Pastor Mark Dankof on the Chosen People of God. Who are They? I Peter 2: 9-10 is the Rosetta Stone.

     [This transcript represents a greatly abbreviated version of the sermon delivered by Mark Dankof in Chetek, Wisconsin on June 23rd, 2013 at the closing worship service in Christ Lutheran Church for the National Convention of the Lutheran Ministerium and Synod--USA.]

The Logo of the LMS-USA and the Pillars of Luther’s Reformation: Christ Alone, Faith Alone, Grace Alone, Scripture Alone.

     “But you are a Chosen People, a Royal Priesthood, a Holy Nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His wonderful light.  Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God: once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.”

I Peter 2: 9-10

     It is good to see all of you again at this treasured annual gathering of a small segment of the remnant of the Chosen People of God in the closing days of the Church Age and the end of history itself as we approach the Second Advent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

     As I open our very brief time together at our Convention’s closing worship service on this blessed Fifth Sunday After Pentecost, I’m blissfully reminded of three (3) things.  First, each time I come back here, my earliest memories of the American Midwest and those that would follow over many years keep flooding back.  The Middle West is where my roots are, having been born to parents from Southwest Iowa, who grew up in the years of the Great Depression in the run up to World War II.  At the same time, being the son of a United States Air Force officer, there were no roots for me at all.  I would travel all over our country, as well as Europe, Southeast and Central Asia, the Middle East, the former Soviet Union, and South Africa.  Of all of these sojourns that God would grant me for reasons known only to Him, many of you know that Iran would be the place where many of my fondest memories of traveling the globe would reside.  When I returned from South Africa last December, I wrote a brief essay on this insight.  It is entitled, “A Reminder of God’s Existence From Long Ago.”

     Secondly, when I come to these Conventions, my mind inevitably drifts back to the salad days of the formation of the American Association of Lutheran Churches (AALC) in 1987.  This is where I would first encounter Pastors Ralph Spears and John Erickson, who have remained among my best friends in life.  Can it really be over a quarter of a century ago that our journey began?

     Finally, it is June 23rd today.  Every June 23rd, my mind goes back to June 23rd, 1967 when my family was transferred from Hawaii the first time, and transported back to the Mainland on the S. S. Lurline bound for San Francisco.  Last year, I shared this experience of 46 years ago at our National Convention with many of you.  Incredibly enough, that was exactly one year ago today, on June 23rd, 2012, when my message to the gathered was entitled, “The Famine, The Watchman, and The Remnant.”  Given that fact that we are now a year closer to the return of our Lord Jesus Christ, I hope that presentation continues to encourage both you and me as the horizon of history continues to darken as storm clouds approach our position near Midnight.

     Today’s message based on the classic text of I Peter 2: 9-10, familiar to so many of us who toiled as kids in the Lutheran Catechetical system a lifetime ago, has three applications to us today and to the entirety of the people of God throughout linear time.  The text reads as follows:

    “But you are a Chosen People, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His wonderful light.  Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God: once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.”

I Peter 2: 9-10

     The first application Biblically is this:  God chooses great people in history to minister to His saints in times of global oppression and evil.  I was reminded of this only eight (8) days ago in Houston, Texas when privileged to see the Cyrus Cylinder at the Museum of Fine Art there, courtesy of a loan of the Cylinder to a series of America’s greatest museums courtesy of the British Museum.

     What is the significance of Cyrus the Great, the first of the Achaemenid Kings of Ancient Persia, where the Old Testament is concerned?  The Bible is absolutely explicit on this point.  After the 70 year Captivity visited upon Ancient Judah courtesy of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, a Captivity which included the Temple Destruction of 586 B. C. [Tisha B'Av], God’s prophets underscore that this catastrophe brought upon Judah because of its own sin and rebellion against God (Jeremiah 25:1- 29:32) would be followed by a Deliverance and a Restoration.  King Cyrus the Great would be the Chosen Instrument of God in this process, a prototype and forerunner of Jesus Christ, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (2 Chronicles 22-23; Ezra, chapters 1, 3, 4, 5, 6; Isaiah, chapters 44 and 45; and Daniel, chapters 1, 6, 10).

The Cyrus Cylinder in Houston’s Museum of Fine Art on June 15th, 2013. Mark Dankof photo.

     Particularly striking are the words of Isaiah, who foretold the coming Persian King’s arrival in history 150 years in advance of his appearance, courtesy of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God:

     “. . . [The Lord] who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my Shepherd and will accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, ‘Let it be rebuilt,’ and of the temple, ‘Let its foundations be laid.  . . . I will raise up Cyrus in my righteousness:  I will make all his ways straight.  He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free, but not for a price or reward, says the Lord Almighty.” 

     And Ezra tells us in chapter one that:

     “In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah, the Lord moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and to put it in writing.  This is what Cyrus king of Persia says, ‘The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build a temple for Him at Jerusalem in Judah. Anyone of His people among you–may his God be with Him, and let Him go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the Lord, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem.  . . .’”

     Now fast forward to I Peter 2: 9-10. What is the connection of the Apostle and his text to the events of the Sixth Century B. C. and an ancient Persian King?

     I will say it again:  The first application Biblically is this:  God chooses great people in history to minister to His saints in times of global oppression and evil.

     Peter is writing his Epistle to a group of churches in the part of Asia Minor north of the Taurus Mountains.  The context is the approaching outburst of persecution directed at Christians by Nero (A. D. 54-68) in A. D. 64.  The martyrdom of the Apostle Paul is just beyond the horizon.  Peter’s horrific upside down crucifixion at Nero’s direction before the latter’s death in A. D. 68 is but a handful of years away  (John 21: 18-19).   The storm clouds that approached Ancient Judah after the death of King Josiah in 609 B. C. and culminated in Nebuchadnezzar’s temple destruction in 586 B. C., are gathering again for the people of God living under the Roman Caesar’s reign in the First Century A. D. But God does not desert His faithful.  As Cyrus the Great made his Sixth Century B. C. appearance at a time of the Lord’s providential designation, so Paul and Peter have been commissioned to minister to the faithful in the midst of the exponential increase in evil in human history embodied by the Ancient Roman Empire.  And the message and witness of these Apostles is clear:  the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son, is the center of the plan of salvation designed before the foundation of the world for those who believe (I Peter 1: 3-5).  And those who believe in the midst of a national culture centered in the things of the Beast (Revelation 13), will endure persecution and oppression at the hands of a majority who have rejected the Messiah, both in a First Century Judah nearing God’s judgment for its role in the rejection of the proclamation of the Kingdom of God (Matthew 24: 1-2), and in a Roman Empire moving toward the Emperor Worship Cultus of Domitian (81-96 A. D.) at the time of the writing of the Apocalypse of John (Revelation 13).

John on Patmos: Exiled Because of Resistance to the Emperor Worship Cultus of Domitian
(A. D. 81-96).

     The same principle applies to Christians in a 21st century America and Western World which have largely abandoned the faith “that was once for all entrusted to the Saints (Jude, verse 3).” Peter warns us as he warned his contemporaries in Asia Minor that we are to be fully ready for this. In I Peter 4:12 he emphatically tells believers “. . . do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you.  But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when His glory is revealed.”

     It is painful for many of us as lifelong denizens of an older American culture, especially in the Middle West and the Southern United States, to recognize how this nation has become a part of the same post-Christian culture of our European counterparts across the Atlantic Ocean.  And how closely we are beginning to resemble the ethos of the Ancient Roman Empire.  As the late Evangelical Francis Schaeffer observed in the aftermath of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, we are increasingly a Culture of Death.  Abortion-On-Demand; every form and brand of sexual perversion; rampant violence and crime; the collapse of the family; the embrace of a Hollywood culture enshrouded in moral sewage; a staggering level of budgetary and national debt; a thoroughly corrupt political and banking system centered in fiat money, usury, and confiscatory taxation; and the overextension of our military presence globally, are the symptoms.  but the root cause is fundamentally a rejection of the Gospel and of God’s Word on an individual and collective basis.  Those who refuse to take the Mark of the Beast (Revelation 13), either in the Rome of Nero and Domitian, or in the increasingly anti-Christian West of the 21st Century, may fully expect trial, tribulation, persecution, imprisonment, and ultimately martyrdom.  As Peter has already told us, “. . . do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you.  But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when His glory is revealed.”  This is the bottom line.

     The second application of I Peter 2: 9-10 Biblically is this:  God chooses to deliver on His promises, both those made to members of His Son’s Kingdom and those made to individuals and societies outside of the Kingdom of God in Christ.

     Any reasonable interpretation of this text and of the New Testament throughout, tells us that the Chosen People of God according to the teachings of our Lord and His apostles, include all who believe in Jesus as Crucified and Risen Savior.  Paul assures us in Romans 10:9 that if “you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.”   This too, is the bottom line.

     The New Testament and I Peter 2: 9-10 as a part of that corpus, explicit reject the notion that the Chosen People of God and the Kingdom of God itself, are rooted in notions of racial supremacy, racial identification, nationalism, military power, political power, or economic supremacy.  Jesus makes this clear in his debate with the Pharisees in John 8: 31-58.  Modern Christian Zionism, based in these false assumptions and in the 19th century eschatological inventions of John Nelson Darby and the Scofield Reference Bible [see charts in "The Famine, The Watchman, and The Remnant" regarding an alleged parenthesis between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel, chapter 9], has resurrected the very false teachings surrounding the Kingdom, the Covenants, Obedience, and Racial Identification that permeated the thinking of the Pharisees in John 8 and those who called for the release of Barabbas on the night of the Savior’s betrayal (Matthew 27:25).  This was the thinking of Paul prior to his conversion on the road to Damascus (Acts 9).  It is an explicit denial of the core doctrine of Justification by Faith in Jesus Christ Alone known as the Material Principle of the Protestant Reformation of the 16th Century.

     This is why Peter uses 2: 9-10 to reiterate what Paul says in Ephesians 1:4 when he states that “. . . He [God the Father] chose us in Him [God the Son, Jesus Christ] before the foundation of the world . . .”  Peter now tells believers in Christ who are racial Gentiles who were “once not a people” that they are “now the people of God” (I Peter 2: 10).  He assures his audience that, “Once you [Gentiles] had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.”

     Peter now applies the terms and the concepts of Old Testament Judaism to Gentiles who believe in Jesus Christ (verse 9).  They are now a “Chosen People.”  They are now members of a Royal Priesthood [of all believers in Jesus Christ], and are a “Holy Nation” and a ”People Belonging to God.”  The Apostle’s application of these terms and concepts to Gentile Christians is fraught with impending spiritual and political irony.  After Peter’s death by crucifixion in A. D. 68 in Rome, it would only be two years before the Romans would visit Jerusalem in a fashion reminiscent of Nebuchadnezzar in the Sixth Century B. C., and would destroy yet another Jewish Temple on Tisha B’Av (August 9th) in the year A. D. 70.  The notion of National and Racial Judah as the Chosen People of God in the New Testament Era had come to a catastrophic end, never to be resurrected again (Matthew 21: 19 and Mark 11: 14).

     As for the true Chosen People of God, it is critical that those “chosen” are also a People “called.”  We are called “out of darkness.”  We are called “into His wonderful light.”  God’s call is to his “elect” (I Peter 1:1).  The elect have been “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God,” (I Peter 1:2) which involves both divine mystery and grace linked to the blood of Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:2).

     The third and final application of Biblical principles using I Peter 2: 9-10 is as follows:  You and I, as the Chosen People of God by his mysterious love and grace alone, have an inheritance (I Peter 1: 4) that is imperishable. 

     If we are living in the hour of history I sense we are, what are the implications of this for you and me?  As we close this National Convention, what do you take from these last 3 days and from this sanctuary and the classrooms here at Christ Lutheran in Chetek?  What do you return home with that will encourage you and empower you and your loved ones in trying times?  Why do we continue in a faith that seems less appealing than ever in our dying culture, and in an America increasingly unrecognized by those of us of an earlier vintage?

     In a nutshell, the answer is in a gift of God to you and me that involves mercy, rebirth, new beginnings, a new life, and an imperishable inheritance being kept in a Divine Repository for safe keeping until the right time.  This is the final bottom line of which we speak on the Fifth Sunday After Pentecost in the year 2013.  The Chosen People of God shall be the final winners at the end of history, and in the eternity to come, in a world without end.

