Posts
A study in our gender typology
- Part Five -
Post 255
WARNING: IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN A REGULAR READER PLEASE SKIP THIS POST.
The probability of misapplication is simply too great.
I confess over the past several posts I have presented a very diminishing perspective on the female gender Type. While this is uncomfortable, it was not without specific intent. We really think far more of ourselves than we ought to think and it takes a bit of delicate discussion to break that rooted focus (Romans 12:3). Please be careful to remember that the female gender role is simply a representation of the entire bride of Christ including both men and women; we are all in this submissive boat together as we serve our Lord. But because it is the woman who represents our Christian role, by corruption American women have been beguiled generally to cast off their Type and are now super-sensitive that anyone should suggest today’s liberated female mindframe is not good, as it warps our understanding of the Christian roll under Christ. I for one have no problem accepting that I am not on equal standing as my Lord and am delighted that I must not assume his authority or responsibilities to provide for my salvation and continuance (I Timothy 1:12). Truly my salvation in Christ is secure as I am not saved by my works or fail to be saved by my lack of works. I am betrothed to the Lord!
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” Ephesians 2:9.
But neither do I assume in self-centered glory to think I am so special that my foolish disobedient behavior does not damage our secure relationship before the actual wedding. I might still be his bride but a cold shoulder and lonely heart is not a pleasant way to go through married life. 100% of all trouble between my Lord and I is a result of me obsessing about me-and-mine and if I have acquired what I think I should have to make me happy (Philippians 4:11). If only we would learn this simple truth we could all remain literally giddy with love of our spouses and our God. Frankly if I am 100% focused on the happiness of my Lord then he is free to spend a whole lot of focus to delight in seeing that I am happy too (Ephesians 3:17-20, Deuteronomy 18:1-14).
So. Assuming that we actually “get it” now, IN THAT MINDFRAME our Lord has some incredible surprises to delight us as we bask in his magnificent glory bearing his unfathomable name and glory: We really do become one with Christ and there is far more to that truth than mere name-calling!
“I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High” Psalm 82:6.
“What in the world does that actually mean? Surely it must be some analogy or something; it seems like you’re suggesting blasphemy!”
Let’s see how Jesus Christ himself used this Old Testament passage as he spoke to the Jewish religious leaders, ending his statement with:
…“I and my Father are one” John 10:30.
“Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God” John 10:31-33.
Now how can we blame them for their conclusion? There is no doubt that Jesus was indeed declaring himself to be God, and yet indeed he was a very real man. But now, these many years removed from the event in question, we believe that Jesus was indeed both man and God and so we judge them as foolish for not believing the man standing before them? Do you who believe Jesus was God actually know the Old Testament passages that guarantee that this particular man was in fact God?
Probably not, yet you believe. It seems apparent then that these Jews were more correct in their rational evaluation than you…. Though you are actually right in your unfounded belief, I wouldn’t call that smart but simply fortunate that your ignorant belief happens to be true.
But how did Jesus respond?
“Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?” John 10:34.
Who are gods? Obviously those to whom it was written in their law; The Israelites; i.e. the children of God (Psalm 82:6). But Jesus does not simply stop at repeating the law, he expounds on it to drive the point home;
“If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified(37), and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” John 10:35-36.
Jesus confirmed with these men of faith that this god status of God’s people is the meaning of the passage, and then re-establishes in their minds what they already believe: that the scripture cannot be broken; therefore “God’s people must be gods” in a very real sense. Then with this established understanding and reasoning, Jesus challenges their confused logic that they should stone him for blasphemy because he simply admitted what the scriptures had already declared; that he was at least a god as the child of God, then he steps it up just one more level; he declares himself to be uniquely special among these gods, as one whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world.
Sanctified 37 hagiazo; from 40; to make holy, i.e. (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate:-- hallow, be holy, sanctify.
With this special status he declares himself to be the Son of God with a capital S.
Suddenly this is not such a leap as they, or we, tend to imagine. If God really declared his people to be little gods because they were God’s children, then one whom he sent sanctified could indeed be the Son of God. But how could they know for sure? Jesus continues:
“If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him” John 10:37-38.
The works; the miracles, the fulfillment of prophecy, the teaching, his life, all show scripturally through the prophets that this is indeed the promised Messiah the Son of God in the express image of God by his works. And they themselves confirmed that the works were true; “For a good work we stone thee not.” But they already had their minds made up and reached out to stone him anyway, not seriously contemplating the prophesied works that validated him (John 10:39, Exodus 5:4, Psalm 28:5, 33:4, 40:5, 86:8, 107:21-31 regarding the disciples in the storm: Mark 4:37-41, Numbers 16:28-30 as a type of the 70AD destruction of the Temple and the Diaspora of the Jews, etc., among many others). A more earnest study will reveal that Jesus’ miracles and works were already typed in the Old Testament in the twin-rut expression to confirm him. And our works likewise validate our own standing with God (James 2:18+26).
* * *
Application:
So getting back on track, God called his people “gods” and Jesus confirmed this was not an analogy. But how are we to actually apply this truth in our temporal reality? Again the scriptures point us back to the marriage relationship to understand it:
“What? know ye not that he which is joined (2853) to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined (2853) unto the Lord is one spirit” I Corinthians 6:16-17.
Joined 2853 kollao; from kola (“glue”); to glue, i.e. (passively or reflexively) to stick (figuratively):-- cleave, join (self), keep company.
Yes this passage is clearly speaking of healthy and unhealthy physical unions in marriage (which science has not yet discovered the accuracy), but that is not actually the primary layer of the point. Jesus was using what they already understood to make a deeper statement: Just as marrying a harlot (as did Hosea) results in great sorrow of heart in this life, and marrying a faithful companion results in a different/better life, so it is, that much more, with our spirits as we join them with God; you partake in whatever comes with the one you join (Romans 6:16, Luke 16:13).
“But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit” I Corinthians 6:17.
We truly, and really, and in this life of the temporal flesh, are made one spirit with God when we accept his offer of union. How is this possible?
“What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?” I Corinthians 6:19.
The topic of the analogy is marriage, when you marry you are not your own but belong to the one you marry… in both directions! (I Corinthians 7:3-4).
Likewise the introduction of the Holy Ghost in our bodies is the evidence of the one-spirit union of marriage to our Lord (Romans 8:9,14). We have this Spirit of God now in our flesh and now we are not our own; we are the bride of Christ! We bear his Name as discussed in previous posts, and in so bearing He is not his own but belongs to us too! He has declared to his “business associates” that our word is His word (Matthew 16:19). Do you understand this?! This is the importance of Simon’s failure to receive the Spirit of God’s name in Acts 8:21. We are not just humans symbolically married to Christ the Son of God; rather we are granted god status by actually being his bride just as Cinderella the poor wretch was granted all the glory of the prince when he married her! What she was is no longer relevant; she is now the princess of the kingdom with all its glory! (*1).
Does she want to lie in bed all day eating bon-bons or go out into her kingdom bringing relief to her people? She can do either and still be the princess (I Corinthians 6:12, 10:23), but the reason the prince married her is because he liked the idea of her servant heart and saw all that she could accomplish with his authority and glory, power and resources. He saw the potential as a perfect match:
“If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:”… Philippians 2:1-7.
We always blow-over the most incredible part of this passage to understand the notion of a servant heart, which is of course its intent. But let’s take a closer look at the central part of this in light of our god status topic:
“Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:…”
Whatever he is about to show us is the mindframe of Christ, and we are to have this very same mindframe ourselves:
“…Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal (2470) with God:…” Philippians 2:5-6.
Equal 2470 isos; probably from 1492 (through the idea of seeming); similar (in amount and kind):--+agree, as much, equal, like.
Are you following this?! Do or do not the Old Testament scriptures, and Jesus Christ himself, and the New Testament apostle writers, tell us that we are indeed to have and should possess the mindframe that we are in the form of God (Genesis 1:26), and it is not robbery to think we are equal with God as gods, his Son’s bride? “Mrs. God Jr.” if you will.
“Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?” John 10:34.
Wow! And again I say WOW!
* * *
The Crux:
This is not an easy thing to wear for most; either it will frighten the mind to hide from it or it will be grabbed with both hands to abuse in the power of self-glory. Being a god sounds exciting and liberating but there is an equal degree of responsibility that comes with it. Finish the passage to see the mind that was in Christ that we also need to assume with the title of god.
Ye are gods in the same way that a wife takes the full name of her husband to bear that name from now on just as her husband bears it from birth. She puts off her family name of birth and becomes a member of her husband’s family to take up her husband’s lifestyle. This image Type is again shown in adoption, also used by scripture to explain from a bit different angle this metamorphosis that takes place (Romans 8:23, 9:4, Galatians 4:5, Ephesians 1:5).
But equal in status does not mean equal in position just as a wife though equal with her husband is not her husband. A son when born bears his father’s name just as much as when he is married and has a son of his own, but at his birth there is much about bearing that name that he does not yet know or intelligently access (Hebrews 5:8-9); he is not positionally equal with his father and never will be his father. A son who pretends to be his father is a forger and a usurper, yet a father wants his son to take up his name and carry the next generation on in his spirit of the family name. It’s easy to see this complex meaning in the flesh but somehow confusing when thinking about it spiritually. yet suddenly, it is no longer hard to understand the answer to the common question:
“If there is a God, why is there so much suffering in the world?”
We are the gods of the Creation, of which the Creator gave us dominion (Genesis 1:26), if we want to trouble it, that is our right as gods, if we want to run it the way he suggests, that too is our right to do as gods. We cannot blame God for what we do; the authority is granted to us to run it as we wish… but wisdom will tell us that accountability to God should factor into our decisions (Romans 14:11-12, I Peter 4:5, Matthew 12:36-37, 18:23+, Luke 21:36, Ephesians 5:6, Colossians 3:6, Titus 1:16). The simple but wholly pivotal issue becomes what we choose to do with our godhood. I regret to say that for quite some time now American Christians have parked their Mrs. godhood on the sofa and wailed like infants for God to do their job for them. The results are not God’s fault and it’s not God’s will that America is falling, that is our lazy doing, as if once married, Cinderella’s servant heart became self-absorbed in the luxury of the kingdom, imitating the attitude of her wicked step-sisters. Likewise, it is our job to bring it back from the brink if it is going to get done at all…. Just don’t forget it is the Spirit of God in you that actually provides the success of your doing as you make godlike choices as children of God the King (Deuteronomy 29:9 when considering it’s large context. Practically applied in every day life; Genesis 24:21).
While the world seems to understand, in a small confused but growing way, that humans are indeed supposed to be gods, Christians run in the fear of blasphemy from the idea because the high place has not been utterly torn down (discussed another time in “The High Place”). Twisted concepts like Mormonism and the New Age movement and now Islam, help forward our fears and so we hide from what God has declared while the world boldly misapplies it, in ways I hope to discuss in another work under the title; The Mystery is not the Beast.
In the Garden, Satan told the woman if they ate the fruit they would be as gods (Genesis 3:5), was he right? Yes!...partially. But as is his nature, he presented the truth in a skewed perspective; They were already gods and by eating the fruit they would be reduced to acting as gods rather than fulfilling being gods; their godhood in fact died on the day they ate the fruit just as God promised. This is what Jesus Christ came to fix.
This concept brings us back into proper alignment; Our god-status is always and forever directly connected to our relationship with Him who puts his God Spirit within us. Our god-status is not in conflict with God; rather it is in union with him because it is of him as a husband and bride are one flesh. Depart from God and you depart from godhood (Ephesians 4:30, 5:18-19).
* * *
What’s in a Spirit?
The single factor that differentiates the Cinderella princess from the modern princesses is this new self-focus. The animators themselves call it; “Independence, Proactive, Self-sufficient, Progressive”, and what did they say of Belle? Oh ya; “[By the Operatic music of the first song ‘Belle’] we’re telling you that this girl is different and the town doesn’t really understand her…basically you set up that she wants more than is in this provincial town.” This is vitally important to understand in our quest for true Christianity vs. the illusion of Christianity. The easiest way to clearly see the difference is to go back to Cinderella and see her forgotten nature (Jeremiah 6:16) and then compare it with the “new” princess, not to evaluate which is better, but to see what was-and-is the right way, as opposed to the way that is “right” today.
* * * * * * *
(*1) The thing that made Cinderella so at peace with her rags situation of abuse was the faith that she would one day be the bride of the prince. This is hard to sell in a non-religious fairytale but the Christian overlay is the only explanation for her demeanor. She was already promised to the Prince in the hope of faith as a believer, now, in this flesh, patiently waiting only for her physical translation to match her faith (Romans 8:10+23-25).
YOU ARE THE BRIDE OF CHRIST if the Spirit of God resides in you! To study the scriptures with this perspective is to open up doors of new comprehension. You are not helpless wretches still waiting for Christ to save you; you are gods with the authority and power of God residing in you while you are yet a servant;
"I can do all things through Christ which strengthens me" Philippians 4:13.
* * *
I would not post such a potentially dangerous article if it were not vitally important. The next few posts will show the reason, as we continue to build on this foundational concept.
*
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Too Far "Out There"?
Post 254
I have been an unapologetic supporter of Chuck Missler’s khouse.org work for many years; he is well informed and well studied, his exposition of scripture is profound and his insightful application is of the highest caliber constantly mindful to point his audience back to a personal interaction with Jesus Christ himself and not rely on the wisdom of Chuck Missler. Yet in spite of my very high regard for Mr. Missler and his work I had concluded that the guy must have slipped a cog when he went off into the tangent of UFOs and demonic/human interbreeding. As I grew my own faith I was very hungry to listen and read his material on any other subject but that one was just too whacked for me to waste my time on. Looking back now, I have no idea how I could respect all his other work so much and still pass judgment of rejection on his material I never even investigated. It’s clear now that I had already determined what was of God and what was not of God even before I looked into it (Proverbs 18:13+16:20).
I say all that to inform you that I am personally very well aware of, and can appreciate the reaction I got from my overlay of scripture onto the fairytales and because of that expected reaction I did not intend to continue that line of material, of which we have only scratched the surface. But the material will not leave me alone as it keeps piling up wherever I turn; the time for it is NOW and in fact we are already behind the times.
As I wrestled with this direction, my mother encouraged me to read “THE AUTHOR’S APOLOGY FOR HIS BOOK” at the front of John Bunyan’s “The Pilgrim’s Progress” first published in 1678 and I found the application to my own quandary inspiring. The argument in his day was most probably that he attempted to present the Holy Scriptures in a fairytale kind of analogy and this seemed dangerously close to heresy as it might diminish the holiness of scripture in the mind of his readers. But what it did, far beyond his expectation, was to provide more than 300 years of the following generations a very useful insight in applying comprehensible understanding to our faith. When we preserve the scriptures in a metaphorical glass jar of formaldehyde to keep on our shelves as too sacred to explore, we loose the value of its message. Sacred? You bet it is! but it must be explored in all its glory to learn its application. John Bunyan’s analogy of the Christian faith is too near flawless not to see it as Divinely sponsored through a true man of faith.
After years of avoidance, when I finally ran out of material from the KI Institute, I reluctantly purchased some of his material on the Nephilim, And as I studied with the mind and heart of a skeptic, I found the scriptures, history, and current events, all leading to a singular conclusion; The man was right on target…again.
The greatest hindrance to finding truth is to assume you already have it. Maybe you do, but then again maybe you don’t. Honest investigation is the only sure way to find out. My experience is why it is far easier now to have compassion on blinded Evolutionists or Muslims who are sure they are fully informed yet without going back through the foundations of the basics to determine if they have been led wrong (Luke 22:34). It’s very, very easy to blind ourselves by our pre-determined parameters of what we will even consider.
If the next section of posts are simply too far out there for you to bother wasting your time, I understand. But know this; 2012 is not the end of the world but it is very probably the beginning of the end of the Church age when God will yet again use another way and means to present his message and you don’t have much time to catch up to God’s current events, otherwise you may find yourself off seeking more oil for your lamp when the others go in through the opened door (Matthew 25:10).
*
I have been an unapologetic supporter of Chuck Missler’s khouse.org work for many years; he is well informed and well studied, his exposition of scripture is profound and his insightful application is of the highest caliber constantly mindful to point his audience back to a personal interaction with Jesus Christ himself and not rely on the wisdom of Chuck Missler. Yet in spite of my very high regard for Mr. Missler and his work I had concluded that the guy must have slipped a cog when he went off into the tangent of UFOs and demonic/human interbreeding. As I grew my own faith I was very hungry to listen and read his material on any other subject but that one was just too whacked for me to waste my time on. Looking back now, I have no idea how I could respect all his other work so much and still pass judgment of rejection on his material I never even investigated. It’s clear now that I had already determined what was of God and what was not of God even before I looked into it (Proverbs 18:13+16:20).
I say all that to inform you that I am personally very well aware of, and can appreciate the reaction I got from my overlay of scripture onto the fairytales and because of that expected reaction I did not intend to continue that line of material, of which we have only scratched the surface. But the material will not leave me alone as it keeps piling up wherever I turn; the time for it is NOW and in fact we are already behind the times.
As I wrestled with this direction, my mother encouraged me to read “THE AUTHOR’S APOLOGY FOR HIS BOOK” at the front of John Bunyan’s “The Pilgrim’s Progress” first published in 1678 and I found the application to my own quandary inspiring. The argument in his day was most probably that he attempted to present the Holy Scriptures in a fairytale kind of analogy and this seemed dangerously close to heresy as it might diminish the holiness of scripture in the mind of his readers. But what it did, far beyond his expectation, was to provide more than 300 years of the following generations a very useful insight in applying comprehensible understanding to our faith. When we preserve the scriptures in a metaphorical glass jar of formaldehyde to keep on our shelves as too sacred to explore, we loose the value of its message. Sacred? You bet it is! but it must be explored in all its glory to learn its application. John Bunyan’s analogy of the Christian faith is too near flawless not to see it as Divinely sponsored through a true man of faith.
