From: Victor Hafichuk
To: Nathan
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 12:47 PM
Subject: A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada
Stray curs gather. But the populace has spoken. No, they do not want any of these curs to be their guard dogs. So the curs go away, sullen and defeated – but not resigned. Now they gather together, their countenances suddenly changed, manifesting their true natures.
They return, not seeking permission to serve as guards for the owners, but brazenly, as a pack with power in numbers to seize for themselves what they would still pretend to unselfishly guard.
Cursed be they who, for personal gain, seize what is not theirs.
Cursed be they who gather in the name of principle and virtue, but there only to take undue advantage. These are worse than unpretentious Somali pirates.
Cursed be they who make unholy alliances, jumping into bed with any partner to please those not worth pleasing.
Let them suffer the wrongs they seek to perpetrate. Let them be cursed of God, and let all people know that God reigns in Heaven against all ungodliness over the affairs of men. Let the pack be broken and scattered.
May God grant wisdom and strength to those who would govern with discretion and honesty.
Victor Hafichuk
Full Version: A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada
From: Nathan
To: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: A Curse on the Betrayal of Canada
The majority of the house speaks.
That is democracy, as it works in Canada.
From: Victor Hafichuk
To: Nathan
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 8:10 PM
Subject: Wisdom Before System
Nathan,
The excuses of democracy, legality, and of majority do not make it right.
There are men’s imperfect laws and God’s Perfect Law. While the majority of members of the House would reject the present government policies does not make them right. What they do is wrong, if not by law, then by motive, pretending to serve the true needs and wishes of the people when you and I both know otherwise.
You see that Harper’s Conservatives won 143 seats. On the other hand, the 2 other national parties, the Liberals won 77 seats and the NDP 37 for a total of 114 seats, 29 seats less than the Conservatives. The BQ won 49 but the BQ is only for Quebec; not one BQ member was elected by Canadians for a united Canada. To allow them to tip the scale and say it is a legitimate coalition in Canada’s favor is like saying a bit of arsenic is fine in your food.
If you were representing the BQ or speaking for them, I would understand your prejudiced logic, but if you presume to speak for the Canadian people in general, who can question that you do them disservice with your devotion to legal procedure and lack of understanding?
Furthermore, God is finished winking at the nonsense that goes on in government and everywhere else in Canada. Oppose what is right and true and just, in the name of playing by the rules of the game, no matter what the keeping of them may usher in, and you play with fire, coming against God, Who is fed up with the whole charade. I am here to tell you so.
Better to get on the winning side, for good, don’t you think?
Victor
From: Nathan
To: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: Wisdom Before System
Are you telling me that God appointed Stephen Harper?
The majority of the House of Commons is the majority of the House of Commons, whatever way you cut it.
Nathan
From: Victor Hafichuk
To: Nathan
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 5:51 PM
Subject: Right Before Might
Yes, Nathan, God appointed Stephen Harper, as He does every ruler at any time, no matter who that may be – Duceppe, Trudeau, Churchill, Hitler, Cyrus, Pharaoh – every one of them. The Scriptures are full of such testimony. And their appointment has nothing whatsoever to do with any virtue. There is no virtue in man intrinsically.
You are right about the majority in the Commons, but this is not about majority so much as morality. It is evident to us that God knows this coalition has not united for the good of Canada but for its own selfish purposes. You don’t fool God. Neither does God place system before wisdom or might above right.
Here are some explicit examples of God appointing whomsoever He will:
“For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘Even for this same purpose I have raised you up, that I might show My power in you, and that My name might be declared throughout all the earth’” (Romans 9:17 MKJV).
“Who says of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall do all My pleasure; even saying to Jerusalem, You shall be built; and to the temple, Your foundation shall be laid” (Isaiah 44:28 MKJV).
To Nebuchadnezzar, likely the most, glorious ruler in unbelieving mankind’s history, God said, “And they shall drive you from men, and your dwelling shall be with the animals of the field. They shall make you eat grass like oxen, and seven times shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He will. The same hour the thing was fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar. And he was driven from men, and ate grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of the heavens, until his hair had grown like eagles’ feathers, and his nails like birds’ claws” (Daniel 4:32-33 MKJV).
To Pilate, the pagan Roman governor, Jesus said, “You could have no authority against Me unless it were given to you from above” (John 19:11 MKJV).
Yes, Nathan, I am telling you God appointed Stephen Harper. I will tell you something else – until God changes His mind or His course, those who oppose His appointed ruler oppose Him, and will reap the consequences, no matter who they are, technicalities and laws of men notwithstanding. God is not interested in man’s systems, majorities or anything else men can come up with.
I also tell you that you can watch and see for yourself.
Victor
From: Nathan
To: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Right Before Might
You’re a perfect example of why separation of church and state is one of the most sacred articles of faith in modern politics.
It worked well to prevent revolution among ignorant peasants in the 18th century.
Seriously though, if you’re willing to go on record stating that God appointed Harper, then I’m willing to go on record to state that you’re an ideologically blinded religious zealot.
