Friday 30 September 2011

U.S. condemns Iranian pastor's conviction

U.S. condemns Iranian pastor's conviction

By Dan Merica, CNN

Washington (CNN) – The White House Thursday condemned the conviction of an Iranian pastor, who may be executed in Tehran for refusing to recant his religious beliefs and convert from Christianity to Islam.

Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani "has done nothing more than maintain his devout faith, which is a universal right for people," a White House spokesman said in a statement. "That the Iranian authorities would try to force him to renounce that faith violates the religious values they claim to defend, crosses all bounds of decency and breaches Iran's own international obligations."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, an independent advisory group appointed by the president and Congress to monitor religious freedom around the world, Wednesday expressed "deep concern" for Nadarkhani, the head of a network of Christian house churches in Iran.

After four days of an appeals trial for apostasy, Nadarkhani refused to recant his beliefs, the commission said. Chairman Leonard Leo said the pastor "is being asked to recant a faith he has always had. Once again, the Iranian regime has demonstrated that it practices hypocritical barbarian practices."

While the trial is closed to the press, Leo said the commission collects information from sources in Iran and around the world.

The commission's statement also called the trial a sham and said Iran is violating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which it is a party.

"A decision to impose the death penalty would further demonstrate the Iranian authorities' utter disregard for religious freedom, and highlight Iran's continuing violation of the universal rights of its citizens," the White House statement said. "We call upon the Iranian authorities to release Pastor Nadarkhani and demonstrate a commitment to basic, universal human rights, including freedom of religion."

Nadarkhani was first sentenced to death in November 2010, the commission said, and in order to avoid the death penalty, he is being asked to recant his beliefs and convert to Islam. Leo said an apostasy trial is rare in Iran; the last occurred in 1990.

Iran's claim stems from the pastor's Muslim parents. According to Leo, the court needed to verify if Nadarkhani had ever been a Muslim. In order to be given what Iran claims is the opportunity to recant his beliefs, Nadarkhani must have never been a Muslim before the age of 15, Leo said.

Because he was given the opportunity during the four-day trial, it is apparent that the Iranian court found he was never a Muslim and therefore Nadarkhani could have converted.

According to a source close to the situation within the Commission on International Religious Freedom, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, would have to sign off on the execution. Speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity, the source said such cases in Iran are difficult because of the lack of transparency in leaders' decision-making.

The source also said that in the past, political prisoners have had their prison time and punishment reduced by the Iranian government. Though they did not say that was guaranteed in this situation, the source indicated it was a possibility.

The American Center for Law and Justice, a right-leaning organization founded by television evangelist Pat Robertson, reported Wednesday night that Nadarkhani's death sentence had been overturned, meaning that the pastor would be receiving a lesser punishment. They sourced the claim to someone in Iran.

Those reports could not be independently verified by CNN. The Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the United Nations failed to comment on the ruling.

Jordan Sekulow, executive director of the ACLJ, said the outcry from Christians in America has been loud and sustained.

"American Christians, like never before, are engaged in this," Sekulow said. "This is evidence that Christians in America over the past decade have done a better job engaging in the persecution issue."

Are "Spiritual Fathers" Supported by The New Testament?

Are "Spiritual Fathers" Supported by The New Testament?

Kato Mivule | September 27, 2011

One of the popular teachings today in Evangelical circles is that of “Spiritual Fathers”, individuals who are supposed to act as mentors, guides, and accountability partners between a Christian and Jesus Christ. Often success, prosperity, fame, blessings, and attaining “the anointing” are tied to this mentor, a.k.a. Spiritual Father, without whom, the believer cannot attain the full blessings of God.

This teaching has become popular due to the trend that Christians today have in the pursuit of monetary success and prosperity. The teaching is also tied to the “Breaking the Curse” teaching, in that believers who don’t have a “Spiritual Father” often “suffer” the prolonged consequences of curses and lack of monetary success and prosperity.

However, the question that critical thinking Christians must ask themselves before submitting to one of the “Spiritual Fathers”, is this teaching biblical, is it supported anywhere in the New Testament? What did Jesus Christ say about “Spiritual Fathers”?