After years of avoidance, when I finally ran out of material from the KI Institute, I reluctantly purchased some of his material on the Nephilim, And as I studied with the mind and heart of a skeptic, I found the scriptures, history, and current events, all leading to a singular conclusion; The man was right on target…again.
The greatest hindrance to finding truth is to assume you already have it. Maybe you do, but then again maybe you don’t. Honest investigation is the only sure way to find out. My experience is why it is far easier now to have compassion on blinded Evolutionists or Muslims who are sure they are fully informed yet without going back through the foundations of the basics to determine if they have been led wrong (Luke 22:34). It’s very, very easy to blind ourselves by our pre-determined parameters of what we will even consider.
If the next section of posts are simply too far out there for you to bother wasting your time, I understand. But know this; 2012 is not the end of the world but it is very probably the beginning of the end of the Church age when God will yet again use another way and means to present his message and you don’t have much time to catch up to God’s current events, otherwise you may find yourself off seeking more oil for your lamp when the others go in through the opened door (Matthew 25:10).
*
Monday, July 16, 2012
Who Is The Beast?
Post 253
If you will remember, I have several early posts building up to the introduction of the Beast of Revelation 17. I will not re-cover that material here but wait for a later time to bring it all together, but because it has been so long since we covered it there may be many who are now asking how I can be so sure that Islam is literally the kingdom of that Beast rather than simply see my conclusions as generic paranoia of an unfamiliar faith among many. So, in a very simple and direct reply, I offer this refresher of Bible Prophecy showing us the world’s last eight Gentile Global Dominate Empires (GDEs) and the evidence that the rising Caliphate of Islam is in fact the eighth and last, before the return of Christ to set up his eternal kingdom of heaven on earth as the ninth, bringing in a truly New Age.
* * *
In identifying the temporal-timeline coming of the Beast that rises from the bottomless pit on which a great city of abominations is carried (Revelation 17:7-9+18), the apostle John is given a fore-history of seven GDEs that come before it:
“and there are seven kings (935): five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space” Revelation 17:10.
We know by history looking back that, at the time John was given this prophecy in his old age (about 90AD), Rome was in position as the reigning GDE and the king (ruler) of Rome was Cesar; i.e. “the one that is.”
To confirm this truth we simply backtrack through history to find the five GDEs that came before Rome and fell previous to John’s revelation. Listing backwards from Rome we find:
Greece, Medo-Persia, Babylon, Egypt, Assyria. “five are fallen…”
Secular history will easily show that these five are in fact the five before Rome which was number 6.
OK, but since these had already come-and-gone (fallen) before this prophecy was written, it’s really not much of a prophecy.
True.
But remember, this fore-prophecy is simply showing the timeline of WHEN in history this eighth GDE Beast would rise to power. The pre-history was simply being established as relevant in time from which to locate the actual prophecy, this keeps us from attempting to apply what comes next in the prophecy to any period of history that suits our fancy.
By this pre-prophecy information we know that after John’s current GDE of Rome there would be but one more Gentile GDE on planet earth before Jesus Christ the Son of God himself comes to earth establishing his own kingdom to rule the earth:
“and there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is (Rome), and the other (7th) is not yet come…”
John never saw the one after Rome that would come, but we have; The only GDE that followed Rome was the Caliphate of Islam, which ruled more globe than any of the previous five and lasted an incredible 1400 years until its official fall on March 3, 1924 AD, and no GDE has taken its place to date. Yes there have been and still are world powers such as Spain, England, Russia, and America, but none of these reached the undisputed state of GDE as did the six previous that reach back through time even before ancient Egypt.
So why stop with Assyria; What happened before then? Historically and Biblically, after the age of the pre-flood period, the earth was not populated enough and/or mentally prepared to create a GDE before Assyria (Genesis 10:13-17<18), and the best that fallen man could do along that line was to create dominate cities (Genesis 10:12). Among the greatest happened to be ancient Nineveh (Genesis 10:11), located up the northern portion of the Euphrates River, and eventually became the capitol of the Assyrian GDE. Another of the great cities was Babylon (Genesis 11:4-6), founded by Nimrod (Genesis 10:8-10), also found on the Euphraties River and geographically located about 40 miles south of Baghdad today. This city too, eventually became the capitol of the later Babylonian Empire GDE. The point is that these very ancient cities were born many centuries before the GDEs sprung up around them in their times.
The fact that this Revelation prophecy only lists one last gentile GDE after Rome, before “the end of the world” (Post Flood age) comes, is not by itself alarming; in skepticism it could be argued that there might be dozens after Rome that simply are not named. So what is alarming is that the prophecy seems to doom itself by making a very radical proclamation: that after the seventh GDE (the one that follows Rome), there would come the kingdom of Christ himself, back from the dead, back from heaven, to set up his own GDE to forever dominate the globe never to be replaced (Revelation 11:15, Daniel 7:27), yet with interesting complexity (Revelation 19-20) which we will cover much later, God willing.
But now, as expected, scripture always provides an interesting twist right before the expected fulfillment of every promise; there is always an expanded complexity in the resolution and this is no exception. Let me explain:
This Revelation 17:10 prophecy, in context, specifically speaks of seven kings (935) rather than kingdoms.
Kings 935 basileus; probably from 939 (through the notion of a foundation of power); a sovereign (abstractly, relatively, or figuratively):-- king.
Kings need kingdoms to be kings, but a kingdom is not a kingdom without a 935-foundation-of-power king so we understand and confirm by history that kingdoms (GDEs) are inferred, but now we find a curious complexity before the kingdom of heaven comes; there is an eighth king not included in the list of seven:
“And the Beast that was, and is not (see Revelation 17:7-8), even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition” Revelation 17:11.
The wording of this verse is extraordinarily curious and has stumped prophetic scholars for two thousand years, there are lots of conjecture and speculation as to is specific meaning and as we get closer to the day of its fulfillment we find our conjecture is getting closer to the truth. I am certainly not proposing that I have the exclusive or full truth of its meaning but the more I search it out the more I find it contains.
The first question that needs to be asked of this verse is;
“Why is the eighth not listed with the seven?”
We get the answer in the same verse; Because he is of the seven.
Remembering that we are specifically speaking of kings, and only inferring kingdoms, we understand that this verse is telling us this eighth king is not in addition to the seven but somehow of the seven, yet independent enough to be listed as the 8th.
In earlier posts I have already expounded on the idea that this eighth king is the return of the seventh king as the twelfth Imam of the first Islamic Caliphate (the seventh GDE) who was occluded at the age of five fulfilling the “he must continue a short space” of Revelation 17:10, and will actually rise from the bottomless pit to which he was banished, and is confirmed by radical factions of Islam to be residing in a well in the Middle East waiting his return (*1). But what I have not yet suggested is that by the specific wording of the verse this eighth king is not simply “of one of the seven” but is perhaps “of all the seven” thus, “of the seven.”
Since the seven kings of their seven GDEs covered thousands of years of world history we begin to see that this king is not simply a man but rather a spirit king that ruled over all seven GDEs. Now as the eighth, he is no longer just a spirit ruling the king of a GDE as before but is now himself risen to assume the actual role of king as “himself”… not of an eighth GDE but a return of the seventh which keeps him from simply being listed among the other seven as the 8th. In the temporal timeline of events he is the eighth king but is actually of all the seven that came before him, like a sum. This theory seems to be confirmed by Daniel’s interpretation that all the last four GDEs will be destroyed by Christ’s coming, and not just the last one existing at the time:
“And in the days of these (ten toe) kings (of the 8th GDE of the feet) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people (replaced in time by others), but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold…” Daniel 2:44-45.
Iron, brass, silver, and gold are the Nebuchadnezzar dream’s identification of the four last Gentile GDEs. I have shown that the GDE of Iron comes in three parts; Four Great Beasts, post 177 (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011/03/four-great-beasts_25.html), which includes the legs of pure iron, and the twin feet of iron and clay. Frankly I am not yet ready to explain why the clay seems to be mis-ordered in this verse, or even included in this list at all, as it is previously presented as little more than a difficult blend with the final Iron kingdom of the feet (Daniel 2:42), but I will state here that it perhaps has a lot to do with the Nephilim and the fact that by Greek Mythology it is suggested that the “clay” was already attempting to blend itself with the brass of ancient Greece, which is perhaps why the clay is located where it is in this list. Suffice it for now to note in Daniel 2:43 that the miry clay will succeed in mingling itself with the seed of men at the time of the GDE of the iron feet, therefore whatever the clay is, it is NOT the seed of men. This was lightly suggested in the discussion of The Little Mermaid in Post 249 The Cinderella Syndrome (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2012/06/cinderella-syndrome.html).
I don’t wish to rabbit trail this post further so only reference that this Daniel 2 section speaks only of the last six Gentile GDEs of Revelation’s eight GDE kings; beginning with Babylon (Daniel 2:37-38) followed by Medo-Persia and Greece (Daniel 2:39), then Rome (Daniel 2:40), and finally the first foot of Islam as the since-fallen Caliphate now waiting for the second foot.
The introduction of an eighth king of the seven shows a return of the Caliphate now rising in our present time, subdivided into 10 later kingdoms at the coming of the Antichrist in the final seven years of this last GDE (Daniel 2:41-43) a prophetic “hour” (Revelation 17:12). What modern Christians perpetually fail to consider in their escapism mentality, is the duration of this eighth GDE before the establishment of its demonic ten-toe-kings and the Antichrist that rises to power through them (Revelation 17:12-13) for the final 7 years (Daniel 12:6-7+Revelation 12:14-17).
There is a plethora of scripture detailing the events during this final GDE reign that we will not discuss in this section of posts but it must be noted that this Daniel prophecy of these last five GDEs is in fact all prophecy written before these kingdoms rose to power after Babylon! Now that really is something!
There is so much scriptural detail of this last kingdom and events that it is now no longer speculation that the return of Islam is this eighth and last GDE before Christ returns to earth. That really does make this the last times as scripture states (Hebrews 1:2, I Peter 1:20). But yet-unfulfilled prophecy, and future history will show this is not going to be a short period as the seven years that modern Christians are presently looking for it to be (Genesis 49:10+Matthew 24:31=Isaiah 32:10).
What concerns me is that careless Christians who have little ability to hear from God through the scriptures have been brainwashed into thinking their Rapture will soon take them away from the darkness that is now coming on the earth because we have simply allowed it to come unresisted (II Chronicles 7:14, 6:32-33). By this belief, coupled with the ignorant notion that the last seven years of Gentile world history begins now, these Christians have stopped participating in reality through earnestly influencing Government positions, local politics, and other seats of social order, or even their own neighbors as if their wickednesses will not affect them. This has left these roles to the Godless (not godless) and as America falls by our neglect, the resulting growth of discomfort is tolerated in expectation of soon being rescued before it gets really ugly. I have bad news; We are only now ending the American pause in the Gentile Age clock of the eight GDE kings, Typed to us in the three-phase Jewish Age clock of Daniel 9:25,26,27 which was itself paused in the middle of v.26 for this 2000+ years Gentile Age of Satan’s rule before v.27 finishes it within 7 years.
Christians universally will not likely escape the wrath of Satan through Islam and its Whore, nor later through his Caliphate Beast king, as has been made clear by the historical pattern of abuse through the previous seven GDEs without rescue. The Rapture only protects us from the wrath of God himself when at the end of Satan’s rule he brings his wrath upon Satan’s kingdom (*2). We are just now about to experience the results of our own neglect of our own Gentile Age “Promised Land,” just as did the Jews who possessed and lost their Promised Land for the same reasons while expecting their messiah to rescue them. Historically and scripturally the results are far less than tolerable, let alone desirable (Matthew 24:21-22). But here is the good part; this period will strip away every luxury that turns your focus away from God so that you will be free to turn your hope and attention to him in earnest;
“If you couldn’t serve me with all the distractions of comforts let's try it without them.”
Isn’t that what God told the Hebrews just before they actually entered the Promised Land? (Deuteronomy 28-31):
“If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD; then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful (6381: distinguished, marvelous, great), and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.” Deuteronomy 28:58-59.
“Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?” Deuteronomy 31:17.
This is not the warm-and-fuzzy message that Christians want to hear today, we only want to hear how our enemies get the harsh end of the stick and how we get nothing but “unconditional love”. That might indeed be your god, but don’t for a second think that is the God of scripture. Warm-and-fuzzy bedroom talk is for lovers not adulteresses! (Revelation 3:16).
* * *
The Beast’s Whore:
Strangely enough the 8th Beast king is not the sole power in this last GDE as End Time scholars seem to proclaim. While everyone is looking for the Antichrist to appear any day, there is another power that rises first, and being a “Mystery,” it’s what we need to be looking into today as the GDE without a king works symbiotically with the Whore for an undisclosed period of time (Revelation 17:7). With this in mind I offer the following current-events example of this embryonic Whore already in pre-action development:
I just watched the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNERS SUMMIT of April 23, 2012 that I pre-recorded off C-SPAN. The moderator’s discussion with Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter expressed in current perspective the growing vilification of the Christian view that I described in the last post.
There is much that was said that would take a lengthy explanation to reveal the error of foundational concepts such as the praiseworthiness of the Arab Spring’s success in Egypt’s recent overthrow, but one portion of the conversation stands out as obvious in the light of the last post and so I address that specifically:
President Carter:
“…I think in the future we are going to see not only the children in China and Japan and South Korea maybe even including North Korea, the Hamas and also Fattah and the Palestinian community, and they and Israelis, and Israelis and Egyptians, those children are going to be able to talk to each other and communicate with one another because of almost instant translation as you know. So I think what has happened within Egypt say, or Tunisia, is very likely to happen in the future among children of different nations. And once they see they have something in common; that is the benefits of peace, and the benefits of prosperity and the benefits of education and the benefits of environmental equality, I think that will be a very major contribution to them wanting to get along better with each other instead of forming a commitment to war on the drop of a hat.”
These four NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS’ arguments in attempting to bring world peace are not specifically evil and I have no desire to stand against their honorable but misguided efforts; we do in fact need world peace and they are trying earnestly to make that happen in these difficult times. “World Peace” is the obvious desire and focus of this Summit and of course peace is not a thing to keep at bay; clearly “we all” want peace, but the error is to assume that actually everyone wants the same peace and so by communication and dialogue we can achieve it.
But how does a teenage girl walking home alone in the park at night make peace with a rapist who suddenly holds a knife to her throat? If she is a good communicator can she expect to talk him out of his goal of finding his kind of peace through abusing her? And is she out of line to persistently and passionately protest that she cannot find peace through being raped? Is the rapist of the mindframe to want to talk about it? Is he prepared to believe he can find the peace he is looking for by a conversation with this girl, or does his violent lust stop his ears from hearing? Perhaps instead of being raped she should propose marriage to make it honorable, and thereby find peace in the event?
Former Polish President Lech Walesa clearly recognized the problem that not all governments and people are yet able to agree on the goals, and this is a monkey-wrench in the peace works. But when asked if a strong leader is needed to forward a movement of change, Jimmy Carter says “No” and sites Arab Spring in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Syria as examples of young “voices combined to make a powerful weapon that can change a government and bring about revolution” without a singular leadership. I contend the argument must be made regarding the success of what kind of change?
If overthrow of what “is” is the goal without concern for “what comes after” then yes these examples were successful, but what is the end result of each of these overthrows, and what controlling spirit led them? By the action of overthrowing in discontent, are these people then automanticaly qualified to create a better government by osmosis? Is the mindframe that thinks only “destruction” the same mind that can then create peace? Islamic domination and control with a strong trend toward Sharia-Law-kind-of-oppression seems to be the trending direction of these present examples. Is this the success we are looking for in bringing about world peace? It seems evident that Jimmy Carter thinks “Yes”. I respectfully and earnestly disagree, as Islam by Quranic mandate is regularly murdering Christians for their refusal to abandon their faith in the Son of God. From the Creator’s perspective this is not the kind of peace the world should be looking for (Luke 1:76-79, Matthew 5:44, I Peter 3:10-11, James 3:17, etc.).
The merits of Mr. Carter’s argument hinges on the goal of a world democracy… which may be a wonderful aim if God does not actually exist. But if there really is a Creator to whom the world is accountable, then the values of democracy (mob rule) is irrelevant in the argument. And if the identity of that Creator is hotly contested by two opposing worldviews, then the entire peace process proposed by Mr. Carter fails at its roots… unless the peanut farmer knows a secret of how to kill the Eternal Omnipotent.
Now since these basically godless men of peace are trying to bring about Peace from godless world democratic views… between two fundamentally established faiths of two opposing Gods, there seems to be an extremely large blind spot in their effort.
Former President of South Africa F.W. de Klerk seems to understand best the basics when he agreed with Jody (?), who said; “Choose your cause and align with an organization.” He ends his statement with “I don’t think we should protest for the sake of protest”.
This argument recognizes that there are many various causes which cannot easily agree and therefore need to be championed by organized collections of like-minded people to further its cause, presumably until it prevails by swayed public opinion (mob rule). This is at least focused intelligence and not mindless masses being driven by undefined forces or goals to undetermined ends such as the uprisings we see today.
“Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters! The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters: but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind” Isaiah 17:12-13.
The entire foundation of the argument changes when we recognize the authority of a real Creator or if we don’t.
Jimmy Carter:
“Yes I believe that faith and religion do have a positive place to exert itself in the future, as long as we look at the overwhelming compatibilities among the great religions…when you look at Christianity, whether its Protestantism or Catholicism, if you look at Judaism if you look at Islam if you look at Buddhism if you look at other religions, then you find that their basic principles are all exactly the same. None of those I mentioned including Hinduism fail to promote peace.”
