January 25, 2024: Ezekiel 38 – Bible Prophecy That’s Now Happening

I was sad to read your earlier words regarding his views on unbiblical unions. I, too, once listened to him quite often. I WILL say, though, that there was always a check in my spirit regarding the big, famous musicians that he sometimes associated himself with.


Thanks for your reply Ken. Yes I see a spirit of Philadelphia in JDs church. And this forum, in going through its paces, does also demonstrate this too, amen. I do notice though honestly in overview (and perhaps in some foreign countries I would take a different account) that we in America do seem to be prone to conviction of views and opinion that can tend to enter the evaluative fabric of what is noticeable symptomatically of our era in general. Along with that there is also spackles of arena of discussion based discernment that seems to also be evolving in America Church Character too. Which is so so lovely to see.

Like in the general Allastair Begg controversy, there seems to be far more evangelicals that weigh in with discussional perspective that frankly amazes me. More than views that would be somewhat more dogmatic in nature. Well, I am making this observation from having varied reasons for my interest there. Which would have much more an ear to the ground than on average, granted. I understand, for example Ken, your recent take on Begg of the “moving on from him approach.” And I would have to say on one level I get that perspective. And if I were to weigh it all out pound for pound, I’d very much likely agree that that seems commencerate with the actual dynamic of the situation. Does Begg present as qualifying the mark and avoid admonition in scripture? Overall I would, on a personal note from pound for pound how I would view the overall thing, be leaning in agreement on that with you. Because it appears to me to rise to that level on a number of fronts (not just the mainstream one often charactorized as Begg compromising–which I would not see is the point in all of this–but even so on other grounds find a marking and avoiding premise for him largely fitting).

When I view something like that through the eyes though of Philadelphia spirit, I find myself considering the greatest context I can for it. Begg incerted his view via a claim press releasing a book called The Christian Manifesto, which by intent is meant to be provocative. In principle, that books venture into the sermon on “the plain” in Luke would support in spirit the claim of Begg’s intent (removing the compromise aspect for the moment). So in theory, the book (not the grandma advice) I believe addresses a need in the body of Christ today–even though Begg’s use of scripture regarding would be lacking or off. But aside from shoehorning verses to fit a thesis, I believe the books premise to be valid.

I say that though not to toot the Begg horn. I say that because the irony is in how Begg reacted to Evangelical pushback. It was the anti-thesis of his book. In that I would see the irony. But also a missed opportunity in the body of Christ whereas had Begg demonstrated the Christian character and maturity toward a more discusional discernment view (rather than a reactionary one seemingly far less mature), he could have actually been a very helpful figurehead for some quantum leap type growth discussion in the body of Christ. I would see in that both he and Family Hour Radio Network missed a culturally ready moment for awesome church growth. I realize in saying this, in light of the perceived “compromise” it appears Begg to be about, my observation might seem rather left of center…lol. And I understand if so. But in nature my observation is not about gay wedding attendance but about how to have a discussion about radical grace that amplifies the body dynamic rather than trivializes it into stalemate. Which seems to be the inconvient “fruit.” – Again, not statement about gay agenda perspective…but how to challenge the body with true biblical principles we might be more asleep in some ways in. And its this sort of phenonon where opinion based conviction vs brotherly love conversational conviction seems to charactorize the chance of the latter’s survival…as a general charactoristic of the church age…I guess is how I might consider. Thanks again dear brother for the interaction. Blessings.


Myrrh, I had a check in my spirit for many years too for other reasons. I was not aware of the musicians he assocated with. If you feel at liberty, do you recall some of the one’s you were concerned about? Blessing.s


Thanks Susan. I appreciate your heart dear sister. I also know I can say things that might be better or best with disclaimers. Thank you for your lovely heart in him. Blessings.

1 Like

Radical Grace would not contradict the Word of God in context, ever, just for the purpose of discussion.
I see that as a (checks and balances) form of checkmate by God’s Word.
The Holy Spirit does not want us to associate ourselves with evil, or to honor anything evil. Indeed we are to bring evil into the Light and to expose it. (This can be very difficult at times as most are inclined to glance over it to avoid controversy.)

Yes we are to love everyone so that they may see our love as genuine, and in staying in step with the Holy Spirit.

Interesting how this sums up the apostate church of today. Rather that sticking to the true Biblical principles, they evolve outside of the Word of God, to make exceptions to suit their desires, and that is where God draws the line.

A deep study in 1 Cor 13 reveals what Love is, not what we want it to be, or how it should be applied.
Sin on ALL FRONTS is still sin, and when accepted into the Body of Christ it becomes the Leven that works its way through the entire Body of Christ to destroy it, and to lead the sheep astray. Destruction from within as Pastor JD just mentioned in a recent sermon.

Needless to say Satan has devised numerous subtle attacks in the last 2000 years on the Body of Christ, and now we are at the point that we are at today, the apostate church at the end of the age.
But thanks be to God that He has us where we are at.


