Normal families, normal jobs, normal political views, as they come back in vogue, infuriate SJWs.
Must the ordinary people in America–of all races and (lawful) interests–who work hard at jobs and try to love & provide safe environments and good educations for their kids constantly apologize for who they are, what they do and what they believe? The last eight years has made many believe so.
But why? How has ‘normal’ become so maligned?
Lots of money has been thrown at an effort to destroy America and the ideals of family, loyalty, and work that have contributed to the success–so far–of the Great American Experiment. Those who, throughout history, have benefited from feudalism and slavery still exist. There are still those who believe their existence is more significant and even deserved than that of others. You probably already know some of the names: George HW Bush & Barbara, George Soros, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates and so many more. If the American Experiment fails, and it is proven that slavery / serfdom is truly a better–or at least more achievable–option for living out a human life, then those who have become accustomed to dominate others through millennia of lord and ladyship get to continue to sit unchallenged at the top of the pyramid.
How has this maligning of normal life, normal families, and normal work been accomplished? Slowly and steadily, and with extensive planning and great determination, that is how. Without going into too much detail, I will offer a couple of examples, the first being the propagation and promotion of feminism by the CIA.
Diluting traditional American culture by bringing in immigrants so quickly that they don’t assimilate (as well as finding those who don’t wish to assimilate) is another means of breaking the engine of American success that is employed by those who wish for the American Experiment to fail so they may continue their rule. They have studied us normal people thoroughly. They know our great weakness is our kindness. They know our Bible teaches us to clothe the naked, feed the hungry and succor the poor. So they force upon us ‘poor’ in vast numbers, demanding that we honor our principles, even if in so doing we are sabotaging the future of our children. We are made to feel that we are responsible for all the suffering in the world, and are personally obligated to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. They characterize doing something as handing over our abundance (which in reality grows ever more meager) to everyone who can manage to arrive at handout stations.
This might (MIGHT) almost be a reasonable request, if (IF) we could come anywhere near ending poverty and suffering in so doing. Alas. We can’t, as this simple video about gumballs expresses:
How can we Americans be most effective in lending the world a helping hand? The same way my high school life saving instructor told me to help those in trouble in the water, and the same way the flight attendants on airplanes tell you to use the oxygen masks in case of emergency: save yourself FIRST. We must restore America to become the land of the free and the home of the brave. Then we, both by example and by sending practical and philosophical help (which is always likely to be cheaper in underdeveloped regions), may be able to lift others out of poverty.
We can’t and probably don’t really want to go back to the old normal, that tended to judge and pigeonhole some people, and perpetuated war for profit. So what does the new normal look like? Let’s all build it together and we shall see.
As Sam Wainwright said to George Bailey, “It’s the chance of a lifetime”
Are you somewhat puzzled by the seeming disconnect between different factions in our country? Do you wonder why people are so vehemently insisting they are right and everyone else is wrong? Why do human responses traditionally considered normal seem to set off armies of radicals?
Those aren’t rhetorical questions. Something just doesn’t seem right about much of what is going on in America in early 2017. What could it be?
A UCDavis Professor, Darrell Hamamoto, has some thoughts on that subject. He believes that we are actually being beamed. Yes, beamed. Focused Extra Low Frequency waves are being aimed at populations in order to alter our mental and emotional states. That explains a lot, doesn’t it?
But is that too far out of an idea to accept? I will let the brilliant Professor Hamamoto make his own case:
This interview from last summer gives somewhat more detail, along with providing a context for understanding why anyone would do such a thing – and who those ‘anyones’ are:
I woke up this morning feeling a little troubled, thinking about a phrase a Latino friend told me she uses to teach her children about racism, “…Comply until you can complain…” What does that truly mean?
The statement implies a victim mentality, and teaching the concept to children will mean that they grow up with a victim mentality, when AMERICA is not a nation of victims, it has been, rather, founded as a nation of SOVEREIGNS.
A sovereign is someone who determines his or her own destiny in spite of circumstances.
