Saturday, June 18, 2005

James Lloyd, Christian Media Network

I've read and heard enough of James Lloyd to know that he doesn't have any special annointing to interpret prophecy. I know for sure that he is no prophet. His writing style is a bit negative, (some of us find a passion in opposing things I guess). My main criticism is that his proofs are usually completely unrelated items that he attempts to connect together. For instance, a map of New York is the same general (and I would emphasize general) shape as a map of Jerusalem, and this somehow proves his theory that New York is the Babylon of Revelation. Much of his proofs are of this nature. Similiar words and names are related in some esoteric hidden way.

Another criticism I have is that there is very little about Christ in his teachings. There are very few, if any, references calling readers to accept Christ for their salvation without also demanding adherence to his peculiar doctrine of the end times.

Most of his vitriol is in fact directed toward all the heretical (majority of) Christians who believe in the rapture or who just plain don't subscribe to remnant theology.

One gets the feeling that Lloyd harbors a lot of anger and bitterness against Christians.

Acording to Lloyd, the only bible you should be reading is the King James Version. All others are corrupted and are not inspired by God.

Also, Billy Graham is a false prophet and servant of the Beast!

Dr. Billy Graham is the singular most influential false prophet in America. Fortunately, a new book finally details his tremendous deception in astonishing detail.

These are just some of the off the wall views this guy puts forth. I am still trying to make up my mind about whether or not he really believes everything he says. Part of me thinks that it is purely a money making endeavor, and then again how could you espouse such things if you didn't believe them?

5 comments:

The Shy Peddler said...

There is no "S" in Revelation

Publius Sed said...

Thank you.

Burl Ratzsch said...

If, indeed, the KJV represents the only valid translation, perhaps Mr. Lloyd should be advised that the present KJV is not the 1611 edition but rather 1769 updated version. This can be checked out or verified by simply obtaining a copy of the original from Nelson Publishers of Nashville, the world's largest publisher of Bibles.

Also, since God's written word supposedly exists only in the KJV, and since the KJV exists in only the English language, are we then to assume that only English speaking peoples possess the written Word of God?

How bereft of enlightenment the world must have been before the English language came into being. But, of course, if the KJV was good enough for Paul...

Burl Ratzsch
http://burlratzsch.blogspot.com/

Publius Sed said...

Hey, thanks for the comment!

This is, of course, to be a post in and of itself eventually. That is, responding to the idea that the KJV is the only inspired version of the bible.

Anonymous said...

On a very personal note, I have a loved-one who has followed Lloyd for years. She used to send me his literature, including many doctrinal statements and theological conclusions. One of the most absurd was his interpretation of Matthew 24:15. I challenged my loved-one many times over the course of about a year in regards to this, but to no avail. In my time of scrutinizing his writings, I found the Scriptural ideas of Grace, Mercy, the Cross, and the power of the Gospel to save almost non-existent. It seems he has other, more urgent matters to attend to.