Wings of Liberty • April 11, 2024

How much of the Word is truth? All of it!

Part 1: Jordan Peterson and the Lobsters

Christianity distilled to its basic fundamental level involves one question and one question only.

Do you place full trust in the Word of God?


That was the question for Eve when she stood before the Serpent, and it was the question for Jesus in the wilderness when He was tempted by the Devil. It is still the question for you and I today.


Unfortunately, while there are many professed Christians in the world, most of them do not trust the Bible.

A 2014 study revealed that only 41% of American Christians are certain that humans did not evolve from non-human life forms. The study also found that only 44% are sure that Adam and Eve were real people. Only 15% of those surveyed were “absolutely/very certain” that humans came into existence within the last 10,000 years.i Similar and more recent studies have confirmed the trend of questioning and rejecting the plain words of Scripture.ii


This all means that the majority of Christians (at least 59%), some of whom are doubtless the same Christians who assert that America is a “Christian Nation”, believe that humans descended from lower life forms through processes of natural selection over the course of millions of years.


If Christianity is the religion of the Bible, and vast swaths of Christians reject the Biblical pronouncement of Creation and the Fall, then what religion are they actually? Who are they following?


To be a Christian is to be a declared follower and believer in Christ. Christ is specific. Christ taught Creationism. Christ taught that Adam and Eve were real people. The New Testament states that Cain and Abel were real people – Matthew 23:35; Hebrews 11:4, that Noah was a real person – Matthew 24:37, and that the Flood was a real event – Matthew 24:37.


When the Pharisees asked Jesus about whether it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife, Jesus referred them back to Creation:


4 And He answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.


Jesus could ask Christians today the same question regarding their doubts on the origins of the human race: Have you not read your Bible?


Christianity, which is the religion which follows the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, believes in Creationism. It has no doubts as to whether Adam and Eve were real people because Jesus says they were real people. “Without Him nothing was made that was made” – John 1:3. The Bible says Jesus created Adam and Eve – just like Genesis says. To disbelieve this is to transfer the authority in your life from the Word of God to the words and opinions of finite man.


Now let’s talk about hypocrisy.


Christians vocally lament the loss of sexual and gender norms in today’s culture. Many of them would assert that the fundamental destabilizing mistake which is ruining western culture is the rejection of the Word of God. Which is true. But they are doing the exact same thing when they throw away the Genesis account of Creation and claim to still be followers of Christ.


This is hypocrisy.


The Bible teaches that God personally formed Adam from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life – Genesis 2:7. The Bible says that Adam transgressed and fell – see Genesis 3 – and that God interposed Himself to save humanity from the consequence of their sin. Christianity is all about the redemption and restoration of the fallen sons and daughters of God.


Therefore, to reject the literal creation and fall as set out in Genesis is to reject the atonement and the plan to restore the lost image of God in man.


This brings us to Professor Jordan Peterson, who has obtained something akin to rock star status in conservative Christian circles for his commentary on gender pronouns and free speech. Peterson, formerly an atheist, has publicly asserted recently that he now believes in God.i


Before going further, I wish to say – I appreciate Jordan Peterson. I appreciate his willingness to speak unpopular truth to an angry mob. We know the mob is angry and violent. It is standing up to the mob – any mob – that is one of the qualities in short supply today.


Jordan Peterson has made no professions of Christianity, and people should stop attempting to make him do so.ii Speaking of the mob, there is almost an obsession on the conservative side of the political spectrum with forcing Jordan Peterson to pronounce some sort of orthodoxy. His wife has been confirmed in the Catholic Church, and there is pressure for him to declare that he is a Catholic, for example.iii


Jordan Peterson has a massive following, and substantial influence. There is no doubt he has taught some important truth. But do the Christian people who follow Jordan Peterson know that God’s Word is a higher authority than Jordan Peterson? That in the event of a conflict between what Jordan Peterson says and the Bible, that the Word is supreme? That it is impossible to follow God without accepting the authority of the Bible as objective truth?


