The News Beats

Atlantis

 Atlanticus Awdawmonus

David Dansker

Published by TheNewsBeats.com

Copyright 2010, all rights reserved.

Introduction

In the Gap

Restoration of Earth

Race of Awdawms

Origin of Demons

Doctrine of Demons

Calling Out a People

Redemption of Satan

Cause of Strandings

Habeas Corpu

Afterword

Doctrine of Demons

The demons, which may be the disembodied spirits of the Awdawms from the Pre-Adamite earth, are sentient.  They possess faculties of intelligence and knowledge acquired over centuries from direct experience and observation. They are better acquainted with us than we are with ourselves, and may pass on information about us to other demons residing in possessed men so that they may appear clairvoyant, or physic, and lead people astray following after them.  Demons are more knowledgeable about the Bible and God’s reveled plans then most of the human race (by comparative example, Satan quotes scripture).   

When Jesus arrived by ship to the country of the Gergesenes he was met by two demon possessed men, and the demons asked if He were going to torment them before the time; thus indicating they know there is an appointed time for their tormenting, and that it did not coincide with the first appearance of Christ (Mat 8:28-29).

The Demons resist the hastening of their fate by opposing Christianity.  They do this by opposing Bible doctrine.  Their strategy is to imitate and replace sound doctrine with their own doctrines.  They use great powers of seduction in getting their own doctrines taught even in the churches; to the extent that many depart from the faith (1Tim 4:1). There artifice is seduction, which they employ to conceive sensuality.  

Is it not a seducing spirit that preaches the doctrine of prosperity for obtaining wealth so that the flesh may be sensually satiated and pampered? 

As we draw closer to the end of the age, demonic activity continually increases (1 Tim 4:1).  This does not mean it can be spotted only in manifestations of demonic influences on isolated individuals, though reports that are hard to be censored due to their public nature are becoming more frequent.  Witness the attack on marriage to destroy it.  The abolition of marriage is a doctrine of demons. 

When demons take control of their victims, they cauterize, or sear, their conscious so that it is rendered unfeeling and thus completely supportive of the lies they tell which are contained in the doctrines of demons (1 Tim 4:2). 

Their doctrine of forbidding to marry is not one of celibacy (1Tim 4:3), but of discontinuing the relationship in order to be promiscuous outside it, and to engage in all manner of perverted sexual behavior.  The rise in divorce and the acceptance of homosexuality in the churches is the success of the doctrine of demons.

The command to abstain from meat is a doctrine of demons (1Tim 4:3).  A vegetarian diet makes a person more susceptible to spiritual forces, and this includes demonic forces as well.  The rise of the animal rights movement is the result of this doctrine of demons. 

The campaigns to reduce phantom carbon footprints by eating less beef, and the push to go to agrarian diets to lessen our impact on mother earth, are the products of this doctrine of demons.  The worshiping of the creatures more than the creator (Rom 1: 25), which is an integral component of the global warming fraud, and that is taking place in the churches, is the success of this doctrine of demons. 

The change in the message churches preach from Christian evangelism to green evangelism is made possible by the embrace of doctrines of demons.  Christians who remain in churches that preach that message are having fellowship with demons.  Those churches that preach that message and continue to take the cup of communion are taking communion with demons, and are partakers of the table of demons (1Cor 10:20-21).

The table of demons is a platform in churches upon which sensuous entertainments of sight and sound are performed in song and lurid dance.  False teachers invest in expensive sound and lighting systems and ply them on congregants to more easily seduce them into doctrines of demons.

These congregants are both acting as one body and are individually responsible for worshiping demons.  We have it on record that ignorance is no excuse for the saint: “Now the Spirit speaketh [teaches] expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils [demons];” (1Ti 4:1).  If you have the spirit of God, you are his, and the Holy Spirit ensures you should know better.  Come out from among them.

People who are fawning over these false teachers, and following them, and floating them financial, are worshiping demons (Rev 9:20).  Their apologists and defenders and disciples are themselves, if they are not possessed outright, under the influence of demons. 

In some cases, false prophets are finally given over to lying spirits to destroy them and their adherents just as the false prophets of old were who lied for Ahab (1 Ki 22:19-23; 2 Thes 2:11). 

Lying spirits are in the mouths of false prophets today who claim to serve the one true God, but teach heresies.  The demons hang from the rafters and sit in the pews waiting for victims turned over to them by the success of those teachers.  The horrible things they do to people once they seize them may, in part, stem from their animus towards us for succeeding them as a race with a special design in play.

By the activity of these spirits it is evident there is an altogether different dispensation of rules for their existence and application of laws which are not applicable to mankind.

There is a trend in scripture pertaining to anthropos, mankind in the lineage of Adam, where their spirits are immediately released upon death and dispatched to their respective destinations; from whence they cannot pass over again to communicate with the living. 