Really?
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” John 14:6.
“Think not that I come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword” Matthew 10:34
Who said that!?
Oh, just Yeshua Christ the author of Christianity and the Prince of Peace.
Yah, but maybe he really didn’t mean it the way it sounds.
Sure.
“For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. A man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it” Matthew 10:35-39.
Clearly generic World Peace is not one of Jesus Christ’s primary goals right now.
“Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever” Deuteronomy 23:6.
You see, Jesus was more concerned that we live in obedience to him than the un-peaceful reaction we get from other because of it.
"Believers! Wage war against such infidels, as are your neighbors, and let them find you rigorous" Qur'an 9:124.
" Make war upon such of those to whom the scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah and have forbidden His Apostle, and profess not the professor of truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled" Qur'an 9:29
But since Godless “Peace” is Mr. Carter’s singular goal he can make such wildly irresponsible claims that are expected to generically arrive at his desired end. But his complete ignorance of the foundational roots of these various religions and faiths entirely disqualifies him from a reasonable statement, yet because of his title of NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER he is revered as one who knows because his lips were moving.
I would ask Mr. Carter; “How do you get, say, Ebola and People to live in harmony together?” By focusing only on the compatible elements and denying the incompatible Mr. Carter assumes that there should be no problem, as both “like” people.
The problem is that one likes to be people while the other likes to eat people. This is not a compatible, or even a small, complexity. The natures of Predator and Prey is the primary factor to be considered in the quest for mutual peace but this is never brought up in their discussions because we don't want to rile the predator.
The moderator asks him next: “Then is it ignorance that makes people fear the religions that they are not familiar with or that they associate for example with terror?”
Mr. Carter: “I don’t think its ignorance, but it’s a matter of people trying to be superior to other human beings. And that creates extremism. It creates fundamentalism. And fundamentalists in any religion, including Christian religion, is that ‘I believe that I have a peculiar or special relationship with God; that I speak basically on behalf of God in my personal belief, anyone who disagrees with me not only disagrees with me but disagrees with God who’s my partner.’ And then that disagreement can deteriorate into feeling that other person is inferior to you, and that can go further into saying that other person is sub-human and therefore that person’s life is not significant. And I can go to war and take advantage of that other person and take that other person’s life because they are inferior in my opinion and also inferior in the eyes of God. So I think extremism or fundamentalism when carried to that point can be a very negative factor in religion, so, but that’s a minor differences among different religions and I think if we look at the overall complex of religions; peace, justice, humility, service, forgiveness, compassion, love, (even of people who disagree with you, are not lovable or who don’t love you back), that’s the essence of religion. And so the common goal of religion is the same, and can be the same goals, by the way of NOBEL PRIZE winners try to strive for, and that individual human beings should adopt.”
Again, this is wonderful sentiment if there is actually no real God to whom our intentions or actions are accountable. Religion can then simply be a means to share a generic good feeling among everyone, without the need to adhere to specifics from a real God, who’s views might tend to run against a NOBEL PRIZE WINNER’S feelings that his views are better than mine.
The problem is even greatly compounded when there are two very real entities claiming to be God. This, Mr. Carter is not actually ready to accept, yet he is more than ready to think his views are superior to those who actually believe in a God and are accountable to him (whether Jehovah or Allah). His argument falls flat for being what he condemns religious extremists for being; i.e. feeling intellectually superior. For Mr. Carter, religion is fine so long as it doesn’t actually have a God, and that is apparently his religious opinion of superior thought.
IF there really is a very real God and Creator, then Mr. Carter stands against Him in his human minded democratic approach to Godless peace. But from such a God’s perspective, the collective views and values of the entire planet united, simply don’t matter when it comes to deciding what is the right thing to do; any view contrary to the Creator’s is a wrong view. The truth of this is made evident by the inability of any of the present Nobel Prize Winners to answer the next question from the moderator:
“How do you get people to care about injustices in the world?”
Though not a single PEACE PRIZE WINNER in the conference could even attempt to answer it, our founders knew the answer to this question and had much to say on the subject:
“It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.” - John Adams “The works of John Adams, Second President of the United States” Vol. IX, p. 401
“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams, Same book p.229
“The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If 'Thou shalt not covet,' and 'Thou shalt not steal,' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.” - John Adams, “The works of John Adams, Second President of the United States”, Vol. VI, p. 9.
“There are three points of doctrine the belief of which forms the foundation of all morality. The first is the existence of God; the second is the immortality of the human soul; and the third is a future state of rewards and punishments. Suppose it possible for a man to disbelieve either of these three articles of faith and that man will have no conscience, he will have no other law than that of the tiger or the shark. The laws of man may bind him in chains or may put him to death, but they never can make him wise, virtuous, or happy.” - John Adams, “Letters of John Quincy Adams to His Son on the Bible and Its Teachings” pp. 22-23.
“We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible. For this Divine Book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and those sober and frugal virtues, which constitute the soul of republicanism.” - Benjamin Rush, “Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical” pp. 93-94.
“The Gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rule for just conduct in every situation of life. Happy they who are enabled to obey them in all situations!” - Benjamin Rush, Essays, p. 112, “A Defense of the Use of the Bible as a School Book" Addressed to the Rev. Jeremy Belknap, of Boston.
“By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects…. It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published.” - Benjamin Rush, “Letters”, Vol. II, p. 936 (to John Adams on January 23, 1807).
Dr. Rush was not a simple religious thinker as his comments on the French Revolution apply directly to events today such as we see in the current upheaval in nations by the mindless revolt of the masses:
“[I}t was Reason in the form of a Goddess that produced all the crimes and calamities of the French Revolution, and… it was by a book entitled The Age of Reason that Tom Paine demoralized half the Christian world….Men are rational only, not reasonable creatures.” - Benjamin Rush, “Letters”, Vol. II, p. 978, (to John Adams on September 16, 1808.
Dr. Rush was not implying that the wicked French Government should not be pulled down but that the horrors that resulted in the process were by the deluded reasoning that went about it. Such are the efforts of today’s Global Community just beginning to fill the streets with the blood of the innocent that appear to stand in the way of their democratic endeavors for "change."
I could go on and on with such examples of our founder’s writings on the subject but what comes plainly clear is that America’s forefathers firmly believed that injustices in the world were only properly evaluated from the Creator’s perspective and that to create a concern in the hearts of society regarding those injustices, Christianity of the Bible must be embraced. This is why Dr. Rush suggested:
“Let every family in the United States be furnished at the public expense…with a copy of an American (English language) edition of the Bible.” - Benjamin Rush, “Essays”, p. 184, “A Plan for a Peace-Office in the United States.”
So how is it that these men in this Peace Conference, who do not actually know the God of Peace personally, and have rejected his most applicable Word on the subject, have been awarded the world’s prestige as worthy to provide the wisdom to finding peace?
I propose that the Goddess Dr. Rush speaks of is the Great Whore of Mystery Babylon rising again today as America has now cast off the God of Peace without questioning what will replace him. The spirit of the Beast and this Whore is what we have voted into the highest office of this once great nation, and the many positions under it. Being that we the citizens put them there, how then can we seriously ask God to help us in the result?
“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn” Proverbs 29:2.
But if you think resolving these kinds of problems is confusing today, we haven’t yet even arrived at confusing!
“If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul” Deuteronomy 13:1-3.
Do you hear this? There will come among us men of renown who bring proof that their recommendations are valid by dreams and signs and wonders which will all come true. How can you argue with such supernatural proofs? There is only one argument; “I will serve no one but Jehovah God of the scriptures.” (Deuteronomy 13:4) declared in a slightly different way by Joshua when reasoning with his people:
“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the (Noah’s) flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell (because God destroyed them): but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD” Joshua 24:15.
But note now; before the confusion of successful prophets come, that God declares these tests come by his own bidding to prove if we really love God WITH ALL OUR HEART AND SOUL. The confusion has not yet come but already the evidence is strong that this is not the way the average Christian loves God; we seem more than willing to follow men like Jimmy Carter even without such signs and wonders or dreams that come to pass. These “Christians” will utterly fail this test and be beguiled by the signs and wonders and dreams; they will follow the god’s recommended by these men because the results look promising and they do not actually know the Creator, though they are confident that they do.
The science of miracles only proves the controlling entity is powerful; it does not prove it is the right entity to follow. If self-preservation of the Germans was the goal, then Hitler was the right choice at the time, but that did not make him right nor his reign enduring. Now looking back we see that everyone must die eventually and all that is left is an ugly memory of foolish people who chose poorly and made many millions suffer horribly. Long after the sum of his life is weighted, the name Hitler is synonymous with Evil.
Do you yet recognize the Beast, and the Whore who uses him?
* * * * * * *
(*1) Post 199 The 7th King (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011 /06/7th-king.html).
(*2) I realize this view stands fully in the face of every Christian expositor I know of. To suggest boldly that the Rapture will not happen “soon” is perceived as near blasphemy. It is true that scripture provides no factor yet to be fulfilled before the rapture of the Church and so this fact makes the event possible at any moment, and by all means I am quite eager to hear that shout and will not refuse to go whenever it comes, but the warning of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-13) very strongly indicates a great need for lengthy endurance that half those waiting will not be prepared for. It is certainly not with pleasure or glee that I make such a proposal, but the American Church is not ready to patiently endure what is about to fall upon it because of our indifference to evil. Think of the great endurance that Jesus experienced as he was tortured before being crucified and at the very last he felt overwhelmingly that God had forsaken him (Matthew 27:46). But was he forsaken? In the above verses of God’s warning to the Hebrews, did he actually forsake his people through all that they then suffered, even in the most recent thousands of years with no help? NO!
"Let your conversation (mode or style) be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me" Hebrews 13:5-6.
That verse does not apply to the disobedient! Are you disobedient? Be very afraid!
"We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh."II Corinthians 4:8-11.
The persecution experienced appears unchanged, but in confidence of our great relationship with the Loving God, we discover that in the midst of it we are not forsaken! The disobedient knows no such security (Hebrews 10:26-27).
By God’s great grace America has been the light to the world for several hundred years, Showing them hope and peace and freedom found in Christ Jesus. But now the light in this nation has grown dark and evil and we are a trouble to the world not a blessing, we provide confusion and blasphemy of the name we bore. Sure there are still faithful believers in this land and they will remain faithful no matter what comes, but as a nation, because believers have become quite and un-influential, the nation has cast off her glorious clothes of righteousness, now chasing after strange gods and the pleasures of spiritual and physical adultery. Lot was not removed from Sodom in all its wickedness until God was about to bring judgment. Likewise the rapture is not so Christians can escape hard times; it is to keep God’s true people from experiencing God’s final judgment on sin. Frankly I see far more history in scripture before that final judgment.
Yes, I know Israel became a nation in 1948, and I know the prophecies that center around such a return; some fulfilled but some not. This is not THAT return since it did not fulfill the details promised (Jeremiah 31:31-34, Isaiah 51:11, etc.). Like the three false starts of the keystone Daniel 9:25 prophecy, this return is close, but we need to be looking for a more accurate fulfillment.
In the meantime, knowing that we will reap the harvest of our own neglect might spur us into serious action to diligently preserve whatever shreds of Christ we can find remaining in our homes and societies and thereby pray as the pagan Ninevites did for mercy. I don’t just tremble for my country anymore; I fear with great sorrow what will become of her because the people will not wake up.
I would like to end this post on a note of hope for those earnestly trying to restructure their lives to align with the Creator. I encourage you to buy and watch the DVD "Courageous" produced by Stephen Kendrick. It is a superb family film showing how we can begin to heal our families in a real way, and by so doing, educate our children to rightly care about real Social Justice and not the wicked illusion using that name.
*
If you will remember, I have several early posts building up to the introduction of the Beast of Revelation 17. I will not re-cover that material here but wait for a later time to bring it all together, but because it has been so long since we covered it there may be many who are now asking how I can be so sure that Islam is literally the kingdom of that Beast rather than simply see my conclusions as generic paranoia of an unfamiliar faith among many. So, in a very simple and direct reply, I offer this refresher of Bible Prophecy showing us the world’s last eight Gentile Global Dominate Empires (GDEs) and the evidence that the rising Caliphate of Islam is in fact the eighth and last, before the return of Christ to set up his eternal kingdom of heaven on earth as the ninth, bringing in a truly New Age.
* * *
In identifying the temporal-timeline coming of the Beast that rises from the bottomless pit on which a great city of abominations is carried (Revelation 17:7-9+18), the apostle John is given a fore-history of seven GDEs that come before it:
“and there are seven kings (935): five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space” Revelation 17:10.
We know by history looking back that, at the time John was given this prophecy in his old age (about 90AD), Rome was in position as the reigning GDE and the king (ruler) of Rome was Cesar; i.e. “the one that is.”
To confirm this truth we simply backtrack through history to find the five GDEs that came before Rome and fell previous to John’s revelation. Listing backwards from Rome we find:
Greece, Medo-Persia, Babylon, Egypt, Assyria. “five are fallen…”
Secular history will easily show that these five are in fact the five before Rome which was number 6.
OK, but since these had already come-and-gone (fallen) before this prophecy was written, it’s really not much of a prophecy.
True.
But remember, this fore-prophecy is simply showing the timeline of WHEN in history this eighth GDE Beast would rise to power. The pre-history was simply being established as relevant in time from which to locate the actual prophecy, this keeps us from attempting to apply what comes next in the prophecy to any period of history that suits our fancy.
By this pre-prophecy information we know that after John’s current GDE of Rome there would be but one more Gentile GDE on planet earth before Jesus Christ the Son of God himself comes to earth establishing his own kingdom to rule the earth:
“and there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is (Rome), and the other (7th) is not yet come…”
John never saw the one after Rome that would come, but we have; The only GDE that followed Rome was the Caliphate of Islam, which ruled more globe than any of the previous five and lasted an incredible 1400 years until its official fall on March 3, 1924 AD, and no GDE has taken its place to date. Yes there have been and still are world powers such as Spain, England, Russia, and America, but none of these reached the undisputed state of GDE as did the six previous that reach back through time even before ancient Egypt.
So why stop with Assyria; What happened before then? Historically and Biblically, after the age of the pre-flood period, the earth was not populated enough and/or mentally prepared to create a GDE before Assyria (Genesis 10:13-17<18), and the best that fallen man could do along that line was to create dominate cities (Genesis 10:12). Among the greatest happened to be ancient Nineveh (Genesis 10:11), located up the northern portion of the Euphrates River, and eventually became the capitol of the Assyrian GDE. Another of the great cities was Babylon (Genesis 11:4-6), founded by Nimrod (Genesis 10:8-10), also found on the Euphraties River and geographically located about 40 miles south of Baghdad today. This city too, eventually became the capitol of the later Babylonian Empire GDE. The point is that these very ancient cities were born many centuries before the GDEs sprung up around them in their times.
The fact that this Revelation prophecy only lists one last gentile GDE after Rome, before “the end of the world” (Post Flood age) comes, is not by itself alarming; in skepticism it could be argued that there might be dozens after Rome that simply are not named. So what is alarming is that the prophecy seems to doom itself by making a very radical proclamation: that after the seventh GDE (the one that follows Rome), there would come the kingdom of Christ himself, back from the dead, back from heaven, to set up his own GDE to forever dominate the globe never to be replaced (Revelation 11:15, Daniel 7:27), yet with interesting complexity (Revelation 19-20) which we will cover much later, God willing.
But now, as expected, scripture always provides an interesting twist right before the expected fulfillment of every promise; there is always an expanded complexity in the resolution and this is no exception. Let me explain:
This Revelation 17:10 prophecy, in context, specifically speaks of seven kings (935) rather than kingdoms.
Kings 935 basileus; probably from 939 (through the notion of a foundation of power); a sovereign (abstractly, relatively, or figuratively):-- king.
Kings need kingdoms to be kings, but a kingdom is not a kingdom without a 935-foundation-of-power king so we understand and confirm by history that kingdoms (GDEs) are inferred, but now we find a curious complexity before the kingdom of heaven comes; there is an eighth king not included in the list of seven:
“And the Beast that was, and is not (see Revelation 17:7-8), even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition” Revelation 17:11.
The wording of this verse is extraordinarily curious and has stumped prophetic scholars for two thousand years, there are lots of conjecture and speculation as to is specific meaning and as we get closer to the day of its fulfillment we find our conjecture is getting closer to the truth. I am certainly not proposing that I have the exclusive or full truth of its meaning but the more I search it out the more I find it contains.
The first question that needs to be asked of this verse is;
“Why is the eighth not listed with the seven?”
We get the answer in the same verse; Because he is of the seven.
Remembering that we are specifically speaking of kings, and only inferring kingdoms, we understand that this verse is telling us this eighth king is not in addition to the seven but somehow of the seven, yet independent enough to be listed as the 8th.
In earlier posts I have already expounded on the idea that this eighth king is the return of the seventh king as the twelfth Imam of the first Islamic Caliphate (the seventh GDE) who was occluded at the age of five fulfilling the “he must continue a short space” of Revelation 17:10, and will actually rise from the bottomless pit to which he was banished, and is confirmed by radical factions of Islam to be residing in a well in the Middle East waiting his return (*1). But what I have not yet suggested is that by the specific wording of the verse this eighth king is not simply “of one of the seven” but is perhaps “of all the seven” thus, “of the seven.”
