it we can do no other than provide for those who cry out to us. It is our earnest prayer that repentance and reconciliation will make this a temporary arrangement. One thing is clear we will not abandon our friends…


…This endless series of proposals and counter proposals continues with no apparent conclusion in sight. Sadly, it is becoming increasingly clear that the only acceptable end as far as TEC is concerned is the full capitulation of any who would stand in opposition to their biblically incompatible innovations- this we will never do. There is a way forward – we have written and spoken repeatedly about it – the time for action is now. I believe that we Primates must meet in the next few months to respond to the crisis that now confronts us…


Excerpts copied from Anglican Mainstream.

John Hagee: Jesus Did Not Come to Earth to Be the Messiah

2007 November 4

Filed in:

– Which of These Things is Not Like The Other? (Heresy)


Seems like Jesus DID claim to be the Messiah…

 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.

[Matt 16.16-20]

“The woman said to him, ‘I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.’ Jesus said to her, ‘I who speak to you am he.’ ”

[John 4.25-26]

I usually don’t use words like heresy and lies [see my category listings] when speaking publicly about others… but the HERESY that John Hagee is espousing is either a down right lie, or extreme ignorance, the second of which I can hardly begin to believe for someone who has made a life off Bible teaching…

I found this at Bobby’s Blog