Excerpt from the book, “The Utopia of a Strange Love: When the Love of God is Mishandled” by Tavares D. Robinson, Watchman Publishing

The Agape Deception

“God’s love for me is agape, and it is unconditional.” This phrase has been used so repeatedly among believers that to speak anything contrary is like signing one’s own death warrant. Men whom we have admired throughout the ages have written books and preached sermons on the love of God which have shaped and developed our views concerning this subject. What are some of the things that we have learned? From such men, we have learned that there are four levels of love: eros, storge, phileo, and agape. Eros is love that extends from the heart, and it is romantic in type. Storge is the kind of love that is founded on family loyalty and duty. Phileo is brotherly love; it is humanity’s love for one another and the lesser form of love when compared to agape. Lastly, there is agape love. We have been taught that this is the highest form of love—the type that only Christians can exhibit as it is selfless, divine, and unconditional. But is agape really unconditional? Is agape divine love? Is phileo the lesser love?

In this chapter, we will look at agape and phileo, due to the frequency of their use today. As stated, agape has been commonly taught as divine and unconditional love, while phileo is a lesser form of agape—brotherly love. How did the concept of unconditional love originate? Before we move forward, I believe it’s important that we first define unconditional love. The dictionary says, “It is the acceptance of a person without them meeting any conditions. Affection that has no limitation. To cherish someone regardless of their character.” Is this what the Bible teaches? Clearly not. Does God extend His love toward all mankind without partiality? Yes. John 3:16 states that “for God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” But to define it as unconditional is misleading and eternally dangerous.

“Unconditional love” has never been a biblical concept. It was first coined by a German psychoanalyst named Erich Fromm in 1934. The idea was further developed in his successful 1956 book, The Art of Loving. Fromm rejected all forms of authoritarian government including God’s. He viewed the God of the Old Testament as a self-seeking authoritarian. He was a vowed atheist who vehemently argued against the teachings of the Christian faith. He believed that man is the measure of all things. He taught that a person must love himself, accept himself, and esteem himself in order to reach his highest potential. He believed that a father’s love was always conditional—while a mother’s was unconditional and couldn’t be forfeited by sins or transgression. His ideas were later refined in the 1960s by a famous humanist psychologist named Carl Rogers.

Rogers’ parents were devout Protestants, and he enrolled in seminary school but later dropped out and abandoned Christianity for New Age mysticism. Rogers, skilled in the Greek language, defined agape as unconditional, but termed it “unconditional positive regard.” It is the basic acceptance and support of a person regardless of what the person says or does. It is to always approve someone by setting aside your personal opinions and biases. It is the ability to isolate behaviors from the person who displays them. Does this sound familiar? How many times have you heard someone say, “God loves the sinner but hates the sin”? Is this biblical? Yes and no. If you are making reference to His love for the sinner in that He gave His Son for the sake of redemption, then yes. But if it’s used to justify and accept wayward behavior without accountability, then no. You cannot separate sinners from their sins. What made them a sinner is their sin. God does not cast the sin into the lake of fire. He will cast the person who died in their sin into the fire.

This view of agape is contrary to apostolic teachings. It is humanistic psychology which is the workings of seducing spirits influencing the wisdom of men. Paul warned the church at Colossae concerning this issue: “And now, just as you accepted Christ Jesus as your Lord, you must continue to follow him. Let your roots grow down into him, and let your lives be built on him. Then your faith will grow strong in the truth you were taught, and you will overflow with thankfulness. Don’t let anyone lead you away with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ” (Col 2: 6-8).