A question though – God also appointed us to be stewards of the earth. Does this mean destroying the environment for our own economic interests or protecting what nature there is left?
I would suggest that your proclivity towards literal interpretation of religious texts could be much more usefully targeted towards encouraging people to respect nature. Be a steward of the earth rather than blindly supporting a leader who puts partisan interests ahead of his country.
Nathan
From: Victor Hafichuk
To: Nathan
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 12:05 PM
Subject: Some Clarification, Explanation, and Correction
Hi Nathan,
Well, it is obvious that you believe nothing of the Bible, the Word of God. Whether you know it or like it or not, God runs the show. Whether men think to combine church and state or not, God is still sovereign. Here is a proverb you need to know:
“Start with GOD–the first step in learning is bowing down to GOD; only fools thumb their noses at such wisdom and learning” (Proverbs 1:7 MSG).
You make many brash, ignorant and foolish assumptions. You need to learn before speaking. There is another proverb tailored to suit you:
“Answering before listening is both stupid and rude” (Proverbs 18:13 MSG).
I am not seeking to combine church and state. That is an impossibility in the true sense of what the Church of God is. The original Greek word translated “church” means “a called out assembly.” The True Church is the Body of Christ – those called out of the world and man’s religious inventions that use the name of “church.” God does not mingle Himself with unbelievers or with men’s institutions. If one ever sees the combination, it is the works of men, and there is a verse for that (which agrees with your viewpoint, by the way):
“Concerning the works of men, by the Words of Your lips, I am kept from the paths of the destroyer” (Psalms 17:4 MKJV).
God forbid that we should have another Catholic, Church of England, Lutheran, Islamic, or any other kind of religious tyranny. I much prefer the status quo. Not that the wedding of man’s church and state is the only curse or even the worst curse there is. Try the Soviet communist experiment, in which the state declared, “There is no God or church,” or the Maoist version of atheism – no church but plenty of Hell, to which tens of millions can testify by their blood crying out of the ground in both dominions.
However, there is still a much better way than democracy, a way of which the prophets of long ago and to the present have spoken. It is rule, not by men or a combination of church and state by men (an abomination to God), but the rule of God in the hearts of men. Think about it, Nathan – when men’s hearts are changed so that they will only desire to do good to one another, then will we be on the way to peace, health and prosperity. There is no other way. That is known as the Kingdom of God on earth.
Now, no man or earthly organization can accomplish this. Only God can do so. That is why He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to lay down His life, raise it up again (demonstrating He is God), and give His Spirit to us, regenerating us and redeeming us from the corruption that leaves us incapable of any true good.
You are a silly and ignorant young man, Nathan, with plenty to learn. That is corruption. The sooner you begin to avail yourself of true knowledge rather than man’s, the better you will like it. Jesus Christ came to change everything and therefore, as His emissaries, we speak. You cannot have light, or knowledge or wisdom or understanding of the true kind without Him. It is that simple, even as the proverb quoted declares.
Because I will be posting your letter in full context on our site, www.thepathoftruth.com, you have already effectively gone on record, foolishly and without cause calling me “an ideologically blinded religious zealot,” as you said you would.
We have gone on record that God appointed Harper, like it or not, agree with it or not, even as the Scriptures clearly testify in implicit, if not explicit, terms. In your opinion, this makes God “an ideologically blinded religious zealot” too. As I have already told you, God appoints all leaders, raises up and pulls down nations and empires. All is in His hands; all things are determined from above, way above even you and your learning and wisdom, Nathan. Here is what God has to say about your intellectual prowess:
1 Corinthians 3:18-21 MKJV
(18) Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this world, let him become a fool so that he may be wise.
(19) For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God; for it is written, “He takes the wise in their own craftiness.”
(20) And again, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.”
(21) Therefore let no one glory in men.
Curiously enough, while you believe nothing of the Bible, you still make reference to God. How so? You believe in God, yet call Him a liar? The Bible is the Prime Source of written knowledge of God, as long as you value and respect the Author of It, Whom He is. You now say:
“God also appointed us to be stewards of the earth.”
Yes, He would that we treat creation with all due care and respect. You then ask, “Does this mean destroying the environment for our own economic interests or protecting what nature there is left?”
Why ask such a foolish question? Are you suggesting I support any destructive policies because God has given me to curse the corrupt and pretentious spirit and motivations of the coalition and ask God to give wisdom to the present government in power (which wisdom would include environmentally healthful policies)?
You then go on to say in your youthful and arrogant manner:
“I would suggest that your proclivity towards literal interpretation of religious texts could be much more usefully targeted towards encouraging people to respect nature. Be a steward of the earth….”
What would you know of “literal interpretation” of the Bible or its validity?
Nevertheless, we are just a bit ahead of you in your suggestion:
Again, you speak hastily, in carelessness, irresponsibility and ignorance, though you think yourself to be wise. Also, at www.thepathoftruth.com, you may read Back to Basics and Christian Physical Diet, and see how you fare in your posture as a true environmentalist.