The New Testament does not at any time support the teaching on Spirituals Fathers. The word “Spiritual Father” is not found anywhere in the New Testament. Just like many other extra biblical teachings, the proponents of “Spiritual Father” often take one or two scriptures in the New Testament out of context and then build on that with heavy out of context reliance on the Old Testament as their back up.

Matthew 23:8-10 (NKJV)
8 But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.

Jesus Christ was very clear that we do not call anyone ‘father’ here on earth as we have one Heavenly Father, our Heavenly Spiritual Father, God Creator of Heaven and Earth. The New Testament uses Father in reference to God in Heaven and He is the only one who has authorized blessing for us believers through Jesus Christ, by Grace and not works. No “Spiritual Father” on earth or inside your Church can grant you any blessing, none…

Ephesians 1:2-4(NKJV)
2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,

On the contrary, The New Testament does support Christian Church Leadership and that must not be confused with “Spiritual Fathers”. Yes, the New Testament speaks about leaders in the Church, Paul the Apostle appointed various leaders in the Churches he opened. However, never did he refer to them as “Spiritual Fathers”. Never did Paul state that blessings and success come from “Spiritual Fathers”.

The concept of "Spiritual Fathers" is used by some for control, manipulation, and monetary gain, driven largely by a Christian’s fear of being “cursed”. The more people who call some individual a “Spiritual Father”, the more that “Spiritual Father” can gain in terms of influence.

When it comes to “Receiving the Anointing”, there is no New Testament backing for such teachings and a Christian does not need a “Spiritual Father” to be anointed. As a matter of fact John the apostle tells us that we are all anointed by the Holy Spirit as Christians after we receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

1 John 2(NKJV)
26 These things I have written to you concerning those who try to deceive you. 27 But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.

The anointing you received from The Holy Spirit is able to teach you all things, that is to say, The Holy Spirit should guide you through God’s Word and your mentor should be Jesus Christ and not a Man who will fail you the next day. The Teaching on “Spiritual Fathers” is about placing a level of trust in a human being but that is disastrous to your spiritual faith as you will discover that humans fail and therefore your true mentor should be Jesus Christ and what He taught and said.

Nowhere does it say in the New Testament that you receive an anointing from your “Spiritual Father”. Yes, we do have Church leaders and their duty is to guide you in your PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with Jesus Christ so that you receive directly from The Lord and relate with Him personally, not to serve as intermediaries between you and Jesus Christ.

The most misquoted verse by the proponents of the “Spiritual Fathers” teachings is 1 Corinthians 4:15-16 in which Paul tells the Christians in Corinth that they may have many instructors but not many fathers …

1 Corinthians 4:15 (NKJV)
15 For though you might have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. 16 Therefore I urge you, imitate me.

Paul was not trying to act as an intermediary between Christians and Jesus Christ, he was not telling them to emulate to him per say, but rather that they should submit to Jesus Christ just as Paul had submitted to Jesus Christ. It is reason that Paul used the phrase, “imitate me”. Many proponents of the “Spiritual Fathers” teaching stop there but in 1 Corinthians 11: 1, Paul completes that phrase, “imitate me as I imitate Christ”.

1 Corinthians 11(NKJV)
1 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.

The teaching on “Spiritual Fathers” is not found anywhere in the New Testament and contradicts the Teachings of Jesus Christ on that subject. You don’t need a “Spiritual Father” to be anointed and blessed. Our Heavenly Father has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in Jesus Christ and anointed us by The Holy Spirit with an anointing that abides with us. Cultivate your personal relationship with Jesus Christ and have no spiritual intermediaries, let Jesus Christ and His Words be your Mentor, and let God of Heaven be your Spiritual Father.

God Bless You.
Kato Mivule
Are we giving fellow humans God’s glory?