A victim passively waits for things to change to his / her advantage.
This morning I experienced a synchronicity of these two seemingly unrelated videos highlighting the same issue: African Americans are killed for their organs.
This video begins with Cynthia McKinney at a Congressional hearing, asking about human trafficking perpetrated by DynCorp, and ends with information about how AfAms are killed so their organs may be harvested.
Does it seem too far out to consider that possibility of AfAms being intentionally killed for their organs? This is a longer (but very interesting) video that highlights many ideas, but ends with speculation that President Trump may be as concerned about Chicago violence as he is because he knows the victims are being looted for their organs — IOW, permitted to die so their organs can be taken.
I sense we are all getting tired of this unrest; ALL Americans.
We have problems, yes, but we all share our most significant problems. The time has come to set aside racial division. The time has come to stop listening to those who seek to divide us.
Yes, Donald Trump is making distinctions between people groups. He’s making distinctions of the sort a parent might make. Here’s what I mean: say your kids were constantly bullied by some neighborhood kids. Food became scarce, and the neighborhood bullies began eating at your home frequently, and when they did so, there wasn’t enough food for your children. Kindhearted though you might be, as a parent, would you not stop the neighborhood bullies from eating the food YOU provided for your own children?
Is it cold hearted to dismiss the neighborhood bullies? It might seem so. Yet, even JESUS told a foreign woman that He wouldn’t heal her child because “…Healing is the children’s bread…” Yes, he healed the child afterward, but clearly stated the obligation is to provide for one’s own children first.
Donald Trump is the one with the parental obligation to distinguish between the Americans that require care and sustenance, and the neighborhood children who aren’t his first responsibility.
What is our obligation? To love one another. A smile goes a long, long way toward good race relations. A warm, genuine smile can dismiss fear and overcome hatred: PERFECT LOVE CASTS OUT ALL FEAR.
As this excerpt from the Declaration of Independence reminds us, a government requires the consent of the governed. This is not only a practical principle of governance, it is a spiritual principle. On the practical level, while individuals can be exiled, tortured, or killed, a majority of people have to give some sort of assent to a small group who control them, or the control is lost. On a spiritual level, when we give assent to evil leaders, we accept, to some extent, the judgment that is due them — or at least we lose a degree of glory (glory is a sort of weight) in our struggle against them. Silence is taken as consent, which is why it is important for us to express the idea and even state, out loud and / or in writing, “I do not consent to this evil governance”.
The social engineers who have set about to manipulate us, and use the power of our will and endeavors to create wealth and power to serve their own ends, are fully aware of this need for our consent to their tyranny.
This concept of controlling the media is nothing new. In 1917 JP Morgan “bought” the media. From that point on he felt quite secure in the ability to manufacture the required consent of the governed.
…Until some of the governed learned that they [WE] could use the Internet to find hard facts and records of history rather than opinions, and determine the truth for ourselves. Now it’s not so easy for the oligarchical control freaks to obtain our consent — because we no longer need a bought-and-paid-for consent manufacturers to find out what is happening in this wonderful world in which we live.
As I write, Judge Scalia has very recently died (read been killed if you will), and the story that immediately comes to mind is The Pelican Brief. I can’t help it; I think in terms of stories I have encountered. Many of them happen to be, at least ostensibly, fictional stories. But Stephen King wrote a book dedication to his children, stating that fiction is “…the truth inside a lie…” And in one of my fav Robert Redford movies, Three Days of the Condor, several black ops murders of intelligence agents were committed because a reader of fiction came across a story he thought might be plausible.
So what works of dramatic fiction are relevant now as aids to finding the truth inside a lie? In our home we have been on a quest to find them. We go mostly on intuition, but we have pretty good intuition, so, with Shondaland — where interestingly enough a Supreme Court Justice was murdered by the US President with a pillow — returning from winter break, we are sharing some of our findings.