Since the seven kings of their seven GDEs covered thousands of years of world history we begin to see that this king is not simply a man but rather a spirit king that ruled over all seven GDEs. Now as the eighth, he is no longer just a spirit ruling the king of a GDE as before but is now himself risen to assume the actual role of king as “himself”… not of an eighth GDE but a return of the seventh which keeps him from simply being listed among the other seven as the 8th. In the temporal timeline of events he is the eighth king but is actually of all the seven that came before him, like a sum. This theory seems to be confirmed by Daniel’s interpretation that all the last four GDEs will be destroyed by Christ’s coming, and not just the last one existing at the time:
“And in the days of these (ten toe) kings (of the 8th GDE of the feet) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people (replaced in time by others), but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold…” Daniel 2:44-45.
Iron, brass, silver, and gold are the Nebuchadnezzar dream’s identification of the four last Gentile GDEs. I have shown that the GDE of Iron comes in three parts; Four Great Beasts, post 177 (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011/03/four-great-beasts_25.html), which includes the legs of pure iron, and the twin feet of iron and clay. Frankly I am not yet ready to explain why the clay seems to be mis-ordered in this verse, or even included in this list at all, as it is previously presented as little more than a difficult blend with the final Iron kingdom of the feet (Daniel 2:42), but I will state here that it perhaps has a lot to do with the Nephilim and the fact that by Greek Mythology it is suggested that the “clay” was already attempting to blend itself with the brass of ancient Greece, which is perhaps why the clay is located where it is in this list. Suffice it for now to note in Daniel 2:43 that the miry clay will succeed in mingling itself with the seed of men at the time of the GDE of the iron feet, therefore whatever the clay is, it is NOT the seed of men. This was lightly suggested in the discussion of The Little Mermaid in Post 249 The Cinderella Syndrome (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2012/06/cinderella-syndrome.html).
I don’t wish to rabbit trail this post further so only reference that this Daniel 2 section speaks only of the last six Gentile GDEs of Revelation’s eight GDE kings; beginning with Babylon (Daniel 2:37-38) followed by Medo-Persia and Greece (Daniel 2:39), then Rome (Daniel 2:40), and finally the first foot of Islam as the since-fallen Caliphate now waiting for the second foot.
The introduction of an eighth king of the seven shows a return of the Caliphate now rising in our present time, subdivided into 10 later kingdoms at the coming of the Antichrist in the final seven years of this last GDE (Daniel 2:41-43) a prophetic “hour” (Revelation 17:12). What modern Christians perpetually fail to consider in their escapism mentality, is the duration of this eighth GDE before the establishment of its demonic ten-toe-kings and the Antichrist that rises to power through them (Revelation 17:12-13) for the final 7 years (Daniel 12:6-7+Revelation 12:14-17).
There is a plethora of scripture detailing the events during this final GDE reign that we will not discuss in this section of posts but it must be noted that this Daniel prophecy of these last five GDEs is in fact all prophecy written before these kingdoms rose to power after Babylon! Now that really is something!
There is so much scriptural detail of this last kingdom and events that it is now no longer speculation that the return of Islam is this eighth and last GDE before Christ returns to earth. That really does make this the last times as scripture states (Hebrews 1:2, I Peter 1:20). But yet-unfulfilled prophecy, and future history will show this is not going to be a short period as the seven years that modern Christians are presently looking for it to be (Genesis 49:10+Matthew 24:31=Isaiah 32:10).
What concerns me is that careless Christians who have little ability to hear from God through the scriptures have been brainwashed into thinking their Rapture will soon take them away from the darkness that is now coming on the earth because we have simply allowed it to come unresisted (II Chronicles 7:14, 6:32-33). By this belief, coupled with the ignorant notion that the last seven years of Gentile world history begins now, these Christians have stopped participating in reality through earnestly influencing Government positions, local politics, and other seats of social order, or even their own neighbors as if their wickednesses will not affect them. This has left these roles to the Godless (not godless) and as America falls by our neglect, the resulting growth of discomfort is tolerated in expectation of soon being rescued before it gets really ugly. I have bad news; We are only now ending the American pause in the Gentile Age clock of the eight GDE kings, Typed to us in the three-phase Jewish Age clock of Daniel 9:25,26,27 which was itself paused in the middle of v.26 for this 2000+ years Gentile Age of Satan’s rule before v.27 finishes it within 7 years.
Christians universally will not likely escape the wrath of Satan through Islam and its Whore, nor later through his Caliphate Beast king, as has been made clear by the historical pattern of abuse through the previous seven GDEs without rescue. The Rapture only protects us from the wrath of God himself when at the end of Satan’s rule he brings his wrath upon Satan’s kingdom (*2). We are just now about to experience the results of our own neglect of our own Gentile Age “Promised Land,” just as did the Jews who possessed and lost their Promised Land for the same reasons while expecting their messiah to rescue them. Historically and scripturally the results are far less than tolerable, let alone desirable (Matthew 24:21-22). But here is the good part; this period will strip away every luxury that turns your focus away from God so that you will be free to turn your hope and attention to him in earnest;
“If you couldn’t serve me with all the distractions of comforts let's try it without them.”
Isn’t that what God told the Hebrews just before they actually entered the Promised Land? (Deuteronomy 28-31):
“If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD; then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful (6381: distinguished, marvelous, great), and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.” Deuteronomy 28:58-59.
“Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?” Deuteronomy 31:17.
This is not the warm-and-fuzzy message that Christians want to hear today, we only want to hear how our enemies get the harsh end of the stick and how we get nothing but “unconditional love”. That might indeed be your god, but don’t for a second think that is the God of scripture. Warm-and-fuzzy bedroom talk is for lovers not adulteresses! (Revelation 3:16).
* * *
The Beast’s Whore:
Strangely enough the 8th Beast king is not the sole power in this last GDE as End Time scholars seem to proclaim. While everyone is looking for the Antichrist to appear any day, there is another power that rises first, and being a “Mystery,” it’s what we need to be looking into today as the GDE without a king works symbiotically with the Whore for an undisclosed period of time (Revelation 17:7). With this in mind I offer the following current-events example of this embryonic Whore already in pre-action development:
I just watched the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNERS SUMMIT of April 23, 2012 that I pre-recorded off C-SPAN. The moderator’s discussion with Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter expressed in current perspective the growing vilification of the Christian view that I described in the last post.
There is much that was said that would take a lengthy explanation to reveal the error of foundational concepts such as the praiseworthiness of the Arab Spring’s success in Egypt’s recent overthrow, but one portion of the conversation stands out as obvious in the light of the last post and so I address that specifically:
President Carter:
“…I think in the future we are going to see not only the children in China and Japan and South Korea maybe even including North Korea, the Hamas and also Fattah and the Palestinian community, and they and Israelis, and Israelis and Egyptians, those children are going to be able to talk to each other and communicate with one another because of almost instant translation as you know. So I think what has happened within Egypt say, or Tunisia, is very likely to happen in the future among children of different nations. And once they see they have something in common; that is the benefits of peace, and the benefits of prosperity and the benefits of education and the benefits of environmental equality, I think that will be a very major contribution to them wanting to get along better with each other instead of forming a commitment to war on the drop of a hat.”
These four NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS’ arguments in attempting to bring world peace are not specifically evil and I have no desire to stand against their honorable but misguided efforts; we do in fact need world peace and they are trying earnestly to make that happen in these difficult times. “World Peace” is the obvious desire and focus of this Summit and of course peace is not a thing to keep at bay; clearly “we all” want peace, but the error is to assume that actually everyone wants the same peace and so by communication and dialogue we can achieve it.
But how does a teenage girl walking home alone in the park at night make peace with a rapist who suddenly holds a knife to her throat? If she is a good communicator can she expect to talk him out of his goal of finding his kind of peace through abusing her? And is she out of line to persistently and passionately protest that she cannot find peace through being raped? Is the rapist of the mindframe to want to talk about it? Is he prepared to believe he can find the peace he is looking for by a conversation with this girl, or does his violent lust stop his ears from hearing? Perhaps instead of being raped she should propose marriage to make it honorable, and thereby find peace in the event?
Former Polish President Lech Walesa clearly recognized the problem that not all governments and people are yet able to agree on the goals, and this is a monkey-wrench in the peace works. But when asked if a strong leader is needed to forward a movement of change, Jimmy Carter says “No” and sites Arab Spring in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Syria as examples of young “voices combined to make a powerful weapon that can change a government and bring about revolution” without a singular leadership. I contend the argument must be made regarding the success of what kind of change?
If overthrow of what “is” is the goal without concern for “what comes after” then yes these examples were successful, but what is the end result of each of these overthrows, and what controlling spirit led them? By the action of overthrowing in discontent, are these people then automanticaly qualified to create a better government by osmosis? Is the mindframe that thinks only “destruction” the same mind that can then create peace? Islamic domination and control with a strong trend toward Sharia-Law-kind-of-oppression seems to be the trending direction of these present examples. Is this the success we are looking for in bringing about world peace? It seems evident that Jimmy Carter thinks “Yes”. I respectfully and earnestly disagree, as Islam by Quranic mandate is regularly murdering Christians for their refusal to abandon their faith in the Son of God. From the Creator’s perspective this is not the kind of peace the world should be looking for (Luke 1:76-79, Matthew 5:44, I Peter 3:10-11, James 3:17, etc.).
The merits of Mr. Carter’s argument hinges on the goal of a world democracy… which may be a wonderful aim if God does not actually exist. But if there really is a Creator to whom the world is accountable, then the values of democracy (mob rule) is irrelevant in the argument. And if the identity of that Creator is hotly contested by two opposing worldviews, then the entire peace process proposed by Mr. Carter fails at its roots… unless the peanut farmer knows a secret of how to kill the Eternal Omnipotent.
Now since these basically godless men of peace are trying to bring about Peace from godless world democratic views… between two fundamentally established faiths of two opposing Gods, there seems to be an extremely large blind spot in their effort.
Former President of South Africa F.W. de Klerk seems to understand best the basics when he agreed with Jody (?), who said; “Choose your cause and align with an organization.” He ends his statement with “I don’t think we should protest for the sake of protest”.
This argument recognizes that there are many various causes which cannot easily agree and therefore need to be championed by organized collections of like-minded people to further its cause, presumably until it prevails by swayed public opinion (mob rule). This is at least focused intelligence and not mindless masses being driven by undefined forces or goals to undetermined ends such as the uprisings we see today.
“Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters! The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters: but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind” Isaiah 17:12-13.
The entire foundation of the argument changes when we recognize the authority of a real Creator or if we don’t.
Jimmy Carter:
“Yes I believe that faith and religion do have a positive place to exert itself in the future, as long as we look at the overwhelming compatibilities among the great religions…when you look at Christianity, whether its Protestantism or Catholicism, if you look at Judaism if you look at Islam if you look at Buddhism if you look at other religions, then you find that their basic principles are all exactly the same. None of those I mentioned including Hinduism fail to promote peace.”
Really?
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” John 14:6.
“Think not that I come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword” Matthew 10:34
Who said that!?
Oh, just Yeshua Christ the author of Christianity and the Prince of Peace.
Yah, but maybe he really didn’t mean it the way it sounds.
Sure.
“For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. A man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it” Matthew 10:35-39.
Clearly generic World Peace is not one of Jesus Christ’s primary goals right now.
“Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever” Deuteronomy 23:6.
You see, Jesus was more concerned that we live in obedience to him than the un-peaceful reaction we get from other because of it.
"Believers! Wage war against such infidels, as are your neighbors, and let them find you rigorous" Qur'an 9:124.
" Make war upon such of those to whom the scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah and have forbidden His Apostle, and profess not the professor of truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled" Qur'an 9:29
But since Godless “Peace” is Mr. Carter’s singular goal he can make such wildly irresponsible claims that are expected to generically arrive at his desired end. But his complete ignorance of the foundational roots of these various religions and faiths entirely disqualifies him from a reasonable statement, yet because of his title of NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER he is revered as one who knows because his lips were moving.
I would ask Mr. Carter; “How do you get, say, Ebola and People to live in harmony together?” By focusing only on the compatible elements and denying the incompatible Mr. Carter assumes that there should be no problem, as both “like” people.
The problem is that one likes to be people while the other likes to eat people. This is not a compatible, or even a small, complexity. The natures of Predator and Prey is the primary factor to be considered in the quest for mutual peace but this is never brought up in their discussions because we don't want to rile the predator.
The moderator asks him next: “Then is it ignorance that makes people fear the religions that they are not familiar with or that they associate for example with terror?”
Mr. Carter: “I don’t think its ignorance, but it’s a matter of people trying to be superior to other human beings. And that creates extremism. It creates fundamentalism. And fundamentalists in any religion, including Christian religion, is that ‘I believe that I have a peculiar or special relationship with God; that I speak basically on behalf of God in my personal belief, anyone who disagrees with me not only disagrees with me but disagrees with God who’s my partner.’ And then that disagreement can deteriorate into feeling that other person is inferior to you, and that can go further into saying that other person is sub-human and therefore that person’s life is not significant. And I can go to war and take advantage of that other person and take that other person’s life because they are inferior in my opinion and also inferior in the eyes of God. So I think extremism or fundamentalism when carried to that point can be a very negative factor in religion, so, but that’s a minor differences among different religions and I think if we look at the overall complex of religions; peace, justice, humility, service, forgiveness, compassion, love, (even of people who disagree with you, are not lovable or who don’t love you back), that’s the essence of religion. And so the common goal of religion is the same, and can be the same goals, by the way of NOBEL PRIZE winners try to strive for, and that individual human beings should adopt.”
Again, this is wonderful sentiment if there is actually no real God to whom our intentions or actions are accountable. Religion can then simply be a means to share a generic good feeling among everyone, without the need to adhere to specifics from a real God, who’s views might tend to run against a NOBEL PRIZE WINNER’S feelings that his views are better than mine.
The problem is even greatly compounded when there are two very real entities claiming to be God. This, Mr. Carter is not actually ready to accept, yet he is more than ready to think his views are superior to those who actually believe in a God and are accountable to him (whether Jehovah or Allah). His argument falls flat for being what he condemns religious extremists for being; i.e. feeling intellectually superior. For Mr. Carter, religion is fine so long as it doesn’t actually have a God, and that is apparently his religious opinion of superior thought.
IF there really is a very real God and Creator, then Mr. Carter stands against Him in his human minded democratic approach to Godless peace. But from such a God’s perspective, the collective views and values of the entire planet united, simply don’t matter when it comes to deciding what is the right thing to do; any view contrary to the Creator’s is a wrong view. The truth of this is made evident by the inability of any of the present Nobel Prize Winners to answer the next question from the moderator:
“How do you get people to care about injustices in the world?”
Though not a single PEACE PRIZE WINNER in the conference could even attempt to answer it, our founders knew the answer to this question and had much to say on the subject:
“It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.” - John Adams “The works of John Adams, Second President of the United States” Vol. IX, p. 401
“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams, Same book p.229
“The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If 'Thou shalt not covet,' and 'Thou shalt not steal,' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.” - John Adams, “The works of John Adams, Second President of the United States”, Vol. VI, p. 9.
“There are three points of doctrine the belief of which forms the foundation of all morality. The first is the existence of God; the second is the immortality of the human soul; and the third is a future state of rewards and punishments. Suppose it possible for a man to disbelieve either of these three articles of faith and that man will have no conscience, he will have no other law than that of the tiger or the shark. The laws of man may bind him in chains or may put him to death, but they never can make him wise, virtuous, or happy.” - John Adams, “Letters of John Quincy Adams to His Son on the Bible and Its Teachings” pp. 22-23.
“We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible. For this Divine Book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and those sober and frugal virtues, which constitute the soul of republicanism.” - Benjamin Rush, “Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical” pp. 93-94.
“The Gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rule for just conduct in every situation of life. Happy they who are enabled to obey them in all situations!” - Benjamin Rush, Essays, p. 112, “A Defense of the Use of the Bible as a School Book" Addressed to the Rev. Jeremy Belknap, of Boston.
“By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects…. It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published.” - Benjamin Rush, “Letters”, Vol. II, p. 936 (to John Adams on January 23, 1807).
Dr. Rush was not a simple religious thinker as his comments on the French Revolution apply directly to events today such as we see in the current upheaval in nations by the mindless revolt of the masses:
“[I}t was Reason in the form of a Goddess that produced all the crimes and calamities of the French Revolution, and… it was by a book entitled The Age of Reason that Tom Paine demoralized half the Christian world….Men are rational only, not reasonable creatures.” - Benjamin Rush, “Letters”, Vol. II, p. 978, (to John Adams on September 16, 1808.
Dr. Rush was not implying that the wicked French Government should not be pulled down but that the horrors that resulted in the process were by the deluded reasoning that went about it. Such are the efforts of today’s Global Community just beginning to fill the streets with the blood of the innocent that appear to stand in the way of their democratic endeavors for "change."
I could go on and on with such examples of our founder’s writings on the subject but what comes plainly clear is that America’s forefathers firmly believed that injustices in the world were only properly evaluated from the Creator’s perspective and that to create a concern in the hearts of society regarding those injustices, Christianity of the Bible must be embraced. This is why Dr. Rush suggested:
“Let every family in the United States be furnished at the public expense…with a copy of an American (English language) edition of the Bible.” - Benjamin Rush, “Essays”, p. 184, “A Plan for a Peace-Office in the United States.”
So how is it that these men in this Peace Conference, who do not actually know the God of Peace personally, and have rejected his most applicable Word on the subject, have been awarded the world’s prestige as worthy to provide the wisdom to finding peace?
I propose that the Goddess Dr. Rush speaks of is the Great Whore of Mystery Babylon rising again today as America has now cast off the God of Peace without questioning what will replace him. The spirit of the Beast and this Whore is what we have voted into the highest office of this once great nation, and the many positions under it. Being that we the citizens put them there, how then can we seriously ask God to help us in the result?
“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn” Proverbs 29:2.
But if you think resolving these kinds of problems is confusing today, we haven’t yet even arrived at confusing!