But how did we get there? That is the crucial question. We can take no credit for it. You see, Nathan, you need a change of heart, a new heart, replacing that stony one of yours with which you now think, speak, and act. Only Jesus Christ can do that for you. So read Victor Hafichuk, Paul Cohen and other testimonies there, and see how He has done it for us, enabling us to do right, if you will care about the earth as you profess you do.
You say of yourself:
“Nathan is an idealist with little interest in unrealistic solutions. He believes that each and every vote for the Green Party and its well-rounded platform is a powerful message from the public that it is in the interests of every political party to engage in a genuine debate regarding the best policies to encourage sustainable social and economic development that will benefit Canadians today and in the future.”
I am not sorry to burst your idealistic bubble, my friend. Read:
For Whom Do We Vote?
Why Do We Vote for Jesus Christ?
How Do We Vote for the Lord Jesus Christ?
Are We Suggesting You Should Put Your Head in the Sand?
Trash your man-educated educated ignorance and begin to learn from his Creator. Pray to God (which happens to be Jesus Christ), the One you can rightfully believe to be the Creator of the earth, of which you rightly think you are to be an effective steward. Find out from Him directly just what it takes to accomplish such an awesome, monumental and impossible job – successfully.
I can tell you right now that, notwithstanding all good and sincere intentions, the Green Party will not do it, nor will Harper. I think you know that too. The thing is, will you be honest and admit it to yourself or will you go on being a hero, deceiving yourself and thinking to impress others? You don’t impress us and you certainly don’t impress God.
Try again, Nathan. We have the counsel to lead you in the right direction, and we are giving it to you now.
Victor
Info on Nathan at Green Party Site: http://www.greenparty.ca/en/campaign/24051 [link defunct]
From: Nathan
To: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: Some Clarification, Explanation, and Correction
Well, I can certainly see that you`re a man of principal, and I always respect that, whether I agree with the fine points or not.
I think you might be the first person to ever call me either silly or ignorant, but I 100% agree that I (like every human on earth) has much to learn. In my mind, the best way to learn is to make an effort to expose oneself to as many different possible perspectives.
You are correct to guess that I don`t believe that the Bible is the direct word of God (although, as son of a pastor, I sure do know it). In truth, I am a complete atheist who takes refuge in agnosticism if push comes to shove, but I find great spiritual satisfaction in the exploration of philosophy and the possibilities of the human mind. Please don`t take that as an indication that I am a target for conversion because I guarantee you that it would be a waste of your time. It is my preferred path and one that I am intent on pursuing.
________________________________________
I do, however, have a question though, that comes from a more respectful tone than I exhibited before. If man is infallible and (as per the analysis of Kierkegaard in his concept of the absolute paradox) is inherently bound to misinterpret truth at every step, I wonder if we might agree that the individual must be permitted to carry out their spiritual development as they see fit. This is a question that has interested me since discussing religious philosophy with a religious community in Indonesia, where we all came to an agreement that honestly stating ones disbelief is always preferable to a false profession of faith. After all, what can `the right choice` mean if there is no choice? They believed I would go to hell either way because I didn`t accept Mohammed as the last prophet, but why not at least get there as an honest man?
My guess is that you will say that God fills us with truth, which would leave me exactly where I stand now with this question, believing that perceived truth is a unique experience for every individual and that genuine truth will forever elude even the most enlightened of us fallible beings.
While I don`t believe in God, I believe that faith in God represents a desire for truth that is ultimately respectable in every manifestation.
________________________________________
Finally, I apologize. My comments, however, represent a reaction that a significant portion of Canadians would share, which is something that you might want to consider when choosing the words to maximize the impact of your message when targeted to people outside your religious community.
I have been known to say many times over that I am willing to respect all beliefs as long as the same is extended to me. I dropped the gloves first, and did so in a dishonourable manner. I had thought your organization may have been part of the Conservative Party propaganda machine. Ultimately, I fear the possibility that the principle of divine right will again be used to justify dictatorships, which is what motivated my response.
Keep doing what you think is right. And good work with the Harvest Haven. God or no God, it`s good news.
Nathan
From: Victor Hafichuk
To: Nathan
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Some Clarification, Explanation, and Correction
Hi Nathan,
Your apology is thankfully accepted. No harm done; no offense taken.
Whether you call yourself an atheist, agnostic, or believer, I can tell you that relatively speaking, as we deal with all the mail, your conduct and attitude have a trace, a faint fragrance, of your Judeo-Christian background, and maybe not so faint as all that. Though many will deny it, there is extraordinary value in the Mosaic Law and the true, Biblical Christian doctrine and ethic, unlike any other religion.
True Christianity is much more than a religion; it is God Himself. I am not saying that you have God; you yourself have denied Him as your God. Yet He may not have denied you.
This is not an expression of partisanship or religious bigotry as some suppose, but a sure and living knowledge of the Lord and Savior of all mankind, Jesus Christ, Who is Risen-from-the-Dead, Almighty God. The problem with the vast majority of Christians is that they are so in name only, as sincere as they may be.
False Christianity is religion; the true is anything but. Jesus Christ came not to give us religion, Christianity, or “churchianity,” but Reality in its glory and splendor by absolute identification with Him.
