THE AFTERLIFE IS NOT A HUSTLE. The hustle is people that read scriptures like this:
Psalm 146:7
“The Lord executes judgement for the oppressed: which gives food to the hungry. The Lord looses the prisoners.”
And then proceed to teach with their ministries and with their lives that God:
– DOESNT care about the oppressed – they mock and dismiss the oppressed,
– He DOESNT handout food to the hungry, and
– He DOESNT care about injustice in the prison system – He wants to keep prisoners in prison for free labor.
THOSE PEOPLE ARE THE HUSTLERS AND LIARS! They care so much about keeping the political status quo flowing that they completely ignore the Bible.

Hank Hanegraaff Exposed

I can’t wait till I get “exposed” one day. So I can change my beliefs closer to Jesus’s Word, and purify my actions too… Its important that we keep the words of God above the Words of men. No one is exempt.


From Ken Ham:

Hanegraaff wrote a book on the issue of creation titled The Creation Answer Book. I previously published a review on my blog.

Sadly, The Creation Answer Book made it evident that Hanegraaff does not hold to a literal Genesis (but buys into geological and astronomical evolution), as he was unwilling to understand Genesis in its most natural form—historical narrative.

In this more recent article, called “Leviathan, Dragons, and Dinosaurs, Oh My!” (CRJ, vol. 36, no. 2), Hanegraaff denies that the Bible’s accounts of the sea creature leviathan and the large behemoth (that we think is an apt description of what could be a sauropod dinosaur) are literal. Working through Job chapters 38–41, Hanegraaff claims that of all the things God lists to Job, these two creatures are meant to be understood as metaphors. He writes the following:

In sum, Leviathan and Behemoth are not dinosaurs but personifications that illustrate a metaphysical reality. As such, the mythology of the dragon underscores the reality of the Devil.

Well, he’s right on one count—leviathan was not a dinosaur, because only particular land animals (possibly behemoth) were dinosaurs. Leviathan was a sea creature, and thus was created on Day Five of Creation Week (Genesis 1:21). Hanegraaff, though, seems to think that some Christians believe leviathan was a dinosaur. At AiG, we understand the technical definition of dinosaur is for a group of land animals, and so we have never suggested leviathan was a dinosaur. Leviathan was a real animal that lived in the sea. The description could fit something like the great Kronosaurus, but we don’t know for sure.

What’s more, every other creature (living or nonliving) that God mentions in Job 38–41 (e.g., lion, raven, donkey, wild ox, ostrich, horse, locust, hawk, or eagle) are literal objects that Job saw. Why would God suddenly mention two “personifications” (which means to give living traits to an inanimate object or idea) in the midst of literal objects?

In fact, leviathan is mentioned repeatedly in Scripture (Job 3:8, 41:1; Psalm 74:14,104:26; Isaiah 27:1). There’s no denying this was a real creature that people were familiar with. Hanegraaff’s conclusion doesn’t make sense in light of all this, but it does reveal his denial of the fact that man lived alongside these great beasts (dinosaurs), which were also made on Day Six of creation along with man. God even pointed out to Job that behemoth was made along with you (Job 40:15).

Hanegraaff, however, relies on a “literary” understanding of Scripture. He says that means he reads God’s Word “in the most obvious and natural sense,” but his views on dinosaurs above clearly contradict that. In other words, he doesn’t believe that dinosaurs, which are land animals, were made on the same day as Adam.

But it actually gets worse: Hanegraaff also denies there was a literal serpent in the Garden of Eden that audibly spoke to Eve. He claims the following:

Eve was not deceived by a talking snake. Rather, Moses used the symbol of a snake to communicate the wiles of the Evil One who deceived Eve through mind-to-mind communication . . .

Now, Hanegraaff’s claim clearly contradicts the plain reading of Genesis 3, which has already been shown beyond doubt to be historical narrative. So how is his reading the “most obvious and natural”? Really, it isn’t. His view on the serpent here causes problems for how we’re to read 2 Corinthians 11:3, where the Apostle Paul clearly considers the serpent to be literal. Furthermore, Paul warns that just as the serpent (a real serpent) beguiled Eve, so Satan will use the same method on us. And that method was to get people to doubt God’s Word, which would lead to unbelief. Sadly, Hanegraaff, by his compromise position in regard to the serpent, is really getting people to doubt God’s Word in Genesis.

Because Hanegraaff holds to an old earth (and hence, also denies a global Flood), that in order to support his views, he has to explain away literal references to man and dinosaurs living alongside each other in Genesis—and that carries over into how he reads much of the creation account in Genesis.

It’s sad that influential Christians like Hanegraaff wholeheartedly accept many secular humanistic ideas like long-age geology and the big bang. When they accept these competing (anti-biblical) claims and mix them with their Christianity, something always has to give. Most people give up what the Bible plainly says in light of the “secular religion” of long ages. I want to encourage you to stand strong on the authority of God’s Word and watch out for these secular ideas in the church. Don’t mix these two religions (Hebrews 10:23). To do so is really no different than the Israelites mixing with the Baal worship of their day. Man’s fallible word should never be used to reinterpret God’s clear Word. To do so is to attack and undermine the authority of the infallible Word.