I will begin with Shondaland, by writing that I am not going back there. No, Olivia, white hats for the most part are not abortion rights crusaders; rather they tend toward defending the rights of the unborn — along with those other vulnerable minorities.
Much as I want to like Analise, she is a stone cold sociopath. True, her innocence was ruined by circumstances beyond her control as a child, via an uncle who raped her, but it was ruined nonetheless, and has not been recovered.
Shondaland, IMHO, is NOT expose, but, rather, an attempt to normalize aberrant behavior. If / when we see the long-promised arrests of those who have hijacked our US Republic (along with the justice system), it would be convenient for the arrested evildoers if we saw them as sympathetic characters. Those who live in Shondaland are not. Neither is a President who kills a Supreme Court Justice with a pillow because she is about to make a death bed confession that she helped him steal an election: just sayin’.
Yes, I was drawn in at first by the romance, and the stated desire to do good, but the good that is meant to justify the murders and deceit simply isn’t done. The satanic ritual abortion on Christmas Eve both convinced me that Scandal is not meant as positive expose, and also reminded me of my old opinion that pregnant Lacey Peterson’s Christmas Eve murder was very likely a satanic ritual killing.
In competition in that hot Thursday night spot is one of our favs, The Blacklist. Is Red a bad guy who does bad things? Sure, but he acknowledges it. He values family, children, innocence and, well, the potential of the human spirit for beauty. This show feels like expose; and not only because the FBI is tracking down members of “The Cabal,” but because, though some characters make questionable moral choices, it’s fairly clear who the good guys are. AND, so far, Lizzie is keeping her baby.
One show whose season premiere we are awaiting is House of Cards. The first and second seasons were spectacular. We would look around the room at each other with mouths open, aghast at the degree of expose of DC shenanigans which we knew to echo events that we know to be quite true, and many others we believe to be true. In last year’s season the show had lost some steam. There were a few entertaining episodes, among them the dinner with the Putin character. I wondered whether maybe Kevin Spacey was ill in real life during the filming. Much of the acting and story were low energy. Were they afraid of mimicking the Clintons too closely? Had someone threatened producers to tone down the show? I am hoping this new season gives us more of the hard hitting stuff we had become accustomed to in the first two seasons.
I watched The X Files faithfully through the mid and late 1990s, and always loved the show, though, as a “nice” Christian mom, with a touch of guilt, especially as I allowed my aged 9 through 15 year children to watch with me. On the first pass back in the day I didn’t believe most of what was exposed on the show. Then we re-watched a few years ago, and realized how very many of the shows were based pretty much on (esoteric) reality. So far, we have been absolutely delighted by the new episodes. Our verdict on The X Files? EXPOSE!
Before moving on to some lesser known shows and shows that were cancelled a little too soon, I will comment on The Walking Dead. Is it an expose? Not strictly speaking, no. But I don’t believe it normalized evil, and I believe it does emphasize how essential love and hope are in holding on to our humanity, and some of the most beloved characters are people of deep faith. Also, I love the value the show attaches to the Scotch – Irish tradition through Beth’s songs (when she was still around), and the staying power of independent minded southern folk of all creeds and colors. As a famous song states, “…country folk can survive…”
We recently completed The Following on Netflix. This show is not for the very sensitive or easily offended. Well, truth be told, none of these shows are. They all have either gore, violence, and / or explicit sex scenes. Fasten your seatbelts, it’s gonna be a bumpy night — especially with The Following. We tried it and very nearly decided not to watch the series. But we went back, and were rewarded by the final series, which ended with the Kevin Bacon main character planning to go after an elite group of sociopathic people of the lie. Again, this show is NOT for everyone. But, though the FBI agents move into some gray areas of justice, those who are truly and determinedly evil are easily distinguishable from ordinary people who make bad decisions.
The Dollhouse is a great show in which to learn about Project Monarch style mind control, sex slavery and even political manipulation (the mind controlled Senator was one of our fav aspects of the story). Ultimately, the people in the Dollhouse realize the errors of their ways, and embraced freedom as the only way to a future worth living.