“If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul” Deuteronomy 13:1-3.
Do you hear this? There will come among us men of renown who bring proof that their recommendations are valid by dreams and signs and wonders which will all come true. How can you argue with such supernatural proofs? There is only one argument; “I will serve no one but Jehovah God of the scriptures.” (Deuteronomy 13:4) declared in a slightly different way by Joshua when reasoning with his people:
“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the (Noah’s) flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell (because God destroyed them): but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD” Joshua 24:15.
But note now; before the confusion of successful prophets come, that God declares these tests come by his own bidding to prove if we really love God WITH ALL OUR HEART AND SOUL. The confusion has not yet come but already the evidence is strong that this is not the way the average Christian loves God; we seem more than willing to follow men like Jimmy Carter even without such signs and wonders or dreams that come to pass. These “Christians” will utterly fail this test and be beguiled by the signs and wonders and dreams; they will follow the god’s recommended by these men because the results look promising and they do not actually know the Creator, though they are confident that they do.
The science of miracles only proves the controlling entity is powerful; it does not prove it is the right entity to follow. If self-preservation of the Germans was the goal, then Hitler was the right choice at the time, but that did not make him right nor his reign enduring. Now looking back we see that everyone must die eventually and all that is left is an ugly memory of foolish people who chose poorly and made many millions suffer horribly. Long after the sum of his life is weighted, the name Hitler is synonymous with Evil.
Do you yet recognize the Beast, and the Whore who uses him?
* * * * * * *
(*1) Post 199 The 7th King (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011 /06/7th-king.html).
(*2) I realize this view stands fully in the face of every Christian expositor I know of. To suggest boldly that the Rapture will not happen “soon” is perceived as near blasphemy. It is true that scripture provides no factor yet to be fulfilled before the rapture of the Church and so this fact makes the event possible at any moment, and by all means I am quite eager to hear that shout and will not refuse to go whenever it comes, but the warning of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-13) very strongly indicates a great need for lengthy endurance that half those waiting will not be prepared for. It is certainly not with pleasure or glee that I make such a proposal, but the American Church is not ready to patiently endure what is about to fall upon it because of our indifference to evil. Think of the great endurance that Jesus experienced as he was tortured before being crucified and at the very last he felt overwhelmingly that God had forsaken him (Matthew 27:46). But was he forsaken? In the above verses of God’s warning to the Hebrews, did he actually forsake his people through all that they then suffered, even in the most recent thousands of years with no help? NO!
"Let your conversation (mode or style) be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me" Hebrews 13:5-6.
That verse does not apply to the disobedient! Are you disobedient? Be very afraid!
"We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh."II Corinthians 4:8-11.
The persecution experienced appears unchanged, but in confidence of our great relationship with the Loving God, we discover that in the midst of it we are not forsaken! The disobedient knows no such security (Hebrews 10:26-27).
By God’s great grace America has been the light to the world for several hundred years, Showing them hope and peace and freedom found in Christ Jesus. But now the light in this nation has grown dark and evil and we are a trouble to the world not a blessing, we provide confusion and blasphemy of the name we bore. Sure there are still faithful believers in this land and they will remain faithful no matter what comes, but as a nation, because believers have become quite and un-influential, the nation has cast off her glorious clothes of righteousness, now chasing after strange gods and the pleasures of spiritual and physical adultery. Lot was not removed from Sodom in all its wickedness until God was about to bring judgment. Likewise the rapture is not so Christians can escape hard times; it is to keep God’s true people from experiencing God’s final judgment on sin. Frankly I see far more history in scripture before that final judgment.
Yes, I know Israel became a nation in 1948, and I know the prophecies that center around such a return; some fulfilled but some not. This is not THAT return since it did not fulfill the details promised (Jeremiah 31:31-34, Isaiah 51:11, etc.). Like the three false starts of the keystone Daniel 9:25 prophecy, this return is close, but we need to be looking for a more accurate fulfillment.
In the meantime, knowing that we will reap the harvest of our own neglect might spur us into serious action to diligently preserve whatever shreds of Christ we can find remaining in our homes and societies and thereby pray as the pagan Ninevites did for mercy. I don’t just tremble for my country anymore; I fear with great sorrow what will become of her because the people will not wake up.
I would like to end this post on a note of hope for those earnestly trying to restructure their lives to align with the Creator. I encourage you to buy and watch the DVD "Courageous" produced by Stephen Kendrick. It is a superb family film showing how we can begin to heal our families in a real way, and by so doing, educate our children to rightly care about real Social Justice and not the wicked illusion using that name.
*
Saturday, July 7, 2012
Who is the Rightful Master?
a study in our gender typology
- Part Four -
Line By Line - Hebrews 1
Post 252
Recommended Pre-reading: Hebrews 1-3.
[2/4/14: corrected a limited understanding of Sarah being Abraham's "sister"]
There are so many things in the last post that deserve deeper exploration but the most important of them is to present a different report of Gaston that can cleanse the foul and Evil presentation of the Son of God. The only sufficient cleansing agent for such a thing is “the water (Spirit) of the word (Son)” (Acts 11:16, Ephesians 5:26). The Ashes of the Red Heifer somewhat additional (Numbers 19:1-10).
As I pursued this primary concept I was constantly led back to Hebrews, yet the important and topically relevant material there is so plentiful that to do it justice I would need to write an entire book on nothing but the exposition of Hebrews but to do so would loose track of our more limited topic.
Oh what to do?!
I cannot beg you strong enough to put my writing on hold and go earnestly but simply read through the first three Chapters of Hebrews for yourself. Don’t get stalled in study, I want you to get its scope. If you can readily see the relevance, and the Spirit is leading your understanding, then by all means do not stop there, continue through chapter five at least, it just keeps going in amazing answer to this whole Beauty and the Beast demonic fairytale presentation of Christ as it applies to our larger study of those who refused to Cross the Jordan River, but more specifically among them; to the men of Korah who challenged the role of Moses (Numbers 16:1-40) and to them of the multitude who in their emotions and reason, judged Moses (Jesus) for the very harsh results! (Numbers 14:41-50).
This is by far the more important concern for us today who are so bold as to assume our intellectual and emotional reasoning is of such skill and ability as to make judgment on God’s judgments! (Deuteronomy 12:8-9).
But, if you can hardly wade through the first three chapters of Hebrews in an inability to see the connection, that’s good enough, we will explore the first together, but please, give it a very earnest effort to hear God’s Spirit show you how those three chapters apply to our present topic.
But what is our present topic?
The fairytale of Beauty and the Beast has done a very convincing job of declaring that Jesus the Messiah is a buffoon and that the Beast is where the reward of love rightfully belongs and is to be found. THAT is the topic, and that topic is not applied in a fairytale; it is even now being applied in the Government of the United States and in the homes and families of every American regardless of religious persuasion. And since Muslims Jews and Christians all agree the true faith came through Abraham, then the discussion should be an honest evaluation of just what present faith holds accurately to the faith of Abraham; in otherwords; how did Abraham act out his faith? Such a study will seem to take us fully off target but we can hardly reach the target without getting to the source. In a roundabout way I am and have been describing the complex faith of Abraham through this Blog. Beauty and the Beast simply addresses our present day perverted application quite plainly.
Allow me an attempt to restrain myself from diverting into the many wonderful details of Hebrews in an effort to expound only on the topical relative message. Remember, we are looking for the rightful authority of Christ as represented by Gaston; “What makes him the right choice over the Beast?”
* * *
Hebrews 1:1-2a
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son…”
It took me a while to realize that “sundry times” and “diverse manners” are single Greek words. If we don’t bother to define such details we tend to simply mush these meanings together into a soup of vague and useless randomness, but Paul is here accurately describing that God has over time spoken his singular message to all the fathers and prophets of our faith in many different methods through different times, and now in our time (the last days era of Daniel 7’s fourth Diverse Beast) he has spoken that same message in yet another “diverse manner” i.e. through his own Son… Through GOD’S actual SON! (Isaiah 9:6+7:14).
So what’s the point Paul is making?
If God had all sorts of different ideas he felt like telling humanity through the thousands of years of history, then everything of the faith we collect would indeed be a mush soup of randomness that could mean anything we wanted it to or nothing significant, because God changes what he says from time to time. The importance of what Paul is telling us is that God is not random and his message has not changed from his first delivery of it even though he has used a whole lot of different approaches for us to collect and combine them all to have many different tellings of the same message. We identify these as the cyclic nature and pattern of scripture, and many different expressions of the same message adds many levels of confirmation to the singular truth of it; a “how do I love you? Let me count the ways” kind of thing. To segregate the message of God by the delivery method used is to imagine “dispensations” where God supposedly has a different message at different times.
Example: God made all the different species with a singular thread of consistency to show his sole authorship of everything, but because we choose to view each species as a different “dispensation” in time, we come to the wrong conclusion that their similarities prove they all evolved from the same genus with random changes over time to arrive at a completely different end than the beginning intended. But if we go through scripture and read the foundational message of all the fathers and all the prophets we discover that all their different tellings add up to the same consistent message, even Old and New Testaments. Truly God does not change and his message is consistent too. Yes, there are dispensations (I Corinthians 9:17, Ephesians 1:10, 3:2, Colossians 1:25) but only in the delivery of the message not in the message itself.
So what is the all-important, none-changing message?
Being the last days and nearing the time of harvest (Matthew 21:34), the message is found in the one who delivered it here at the last (Matthew 21:37-39) because he is also the same one who made it all at the beginning; call it a “wrap up.”
Hebrews 1:2
“(God) Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds (165);”
worlds 165 aion; from the same as 104; properly an age…
We are told here (and it was already confirmed by miracles and confirmation of the very same message told to the fathers and prophets [Matthew 21:34-36]), that this messenger is the Son of God (Genesis 22:7-8, Matthew 21:37). God sent his Son, in these last days, to speak his consistent message of salvation to us in yet another diverse way. Abraham foresaw that message and the means by which it would be delivered, when he pre-acted out the sacrifice of his own son on the same Mountain God would later use (Genesis 22:1-14), as well as many other confirming events of understanding the consistent message spoke in a previous way (Genesis 15:13-16, 17:19, 18:16-21, 22:15-19, etc.). This is in fact the dividing line of all dividing lines between God and Allah; it is that God, through Abraham’s foreshadowing Type pre-reenactment provided his own son Isaac as a sacrifice, while Allah through Abraham provided no such sacrifice Type by Ishmael (Genesis 17:18-22, Qur’an 4:157-158). Both faiths come through Abraham but only one has the “In many parts and many ways of old” confirmation through time of that singular salvation message of the True God of love and peace and self-sacrifice for his people (Genesis 17:18-19 + James 1:16-17 = Genesis 17: 21 + James 1:18).
I am beginning to hear regularly the parroting of ignorant Americans that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all basically the same faith. But without the sacrifice of God’s actual Son for our salvation, there is no Christianity, and without that same Son there is now no real Judaism (Genesis 49:10, Daniel 9:25), but with that Son there is no Islam. Christianity does not have “a good concept” kind of faith that would continue if there was no Son of God; The Son of God is EVERYTHING, he made everything, and sustains everything (Colossians 1:12-16), he sacrificed himself for everything (John 3:16-17), and still holds everything together (Colossians 1:17-18), that everything might have the opportunity to be redeemed (Luke 3:8-9) (*1).
Who is this declared Son of God by whom the message of salvation is given to everyone in these last days?
Hebrews 1:2 finishes a two verse declaration of the authority behind the most recent telling of the salvation message by revealing the authority of the message giver. In otherwords; the message means nothing unless the giver has the proper authority to back it up. This giver has both the authority as the appointed giver and as the natural provider!
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds (ages);”
There are three declarations here regarding his Son;
1. God spoke his age-old consistent message to us, now through his Son.
2. God appointed his Son to be the heir of all things.
3. God, through his Son, made the world and all it’s various ages.
This is confirmed many times in Genesis 1 “And God (430) said…” as it is now revealed that God’s Son is the word of God that did the saying (John 1:1-3+, 8:55-58 *2) and thereby “saying”, produced mankind in the marriage of two distinct parts; male and female, in the image of God creating a Son. Elohiym; a plurality of One.
God 430 elohiym; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God…
This is the Son of God, who in our age, at the last days, is declaring God’s singular consistent unchanging message of salvation to mankind. But frankly the message, though inseparably tied, has quickly become far secondary to the rave review of the message giver himself, and now we see this is in rebuttal to (the father of the Beast;) Satan’s challenge of the Son’s right to inherit everything. Hebrews is the Son’s legal argument:
Hebrews 1:3
…“(the Son) Who being the brightness of his (the Father’s) glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he (the Son) had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;”
Oh how I crave to explain in detail all that is said here regarding the effulgence of this Son as in quantum mechanics he abundantly distributes the light of God’s glory in a wave and not miserly in a studied (observed) particle, or to describe his exact expression of God’s substance, or the all supporting power of God’s word and its ability to literally maintain all things, his lone self-sacrifice and its redeeming qualities to restore the destroyed, and the place of all honor and authority granted to him by The Father. The Son of God is actually the perfect expression of God himself (John 5:30) and not a “lone wolf” separate from his Father. These are the beginnings of his “credentials” that Hebrews shows us, but for brevity we must continue.
Hebrews 1:4
“Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.”
Now we begin to see a very clear distinction of this Son’s comparison not with the lesser animals, or even with lesser humanity; but with God’s glorious creation of angels themselves, who have a very excellent name (3686) indeed.
Name 3686 onoma; from a presumed derivative of the base of 1097 (compare 3685); a “name” (literally or figuratively) (authority, character):-- called, (+sur)name(-d).
1097 ginosko; a prolonged form of a primitive verb; to “know” (absolute)…
This name is not just the identity by which we call someone, but the identity of who he is by his recorded heraldry, i.e. nature. By example; angels are also named the sons of God (Genesis 6:2,4, Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7) while humanity is not (besides Adam himself)... yet we are given the opportunity to be adopted as sons of God (John 1:12, Romans 8:14, Galatians 4:6-7, Philippians 2:15, I John 3:1-2.), so what makes the difference? Chuck Missler’s The Return of the Nephilim podcast describes it as “direct creation” as opposed to indirect generations; Adam was indeed a direct creation of God and was therefore a “son of God” like the angels, but his children were indirectly created from man and so are called “sons of Adam” not sons of God (Luke 3:38). I agree.
This leads to the discovery strangely enough, that Adam’s wife was kindof a combination as she was a direct creation of God but he used Adam’s material to make her and so we see again she is made in the accurate image Type of Christ from God, who was also both the Son of God and a son of man for similar causes (Luke 1:35 + Matthew 8:20 = Matthew 4:3-4, 9:6, 12:8), only the genders and related accountabilities were switched for very important reasons too complex to explain here but tied to our Gender Typology and its lineage, which we will begin to explore in Post 292 “Beyond the Harbingers” (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2013/03/beyond-harbingers.html).
But now we have several factors that become apparent in this short verse;
1. The Son of God was made “better” than the angels because his name was better.
2. This Son of God obtained this better name.
3. And that this better name was obtained by inheritance.
The angels have the name “sons of God” by the fact it was a direct creation, while this half-direct creation Son was by "the other half" made to inherit the title from the Father in the delayed pedigree way of sons and fathers. Inheritance comes only by a legally defined relationship with the one through whom the inheritance comes; this Son had that legal standing through his human mother.
How?
The specific wording of this verse leads us to understand that this Son of God was not made as the angels were made, but made better (Hebrews 2:16). Not through direct creation, as “a product” attached to the Creator by famous handiwork (which they were more so), but by obtaining the inheritance as a true Son of the Father. Yet for a time, before he obtains that inheritance, he might appear by the temporal focus of creation to be on less that equal footing with the angels to claim the inheritance. In otherwords the angels have an arguable case of apparent equal or better worthiness to receive the inheritance as “sons” of God; “Why should it go to the less direct ‘Son’ of God, who is so much flesh that, unlike angels, he can even be killed?”
The next verses provide the answer;
Hebrews 1:5
“For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I (1080)begotten thee? (Psalm 2:7) And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?”
These are very intimate claims. God is without apology claiming that he fathered this Son and that he confesses that this is his son also in the God/human adoption of a son. God is speaking of an actual father-son relationship with humanity not ignoring the complexity that he is God. Although directly created by the Father and so called sons in a different way, the angels had no such position real or recognized by the Father, so although the angels were made by God, only this Son was made by God to be his actual Son of lineage and adopted son of declaration and therefore worthy of the inheritance in two ways. This Son was made of his own stuff. That is the meaning of the word begotten:
begotten 1080 gennao; from a variation of 1085; from a variation of 1085; to procreate (properly, of the father, but by extension of the mother); figuratively, to regenerate:-- bear, beget, be born, bring forth, conceive, be delivered of, gender, make, spring.
John 3:16’s famous use of begotten makes this especially unique:
only-begotten 3439 monogenes; from 3441 and 1096; only-born, i.e. sole:-- only (begotten, child).
But although that is doubly good enough for a very special legal inheritance, in the elimination of the angel’s potential cry of “Unfair!” God takes it several steps further;
Hebrews 1:6-8
“And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom.”
With all the translational-capitalized first-word verse-segregation and the capitalized replacement-of-quotations of older verses, it becomes hard to understand, so let me simply adjust that part, keeping the words and context in tact:
And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world (the birth of his Son), he saith; “(this is my firstbegotton) and let all the angels of God worship him.”
And of the angels (in comparison) he saith; “(I God,)who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire” but unto the Son (again in contrast) he saith; “Thy throne, O God (my Son), is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom”.