Do Christians realize that Jordan Peterson and the Bible completely disagree about the origins of humanity and life on this earth?


The Bible says that it is by faith that “we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” Hebrews 11:3. The Bible says, “He spoke and it was so. He commanded and it stood fast.” Psalms 33:9. The Bible says God “formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.” Genesis 2:7. The Bible says that Adam is the son of God – Luke 3:38.


But Jordan Peterson says that Adam is the son of Larry Lobster. And Mike the Monkey.iv Yes, he reads the Bible and says he appreciates the story of the cross of Christ, but he also says you are a highly developed crustacean.


There is a growing contingent in western society which likes some of the traditions of cultural Christianity, and enjoys speaking truth to progressive power, but places a low priority on the Word of God. When evolution clashes glaringly with the Bible, so-called Christians prefer cultural orthodoxy to God’s Word. It’s much easier to stay with the ecumenical conservative crowd that way.


But make no mistake: There were NO monkeys or lobsters in the genealogy of Adam. Christ came to die for His fallen child, made in the image of God. Christ did not leave His throne of glory to die for the descendants of the lobsters. Apart from the fact that the very contention is ridiculous, what would be the point?


Did the lobsters sin? Or was it their ancestors? How did they sin? When? Against what commandment? Sin is the transgression of the law – 1 John 3:4. What law did the lobsters transgress?


Did the lobsters know that they were sinning? Were they warned in advance not to sin?


The Bible teaches that in the beginning everything was made good – very good. The world was perfect. There was no death. Not for Adam or the lobsters. The Bible teaches that death did not enter until sin, and the world deteriorated as a consequence of that sin – Romans 5:12.


But according to Darwin, death has been the norm since the sloppy goo got hit by lightning and turned into the great grandaddy of the craw daddy. The lobsters and their variants grew up with death. They fought, they ate, they lived, they died. For millions of years. Until they became monkeys.


This is progressivism. This is evolutionism. It is not Christianity.


Darwinism has no place for the Fall or the entrance of sin. Darwinism has no place even for the concept of sin or for the broken law of God. This means Darwinism has no place for redemption. There is no need for Jesus in evolution. Jesus does not need to die to save the lobsters or their descendants.


While Jordan Peterson champions the cause of free speech, and the obvious reality that there are only two sexes, male and female, he truly destabilizes the foundation of his arguments by, on one hand, publicly confessing his belief in God, and on the other hand, repeatedly asserting that humanity had lobsters for ancestors.


Perhaps Peterson does not realize he is undermining the foundations of the rights he is championing.


For example, where does free speech come from if we come from crustaceans? Shall we pretend that God gave freedom of speech to lobsters?


Who made men’s mouths, asks God rhetorically – Exodus 4:11. He did. He formed the mouth of Adam, and gave him the breath of life, and the ability to reason and communicate. The right to speak comes directly from the Creator. At Creation.


The right did not evolve. It did not come from millions of years of social hierarchies where the lobsters duked it out and eventually organized themselves into the early beginnings of the modern state, which then condescended to give free speech to mankind.


We need to ask ourselves - Do “we hold these truths to be self-evident” or not? Are all people endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, or aren’t they?


When "Christians” reject the book of Genesis and reject creation, they also undermine the rights the Creator gave humanity.. Evolution is undermining the concept of God-given individual rights every day, all around the world. The Declaration of Independence says rights come from the Creator. Darwinism says rights come from the state.


With evolution being taught around the world, is it any wonder that the concept of inalienable rights is also weakening simultaneously?


Christians need to stop pretending that evolution and Christianity are harmonious. They aren’t. The plain word of Scripture simply does not allow for that interpretation.


Darwin didn’t love you, but Jesus does. So, pick a side.