Hi Teren!

I should back up a little, as my memory isn’t always to be trusted. Perhaps not buddies, likely nothing scandalous, but he liked to be a bit more contemporary than I would expect….

I recall that Alistair very often spoke of the Beatles in a fond way. He was a fan, and he really liked to ponder them.

Alice Cooper and his testimony—it may be authentic (praise God), though other pastors have frowned, due to his continued concert tour content? Just notes for me…

Again, faded recollections on my part.

I linked the above but admit that I have not listened to the interview. I will say that anyone who gets mentioned in Christianity Today makes me squirm a little. I do not care for that progressive publication. :wink:

I will share more if I find anything more.


Screenshot, as I can’t open full article. Makes me go hmmmm. Why would a pastor play such a role?


Yes brother Amen. I hear what you are saying… There is one guy on the 25 hours of Begg controversy (lol or feels like it) that siad, “I’d go to a gay wedding. And when they ask if there is anyone who objects to this marriage, I’d give them the gospel, tell them the whole thing is a shame and read portions of scipture.” That would be an interesting wedding or what ever it would was. But I understand what you are saying. I could say a lot here. But watch me Ken :slight_smile: look no hands :grin: i can do the whole “reserved” thing too ya know :crazy: But i would say this much: For Begg to permit this gay marriage attendence thing to be served up like that in a press release book interview I would say is mad scientist marketing. The lack of discretion there = to me, its heat seeking destruction capability within the flock. Master Class Level pastor aught to know better. For real.

I see two extreme mistake perceptions on biblical sensibilities:

(A) Seek to Stretch the Flock’s Awareness of Living Biblical Principles
(B) Seek to Protect the Flock from Rogue Principles Outide Biblical Principles

Both are correct in proportion. Both are wrong in improporition. Is someone who does not have a pretrib rapture view an apostate? Some woud say yes. Some would say it depends. I would say no. Apostate to me means the Loadicean brand that is “not saved.” So yeah that would be churches that compromise on homosexuality and transgender issues. And probably those who punk on grandma to sell books. lol That was too fun not to not say…if i said that right.

We ourselves are not the standard of exegesis and hermeneutic. In that balance is where the two extremes exist. This is not anything to do with liberal agendas concerning gay or transgener anything (at least in what i am addressing). I am coming from the place of the reason why Begg wrote The Christian Maniifesto. I believe the principles from that interview Begg gave (outside advice to grandma) are sound. And actually preferred I’d say. I would also say that Begg’s disploy of how he chose to defend his view resembles that thought processes of a reprobate in some ways–the way he permits himself to use scripture for one. Ken what would you say is the difference between reprobate and apostate? I would see there are crossover. Would the only diffence be one is in the church and the other is outside the church?

As the example of the above: Someone from the Amish community would see you or me as improper use of (A). Yet you Ken demonstrate what i would call a more balanced nuanced mature understanding of same said biblical principles–that Amish would see you as outside the camp on. Is it possible to question that about ourselves without giving up the foundation of principle? Since we have the spirit…I think we can. Not to go to gay weddings…but just that we can challenge our own biases and still believe…perhaps hopefully all the more.

Just saying… Blessings.

1 Like

Wow thanks for your reply I’ll check out that interview. As for the Beatles i am not a fan nor not not a fan. But in the gist of the unkown god and Paul related to contemporary beliefs, i think it is important for pastors to be able to hugely relate with their contemporary world. Not all. Not manditory. Some have very refined callings. Is just that what helps navigate away i believe from pastors perhaps being too heavily focused on the sense of theiir ministry in contrast in how actually God is using them would be something like that which tempers and balances. It is kind of know historically that some pastors have such a fixation on their sense of mission they have denied their wife and chidlren kind of thing…i am sure you have heard these stories.

When a missionary comes to a foreign land it is helpful they be familiar with the psyche of that culture. In Beggs case it seems like he just liked the Beatles and found a way to see the culture he missons to through them. Well that’s just my take on that for what its worth. It is too bad he turned out this way though. Like he did not really understand his mission field regardless of the Beatlles or Alice Cooper. Instead it seemed like what he did do is let too much like a hero complext worship of self settle in and then everything outside that box were demons…lol. Like what he did with the Evangelical Church is turned us into demonic Pharisees instead of doing what he wrote about in his book, The Christian Manifesto. And reason with the concerned church against his own frayed perspective.

Thanks i did not know this about the man. I appreciate it dear sister. What troubled me most about him were two things:

(a) He stated in a sermon that he counseled with a Roman Catholic Biship. Meaning, he got council from.

(b) He turned the gift of salvation into Lordship Salvation and used a twisting of the narrow gate to do it. Lordship Savlation is very subtle. And difficult sometimes to untangle from Christian pop culture even. But when someone drew my attention to that and i studied the narrow gate for myself deeper…wow…its like Begg was not teaching the word.



