Page Suggestions: Freemasonry, The Order of the Illuminati, One World Church
A Symbol of The Big Problems Within The American Church
Writer: Brannon S. Howse | 01 March 2012 | www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.shtml?articleid=8041
My radio program and last column has many people talking about the movie Monumental and the statue, Monument to the Forefathers that seems to be a major prop for this movie. While the monument is an important topic for many reasons, I believe it is also a symbol of the troubling, big picture, and state of the American church. Far too much of the church has taken the music, the paganism, the political fight, the pragmatism, the styles and the methods of the culture and tried to mix them with Biblical Christianity. We have proven with plenty of historical documents from 1863 and 1906 that the Monument to the Forefathers is a pagan statue and it should not be called anything but pagan. I believe this monument is a good example of the problem with much of the church today, mixing the truth of Christianity with the paganism of the world. This is often done by mistake and with good intentions, but it is no less a problem.
Neither I, nor anyone I know, has said that the movie Monumental deliberately chose a monument that historical documents report has a history and message of paganism and freemasonry. Neither I, nor anyone I know has said the film will be a pro-freemason film. Neither I, nor any of my radio guests, nor the majority of the Christians that have contacted our organization to thank us for our research on this topic are interested in entertaining wacky conspiracy theories. We understand that sometimes people just make mistakes. I think picking the Monument to the Forefathers to be the "Gilgal" stone for American Christians was just that, a mistake. After all, should Christians rally around Stonehenge? This monument I believe is actually worse because it has a form of godliness but denies the God of the Bible. The monument's main character is a lady pointing to "a higher power" and "towards the impersonation of the Spirit of Religion above" according to those that planned the monument and erected it.
D.L. Moody, when speaking of the Masons said, "You can never reform anything by unequally yoking yourself to ungodly men. True reformers separate themselves from the world."
When you unite around an ecumenical monument with pagan symbols that was built, funded, and dedicated in part by Masons with the Grand Master of the Mason overseeing the cornerstone ceremony, it is not a good idea to call for this statue to be the "Gilgal" stone for American Christians. How can anyone call this a Christian monument or Christian symbol when a "Masonic procession" that included numerous Masonic Lodges and the Knights Templar, a Catholic order, was organized to celebrate the laying of the Masonic cornerstone? I believe Christians that want to call this monument a Christian symbol or a "Gilgal" stone are perhaps inadvertently yoking themselves to a pagan symbol as well as to men that mocked God and served Satan. It may be unintentional but it is still tying oneself to a pagan and ungodly symbol that is hostile to the gospel. Ignorance may be bliss but it does not make such activity any less troubling.
When discussing the monument, we have dealt with facts that are documented by the very people that designed and erected the monument. I believe the Christians that are praising this statue simply did not do all the necessary research on the Monument to the Forefathers. Within ten minutes of hearing the name of the monument, I confirmed with one search engine the monument's Masonic dedication. Within four hours I had obtained a book written in 1863 detailing the monument's Masonic and pagan history, symbolism, funding, and ecumenical message. How long has this film been in the works?
In John MacArthur's Masters Seminary Journal, fall, 1994 the following statement was published by Eddy D. Field II and Eddy D. Field III:
The Lodge teaches clearly that one may earn admittance into heaven on the basis of works, regardless of religion. This is a false gospel, which places those who advocate such a doctrine under Paul's imprecation. If this is not enough to convince a Christian not to involve himself in Masonry, it should be enough that a Christian Mason binds himself by oath to all other Masons in a way that associates him with their idolatry. In 2 Corinthians 6:14 Paul forbids such a relationship. The activity of a Christian Mason is even more unbiblical, though, when he kneels at the altar of the false god of the Lodge and pays homage to its deity. These facts demonstrate that Christian participation in the Lodge is more than a matter of individual Christian conscience. It is imperative that Christians not participate in this organization.
The defenders of the movie that want to claim that we do not have a right to speak on what we already know until we have seen the film are 100% wrong. In fact, what they say does not even pass the common sense test of reason and logic and must be seen for what I think it is; deflection of legitimate concerns and spinning.
I notice that the movie's defenders have not refuted our documentation of the freemason paganism of the monument or our Biblical text that confirm that Christians should have nothing to do with such things. I notice that the movie's defenders have not addressed or refuted any of the documentation presented in my last article. All they can say is "wait until the film comes out". Truth is often sacrificed by members of the good old boy club because of the benefits that come with such loyalty and compromise; I turned in my membership to that club a long time ago.
I did not have to see the film to know or discover historical facts. I have also watched several lengthy speeches by Kirk Cameron talking about this monument and calling it our "Gilgal" stone. [17 minute mark] I have also watched the movie trailer and other interviews with Kirk that I believe reveal enough to cause concern.
I invited Kirk to call me in June of 2011 to discuss some concerns of what I was hearing about his upcoming film. We exchanged text messages in late February of 2012 in which I invited Kirk to be a guest on my radio program. I wanted to interview Kirk about his film, his purpose for producing the film, who he picked to interview and why and to have him explain his eschatology. Knowing his eschatology would help shed light on his overall worldview. Unfortunately, Kirk did not appear on our program as a guest to discuss the film.
We have plenty of pre-released and promotional information related to the movie, its reported interviewees, goals, and ideas. Many of these clips have been played on my radio program. When the film comes out on DVD, I will see it. Then both positive and negative will be reported. However, the childish attempts to spin and discredit legitimate concerns I believe only reveals a lack of commitment to truth and a larger commitment to pragmatism. There is plenty of data to examine now about the movie that allow for concrete statements and analysis. I believe a few of the defenders of the movie have already lost some of their credibility because of their willingness to compromise truth in order to have a bigger audience. These are not the folks I believe we should look to now to lead us through this mine field.
One defender has implied that we need to not question this film or Kirk, but to just trust him because of his association with the gospel and Way of the Master. It is because of these associations that so many have been concerned about what we have seen and learned prior to the film even being released. The idea that we cannot disagree with someone or question their project because of who they are and what they have done is exactly the celebrity driven Christianity that has gotten the church in trouble time and time again.
While I am told the Monument to the Forefathers is only a part of the film, I think the fact that it has been a rallying point and has been called a "Gilgal" stone for American Christians is really a symbol of the problem facing the church.