Of those ascribing to “orthodox” Christianity, they are poisoned with many falsehoods, not the least being doctrinal “pillars of faith,” which are not truths but lies. Some of these they regard as keystones of true Christianity, such as the pagan doctrines of the trinity, free will, and of eternal torment, all of which only serve to increase their confusion and reinforce their instinctive doubt.
Narrowing it down to a segment of nominal Christendom, evangelicals preach a false gospel of “Accept Jesus into the heart and you are saved – that’s all there is to it.” They deceive themselves, terribly so, thinking to have the Rock as their foundation, but finding themselves in quicksand.
Then when we come and preach the Truth with full assurance and conviction, by the anointing He has bestowed upon us, which anointing He IS, we are called false prophets, dogmatists, arrogators, fanatics, religious bigots, fools, heretics, and a “cult.” So be it; we knew it would be coming because He told us so in advance.
Think about it, Nathan: Religious establishments are recognized, readily accepted, and respected in the world, yet Jesus plainly declared that if we were truly His, we would be hated by all men because the world hated Him first, and does hate Him to this day. But those in established, orthodox nominal Christianity just don’t see it. As far as they are concerned, they are the beloved of God and we, who are hated by all men for His Name’s sake, are the offscouring of the earth – no different than it was 2000 years ago and prior.
Sour grapes, Nathan? Not at all! I speak for your sake now. Am I trying to convert you, as you warned that I shouldn’t try? Not at all. I know that unless God decides to call and choose anyone, you and I don’t stand a chance of changing your mind or heart. Nobody could do a thing with me until the time.
As Jesus said to His disciples, “You have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you.” That’s the way it is, and not as mainstream Christendom would have you believe, so that listeners might join them and become members of their kingdoms (not God’s).
I took a long time to get to your letter because there was plenty to be said. I am not wasting my time on you. What I have to say is no waste of time and will bear fruit, if not with you, then somewhere, somehow. I am not writing in vain.
Now to your question: You and your companions in Indonesia came to a right conclusion, which was, “Honestly stating ones disbelief is always preferable to a false profession of faith.” Of course that is true! Who would or should argue? That is straight out of the Bible, which I know to be the Word of God. Who has ever said differently?
Yet, you struggle with the fact that you have seen many profess but not truly believe, and more importantly, you have professed without true belief. You felt the hypocrite or unsettled about it, but relieved when you decided to be honest, mostly with yourself, but also with your family and neighbors, and ironically, even with God, Whose existence you have honestly confessed to question or doubt. There is nothing wrong with that.
You write: “If man is infallible and (as per the analysis of Kierkegaard in his concept of the absolute paradox) is inherently bound to misinterpret truth at every step….”
If you mean to say “fallible,” Kierkegaard was perfectly right insofar as this statement is concerned, if this statement accurately represents his thoughts. This is the fate of all unregenerate mankind; it is the very essence, source and condition of sin. The Bible tells us that. Man, in and of himself, cannot know the truth, because he is disconnected from the Truth, Creator God.
That is precisely why we needed a Mediator, a Bridge, a Gate, an Intervener, a Savior (I capitalize the word not because of an implicit religious reference to Jesus Christ but in respect to God, the only Power, above us all) – the Creator, Who is able to give us the change of nature that alone will solve the problem that Kierkegaard so perceptively observed and elucidated.
So while he accurately stated the problem, even as the Bible does, he, true to his philosophy and in his unbelief, was unable to come to the solution for it, not that he could come to the solution in his own power, and not that the solution is nonexistent. He needed a Savior! He greatly erred, based on the external appearance of things, in believing that people are entirely free and thus responsible for what they make of themselves. And he has led you, or will lead you, down a dead-end alley, if you have been, or are, following him.
He and Nietzsche were two intelligent, but spiritually dead, men, perfectly locked in their own well-defined state, as are all men without the One Who came, as you know, saying, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life; no man can come to the Father but by Me” (John 14:6), and, to those receiving Him, “You shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make you free” (John 8:32 MKJV).
Is there choice? Yes, there is, but there is no such thing as free will. We have some things to say on this topic. You could start with “Diabolical Doctrine” #(20) “Man has been given a free will,” and then read the selections in “Free Will”?
I think one way to put it is that we have the freedom, it seems, to choose, but not to do. All things are determined from above, even as Jesus indicated to Pilate. If we happen to do as we choose, it is only because we are granted it.
“You may make your plans, but God directs your actions” (Proverbs 16:9 GNB).
Jeremiah, by the Spirit of God, declared:
“LORD, I know that none of us are in charge of our own destiny; none of us have control over our own life” (Jeremiah 10:23 GNB).
Indeed, we have choice to demonstrate that we have no free will – it certainly proves so.
At the risk of being won to Christ your Redeemer, read the papers we offer. Even if you don’t believe God, our writings will prove those, whom you do believe, to be in manifest error, rationally and logically, as well as spiritually.
As you said, I can’t convert you, but as you reserve or presume the right (whether you have it or not is another matter) to speak what you believe, so do I. If you were to believe me, your searching would be over. I have the map to the destination you seem or think to seek; indeed, all those in Christ ARE the map, Which map He is, in that He said, “I am the Way.” True Christians are duplicates in process of the One Who creates them in His own image.