Scripturally nothing and no one is permitted to be worshipped but God himself (Exodus 20:3, Matthew 4:10, Revelation 19:10). Yet here the angels were told to worship the Son when he was brought into the world as the human firstborn inheritor now declared to be the inheritor Son of God though Satan found himself on earth first as did Ishmael. This Son cannot be an acquired position but must be a “spiritual genetic DNA test” kind of God or he could not be “God-approved” worshipped as God. He is either ACTUALLY God or not. “Son of God” (capital) and “sons of God” (creations) are not the same things, and by mankind’s adoption as “sons of God” into a family relationship above the angels, yet still not worshipped even as gods, we know that the DNA is vital to actually being God. As represented by the true son of promise coming from an impossible Sarah herself (because of both; lifelong barrenness and extreme age), this promised DNA Son of God was accomplished through the promised miracle (virgin) birth of Mary (Luke 1:34-35) where the Holy Spirit provided the nonhuman God DNA to the specific woman promised, in a none human way. Every cell in this Son’s body was composed of DNA that was human from his mother and yet also God from his Father. Today such a thought is wrongly profaned by Greek Mythology and so hushed even in full consideration of its truth, so Satan seems to win-over the human jury not by proving the Son a lie but by making the thought spiritually repulsive through distortion, not only by Greek Mythology but by the Nephilim from which the mythology is based (Genesis 6:4, Jude 6-7, II Peter 2:4-5 *3). I intend to address this in detail later.
God gave the angels a very glorious position and nature (ministers of fire) but to this Son through birth he gave the name God and the throne to match! The only way this could not be utter blasphemy is if this creation was actually God come in the flesh, which is what is claimed and is evidentially further proven by his kingdom fulfilling the righteousness of the scepter of God himself. This Son’s true people conduct themselves in the faith of Abraham’s faith (Genesis 21:10-11), that is; like Cinderella, reactively waiting on God through the hope of patient obedience (Genesis 21:34, II Thessalonians 3:5-6, Matthew 4:8-10) rather than proactively taking by force the promise out of time as do others, like early Sarai, who have no self-sacrificing God-Son offered for their salvation.
The definition of scepter is a bit of a rabbit trail but results in an ordained stick-of-authority by which punishment through “thumping” is meet out in administering the discipline of the kingdom. The rod of Moses by which he struck the rock is the direct Type of this Son’s scepter, who in effect used it to strike himself for the salvation of mankind. It’s the “My authority is provable” stick, and he demonstrated its power by whacking himself instead of others (John 10:17-18). By this act, this Son’s throne IS a scepter of righteousness, differing from scepters of unrighteousness in violence and hate toward others. This is the two-part argument made in the last portion of this passage beginning with “And of the angels he said”:
Hebrews 1:7-8
“And of the angels he saith; Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he saith; Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom”.
One sentence is describing the angels in their job, the other about the Son. Beginning with “But” this is simply a contrast in describing the limitation of the angels against the magnificence of the Son: One is the servant of the Lord and the other is the Lord, one is the creation and the other is the Creator. By comparing the one against the other, the angel’s great and powerful position is “put in its place”; there simply is no equal ground between them from which a fair contest can be made. Yet the still less-glorious people who refused to cross over were willing to condemn Moses himself, and thereby his God, for killing the party of Korah. The viewer of “Beauty and the Beast” is manipulated to do the same thing when Gaston kills the Beast!
The next verse further defines the nature of that God-Son’s righteous kingdom of authority and the reason for anointing him above the others:
Hebrews 1:9
“Thou (O God my Son)hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows (3353)” (from Psalm 45:7).
This can get confusing; “How is the Son of God, declared by God to be God, then as God, he is anointed by God, who is his God?”
And who are this Son’s fellows; are they then gods too? Doesn’t “fellows” indicate an equality; “If he is God then so are they?"
Fellows 3353 metochos; from 3348; participant, i.e. (as a noun) a sharer; by implication an associate:-- fellow, partaker, partner. (From Hebrews 1:9 New Testament)
Fellows 2270 chaber; from 2266; an associate:-- companion, fellow, knit together. (From the same verse in Psalm 45:7 Old Testament)
This core argument of the fallen angels is the nature of the problem between the peoples of Isaac and Ishmael, both sons of Abraham. Why does one, the second one, get the inheritance while the other, the first one, does not? But theirs is just a Type of the more foundational spiritual complaint of Islam’s god against the God of Abraham’s Hebrew faith: a faith of promise, not force of will.
Now from having already picked a side in this battle (regardless of which side) you risk blinding yourself to the true and legitimate answer in favor of a quick and emotional support of your hero that may or may not be valid. So forget Ishmael and Isaac, or Islam and Jewry, and ask the same question from the perspective of the angels who are asking:
"If the Son of God was indeed “made” in the flesh as declared, then why are his fellow “made” creations not at least equal with him?"
The fact that they are indeed his fellows is not arguable as it is God himself who declared it so in Psalms 45:7 in context. But this question does not present the real argument: It’s not a “whole batch” of generic angels asking; it’s the lead angel, the anointed cherub (Ezekiel 28:14), it’s possibly the “greatest-angel-ever-created” angel (Ezekiel 28:12-13) that is bringing the challenge; it’s the Beast claiming an equal justified right to Belle’s love, It’s a “fair and balanced trial of equal contenders” challenge.
God’s answer is not even debating that Satan and his company of angels loves Belle, but just the contemplation of such a fact confuses the minds of unlearned Christians; “Can Satan even love?” Genesis 6 tells us that this is a probability at least from his perspective of love, but again, this is not God’s argument; The argument is regarding the love of righteousness.
Both these Old and New Testament verses declare that God made the just determination because this Son loved righteousness and hated iniquity/ wickedness, and that this particular loving nature (name) is the ruling power; i.e. scepter of the throne of his kingdom, and that kingdom is eternal, because he is God. These arguments are not independent but all one argument that results in the anointing above his fellow sons of God.
But that only slightly answers the confusion of questions presented above. How are we to really understand that this creation is being called God, by God himself? (Matthew 22:42-45). Is the Christian God really monotheistic?
How wonderful God is in his explanation of spiritual things too big for our limited minds!
We suddenly “see the light” when we comprehend that woman is in the image of the Son of God as man is in the image of the Father. This is why God, through the Son, made woman from the actual body of man (Genesis 2:22) and not as an independent creation of dust then united with him only in marriage, “Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). Jesus the Son of God was “of God” made into a lesser state (position) of authority in his humanity under his Father (Galatians 4:4-7) and thereby is represented by woman specifically being man’s wife and made for the man (I Corinthians 11:7-10) being incorporated (back)into himself through marriage to be “one flesh” (Genesis 2:23-24+Ephesians 5:31 in context).
This is not about a gender power-trip but a representation of how the Son of God, different than God, is united with God and yet is of God Himself (John 1:1-4) and (re)united into one name through inheritance. Similarly Adam and Eve were both human, one is made from the other, of the same stuff yet revealed as different, and SO they (re)united as “one” in marriage (Matthew 19:5-6) to inherit his same and his stuff, and produce a mutual offspring; an entity of them both, which are called Christians. Contrary to current philosophy this institution of marriage is not just arguable customs invented by man to control women; Each gender has its responsibilities accountable to God for how they portray their Type (Ephesians 5:21-25). As the Type of God, Christian men glorify their women; the Type of Christ (Philippians 2:9), while Muslim men, as the Type of Allah, diminish their women in self-serving oppression as the Type of Allah’s servant subjects. Both concepts are actually based on the same Type; the only difference is the god that each Type represents. As American men become less Godly their representation reflects that too, and as American women do the same, their responses are less than Christ-like. This is not a matter of which fault came first as these problems are reflections of their Types alone; Often God seems unconcerned that his wife is abused or mistreated yet she is expected to maintain her faith and loyalty while confused. Conversely God’s love and commitment to his wife remains unaltered by her abuse of the marriage and resulting unhappiness (Isaiah 50:1).
This DNA/genus relational Type is again shown to us in Abraham, the Type of God, who did not marry a strange woman but his (269: loosely, figurative) “sister”, “made from the same stuff” as it were. God made sure to emphasize this important point as Abraham more than once made a big deal of the issue that his wife was his sister while keeping the details vague. There are lots of “fellows” of Sarah, but Abraham chose her for many reasons, and “by happen chance” including that she was from the same familial stuff as he, which is an image of Eve from Adam, itself foreshadowing that the Son would be of the same stuff as the Father, as well as showing that the Church through regeneration inclusion of the Holy Ghost is actually of Christ, which is why Jesus is called the firstborn of many brethren (Romans 8:29, Hebrews 1:6). It’s all a big repeating cycle of the same idea in many different ways.
As a woman recently stated while debating a group of Woman's-Libers; “Why would we want to be men, we have the better deal!” Man was made from Dirt but Woman was made from refined flesh! Man has the burden of responsibility while woman gets the beauty, the feminine refinement, the glory of that femininity, and the freedom under the man’s provision and protection.
I don’t wish to rabbit trail this topic but since we are studying Gender Typology I feel it important to show that here in Hebrews (as well as many other scriptures) this position of “wife” through marriage/inheritance/ election, is an extraordinarily elevated and glorious position expressed in Cinderella becoming the wife of the greatly desired prince that would utterly change her life. That position comes only through the prince, but once obtained, is all the glory that can possibly be received beyond what was imagined (Ephesians 3:17-20)! This is why in the past, woman were not given an inheritance or the means to provide for themselves; so that no matter the diminished degree of success of the man, because he was the man, he was still her provider and this maintained the proper Type which was the intent of God for us to understand what he, God himself, was offering to us his bride.
In the old days we used to the phrase; “putting her onto a pedestal”, but today, women in general, having the means and freedom to provide for themselves (even far better than many men could provide) despise such a thought of being lifted above (as originally “from below”), because they want to earn their own standing as equals without depending on their man. This is purely an issue of foundational pride regarding equality; exactly as Satan’s endeavor against God (Genesis 3:5+ Isaiah 14:14).
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t suppose this is intentionally evil, not coming from an intentionally evil heart, but like Belle, is from an evil heart as a result of a confused and diminished society no longer able to guided her by correct biblical faith. So now, by the godless spirit of hell, and by it’s careful instruction to desire “more”, she is unwilling to continue in that confusion of her society, not having in herself an informed heart of right understanding, (See post 197 Transition).
Now, like Belle, today’s women/church, resulting from corrupt cultural teachings regarding their happiness, have in the unintentional spirit of rebellion flung off the image of being the wife of the Son and are now boldly declaring that she is intellectually equal or even better than Gaston and therefore free to make her own equally valid choices in life contrary to his desire (Numbers 16:1-3). And so she is free (like the Jews who rejected their suitor), but that freedom does not change the results of good and evil choices and she was not designed by gender to guide her own path, though as Christ, her loving suitor is usually of the nature not to enslave her against her will but to let her have her way if that’s what she requires to be happy (Matthew 18:18), (obviously with life-saving limitations). I marvel at these headstrong independent women who despise their husband even more for his tolerant love and so publicly accuse him of holding her back! Beauty and the Beast has shown this to us very clearly, and it just seems right because we have been led to believe that it’s all about Belle and what she wants. This translates DIRECTLY to Christianity today as we literally argue with Christ how he shouldn’t manage our lives, and accuse him of holding us back;
“If I want to love the Beast that’s my business, we haven’t consummated this relationship that you want so bad!”
But we cannot ignore the scripturally valid parable of the fairytale that shows, as a young resident of the town, she is already the betrothed bride in the body of Christ (Romans 12:5, I Corinthians 12:27, Ephesians 3:6, 5:23); i.e. she is a Christian and not an enchanted item in the castle of the Beast. In otherwords; she is a “son of Adam” and that makes her redeemable by Gaston if she will but have him, which he is diligently ready to do after setting up the wedding before officially proposing, which is scripturally sound.
This Son of God is declared by God to be her God because his kingdom is the love of righteousness and the hatred of iniquity. His promised bride needs those protective parameters and as a fiancé should adapt them for herself in recognition that it will save her from an internal confusion of falling in love with the Beast. Gaston was not the one failing his role but Belle could fill your ear with her opinions on that and what she expected her Savior to be like. In yet another onion layer practical application, Belle is the teenage daughter who fights with her father over his efforts to protect her from predator men to which she gravitates.
The two contenders (Gaston and the Beast) could not be any different in their very natures and are of completely different stuff (Gaston wants to give his love to Belle while the Beast needs to get love from Belle). Beauty and the Beast does not argue the fact that the Beast is only a prince like Gaston and therefore we know he is either the “(S)on of God” prince, or the contending angel “(s)on of God” prince. Obviously God is the undisputed King, though whether Allah or Jehovah is now disputed, as the fairytale changes viewpoints of the same story of Cinderella.
But if Satan is God as he now declares, then the Beast prince can’t actually be Satan. Hmmm, who then is the Beast? It is in effect the son that Satan/Allah claims not to have because Satan is not a giving God as he pretends; he’s only a selfish prince as even the stained glass window admits. This confusion is dramatically described in Revelation 17:8 as we began to discuss in post 198 Finally Revelation 17 7-9 and post 199 The Seventh King regarding this Beast that crawls from the Bottomless Pit. (I know you haven’t forgotten this original topic goal!).
"How, in the nature of God, does the Son of God obtain the inheritance?"
By his voluntary purging of our sin (Hebrews 1:3) through his sacrificial death spoken of in a different way at a different time by the implementation of animal sacrifices (Exodus 10:25). Yes, but even further back, in yet a different manner and time than we are even privy to (Genesis 4:1-5).
"But why was this self-sacrifice of the Son necessary to obtain the inheritance that was rightfully his anyway?"
Because without the self-sacrifice he would not have left the unity (“Singularity”) with the Father and would have never been “made” a son of man who needed an inheritance to claim what is the Father’s. As God, for man’s sake, he was made a man and therefore a necessary eventual inheritor of what is God’s. None of this would yet be necessary if he just returned to the previous state after his crucifixion, but he didn’t, nor could he. Having been made a man with an eternal soul, he will always be a man for eternity, yet with the rightful inheritance as the God he is. No angel fits that bill, not even the covering cherub.
But not too far off in the future, I propose that mankind will see a new thing (Ezekiel 28:3-6). I believe the Beast of Islam will imitate his own version of that necessary sacrifice that validates the position of authority which he is still contesting until the inheritance is obtained (Psalm 110:1), and will therefore seem to sacrifice his angry destructive nature for Christian Belle, showing her that her love indeed has a great value to calm the Beast. Her love will seem to save the world and who can argue with that then?! (*4).
Gaston will be made the fool and villain for warning that “loving the Beast is the wrong thing to do”. After all, the evidence will show the Beast to be changed by her and the world will actually rest because of it (Revelation 13:3-4, Daniel 11:21,24a, 9:27a, I Thessalonians 5:3, Zechariah 1:11?), this will not be a good time for the Biblical Christians to publicly cry “Danger!” even thought it is true (Amos 5:13). The true Christian argument will appear both hollow and evil in their refusal to forgive Satan and join the Beast with the (apostate) Christians (Belle) in a peaceful global unification of all religions. At that point the true biblical Christian argument will no longer be made publicly logical but kept internally spiritual in simple waiting obedience to Jesus Christ and his kingdom of righteousness regardless of Global appearances and the consequences for refusal. The only reason to resist conforming to this wonderful globalization of peace is because the scriptures have already warned us by prophecy that this would happen as a ploy of Satan the destroyer (Jeremiah 9:5-6, Daniel 8:24-25a, I Thessalonians 5:3). This is the value and power of prophecy; its nature of fulfillment confirms its message. The viewer and Belle both see her relationship with the Beast as a wonderful outcome of the circumstances but the prophecy shows the honeymoon to be very short lived before the Beast reverts to his true nature of wrath and violence unimaginable (Revelation 13:5-18). Belle will actually be surprised that her love somehow has no power of persuasion anymore. Her bewildered confusion will be genuine but she planned that course way back when she wanted an undefined “more” “in the great wide somewhere” without concern of where that somewhere would lead. Belle was simply following her heart (Jeremiah 17:9, Hosea 7:2, Acts 8:22). So did a cruel God send her to hell with the Beast or did she crave it and demand it with all her willful longing?
Hebrews 1:10-12
declares the past and future of this Son of God relative to the Creation, but they are there as a counter argument to the angel who is contesting his inheritance. I have simply left them out for space.
Hebrews 1:13-14
“But to which of the angels said he (God) at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all (merely) ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them (mere men) who shall be heirs of salvation?”
I hesitate to include “merely” here because by no means are angles ever “merely” unless directly compared to the Son of God, but that is exactly what this passage is doing. In comparison it is pitifully “mereful” for angels to be the ministers of those creatures made even lower than they, while loosely speaking God has “scooched over" as it were, to make room for his Son to sit on the throne until “arrangements” can be made for his own throne when he finally obtains the inheritance!
We have only covered the first chapter of Hebrews with twelve more to go (which I don’t intend to cover at this time), but now that we have lightly refreshed and realigned our perspective of Jesus Christ the Son of God imaged by Gaston, we need to give the contesting angel a just review of the facts. We have already heard his argument in the presentation of the animation, now we are only looking at the evidence for the facts:
Who is the Beast?
* * * * * * *
(*1) Email
Subject: Storm
From: A friend
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 05:29:49 -0700
To: Me
Did you hear about the unique storm that hit the east coast this last week, much of the force hit DC. It surprised the weathermen by the time they saw it coming it was to late. It did lots of damage to several states but it came on shore in the DC area.
It was more like the hand of God showing warning signs to our leaders.
[Note this storm was Pre-Hurricane Sandy of October 22-31, 2012]
________________________
While it is true these kinds of things are perhaps warning signs to us all (the leaders are simply whom WE put there), there is just no way that will sell because the scriptures don't tell us these are specifically signs, [though] they are foretold to us believers as maybe "pre-signs" as it were. But even the great signs of the coming of the Lord do not include storms and seas as even pre-signs (Matthew 24:6-7).