Helix and Ascension are both SyFy productions. Our verdict is that both are crafted as expose. Ascension is very fun to watch for a glimpse into the 1960s, and intimates that there has long been a secret space program. Helix is painful to watch due to extensive gore and many windows on the darkness of deep human misery and treachery. It wasn’t until the very last episode that we allowed that the show is expose rather than an effort to convince us the elite have good intentions toward us inferior cattle folk. The show exposes the plan of the elite to either kill us openly via intentionally spreading deadly viruses, or sterilize us via GMO foods.
We loved Fringe. Though some aspects of esoteric science are addressed in the show, the main plot contains only an allegorical truth rather than a specific truth. But understanding the allegorical evil plan can help us recognize real plans for human manipulation.
Jericho, Revolution and Firefly have all been retired — understandably. Jericho — one of my personal favs — lends understanding to how an evil faction of US gov could use false flag terror to strengthen their position, and shows how genuine friendships in a mid-western farm community can overcome such an evil plan. Revolution gives some similar clues to how things might play out in the US in a Mad Max type of scenario. Firefly is a LOT of fun to watch, emphasizes the value of personal freedom, and gives a view of Big Pharma gone horribly, horribly wrong.
I’ve saved one of the best for last: The Finder. This was a VERY short series. It’s a sort of private detective show that expresses great humor, beautiful relationships, and a lot of truth that, to many people, is pretty esoteric. The morals are clean, repentance from evil lifestyles is expressed, and sociopathic evil is exposed as such.
Feel free to comment, as I am aware that a lot of people likely won’t agree with me. Please don’t hate on me, simply leave your own opinions on the shows I’ve mentioned, and share any other shows in which you have found value for truth seekers.
I chose the title of this blog with my tongue somewhat in my cheek. Arguers against dualism — the category into which most tenets of faith in CHRIST fall — love to point out that the word ‘Israel’ is a composite of Isis, Ra, and El. The word ‘Israel’ is a transliteration, since Hebrew does not translate directly into English; the characters are different since Hebrew is not a “Romance language” and English is. So what we read in our Bibles as ‘Israel’ could also be transliterated ‘yisrael’ ‘yesarelah’ or ‘Jesharelah’.
But of course I’m not going to stop there. Let’s go with this as a serious question: Israel? Who / what is Israel, and what is our obligation to it, both as believers in CHRIST and as Americans, allied with the country? Fasten your seatbelts, I have some bumpy answers.
I’m not anti-Semitic or anything like that. I think what Hitler did to the Jews was despicable. Also, I believe freedom of religion is crucial in order to live a fulfilling life, and I’m not telling anybody whom to worship or how (unless they ask, of course 😉 ). But Christians specifically, and many others in general, have embraced some ideas about Judaism and the supernaturally endowed rights of the physical nation Israel that don’t seem to be based in Biblical (or otherwise objective) truth.
The Territory of Judah vs the Territory of All the Tribes
Have we who read the Bible forgotten? Only Judah, Benjamin, and a few Levites were left by the time of the Babylonian captivity, so only those tribes would have been represented by those who returned from Babylon following the captivity — and there is actually a Biblical record of most of those people along with their heritage. The rest of the tribes were gone by the time of the captivity, therefore were not taken and did not return. [A fascinating side study is looking into whether the Vikings were, indeed, VI (6) kings of tribes of Israel who left their middle eastern home. Beware: there is a lot out there that is crafted to mislead / deceive. This website seemed scholarly enough to consider: http://www.orange-street-church.org/text/lost-tribe-migration.htm ]
Why would Judah now expect to be able to claim all of the territory once held by the twelve tribes? If the Jews (taken from the name ‘Judah’) were asking for the territory given them by GOD via Moses as expressed in the Biblical record, would they not simply ask for the territory given to Judah, and possibly Benjamin? Claiming all of the territory seems like an overreach at best.