     I Peter 1: 3-5 serves as a marvelous companion to I Peter 2: 9-10 and our Chosen People theme for the 2013 National Convention of the Lutheran Ministerium and Synod–USA:

     “Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In His great mercy He has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil, or fade–kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time.” 

     As that last time draws ever closer, so does your salvation and the arrival of your long awaited and promised inheritance.  For every ending there is a New Beginning.  The best is yet to come for you, and for me, as we await the re-entry of the Logos into the time and space of this present cosmos.  And now may the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God the Father, and the fellowship of God the Holy Spirit be with you now, and always.  Amen.

Mark Dankof: Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988. An American atrocity.

Mark Dankof’s discussion of the horror of Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988 is revisited on the July 10th Mark Dankof’s America for The Ugly Truth radio network. Click here for a review of that day 25 years ago, along with other news stories:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWCRnFCKECs

Mark Dankof in Washington, D. C. in November of 2011

Mark Dankof’s America on Wednesday, July 17th on The Ugly Truth will discuss the George Zimmerman acquittal in the Treyvon Martin case with Anisa Abd El Fattah, President of the National Association of Muslim American Women (NAMAW). The show airs 12:30 pm to 2:30 pm Central time, and will be archived for later listeners.

Special emphasis will be placed in the discussion on the article entitled, “Black Conservatives for Treyvon Make Best Case Ever for a Zimmerman Conviction.”

Mr. Dankof’s past article, “The Zionist Media Plot and the Treyvon Martin Tragedy“, will also be referenced, along with William Saletan’s essay for Salon, entitled “You Are Not Treyvon Martin.”  Special interest in Dr. David Duke’s new video, “How the Media Incites Violence and Racism in the Zimmerman Case,” may also prove relevant to the discussion.

Mark Dankof in Washington, D. C. in November of 2011

Mark Dankof sits down with Mohsen Abdollahi, Director of the Americas Desk of the Tehran-based Light House Viewer News to answer questions on Iran, Syria, and Edward Snowden, in a September interview destined for translation from American English to Persian, Arabic, and Spanish for a wider global audience.

On IRAN

Question: With a new government in Iran, is there going to be any compromise on the Iranian nuclear issue? If any compromise is reached, how are the sanctions going to be eased or eliminated entirely?

Mark Dankof:  There will ultimately be no compromise.  The reason is that the question of Iranian possession of nuclear power is not the issue for the Zionist-oriented West and Israel.  The issue is “regime change“ in Iran, and bringing to power in Tehran a regime that will be absolutely compliant with anything that the United States and Benjamin Netanyahu desire.  Israel does not want any strong regional power in the Middle East other than itself; Israel wants to continue its illegal and genocidal policies in Palestine, Gaza, the West Bank, and throughout the region unimpeded, including an eventual expansion of Eretz Yisrael (“Greater Israel“) into the absolute control of every bit of territory from the Nile River to the Tigris/Euphrates River and north of the Litani River, as modern Zionism has advocated since the late 19th century.  The International Central Bankers and the Multi-National Energy Consortiums also want Iran carved up for their own purposes, in effect to bring that country into full membership in what some of us call the global New World Order (NWO).

The Marxist Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK): A Long Track Record of Spilling Innocent Blood. And now the Friend of the Israeli Mossad and American Neo-Conservatives.

As for sanctions, the sanctions on Iranian banks, oil companies, and other entities are part of a war on Iran that has already been declared by the Zionist State and its allies and puppets in Western government and media.  They are a part of a continuum of aggressive actions that has included using the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK/MKO) to assassinate Iranian scientists on Iranian soil, that has employed Global Corporate Media to falsify the character of the Iranian nuclear program and the motives of its government and people, and that has violated Iranian airspace and borders with every conceivable brand of clandestine black operation imaginable.  Finally, the present war with Syria being conducted by the United States, Israel, and the Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in conjunction with Turkey, is the latest phase in this illegitimate aggression.  This is where Zionism, Banks, Energy Consortiums, and Sunni Wahabic animosity toward Shia Islam coincide in mutual interest in a most evil coalition.

Uncle Sam Wants You to Die for Amerikka, or is it Israel?

Question: What are your ideas about placing sanctions on Iran while the Iranian nuclear program is peaceful and non-weaponized? Are there any other reasons for applying such sanctions?

Mark Dankof:  As I said before, the sanctions are part of a continuum of actions designed to bring about the destruction of the present government in Iran and its replacement with an entity that would do the bidding of the United States, Netanyahu, the International Banks, and the Energy Companies.  The fact is that the last National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) prepared by the  16 intelligence agencies of the United States contradicted Israeli propaganda completely about the character of the Iranian nuclear program, even as Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and has the provable right as a signatory to this treaty to have a peaceful nuclear program complete with the right to enrich uranium.  Iranian has been subjected to repeated inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), even as the known Zionist possession of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, and Israel’s non-signatory status to the NPT and non-submission to IAEA inspections, is a matter of record.

Question: Many human rights advocates worldwide observe that the main target of sanctions are ordinary people; how does the American government justify using sanctions against such people, even as it claims otherwise?

Mark Dankof:  I’ll give you the short version, the version that I discussed on camera with Marzieh Hashemi of Press TV last evening in a 5 minute segment.  The United States government will legitimize anything that involves the interests of the Zionist regime, up to and including criminality.  If Israel wants it, they get it.  That is the ongoing position of the American government for decades.  The last American President with any degree of independence from the Israeli Lobby was John F. Kennedy.  In 1963, we now know that Kennedy was trying to get Prime Minister David Ben Gurion of Israel to agree to American and international inspection of the Dimona nuclear plant in the Negev desert that Ben Gurion falsely told Kennedy was merely a water desalinization project.  Kennedy was also known to have contemplated eventual dissolution of the Federal Reserve Banking system and the return of American monetary policy to the Congress of the United States, where the Constitution of the United States and the Founding Fathers of America put it.  Your readers may duly note that Mr. Kennedy did not live to pursue the realization of these objectives.  Michael Collins Piper’s book, Final Judgment, translated into a number of languages and sold globally, may well tell them why.

Philip Giraldi of the Council for the National Interest: Israel Spying and Technology Theft is Threatening American National Security.

The Government of the United States does not care about average people anywhere, including Iran, Palestine, and within its own American borders.  The bottom line is that the American government and corporate news media are totally sold out to Zionist interests, as has been demonstrated time and time again by reputable scholars and political commentators.  This control is so monolithic that even when Israel is committing crimes against the United States, like the Lavon Affair, Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967 [a deliberate attack according to Secretary of State Dean Rusk; Admiral Thomas Moorer, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Ronald Reagan; and Richard Helms, former head of the Central Intelligence Agency and former American Ambassador to Iran], the PROMIS espionage scandal, and the Jonathan Pollard/AIPAC spy cases of more recent years, no serious repercussions for Israel ever occur.  In the case of the AIPAC spy case, Congresswoman Jane Harman of California, whose late husband owned Newsweek magazine, was overheard in a wiretapped conversation with an Israeli agent, promising to use her influence to get charges dropped in the AIPAC spy case in exchange for her own appointment to the position of the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee.  Congressional Quarterly (GQ) had a major story on this at the time, but nothing ever happened to Harman, who should have been formally tried for treason, booted out of Congress, and imprisoned.  Why?  I believe you see the seriousness of my point, and what it means for you and me as “average people.”

Oh, yes, I forgot the infamous date of September 11, 2001.  I told your Kourosh Ziabari of the Fars News Agency sometime ago why I agree with Dr. Alan Zabrosky of the U. S. National War College that Israel was behind the 9-11 attacks in New York.  If your readers are interested, check out  “A Conversation with Mark Dankof on Israel and 9-11.”  This is just how deeply the cancer has metastasized.

What will be the next move of the Masters of the False Flag Operation? “By Way of Deception, Thou Shalt do War.”

And as for average people in Iran, the Jewish racial supremacist doctrine taught in the Talmud indicates that they are sub-human and do not possess the rights of “The Chosen People.”  This racist doctrine undergirds all of Zionist ideology, and discriminates equally against all of us, some more obviously than others.  Right now, the Palestinians, the folks in southern Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, are the most obvious victims with a dangerous and precarious position in the rifle crosshairs of the Israeli war machine–and the American war machine in the service of the Zionist cause.

On SYRIA

Question: What is your opinion on the future outcome of the conflict in Syria? Is Congress going to let Obama strike Syria?

Your Congressmen and Senators will vote for War with Syria and Iran. It’s about their sponsors.

Mark Dankof:  I believe Obama will get his vote for war in the American Senate, by a wide margin, and in the House of Representatives by a lesser margin.  What is interesting is that some rabid pro-Zionist types like ex-U.S. Ambassador John Bolton; Danielle Pletkin of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI); and media voices like Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity, have either expressed outright opposition to the war with Syria, or serious reservations about pursuing it.  This tells me that even they see the risks and dangers, which include serious blowback against the United States in the Middle East, countermoves by Vladimir Putin and China against this illegal aggression against Syria, and most importantly, blowback against the Zionist shills in the American media and government by the people of the United States if they ever connect-the-dots on who is behind these irresponsible and reckless policies.  This latter factor is our only mutual hope, a terrible tragedy against the average people of the United States in all of this that causes them to rise up and put this Fifth Column out of business forever in their own country, and to reclaim their culture, economy, political independence, and extrication from senseless foreign wars that are not in their individual and national interest.  If it happens, it will not be pretty.  A terrible price will be extracted from the American people if they conduct their own fight against these tyrants, but freedom is never free.  What the goal is, as I said on Press TV yesterday, is the death of the American Empire, and the rebirth of the Old American Republic governed by the Constitution and the rule of law.  In other words, let’s eradicate the malignant influence of the Barney Franks, the Joseph Liebermans, the John McCains, and the Lindsey Grahams, and bring back the foundations of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Charles Lindbergh.  Only time and history will tell in regard to whether or not this will happen.  If it doesn’t happen, Americans with any decency and intelligence at all will have to become expatriates somewhere else.  This is how it is shaping up.

The Samson Option: The Zionist State’s Endgame for the Middle East and the World?

Question: Why did Obama decide to get the approval of Congress for attacking Syria? Why did he change his mind?

Mark Dankof:  Obama understands that the power of the Israeli Lobby in the United States has been unshakeable in getting its agenda undertaken by every American President since World War II, with the notable partial exceptions of Eisenhower and John Kennedy.  He has also acknowledged in his own words to the Israeli media on his last trip there that his own election to the United States Senate in Illinois, and the American Presidency itself, could not have happened without the support and funding of Jews in the United States and their respective lobbying groups.  The vast percentage of the money that flows into the Democratic Party coffers in the United States is Jewish money.  This is an absolute and provable fact.  So, on the one hand, he wants to do something in Syria to placate and appease his Jewish supporters and power brokers.

At the same time, he is enough of a political survivor to understand that the risks of attacking Syria, and the law of unintended consequences, are such that having a Congressional imprimatur on this lunacy will protect him from absorbing the blowback in isolation if things go wrong.  One also wonders if the man knows in his heart that this entire pathway is wrong, and has a secret wish to have a Congressional vote say “no,” to give him the political cover necessary to tell Netanyahu and his agents in the American government that the President cannot proceed without the political cover denied to him by a Congressional turndown.  This is a most fascinating crossroad we see the President approaching, and the Congress, before a fateful decision is made publicly.

Question: How can we understand the Obama decisions on Syria in the context of the ongoing debate in Washington on the wisdom of his policies? How does the debate on Syria compare to Congressional and Party debates on immigration policy, budget priorities and other items of concern to the American people?

Mark Dankof:  I would say that the present debate on Syria reveals the moral and political bankruptcy of both major political parties in the United States, and the inability of these corrupt parties to frame workable policies on a bipartisan basis on Syria, Middle Eastern policy generally, immigration policy, budget priorities, or healthcare.  The present system is possibly broken beyond repair, due to how elections are funded in the United States, the corrupt character of what Ray McGovern calls Establishment Corporate Media (ECM) in America, and the deficient character of an American public that struggles with a toxic synthesis of hopelessness and cynicism; an unwillingness or inability to read and consult responsible sources of information; and moral decadence and insatiable obsession with the targeted sexual decadence and perversion that represents the moral sewer system the culture of the United States in the last half century has come to embody.  For all of that, we may thank our Zionist Masters.

