Holiness Profaned

Post 297

For a while now I have been mulling over a very big concept attempting to break it down into manageable portions useful to practical application. As in tracking the quantum movements of photons it is impossible to retain a focus on the wave action at the same time so for the moment let’s just ignore the very big concept while we explore the several tiny practical applications and let the grand wave go where it will. But first let’s lightly explore the big picture we are about to dissect:

It seems apparent that intelligent humanity has arrived at a place where the IF-THEN principle has been forgotten; the Creator’s cause-and-effect laws of nature has apparently been abrogated (*1c) by man himself, having by coup supposed to have succeeded Him for the authority to do so (*1a). In a non-realistic intellectual world where scientifically virtually everything that is can suddenly explode into being from virtually nothing and from nowhere, without cause (*2), the IF-THEN principle has no place: If I rob you then I must pay it back with penalty, If I molest you then I must pay restitution, If I kill you then I must be killed; these are all IF-THEN principles that have no place in such a world where rules of reality have been waived by desired illusions of reality. From petty-thieves to Presidents the intellectual mindframe of American thinking has changed and by complexity the guilty is now the person who has something worth stealing and not the person who steals it. The provocative raped is now the guilty for having defrauded the innocent rapist whose life is destroyed by the subsequent trial. Freedom is seen as the cause of global unrest. The greed driven endeavor to create a product that the world needs and wants is accused of manipulating the masses while the masses by virtue driven violence destroy the production that they need and want (*3). The marketers have moved beyond merchandising TO us and have taken up making merchandise OF us, and we don’t seem to mind because we favor the result (such as FaceBook). The most violent religion on the face of the earth is called the religion of peace while the most benevolent religion on the earth is accused of evidential violence. Everyone is simultaneously equally guilty and innocent of everything and nothing, and those who cry “Don’t judge” are the ones who punish those who disagree with them. All of this is intellectually possible because the IF-THEN principle has been rejected by the collective of those educated by the wholly un-documentable scientific “fact” that the entire universe is just an undirected accident in time with no meaning or purpose and therefore no foundational morality by which it must be run. It is “common knowledge” that the universe is just a gigantic free-for-all while the “superior” intellectual few push their agenda-driven propaganda, herding the masses to give advantage to the few because the slaughter room is decorated with promises that appeal to our lusts like bait to a trap.

I am not here trying to change the minds of these “Great Intellects”; they are beyond reasoning by any function based in reality beyond a base selfishness appealingly labeled favorably as ‘Survival of the Fittest.’ What I am attempting to do is to wake up the slothful that haven’t yet succumbed to such idiocy. The problem is that by simply recognizing the foolishness as such the slothful assume they are awake, but this simplistic intellectual yin-and-yang condition is in fact the stage that transitions from reality to illusion and ends in just such foolish intellectualism as those they presently disdain. Therefore let’s explore some details in the simple IF-THEN principle that have been forgotten even by those who are trying but failing to apply it.
* * *

I find that the IF-THEN principle comes with three distinct elements:

1. The Condition: “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge…” Hosea 4:6
(If ignorant THEN destroyed).

2. The inoperative Solution: “IF my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; THEN will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land” II Chronicles 7:14
(IF you act THEN I will do).

3. The missing Key: “Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and shew thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not” Jeremiah 33:3.
(IF you call unto me THEN I will provide the missing knowledge of part 1 that applies in part 2).

It is by the ignorance of how these three elements interact that God’s people find themselves collectively in irresolvable destruction while they attempt and fail to apply part 2 to fix part 1 while missing part 3. So let’s take the time to briefly examine their relationship conceptually, establishing the solid ground from which the promised healing can take place.
* * *

Holiness Profaned:
Like the drug addict who knows and agrees with all the right information regarding the evils of his addiction (Malachi 2:13), the learned Christian is chock full of scriptural knowledge but none of it is able to provide the desperately needed relief from that which is destroying him, so how is it that the above verse claims it is a lack of knowledge by which God’s people are collectively destroyed?
Let’s examine an example case:

“Judah hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned the holiness of the LORD which he loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange god” Malachi 2:11 (see Genesis 38:2).

Can you name the abomination in this passage? I mean practically. Is it lying, or murder, or theft, or telling a dirty joke, or violence, or deception, or manipulation, or cheating on taxes, or… what exactly is this error that Judah commits which might translate practically to America/Christendom today? (*4).