As stated previously, phileo is a type of love that has also been distorted in our time. It is said that phileo is shared mostly by the worldly and unregenerate. The words agape and phileo have become something like urban legends, anecdotes based on hearsay and widely circulated as true. In the church, many things have been said about these terms that are untrue. Whereas phileo has been taught as brotherly love, it has also been taught that only those who are not Christians express it. In that way, it is a lesser form of love than agape. Yet some Bible texts teach otherwise:

• For the Father loves [phileo] the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed (John 5: 20).
• So the sisters sent word to Jesus, “Lord, the one you love [phileo] is sick” (John 11: 3).
• Then the Jews said, “See how he loved [phileo] him!” (John 11: 36).
• No, the Father himself loves [phileo] you because you have loved [phileo] me and have believed that I came from God (John 16: 27).
• So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved [phileo], and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” (John 20: 2).
• If anyone does not love [phileo] the Lord, let that person be cursed! (1 Cor. 16: 22).
• Those whom I love [phileo] I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent (Rev. 3: 19).
• These scripture verses and others clearly show us we have been taught a distorted view of phileo. Yet even greater damage has been done to agape. We have been led to believe that agape is God’s divine love. And because it is divine, we have been told it is unconditional and never ceases. First John 4 has been used to convince the masses that this is absolutely the meaning of agape:
• Dear friends, let us love [agape] one another, for love [agape] comes from God. Everyone who loves [agape] has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love [agape] does not know God, because God is love [agape] (1 John 4: 7-8).

These verses use agape in reference to God five times. If this reference could be taken alone, we could indeed hold that agape means divine love. But what is missing is correlation. How does 1 John 4:7-8 correlate with other texts referencing agape? It is highly important for us to learn this principle. Imposters and deceivers will steadily increase as we approach the return of our Lord, and Peter left some weighty words on this in his second Epistle to the church:

And so, dear friends, while you are waiting for these things to happen, make every effort to be found living peaceful lives that are pure and blameless in his sight. And remember, our Lord’s patience gives people time to be saved. This is what our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom God gave him—speaking of these things in all of his letters. Some of his comments are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with other parts of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction. You already know these things, dear friends. So be on guard; then you will not be carried away by the errors of these wicked people and lose your own secure footing. Rather, you must grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. All glory to him, both now and forever! Amen (2 Pet. 3: 14-18 NLT).

Other verses besides 1 John 4: 7-8 show us that agape can mean different things than divine love or unconditional love:

• Woe to you Pharisees, because you love [agape] the most important seats in the synagogues and respectful greetings in the marketplaces. (Luke 11: 43)
• No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love [agape] the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money. (Luke 16: 13)
• This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved [agape] darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. (John 3: 19) . . .
• for they loved [agape] human praise more than praise from God. (John 12: 43)
• Demas, because he loved [agape] this world, has deserted me and has gone to Thessalonica. Crescens has gone to Galatia, and Titus to Dalmatia. (2 Tim. 4: 10)
• They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Bezer, who loved [agape] the wages of wickedness. (2 Pet. 2: 15)
• Do not love [agape] the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves [agape] the world, love [agape] for the Father is not in them. (1 John 2: 15)

Paul Prophesied These Days Would Come

In the previous verses in which all of them use a form of agape, it is impossible to translate agape as divine love or love from God. Is it divine love that we love money or human praise? Is it the love of God that men desire darkness? Is it really God’s love that we love the world—or seats in the synagogues? In 2 Samuel 13 there is the story about Amnon having love for his sister, Tamar. In the Septuagint, the translation of the Old Testament into Greek, the word used four times to describe Amnon’s love for Tamar is translated agape. Verses 14-15 say, “But he refused to listen to her, and since he was stronger than she, he raped her. Then Amnon hated her with intense hatred. In fact, he hated her more than he had loved her. Amnon said to her, ‘Get up and get out.’” If agape means God’s love, or divine love, how could it lead to rape?

If the scripture text does not fit, the teaching or doctrine is not legit! Do men love darkness unconditionally? Did Demas love the world in a divine way? Do people have a God kind of love for money? People love darkness, the world, human praise, and money because these things bring them something back in return. They certainly don’t love them unconditionally.