I never knew that, or never caught that. Yes, hmm.

This I knew, but always “felt” like Begg was the most forgiving about it. I admit that gave me some comfort.

Siiiigh. :pray: Siiiiiigh.


That nails it down. In all the examples does it not depend on how one reads the Word of God? Or misread it?
This forms the base for core belief. But if a person gets their base wrong, it throws off the rest of their understanding of the Word and we end up with multiple denominations and sects in Christianity when really there should only be one denomination, one church and very soon we will live it.
A reprobate in some ways is the result of a depraved mind. And that is exactly what the Word of God says about practicing homosexuality, He gives them over to a depraved mind. God says to love them so that they might repent from their sin. But that does not mean to honor or agree with them in all that they do. It also means to set a good example that God would have us do.

LOL I have seen them both in church. I have even escorted one or two of them out in the middle of a service when they have disrupted the service. (Always in Love)


Do Not Reward Evil as Good

By Hal Lindsey

Axios and certain other media outlets have recently reported that the State Department is considering recognizing Palestine as a state. There are a host of reasons why that’s a bad idea. One of the worst is this — it rewards terrorism. It rewards the very worst in human behavior.

The idea is that the United States would make this move soon after Israel’s campaign in Gaza ends — and US pressure to end the campaign is already enormous. Hamas would then be able to say to every terror group in the world, “Here’s how you get the really big concessions. Kill, mutilate, rape, burn people to death, and take lots of innocents as hostages.”

To recognize a state of Palestine in the aftermath of their September terror attacks on Israel, would encourage every rogue group on earth to follow that wicked path. It would bring chaos to this planet, the likes of which have never been seen before!

For decades, the United States has called for a two-state solution in the Holy Land. But the US has said such a solution must be predicated on negotiation among the people who live there, and that it cannot be imposed from the outside. But the present administration seems to be considering a radical change in that policy. How radical? The Biden Administration is reportedly considering imposing a new state of Palestine in a Middle East where terms and borders have not been negotiated, much less implemented. The plan is to go in the opposite direction from previous US policy and impose this “peace plan” from the outside, from far-off Washington.

The Palestinian goal has not changed from the PLO’s beginning. They want the complete annihilation of the State of Israel and the genocide of Jews around the world. They have tried to do it by sheer force, but even with the help of invading Arab armies, they have failed every time. They have now made it clear that they are willing to accomplish their goal in stages.

A key stage in that campaign is recognition of Palestine as a state by the United Nations. In 2012, they were accepted by the UN as “an observer state,” but the US has blocked the UN from giving full recognition to Palestine. 139 of the UN’s 193 member states have given full recognition to “Palestine,” a nation that has never existed in all of world history.

Some things are known by everyone in the world — known by instinct, intuition, and by experience. One is that if you reward a behavior, you will get more of it. We all know that’s true. That’s why we reward puppies with treats and give children words of praise when they do right. Real life proves this idea again and again. The ones who still think it’s a good idea to positively reward evil behavior mostly live in the ivory towers of academia and government.

In the real world, we know that if you don’t want people to break the law, don’t reward lawbreaking. If you don’t want drug addiction, don’t reward drug use. If you don’t want people to cross your borders illegally, don’t reward attempts at illegal immigration. If you don’t want kidnapping, don’t reward kidnappers.

And most of all — if you don’t want terrorism, don’t reward terrorist acts!


Great observations by Hal Lindsey.
So will the USA go belly up on it’s policies and concede to the terrorists, and push for a two state solution?

Hypothetically I think it can go that route during the beginning of the 7-year tribulation pushing it as: “give peace a chance the world has changed” as the USA will be aiding in putting the world back together again after the rapture.

Iran and the world will be recuperating from the rapture and then state that they no longer want the complete destruction of Israel. All of the Iranian proxies will have stopped their offensives.

That scenario would play right into the hands of the Anti-Christ’s plans. THEN Israel would be saying, “Peace and security.”

No matter how you look at it, the rapture is imminent in this generation. I think it is closer than any of us realize.


Pretty good observation yourself.

I especially find this so close to my heart and expectations for the near future!



I second your request, Teren and @Myrrh. It really doesn’t matter at this point if I don’t know who they are, but on the other hand it might matter for others to know. I have had that same check but mainly because of his milk toast teachings these past few years and during C19.

1 Like

EXACTLY. Notice who the pastor was that praised AB for his advice. A homosexual pastor. That says it all. He should have repented immediately.


You know, it was during the C19 happenings in 2020 that had me stop tuning in to Alistair’s messages. I found no substance, and just bland “going along with the isolated worship rules.” I never really thought about when I stopped viewing until you mentioned it, CaroleAnn.

You’ve likely read my name mentions at this point, for what they were worth.:wink:. Fragments in my now foggy thoughts.