Land Ownership in the Context of Family
When Israel was settled, GOD did not simply say, “Nation of Israel, here are your borders”. Each family took territory and settled there. Dividing the land was a very careful undertaking, as reading of the Book of Joshua will show.
The concept of families being attached to land rather than simple idea of land ownership or national borders was so strong that GOD told Moses to establish the 49th Year of Jubilee, wherein all those who had sold the rights to the use of family land would return and take possession of the land originally divided to them. The land in OT Israel belonged not to a nation, but to a family.
OT Sin Cycle & the Withdrawal of GOD’s Protection
Why do we expect a supernatural protection of Israel, and demand a natural one? Have we not read the Old Testament? Israel’s recorded history was wrought through the push – pull of embracing GOD and seeking idols. When the people sought GOD, they were protected from their enemies and succeeded as a nation. When they “played the harlot” spiritually, they were invaded and subdued by foreign powers.
Why would we expect a different manifestation now?
OT Israel Got into Big Trouble with GOD When Accepting Worldly Allies
Have we read Jeremiah? Have we read the final chapters of the Books of Kings and Chronicles? If so, we are aware that Israel of the Bible was strongly discouraged by GOD from accepting worldly allies.
Enlisting the help of Egypt at the time of Babylon’s growing power only further eroded Israel’s place of blessing. Here is the prophetic statement about trusting help from Egypt found in the KJV of IIKings 18:21: “Now, behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed, even upon Egypt, on which if a man lean, it will go into his hand and pierce it. So is Pharaoh king of Egypt unto all who trust in him.”
Taken in context of the circumstances of the time, I don’t believe it is projecting too far to believe that this infers that Israel ought to depend on GOD rather than worldly allies. So why do American Christians desire for Israel to depend upon America for deliverance from their surrounding enemies?
Why Did Rome Destroy Jerusalem?
I thought it was because the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah…or maybe to get those with faith in CHRIST to leave Jerusalem in order to further spread the message.
At any rate, was this destruction not prophesied even by JESUS, and can we not assume it was a part of GOD’s plan? What would then give us confidence that a Jerusalem void (not completely, I realize) of faith in CHRIST should now be promoted and served?
The Traditional “Jewish” Faith with Expression Proscribed by Moses Is Not Practiced by Jews
Here’s the Big Enchilada for me. This is something I have been thinking about for some time, though in many settings I would hesitate to bring it up, realizing that it is a controversial idea (in other words, I know it will piss people off; if you can, suspend your emotions for a sec, and think this one through).
In the Old Testament, GOD punished, destroyed, and brought captivity to Israel when they didn’t obey Him. What did this look like in practice? It looked like foreign armies invading.
IF Israel was seeing enmities with eyes of faith, and IF there were prophets telling them to repent and seek GOD, the pressure of the Palestinians and others might stir them to repentance, and GOD might protect their borders. Yes? Isn’t this what happened throughout the OT?
But, wait. There aren’t Jewish prophets in the traditional, Biblical sense. There aren’t sacrifices being offered in the temple. There isn’t an Ark of the Covenant present. There isn’t a Covenant being observed.
In 2009 only 8% of Israeli Jews classified themselves as “Haredim” what they consider to be the most orthodox of Jewish faith practitioners ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Israel ). And even they don’t offer the sacrifices and follow the practices proscribed by Moses.
May I pose this question: are there true “Jews” even in existence (the obvious answer is, yes, all who embrace Yashua Ha-Mashiach)?
Whom do so many American Christians want to protect in Israel, and why?
Ashkenazi / Khazarian Ancestral Roots of Many Israeli Jews
Each person must answer this question for himself / herself.