We can use the same vocabulary, but if our vocabulary has the wrong definition, we will worship another Jesus. Paul warned that “if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough” (2 Cor. 11: 4). J. C. Ryle (1816–1900), the first Anglican bishop of Liverpool, wrote, “There is a quantity of half-truth taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense.”

Why does Satan work to convince the church that God’s love is unconditional? It is in order to promote lives of disobedience, to remove the fear of God, and to strip away the belief of God’s wrath. The enemy ultimately desires us to nullify Jesus’ death on the cross. If I am convinced God’s love is unconditional, I can pick and choose what scripture to obey. There is no reason why I should repent and be converted. I can live my life to please myself, and I can live without conviction. Why would God require a Lord-and-slave relationship?

To summarize, phileo means to cherish, to be fond of, to take strong delight in, or to like well. The word is associated with intense endearment, although brotherly love and unregenerate love is a stretch. Paul’s closing remarks to the Christians in Corinth should make us rethink the idea that phileo is a lesser love: “If anyone does not love the Lord, let that person be cursed!” (1 Cor. 16: 22). Agape, on the other hand, means to esteem, to honor, to value, or to respect. Agape represents devoted love for someone or something. Agape love is an act of the will, not the emotions, and it should not be defined as “divine love” or the “God kind of love.” According to the scriptures, agape is not always unconditional. God functions in both phileo and agape types of love. It is vital we divorce ourselves from erroneous teachings concerning God’s love.

This famous phrase was a response by Benjamin Franklin when he left the Constitutional Convention in 1787. He was reportedly asked, “What kind of government did the founders propose, a republic or a monarchy?”

After the 2024 election, I reckon this statement will be on the minds of many Americans who see history as a relevant voice in the present.

In my latest book, Hostility Within, I expressed concern that what we witnessed in 2020 would be repeated in 2024 but on a greater scale. It was my intention to warn and equip believers for what I perceived as a momentous change coming to this country. And due to the broken and disjointed relationships we suffered four years ago, I did not think we were in a good place, as a country, and sadly, as a church, to handle more divisiveness. I believed we had crossed the Rubicon, a place of no return, due to our mismanaging and abusing the mercy and long suffering of God. We were treading toward a place and time we have never seen. We were moving from a preventable sickness to a terminal disease, and we needed to make serious spiritual adjustments to how we display our kingdom responsibilities. Looking back, I am fully convinced we have entered that lethal sickness phase in this nation, and I regret to say, the church, that I love deeply, has played a significant role in this death.

As a pastor, I tend to look at the culture and the world through the lens of a biblical worldview. This perspective causes me to view and interpret life, crises, and the world from a framework that is Bible-centric. In other words, “How would Jesus view this and what would He do if He were in my shoes?” But others who subscribe to a similar worldview oftentimes focus on moral absolutes and righteous lifestyles, which are indeed important, but many miss, at a painful cost, the importance of God’s history, and how He dealt with humanity in times past.

The Bible declares to us that God said, “I make known the end from the beginning…” (Isa. 46:10). This means that God has the unique ability to declare the future centuries before it happens; but also, it reveals His future by the past. In other words, God’s future is locked up in His history. If you want to know what God is going to do, and what His view of things is, then you would have to know His history. The history of God has always interacted and collided with nations and the culture of that day.

Because of this truth, we can safely go back and draw parallels, beliefs, and perspectives on what was happening in and among those nations, of that day, and what was God’s response to what was happening. How God will work out an issue can indeed be a complex thing to understand, but His character is different. His character is predictable because it is repetitive and immutable.

God displays a repetitive pattern throughout the Scriptures of working His history into, at that moment, a crisis or dilemma. There are many I can list, but for the sake of a laborious read, there is one example in the book of Jeremiah when God sent the prophet Jeremiah to warn the people of his day to repent and avoid God’s judgment. The people were convinced Jeremiah was not speaking on God’s behalf, because after all, they believed God had established the land and the temple, so why would He destroy what He approved? But God reminded the people of what He did in His history (Shiloh) to get them to see His perspective (7:12-15). God has worked His history into blessing humanity, but He also worked His history in judging nations. If this is indeed the case, why is this critical viewpoint overlooked or silent?