The primary question usually asked by Christians when quoting the above II Chronicles 7:14 is; “What are our ‘wicked ways’ that must be turned from?”
Christians really have no idea what they are doing wrong. So let’s seriously ask the question with expectation of finding the solid answer; “What are our ‘wicked ways’ that must be turned from?”
Remember, this verse in Malachi is not speaking to those NOT called by God’s name, nor is this verse directed primarily at those who are called by His name but are wholly in open rebellion (the northern kingdom of Israel); it’s specifically targeting the southern kingdom of Judah, the chosen among the chosen, the presumed faithful among the rebellious. The “Isaacs” in relation to the “Ishmaels,” both children of Abram-- but not of Abraham (Genesis 17:5 vs. Genesis 16). In fact by context it is speaking to the sanctified, the ministers, the priests of Jerusalem the Holy City. It’s not to be the priests/Christians asking; “What are THEIR wicked ways…” but “What are OURS?” If we don’t know what they are PRACTICALLY, then how can we turn from them where the rubber meets the road?

Let’s explore this verse some more and see if we can draw out the answer:
First this verse is speaking nationally; collectively, but specifically identifying the few who, of all people, should be the most faithful. Observe how many times Judah is named in this accusation and how many times Israel is; it’s 3:1 (Jerusalem being the capitol of Judah and the very heart of Judah’s faith). In this verse I suggest by the relationship between Israel and Jerusalem rather than the usual Israel and Judah, it is in this case identifying Israel as the entire nation, Judah as the more righteous element of it, and Jerusalem as the very heart of that more righteous element of the entire nation. This is not speaking of a divided nation but the nation as a whole, which happens to be divided.

Next we note that there are two words used in the accusation; “Treacherously” and “Abomination,” which could both be describing the same crime against God or could be describing two different crimes. But by understanding the names as progressively distilled elements of the singular nation and that “treacherously” is a descriptive action word, we can conclude that it is one crime with two descriptions; the committed abomination is done treacherously, and this singular crime against God is done by the very heart of the most faithful portion of the divided nation. Described as a biological hazard protection facility; the deadly virus has penetrated the two stage sealed doors and is found within the inner most secure chamber, and even inside the scientist’s protective suit in that chamber, as the third and last layer of defense.
That’s bad.

Next we find this treacherous abomination, found through the entire nation and even in the very heart of the nation (Psalm 66:18, Acts 8:22), is described as having profaned the holiness of the LORD… which Judah loved.
Our heart, like our personal environmental suit, is where we hold dear our fundamental values; that which is most important to us and to our survival. And we see that it is confirmed that Judah once loved; either the LORD, or the holiness of the LORD.
Since the rest of the verse discusses an alternative marriage, we know that the whole topic is discussing a gender Typology as it relates to marriage and so we might conclude that it is the LORD as Judah’s former lover that the confirmation is referencing; Judah once loved the LORD but has now married another woman. But this does not lay equally, as God the Father-- though on occasion references himself emotionally as like his children’s birth mother (Isaiah 66:13)-- is never viewed as a lover in the relationship with humanity in the female gender.

When Scripture discusses the Jewish nation as Judah, it is usually in the masculine form. Yet this does not eliminate the Gender Typology of the Nation as the wife of God; much as human men as well as women are applied in the female gender roll in the marital relationship with Jesus Christ. It can get a little confusing but the reason for this is because in humanity we play different gender rolls spiritually; whether rightly intended by God or by wrongly “cross-dressing” our own wills in roles we don’t belong. This truth is evident in a family where the Godly wife is submissive to the husband yet plays the dominate role over the children as proper. But to then dominate the husband is improperly “cross-dressing” her role (Deuteronomy 22:5, also Leviticus 7:21 if you can comprehend it).
Not to rabbit-trail this off topic but Dr. Del Tackett does a superb job explaining Sphere Sovereignty in The Truth Project Lessons 7&8, which is a must see. Too often Christians read the Scriptures casually and apply every principle they find as a simplistic fact that blanketly covers every area of life. It is imperative that we deeply understand that blending Sphere Sovereignty between spheres will result in grave and confusing errors of destruction yet similar sovereignty natures can and do apply in different spheres, like the specifically separate but necessarily complex unification of the three-branches of American Government (see The Federalist Papers No. 40-43). So getting back on topic, in this verse, Judah-- the Bride of God-- is shown in the masculine role because of the crime, which is masculine in nature. And now we see that in the masculine role, it is the Holiness of the LORD that Judah once loved but married another wife. The LORD’s holiness plays the female gender role in this case for reasons that must be drawn out.