On SNOWDEN

Question: With regard to the Obama trip to Russia in coming days, how much has the Edward Snowden/National Security Agency surveillance case impacted the American/Russian relationship?

Mark Dankof:  The Snowden case is just the icing on the cake in terms of a poisoning of the American-Russian relationship.  Pat Buchanan has an excellent essay on this from August 8th, 2013, entitled “Do We Want a Cold War II?” .  I will quote Buchanan directly for your readers:

“From 1989 to 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev agreed to let Eastern Europe go free and   withdraw his troops and tank armies back to the Urals. The Soviet Union was   allowed to dissolve into 15 nations. In three years, the USSR gave up an empire,   a third of its territory, and half its people.

“And it extended to us a hand of friendship.

“How did we respond? We pushed NATO right up to Russia’s borders, bringing in   Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, even former Soviet republics   Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

“European objections alone prevented us from handing out NATO war guarantees   to Ukraine and Georgia. Was this a friendly act?

“Would we have regarded post-Cold War Russian alliances with Cuba, Nicaragua,   Venezuela, and Mexico as friendly acts?

“To cut Moscow out of the Caspian Sea oil, we helped build a pipeline through   two former Soviet republics, Azerbaijan and Georgia, and, thence, under the   Black Sea to our NATO ally Turkey.

“In the Boris Yeltsin decade, the 1990s, U.S. hustlers colluded with local oligarchs   in looting Russia of her natural resources.

“In the past decade, the National Endowment for Democracy and its Republican   and Democratic subsidiaries helped dump over governments in Serbia, Ukraine   and Georgia, and replace them with regimes friendlier to us and more distant from Moscow.”

Pat Buchanan and Mark Dankof in San Antonio, Texas. 1995.

Question: Can we expect any change in Latin American, European and Russian perceptions and policies toward the United States  because of the Snowden case, especially with the revelations that the American government was involved in the wholesale electronic surveillance of the governments of these sovereign countries? What is the future of the bilateral relationship of these countries around the world with the United States?

Mark Dankof:  I am not sanguine about the bilateral relationship between the United States and any of the countries and governments your question alludes to.  There can be no question that our support for Zionist policies globally has had more to do with the decline in American popularity in recent years than any other single factor, and not simply in the Middle East and Central Asia.  As far as the Snowden NSA revelations are concerned, the real story has yet to be reported by the international or American media virtually anywhere:  that the NSA spying program, along with other American surveillance operations domestically and abroad, has a disproportionate number of companies and contractors connected to Israel officially involved in these lucrative enterprises and sinister efforts. This includes the burgeoning American Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is a hotbed of money and activity within American borders for Israeli agents, arms brokers, and Israeli surveillance and security companies.  Your readers need to see English, Persian, Arabic, and Spanish translations of Dr. Philip Giraldi’s “Homeland Security Made in Israel.”

The bottom line is this:  this Fifth Column operating within the American homeland is not simply targeting Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, and Iranians.  They are provably targeting lawful dissenters from the Israelification of the American homeland.  We are all in mutual future danger.  You need to understand that the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith (ADL) in the United States is targeting lawful and legal American citizens exercising their First Amendment rights in criticizing Israel and Zionism.  I have been one of their targets in recent years, courtesy of Rabbi Aryeh Tuchman, the Director of the Library and Research Division of the ADL in New York City, as well as their Assistant Director of their Civil Rights Division.  The good Rabbi was doing all of this on an anonymous basis–until he got caught.  I’d like to close by sharing two articles with your readers.  One is “Mark Dankof’s Open Invitation to Rabbi Aryeh Tuchman of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith in New York:  Come Out of the Closet and Join Us.”  The other is “Mark Dankof Responds to Rabbi Tuchman of the ADL Regarding His Hit on Mark Glenn and Press TV.”

If things go way wrong, Edward Snowden and I may join many other patriotic Americans concerned about the rule of law in the same type of assault the ADL conducted against American dissidents protesting the policies of Franklin Roosevelt in 1944.

But this has been my calling, and will continue to be.  I suspect Mr. Snowden would say the same thing.

Mark Dankof in University of Texas/Austin colors on a frigid day in northern Idaho at Mark Glenn’s family compound. November, 2010.

[Mark Dankof is a former 3rd Party Candidate for the United States Senate in the year 2000; he is an occasional contributor to the American Free Press of Washington, D. C. and Breaking All the Rules News (BATR).  His radio show, "Mark Dankof's America," is heard on The Ugly Truth radio network.  He is a frequent guest on Iran's Press TV and has been interviewed by Kourosh Ziabari of Fars News Agency regarding Israel's role in the September 11th, 2001 attacks in New York. Mr. Dankof resides in San Antonio, Texas, and is a Lutheran clergyman.]

Mark Dankof in Washington, D. C. in November of 2011

Dr. Kevin Barrett of Truth Jihad Radio will interview Mark Dankof of Mark Dankof’s America and The Ugly Truth radio network on Friday, September 27th, 2013.  The topic will be Populist 3rd Party machinations in 2016, and the rumors about a Presidential ticket involving Merlin Miller of Americana Pictures with Mr. Dankof riding shotgun.

Independent Film Producer and West Point graduate Merlin Miller. Anti NWO Presidential candidate in 2016?

Will there be a new 3rd Party, or an America First, anti-Zionist, anti-New World Order slate in GOP primaries as an alternative?  Listen for the latest live on September 27th, 3-4 pm Central/4-5 pm Eastern, on the American Freedom Radio network. The show will be archived for later listeners by clicking here. The Call-in Number for live listeners: (218) 339 – 8525.

Kevin Barrett interviews Mark Dankof on Truth Jihad Radio on Friday, September 27th, 2013.

Kevin  Barrett is an outspoken 9/11 truth activist, author, and academic. A  co-editor of 9/11 and the American Empire Vol. 2: Christians, Jews and  Muslims Speak Out (Interlink, 2007) and author of Truth Jihad: My Epic  Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie (Progressive Press, 2007), he has  taught English, French, Arabic, American Civilization, Humanities,  African Literature, Folklore, and Islam at colleges and universities in  the San Francisco Bay area, Paris, and Madison, Wisconsin. He is a  co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth. This show, like his writings, features Dr. Barrett’s  all-out struggle for truth spiced with his offbeat sense of humor.

Lee Atwater and Mark Dankof in Seattle 1988: Decapitating Michael Dukakis is Achieved. But for What and for Whom?

Mark Dankof and Michael Collins Piper of the American Free Press in the Nation’s Capitol: November 2011

Mark Dankof’s speech at the American Free Press conference in Austin, Texas on Nov 9th, 2013 is entitled, “FDR and Pearl Harbor: The Primer for the Zionist Assault on the American Republic and the Nation of Iran.”

Mark Dankof will speak at the American Free Press sponsored conference in Austin, Texas, on Saturday, November 9th, 2013. Information on how to attend the conference and whom to contact may be accessed through the Dave Gahary AFP Radio interview with Mark Dankof posted here.

[Presented in modified/edited form as FDR and Pearl Harbor:  The Primer for the Zionist Assault on the American Republic and the Nation of Iran for the American Free Press conference in Austin, Texas on November 9th, 2013. Mark Dankof was interviewed by Dave Gahary before the conference began.]

Mark Dankof’s speech at the American Free Press conference in Austin, Texas on Nov 9th, 2013 is entitled, “FDR and Pearl Harbor: The Primer for the Zionist Assault on the American Republic and the Nation of Iran.”

[Originally issued with the title below]

Preemptive War, State Sponsored Terrorism, Cultural Subversion, and the Criminalization of Dissent as a Total Package of Zionist/Jewish Methodology

by Mark Dankof

 Scheduled to have been delivered in Tehran, Iran/August/September 2013 at the Freethinkers/New Horizon Conference which was subsequently cancelled. The presentation was presented with an award in Tehran in 2013 by the National Congress of 17000 Iranian Terror Victims.

Mark Dankof in Washington, D. C. in November of 2011

—————————–

“Eternally Dedicated to the Old American Right, the Old American Republic which hated Empire, and the Nation and People of Iran”

     Let me begin by saying that I have my own reasons for being in Iran today.  As one who is an orthodox Lutheran Christian, and who loves the Constitutional heritage of an America that is long gone, I am reminded at this moment that back in early July, at the pro-Zionist national conclave of the so-called Christians United for Israel (CUFI) founded by John Hagee of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Malcolm Hoenlein, the Executive Vice-President of the  Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, made the statement when receiving the Defender of Israel award from Hagee’s organization, that American Christian support of Israel and its bellicose policies toward Iran, was Israel’s “nuclear weapon.”  At this same gathering, the Israeli press quoted Hoenlein as saying “. . . the Jewish lobby is a myth.  Our job is to make it a legend.“

The Samson Option: The Zionist State’s Endgame for the Middle East and the World?

     Make no mistake about it.  The Talmudic Racial Supremacist doctrine of Zionism has nothing to do with Christianity and the teachings of Jesus Christ.  And the fraudulent 19^th century interpretation of the Bible known as Dispensational Premillennialism, popularized by the Scofield Reference Bible, is both bad theology and bad foreign policy for the United States (see my paper on Dispensationalism entitled “A Historical Critique of Dispensationalism, Zionism, and Daniel’s Prophecy of 70 Weeks” at MarkDankof.com). As an American and a Christian, I am called to expose Hagee and Hoenlein and their Fellow Travelers as the clones of the Prince of Darkness.  They are evil.  Their ideology is evil.  Those who blindly follow them are on the road to perdition, even as they take the United States and the world down a pathway to global tragedy. All of this is why I am here today.

Christian Zionist John Hagee of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio and Christians United for Israel (CUFI): Netanyahu’s point man in enlisting American evangelicals in World War III for the Zionist Enterprise and the New World Order.

     There is yet another reason.  I love Iran, and always have since I first visited it as a young person of only 18 years of age. It is almost impossible to believe I am back here again after so many years of absence from this great country and interaction with its wonderful people.  I was here a lifetime ago, in terms of everything that has happened since the late 1970s in the world, to American-Iranian relations, and to me personally.

     I owe a debt of gratitude for both invitations to visit Iran once more after a 37 year absence, both to the 2^nd International Conference of Independent Thinkers (New Horizon) sponsored by the Iranian Ministry of Culture, and the Habilian Association of Iran, which has done more to chronicle the hideous history of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) in the murder of some 17,000 Iranian citizens, than any other organization of which I am personally aware.

     When I think of Iran just now, my mind goes back to the early summer of 1973.  I had just graduated from high school in Dayton, Ohio.  My late father had returned in April of that year from Vietnam, to subsequently retire from the United States Air Force after 32 years of active duty service. I had been accepted for the fall of 1973 for collegiate study at Valparaiso University in Indiana, America’s largest Lutheran institution of higher education.

Valparaiso University’s Chapel of the Resurrection. Largest University Chapel in the United States.

     My father’s intention was to settle down, preferably in the American Midwest, after decades of traveling around the world and moving his family on a constant basis.  His two leading possibilities for civilian employment involved teaching at either Kearney State Teachers College in Nebraska, or his alma mater, the University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO).  As it turned out, the open doors in these places quietly closed during his last several years in Southeast Asia.  Other inquiries in the spring and early summer of 1973 turned up empty.

     But when he sent a resume to an American aerospace company, Lockheed, there was immediate interest.  The phone rang in my parents’ apartment in Dayton.  It was Lockheed in Marietta, Georgia outside of Atlanta.  My father’s presence was requested in Atlanta immediately for a job interview.  The company wanted to fly my mother down there also for conversation.

     Upon return from Atlanta, my parents announced in Dayton they were leaving the United States again for a new assignment: My father was to become an employee of the Lockheed Company, serving as a logistics advisor and consultant to the Imperial Iranian Air Force.

Mark Dankof’s father’s headstone in section 54, Arlington National Cemetery, Washington, D. C.