A few years ago, I watched the anniversary coverage of the Jonestown Massacre, where over 900 people lost their lives under the direction of cult leader Jim Jones. One particular scene that caught my attention was horrific yet cryptic. A photo showed the many deceased bodies spread out around Jones and his concocted makeshift “throne.” A huge sign hung on top of the throne that read, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” What a compelling and prophetic warning. This was a quote from the Spanish philosopher George Santayana from his book, The Life of Reason (1905). Why are we so deficient in knowing God’s history? For one, we have developed an affection for things that Christ has not approved, while displaying a contemptuous disposition for things that are necessary. From personalities to rhetoric, we have digested disinformation that has caused a spiritual disruption within the body of Christ. Those who are ignorant of God’s past will never be crowned to speak for him in the present.

Ignorance of biblical history—or in some cases, historical amnesia—has left the body of Christ vulnerable to the ever-changing current of a misleading culture. There are only a few things that Satan enjoys more than God’s people being historically illiterate.

English novelist and cultural critic George Orwell wrote: “To enforce the lies of the present, it is necessary to erase the truths from the past. Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

G.K. Chesterton, an English writer, poet, and theologian, expressed the same point: “The disadvantage of men not knowing the past is that they do not know the present. History is a hill or high point of vantage, from which alone men see the town in which they live or the age in which they are living. Without some such contrast or comparison, without some shifting of the point of view, we should see nothing.”

Likewise, C. S. Lewis, a British writer, theologian, and apologist, wrote frequently about what he called “the great cataract of nonsense,” which is our tendency to concern ourselves only with the present that it blinds us to knowledge of earlier times and keeps us content with history in pieces. He spoke about the common tendency to treat the voices of history with a certain level of incredulity and inferiority. Elsewhere, he called it chronological snobbery, a tendency to concern oneself primarily with present sources while dissecting history as we please. Lewis warned that to do so is to walk unaware of the cataracts through which we see the world today. Far better is the mind that truly considers the past, allowing its lessons to interact with the army of voices that battle for our allegiance. For a person who has lived thoroughly in many eras is far less likely to be deceived by the errors of his or her own age. Lewis’ prophetic statement still rings true in our era, for to truly understand our current times we need a historical perspective.

Divorcing ourselves from the past makes us blind in the present. Furthermore, believers without knowledge of the past are spiritual infants in the hands of the Ancient Seducer and Fallen Angel. In the Scriptures, we see that every time God’s people forgot their history, apathy, anarchy, apostasy, and abandonment soon followed. And whenever the church turns her back on history, she will embrace autocracy and appealing spokespersons who teach a future devoid of any type of reality.

What does this all mean for America? Let us look at history from three different perspectives: biblical, world, and voices from Americas’ past. From a biblical perspective, this nation’s current state resembles Israel’s desire for a king (1 Sam. 8:1-22), and the final days of ancient Judah before their historical system of government was overthrown.

In 1 Samuel chapter 8, the nation was fed up with the type of government God had been providing, so they demanded a “strong arm” leader so that they could be like the rest of the world’s government. And despite God revealing to them the selfish and brutish nature of the king, they still obliged. So, God gave them their request. Sounds familiar? I see the same parallels in this country. The character of the incoming president has been on display for years and despite his authoritarian cravings, bratty behavior, and dislike for the constitution and other restraints, the majority chose him just as King Saul was chosen.