By understanding that the nation of Israel, as the Bride of God the Father, has committed a masculine crime against her husband and his nature, we perceive that she has wrongly usurped His masculine role of choosing a spouse, and thereby breached her gender role by cross-dressing her scope of authority over His. By “wearing the pants in the family” Judah has abandon her love of God’s dominate masculine protective Holiness, which she has emasculated (*5), and not just gone a whoring after another love but actually married the daughter of a strange god. In essence Judah has played the masculine role as the “male figure” in a Lesbian relationship. This is not the same thing as if Judah would have married another god; this level or degree of spiritual profanity is as toxic as homosexuality. It is confusion, it is abomination, it is folly (Leviticus 18:22) on a foundational level. When your wife runs off with another man there is comprehension and even resolution, but what do you do when she runs off with another woman?
So comprehending the magnitude of this treacherous abomination in profaning the Holiness of the LORD by marrying the daughter of a strange god, we need to ask the question;
* * *

What or who is the daughter, and what or who is her father?
Without branching off into complex details, it seems evident that the strange god father can be simply identified as the Beast of prophecy. Since effectively all gods but Jehovah are scripturally strange, we can safely conclude simply that this strange god is Satan in one form or another. The real question is; Who is Satan’s daughter? And How/Why does Judah marry her?

Let’s start by exploring the meanings of words in this key verse:

“Judah hath dealt treacherously (898), and an abomination (8441) is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned (2490) the holiness (6944) of the LORD which he loved, and hath married (1166) the daughter of a strange (5236) god” Malachi 2:11.

Treacherously 898 bagad; a primitive root; to cover (with a garment); figuratively, to act covertly; by implication, to pillage:-- deal deceitfully (treacherously, unfaithfully), offend, transgress(-or), (depart), treacherous (dealer, -ly, man), unfaithful(-ly, man), X very. [note the masculine active roll: treacherous man, unfaithful man].

Abomination 8441 tow’ebah; or toneban; feminine active participle of 8581; properly, something disgusting (morally), i.e. (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol:-- abominable (custom, thing), abomination.
8581 ta’ab; a primitive root; to loathe, i.e. (morally) detest:-- (make to be) abhor(-red), (be, commit more, do) abominable(-ly), X utterly. [note the feminine nature of the act].

Profaned 2490 chalal; a primitive root (compare 2470); properly, to bore, i.e. (by implication) to wound, to dissolve; figuratively, to profane (a person, place or thing), to break (one’s word), to begin (as if by an “opening wedge”); denom. (from 2485) to play (the flute):-- begin (X men began), defile, X break, defile, X eat (as common things), X first, X gather the grape thereof, X take inheritance, pipe, player on instruments, pollute, (cast as) profane (self), prostitute, slay (slain), sorrow, stain, wound.
2485 chaliyl; from 2490; a flute (as perforated):-- pipe. [note the beginning nature of this new, alternate, perversion of what was established. To profane is to suddenly corrupt the original effort toward another end: i.e. bore holes in a solid pipe made to transport life-giving water, and begin playing it like a flute for entertainment: Insurrection].

Holiness 6944 qodesh; from 6942; a sacred place or thing; rarely abstract, sanctity:-- consecrated (thing), dedicated (thing), hallowed (thing), holiness, (X most) holy (X day, portion, thing), saint, sanctuary.
6942 qadash; a primitive root; to be (causatively, make, pronounce or observe as) clean (ceremonially or morally):-- appoint, bid, consecrate, dedicate, defile, hallow, (be, keep) holy(-er, place), keep, prepare, proclaim, purify, sanctify(-ied one, self), X wholly.

Married 1166 ba’al; a primitive root; to be master; hence, (as denominative from 1167) to marry:-- have dominion (over), be husband, marry(-ried, X wife).
1167 ba’al; from 1166; a master; hence, a husband, or (figuratively) owner (often used with another noun in modifications of this latter sense):-- + archer, + babbler, +bird, captain, chief man, + confederate, + have to do, + dreamer, those to whom it is due, + furious, those that are given to it, great, + hairy, he that hath it, have, + horseman, husband, lord, man, + married, master, person, + sworn, they of. [note the strictly masculine authority role].