However, in considering the strong likelihood that Israel is now allied with Saudi Arabia to support ISIS (just ONE article, but a careful search will yield many: http://www.infowars.com/un-finds-credible-ties-between-isis-and-israeli-defense-forces/ ), the rather obvious answer IMHO is: not military or even financial support, but to love one another, which is what all Christians are to owe everyone: “…Owe ye no man any thing, but to love one another…”
Recently a friend posted an article about a shill working for Monsanto possibly being prosecuted for a second degree felony. The FB post was recognized by aggressive commenters, which raised a flag for me: likely SHILLS. What characterized the comments that convinced me the comments were from shills? I decided to try to quantify the characteristics (realizing at the same time that quantifying shill comment characteristics might serve to help shills make more genuine, convincing comments **SIGH**).
This is the first indicator: shills have practically unlimited time to comment. The rest of us, even when passionate, have LIVES. We can’t hover over our comments and respond on a continual basis. Shills can. They relish it; because, here’s the deal: THEY ARE GETTING PAID! They aren’t fitting in their comments around a job and responsibilities. The comments ARE their job and responsibility!
If you are baffled and overwhelmed at how much your opposition is able to post — the sheer volume of it — you may be dealing with a shill.
Shills often leave aggressive, hostile comments with little or no emotion, and little or no explanation of why they are taking such an emphatic approach to the subject. Typically a person with strong opinions on a subject can explain them by some personal experience.
When someone expresses a strong opinion that is, say pro-GMO or pro-Roundup, I always wonder why. Sure, a person might use Roundup and might eat GMOs, but typically if they do, they don’t feel that strongly about it. For instance, few people will write, “I LOVE the taste of GMO zucchini and I won’t give it up for the future of the earth!” Why? Because it’s not an issue. Parents whose children have been injured by vaccines; people whose family members have died of cancer; people whose community water supply is contaminated by fracking runoff, THEY have passion, and write passionate comments — understandably. People generally may be aggressive — yes — but won’t be passionate unless they have a personal reason for passion. Most shill comments tend to be high on aggression but low on passion.
Subtle Departure from Central Subject
Shills will often attack a side issue related to the central issue. They will suggest a financial motive for the position they are attacking (ironic, yes, but they evidently believe turnabout is fair play); they will challenge some obscure and often insignificant reference; they will try to lure the writers of genuine and sincere comments AWAY from their passion, and search for a way to create confusion and strife among supportive commenters, and doubt among the unconvinced.
Insistence on False Paradigm
“Vaccine herd immunity prevents disease outbreaks”; “Nobody has been cured by Gerson”; “Natural News admits they publish untruths (because their website has a disclaimer)”: reading blatant un-truths can give us brain freeze and paralyze our ability to respond. What do we do, call someone a liar? Either the shill is lying or we are lying. We know it is the shill, but most of us are so unaccustomed to that sort of bold rudeness in everyday life that we are at a loss as to how to respond. And if we call them liars, we appear as if we may be the pot calling the kettle black (no racial disrespect intended). Shills know this, and they don’t care. News flash: their very presence in comment sections is a prevarication. THEY ARE THERE TO LIE AND MISLEAD.
Shills often love to quote statistics. But are they true stats? Why would they be? Again: shills exist to mislead. Falsifying facts is merely a part of their job. They must simply make their lies convincing. Remembering that can help you spot shill comments and RESIST being misled.
Efforts to Make Opponents Feel / Appear to Be Uneducated; Bigoted; Backward; Otherwise Un-Cool
Shills love to try to humiliate. They evidently believe we are all victims of TV commercial mind control, and terrified of being ill-thought-of. They try to make commenters feel that we must have ALL of the answers (be politically correct, cool or whatever), or our opinions are invalid. NOT SO! We are all entitled to our opinions. Yes, PLEASE, educate yourself and learn what you can, but don’t feel as if you must apologize for your opinion. You may believe what you wish, and you are not obligated to justify your beliefs & opinions to everyone who challenges your position. Here’s a li’l secret for ya: YOU CAN DELETE CRAP PEOPLE PUT ON YOUR FB PAGE if you don’t agree with it! If someone grows insulting to you or you simply don’t want to deal with contrasting comments, use your delete button. There’s no shame in it. This is YOUR FB wall, YOUR blog, YOUR life! Your place is YOUR forum. Detractors need not always be welcomed — though, certainly, the rabbit hole appears ever deeper, and we all may need to adjust our opinions from time to time.