God uniquely crafted and handpicked an individual, who was tall and looked impressive, and would reflect the character and idolatry of the nation. God chose him because he would be a physical manifestation of their inner heart’s desires. Every time they looked at Saul and witnessed the unwise decisions he made, they would see themselves. But it is hard to see what is wrong in us, when that wrong is what we secretly admire. We indeed serve a God who does not mind giving us the desires of our heart, if we delight in Him, but it is different when God gives you your desire as an act of divine judgment. The danger of that is you are so elated by the desire, that you are willing to place God’s name on it yet clueless that the desire came by trickery, lies, manipulation, impatience, and sin. When we want what we want, we are willing to overlook things that before would have made us question it. We are willing, in our hypocrisy, to call out others for the things we now have personally made accommodations for in our lives. They wanted a king so badly that they did not realize God gave them a king from the wrong tribe. Legitimate kings were supposed to be from the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:10); Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin. They were so spellbound and did not realize that the king they chose was illegal, unapproved and destined to ruin from the very beginning. There is nothing more deceptive than labeling something God’s choice when it is only God’s choice for judgment, not blessing, and for rebellion, not obedience (Ps. 106:15).

In the final hours of Judah, the people were deceived by a distorted nationalism due to historical amnesia. While divine judgment was on the horizon, God’s own people were delusional and demented in their views concerning Him and where they stood with Him (Jer. 5:1-31). They were so compromised in their relationship with God that they were convinced that anyone who challenged and spoke against their liberty and freedom was viewed as an enemy. The challenge the prophet Jeremiah faced is the same challenge that many prophetic voices face today. How do you teach surrender to a generation who feels entitled to freedom? Freedom is not a right, it is God given, God supervised, and God removed. Many misinterpret the voice, choice, and the will of God due to their idolatry of freedom.

We have idolized freedom, and it has caused a serious deterioration in our social climate. Freedom without restraints is lawlessness without any convictions. In reference to the people of Judah, they were parroting a false assurance that was blinding them to a reality of a present calamity. Jeremiah reminded them that God does not override His divine principles to justify habitual sin, regardless if He placed His name on something from the past. He was informing them that being the people of God will not prevent them from being punished by God. In the words of Jewish theologian, Abraham Joshua Heschel, “Prophets had to remind the people that chosenness must not be mistaken as divine favoritism or immunity from chastisement, but, on the contrary, that it meant being more seriously exposed to divine judgment and chastisement.”

Jeremiahs’ words were ignored and trampled underfoot by the masses, and years later, the temple and Jerusalem were destroyed by fire, and the people were taken captive and exiled to a pagan environment for seven decades. When the called-out ones start to embrace things that are diametrically opposed to our King, consequences are inevitable. When God’s people neglect what they know to be right, fail to embrace and humbly submit to the truthfulness of His word, and give themselves to faddish and duplicitous rhetoric, the culture around them will start to decay.

When our pulpits no longer echo God’s authentic, prophetic word but become springboards for political pandering and clichés, Satan will choose diabolical polarization as his tool. When the voice of God is silenced during times of panic, upheaval, confusion, and skepticism, Satan looks to fill the void with voices that parade conspiracies, unjust hatred, and religious lies. Be not deceived, just because America may have had some Judeo-Christian values does not mean we are exempt from the wrath of God.

As we look at the past through the lens of world history, there are some things that are happening now that are similar to a particular time before. Many are disturbed by the phrase “history repeats itself,” but they cannot refute that history does not rhyme. I believe it is no coincidence that the name of late author and Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer is being highlighted in many circles today.

Unfortunately, some are using his name in such a way that is undermining the accuracy of what he stood for and stood against. His name has been used to push a religious nationalism that’s antithetical to why he was killed. He was executed by hanging in 1945 because he did not ascribe to Adolf Hitler’s agenda. He vehemently opposed nationalism and rebuked the church for its gross silence while Hitler used propaganda to mentally confuse and disarm the masses. You see, silence is not a badge of honor and humility, in times of gross deceit, for the sake of political advancement.