I more liken these things to the rocks that would have cried out praising Jesus as God if the people had not (Luke 19:40). Since America has stopped publicly and officially proclaiming that Jesus is God, the seas will take up that job (Psalm 98:7-8 in context) and do it in power. Someone or something is going to praise the greatness of God and it really had better be us!
In this way we see the sea take up our role while at the same time reflecting the destruction of our own wickedness for our failure (Isaiah 57:20-21, Jude 1:12-13). Scripturally the sea has always prophetically represented the masses of mankind (Daniel 7:3), whether in turmoil (Jeremiah 51:42) or at rest (Revelation 4:6, 15:2) but regardless it is always in the specific hand of God to do his specific will (Jonah 1:4, Mark 4:39) and not random as we like to think (Zechariah 6:7).
So are such storms warning signs to those in power? Perhaps, but more rather it is a warning sign to us the masses, who the seas actually represent.
Because the nation of America has now officially ended our proclamation that Jesus is our God ("Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation..." Barack Obama,) I believe we will see a dramatic and persistent increase in the seas, and other creation, taking up that role to our own devastation for our failure.
“For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” Romans 8:22-23.
This groaning and redemption of the entire creation and not just mankind, is a subject for a later study!
(*2) John 8:55-58,
Jesus used this exact phrase “before Abraham was, I am” to make clear to these Jewish scholars that he was declaring himself to be the voice speaking from the burning bush (Exodus 3:3,13-14), it is this clear declaration that moved them to attempt to stone him for proclaiming himself to be GOD.
(*3) Nephilim:
These demonic giants were the reason the people feared to cross the Jordan into the Promised Land (Numbers 13:31-33) and were the resident occupants of the land that the next-generation Hebrews conquered through total genocide of this demonic race.
Being the special people of Satan, we now know why Satan is so determined to make retribution by the genocide of the Hebrews; the special people of God. While this retribution seems to thus be justified, don’t forget the pre-flood overrunning of God’s earth by Satan’s people first. Today’s Islam is only a re-enactment of an old play.
(*4) See Post 179 “Zechariah 1 Cliff’s Notes” http://when-did-reason-die. blogspot.com/2011/04/zec-1-cliffs-notes.html).
*
- Part Four -
Line By Line - Hebrews 1
Post 252
Recommended Pre-reading: Hebrews 1-3.
[2/4/14: corrected a limited understanding of Sarah being Abraham's "sister"]
There are so many things in the last post that deserve deeper exploration but the most important of them is to present a different report of Gaston that can cleanse the foul and Evil presentation of the Son of God. The only sufficient cleansing agent for such a thing is “the water (Spirit) of the word (Son)” (Acts 11:16, Ephesians 5:26). The Ashes of the Red Heifer somewhat additional (Numbers 19:1-10).
As I pursued this primary concept I was constantly led back to Hebrews, yet the important and topically relevant material there is so plentiful that to do it justice I would need to write an entire book on nothing but the exposition of Hebrews but to do so would loose track of our more limited topic.
Oh what to do?!
I cannot beg you strong enough to put my writing on hold and go earnestly but simply read through the first three Chapters of Hebrews for yourself. Don’t get stalled in study, I want you to get its scope. If you can readily see the relevance, and the Spirit is leading your understanding, then by all means do not stop there, continue through chapter five at least, it just keeps going in amazing answer to this whole Beauty and the Beast demonic fairytale presentation of Christ as it applies to our larger study of those who refused to Cross the Jordan River, but more specifically among them; to the men of Korah who challenged the role of Moses (Numbers 16:1-40) and to them of the multitude who in their emotions and reason, judged Moses (Jesus) for the very harsh results! (Numbers 14:41-50).
This is by far the more important concern for us today who are so bold as to assume our intellectual and emotional reasoning is of such skill and ability as to make judgment on God’s judgments! (Deuteronomy 12:8-9).
But, if you can hardly wade through the first three chapters of Hebrews in an inability to see the connection, that’s good enough, we will explore the first together, but please, give it a very earnest effort to hear God’s Spirit show you how those three chapters apply to our present topic.
But what is our present topic?
The fairytale of Beauty and the Beast has done a very convincing job of declaring that Jesus the Messiah is a buffoon and that the Beast is where the reward of love rightfully belongs and is to be found. THAT is the topic, and that topic is not applied in a fairytale; it is even now being applied in the Government of the United States and in the homes and families of every American regardless of religious persuasion. And since Muslims Jews and Christians all agree the true faith came through Abraham, then the discussion should be an honest evaluation of just what present faith holds accurately to the faith of Abraham; in otherwords; how did Abraham act out his faith? Such a study will seem to take us fully off target but we can hardly reach the target without getting to the source. In a roundabout way I am and have been describing the complex faith of Abraham through this Blog. Beauty and the Beast simply addresses our present day perverted application quite plainly.
Allow me an attempt to restrain myself from diverting into the many wonderful details of Hebrews in an effort to expound only on the topical relative message. Remember, we are looking for the rightful authority of Christ as represented by Gaston; “What makes him the right choice over the Beast?”
* * *
Hebrews 1:1-2a
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son…”
It took me a while to realize that “sundry times” and “diverse manners” are single Greek words. If we don’t bother to define such details we tend to simply mush these meanings together into a soup of vague and useless randomness, but Paul is here accurately describing that God has over time spoken his singular message to all the fathers and prophets of our faith in many different methods through different times, and now in our time (the last days era of Daniel 7’s fourth Diverse Beast) he has spoken that same message in yet another “diverse manner” i.e. through his own Son… Through GOD’S actual SON! (Isaiah 9:6+7:14).
So what’s the point Paul is making?
If God had all sorts of different ideas he felt like telling humanity through the thousands of years of history, then everything of the faith we collect would indeed be a mush soup of randomness that could mean anything we wanted it to or nothing significant, because God changes what he says from time to time. The importance of what Paul is telling us is that God is not random and his message has not changed from his first delivery of it even though he has used a whole lot of different approaches for us to collect and combine them all to have many different tellings of the same message. We identify these as the cyclic nature and pattern of scripture, and many different expressions of the same message adds many levels of confirmation to the singular truth of it; a “how do I love you? Let me count the ways” kind of thing. To segregate the message of God by the delivery method used is to imagine “dispensations” where God supposedly has a different message at different times.
Example: God made all the different species with a singular thread of consistency to show his sole authorship of everything, but because we choose to view each species as a different “dispensation” in time, we come to the wrong conclusion that their similarities prove they all evolved from the same genus with random changes over time to arrive at a completely different end than the beginning intended. But if we go through scripture and read the foundational message of all the fathers and all the prophets we discover that all their different tellings add up to the same consistent message, even Old and New Testaments. Truly God does not change and his message is consistent too. Yes, there are dispensations (I Corinthians 9:17, Ephesians 1:10, 3:2, Colossians 1:25) but only in the delivery of the message not in the message itself.
So what is the all-important, none-changing message?
Being the last days and nearing the time of harvest (Matthew 21:34), the message is found in the one who delivered it here at the last (Matthew 21:37-39) because he is also the same one who made it all at the beginning; call it a “wrap up.”
Hebrews 1:2
“(God) Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds (165);”
worlds 165 aion; from the same as 104; properly an age…
We are told here (and it was already confirmed by miracles and confirmation of the very same message told to the fathers and prophets [Matthew 21:34-36]), that this messenger is the Son of God (Genesis 22:7-8, Matthew 21:37). God sent his Son, in these last days, to speak his consistent message of salvation to us in yet another diverse way. Abraham foresaw that message and the means by which it would be delivered, when he pre-acted out the sacrifice of his own son on the same Mountain God would later use (Genesis 22:1-14), as well as many other confirming events of understanding the consistent message spoke in a previous way (Genesis 15:13-16, 17:19, 18:16-21, 22:15-19, etc.). This is in fact the dividing line of all dividing lines between God and Allah; it is that God, through Abraham’s foreshadowing Type pre-reenactment provided his own son Isaac as a sacrifice, while Allah through Abraham provided no such sacrifice Type by Ishmael (Genesis 17:18-22, Qur’an 4:157-158). Both faiths come through Abraham but only one has the “In many parts and many ways of old” confirmation through time of that singular salvation message of the True God of love and peace and self-sacrifice for his people (Genesis 17:18-19 + James 1:16-17 = Genesis 17: 21 + James 1:18).
I am beginning to hear regularly the parroting of ignorant Americans that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all basically the same faith. But without the sacrifice of God’s actual Son for our salvation, there is no Christianity, and without that same Son there is now no real Judaism (Genesis 49:10, Daniel 9:25), but with that Son there is no Islam. Christianity does not have “a good concept” kind of faith that would continue if there was no Son of God; The Son of God is EVERYTHING, he made everything, and sustains everything (Colossians 1:12-16), he sacrificed himself for everything (John 3:16-17), and still holds everything together (Colossians 1:17-18), that everything might have the opportunity to be redeemed (Luke 3:8-9) (*1).
Who is this declared Son of God by whom the message of salvation is given to everyone in these last days?
Hebrews 1:2 finishes a two verse declaration of the authority behind the most recent telling of the salvation message by revealing the authority of the message giver. In otherwords; the message means nothing unless the giver has the proper authority to back it up. This giver has both the authority as the appointed giver and as the natural provider!
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds (ages);”
There are three declarations here regarding his Son;
1. God spoke his age-old consistent message to us, now through his Son.
2. God appointed his Son to be the heir of all things.
3. God, through his Son, made the world and all it’s various ages.
This is confirmed many times in Genesis 1 “And God (430) said…” as it is now revealed that God’s Son is the word of God that did the saying (John 1:1-3+, 8:55-58 *2) and thereby “saying”, produced mankind in the marriage of two distinct parts; male and female, in the image of God creating a Son. Elohiym; a plurality of One.
God 430 elohiym; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God…
This is the Son of God, who in our age, at the last days, is declaring God’s singular consistent unchanging message of salvation to mankind. But frankly the message, though inseparably tied, has quickly become far secondary to the rave review of the message giver himself, and now we see this is in rebuttal to (the father of the Beast;) Satan’s challenge of the Son’s right to inherit everything. Hebrews is the Son’s legal argument:
Hebrews 1:3
…“(the Son) Who being the brightness of his (the Father’s) glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he (the Son) had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;”
Oh how I crave to explain in detail all that is said here regarding the effulgence of this Son as in quantum mechanics he abundantly distributes the light of God’s glory in a wave and not miserly in a studied (observed) particle, or to describe his exact expression of God’s substance, or the all supporting power of God’s word and its ability to literally maintain all things, his lone self-sacrifice and its redeeming qualities to restore the destroyed, and the place of all honor and authority granted to him by The Father. The Son of God is actually the perfect expression of God himself (John 5:30) and not a “lone wolf” separate from his Father. These are the beginnings of his “credentials” that Hebrews shows us, but for brevity we must continue.
Hebrews 1:4
“Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.”
Now we begin to see a very clear distinction of this Son’s comparison not with the lesser animals, or even with lesser humanity; but with God’s glorious creation of angels themselves, who have a very excellent name (3686) indeed.
Name 3686 onoma; from a presumed derivative of the base of 1097 (compare 3685); a “name” (literally or figuratively) (authority, character):-- called, (+sur)name(-d).
1097 ginosko; a prolonged form of a primitive verb; to “know” (absolute)…
This name is not just the identity by which we call someone, but the identity of who he is by his recorded heraldry, i.e. nature. By example; angels are also named the sons of God (Genesis 6:2,4, Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7) while humanity is not (besides Adam himself)... yet we are given the opportunity to be adopted as sons of God (John 1:12, Romans 8:14, Galatians 4:6-7, Philippians 2:15, I John 3:1-2.), so what makes the difference? Chuck Missler’s The Return of the Nephilim podcast describes it as “direct creation” as opposed to indirect generations; Adam was indeed a direct creation of God and was therefore a “son of God” like the angels, but his children were indirectly created from man and so are called “sons of Adam” not sons of God (Luke 3:38). I agree.
This leads to the discovery strangely enough, that Adam’s wife was kindof a combination as she was a direct creation of God but he used Adam’s material to make her and so we see again she is made in the accurate image Type of Christ from God, who was also both the Son of God and a son of man for similar causes (Luke 1:35 + Matthew 8:20 = Matthew 4:3-4, 9:6, 12:8), only the genders and related accountabilities were switched for very important reasons too complex to explain here but tied to our Gender Typology and its lineage, which we will begin to explore in Post 292 “Beyond the Harbingers” (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2013/03/beyond-harbingers.html).
But now we have several factors that become apparent in this short verse;
1. The Son of God was made “better” than the angels because his name was better.
2. This Son of God obtained this better name.
3. And that this better name was obtained by inheritance.
The angels have the name “sons of God” by the fact it was a direct creation, while this half-direct creation Son was by "the other half" made to inherit the title from the Father in the delayed pedigree way of sons and fathers. Inheritance comes only by a legally defined relationship with the one through whom the inheritance comes; this Son had that legal standing through his human mother.
How?
The specific wording of this verse leads us to understand that this Son of God was not made as the angels were made, but made better (Hebrews 2:16). Not through direct creation, as “a product” attached to the Creator by famous handiwork (which they were more so), but by obtaining the inheritance as a true Son of the Father. Yet for a time, before he obtains that inheritance, he might appear by the temporal focus of creation to be on less that equal footing with the angels to claim the inheritance. In otherwords the angels have an arguable case of apparent equal or better worthiness to receive the inheritance as “sons” of God; “Why should it go to the less direct ‘Son’ of God, who is so much flesh that, unlike angels, he can even be killed?”
The next verses provide the answer;
Hebrews 1:5
“For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I (1080)begotten thee? (Psalm 2:7) And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?”
These are very intimate claims. God is without apology claiming that he fathered this Son and that he confesses that this is his son also in the God/human adoption of a son. God is speaking of an actual father-son relationship with humanity not ignoring the complexity that he is God. Although directly created by the Father and so called sons in a different way, the angels had no such position real or recognized by the Father, so although the angels were made by God, only this Son was made by God to be his actual Son of lineage and adopted son of declaration and therefore worthy of the inheritance in two ways. This Son was made of his own stuff. That is the meaning of the word begotten:
begotten 1080 gennao; from a variation of 1085; from a variation of 1085; to procreate (properly, of the father, but by extension of the mother); figuratively, to regenerate:-- bear, beget, be born, bring forth, conceive, be delivered of, gender, make, spring.
John 3:16’s famous use of begotten makes this especially unique:
only-begotten 3439 monogenes; from 3441 and 1096; only-born, i.e. sole:-- only (begotten, child).
But although that is doubly good enough for a very special legal inheritance, in the elimination of the angel’s potential cry of “Unfair!” God takes it several steps further;
Hebrews 1:6-8
“And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom.”
With all the translational-capitalized first-word verse-segregation and the capitalized replacement-of-quotations of older verses, it becomes hard to understand, so let me simply adjust that part, keeping the words and context in tact:
And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world (the birth of his Son), he saith; “(this is my firstbegotton) and let all the angels of God worship him.”
And of the angels (in comparison) he saith; “(I God,)who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire” but unto the Son (again in contrast) he saith; “Thy throne, O God (my Son), is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom”.
Scripturally nothing and no one is permitted to be worshipped but God himself (Exodus 20:3, Matthew 4:10, Revelation 19:10). Yet here the angels were told to worship the Son when he was brought into the world as the human firstborn inheritor now declared to be the inheritor Son of God though Satan found himself on earth first as did Ishmael. This Son cannot be an acquired position but must be a “spiritual genetic DNA test” kind of God or he could not be “God-approved” worshipped as God. He is either ACTUALLY God or not. “Son of God” (capital) and “sons of God” (creations) are not the same things, and by mankind’s adoption as “sons of God” into a family relationship above the angels, yet still not worshipped even as gods, we know that the DNA is vital to actually being God. As represented by the true son of promise coming from an impossible Sarah herself (because of both; lifelong barrenness and extreme age), this promised DNA Son of God was accomplished through the promised miracle (virgin) birth of Mary (Luke 1:34-35) where the Holy Spirit provided the nonhuman God DNA to the specific woman promised, in a none human way. Every cell in this Son’s body was composed of DNA that was human from his mother and yet also God from his Father. Today such a thought is wrongly profaned by Greek Mythology and so hushed even in full consideration of its truth, so Satan seems to win-over the human jury not by proving the Son a lie but by making the thought spiritually repulsive through distortion, not only by Greek Mythology but by the Nephilim from which the mythology is based (Genesis 6:4, Jude 6-7, II Peter 2:4-5 *3). I intend to address this in detail later.
God gave the angels a very glorious position and nature (ministers of fire) but to this Son through birth he gave the name God and the throne to match! The only way this could not be utter blasphemy is if this creation was actually God come in the flesh, which is what is claimed and is evidentially further proven by his kingdom fulfilling the righteousness of the scepter of God himself. This Son’s true people conduct themselves in the faith of Abraham’s faith (Genesis 21:10-11), that is; like Cinderella, reactively waiting on God through the hope of patient obedience (Genesis 21:34, II Thessalonians 3:5-6, Matthew 4:8-10) rather than proactively taking by force the promise out of time as do others, like early Sarai, who have no self-sacrificing God-Son offered for their salvation.
The definition of scepter is a bit of a rabbit trail but results in an ordained stick-of-authority by which punishment through “thumping” is meet out in administering the discipline of the kingdom. The rod of Moses by which he struck the rock is the direct Type of this Son’s scepter, who in effect used it to strike himself for the salvation of mankind. It’s the “My authority is provable” stick, and he demonstrated its power by whacking himself instead of others (John 10:17-18). By this act, this Son’s throne IS a scepter of righteousness, differing from scepters of unrighteousness in violence and hate toward others. This is the two-part argument made in the last portion of this passage beginning with “And of the angels he said”:
Hebrews 1:7-8
“And of the angels he saith; Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he saith; Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom”.