     I remember being incredulous, first that after retirement from the American Air Force, my father’s first job in civilian life since 1941 would involve leaving the United States for the umpteenth time.  Second, I had only the vaguest of ideas as to where Iran was, and of what interest it was to my own country.  That is how ignorant I was, how little I really knew.  This is especially revealing when one considers that I was far more well traveled and politically astute than the vast percentage of American youth my age at that time. TV News, newspapers, and conversations on matters political were standard fare in my home growing up.  My travels with my father to Southeast Asia in the summer of 1972 after finishing a year at Iolani School in Honolulu had begun to open up horizons beyond American borders.  But it was only a beginning.

     In my case, first coming to this country for a visit in May of 1974, two months short of my 19^th birthday, changed the course of my life.  I would return here in the summer of 1975 and 1976, as well as the Christmas seasons of those two years.  I would celebrate my 21^st birthday in this country, the month and summer of the American Bicentennial (1976).

Mark Dankof turns 21 in North Tehran during the American Bicentennial.

     In those brief visits, I made the most I could of the experience.  I began finding English language books on the history of Iran.  I began traveling outside Tehran, including Iranian Azerbaijan, the Caspian region, Lar Valley, Isfahan, Shiraz, Pasargadae, and Persepolis.  Since I was on summer vacation from college in Indiana, I did not have the time to spend trying to learn Farsi.  This is a deficiency I have felt personally in all the years since leaving this country.  Someday I would like to remedy this, even at a far more advanced age now. If my profile as an American political dissident in the last two decades results in my eventual exile from the country of my birth, perhaps I would come full circle and reside here for the duration.  Learning the language would no longer be a luxury, but a necessity.

     I do not say this lightly.  To put into perspective how vulnerable I and several others could prove to be, as critics of the Zionist-inspired American Empire and our Israel First policies, Dr. Philip Giraldi, the ex-CIA analyst and outstanding critic of Israel and Zionism found at the Council for the National Interest, Antiwar.com, and The American Conservative, directly warned Mark Glenn and me on his own initiative, that leaving the United States before the next Presidential “election” in 2016, might prove to be an auspicious move for all three of us, and others.  He suggested several places in Latin America.  This is how late the hour might be for people in our present business and struggle.  But then again, none of us got into this for money, or career advancement, or ease, but to prevent the consummation of the most evil plan, on the part of the most evil forces, that presently exist in world history.  Let there be no mistake.  The Zionist ideology, and the international banking system and technocracy which are attempting to establish the New World Order, are not simply evil, but the greatest evil to threaten humanity in history.  In this regard, The Apocalpyse of John written on the island of Patmos during the reign of Emperor Domitian (A. D. 81-96), coincides with the eschatological analysis of Islam in terms of the identity of the Beast and the forces aligned with him that threaten us all today who are here.

John on Patmos: Exiled Because of Resistance to the Emperor Worship Cultus of Domitian
(A. D. 81-96).

     But reading books of all kinds was a critical factor in moving me over many years to a better and more critical understanding of American history, the American political scene, and the increasingly evil character of my own government as that evolved over the course of my lifetime.  You must all understand that I did this almost entirely on my own.  The American educational system as I experienced it in both public and private institutions largely failed me, and many others, by failing to facilitate the  examination of all the responsible sources and engaging in honest self-examination of our country’s real history, and the meaning of that history.  This is not by accident, but design. Critical analysis of facts was replaced with Mythology, for reasons we shall understand more fully in a few minutes.

     As a thesis statement for my portion of this program, let me state that Mythological Interpretation of History is the key to facilitating the acceptance of the unthinkable: being ruled by a government committed to the ideology of Preemptive War, State Sponsored Terrorism, Cultural Subversion, and the Criminalization of Dissent by those who stridently disagree with these policies and their acceptability in a civilized society.  The other side of the Coin of Mythological Interpretation is Demonization, the Demonization of the victims of these policies.  A corollary of Demonization is the denial of the humanity of the victims, and their status as God’s children.   A corollary of both Mythological Interpretation and Demonization is the spinning of deliberate falsehoods, especially through Controlled Mass Media in a technological age.  A related corollary is the Erasure of Historical Memory, when it comes to individual and collective recall of the factual and the accurate, which cannot be tolerated by any government committed to Preemptive War, State Sponsored Terrorism, Cultural Subversion, and the Criminalization of Dissent.

     In terms of our Conference participants understanding how my personal Odyssey to a better place began, and how all of this relates to the present situation with Iran vis a vis the United States and the Zionist State of Israel, I will simply mention a few events.

     The first is the Kennedy Assassination.  I was in the 3^rd grade at Floyd Elementary School in Montgomery, Alabama in November of 1963.  My father was stationed at the Air War College there.  I was terrified that afternoon, and all through the weekend.  I would later witness Jack Ruby’s televised murder of Lee Harvey Oswald that Sunday.  When the Warren Commission in 1964 told the American public that Oswald acted alone, my father indicated his support for this verdict.

Mark Dankof in November of 1963: Age 8, Montgomery, Alabama.

     But my own youthful reading led me in 1966 at the age of 11 to Mark Lane’s expose, Rush to Judgment and to Josiah Thompson’s Six Seconds in Dallas.  These in turn led me to many other books on the subject over many years.  A real turning point was at Valparaiso University in 1975 where African American comedian Dick Gregory showed me and a few others the infamous Zapruder film, complete with Frame 313.  This film had been suppressed from public view for a dozen years after the killing.  I could see why, after viewing the film. Kennedy was clearly the victim of a crossfire, involving multiple assassins.  The American public was lied to by its own government.  The Warren Commission’s foundation, the Single Bullet theory contrived by Israeli Lobby asset, Arlen Specter, was a scientific and ballistical absurdity.  What was going on here?  This began not only my search for the truth about Kennedy’s death, but a search for the larger philosophical questions about the character of my own government, and the search for the implications of the answers, which would haunt me for half a century thereafter.

The Linear Progression from Dealey Plaza to 9-11 and War with Iran: Mark Dankof photo of Elm Street from the Grassy Knoll in Dallas, September 1st, 2010.

     After thousands of pages of reading over many years, and talking to people who actually knew something personally about Kennedy’s violent end, I finally discovered Michael Collins Piper and his book, Final Judgment, after September 11^th, 2001.  The contents of that book tied so many loose ends together, even as I was delving into the 9-11 event with questions that led to many of the same forces and suspects that had ended Kennedy’s life in the early 1960s.  What I now believe about Kennedy and 9-11 is not my focus today, but Conference Participants may reference my public interviews with Press TV and Kourosh Ziabari in these areas.  Especially helpful may be Kourosh Ziabari and Fars News Agency: A Conversation with Mark Dankof on Israel  and 9-11, along with Mark Dankof’s Final Word on Michael Collins Piper’s Final Judgment on Israel  and the Assassination of JFK, and Mordechai Vanunu and Michael Collins Piper Converge: The Israeli Mossad Assassinated JFK.

Mark Dankof and Michael Collins Piper of the American Free Press in the Nation’s Capitol: November 2011

     What is noteworthy for our purposes now, is not simply to see a connection between JFK and 9-11, but between these tragedies and how and why the United States ended up in World War II.  And the connection between these 3 events, and the current threat of war today in 2013 between the United States and its Zionist ally on the one hand, and Iran on the other.  I cannot overemphasize this in today’s conversation with everyone gathered here in Tehran at this very moment in time.

     The second event which tells you more about who I am now, involved one Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the infamous Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. I was not born until 1955, of course, but in the 1960s and 1970s, two different Air Force tours on Oahu with my father enabled me to develop an extreme interest in the subject.  The event that involved my life with Roosevelt’s legacy, and the tragedy of December 7^th, 1941, occurred in late 1971 or early 1972, during my sojourn in high school at Iolani School in downtown Honolulu, near the Ala Wai Canal, Diamond Head, and Waikiki Beach.

Investigating FDR’s Duplicity on Pearl Harbor: Mark Dankof at Iolani School in Honolulu in 1972.

     There was a fantastic American history teacher at Iolani in those days, the late, salty retired American Navy Captain R. C. Sleight.  He had been a destroyer skipper in World War II.  His politics were Right of Center, but he had plenty of room in the class for anyone who disagreed with his views with their own academic and political perspective, if it was credible.  His sardonic humor, Sea Captain’s expressions, and wit would be ruled out-of-bounds in American education today.  His brute frankness which cut through canards, shoddy thinking, and superficial analysis, would be intolerable to the Minions of Political Correctness [Jewish Political Correctness] that control what passes for education in the United States now.  It was my privilege to have one last conversation with him by telephone, when visiting Honolulu for my parents’ 50^th wedding anniversary in 1991, 20 years after I left Iolani School as a student.  I shall never forget him.  I have thought of him many times in all the years since.

Iolani School in Honolulu: Diamond Head, Ala Wai Canal, and Waikiki are prominent.

     When we got to the subject of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and World War II one morning at Iolani School, Sleight became especially serious.  He made it clear that he did not agree with the Establishment Consensus on FDR, or the events that led up to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.  His reasons for this statement were not entirely elaborated upon with the class, but I noticed that the bibliography he distributed on these subjects included a section entitled Revisionist History Books on Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor.  When I returned to my home at Hickam AFB in Honolulu on the Pearl Harbor Channel Entrance on Julian Avenue that evening, I began looking at this particular section of the bibliography.  The titles told me something about the contents of the books. (I have recently gone back into this fine but dated bibliography, at the suggestion of Dr. Paul Sheldon Foote of Cal State-Fullerton, to add the Hamilton Fish volume entitled “Tragic Deception:  FDR and America’s Involvement in World War II.”

Hamilton Fish joins Herbert Hoover, John Toland, Robert Stinnett, and John Koster, in laying the foundation for the damning case against Roosevelt and his Red Agent advisors like Harry Dexter White, who set up the Pearl Harbor tragedy and everything that followed.

1972: Mark Dankof’s Home at Hickam AFB was on Julian Ave on the Pearl Harbor Channel Entrance.

     Did President Franklin Delano Roosevelt really know in advance that the American Pacific Fleet was going to be attacked at Pearl Harbor on the morning of December 7^th, 1941?  Was that information deliberately withheld from the American Commanders at Pearl Harbor, Admiral Husband Kimmel and General Walter Short?  If so, why?  The mere thought of something like this alternated in my mind between the preposterous and the monstrous.  Could anyone really seriously entertain this idea who was sane?

     I could not sleep in my bedroom at Hickam AFB that night.  My night thoughts would not allow my mind a nocturnal peace, despite the Pacific Ocean breeze and the sound of rustling palm trees outside my window.  The American Air Force planes that constantly overflew my home on Julian Avenue, headed toward a landing strip at Hickam’s Military Airlift Command (MAC) terminal, also punctuated a sleepless night.

October 1940: Hickam AFB, Pearl Harbor, Ford Island, and Battleship Row in Peace, while FDR and Harry Dexter White plot World War II.

     I made a private appointment to see Captain Sleight in his academic office at Iolani School.  When I arrived, he pointed to a chair in front of his desk.  He had the same demeanor as other military men I had grown up around in the Air Force, when serious conversation was imminent.  He told me to sit down.

     Sleight asked me why I had come in, what the nature of my concern was.  I was just as much to the point.  Basically, I indicated I’d like to know what Revisionist History was.  And whether or not he thought there was any truth to what I was picking up on in the bibliography he had passed out to the class, regarding President Roosevelt having advance knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the American Pacific Fleet.

FDR and the USS Arizona: The Winners are the Jews, the British, the Bankers, and Stalin.

     He lit his infamous pipe and looked at me with a seriously piercing examination I had never quite seen before.  His question to me, before proceeding, was one I have heard a thousand times, as the son of a military man, a Lutheran pastor, an activist, and a journalist:

     “Are we speaking totally off-the-record here?“

      I indicated that we were.

     Sleight then proceeded.  I will never forget what he said, and how clearly and powerfully he said it, while continuing to pierce me with the penetrating focus he always had when zeroing in on something that was pivotal.