_________________________________________________________________________________________


1.  https://slate.com/technology/2014/12/creationism-poll-how-many-americans-believe-the-bible-is-literal-inerrant-or-symbolic.html


2. https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/fewer-bible-literal-word-god.aspx; https://julieroys.com/george-barna-survey-biblical-worldview/


3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrXU-JJ8d-E


4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe-OAa4jqok


5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe-OAa4jqok


6.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZOkxuNbsXU;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j-llZc9X70;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACt5D6xVRx8


_________________________________________________________________________________________


Coming Soon, Part 2: In Darwin We Trust

MICHIGAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PASS RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH PAPAL HOLIDAY

By Wings of Liberty • November 22, 2025
On November 13, 2025, the Michigan House of Representatives passed House Resolution 222 which officially declares November 23, 2025, as “Christ the King Sunday”. Since we had never heard of this festival some research was in order. The Feast of Christ the King is an annual Catholic holy day instituted by Pope Pius XI in 1925 in an encyclical entitled Quas Primas, Latin for “In the First”. i SPOILER ALERT: If you have read papal encyclicals before, this one is just as pretentiously arrogant as the rest of them, full of flowery rubbish the substance of which is that the pope ought to be reinstated as ruler of the world, and outrageous lies about utopia on planet earth if this were to occur. The encyclical would be ridiculous but for the deadly serious history of the murder of millions of martyrs by the Papacy. Rome never changes. Quas Primas was written by Pius XI prior to the Lateran Pact in 1929 which restored civil power to the Papacy. In consequence, the encyclical is a manifesto for the restoration of the union of church and state, and contains a number of statements to this effect: If We ordain that the whole Catholic world shall revere Christ as King, We shall minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society. We refer to the plague of anti-clericalism, its errors and impious activities. [Anticlericalism is criticism of the clergy, especially clergy who are always meddling with civil power]. … Moreover, the annual and universal celebration of the feast of the Kingship of Christ will draw attention to the evils which anticlericalism has brought upon society in drawing men away from Christ, and will also do much to remedy them. While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights. … When we pay honor to the princely dignity of Christ, men will doubtless be reminded that the Church, founded by Christ as a perfect society, has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the state; and that in fulfilling the task committed to her by God of teaching, ruling, and guiding to eternal bliss those who belong to the kingdom of Christ, she cannot be subject to any external power. … But how is this connected to Resolution 222? Why is the Michigan House of Representatives making resolutions to impose Catholic religious festivals on the people of Michigan, most of whom are not Catholic? The answer is that Christian Nationalists today want the same thing Pius XI wanted when he wrote Quas Primas in 1925, and created the Feast of Christ the King: a union of church and state. The Michigan resolution was sponsored by Republican state Representative and Catholic, Josh Schriver, who also sponsored a resolution in September 2025 to honor Pope Leo XIV upon his election as pope. Mr. Schriver has ties to the so-called Christian Nationalist movement and its ongoing efforts to unite church and state in America. In a 2023 talk radio interview on WCHY-FM, Mr. Schriver declared that “it's God who appoints our elective officials. Honestly, I work for God and not for man. And so I answer to one person, and that's Jesus Christ.” Mr. Schriver’s assertion that he is not accountable to the citizens of the 66 th district is something they will perhaps remember when they have occasion to revisit the ballot box. But we digress. More to the point, the Michigan House of Representatives has taken steps to unite church and state, a violation of the Establishment Clause which is extended to apply to the individual states via the 14 th Amendment. See Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) - https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/330/1/. Bible prophecy foretells of a coming union of church and state in America, and in the world at large, and the imposition of the mark of papal authority, which is Sunday sacredness. It is not so far fetched as one watches events in the state of Michigan.