Sunday Vision | 25th September, 2011|


Moses Mulondo explores the concept of spiritual fathers
LAST month, I attended a pastor’s conference at Zion Wakening Centre in Bweyogerere, where a Pentecostal bishop from Kenya told believers that those who wished to be successful in church ministry should have both a vision and a spiritual father. One of the participants opposed him, citing St Paul who never had a spiritual father nor any spiritual leader who taught him salvation, yet became one of the greatest apostles.
The pastor was referring to Galatians 1:11-17 where Paul says: “I want you to know, brothers the Gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.” Pastor Martin Ssempa also opposes the doctrine of calling fellow believers spiritual fathers. “This question needs to be resolved once and for all. There are many people calling themselves our spiritual fathers but let it be known that our one and only spiritual father is God the creator of heaven and earth,” Ssempa argues. The teaching of spiritual fathers has, for long, been emphasised in the Catholic Church more than in any other denomination, as evident in the head of the Catholic Church — the Pope, called the Holy Father.
The Pentecostal church, which started at the beginning of the 20th Century, never classified Jesus’s followers into fathers and children or sons and daughters. They believed that all believers related as equal brothers and sisters working together. They carried the notion that calling some spiritual fathers created inequality in the Church. But today, they teach the importance of having spiritual fathers.

Impunity and Complicity in the Genocide in Rwanda and Congo: African Mercenaries for the American New world order system

Impunity and Complicity in the Genocide in Rwanda and Congo: African Mercenaries for the American New world order system

'Dear Brother Jean Baptiste Bagaza, we have the greatest honour to extend our sincere gratitude to you both for your financial and technical support in our struggle that has just ended with the taking of Kigali.

'Rest assured that our plan to continue shall be pursued as we agreed at our last meeting in Kampala. Last week I communicated with our big brother Yoweri Museveni and decided to make some modifications to the plan. Indeed, as you have noted, the taking of Kigali quickly provoked a panic among the Hutus who fled to Goma and Bukavu. We have found that the presence of a large number of Rwandan refugees at Goma and the international community can cause our plan for Zaire to fail. We cannot occupy ourselves with Zaire until after the return of these Hutus. All means are being used for their return as rapidly as possible. In any case, our external intelligence services continue to crisscross the east of Zaire and our Belgian, British and American collaborators, the rest of Zaire. The action reports are expected in the next few days.

Obama requests immunity for Kagame re Rwanda Genocide and Congo wars
September 14, 2011

Reporting on the mass protest on Tuesday, Sept. 13, in Paris against Kagame’s visit, Susana Sanz Guardo of Basta de Impunidad en Ruanda (Stop Impunity in Rwanda) wrote that an unprecedented 1,300 people from several European countries marched to the Parliament Building protesting Kagame’s human rights abuses in Rwanda and Congo, calling him “genocidaire (someone who commits or advocates genocide).” “The biggest success has been, without doubt, that for the first time Rwandans and Congolese living in Europe, being victims of the policy of Kigali, have joined together in the same march and with one common voice,” she wrote. “For the first time the protest has been massive. This means that they have lost the fear, that we will not stop and that there is no turning back.”

KPFA Weekend News report broadcast Sept. 10, 2011

On Aug. 29, Barack Obama’s State Department filed “Suggestion of Immunity Submitted by the United States of America,” a request for immunity for Rwandan President Paul Kagame in the civil lawsuit Habyarimana vs. Kagame, which alleges Kagame’s guilt in the Rwanda Genocide and Congo wars and demands damages for the widows of assassinated Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana and Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira.

Obama seems to be requesting more legal immunity for a foreign head of state than he himself enjoys, after the landmark Supreme Court case Clinton v. Jones, which established that a sitting president of the United States has no immunity from civil litigation against him for acts done before taking office and unrelated to the office.

Plaintiffs' complaint in Habyarimana vs. Kagame promises to prove that then Gen. Paul Kagame, now president of Rwanda, ordered the assassination of Rwandan President Habyarimana and Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira on April 6, 1994. The crash triggered the ethnic massacres known as the Rwanda Genocide.
Or will the Obama team argue that Kagame is immune from legal action for assassinating the Rwandan and Burundian presidents because that was part of Kagame’s path to seizing power and is therefore related to his office as president of Rwanda?

Plaintiffs’ counsel say they can prove that Kagame ordered the assassination of the Rwandan and Burundian presidents by shooting down their plane, which crashed into the presidential palace in Kigali, Rwanda, on April 6, 1994, triggering the panic and subsequent massacres that came to known as the Rwanda Genocide. The two presidents were returning from peace talks in Arusha, Tanzania, called to try to bring an end to the Rwandan civil war of 1990-1994, which began when then Gen. Paul Kagame and his Rwandan Patriotic Army invaded Rwanda from Uganda on Oct. 2, 1990.