     What he said was simply this: “Roosevelt not only knew about the attack in advance, he deliberately provoked it, from October of 1940 onward.  And the United States not only had the capability to intercept Japanese diplomatic communications, as the Tora! Tora! Tora! movie (1971) depicts, but had the network and the active Naval Intelligence operation going on throughout the Pacific, to intercept Japanese military communications.  We were listening in constantly on [Admiral] Yamamoto’s radio communications with [Admiral] Nagumo, after Nagumo departed from Hitokappu Bay in Japan in late November of 1941 with the six (6) aircraft carriers which comprised the task force which ended up 200 miles north of here, launching the attack on Pearl, Wheeler, Schofield, Hickam, Shafter, and Kaneohe on December 7^th. If you want to know why, you have to find out about the [Arthur] McCollum memorandum to Roosevelt in October of 1940.  That’s the Rosetta Stone.“

     How, I asked, do I find this stuff.  Answer: “Presently, you won’t.  I know about it from classified Naval Intelligence materials I’ve seen, and my conversations with a couple of the guys doing the cryptology and the intercepting in the project which was intercepting Japanese military communications.  That stuff, and the very existence of the program, is still top secret.  Maybe in your lifetime, you’ll be able to see the evidence on paper.”

     My last remark was that I had just seen a documentary film on Roosevelt’s speech to the 1940 Democratic National Convention, assuring Americans he would keep their kids out of any European, or foreign war, period.

Hickam AFB Under Japanese Attack: December 7th, 1941.

     Captain Sleight cut to the chase: “Roosevelt was a duplicitous, lying son of a b—-.  He lied this country into a war that was totally avoidable.  If he’s the model of the American Presidency in the world we live in now, God help us.  The Mythology that surrounds this guy is enough to make you puke.  And don’t ever forget it.“

     I never did forget it.  And yes, thanks to Robert Stinnett, author of Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, and his Freedom of Information Act law suit against the Federal Government of the United States, the evidence is now in for all to see.  Stinnett was one of those secret cryptographers in the network that was intercepting Japanese military communications in the Pacific, and the specific conversations between Yamamoto and Nagumo that Captain R. C. Sleight had told me about in Honolulu decades before.  His book includes the infamous McCollum Memorandum of October 1940 and its so-called Eight (8) Point Action Memo “designed to provoke Japan into an overt act of war.”

     The complete text of the McCollum Memorandum is presented in Appendix A of the Stinnett book, which provides a photographic copy of what Stinnett discovered personally in Box 6 of a special U. S. Navy collection in RG 38 in the Military Reference Branch of Archives II, January 24, 1995.

Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, fluent in Japanese as one who grew up in Japan as the son of American Baptist missionaries there, was the head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI).  His office was an element of Station US, a secret American cryptographic center located at the main naval headquarters at 18^th Street and Constitution Avenue N. W., about four blocks from the White House.  As Stinnett freely admits it in Day of Deceit, the Eight (8) Point Action Memo called for “virtually inciting a Japanese attack on American ground, air and naval forces in Hawaii, as well as on British and Dutch colonial outposts in the Pacific region.”

The Eight (8) Points are as follows:

1.  Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.

2.  Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies [now Indonesia].

3.  Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang Kai-shek.

4.  Send a division of long-range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.

5.  Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.

6.  Keep the main strength of the U. S. Fleet, now in the Pacific, in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.

7.  Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.

8.  Completely embargo all trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.

     It is critical that we understand the exact timing of this Eight (8) Point Action Memo of Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum, as Stinnett explains it to us:

     “[Admiral] Richardson’s removal [as CINCPAC, or Commander in Chief Pacific] on February 1^st, 1941, strengthened the position of McCollum.  Only five months earlier, in mid-September 1940, Germany and her Axis partner, Italy, had signed a mutual-assistance alliance with Japan.  The Tripartite Pact committed the three partners to assist each other in the event of an attack on any one of them.  McCollum saw the alliance as a golden opportunity.  If Japan could be provoked into committing an overt act of war against the United States, then the Pact’s mutual assistance provisions would kick in.  It was a back-door approach: Germany and Italy would come to Japan’s aid and thus directly involve the United States in the European war.”

     Thus, the roadmap for what Stinnett terms “FDR’s Back Door to War” was set.  Perhaps the greatest indication of the mindset of both Arthur McCollum and Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the former’s “Action D,” which involved the deliberate deployment of American warships within or adjacent to the territorial waters of Japan.  We now know that FDR personally took charge of secret White House meetings where Action D was discussed and implemented.  The President termed these illegal and reckless provocations “pop-up” cruises. These cruises were opposed by Admiral Husband Kimmel (CINCPAC commander) who objected to Action D as “. . . ill-advised and will result in war if we make this move.”  Stinnett notes that:

     “From March through July 1941, White House records show that FDR ignored international law and dispatched naval task groups into Japanese waters on three such pop-up cruises.  One of the most provocative was a sortie into the Bungo Strait southeast of Honshu, the principal access to Japan’s Inland Sea.  The strait separates the home islands of Kyushu and Shikoku, and was a favored operational area for the warships of the Imperial Japanese Navy in 1941.”

     Footnote 11 for chapter 2 of Day of Deceit clinches how deeply involved Franklin Roosevelt was in these reckless, illegal, provocative, and un-Constitutional actions embodied in Action D.  Stinnett’s footnote states:

     “Documentation that directly links FDR with McCollum’s Action D–sending US Navy cruisers in provocative moves against Japan includes the following: the first discussion in the White House February 10, 1941. Present were President Roosevelt; Secretary of State, Cordell Hull; Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson; Secretary of the Navy, Frank Knox; General George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff; and Admiral Harold R. Stark, Chief of Naval Operations.  Stark warned FDR that the cruises “will precipitate hostilities.” PHPT 16-2150 and PHPT 33, p. 1203.  FDR advocated the cruises, says Stark in PHPT 33, p. 1203.”

     There is another critical Rosetta Stone and smoking gun in the Pearl Harbor conspiracy involving Franklin Roosevelt and the subsequent set-up of Admiral Husband Kimmel (CINCPAC), and the later publication of the fraudulent Roberts Commission report on the Pearl Harbor attack.  I will simply mention it for those subsequently interested in further research of this horrifying episode in American history: The Prokofiev Seamount (Stinnett 146, 148, 150, 233) and the Vacant Sea Order (Stinnett 144-46, 149, 160, 187, 188, 193).  These gems are accompanied by the White House Route Logs and Station US files, RG 38, MMRB, Archives H Document, which lists the Thirty Six Americans Cleared to Read the Japanese Diplomatic and Military Intercepts in 1941.  What is incredible about this document is that it proves (“access restricted”) that the intelligence from this electronic surveillance and decryption was withheld from Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, CINCPAC in Hawaii, and Lieutenant General Walter Short, the Commanding General of the Hawaiian Department, U. S. Army, Fort Shafter, Oahu.  Why???

     I hope that at this point in the narrative, everyone here is already connecting the dots.  The Mythology that surrounds Franklin Delano Roosevelt to this day could not be sustained without the absolute cooperation of the American government, the corporations, the news media, Hollywood, the sycophants in the American National Security apparatus, and the educational system.  This Mythology conceals the illegal, un-Constitutional, and yes, criminal mind of America’s 32^nd President.  Even more so, for those who are analyzing Roosevelt by comparison now to George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and their respective actions vis a vis Iran and the Middle East in the 21^st century, the references we have already made to secrecy, duplicity, economic sanctions, and illegal covert military operations conducted by Franklin Roosevelt, should serve as an ominously suggestive prototype and precursor to what has been happening with American Presidential Administrations of recent years and their equally criminal operations against Iran.  Even more ominously, as demonstrated by Mark Weber in his essay, “President Roosevelt’s Campaign to Incite War in Europe: The Secret Polish Documents,”  the political forces operating behind and through Franklin Roosevelt, are identical to those in play in the American political power elite now: International Central Bankers and the disproportionate role of Jews in that milieu; Zionists and the Jewish and Israeli Lobby organizations; and in the case of the Roosevelt Administration, the pro-Soviet foreign policy agenda of key Jewish agents in their midst, the 20^th century counterpart to the Israel  First Fifth Column operating in the Bush and Obama Administrations in the 21st, as demonstrated by the publicly revealed names in the United States involved in the successful Public Relations campaign to have the American State Department remove the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK/MKO) from the official American governmental list of known terrorist organizations around the globe.

     What is going on with this campaign?

     The what and why are crystal clear.  The Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) has been enlisted by the Israeli Mossad and the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for covert acts of terror and criminality against the present government of Iran.  The message?: Terror is legitimate when pursued by those we Mythologize, against those we Demonize and Dehumanize, so much so that the word “Terrorism” is removed in most Orwellian fashion from the MEK and its activities, to be replaced with words and terms like “Freedom Fighting” and “Human Rights.”  Historical memory of the track record of the MEK throughout its blood-stained history must be removed and erased also, as a part of a very familiar and evil process of self-justification.

The Mossad and the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK/PMOI): Will Israel employ them in a False Flag Operation against the United States falsely pinned on Tehran? Is World War III the Endgame?

     The Israeli-linked campaign in the United States and Europe to legitimize the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) is only the tip of the iceberg.  We now know, courtesy of Seymour M. Hersh’s article, “Our Men in Iran?” in the April 6, 2012 New Yorker, and Glenn Greenwald’s “U. S. Trained Terror Group” in the April 6, 2012 Salon, that the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) began training members of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) in the United States at a secret facility in Nevada in 2005.  According to one of Hersh’s informants, JSOC provided MEK personnel with “the standard training, including communications, cryptography, small-unit tactics, and weaponry” over a period of at least 6 months.  Few doubt the MEK link to the assassinations of Iranian scientists and other acts of criminality in this country in recent years, as the pro-Zionist Newsweek has virtually confirmed publicly.  But will the MEK be a convenient tool for a false flag attack in the domestic United States designed by Israel for false linkage to Iran and the provision of a subsequent causus belli (“cause for war“) for overt hostilities with Iran to commence?  Keep your ears close to the tracks. . . .  If Christopher Bollyn and Robert Sungenis are correct about the real architects of September 11, 2001, we had better anticipate the worst. . . .

     For the previously uninitiated, I will recommend several brief articles.  One is David Martin’s “Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government.” Please consult Elizabeth Rubin’s op-ed in the New York Times of August 13^th, 2011 entitled, “An Iranian Cult and Its American Friends,” along with her earlier July 13, 2003 piece entitled, “The Cult of Rajavi.”  My own past interview with your Habilian Association on the MEK may prove instructive as well.  See “Iran’s Habilian Association Talks to Mark Dankof: The MEK Delisting and the Zionist War Agenda.”  And lastly, the annual documentation of Israeli PAC money funding American elections put together by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) will document the magnitude of the problem we mutually face.

     But let us return, momentarily to Franklin Roosevelt and the run-up to Pearl Harbor.  In this instance, our focus shall now be upon the diplomatic games being played by the United States Government with Japan leading to December 7^th, 1941.  Here, Mythology matches what it accomplishes with the McCollum Memorandum and its Eight (8) Point Action Memo.

     What we now know, eternally grateful to the uncovering and publishing of the real story, is that no amount of good will, no amount of concession on the part of the Japanese government in 1941, would deter Franklin Roosevelt and his Jewish power brokers from the drive to war with Japan.  Why?  This is easily understood.  1) Central Bankers always profit by war. In the case of the United States, this is fueled by the creation of the Federal Reserve Board in 1913, as a precursor to the absolute global militarization of American foreign policy ever since.  2) An American-Japanese war in the Pacific would not simply be a back-door way of involving the United States in Churchill’s war against Hitler in Europe, also a Jewish objective, but would terminate the threat of an alliance between Imperial Japan and Adolf Hitler in a two way invasion of the Soviet Union.  This was an essential objective of the Jewish power nexus.  David Martin’s aforementioned essay gingerly admits this.