The church in Germany was deceived by Hitler’s speech of promising to bring national revival back to the country. While he was convincing the church of that, he was deceptively working behind the scenes to find loopholes in constitutional laws. Many people underestimated Hitler’s political persuasion and afterward, laws were passed to effectively grant him broad power to act outside of governmental control. He no longer had any government oversight that could restrain his psychotic depraved mind and behavior.

Hitler quickly used these powers to block constitutional oversight and suspend civil liberties, which brought about the sudden collapse of democracy at the federal and state level and the creation of a dictatorship under his leadership. Germany moved from a constitutional democracy to totalitarianism by the diabolical influence of one person. It does not take a crowd of people to lead you astray; it only takes one. You do not need a large group to change an entire nation for the worst. By the hands of King Hezekiah, the nation of Israel was restored. But by the hands of his son, Manasseh, the nation was destroyed. One person with the right amount of power, influence, and political posturing can upset and tear apart the moral fabric. King Manasseh, in one generation, reversed everything that was built by his father, and Germany likewise witnessed the power of one individual. Sounds familiar?

Bonhoeffer understood the role that evil played in the destruction of Germany, but he did not overlook the role that the church played in not challenging the evil. The church’s silence was complicit and ungodly. After Hitler had ascended into power, he scornfully dismissed the church and its leaders as an irrelevant voice posing no threat to his agenda. Sadly, Hitler was right. Many of the German churches remained quiet and looked the other way. Hitler said, “We should destroy the preachers by their notorious greed and self-indulgence. We shall thus be able to settle everything with them in perfect peace and harmony. I shall give them a few years reprieve, why should we quarrel? . . . They will betray their God for us, they will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and income.”

Few voices were raised against the monstrous Nazi evil during that time because it required real courage to speak the truth. Bonhoeffer was deeply troubled by the church’s silence and wrote: “We the church must confess that we have not proclaimed often or clearly enough the message of the One God who has revealed Himself for all time in Christ Jesus, and who will tolerate no other gods beside Himself. She must confess her timidity, her cowardice, her evasiveness and her dangerous concessions. She was silent when she should have cried out because the blood of the innocent was crying aloud to heaven…The church is guilty of the deaths of the weakest and most defenseless brothers of Jesus Christ. The church must confess that she has desired security and peace, quiet, possession, and honor to which she has no right. She has not born witness to the truth of God and by her silence, she has rendered herself guilty, because of her unwillingness to suffer for what she knows to be right.”

In its thunderous silence, the church became a traitor to the lordship of Christ. She failed to heed Bonhoeffer’s prophetic words, and within a few years, Hitler’s agenda was carried out—with over eleven million people (including six million Jews) being murdered, including Dietrich Bonhoeffer himself.

Finally, through the lens of America’s past, there have been voices that warned us what would happen to our republic if we veered off course.

President Abraham Lincoln, in his 1838 Springfield, Illinois speech said: “At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer if it ever
reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

Lincoln stated that if we as a country (the U.S.) would ever be destroyed, destruction would come from within. While many are focused on the impact climate change could have on the world, many are overlooking a more perilous version of change. Social climate change creates a hostility within, the path of which is hard to redirect. Every great kingdom has become vulnerable to external calamities when its people, structure, and values start to deteriorate from within. When a nation is filled with people who stir up conflict for the sake of personal gain, understand that the moral decay has moved into an impossible reversal. General Douglas McArthur wrote: “History fails to record a single precedent in which a nation subject to moral decay has not passed into political and economic decline. There has either been a spiritual awakening to overcome the morale lapse or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”

Professor Alexander Taylor wrote the following in 1787: “The world’s great civilizations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith. From faith to great courage. From courage to liberty. From liberty to abundance. From abundance to selfishness. From selfishness to complacency. From complacency to apathy. From apathy to dependence. From dependence back into bondage… Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority will always vote for the candidate promising them the most benefit from the public treasury, with the result that a Democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policies followed by a dictatorship.” Could all the signs we see in this country be signs of a fallen democracy?