Because you don’t believe, I must allow you the “freedom” to keep “banging your head against the wall” and searching even as I was subjected to doing for a time, even as all men are made subject to vanity until the time. It is part of the process, Nathan; it is part of the process that is not of our doing or in any way in our control.
“All creation is eagerly waiting for God to reveal who His children are. Creation was subjected to frustration but not by its own choice. The One Who subjected it to frustration did so in the hope that it would also be set free from slavery to decay in order to share the glorious freedom that the children of God will have. We know that all creation has been groaning with the pains of childbirth up to the present time” (Romans 8:19-22 GW).
So much for freewill. The Bible certainly does not teach it, and what a relief that we don’t have it! We would have perished long ago.
So you are wrong in your guess that I will say that God fills us with truth, unless you mean at some point in time. No, we are all full of lies until the time when He does fill us, one person at a time, perhaps sometimes a household, and rarely a group of people, as He did for example at Pentecost when 3000 were saved.
You write: “While I don’t believe in God, I believe that faith in God represents a desire for truth that is ultimately respectable in every manifestation.”
I think you refer to worship or religious affiliation and activity, but that is not what faith is according to Scripture. James had a word on this that may clarify somewhat:
“You believe that there is one God, you do well; even the demons believe and tremble. But will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:19-20 MKJV).
Those who truly desire truth and are prepared to enter into it or to have it rule them will find it:
“I alone know the plans I have for you, plans to bring you prosperity and not disaster, plans to bring about the future you hope for. Then you will call to Me. You will come and pray to Me, and I will answer you. You will seek Me, and you will find Me because you will seek Me with all your heart. Yes, I say, you will find Me, and I will restore you to your land. I will gather you from every country and from every place to which I have scattered you, and I will bring you back to the land from which I had sent you away into exile. I, the LORD, have spoken” (Jeremiah 29:11-14 GNB).
Until then, you will search and ponder in vain, and those who indulge in idolatry and their own chosen machinations are less than respectable to God.
You write some interesting things here, Nathan:
“…I stand now with this question, believing that perceived truth is a unique experience for every individual and that genuine truth will forever elude even the most enlightened of us fallible beings.”
One, people have their opinions and perceptions of truth, that is true itself, but truth is not relative. There is the Real, the Original, the Origin.
Two, I note that you do acknowledge, wittingly or otherwise, that there is the “genuine truth.”
Three, truth is indeed, as you and your philosopher friends acknowledge, perfectly elusive to, and unattainable by, man, no less than catching the wind in your hands. As to the word “enlightened,” I think you use it clumsily. “Enlightenment” means “having light.” Here is what the Bible says about light:
“Everything came into existence through Him. Not one thing that exists was made without Him. He was the source of life, and that life was the light for humanity. The light shines in the dark, and the dark has never extinguished it” (John 1:3-5 GW).
“He (John the Immerser) himself was not the Light; he came to tell about the Light. This was the Real Light—the Light that comes into the world and shines on all people” (John 1:8-9 GNB).
Jesus said this of Himself:
“Jesus spoke to the Pharisees again. He said, ‘I am the Light of the world. Whoever follows Me will have a life filled with light and will never live in the dark’” (John 8:12 GW).
In other words, there is no true enlightenment without the Light of men.
Now here is where Kierkegaard is right, and also how the problem (and not knowing the Truth is a problem) can only be solved:
“He went to His own people, and His own people didn’t accept Him. However, He gave the right to become God’s children to everyone who believed in Him. These people didn’t become God’s children in a physical way-from a human impulse or from a husband’s desire to have a child. They were born from God” (John 1:11-13 GW).
It is God’s doing and not man’s to come into Light and Life.
You say, “I have been known to say many times over that I am willing to respect all beliefs as long as the same is extended to me.”
Do you, and can you, “respect all beliefs”? God comes and says, “Believe My Son Whom I send to you,” but the Muslims say, “God has no son.” Jesus comes to lay down His life for the world while Muhammad comes to take lives for himself in God’s Name.
Another example: Pro-lifers say, “Killing unborn babies is wrong,” while abortionists (“pro-choicers”?) say, “It is not wrong to kill unborn babies.”
To respect all beliefs, Nathan, is to be a classical schizophrenic. As one person said, “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.” That same person may not have gone far enough to say, “Believe the ‘genuine Truth’.”
Or are you saying that you respect their right to believe as they choose? I think the latter. Even there, do we allow such a thing? Did you respect our entry when you suspected we were of the “Conservative Party propaganda machine”? I don’t think so. Therefore, while the philosophy sounds objective, unbiased, understanding, tolerant and wise, it contradicts itself. It is patently irrational, illogical, foolish, and frankly, insane.
Without the Light is only darkness. Jesus being the Light, without Him is only darkness. To exist, stumbling and fumbling in darkness when there is Light, is insanity. Without Christ, all men are insane, as the creatures in I Am Legend.
You write: “Ultimately, I fear the possibility that the principle of divine right will again be used to justify dictatorships, which is what motivated my response.”