     The key for understanding this last point is Operation Snow, the Rosetta Stone.  Take it to the bank.  The information about Operation Snow continues to unfold.  The recent release of John Koster’s “Operation Snow: How a Soviet Mole in FDR’s White House Triggered Pearl Harbor,” has begun this new unraveling of Establishment American History About Roosevelt and World War II in earnest.  The Soviet Mole is Harry Dexter White. White was the son of Lithuanian Jewish immigrants to the United States.  When the evidence becomes too voluminous to deny, regarding pro-Stalin agents and Franklin Roosevelt, you can at least be sure the American Establishment will detach White, and so many others, from the obvious implications of their Jewish identification.  In the same way, the modern Jewish character of the American Neo-Conservative political movement, which drives the American war machine globally and in the Middle East, which is proven by a blizzard of responsible academic research and writing, will be buried by a compliant American media and educational establishment beholden to Zionist interests.  How much longer can this continue?  And how much more obvious must it be, that every single American military operation in the Middle East and Central Asia today, is driven by the Israeli/Jewish agenda compiled by the Project for the New American Century in 1996 and its document of that time entitled, “A Clean Break: A Strategy for Securing the Realm”?

Harry Dexter White: The Lithuanian Jew Whose Operation Snow for FDR and Joseph Stalin Killed Americans at Pearl Harbor. Can You Spell Treason?

     In the case of the tragic events of 1941, the latest revelations occur with the publication of President Herbert Hoover’s diary and the 50 pages they contain about Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor.  Edited by George Nash, the volume is entitled, “Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover’s History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath.”  Everyone  here in Tehran should one day avail himself or herself of the contents, not simply to understand what happened then, but what is happening now, in the runup to a war between the United States/Israel and Iran, that I believe only Divine Intervention can stop.  The forces that desire it are those who had their way with Americans in the 1930s and 1940s.  We have been living with the aftermath ever since.

     The basic facts are these.  Japan in 1941 was bogged down in a 4 year war with China she could neither win nor end.  Japan’s move into French Indochina had created a sense that the Japanese Empire was at the end of the line in its war configuration.

     Inside the Japanese government was a powerful faction led by Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoye that desperately wanted to avoid war with the United States.  The pro-Anglo-Saxon camp included the Japanese Navy.  The  War Party within the Japanese government included the Army, General Hideki Tojo, and Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka, whose virulent anti-American views were especially pronounced in the anti-Anglo-Saxon camp in the struggle for control of the direction of the Japanese government.

     On July 18, 1941, a critically important opportunity emerged for the United States.  Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoye ousted Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka.  Konoye’s replacement proved to be a pro-Anglo-Saxon, Admiral Teijiro Toyoda.

     The American response was equally pivotal.  It proved what I believe to be just as true today of a Zionist Occupied American Government in the latter’s desire to see a war with Iran transpire, at any cost, because of the Talmudic bloodlust of the Netanyahu regime in Israel and its backers in the United States.  Franklin Roosevelt wanted war with Japan, at any cost, because the Bankers wanted that conflict to transpire as a prelude to a back-door entry into the British war with Adolf Hitler, and because it guaranteed Japan’s diversion from any threat of participation with Hitler in a two-pronged invasion of Bolshevik Russia, a Bolshevik Russia dear to the hearts of organized World Jewry and the Harry Dexter Whites of the Roosevelt administration.

Harry Dexter White: Working for FDR, Joseph Stalin, and The Bankers.

     On July 25, 1941, one week after the apparent victory of Konoye over Matsuoka, the United States froze all Japanese assets in the United States, ending all imports and exports, and denying Japan the oil upon which the Japanese Empire depended.  Does this sound familiar to Iranians today dealing with Mr. Roosevelt’s descendant, Barack Obama?  Is it a portent of things to come?

     One thing is clear.  Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoye, although stunned, still believed in the desire of the United States for peace with his country, and won secret support from both the Japanese Navy and Army for a meeting with Franklin Roosevelt, on the U. S. side of the Pacific, to continue good faith dialogue with the American Chief Executive.

     It is especially noteworthy that U. S. Ambassador to Japan, Joseph Grew,  implored his Administration not to ignore the overture from Konoye or the opportunity for peaceful resolution of the crisis offered.  Konoye had convinced Grew an agreement on Japanese withdrawal from Indochina, and from South and Central China, could be reached.  Fear of Mao’s armies and Stalin’s Russia  understandably prompted Japan to hold a buffer in North China.

     On August 28, 1941, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States presented Franklin Roosevelt a letter, containing Konoye’s offer to the President to meet face-to-face.  There was but one condition: Tokyo begged Roosevelt  to keep the letter, and the offer, secret.  The reason was entirely legitimate:  a public revelation of the Japanese Prime Minister’s offer to cross the Pacific to speak to an American President could imperil the survivability of his government.

     Yes, you guessed it.  On September 3, 1941, the letter and its contents were conveniently leaked to the Herald-Tribune newspaper.

     On September 6, 1941, Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoye met again with American Ambassador Joseph Grew over a 3 hour dinner, telling Grew the Japanese now agreed with the 4 principles advanced by the United States Government for peace.

     The response from Roosevelt: No response.

     On September 29, 1941, Grew sent what Herbert Hoover described as a “prayer” to Roosevelt, begging the latter not to let a chance for peace elude the United States.

     On September 30, 1941, Grew wrote to Washington, “Konoye’s warship is ready and waiting to take him to Honolulu, Alaska, or anywhere else designated by the President [Roosevelt].”

     No response.  On October 16, 1941, Konoye’s cabinet fell.

     In November, the United States intercepted 2 new offers from Tokyo: a Plan A for an end to the China war and occupation of Indochina.  If that were rejected, Plan B called for a modus vivendi where neither side would make any new moves.

     The response from Roosevelt: Rejection out of hand.

     This then brought about the infamous meeting of Franklin Roosevelt’s War Council, on November 25, 1941. In this gathering, Secretary of War Henry Stimson [privy as we have already seen to Roosevelt’s illegal incursions into Japanese territorial waters courtesy of Arthur McCollum’s Action D recommendations], makes written notes of the conversations of the War Council.  The prevailing consensus, according to Stimson, is as follows:

     “The question was how we should maneuver them (the Japanese) into. . . firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.”

     What was the result of Mr. Roosevelt’s version of diplomacy?

     Here is the result for all to see: Thousands of lives ended or ruined, the burnt ashes of a radiated Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the fall of China to Mao, American involvement in Korea and Vietnam, the rise of Communist China, and the expansion of the Soviet Empire in Eastern Europe and elsewhere after the end of World War II.  The establishment of the Zionist State of Israel in 1948 would pin the fortunes of the United States to this entity, resulting in the present overextension of the American Empire in the Middle East and Central Asia, with yet more war to unfold.  This is why Tyler Kent, the American linguist and cryptologist operating out of the American Embassy in London, revealed to key figures in the American Congress and elsewhere, what Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were cooking up in the runup to Pearl Harbor.  Kent was the Edward Snowden of his time.  In the aftermath of his arrest in May of 1940, his life would never be quite the same again.  The shadow of Roosevelt and his duplicity in destroying what Kent knew of the United States prior to that time, would follow the latter all the way to the end of his life in Kerrville, Texas in 1988.

     Even more ominously, it proved to be the expansion of the insidious doctrine of American Exceptionalism, the Rooseveltian belief in the Imperial Presidency as understood by Mr. Roosevelt’s successors, the explosion of growth in an American National Security State which threatens the Bill of Rights and the survivability of the American Dollar, and the ongoing expansion of Jewish power in all the basic institutions in American life since the end of the Roosevelt era and the Second World War that many argue marked the beginning of the end of the Western World. 

     These are the fruits of American “victory,” a most Pyrrhic triumph. Among these poisonous fruits has been the introduction of the demonic into the American-Iranian relationship, courtesy of the 1953 Operation Ajax of the American CIA and the British MI6, and the backing of the Rockefeller Empire, the oil consortiums, and the Zionist entity.  When we speak of Mythology, Demonization, and the Erasure of Historical Memory, let me share with you that when I visited Iran as a young person for the first time at age 18, I had no idea of what the United States had done in this country in 1953, or why.  The names of Kermit Roosevelt and Donald Wilber meant nothing to me.  The name of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh meant nothing to me.  The increasing tension I sensed in a handful of summers in Iran in Pahlavi Iran in the 1970s was one I could not possibly understand as a young American college student.  The information, and the context, of this brewing cauldron was one that had been at first denied to me.  Later I would receive a false spin and explanation for what had happened years before, couched primarily in the notion advanced by defenders of the American Governmental Establishment that Dr. Mossadegh was a “Communist” working in tandem with the Soviet KGB in Iran against both American and the Free World.

     Thanks to the American Free Press, we now know the truth.  That fine newspaper in 2007 republished the Clandestine Service Historical Paper No. 208, authored by Dr. Donald N. Wilber in March of 1954 and entitled, “Overthrow of Prime Minister Mossadegh of Iran: November 1952-August 1953.”  That document includes various Appendices, including the “Initial Operation Plan for Project Ajax, as Cabled from Nicosia to Headquarters on 1 June 1953 [Preliminary Plan Prepared by SIS and CIA representatives on Cyprus]“; and the “London Draft of the Ajax Operational Plan.“

     What does Dr. Wilber’s published document reveal, complete with the original CIA and MI6 documents from that time, now declassified?

     It reveals that the organized duplicity and criminality of Franklin Roosevelt would become the foundational methodology of every American Administration of the post-World War II period, conducted by the power elite we have already identified specifically, as the driving force behind it all. Understood comprehensively, the Mythology of Franklin Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor becomes the Prototype and Concrete Foundation for all of the official public lies that would follow, including the false official version as to why Harry Truman approved the use of atomic weapons against Hiroshima (a lie contradicted by the honesty of General Curtis E. LeMay, among others); the false official story about what happened to JFK in Dallas on November 22^nd, 1963; and the false official story about who and what was behind September 11, 2001 in New York.

     The methodologies of Mythology and Demonization especially characterize the entire history of the modern Zionist State of Israel, ranging from the role of the Meyer Lansky Jewish crime syndicate in the United States in providing funding for Menachem Begin and the Irgun in their bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, to official American silence on Deir Yassin and the Sabra and Shatila massacres years later in southern Lebanon.  The silence is deafening in regard to the truth about the Lansky-Ben Gurion connection to the death of John Kennedy in Dallas and why, not to mention Israel’s deliberate attack on the USS Liberty in 1967; the PROMIS affair and Robert Maxwell; the Pollard and AIPAC spy cases; the Israeli link to the crimes of the MEK in Iran in recent years; and the obvious Israeli link to the tragedy of American interventionism in the Middle East for decades, especially since the false flag incident of September 11, 2001.

What will be the next move of the Masters of the False Flag Operation? “By Way of Deception, Thou Shalt do War.”

     The most obvious Mythological Falsehood is this: That the Zionist State of Israel and the Zionist Occupied Government (ZOG) of the United States want peace and mutual trust and coexistence in the Middle East, compounded by the Demonization of Iran as the alleged source of every evil in the region.  It is no different in any sense from the lies of 1940 and 1941 that Franklin Roosevelt and his backers wanted peace with Japan in the Pacific, and that the failure to achieve it was the result of Japanese intransigence, recklessness, and absence of goodwill.

     If the Endgame of Pearl Harbor is the world we presently live in, it pales in comparison to the monstrous ramifications in history just ahead, if Netanyahu, the Lobby, and their allies in the governments of America and Europe get their way, with what they desire to do both to Iran, and to American dissidents like me who use our meager resources and lack of power to speak the truth to demonically exercised powers and principalities.

     The ultimate truths are these.  As General Robert E. Lee put it in the 19^th Century, “The consolidation of the States into one vast Empire, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor to ruin which has overwhelmed all that preceded it.” 

     The aggressors against Iran are the same despots who have destroyed the economy, the culture, and the Constitutional Bill of Rights of my own country, especially since the advent of Franklin Roosevelt and World War II. Just as they have destroyed any vestige of the older Christian cultural and moral climate of my homeland, polluting the land with the the Sexual and Drug Revolutions of the 1960s and the ideology of Sigmund Freud and the Frankfurt School, they have destroyed the American currency and banking system since 1913 with the Federal Reserve Board’s fiat money, usury, and the drive to Globalization, War, and Rumor of War.  The American Domestic Police State since 2001 has had the full involvement and support of the Israeli telecommunications industry and Israeli security companies who are assisting the government of the United States in the implementation of the USA Patriot Acts, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the various versions of the National Defense Authorizations Act (NDAA), and the wholesale warrantless electronic surveillance of the National Security Agency (NSA).  Surely the Beast (Revelation 13) is soon to be fully unveiled, desirous of devouring all those who will not take his name, or his mark on the forehead or the right hand. . . .

