I know someone has a question regarding why occult work seems to work, and then suddenly and repeatedly falls apart along the exact same lines as the original formulation.
Not in a mood for heavy blogging, so here's the gist. When someone does occult activity they lay down tracks, and the more they use the tracks the heavier a path they leave. Suppose they think they fulfilled their original objective. It's not like they can "pick up the tracks" of the path they had laid. The path of their spelling, or other occult activities (astrology, anagrams, numbers, cards, etc) remains because they made it happen. It's not like they can undo history like it never happened, as they obviously did those occult things to achieve a presumed result. Once the result is obtained (or as more usual, is a total fail), the spiritual and activity path remains as they have left footprints.
At this point the "wages of sin is death" kicks in along the pathway that was laid down. Occult work is sinful and evil because it places a pathway in place and presumes someone's right to oppress another person (or "self bless") where that right belongs to God alone. So the footsteps remain of the original occult activity. Punishment, either deliberate delivered via God by his angels, or natural (consequences of very bad decision making) then follows the same footsteps that person had laid down.
Let me use an easy example. Let's say someone put a spell down, or did occult work, against someone using the number five. Let's say it was done through numerology (where they whammy some person using presumed "5" power) or it was done through anagram or other "word" power (using the letters F, I, V, E, as in "fie to V" or something like that to whammy someone with a V or whatever). Working or not, valid or bogus, the occult work drew a line that involves the number 5 or the letters F, I, V and E. God and his creation nature will respond and follow that path back to the person, their supporters, and/or even those who benefit from other parallel bad deeds (not necessarily part of the whammy 5 group).
A natural backlash example would be if the person uses 5 for magic/occult and then is blind to some real life danger that involves 5, since they are thinking only of magic and not real world. So they get run over by a truck on route 5 or something because they fall into an unconscious neglect of their normal real life caution since they think they "control 5." So without even realizing it they drive along route 5 and ignore normal safety protocol.
A God backlash example is he allows his angels to confound the occult maker by opposing them via the same pathways they had laid down. So angels will throw, with God's permission, a boomerang, so to speak, along the 5 or the F,I,V,E footsteps, and that boomerang will often hit something that at some point is in service to or allied with or a beneficiary of the person who had performed the occult in the first place.
So the bottom line answer is that when someone does an occult deed the footprints never disappear since the act, successful or bogus, was real and a part of actual history. It is thus opened not only the one way original sense of the whammy or whatever, but not only back along the path to the originator, but also creates tributaries (like a river) along similar streams. So a 5 whammy by person A against person B can well create 5 whammy paths to C, D, E and so forth because energy will settle into similar channels of connectivity. Duh.
That is why all occult activity is forbidden by God and never can be considered "good," ever.
Showing posts with label chastisement of humans by God. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chastisement of humans by God. Show all posts
Friday, May 28, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
understanding God: failure to pray in school
I'm not going to mince words. When prayer was taken out of the public schools (and the ability to discuss the Bible), God promptly withdrew many blessings from the United States, both as a community and all individuals. And yes, that includes from those who not guilty of the actual decision, including the students who are deprived of prayer/discussion in school. Why is this? Why is this "fair" for God to punish all? I'll use scripture in a second part to this, but first an analogy, because I know that this helps these modern generations the most in making the first steps toward understanding, repentance and correction.
A father dispenses a generous allowance to his children. So his kids line up in front of him once a week (after dad has received his paycheck) and he hands each child their weekly allowance. Two things happen. One is that each child thanks their father. The second is that the child tells their dad at least one thing good that they did with the last week's money. (For example a daughter may have spent money on clothes, and dad doesn't want to hear about that, but tells her dad about the dollar she gave to a charity for Haiti). So dad has only two conditions for the generous allowance: one is that each child thank him as he or her receives it, and two that they tell him the one charitable or wise thing that they did each week with even the smallest portion of the money.