This has been the bane of mankind throughout all his history, from the fall of man. It is the very nature of the man of sin, the son of perdition, which lives in, and is, every person ever born except for Jesus Christ. That is precisely why He has come and is now here to do what He has always intended to do. There is no other hope or solution. He is it, and He will perform His will to perfection. Read The Restitution of All Things.
We know, and therefore we speak.
Victor
[Jumping ahead to 2014]
From: Nathan
To: The Path of Truth
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 3:22 PM
Subject: Every person looking at the same picture will tell a different story
How can people who clearly want so much good get so involved in the diffusion of misinformation and misunderstanding with respect to people of other faith traditions? Today, nations of Christian heritage hold the biggest guns. We also use them. We are far more violent than Muslims. But we bring war on them, and sit on the comfort of our own homes, while generals press buttons, and when the people whose villages we blow up get angry, we take photos of their angry faces and say “what savages!”.
How savage!
From: Martin VanPopta
To: Marilyn Hafichuk, Paul Cohen, James Sorochan, Dena Dahl
Cc: Harvest Haven, Victor Hafichuk, Sara Schmidt, Mark Benson, Mariko Benson, Ingrid Benson, Trevor Benson, Sean Fife, Jonathan Hafichuk, and Lois Benson
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 8:33 AM
Subject: RE: I hope the proceeds are going to GOOD things, not HATEFUL things
I looked him up on FB and can’t see much but there is this strange rant:
‘Facebook is effectively an arm of the American security apparatus, as are all the big American players online, and they are all spying on everyone. People who say so are now ridiculed for stating what everyone knows already rather than for suffering from paranoid delusions. Please send messages to gmail, so another American company can intercept our evil plot to blow up everything. Jihad, inshallah. Now fight with words and start with respect. You are all god. Allahwu Akbar.’
Jeannie
Same letter sent to Harvest Haven with a different subject header:
Subject: RE: I hope the proceeds are going to GOOD things, not HATEFUL things
From: Paul Cohen
To: Nathan
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: Every person looking at the same picture will tell a different story
Nathan, what we hear in your letter is a generalized complaint about the so-called “Christian” West. What does that have to do with us, since we aren’t nominal Christians and don’t walk in their ways?
As for what we teach about Islam (section), unless you have something specific to say in rebuttal to our precise words taken in context, we’ve made a sure case against the devilish and ungodly origin of this organized crime syndicate posing as a “faith tradition.” You’re quite mistaken if you think Islam has anything to do with the faith of God.
Such a stance comes from ignorance of the history and true meaning of Islam (seen daily in current events), cemented in self-righteous naïveté. Ignorance is simple enough to fix with factual information, but to cure self-righteousness requires repentance and a change of heart.
I’ve included below the last letter Victor wrote to you in 2008, which has yet much to offer you, in case you didn’t read it before or would like to again. [Editor’s note, to reduce redundancy, that letter is not below Paul’s E-mail. It is, however, up in the 2008 E-mails.]
Paul Cohen
From: Nathan
To: Paul Cohen
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: Every person looking at the same picture will tell a different story
OK, if you are unwilling to look beyond your own backyard in the search for continuous spiritual progress and the pursuit of truth, then surely you will find what is already in your backyard and no more.
How empty. What a sad thing to live such an angry and disrespectful life. Please focus on the first five of those books in that compilation you look to for guidance.
Please learn to respect other people.
Nathan
From: Paul Cohen and Victor Hafichuk
To: Nathan
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 9:09 AM
Subject: Re[3]: Every person looking at the same picture will tell a different story
Who is it that ignorantly claims we haven’t looked beyond our own backyard? We’re in touch with people all over the world, Nathan, friends and foes, learning from all and watching what’s going on with great interest and understanding from God.
You defend Islam, the most grotesque violator of humanity since the Catholic Church, and then talk to us about respecting other people? Wow, you aren’t the least bit ashamed of your contradiction and baseless charges against us, are you? You won’t even investigate what’s readily available to corroborate or refute your accusations. But that’s exactly how hypocrisy works – it has no use for the truth.
You say, “Please learn to respect other people.” You also say you’re an atheist. Where did you get this notion of respecting others? Does it happen to be a component of accidental, exploding gases? What do you care about respect?
As for your suggestion of reading material, we have focused on the first five books of the Bible, with light from God to see. Read God and Violence, or don’t, and continue in darkness, pain, and gnashing of teeth, showing yourself for the damned fool you are.
Paul and Victor
From: Nathan
To: Paul Cohen
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: Every person looking at the same picture will tell a different story
“… showing yourself for the damned fool you are”
What do you know of respect?
I have met Muslims who have great respect for the model of Jesus. I believe that Jesus would have failed in Mohammed’s shoes and vice versa. There are many valuable things in their practice and world views. Please do not allow the views and practices of crazy extremists to colour your view of any group.
The fact of having connections around the world means nothing for your cosmopolitanism if you only keep ties with those who agree with you.