In 1920, American journalist H. L. Mencken penned these words: “As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.” Sadly, these prophetic words are happening quickly before our eyes, and many are clueless that these words were ever spoken.

As believers, we understand that the word of God warns us about the dangers of judging those in the world, for they are God’s responsibility; but for those who say they are believers in Christ, we have a duty to judge their behavior. And I have reached the conclusion that the U.S. is divided because the church in this nation is under a strong delusion. This nation has forgotten about God because the church has disregarded the authority of Christ and His character. This nation’s immorality has stemmed from the church’s lack of spiritual morals. The U.S. has gradually become anti-God because the church has become anti-Christ. This land bleeds self-centeredness because the church promotes self-aggrandizement. The people are drowning in humanism because the church’s focus and objective is power and money. Society despises the Bible because the church doesn’t teach or demonstrate the Bible. The culture in America has evolved to shun God because the church in America doesn’t fear God.

What did Franklin mean by, “if we can keep it?” It means that a healthy democratic government requires that its citizens be actively engaged and morally sober to defend itself against humankind’s destructive inner vices. How can you measure a nation’s health? By its leadership and the majority’s choice. The real adults have exited the stage and now the immature, morally bankrupt, political savages, and spiritual grifters have embraced the spotlight. “What America wants, America gets” is not a term of power and blessings. It is a sign of dark days ahead, for God has allowed “cause and effect” to be His instrument of Bible prophecy being fulfilled.

We need to be very careful of how we interpret the term, “God’s choice.” Because God allows something does not mean it was His sincere desire. Once again, God allowed King Saul to rule only because he was what the majority desired. The cause and effect of Saul’s kingship was based solely on the people’s choice.

Donald Trump will do some good deeds, but it will only be to cover up disruptive plans. He will spearhead America losing its social prestige around the world. But remember, there must be a realignment of the nations to fulfill end-time prophecies. And in case you didn’t know, the U.S. is not mentioned in Bible prophecies, which likely means that eventually, this country will lose its influence among other nations. Countries usually lose their influence when they can no longer fix or solve their own problems or are under the leadership of someone the world finds untrustworthy.

During Christ’s first coming, the power of the nations shifted from the East to the West, and Rome was in power. But at His second coming, the opposite will take place, and the power of the nations will shift from the West back to the East (Ezek. 38:1–6). In years to come, we will see strong countries in the West start to look weak due to a lack of stability and deterioration from within. Brace yourself: a different America is upon us.

By Tavares Robinson

 

We are living in a time where silence has become something admirable. The admiration has led many to believe that promotion from God will come if you just mind your business.

I understand there is a time to be quiet; however, there is also a time to speak. When the Holy Spirit is compelling us to open our mouths, silence is not a badge of honor and humility.

When Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany, he scornfully dismissed the church and its leaders as an irrelevant voice posing no threat to his agenda. Sadly, Hitler was right. Many of the German churches remained quiet and looked the other way. Hitler said, “We should destroy the preachers by their notorious greed and self-indulgence. We shall thus be able to settle everything with them in perfect peace and harmony. I shall give them a few years reprieve, why should we quarrel? . . . They will betray their God for us, they will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and income.”

The church looked away, thinking that showing “love” instead of confronting evil would turn the tide. But this not only encouraged the sin; in fact, it directly strengthened the hands of the evildoers. Few voices were raised against the monstrous Nazi evil during that time. One of the few was Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He understood that love for Christ and others required courage to speak the truth even in unfavorable times. Bonhoeffer was deeply troubled by the church silence:

“We the church must confess that we have not proclaimed often or clearly enough the message of the One God who has revealed Himself for all time in Christ Jesus, and who will tolerate no other gods beside Himself. She must confess her timidity, her cowardice, her evasiveness and her dangerous concessions. She was silent when she should have cried out because the blood of the innocent was crying aloud to heaven. . . The church is guilty of the deaths of the weakest and most defenseless brothers of Jesus Christ. The church must confess that she has desired security and peace, quiet, possession, and honor to which she has no right. She has not born witness to the truth of God and by her silence, she has rendered herself guilty, because of her unwillingness to suffer for what she knows to be right.”