The penitent thief beside Jesus on the cross went to paradise where Jesus met him when he died that day (Lk 23:43).  Paul tells us that for Christians, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord (2 Cor 5:8). The unrepentant die and go to hell. The rich man who had fared sumptuously, and who died and went to hell, was separated from the beggar Lazarus, who died and was carried by angles to Abraham’s bosom, by an impassible gulf; and he was not permitted to communicate even a warning to his brethren of the torment awaiting the unrepentant (Lk 16:43). 

The question naturally arises as to why demons, as the disembodied spirits of Awdawms, are not spirits confined in some prison, such as hell, but instead are free to roam about like familiar spirits and to communicate their doctrines (Isa 8:19).   

But here an aside must be taken which, though dealing with a different topic, is an important part of the answer.

[Editor’s Note: more on doctrine of demons in the Afterword.]

For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Go, set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth. (Isa 21:6)

Support for the Senate investigation into prosperity preachers’ financial dealings continues to grow. Lee Grady, editor of Charisma magazine has gone on record welcoming a congressional-led “reformation,”¹ and now Michael Barrick of MinistryWatch.com has also joined the charge. Barrick has reportedly said of the investigation, led by Sen. Charles Grassley, that: “If the Church fails to hold its own accountable and if its most visible leaders fail to live by the very standards they purport to proclaim, then we should applaud when a leader with the standing of Grassley demands accountability.”² Yet, applause may be premature.

As members in Christian industry join the bandwagon of ministry watchdogs they may be overlooking a few key points regarding their brand of church accountability, and the means for achieving it. And these oversights raise some questions.

The prompting, in the first place, of congressional fishing expeditions into ministries that have satisfied IRS requirements calls into question the motives of those who initiate it. Are they really concerned with financial accountability, or is it because they find a particular religious teaching distasteful that they seek to punish by other means what they cannot censor?

By their use of the term “the church,” in the second place, do these watchdogs imply that these ministries they lead the charge on are congregations in the Church of Jesus Christ, the body of saints who are born again believers? Thirdly, do they also imply that they are in that body too?

The answers on these questions are important because they prescribe or explain courses of action, but no possible answer on any of of the first two questions should result in the action these watchdogs are taking.

If it is the case that these ministries’ religious teachings are the real reason behind the action of these watchdogs, that they are so distasteful to their doctrinal sensibilities, then it might have occurred to them that perhaps these are not Christian ministries. In which case, they have an obligation to expose them (Rom 16:17,18), but they have no justification to persecute them. And if any of them are Christian ministries, they have no doctrinal justification to go before the law.

These are points that Barrick neglected to take note of while applauding an onslaught of congressional oversight to ensure that those ministries follow their own catechisms. Another point he neglects is the need to abide by any instructions that would apply here to himself on this subject:

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? (1Co 6:1)

Now, Barrick and Grady and Ole Anthony of Trinity Foundation, who initiated the investigation, may say that they have aired it out with these ministries for several years and have gotten nowhere. But did any one of them actually have a matter against them, other then a disagreement over doctrine? It hardly appears that it is anything else (they question their fidelity because of lavish lifestyles which by prosperity teaching is a sign of God’s blessing), and even if they had a matter they stand to be rebuked for their action, or endorsement of it:

I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. (1Co 6:5-6)

This is a key point to consider here in determining a legal action; that it should not set unbelievers to adjudicate the affairs of the saints. These are supposed to be spiritual in their reckoning amongst themselves and not carnal (Grassley not withstanding, the House of Representatives is a secular body). While Barrick is correct to observe that: “How these televangelists respond will reflect directly upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ,”³ which has already been made a casualty on many fronts due to scandalous behavior of professing Christians, in and out of the pulpit; his scrutiny appears to fail him in close quarters.

If he and the rest of these watchdogs are themselves Christians-in-watching, they should be able assess the negative impact their own actions would have on the gospel; affixing the seal of Christianity to these organizations in question, and whetting legislative appetites to attack real gospel preachers they find offensive. Moreover, in light of that concern, they should have acted out of the knowledge that it would be better for the Church if they would suffer a matter unresolved (if there be a matter), than to take it to the unsaved:

Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? (1Co 6:7)

It is one thing to be a watchman alerting the sheep to wolves in sheep’s clothing. Therein is plenty of work that will only cease when the Lord returns. Until then, the wolves, for the most part, are going to remain wolves, and sheep will be sheep; some of whom will be torn on occasion. That’s the reason for the watchman. He is to spend his time warning the sheep, not taking the wolves to court. Perhaps only two sorts of watchmen would fail to understand this. One would be too unlearned to be at his post.

Notes:

^1. Lillian Kwon, “More Questions Raised in Probe of Preachers,”The Christian Post, December 04, 2007.
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20071204/30344
_More_Questions_Raised_in_Probe_of_Preachers.htm

^2. Lillian Kwon, “Grassley Still Waiting on Preachers Under Financial Scrutiny,” The Christian Post, December 19, 2007

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20071219/30563_Grassley_Still

_Waiting_on_Preachers_Under_Financial_Scrutiny.htm

^3. Ibid.