Habyarimana v. Kagame
Habyarimana v. Kagame alleges that Gen. Paul Kagame and nine of his top military commanders and officials are guilty of “wrongful death and murder, crimes against humanity, violation of the rights of life, liberty, and security, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, torture, and continuing conspiracy in furtherance thereof” in Rwanda and its neighbor, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Plaintiffs allege that many of these crimes, including the assassination of the Rwandan and Burundian presidents, were committed before Kagame succeeded in overthrowing the government and becoming first a government official and then president.

The suit demands a jury trial, in which evidence would become public record, and might then be included as evidence in a criminal trial.

Peter Erlinder and lawyers Kurt Kerns and John P. Zelbst filed the suit on behalf of Mesdames Habyarimana and Ntaryamira in the federal District Court of Western Oklahoma in Oklahoma City prior to Kagame’s April 30, 2011, commencement address at Oklahoma Christian University.

Kagame failed to answer the complaint within the time allowed, and the court thus declared a default judgment in favor of Mesdames Habyarimana and Ntaryamira.
This judgment could, however, quite likely be overturned if Kagame, Obama and the State Department were willing to let the case proceed on its merits to a jury trial.

Pierre Prosper, a lawyer who served as George Bush’s second United States ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues from 2001 to 2005, is representing Kagame in his claim that he was not properly served with the lawsuit and that he therefore cannot be expected to answer the lawsuit or be declared in default for failing to answer.

Kagame was not properly served?
It seems unlikely that the State Department would have intervened had they expected Pierre Prosper’s challenge of proper service, by a team of experienced lawyers and private investigators, to succeed.

Claude Gatebuke, with other Rwandans and supporters, protested the April 30, 2010, visit of Kagame to Oklahoma Christian University, where he was served with the lawsuit on behalf of the assassinated presidents’ widows. – Photo: Kendall Brown
But it’s difficult to argue that Kagame was not properly served and remains unfamiliar with the lawsuit, considering that his own prosecutors presented portions of it as evidence against law professor Peter Erlinder following his arrest in Kigali, Rwanda, in May 2010, after he arrived to defend opposition leader Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza.

Kagame’s prosecutors’ use of the lawsuit now as evidence against Ingabire herself make it even harder to argue. Ingabire stands in the dock in Kigali, facing a possible sentence on charges of terrorism and “genocide ideology,” i.e., refusing to deny that Hutus as well as Tutsis died in ethnic violence before, during and after the genocide.

Executive immunity after Clinton v. Jones

This is the first time that the U.S. State Department has requested immunity in a civil lawsuit for a foreign head of state in U.S. courts beyond that which U.S. presidents can claim after Clinton v. Jones, a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case establishing that a sitting president of the United States has no immunity from civil litigation against him for acts done before taking office and unrelated to the office.

The State Department has claimed immunity for Kagame’s alleged wrongful acts before he became the president of Rwanda, an immunity which Bill Clinton could not claim from Paula Jones’s lawsuit, which she filed when he was president of the United States, suing him for what he allegedly did while he was governor of Arkansas.

On Monday, the wives of the assassinated Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi filed their “Objections to the August 29 State Department Suggestion of Immunity on Behalf of Rwanda’s President Kagame” and cited the State Department statement of interest of the United States of America, No. 1:104 CV 1360 (Feb. 14, 2011) (LMB), declaring that immunity is only applicable to “official acts by a sitting government,” with which all parties agree.

Law professor Peter Erlinder
“It is astounding that the Obama-Clinton-Koh State Department would choose Paul Kagame as the first head of state on whose behalf to assert immunity for unofficial actions,” observes law professor Peter Erlinder, “wrongful acts before becoming head of state, in light of the clear legal guidance of Clinton v. Jones and the factual record of massive crimes committed by Kagame before he became titular head of state under questionable circumstances in 2000 and again in 2003 and considering negative White House comments that ‘an election is not democracy’ after opposition parties were outlawed and journalists expelled and assassinated in the rigged election in August 2010.

Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, who would likely have prevailed over Paul Kagame had he allowed her to run in last year’s presidential election, has endured nearly a year in Rwanda’s maximum security prison and is now on trial.