Strange 5236 nekar; from 5234; foreign, or (concretely) a foreigner, or (abstractly) heathendom:-- alien, strange (+ -er).
5234 nakar; a primitive root; properly, to scrutinize, i.e. look intently at; hence (with recognition implied), to acknowledge, be acquainted with, care for, respect, revere, or (with suspicion implied), to disregard, ignore, be strange toward, reject, resign, dissimulate (as if ignorant or disowning):-- acknowledge, X could, deliver, discern, dissemble, estrange, feign self to be another, know, take knowledge (notice), perceive, regard, (have) respect, behave (make) self strange(-ly). [note: by 5236 coming from 5234, we see that this strange god, whether identified or not, is one who is specifically recognized as NOT natural to the common faith; knowing what it ISN’T does not automatically identify what it IS].

What we discover in the details is that Judah, as the bride of God, has perverted what was established in that relationship and used it to covertly take up the masculine role in a new relationship with a feminine entity unfamiliar to the previous practice of faith. In such a complete and total overturning of every element established, the destruction is unrecoverable. There is simply no foundation from which to rebuild (Psalm 11:3).
As third-party observers significantly at risk of following their destructive example, we need to explore the details of just who this feminine entity is and how they came to love her to the point of marriage. This is the main focus of the next lengthy section of Posts I am calling; The Mystery Is Not The Beast.
* * * * * * *

(*1) Abrogate:

(*1a) To annul by an authoritative act; to abolish by the authority of the maker or his successor; -- Applied to the repeal of laws, decrees, ordinances, the abolition of established customs, &c.
Let us see whether the New Testament abrogates what we so frequently see in the Old. -- South.
Whose laws, like those of the Medes and Persians, they cannot alter or abrogate. -- Burke.
Syn. - to abolish; annul; do away; set aside; revoke; repeal; cancel; annihilate. See ABOLISH. -- Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary 1881.

(*1b) To annul by an authoritative act; to abolish; repeal. - Syn. annul, revoke, repeal, cancel. See ABOLISH. -- Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 5th edition 1948.

(*1c) 1. to abolish by authoritative action: annul 2. to treat as nonexistent abrogating their responsibilities Syn. see nullify. Examples • the U.S. Congress can abrogate old treaties that are unfair to Native Americans -- Merriam-Webster 2013 electronic dictionary app.

I have included these three definitions, slightly changed over time, to show the small but powerful “evolution” of how this concept has been altered to accommodate the abrogating desire of the times.

(*2) The theory of Evolution, as it violates, or at least greatly stretches beyond its boundaries, the actual definition of the word itself.

(*3) “On the one hand, a commune can’t bank on the ‘welfare state’ being around forever, and on the other, it can’t count on living for long off shoplifting, nighttime dumpster diving at supermarkets or in the warehouses of the industrial zones, misdirecting government subsidies, ripping off insurance companies and other frauds, in a word: plunder. So it has to consider how to continually increase the level and scope of its self-organization. Nothing would be more logical than using the lathes, milling machines, and photocopiers sold at a discount after a factory closure [which we forced] to support a conspiracy against commodity society.” - The Coming Insurrection p.105.

(*4) In previous Posts I have boldly suggested that America is the Gentile Age version of the Promised Land in Type as Israel was in the Previous Age. In this way I am not claiming America is the sum of Christianity but that it is/was the center, the power, the seat, the figurehead, of Christianity to the world. As America falls so falls Christendom as a global power to be reckoned with. But the fall of America in no wise destroys Christianity, which lives in the hearts of individuals faithful to Christ and his Word anymore than the fall of Israel destroyed the Jews. I continue to use America as the figurehead representation of the fallen church power because like Israel, even destroyed, the representation of God’s people remains. As the prophets promised God would restore Israel to her glory never to again be removed (Isaiah 45:17, II Chronicles 21:7, Hebrew 8:10-12, etc.), so the Son of God promised to return and gather his faithful followers never to again be separated from himself (John 14:3, II Thessalonians 2:13-14, I Thessalonians 4:16-17).

(*5) Emasculate: 1. To castrate; geld. 2. To deprive of masculine vigor or spirit; to weaken. - adj. Deprived of virility or vigor.
*