Indeed, violence is not the way. Yet those who purport to follow in the footsteps of Jesus all too often also support the use of tools like unmanned drones to bomb out areas where poor intelligence all too often leads to the death of innocents. That is not Christian. No doubt, that historical figure known as Jesus would have condemned such a practice.
Nathan
From: Paul Cohen
To: Nathan
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 9:01 AM
Subject: Re[5]: Every person looking at the same picture will tell a different story
“Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him” (Proverbs 26:12 MKJV).
[Jumping ahead to 2016]
From: Nathan
To: The Path of Truth
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 4:28 AM
Subject: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
Hi,
Please correct or remove the conversation hosted at https://www.thepathoftruth.com/teachings/kingdom/betrayal/wisdombeforesystem.htm.
This conversation was held between private citizens in a context where no confirmation of identity was required, and did not occur in any official capacity whatsoever. Your attribution to this as coming from the Green Party is incorrect, since this conversation was between private citizens, only one of which had a verifiable identity. In fact, in making such a link, you can only have jumped to conclusions about the non-verified identity of the person involved in the exchange.
[Editor’s note: The same E-mail address is used by “Nathan” in 2008, 2014, and 2016. No E-mail from Nathan comes from a different address.]
The fact that this 10-year old blog exchange continues to rank in the first page of Google hits on my name search is very strange indeed. Given my social networking pages, professional business websites, and various hits as an academic translator and editor, I can only assume that you have prioritized efforts to ensure that web searches in my name return this 10-year old blog exchange.
This comes across to me more like a vengeful vendetta than anything. I whole heartedly agree with all of the pro-democracy comments made in that conversation, but it is exceedingly mean-spirited and un-Christian to have taken such care to ensure the historical preservation of that conversation on a blog outlet.
Your posting of this conversation suggests that I should “reap the consequences”, and it appears that some folks have taken it upon themselves to make it so. As such, this may violate hate crime laws for the possibility of promoting psychological and/or physical violence against members of a specific group (atheists in this case).
I have posted a copy of this request at http://www.inandoutofthebox.net/blog/?p=12044 [link defunct]. If you feel that the content of this post does not accurately represent the situation, please explain why and I will consider modifying the content as a result.
If you do not remove this 10-year old exchange associated with my name from your website, I may pursue a defamation lawsuit in relation to calling me “corrupt” in addition to pursuing charges for a hate crime against atheists. The easy option would be to remove the defamatory (“corrupt”) and hate-speech-violating (“reap consequences”) content.
Nathan
From: Paul Cohen
To: Nathan
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
Nathan, you wrote, “Indeed, violence is not the way. Yet those who purport to follow in the footsteps of Jesus all too often also support the use of tools like unmanned drones to bomb out areas where poor intelligence all too often leads to the death of innocents. That is not Christian. No doubt, that historical figure known as Jesus would have condemned such a practice.”
Is not your threat of a lawsuit violence? And you say violence isn’t the way? You speak of the illegitimacy of drones and the death of innocents. So no defence or action against violence is warranted, you suggest, because something can go wrong? Then how about your retaliation?
And as an atheist, what do YOU know of Jesus Christ, or what is Christlike, following Him in truth? You deny Him, not believing, yet preach Him to us? How foolish and contradictory is that? Isn’t that approach an attempt at fulfilling the classic “having your cake and eating it, too”?
Aren’t you presuming to sit in the seat of authority and judgment based solely on your own righteousness? Hypocrite!
Psalms 14:1-5 MKJV
(1) The fool has said in his heart, There is no God! They acted corruptly; they have done abominable works, there is none who does good.
(2) The LORD looked down from Heaven on the sons of men, to see if there were any who understood and sought God.
(3) All have gone aside, together they are filthy; there is none who does good, no, not one.
(4) Have all the workers of iniquity not known, eating up My people as they eat bread? They have not called on the LORD.
(5) There they were in great fear; for God is in the generation of the righteous.
Victor
Nathan, Paul here. I’ll give you some pertinent facts in response to your specific charges:
“I can only assume that you have prioritized efforts to ensure that web searches in my name return this 10-year old blog exchange.”
No such efforts made whatsoever. Therefore, your presumptuous conjectures and accusations as follows are false:
“This comes across to me more like a vengeful vendetta than anything…
“…but it is exceedingly mean-spirited and un-Christian to have taken such care to ensure the historical preservation of that conversation on a blog outlet…
“…Your posting of this conversation suggests that I should ‘reap the consequences’, and it appears that some folks have taken it upon themselves to make it so.”
You also state:
“Your attribution to this as coming from the Green Party is incorrect, since this conversation was between private citizens, only one of which had a verifiable identity. In fact, in making such a link, you can only have jumped to conclusions about the non-verified identity of the person involved in the exchange.”
We never said your letters came from the Green Party. We only alluded to the fact that you were an advocate for the Green Party, as published on the net:
“Nathan is an idealist with little interest in unrealistic solutions. He believes that each and every vote for the Green Party and its well-rounded platform is a powerful message from the public that it is in the interests of every political party to engage in a genuine debate regarding the best policies to encourage sustainable social and economic development that will benefit Canadians today and in the future.” (https://web.archive.org/web/20081103154856/http://greenparty.ca/en/campaign/24051)
It’s on the record that you were a candidate for the Green Party of Canada in the 2008 Federal Elections.