“The objection on behalf of the presidential widows filed today lists French and Spanish indictments; four U.N. Security Council reports from 2001-2008; a 600-page UNHCHR report of Kagame’s Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity between 1993 and 2003 issued Oct. 1, 2010; and U.N.-ICTR prosecutor reports from 1994 to 2003, all of which confirm massive crimes committed by Kagame and his Rwandan Patriotic Front that are in the public record.

“The irony of the ‘Suggestion of Immunity’ is compounded because Victoire Ingabire, the would-be presidential candidate against Mr. Kagame whom I attempted to advise in Rwanda in May 2010, which resulted in my own arrest by Kagame on charges of ‘genocide ideology,’ is now in the dock in Kigali facing trumped-up terrorism charges, as reported in the New York Times Sept. 10, 2011, during the same week that the Obama administration has asserted immunity for massive crimes for which Mr. Kagame is charged in multiple criminal indictments and U.N. reports.

“The question is, why IS protecting Mr. Kagame so important for U.S. policy-makers, anyway?”

Habyarimana vs. Kagame, the civil lawsuit, is available here.
Suggestion of Immunity [Kagame’s] submitted by the United States of America is available here.
Objections to the August 29 State Department Suggestion of Immunity on Behalf of Rwanda’s President Kagame is available here.
Ingabire on trial, Kagame in France, Obama for Kagame immunity
Transcript of KPFA Weekend News report broadcast Sept. 10, 2011
KPFA Weekend News Host Cameron Jones: Victoire Ingabire’s trial will resume in Kigali, Rwanda, on Monday, where Ingabire is expected to testify in her own defense. Ingabire is on trial for terrorism and genocide ideology, which, in her case, means refusing to deny that Rwandan Hutus as well as Tutsis died in ethnic violence before, during and after the 1994 Rwanda Genocide.

Law professor Peter Erlinder, arrested last year when he went to Rwanda to defend presidential candidate Victoire Ingabire, is featured in this poster worn by a protester against Rwandan President Kagame’s visit to Paris Sept. 12, 2011.

As Ingabire prepares to testify, Rwandan President Paul Kagame is on his way to France in response to the invitation of French President Nicholas Sarkozy and President Obama has requested immunity for Kagame as a head of state in the civil case, Habyarimana v. Kagame, which alleges Kagame and his officers’ guilt in the Rwanda Genocide and Congo wars and demands damages for the widows of Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana and Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira. Ann Garrison has this report:

KPFA/Ann Garrison: As Victoire Ingabire prepares to testify in her own defense, Rwandan President Paul Kagame is on his way to France at the invitation of French President Nicholas Sarkozy. Sarkozy has sent French Foreign Minister Alain JuppĂ© to Asia for the duration of Kagame’s visit.

JuppĂ© has publicly disapproved of the invitation and said that the official Rwandan report on French involvement in the genocide is a collection of lies assembled to stop the investigation of Kagame and his senior officers and government officials’ crimes, including genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, an investigation conducted by the French court of Jean-Louis Bruguiere.

Susana Sanz Guardo is a principle organizer with Basta de Impunidad en Ruanda – in English, End Impunity in Rwanda – an international organization based in Spain. KPFA spoke to Sanz Guardo as she prepared to travel to France to join Rwandan, Congolese, Burundian and international human rights activists in protesting Sarkozy’s invitation and Kagame’s presence in France.

Susana Sanz Guardo: His visit is really surrounded by a strange atmosphere, and has awakened most human rights organizations, who have asked to be mobilized. Military diplomatic French people are also doing their work, who are all against Kagame’s visit.
KPFA: On Friday, in the United States, President Obama asked a federal court in Oklahoma City to grant Kagame immunity in the civil suit alleging his guilt in the Rwanda Genocide and Congo wars filed by William Mitchell law professor Peter Erlinder and Wichita lawyer Kurt Kerns. Rwandan American legal scholar Charles Kambanda, a professor at St. John’s University Law School in New York City, had this to say about Obama’s request:

Charles Kambanda: In this case, in my opinion, the interests of the people who have come to this court – of the United States court – are far greater than the interest the United States might have in protecting Kagame. Also the interest the United States has in protecting its image as the pioneer of fighting for the helpless people who are denied their rights by their leaders is far compelling to any interest the president of the U.S. can possibly think of in Kagame’s case.

Tuesday 27 September 2011

Are Christians Bound By Generational Curses? No!