How to Respond
Yes, I already gave a very significant suggestion: use your delete button.
But there are other ways to respond, and I think it’s important to understand some reasons why shills might be writing.
Yes. They mainly write to detract from the main message. However, they also write to waste our time and make us feel frustrated.
Do you believe in loosh / know what loosh is? Loosh is a substance said to feed dark / demonic entities (if you despise dualism I’m not exactly sure how you process this idea, so apologies if this offends you). Loosh consists of negative human emotions.
So, yes, I believe MIC / PIC / AIC mega-corps hire shills to protect their territory. But I also believe it is likely there is a spiritual / psychological component to “shilling” (if I may). If we truth seekers / freedom fighters become confused; become divided; become frustrated; begin to question ourselves in unhealthy ways, we become less effective in seeking truth — and helping others find it; in fighting for freedom — along with love, peace and joy.
We can delete, we can ignore, ideally we can find ways to communicate that break the pattern of attack against us, and even turn attacks into opportunity. However we respond, we must RISE ABOVE confusion, frustration and loosh generation. If that means using the delete key, banning detractors, block folks on FB, so be it. YOU decide how you want to use your time. Don’t let shills steal your time, your peace, or your truth!
“All have sinned and fall short of the glory of GOD.”
I want to clearly acknowledge my belief in that at the outset here.
However, not all have “…Sold himself [themselves] to do evil.” Do you see the difference?
Each of those categories of wrongdoing has its own set of consequences. There is a difference. There is a delineation.
Can we tell the difference from the outside which category a person’s behavior may fall into? Not necessarily. However, we can make choices between the two in our own lives.
People of faith may be afraid to distinguish between good and evil, because partaking of the knowledge of good and evil was what doomed Adam and Eve. But it’s actually crucial to distinguish between doing right and doing wrong, as this recognition guides our own behavior, which will ultimately present us with consequences.
We watched the film Noah on Netflix last night (spoiler alert!). I wanted so much to like it. I had been told about some of it that might be objectionable to those who believe the Bible is the Word of GOD, so I was prepared and could overlook a lot of variations from the Biblical record.
What I could not overlook, and what left a bad taste in my mouth, was the moral ambiguity. Tubal-Cain cried out to GOD something like “If you made me in your image, why would you destroy me?” though he wronged many people, seemingly participated in cannibalism, manipulated and deceived to get his way, and failed to display GOD’s trademark characteristic of LOVE.
Noah figured everybody is equally bad, because everybody has, at the very least, made mistakes, or displayed character flaws.
Is this sort of rhetoric at all familiar to anybody? Does this remind anybody of philosophies promoted by a certain fallen angel?
lucifer and his emissaries have been propagating this deception for millennia.
Here is the reality though: again: not everybody has sold himself to do evil. A weakness or an “ooops” or a flawed character or even a broken spirit leading to awful behavior is not the same as CHOOSING, with full knowledge and consciousness, to throw off GOD’s authority, and do what is clearly and obviously wrong.
Now, people who have made that choice will be very busily trying to convince all of us that we deserve the same consequences as those who have made that choice. That simply is not true.
I have heard people of the Christian faith worry that they may have committed the “unpardonable sin”. I very sincerely doubt that anybody holding that concern has. Again, this would not be some random, un-knowing “ooops”. This would be a very clear choice between right and wrong, made with a willful, arrogant, rebellious decision.
We have, in our culture and country, many people who have made that choice to consciously rebel against GOD. This does not worry GOD in the least. That fact is the subject of Psalm 2.
However, we as people are challenged by that rebellion. Because they would like to deceive us and make us feel that no sort of judgment should come upon them because we are all guilty. Again, yes, we all have sinned and fallen short. But we have not all chosen to rebel against GOD. And there is a significant line between the two.