The Frankfurt School’s Institute for Social Research: Jewish financed subversion and destruction of Western Civilization and Christianity via Sexual Perversion, Abortion, the Destruction of the Family, and the Deification of the State.

     And as they target Iran with economic sanctions; MEK-linked terror attacks; societal subversion with Western (Jewish) supported pornography, abortion, and every brand of sexual perversion; and a technologically empowered Mass Media Demonization, so the European and American dissidents who refuse to countenance the physical, economic, and moral assault on Iran can, are, and will be increasingly targeted. 

     As it was provably the Jewish Lobby and the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith (ADL) who stirred Franklin Roosevelt’s Justice Department to begin politically motivated and un-Constitutional persecution of American dissidents from Roosevelt’s World War II policies, culminating in the famous Great Sedition Trial of 1944, so it is that the ADL is now working hand-in-glove with American intelligence and police agencies to create secret dossiers and profiles of their opponents, for most obvious purposes. It has already started for many of our speakers here today from the States or Europe.  In my case,  I was targeted for anonymous Internet vilification from obviously Jewish sites that were later provably traced to the offices of Rabbi Aryeh Tuchman, Director of the Library and Research Center and the Assistant Director of the Civil Rights Division of the New York headquarters of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith (ADL).   My open public letter to him is available on the Internet.  You can judge the meaning and intent of his activities directed at me, and others gathered here, for yourself.

     Add to this the revelations in 2008 and 2009 about the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report for Missouri State Law Enforcement prepared for Federal and State Law Enforcement in conjunction with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai Brith and the American Federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS).  Kurt Nimmo’s essay on March 11, 2009 for Infowars is but one of the places where you will find the information on what this MIAC report is, and what it means.

3 American Patriots that Abe Foxman Detests: Michael Collins Piper, Mark Dankof, and Mark Glenn in Washington, D. C.

     In a nutshell, the MIAC report expose tells us that the Zionist-driven police state in America has targeted three (3) groups for profiling and targeting with harassment and worse.  These three (3) groups, according to the MIAC report, constitute the recruitment base for “domestic terrorism” in America.  It is important that we understand, in truth, that anyone who opposes use of the money and Armed Forces of America for Israel’s purposes in the Middle East, Iran, and Palestine, is automatically to be libeled and Demonized as a “terrorist,” “subversive,” “racist,” “extremist,” or “violence-prone  criminal.”  The first group targeted will not surprise you. It is Islamic people living in the continental United States.  The second targeted should not be a real surprise either.  It is the Antiwar Movement in America.  But the third group is most revealing: according to the MIAC report prepared in conjunction with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai Brith, anti-Zionist Libertarians and Constitutionalists identified with political candidates like Congressman Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party [the party I represented in the United States Senate race in Delaware in 2000], and Pat Buchanan, are to be profiled and watched as a potential future danger to the “national security of the United States.”

Pat Buchanan and Mark Dankof in San Antonio, Texas. 1995.

     Translation: In the Zionist inspired lexicon of the American Domestic Police State that has emerged since September 11^th, 2001, anyone who believes that the President of the United States has no moral or Constitutional authority to order the targeted killings of Americans without trial and legal representation is a “terrorist.”  Anyone who believes that the President and the Federal Government of the United States cannot Constitutionally detain anyone indefinitely without specific charges, legal representation, and conviction in a civilian American court of law, is a “terrorist.” Anyone who believes that the Armed Forces of the United States can only be Constitutionally committed to a foreign war by the specific Declaration of War issued by the House and Senate of the United States (Article 1, Section 8 of the American Constitution) is a “terrorist.”  Anyone who believes that the Government of the United States has no right to order the targeted physical and electronic surveillance of any Citizen of the United States without the demonstration of Probable Cause and a Court Ordered Warrant (the 4^th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States) is a “terrorist.”

     And finally, anyone who believes the Zionist State of Israel was founded in terrorism and the ethnic cleansing and defrauding of Palestinians is a “terrorist,”  along with anyone who believes that Palestinians, Iranians, and other indigenous peoples of the Middle East and Central Asia have what the Founding Fathers of America would have termed “inalienable rights,” not to be taken from them because the Talmudic Racial Supremacist Doctrine of modern Zionism defines them as subhuman and inferior to “God’s Chosen People.”

     You now get the idea.  The Iranians gathered here today are my brothers and sisters, my friends and allies, in the mutual fight against the tyranny, horror and oppression of The New World Order.

     And in closing, with God’s help, we shall win, for our families, our friends, our communities, our churches and mosques, our respective cultures and histories.  At the end of history, Christian and Islamic eschatology agree: The godly shall win, and evil shall be comprehensive defeated and destroyed at a divinely appointed hour.  Be sure of this.

     And as I think, wistfully, of my beloved America of bygone days, I am reminded of several writings from your own history which explain to me as a foreigner, the powerful and mysterious allure of your marvelous land, and why I shall always love Iran and the Iranian people.

     One takes me back to my days fishing in Lar Valley in the sunlight of my youth of decades ago, and watching the stunning Persian Night Skies with my late father after the setting of the sun in the West.  At night, I would listen endlessly to the rushing sound of the river that runs through the Valley like the River of Life that has neither a beginning nor an end.

A River Runs Through Iran’s Lar Valley.

     The words of Hafez in the 14^th century come to the forefront of my consciousness at this moment now in Tehran in time and space in history, as they did one night by a campfire in Lar Valley so long ago, when I read the following for the very first time:

“Lie down beside the flowing stream

And see Life passing by and know 

That of the World’s transient nature

This One Sign is enough for us.”

     A second thought in my journey into the distant past now makes its entrance into the forefront of consciousness at this moment in Tehran I presently share with all of you in time and space at this point in linear history.  We retreat from Hafez in the 14^th century to the Persian poet, Ferdowsi in the 10^th century, and the inscription on his tomb near Tus:

“Let not this body live, if there is no Iran.”

     One last time here today, I offer my profound and humble thanks to the 2^nd International Conference of Independent Thinkers (New Horizon), the Iranian Ministry of Culture, and the Habilian Association of Iran for this blessed invitation to be with each of you, and to share our hearts and innermost thoughts and dreams with each other while that is yet possible.

     And may God bless all of you, on this special day we shall never lose or forget, either in time, or in the eternity we possess that is yet to be. We are reminded, as I was reminded in an experience last December on a United Arab Emirates flight from Dubai to Houston that I later reflected upon in an essay, that the evidence of God’s existence and His faithful fulfillment of His promises in the past, is a down payment on promises and blessings yet future.  You and I have a future.  It is bathed in brilliant and overwhelming Light.  Our mutual struggle for freedom and liberation from the demonic forces of darkness presently on the ascendancy, will be a successful one.  We can and must and shall persevere and endure to the end of the race, and the end of linear time.

     The final victory is ours.  Be sure of this. You and I are on the winning team.  And each one of us has a unique contribution to make, as the God of history empowers us and emboldens us to speak the truth in love, with the Blessed Endgame now in sight, and within our grasp.

     I bid each and everyone of you a heartfelt “Good Day.”

Mark Dankof at KABB-FOX 29 in San Antonio for an appearance on Press TV/Iran’s “The Debate.”

Pastor Mark Dankof on the Chosen People of God. Who are They? I Peter 2: 9-10 is the Rosetta Stone.

Mark Dankof was Bedros Hajian’s guest on the International Christian Family Network of Glendale, California on Tuesday, January 14th, at 7-8 pm Pacific; 9-10 pm Central; 10-11 pm Eastern.  Topic:  Biblical Prophecy and the End Times.  Enjoy here (the first 1:50 involves a previous telecast on that network, just before the Hajian show begins). There will be future shows with Mr. Hajian, and technological improvements in the telecasts heard around the world.

Bedros Hajian interviews Mother Agnes Mariam on Syria.

Bedros Hajian and the Government of Western Armenia Map Out the Reality of Wilsonian Armenia and the Treaty of Sevres. What Are the Implications?

Mark Dankof joins Bedros Hajian Live on the International Christian Network to discuss current events and Biblical Eschatology.

The International Christian Family Network of Glendale, California includes Bedros Hajian Live.

Mark Dankof’s most recent appearance with Bedros Hajian on Bedros Hajian Live on the International Christian Family Network may be accessed here.  The introduction of Mr. Dankof is in the Armenian language, the interview conducted in English.  Enjoy!  Topics include John Kerry and Geneva II, and the Syrian crisis, but all evaluated from the vantage point of Biblical Eschatology.

Bedros Hajian interviews Mother Agnes Miriam on Syria.

Pastor Mark Dankof of the Lutheran Ministerium and Synod-USA, a member of the International Lutheran Council (ILC).

Creeds As Confessions in Liturgy

by

Rev. Mark Dankof

The LMS-USA Indianapolis Conference

St. Matthew Lutheran Church

Indianapolis, IN

23 April 96

     Before my brief paper on Creeds as Confessions in Liturgy is read this morning, I would like to engage in covering two (2) housekeeping items. First, I offer my profound apologies to Pastor Spears and the entire national convention of the LMS-USA for my physical absence from Indianapolis. This was necessitated by several recent tragedies in my wife’s family, the completion of our emergency duties as temporary house parents of a pro-life maternity home here in Kerrville, Texas where I serve on the Board of Directors, and the fact that it was my misfortune to be clobbered by influenza beginning April 10 and intensifying April 15-17. My prayer is that I will see all of you soon, and that downstream, God will give me another opportunity to be in a Lutheran pulpit again.

     Second, I would like our convention to formally acknowledge the recent departure from this life of Dr. Arthur Braun, pastor emeritus of Calvary Lutheran Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, and former Bishop of the Minnesota District of the old American Lutheran Church. He died on Good Friday, April 5, at the age of 86. Dr. Braun was a gallant, sometimes lonely voice, in calling his church back to its Biblical and creedal heritage. Despite his best efforts, he was pained, in the waning years of his life, to witness not only the eventual formulation of the ELCA under circumstances hostile to evangelical orthodoxy, but the failure of two (2) other attempts to create a mainstream, confessional Lutheran church in America. His vision was for a church which would avoid both universalism and apostasy on the left, as well as some of the more sectarian and isolationist offerings at the starboard end of the American Lutheran spectrum. Copies of his obituary, a 1985 speech made in Waterloo, Iowa, and editorials from the St. Paul Pioneer Press and Christian News are available if anyone at today’s conference would like them, both for edification as well as for ongoing historical documentation on one of the orthodox Lutheran church’s giants. Art Braun fought the good fight unto the end, even in the conscious understanding that for all involved in the corporate fight for the soul of our denomination, time and history are not on our side, even as eternity and Jesus Christ firmly stand with us. Let us observe a moment of silence in Dr. Braun’s memory–

     Thank you. Now it is time to move on to the question of Creeds as Confessions in Liturgy in the life of the contemporary church. What is the significance of these various forms? What is the key history behind their development? Does their utilization today undermine or enhance the doctrine of Sola Scriptura? Is their present day employment a bone thrown to the memory of archaic times, persons, and seasons, relevant only to esoteric academicians and long discarded history textbooks? Or do they retain a legitimate, practical usage as a key line of defense in the maintenance of God honoring worship rooted in the history of the church catholic, as well as in the retention of an orthodox apology against newly repristinated ancient heresies and frontal assaults?

     If we assume the legitimacy of the Sola Scriptura today, and assume a commitment to the Lutheran Confessions as the normative explication of what the Bible teaches, an appropriate launching point for answering some of these raised questions may lie in what occurs first in the Book of Concord of 1580, namely the listing of the Three Ecumenical Creeds, or Three Chief Symbols of the Church as the foundational basis of all the Confessions which follow. This is important for several reasons.  First, the Confessions wanted to reiterate that their articles of faith were neither recent nor heretical, but were undergirded by the theological and historical foundations of the early Church. Second, it is noteworthy that the controversies of the second, third, and fourth centuries were consistently deemed applicable to the struggles of the Reformers in the sixteenth century. Third, if historical and theological struggles and issues of centuries two, three, and four continued to be relevant in the sixteenth, one might suspect the possibility of a prima facie relevance of those developments to a church under renewed attack from similar, in some cases identical forces, as we approach the beginning of the twenty first century. The writer of Ecclesiastes states that, “There is nothing new under the sun.” —this may well be his verdict on Biblical theology’s constantly recast conflict with false doctrine — fought time and again within the confines and context of redemptive history.