Are Christians Bound By Generational Curses? No!

Kato Mivule | September 20, 2011

An article appeared in the Ugandan Weekly, Sunday Vision September 17, 2011 that questioned if Christians are cursed. There is a popular teaching among Evangelical Christians in Uganda that Christians remain cursed until those curses are “broken” by some anointed Man or Woman of God. Usually, those who are deemed cursed are the poor, weak, destitute, unemployed, sick, and those facing various challenges of life.
One of the remedies for “breaking” the curse is to give “seed” money to preachers so as to “break” the curse. The teaching has become very popular given the current global economic malaise, that poor Christians will take the little savings they have and “sow the seed” into the ministries of these predatory preachers.

The popularity of these “breaking the curse” teachings caught the attention of media that the Ugandan Weekly, Sunday Vision published an article on the subject (see below). The catch phrase that these predatory preachers use is “if you are poor then you are cursed”. Thus many ignorant poor Christians give all they have as “seed money” so as to “break” the curse in hopes of getting a job.

However, the New Testament is very clear when it comes to the subject of being cursed. The only time the New Testament mentions about curses and deliverance is in Galatians 3; the New Testament is very clear that those who are in Christ Jesus have been redeemed from the Curse and by Grace and not works. This means that no one can buy their way out of being cursed by giving “seed money” to preachers for deliverance. Redemption from the Curse is a free gift from God through Jesus Christ by Grace and not works.

Galatians 3: 10- 13 (NKJV):
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.” 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

Therefore don’t waste your time and money by giving it to predatory preachers who mentally try to sway you that you are cursed. You have been redeemed from all curses in Christ Jesus as a free gift and that comes with your Salvation in Jesus Christ.
Now, this does not mean that you will not go through hard times, yes, you will face challenges in life but that does not mean you are cursed. Jesus Christ suffered and endured, Paul the apostle endured sufferings and difficult times, many Christians have had to endure suffering and pain but that does not mean that they were cursed.
In fact they turned those life challenges into good. They saw those life challenges as stepping stones for the better. Remember that Jesus Christ did not save His own to turn around and curse them; that is a lie from Satan and not from Jesus Christ. You are blessed, yes, even when you go through hard times, and face difficult challenges of life; you are blessed in Christ Jesus.
Are Christians bound by generational curses?

Sunday Vision September 17, 2011

Maureen Nakatudde asked several religious leaders to offer their advice... JONATHAN has been in the church for five years. He is a born again Christian, but has failed to find a job. Many of his schoolmates got jobs as soon as they graduated. He wonders what went wrong. To make matters worse, when the pastor comes to the pulpit, he says if you have been in a bad situation for long, you have generational curses. Jonathan’s pastor is not the only one who lauds the songs of generational curses. Many religious leaders do. But many other church leaders argue that immediately a person becomes born-again, the generational curse stops. So, what is the truth?

VINCENT KASHAIJA New Hope Missions, Matugga: “The Bible says all things become new when a person accepts Jesus Christ as his personal saviour. Therefore, there is no way a person can have generation curses if he or she is born again.” In addition, the Bible forbids people to say children pay for their parents’ sins. Jeremiah 31:29 states: “In those days, people will no longer say, the fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.”

Pastor Vincent Kashaija: Deuteronomy 24:16 says fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; instead, everyone will die for his own sin. The preachers who dismiss this teaching of curses among Christians also always make reference to John 8:36, where Jesus said: “He whom the Son sets free is free indeed!” Kashaija says today people have different doctrines, depending on the churches they belong to.

JAMES MBALIRE, Universal Church of God: “If a person gets saved and is not filled with the Holy Spirit, he or she can continue having the generational curses. In order to break the spell of a generational curse, Mbalire advises one to devote him or herself to prayer and repentance of all the sins committed. He adds that the person should turn away from evil; otherwise the curses will return and the person shall be worse off than before, so the Bible says. Even though as a Christian you have been sanctified, make sure that you leave no gap for the devil. Kashaija says the demons always look for an empty gap to fill and this time when they return, they will be more. (Mathew 12:45: The spirit finds seven other spirits more evil than itself). Mbalire concludes: “When you pray, always believe that God has answered your prayers and you are free from all the curses of the enemy.” He adds: “Christians should look out for any familiar traits in their families and tackle them so that they do not follow them or their children.”