In its thunderous silence, the church became a traitor to the lordship of Christ. She failed to heed Bonhoeffer’s prophetic words, and within a few years Hitler’s agenda was accomplished—with over eleven million people being murdered, including Dietrich Bonhoeffer himself. True biblical love never turns a blind eye to deception, error and sin. The attitude that we should ignore these things and “just let God deal with it,” is anything but biblical. Compromising for the sake of peace, acceptance and approval is never the answer for devoted Christians.

This type of mindset draws minimal opposition from the Enemy. Satan knows people have the ability to reassess their spiritual condition, so his plan is to keep them as comfortable as possible. It could even appear God is rewarding them because of their increased earthly achievements, adding credibility to the notion that God is blessing them despite their unbiblical view of love. It is a view of love that compromises for the sake of adulation and approval.

What happened among the German churches happened first to the church at Corinth. In First Corinthians chapter five, we see a church that has become seduced by a false notion of grace and love. There was a particular man who was having a sexual relationship with his stepmother. This illicit relationship bore the same stigma as if the man had been having a sexual relationship with his own mother. Incestuous affairs were of course forbidden by the Scriptures: “Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father,” intoned Leviticus 18:8. “A man is not to marry his father’s wife; he must not dishonor his father’s bed,” Deuteronomy 22:30 reads.

This incestuous affair was even considered taboo by the pagan city of Corinth. To say that the city did not approve this sort of thing speaks volume. Corinth was known as the hotbed of immorality. Living a blatant, licentious lifestyle was standard. The city had temple priestesses who served as prostitutes where men would go in and have sexual relations as part of their temple worship. The prostitutes would leave the temple to come into the city and sell their services in the marketplace. They lived the immoral life to the fullest, and the church allowed this to go on. The world was looking at the church and saying, “Even we know that is wrong!” That is what troubled the apostle Paul.

What outraged Paul the most was not just the man’s sin, but the Corinthian church’s response to his sexual immorality. He asked, “And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this?” (1 Cor. 5:2). There are perhaps two main reasons why the church looked the other way when it came to egregious sin. First, the rejection of the authority of the Word of God. They overlooked the sin even after Paul said, “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people, (1 Cor. 5:9). Second, the church had a false view of love, which led directly to the rejection of the Scripture. With the rejection of Scripture came a causal attitude toward sin.

What the church of Corinth displayed in this salacious situation was definitely not biblical love but rather the character traits of worldly love and undiscerning tolerance. Embracing tolerance just because it is politically correct will cause us to ignore what the Scripture says about a particular issue so we can come across as more loving and accepting. But according to Paul, when the church remains silent, this is not evidence of walking in love but in pride. “Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough?” (1 Cor. 5:6).  The Corinthians should have been grieving over the sin within their ranks, but they allowed sin to influence and corrupt the church at large.

How is it that when non-Christians divorce, due to adultery, we call them sinners? But when our favorite church leaders do the same, we call them human, say they’re under grace, and we allow them to hold on to leadership positions? We judge the person in the world, but we protect the one in the church. When someone in the church speaks against our personal idols, whether it is a sinning leader, smoking, drinking, or sexual perversion, it is common to hear, “Who are you to judge?” “That is not the love of God,” “That is not your business” or “Just pray about it.” According to Paul, this should never be. “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked person from among you,” (1 Cor. 5:12-13).

When the love of God is mishandled and becomes something foreign to God’s Word, we move from an apostolic view of love to a therapeutic view of love. When things are done contrary to God’s Word, and we are not bothered by it, that is a good indicator that we have attached ourselves to a strange love. This love is toxic, the mixture of poison and some truth. Biblical love is indeed the greater virtue, but without the complete truth, it loses its potency.