The Logo of the LMS-USA and the Pillars of Luther’s Reformation: Christ Alone, Faith Alone, Grace Alone, Scripture Alone.

     Among many heretical movements of significance to the early church were Gnosticism, Marcionism, Montanism, Monarchianism, and Arianism.

     Out of orthodoxy’s clash with these came an increasingly systematized Christian theological rebuttal and the formulation of affirmative creedal statements. These statements may be seen not only as the voice of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church staking out its position in challenges past — but as the bequeathed legacy to today’s church, which must turn, paradoxically, to the past, to understand the ideological lineage and connections of ancient enemies to modern antagonists, as well to recover its own historical memory as the key to the reestablishment of a previously possessed Biblical identity, obscured by compromise with doctrinal relativism and repristinated apostasy.

     The battle with Gnosticism is particularly instructive in application to today’s crisis of clarity and faith. Christianity had borrowed four (4) concepts from Judaism for its battle with this new threat. These were monotheism, the personhood of God, verbal revelation, and the idea of God’s intervention in real, time/space history. Gnosticism, an ancient forerunner of the modern existentialism of Rudolph Bultmann (1884-1976), came to the appointed conflict with a variety of advocates and ideas, common threads which included the rejection of the Jewish Old Testament as fraudulent, the utilization of magic and the occult as a replacement for Christ in the connection of the physical and spiritual realms, the belief in docetism (Christ only seemed to have a human body/identity), the belief in the antithesis of the physical and spiritual realms, extreme asceticism, and every conceivable form of philosophical speculation outside of God’s written revelation. Irenaeus (125-202) and Tertullian (160-230) would be key players in the struggle with Gnosticism (and later Marcionism). Key Gnostic figures in the relevant period include Saturninus of Syria, Basilides of Egypt (who posited a sexual union of Dynamis and Sophia in the creation of 365 aeons between an unknowable Father and humanity — this places last year’s Goddess Sophia conference of the ELCA, PCUSA, and UMC in context!!!), and Valentinus of Rome (who posited Christ as the offspring of Sophia and as the last of 30 special aeons between God and humanity. Christ was a docetic Christ, and saves only by His enlightenment of souls!!!).

Dr. Donald Thorson, Pastor Ralph Spears, Pastor Mark Dankof, Pastor John Erickson: June 2012 in Chetek, Wisconsin.

     Marcion’s heresies only served to intensify the challenges to orthodoxy. As a contemporary of Valentinus, he posited the existence of two (2) gods. One was the good, ultimate Father; the other was the alien God who was also the malignant God of the Jews. Marcion forced Christians to draw up their first New Testament canon as a result of his acceptance of only Paul’s writings and a portion of Luke. He simultaneously denied carte blanche, the validity of the Hebrew Old Testament Scriptures. posing a radical dichotomy between that era and that of the New Testament. Christ was once again, a docetic Christ of the unknown God; a different God from the Demiurge who created the material world and physical bodies. His de facto rejection of the reality of the Incarnation led him to a denial of the doctrine of the second coining of Christ; he also served as a precursor of Sabellian Modalism, with his idea that Christ was only a mode of the Father’s existence, and that He did not really suffer and die.

     Montanus, active during the reign of Antoninus Pius (138-61), further exposed the theological vulnerability of a Church bereft of a fixed canon and sufficiently detailed creedal statements integrated into the daily liturgical life of the Church Catholic. Like Marcion, Montanus had an aversion to Judaism, as well as the notion of a fixed revelation and canon. Emphasizing only the writings of John, he called the church from worldliness to the embrace of an extreme asceticism (including the dissolution and abolition of the institution of marriage), advocated an imminent chiliasm (the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth during a literal 1000 year reign of Christ in Jerusalem), articulated an understanding of the priesthood of all believers which opposed any ecclesiastical authority or hierarchy, opposed the use of art or fixed creeds of any kind in the Church, and most importantly, along with female prophetesses Priscilla and Maximilla, utilized glossolalia, dreams, and visions to proclaim himself the Paraclete’s personal vehicle of progressive revelation to those seeking the will and mind of the Spirit. Montanism served not only as a further impetus for the development of canon and creeds in the Church’s battle with heresy, but as a current warning to late twentieth century Lutherans as well — that those who emphasize the normative character of the Spirit’s supernatural revelation outside of Scripture, who call for the cessation of the use of confessional creeds and liturgy in corporate worship, and who stress a combination of individual subjectivism and authoritarianism in revelation and congregational leadership as being of the Spirit, are leading the sheep into a schismatic, sectarian Sheol, out of which there can be no escape, save in Word and Sacrament, and in the Creeds and Confessions of the Ancient and Reformational Church.

     The fourth major threat to Biblical orthodoxy which would add to the pressure for creedal formulation and adherence, was Monarchianism. It arose as a movement designed to emphasize the oneness of God vis a vis the duality and plurality of gods espoused by both Marcion and the Gnostics. Its desire for monotheistic expression was admirable — its theological confusion about Jesus Christ was concurrently catastrophic, and along with the heresies of Gnosticism and Arianism, would mandate the orthodox creeds of the First Ecumenical Council of Nikko (325), the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (381), and the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (451). By 451, it can be argued that the foundational Trinitarian and Christological truths based on Scripture were properly explicated, and available for the Reformation’s rediscovery in the sixteenth century, as well as for the rediscovery of the modem Church mired in the ruins of relativism and existentialism. It can also be argued that these intellectual theological rediscoveries take on their best practical and spiritual significance for the Church, when employed again and again as creedal confessions in corporate worship and apologetic defense of the Faith.

     There were two (2) types of Monarchianism. The first was Dynamic Monarchianism or Adoptionism. Its falsehoods would reappear later in history in the theology and Christology of modem liberals like Friedrich Schliermacher, Albrecht Ritschl, Adolf von Harnack, and John A.T. Robinson. In this view, Christ is adopted as God’s Son, but is not essentially God. Christ then becomes a moralistic example of God’s will and desires for humanity, with pithy sayings and concerns for the poor. He ceases to be the Christ of Nikko who is homoousion (of the same essence) with the Father, and the Lamb of God in the context of propitiation and substitutionary atonement. The adoptionistic Christ of Theodotus the Tanner (late second century) and Paul of Samosata (200-75), only a supernaturally endowed mere human, preserves the unity of God by sacrificing the deity of Christ. The rejection of this apostasy by Nikko and Chalcedon must be renewed again by today’s one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, employing confessing creeds in corporate worship against the recycled militant adoptionism of twentieth century liberalism — the prevalent Christology of a dying, modem world.

     The second type of Monarchianism was Modalistic Monarchianism or Modalism, first advocated by Praxeus. It equated Christ and the Father as being the same. Instead of sacrificing the deity of Christ as Adoptionism did, it jettisoned the Personhood of both Christ and the Holy Spirit. In denying that Christ was a distinct Person vis a vis the Father, but only a mode or aspect of the Father Himself, Modalism abandoned the doctrine of the diversity of Persons within the Godhead, losing the concept of Christ as Advocate before God the Father (I John 2:1). If Christ, not being a distinct Person, cannot really represent us before the Father, the doctrine of substitutionary atonement is removed from legitimacy as the key ingredient in redemptive history. Modalism also produces a docetic Christ, since Christ as only a mode of the Father, could only appear to be a man.

Mark Dankof in the Christ Lutheran Seminar Room: Computer and Video Screen for Lecture Charts and Visuals for Amos 8, Habbakuk 3, Revelation 2-3, Daniel 9 and the 70 Weeks.

     Its confusion of Persons with Essence in regard to Christ’s oneness with the Father (John 10:30; 14:9), needed to be clarified by Nicaea and Constantinople to preserve Christ’s Personhood, Advocacy, and Atonement, at the same time that Modalism’s rejection of Christ as lesser aeon(Gnosticism) and supernaturally endowed mere human (Adoptionism), were affirmed by orthodoxy.

     The fifth and final ancient threat to confessional orthodoxy that will be considered here, was Arianism in the fourth century. It revealed the insufficiency of the Apostles Creed in completely explaining the relationship of the Son to the Father. Arianism, more powerful in the East than the West, denied that Christ is eternally begotten, and claimed that He is first begotten of the Father. In this view, Christ is a semi-divine being created. not begotten by the Father and having an origin in time, or at least a definite beginning before the creation of the material world.

     Arius came out of the rigorist, monastic movement in Egypt, and spent much time in Alexandria, home of a theological school that stressed the deity of Christ. Unfortunately, Arius was profoundly influenced by Lucian of Antioch, who followed Paul of Samosata in emphasizing the exclusive humanity and human will of Jesus. Arius coopted Lucian’s view of the Logos as an intermediate, created, spiritual being between God and humanity, and argued that the Logos was higher than any other created being, but still a creature Himself and different in essence from the Father. Arius taught of a “time when the Logos was not”, equated begetting with creating, stated that the Logos had a body but not a soul, and that the Son was not worthy of divine worship as is the Father, but is merely the ktisma teleion (Perfect Creature) through whom all other things were made.

     Arianism insisted that Christ did not possess deity by nature, but developed it by virtue of His constant and growing moral unity with God. He is our Savior only in the sense that He presents us with divine truth and furnishes a perfect example of commitment to the good. If the created Logos develops into deity, Arius opens the door to the possibility of other created, contingent beings partaking of divinity through evolution toward moral perfection and conformity to divine truth. Here lies the seeds of a Christology and anthropology consistent with humanism, Mormonism, the New Age movement, the works righteousness of medieval Roman Catholicism, and some of the extreme ascetic tendencies in aberrant charismatic/Pentecostal movements.

The Logos, the Word Who Became Flesh and Dwelt Among Us, Eternally Begotten of the Father, of the Same Substance (homoousios) as the Father.

     Arianism was rejected by Nicaea (325) and even more roundly so at Constantinople (381). Especially between 361-81, the Son, and derivatively, the Holy Spirit, were deemed to be of the same essence as the Father, but also as distinct Persons, avoiding the twin dangers of tritheism and modalism. Oneness of nature/essence and the distinct, yet equal existence of Persons had been articulated together as a packaged foundation of orthodox Trinitarianism and Christology.

     This package, and the history surrounding its development, would serve the Church to the present moment in time.

      Names like Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Athanasius, the Cappadocian Fathers, Ambrose of Milan, and Augustine, all contributed to the orthodox derivation from Scripture of “One Essence, Subsisting in Three Persons.” The Athanasian Creed (450??), the Western world’s greatest statement on the Trinity, would put it this way:

This is the catholic (universal) faith, that we worship one God in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity, neither confusing the Persons nor dividing the substance.

     Ecumenical creeds and canonical Scripture thus became mandated as components in the liturgical forms employed in the worship life and apologetic defense of the Faith inherent in the ministry of the Ancient Church Catholic and Militant. Failure to employ them today 1) elevates individuality and subjectivism above the historic experience of the Church Catholic in time, as well as Scripture itself; 2) presupposes an irrelevancy in that which is time tested through the centuries; 3) assumes that Greek, Hebrew, and Latin express theological truth only in the context of their immediate culture and era of usage; 4) insinuates that theological truth is not immutable but evolutionary in nature; and 5) holds as orthodox the naive belief that ancient Christological and Trinitarian controversies will not reappear as renewed threats to the faith delivered once unto the saints (Jude). These dangerous five (5) assumptions mirror the Ancient Five (5) of Gnosticism, Marcionism, Montanism, Monarchianism, and Arianism, as cancers growing within the shrinking remnant Church today. A truly Lutheran and catholic worship life centered in Christ, Scripture, history, objectivism, and apologetics, is our first, last, best, and only line of defense in the waning days and twilight of the Church Age, before the dawning of the Blessed Eschaton itself.