Have you seen traits such as fornication, witchcraft, illiteracy, poverty and theft in your family? Analyse your life and see where it is heading to. If it inclines towards that direction, the best option is to have a will not to be like your relatives with those traits. Also, ask God to transform you. Remember God will help you if have faith in Him.

Published on: Saturday, 17th September, 2011

Lawrence Brewer Executed: White Supremacist Executed For Texas Dragging Murder

Lawrence Brewer Executed: White Supremacist Executed For Texas Dragging Murder

HUNTSVILLE, Texas -- White supremacist gang member Lawrence Russell Brewer was executed Wednesday evening for the infamous dragging death slaying of James Byrd Jr., a black man from East Texas.

Byrd, 49, was chained to the back of a pickup truck and pulled whip-like to his death along a bumpy asphalt road in one of the most grisly hate crime murders in recent Texas history.

Brewer, 44, was asked if he had any final words, to which he replied: "No. I have no final statement."

He glanced at his parents watching through a nearby window, took several deep breaths and closed his eyes. A single tear hung on the edge of his right eye as he was pronounced dead at 6:21 p.m., 10 minutes after the lethal drugs began flowing into his arms, both covered with intricate black tattoos.

Byrd's sisters also were among the witnesses in an adjacent room.

"Hopefully, today's execution of Brewer can remind all of us that racial hatred and prejudice leads to terrible consequence for the victim, the victim's family, for the perpetrator and for the perpetrator's family," Clara Taylor, one of Byrd's sisters, said.

She called the punishment "a step in the right direction."

"We're making progress," Taylor said. "I know he was guilty so I have no qualms about the death penalty."

Appeals to the courts for Brewer were exhausted and no last-day attempts to save his life were filed.

Besides Brewer, John William King, now 36, also was convicted of capital murder and sent to death row for Byrd's death, which shocked the nation for its brutality. King's conviction and death sentence remain under appeal. A third man, Shawn Berry, 36, received a life prison term.

"One down and one to go," Billy Rowles, the retired Jasper County sheriff who first investigated the horrific scene, said. "That's kind of cruel but that's reality."

It was about 2:30 a.m. on a Sunday, June 7, 1998, when witnesses saw Byrd walking on a road not far from his home in Jasper, a town of more than 7,000 about 125 miles northeast of Houston. Many folks knew he lived off disability checks, couldn't afford his own car and walked where he needed to go. Another witness then saw him riding in the bed of a dark pickup.

Six hours later and some 10 miles away on Huff Creek Road, the bloody mess found after daybreak was thought at first to be animal road kill. Rowles, a former Texas state trooper who had taken office as sheriff the previous year, believed it was a hit-and-run fatality but evidence didn't match up with someone caught beneath a vehicle. Body parts were scattered and the blood trail began with footprints at what appeared to be the scene of a scuffle.

"I didn't go down that road too far before I knew this was going to be a bad deal," he said at Brewer's trial.

Fingerprints taken from the headless torso identified the victim as Byrd.
Testimony showed the three men and Byrd drove out into the county about 10 miles and stopped along an isolated logging road. A fight broke out and the outnumbered Byrd was tied to the truck bumper with a 24 1/2-foot logging chain. Three miles later, what was left of his shredded remains was dumped between a black church and cemetery where the pavement ended on the remote road.

Brewer, King and Berry were in custody by the end of the next day.

The crime put Jasper under a national spotlight and lured the likes of the Ku Klux Klan and the Black Panthers, among others, to try to exploit the notoriety of the case which continues – many say unfairly – to brand Jasper more than a decade later.

King was tried first, in Jasper. Brewer's trial was moved 150 miles away to Bryan. Berry was tried back in Jasper. DNA showed Byrd's blood on all three of them.

Brewer was from Sulphur Springs, about 180 miles to the northwest, and had been convicted of cocaine possession. He met King, a convicted burglar from Jasper, in a Texas prison where they got involved in a KKK splinter group known as the Confederate Knights of America and adorned themselves with racist tattoos. Evidence showed Brewer had violated parole and was involved in a number of burglaries and thefts in the Jasper area.

King had become friends with Berry and moved into Berry's place. Evidence showed Brewer came to Jasper to stay with them.