The Half-life of Carbon is only 5730 years old….

The Half-life of Carbon is only 5730 years old…. So when people tell you that carbon dating of fossils proves that the earth is millions of years old, they are lying.

“Let’s suppose we find a mammoth’s skull and we want to date it to determine how long ago it lived. We can measure in the laboratory how many carbon-14 atoms are still in the skull. If we assume that the mammoth originally had the same number of carbon- 14 atoms in its bones as living animals do today (estimated at one carbon-14 atom for every trillion carbon-12 atoms), then, because we also know the radiocarbon decay rate, we can calculate how long ago the mammoth died. It’s really quite simple.

This dating method is similar to the principle behind an hourglass.6 The sand grains that originally filled the top bowl represent the carbon-14 atoms in the living mammoth just before it died. It’s assumed to be the same number of carbon-14 atoms as in elephants living today. With time those sand grains fall to the bottom bowl, so the new number represents the carbon-14 atoms left in the mammoth skull when we found it.

The difference in the number of sand grains represents the number of carbon-14 atoms that have decayed back to nitrogen-14 since the mammoth died. Because we have measured the rate at which the sand grains fall (the radiocarbon decay rate), we can then calculate how long it took those carbon-14 atoms to decay, which is how long ago the mammoth died.

That’s how the radiocarbon method works. And because the half-life of carbon-14 is just 5,730 years, radiocarbon dating of materials containing carbon yields dates of only thousands of years, not the dates over millions of years that conflict with the framework of earth history provided by the Bible, God’s eyewitness account of history.”

– Dr. Andrew Snelling

Read the rest here.

Using Actors to Expose Hypocrites | ReThinking the Trayvon Martin Case | FREE GiveAway!!!


When I first spoke up about the Trayvon Martin case, it was not about race, it was based on Proverbs 31:8,9, speaking up for the oppressed, Psalms 82. It was about the Shedding of Innocent Blood. It was about Envying not the Oppressor, Proverbs 3:30,31.

But now after seeing how racially divided the opinions are on this  case… maybe race does have a little something to do with it? The reports are so conflicting on what actually happened, but people tend to divide either along race lines or political views whether they think George is innocent.

Also, did you know that Sanford, Florida has a storied history of racism, going back to the fact that the city’s founder couldn’t even hire black laborers because the people of the town reacted violently. Florida also had more lynchings per capita than any other state in the South, and Sanford Florida was a place that Jackie Robinson couldn’t even workout for baseball’s spring training, because angry mobs came to make him leave. Spanning from the 1870s to the 1940s to 2012, this clearly is not an issue of flesh and blood, but of principalities and powers (Ephesians 6). Love and the Truth of God is the antidote.

I still hold to my first thoughts: the natural cause of the killing wasn’t race. The response however has been largely based on race, but more on socialist versus fascist political views. Socialist=left wing, Fascist=right wing.

For the antidote to the endless and divisive socialist/fascist dialectic, (a dialectic is an endless argument with no conclusion, meant to go back and forth forever like this run on redundant parentheses, done just to move forward in an upward spiral, because a conclusion would be an admission of absolute truth, and we can’t handle the absolute Truth, and the real power (the dialectic promoter) is charging for tickets and advertising, and just using the dialectic (war) to gain power over both sides and money for himself, so he doesn’t want absolute truth to end the dialectic war) check out this blog about Biblical Authority and Constitutional liberty. I say this is an antidote, not an alternative, because alternatives are just meant to alternate. Antidotes are substances that have the ability to counteract a poison, i.e, truth is the antidote for two alternative lies.

The case is actually very simple, if you think honestly and in a balanced way. George Zimmerman was probably not racist, just human. However, he instigated a conflict and killed another human. Innocent blood was shed. He may not be a ‘premeditated’ murderer, but he is guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Any law that excuses him is an unjust law.

I’ll have a blog coming up next week that will contain my thought process behind that. It will be a blog about Biblically deductive thinking skills. Its a doozy, so be on the lookout!

But for now, here’s a question for you to think about: what’s the difference between murder and manslaughter?

What did God say about it in the Bible? The first 10 people that can find me a scripture where God differentiates between pre-meditated murder and manslaughter can get a FREE copy of Killing Idols For Revival!

twitter me the answer in a private message @esosa

Hmmmm… maybe I should rename it “Idolslaughtering for Revival.” lol

ON a Much Lighter Note:

Here’s some more “Acting” that exposes the hypocrisy of FLOPism in the NBA:-) – Fakest FLOP ever – Amazing double FLOP – Blake Griffn FLOP or fingernail graze?


– Get the book that exposes spiritual principalities that cause hypocrisy in the Church and racism in America – Killing Idols For REVIVAL.