One sentence is describing the angels in their job, the other about the Son. Beginning with “But” this is simply a contrast in describing the limitation of the angels against the magnificence of the Son: One is the servant of the Lord and the other is the Lord, one is the creation and the other is the Creator. By comparing the one against the other, the angel’s great and powerful position is “put in its place”; there simply is no equal ground between them from which a fair contest can be made. Yet the still less-glorious people who refused to cross over were willing to condemn Moses himself, and thereby his God, for killing the party of Korah. The viewer of “Beauty and the Beast” is manipulated to do the same thing when Gaston kills the Beast!
The next verse further defines the nature of that God-Son’s righteous kingdom of authority and the reason for anointing him above the others:
Hebrews 1:9
“Thou (O God my Son)hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows (3353)” (from Psalm 45:7).
This can get confusing; “How is the Son of God, declared by God to be God, then as God, he is anointed by God, who is his God?”
And who are this Son’s fellows; are they then gods too? Doesn’t “fellows” indicate an equality; “If he is God then so are they?"
Fellows 3353 metochos; from 3348; participant, i.e. (as a noun) a sharer; by implication an associate:-- fellow, partaker, partner. (From Hebrews 1:9 New Testament)
Fellows 2270 chaber; from 2266; an associate:-- companion, fellow, knit together. (From the same verse in Psalm 45:7 Old Testament)
This core argument of the fallen angels is the nature of the problem between the peoples of Isaac and Ishmael, both sons of Abraham. Why does one, the second one, get the inheritance while the other, the first one, does not? But theirs is just a Type of the more foundational spiritual complaint of Islam’s god against the God of Abraham’s Hebrew faith: a faith of promise, not force of will.
Now from having already picked a side in this battle (regardless of which side) you risk blinding yourself to the true and legitimate answer in favor of a quick and emotional support of your hero that may or may not be valid. So forget Ishmael and Isaac, or Islam and Jewry, and ask the same question from the perspective of the angels who are asking:
"If the Son of God was indeed “made” in the flesh as declared, then why are his fellow “made” creations not at least equal with him?"
The fact that they are indeed his fellows is not arguable as it is God himself who declared it so in Psalms 45:7 in context. But this question does not present the real argument: It’s not a “whole batch” of generic angels asking; it’s the lead angel, the anointed cherub (Ezekiel 28:14), it’s possibly the “greatest-angel-ever-created” angel (Ezekiel 28:12-13) that is bringing the challenge; it’s the Beast claiming an equal justified right to Belle’s love, It’s a “fair and balanced trial of equal contenders” challenge.
God’s answer is not even debating that Satan and his company of angels loves Belle, but just the contemplation of such a fact confuses the minds of unlearned Christians; “Can Satan even love?” Genesis 6 tells us that this is a probability at least from his perspective of love, but again, this is not God’s argument; The argument is regarding the love of righteousness.
Both these Old and New Testament verses declare that God made the just determination because this Son loved righteousness and hated iniquity/ wickedness, and that this particular loving nature (name) is the ruling power; i.e. scepter of the throne of his kingdom, and that kingdom is eternal, because he is God. These arguments are not independent but all one argument that results in the anointing above his fellow sons of God.
But that only slightly answers the confusion of questions presented above. How are we to really understand that this creation is being called God, by God himself? (Matthew 22:42-45). Is the Christian God really monotheistic?
How wonderful God is in his explanation of spiritual things too big for our limited minds!
We suddenly “see the light” when we comprehend that woman is in the image of the Son of God as man is in the image of the Father. This is why God, through the Son, made woman from the actual body of man (Genesis 2:22) and not as an independent creation of dust then united with him only in marriage, “Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). Jesus the Son of God was “of God” made into a lesser state (position) of authority in his humanity under his Father (Galatians 4:4-7) and thereby is represented by woman specifically being man’s wife and made for the man (I Corinthians 11:7-10) being incorporated (back)into himself through marriage to be “one flesh” (Genesis 2:23-24+Ephesians 5:31 in context).
This is not about a gender power-trip but a representation of how the Son of God, different than God, is united with God and yet is of God Himself (John 1:1-4) and (re)united into one name through inheritance. Similarly Adam and Eve were both human, one is made from the other, of the same stuff yet revealed as different, and SO they (re)united as “one” in marriage (Matthew 19:5-6) to inherit his same and his stuff, and produce a mutual offspring; an entity of them both, which are called Christians. Contrary to current philosophy this institution of marriage is not just arguable customs invented by man to control women; Each gender has its responsibilities accountable to God for how they portray their Type (Ephesians 5:21-25). As the Type of God, Christian men glorify their women; the Type of Christ (Philippians 2:9), while Muslim men, as the Type of Allah, diminish their women in self-serving oppression as the Type of Allah’s servant subjects. Both concepts are actually based on the same Type; the only difference is the god that each Type represents. As American men become less Godly their representation reflects that too, and as American women do the same, their responses are less than Christ-like. This is not a matter of which fault came first as these problems are reflections of their Types alone; Often God seems unconcerned that his wife is abused or mistreated yet she is expected to maintain her faith and loyalty while confused. Conversely God’s love and commitment to his wife remains unaltered by her abuse of the marriage and resulting unhappiness (Isaiah 50:1).
This DNA/genus relational Type is again shown to us in Abraham, the Type of God, who did not marry a strange woman but his (269: loosely, figurative) “sister”, “made from the same stuff” as it were. God made sure to emphasize this important point as Abraham more than once made a big deal of the issue that his wife was his sister while keeping the details vague. There are lots of “fellows” of Sarah, but Abraham chose her for many reasons, and “by happen chance” including that she was from the same familial stuff as he, which is an image of Eve from Adam, itself foreshadowing that the Son would be of the same stuff as the Father, as well as showing that the Church through regeneration inclusion of the Holy Ghost is actually of Christ, which is why Jesus is called the firstborn of many brethren (Romans 8:29, Hebrews 1:6). It’s all a big repeating cycle of the same idea in many different ways.
As a woman recently stated while debating a group of Woman's-Libers; “Why would we want to be men, we have the better deal!” Man was made from Dirt but Woman was made from refined flesh! Man has the burden of responsibility while woman gets the beauty, the feminine refinement, the glory of that femininity, and the freedom under the man’s provision and protection.
I don’t wish to rabbit trail this topic but since we are studying Gender Typology I feel it important to show that here in Hebrews (as well as many other scriptures) this position of “wife” through marriage/inheritance/ election, is an extraordinarily elevated and glorious position expressed in Cinderella becoming the wife of the greatly desired prince that would utterly change her life. That position comes only through the prince, but once obtained, is all the glory that can possibly be received beyond what was imagined (Ephesians 3:17-20)! This is why in the past, woman were not given an inheritance or the means to provide for themselves; so that no matter the diminished degree of success of the man, because he was the man, he was still her provider and this maintained the proper Type which was the intent of God for us to understand what he, God himself, was offering to us his bride.
In the old days we used to the phrase; “putting her onto a pedestal”, but today, women in general, having the means and freedom to provide for themselves (even far better than many men could provide) despise such a thought of being lifted above (as originally “from below”), because they want to earn their own standing as equals without depending on their man. This is purely an issue of foundational pride regarding equality; exactly as Satan’s endeavor against God (Genesis 3:5+ Isaiah 14:14).
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t suppose this is intentionally evil, not coming from an intentionally evil heart, but like Belle, is from an evil heart as a result of a confused and diminished society no longer able to guided her by correct biblical faith. So now, by the godless spirit of hell, and by it’s careful instruction to desire “more”, she is unwilling to continue in that confusion of her society, not having in herself an informed heart of right understanding, (See post 197 Transition).
Now, like Belle, today’s women/church, resulting from corrupt cultural teachings regarding their happiness, have in the unintentional spirit of rebellion flung off the image of being the wife of the Son and are now boldly declaring that she is intellectually equal or even better than Gaston and therefore free to make her own equally valid choices in life contrary to his desire (Numbers 16:1-3). And so she is free (like the Jews who rejected their suitor), but that freedom does not change the results of good and evil choices and she was not designed by gender to guide her own path, though as Christ, her loving suitor is usually of the nature not to enslave her against her will but to let her have her way if that’s what she requires to be happy (Matthew 18:18), (obviously with life-saving limitations). I marvel at these headstrong independent women who despise their husband even more for his tolerant love and so publicly accuse him of holding her back! Beauty and the Beast has shown this to us very clearly, and it just seems right because we have been led to believe that it’s all about Belle and what she wants. This translates DIRECTLY to Christianity today as we literally argue with Christ how he shouldn’t manage our lives, and accuse him of holding us back;
“If I want to love the Beast that’s my business, we haven’t consummated this relationship that you want so bad!”
But we cannot ignore the scripturally valid parable of the fairytale that shows, as a young resident of the town, she is already the betrothed bride in the body of Christ (Romans 12:5, I Corinthians 12:27, Ephesians 3:6, 5:23); i.e. she is a Christian and not an enchanted item in the castle of the Beast. In otherwords; she is a “son of Adam” and that makes her redeemable by Gaston if she will but have him, which he is diligently ready to do after setting up the wedding before officially proposing, which is scripturally sound.
This Son of God is declared by God to be her God because his kingdom is the love of righteousness and the hatred of iniquity. His promised bride needs those protective parameters and as a fiancé should adapt them for herself in recognition that it will save her from an internal confusion of falling in love with the Beast. Gaston was not the one failing his role but Belle could fill your ear with her opinions on that and what she expected her Savior to be like. In yet another onion layer practical application, Belle is the teenage daughter who fights with her father over his efforts to protect her from predator men to which she gravitates.
The two contenders (Gaston and the Beast) could not be any different in their very natures and are of completely different stuff (Gaston wants to give his love to Belle while the Beast needs to get love from Belle). Beauty and the Beast does not argue the fact that the Beast is only a prince like Gaston and therefore we know he is either the “(S)on of God” prince, or the contending angel “(s)on of God” prince. Obviously God is the undisputed King, though whether Allah or Jehovah is now disputed, as the fairytale changes viewpoints of the same story of Cinderella.
But if Satan is God as he now declares, then the Beast prince can’t actually be Satan. Hmmm, who then is the Beast? It is in effect the son that Satan/Allah claims not to have because Satan is not a giving God as he pretends; he’s only a selfish prince as even the stained glass window admits. This confusion is dramatically described in Revelation 17:8 as we began to discuss in post 198 Finally Revelation 17 7-9 and post 199 The Seventh King regarding this Beast that crawls from the Bottomless Pit. (I know you haven’t forgotten this original topic goal!).
"How, in the nature of God, does the Son of God obtain the inheritance?"
By his voluntary purging of our sin (Hebrews 1:3) through his sacrificial death spoken of in a different way at a different time by the implementation of animal sacrifices (Exodus 10:25). Yes, but even further back, in yet a different manner and time than we are even privy to (Genesis 4:1-5).
"But why was this self-sacrifice of the Son necessary to obtain the inheritance that was rightfully his anyway?"
Because without the self-sacrifice he would not have left the unity (“Singularity”) with the Father and would have never been “made” a son of man who needed an inheritance to claim what is the Father’s. As God, for man’s sake, he was made a man and therefore a necessary eventual inheritor of what is God’s. None of this would yet be necessary if he just returned to the previous state after his crucifixion, but he didn’t, nor could he. Having been made a man with an eternal soul, he will always be a man for eternity, yet with the rightful inheritance as the God he is. No angel fits that bill, not even the covering cherub.
But not too far off in the future, I propose that mankind will see a new thing (Ezekiel 28:3-6). I believe the Beast of Islam will imitate his own version of that necessary sacrifice that validates the position of authority which he is still contesting until the inheritance is obtained (Psalm 110:1), and will therefore seem to sacrifice his angry destructive nature for Christian Belle, showing her that her love indeed has a great value to calm the Beast. Her love will seem to save the world and who can argue with that then?! (*4).
Gaston will be made the fool and villain for warning that “loving the Beast is the wrong thing to do”. After all, the evidence will show the Beast to be changed by her and the world will actually rest because of it (Revelation 13:3-4, Daniel 11:21,24a, 9:27a, I Thessalonians 5:3, Zechariah 1:11?), this will not be a good time for the Biblical Christians to publicly cry “Danger!” even thought it is true (Amos 5:13). The true Christian argument will appear both hollow and evil in their refusal to forgive Satan and join the Beast with the (apostate) Christians (Belle) in a peaceful global unification of all religions. At that point the true biblical Christian argument will no longer be made publicly logical but kept internally spiritual in simple waiting obedience to Jesus Christ and his kingdom of righteousness regardless of Global appearances and the consequences for refusal. The only reason to resist conforming to this wonderful globalization of peace is because the scriptures have already warned us by prophecy that this would happen as a ploy of Satan the destroyer (Jeremiah 9:5-6, Daniel 8:24-25a, I Thessalonians 5:3). This is the value and power of prophecy; its nature of fulfillment confirms its message. The viewer and Belle both see her relationship with the Beast as a wonderful outcome of the circumstances but the prophecy shows the honeymoon to be very short lived before the Beast reverts to his true nature of wrath and violence unimaginable (Revelation 13:5-18). Belle will actually be surprised that her love somehow has no power of persuasion anymore. Her bewildered confusion will be genuine but she planned that course way back when she wanted an undefined “more” “in the great wide somewhere” without concern of where that somewhere would lead. Belle was simply following her heart (Jeremiah 17:9, Hosea 7:2, Acts 8:22). So did a cruel God send her to hell with the Beast or did she crave it and demand it with all her willful longing?
Hebrews 1:10-12
declares the past and future of this Son of God relative to the Creation, but they are there as a counter argument to the angel who is contesting his inheritance. I have simply left them out for space.
Hebrews 1:13-14
“But to which of the angels said he (God) at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all (merely) ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them (mere men) who shall be heirs of salvation?”
I hesitate to include “merely” here because by no means are angles ever “merely” unless directly compared to the Son of God, but that is exactly what this passage is doing. In comparison it is pitifully “mereful” for angels to be the ministers of those creatures made even lower than they, while loosely speaking God has “scooched over" as it were, to make room for his Son to sit on the throne until “arrangements” can be made for his own throne when he finally obtains the inheritance!
We have only covered the first chapter of Hebrews with twelve more to go (which I don’t intend to cover at this time), but now that we have lightly refreshed and realigned our perspective of Jesus Christ the Son of God imaged by Gaston, we need to give the contesting angel a just review of the facts. We have already heard his argument in the presentation of the animation, now we are only looking at the evidence for the facts:
Who is the Beast?
* * * * * * *
(*1) Email
Subject: Storm
From: A friend
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 05:29:49 -0700
To: Me
Did you hear about the unique storm that hit the east coast this last week, much of the force hit DC. It surprised the weathermen by the time they saw it coming it was to late. It did lots of damage to several states but it came on shore in the DC area.
It was more like the hand of God showing warning signs to our leaders.
[Note this storm was Pre-Hurricane Sandy of October 22-31, 2012]
________________________
While it is true these kinds of things are perhaps warning signs to us all (the leaders are simply whom WE put there), there is just no way that will sell because the scriptures don't tell us these are specifically signs, [though] they are foretold to us believers as maybe "pre-signs" as it were. But even the great signs of the coming of the Lord do not include storms and seas as even pre-signs (Matthew 24:6-7).
I more liken these things to the rocks that would have cried out praising Jesus as God if the people had not (Luke 19:40). Since America has stopped publicly and officially proclaiming that Jesus is God, the seas will take up that job (Psalm 98:7-8 in context) and do it in power. Someone or something is going to praise the greatness of God and it really had better be us!
In this way we see the sea take up our role while at the same time reflecting the destruction of our own wickedness for our failure (Isaiah 57:20-21, Jude 1:12-13). Scripturally the sea has always prophetically represented the masses of mankind (Daniel 7:3), whether in turmoil (Jeremiah 51:42) or at rest (Revelation 4:6, 15:2) but regardless it is always in the specific hand of God to do his specific will (Jonah 1:4, Mark 4:39) and not random as we like to think (Zechariah 6:7).
So are such storms warning signs to those in power? Perhaps, but more rather it is a warning sign to us the masses, who the seas actually represent.
Because the nation of America has now officially ended our proclamation that Jesus is our God ("Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation..." Barack Obama,) I believe we will see a dramatic and persistent increase in the seas, and other creation, taking up that role to our own devastation for our failure.
“For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” Romans 8:22-23.
This groaning and redemption of the entire creation and not just mankind, is a subject for a later study!
(*2) John 8:55-58,
Jesus used this exact phrase “before Abraham was, I am” to make clear to these Jewish scholars that he was declaring himself to be the voice speaking from the burning bush (Exodus 3:3,13-14), it is this clear declaration that moved them to attempt to stone him for proclaiming himself to be GOD.
(*3) Nephilim:
These demonic giants were the reason the people feared to cross the Jordan into the Promised Land (Numbers 13:31-33) and were the resident occupants of the land that the next-generation Hebrews conquered through total genocide of this demonic race.
Being the special people of Satan, we now know why Satan is so determined to make retribution by the genocide of the Hebrews; the special people of God. While this retribution seems to thus be justified, don’t forget the pre-flood overrunning of God’s earth by Satan’s people first. Today’s Islam is only a re-enactment of an old play.
(*4) See Post 179 “Zechariah 1 Cliff’s Notes” http://when-did-reason-die. blogspot.com/2011/04/zec-1-cliffs-notes.html).
*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)