The only thing non-verified here is your lame complaint.
From: Nathan
To: Paul Cohen
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 7:19 AM
Subject: Re: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
You are posting things under people’s names with no idea who you’re actually talking to. Many people have the same name and you have no way of knowing which “Nathan” you were communicating with, or even if that person who sent the message under the auspices of “Nathan ” was in fact even that person.
Anyways, having researched you a bit, I’ve found that you are a serial harasser who has said a tonne of horrible things to a tonne of people and who generally treats people like garbage. For your sake, I hope there is no such thing as a just God. Because if he is just, in your own words, you will “reap the consequences”.
Your comments are defamatory and slanderous, and moreover, were posted with no effort whatsoever to determine who you were actually speaking to, and therefore were grossly negligent.
Matthew 12:36
“But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment.
Psalm 101:5
“Whoever secretly slanders his neighbor, him I will destroy; No one who has a haughty look and an arrogant heart will I endure.”
Ephesians 4:31
“Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice.”
From: William Woeger
To: Paul Cohen
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
It’s funny how when you click on the wiki link, the first name that shows in bold letters “Nathan Wheaterdon” or however his last name is spelled.
I think he getting worked up about nothing. His atheism has him talking in a very technical ‘smart’ way, maybe because he thinks he’s highly intelligent, but he’s actually coming off as a complete ass. Whereas in the TPOT article, by the end of the correspondence, he doesn’t seem so bad. Guess he got worse in those 10 years.
Apparently he did get worse. If you go to his ‘inandoutofthebox’ link (I forget the links name) he is all for being anonymous and blurting out comments without identifying yourself or standing behind what you say. Cowardly. But in the TPOT article, Nathan was much more brave and honest, saying he was willing to go on record for the things he said and even apologizing for his wrongful approach.
From: William Woeger
To: Paul Cohen
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 11:17 PM
Subject: RE: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
I think he’s full of cow poo.
Just a side note – it’s spelled ‘ton’ not ‘tonne’.
If he’s not the same Nathan then why throw such a hissy fit?
He accuses you of gross negligence. His attitude and atheist victimized mentality is gross. If he’s not the same Nathan, then wasn’t he negligent to assume this past correspondence on TPOT was speaking of him? It would be obvious you were talking with another Nathan. Not exactly the brightest crayon in the box.
He’s still the same old Nathan, in the sense that he’s ignorantly quoting Scripture against you, though he calls himself atheist.
W
From: Paul Cohen
To: Nathan
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 7:45 AM
Subject: Re[3]: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
As the saying goes, Nathan, “If the shoe fits, wear it.”
One of our readers made the following astute comments regarding your last two letters.
After the first letter:
It’s funny how when you click on the wiki link, the first name that shows in bold letters is “Nathan.”
I think he getting worked up about nothing. His atheism has him talking in a very technical ‘smart’ way, maybe because he thinks he’s highly intelligent, but he’s actually coming off as a complete ass. Whereas in the TPOT article, by the end of the correspondence, he doesn’t seem so bad. Guess he got worse in those 10 years.
Apparently he did get worse. If you go to his ‘inandoutofthebox’ link (I forget the links name) he is all for being anonymous and blurting out comments without identifying yourself or standing behind what you say. Cowardly. But in the TPOT article, Nathan was much more brave and honest, saying he was willing to go on record for the things he said and even apologizing for his wrongful approach.
After your more recent letter:
I think he’s full of cow poo.
If he’s not the same Nathan then why throw such a hissy fit?
He accuses you of gross negligence. His attitude and atheist victimized mentality is gross. If he’s not the same Nathan, then wasn’t he negligent to assume this past correspondence on TPOT was speaking of him? It would be obvious you were talking with another Nathan. Not exactly the brightest crayon in the box.
He’s still the same old Nathan, in the sense that he’s ignorantly quoting Scripture against you, though he calls himself atheist.
From: Nathan
To: Paul Cohen
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
You are posting personalized attacks against individuals without the slightest effort to verify their identity.
You are well documented as a serial online stalker and harasser who goes to great ends to engage in humiliating and insulting communications with people.
Please stop the harassment and spreading of unverified and/or even untrue reports about people.
I have asked you to take down the defamatory material. Please stop with harassment and personalized attacks against people. You know I don’t want it – which by the definition of “harassment” under the legal code of Canada makes it a crime. Whether a judge will agree that it is sufficient to warrant punishment is another question. You are a criminal. Stop harassing people.
You call yourself a Christian? Go see what Jesus said. Christianity is based on the life, teachings and example of Jesus. You could hardly be further from those teachings.
From: Oniel Richards
To: Nathan and Paul Cohen
Cc: Victor Hafichuk
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: Please remove a 10-year old blog exchange that you have posted online
Classic example of a bully crying and calling for help after realizing that he picked the wrong people to bullied.
The fool has said in his heart, There is no God! They acted corruptly; they have done abominable works, there is none who does good