The Sun Is Setting on the British Empire

By Wings of Liberty • October 18, 2025
Humanity is accelerating toward the fulfillment of Bible prophecy and the events warned of in Revelation 13-18. Ecumenism is bringing Protestantism back into harmony with the Papacy. The wall of separation between church and state is under attack from religeonists who covet state power to compel their dogmas on the human population. We have passed another signpost. The Church of England split from the Roman Catholic Church in 1534 during the Reformation over a dispute about papal authority and the annulment of Henry VIII’s marriage. As a result of this schism, Anglicans have long had an established creed similar to the Westminster Confession of the Reformed Church. Like the Westminster Confession, the “39 Articles of Anglicanism” formally rejects the papal claim to universal supremacy for the Bishop of Rome. The 39 Articles of Anglicanism include the following: “As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have erred, so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith”; “The Romeish Doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshiping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God”, “It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the Primitive Church to have public Prayer in the Church, or to minister the Sacraments, in a tongue not understanded of the people”, “Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, are not commanded by God's Law, either to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain from marriage: therefore it is lawful for them, as for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness”, and “ The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England.” The Popes assert they “hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty”. England rejected these boastful claims and the Pope’s presumptuous authority to dominate the minds and hearts of humanity. It is not a coincidence that while many other European countries were suffering under the oppression of the Inquisition, England was advancing toward empire. So vast was is influence at one time it was famously even claimed that “the sun never sets on the British empire”. But a great change has come. For some decades England, which never sufficiently distanced herself from Rome doctrineally, has been increasingly friendly toward the Papacy. Today, the globalism of the Roman pontiff is the globalism of King Charles III. The climate change agendas of Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV are also shared by King Charles III, the latter of who’s father publicly advocated for population reduction and compared humanity to a “plague”. England is also adopting digital IDs and carrying out mass surveillance and censorship on its own citizens, a practice near to the hearts of the prelates of Rome, to be sure. And now, King Charles III, who holds the title of not only king but Supreme Governor of the Anglican Church, is headed to Rome to hold a public prayer ceremony with Pope Leo XIV. The leader of the Anglican Church has not engaged in public prayer with the Bishop of Rome for approximately 500 years. According to the Royal Palace, “This will be the first state visit, since the Reformation, where the Pope and the Monarch will pray together in an ecumenical service in the Sistine Chapel, and the first time the monarch will have attended a service in St Paul’s Outside the Walls, a church with an historic connection to the English Crown.” According to MSN News, Charles III will also accept a new title. “Charles is also being recogenised for the British monarchy’s historic association with the Papal Basilica of St Paul’s Outside the Walls in Rome, the seat of a Benedictine Abbey, and will be made “Royal Confrater” of the abbey.” Rome never changes. The Papacy has not retreated one letter from its false doctrines. It still claims authority over this earth. It still teaches the false doctrine of purgatory and forbids priests to marry, as well as many more false doctrines which Protestants, including Anglicans, object to. So why this ecumenical development today? The change is with the Anglican Church, which is drifting back toward the once-estranged mother as prophecy foretells. The light of sola scriptura that was brought to England by the Bible is being rejected. It seeks the company of the pope, the pretender to the throne of Christ. Like Israel of old, Anglicanism will say, “we have no king but Caesar.” Of all the Protestant denominations, Anglicanism is the closest to Catholicism. The pageantry and formal rites still have many similarities. England mirrors the union of church and state of Roman Catholicism by unifying church and state in the person of the monarch of England. It has no pope, but it has a king who claims to be the head of the church. Now that king will go to Rome. All roads lead there, it is said, and Protestantism has set itself to prove it. The sun is setting on the British empire after all. SOURCES: https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13praec.htm https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/king-to-pray-at-public-service-with-pope-during-state-visit-to-vatican/ar-AA1OF5lH https://www.ibtimes.com/prince-william-shares-prince-charles-philips-grave-concern-over-issue-2767853

An Inconvenient Study

By AnInconvenientStudy.com • October 15, 2025
In 2016, journalist Del Bigtree issued a challenge to the head of infectious disease at one of the most prestigious medical institutions in the world: conduct the most thorough vaxxed vs. unvaxxed study that has ever been done. The expert took up the challenge and ran the study to prove Del wrong. That study never saw the light of day... until now. Learn the implications and maybe for the first time see what the actual data shows. Too often we depend on medical experts , media, what our neighbor says, or what we have always believed. In this documentary type film learn what actual studies show on this issue. It may seem controversial but this presentation strives to reduce controversy to facts. View and perhaps be surprised and informed.