One day the Supreme Court, in following all the previous courts, decides it is "mean" and "cruel" that the father expect 1) thanks from his children as he dispenses his money to them and 2) requires them to spend at least a dime or something for a wise and/or charitable action. The courts have all ruled that this is a cruel thing to do, as it is "forcing" children to "thank" the father for something they already were going to receive! Also, it is "unfair" that those "evil" charities and wise actions receive a percentage of the allowance. I mean, how unfair is that? Those kids would be giving a portion of money in good or wise actions only to the places they know about locally! How unfair is that to some charity that exists maybe halfway around the world and tattoos kangaroos? Why don't they get the money? So the courts rule that dad cannot receive thanks from the children, and they cannot donate a percentage of their money to a good cause because it is "unfair" that they are not having a list of every good cause in the entire world.
So the next paycheck day dad is sitting at his home desk and the kids line up. Glancing up at the local policeman with a gun in his holster staring at him, dad hands each child the allowance and the child, also looking at the policeman with the gun, silently takes the money and silently leaves.
***
That is what happened when school prayer and the ability to discuss the Bible at all was taken out of the schools. The courts ruled that children were not allowed to in a school premise (their place of "work" if you think about it) address and thank God, even briefly. Further, the ability to do good was taken from them because it was "unfair" to learn how to do good from the Bible, and it's so meeeeeeeeaaaaaaan that the neighbor's children might have to actually listen to a few words of what Christians do and believe. In other words, don't do ANY good with the allowance if one is selecting only from one's own list because goodness gracious, that's so "exclusionary" and "mean."
Now realize the man with the allowance is God. He now has a man with a gun telling his children that they cannot thank him and that they cannot use their own judgment to give a portion to a wise use or charity. What will the man do? What are his responsibilities?
***
Back to our analogy. The man stops giving allowances to his children at all, so the man with the gun and the courts that sent him will get the hell out of his house.
That is why this analogy is so apt. The moment school prayer and Bible mention was taken out of the schools, God stopped that particular allowance. Period. So the children suffer through loss of the allowance and the wise/charitable funds expenditure recipients also lose their financial blessing. This is the bottom line: without school prayer and Bible mention in schools, God withdrew from ALL that particular form of blessing he had been giving to the nation and to individuals.
This does not mean, of course, that there is no blessings anymore, but think about it: besides 1) one's personal relationship with God and 2) one's worship community's relationship with God, what is the third largest relationship with God? In the "public square" and workplace, which for many are the schools. God basically cut off one third of the blessings allowance to the United States when school prayer and mention of the Bible was prohibited.
***
Young people, I bet you are pissed off reading this, as you should be, if you understand and believe my analogy, which you should understand and believe because it is the cold truth. Yet, all children (say nothing of teachers, etc) have lost one third of the blessing allowance from God that had been previously dispensed, whether you as kids agreed with that decision or not. (Most of you don't remember the time when prayer and Bible mention was OK in school, say nothing of the olden days when it was a fundamental part of education and daily activities as your mind and character were grown in schools, your place of work).
What can someone do who has been cheated of this? Use the analogy for a minute.
1) The dad can stop giving the allowance, but put it in a bank for the kids to get when they are older. Yikes because how do they buy what they need when they need it now?
2) Dad can move out of the country that has that law. That's not practical or cool either but I mention it because I'm telling you, boys and girls, men and women, it would be better to quit the public schools and attend a private/parochial school where Bible and prayer are allowed. Young people.... what is being cool in a "free" and "hip" school mean when you are cheated out of your blessings from God? But that is a solution that is full of pain (leaving classmates, football teams, etc) and often not practical (can't afford to pay for a nearby parochial school, etc).
3) The children can silently keep taking the money and find a way to thank Dad when the cop has gone away. But it still means that cop is standing there every day in your home, censoring the family. They become persecuted refugees in their own home during allowance time.
4) The children can obtain knowledge, understanding and righteous indignation about this treatment of Dad, and all dads and moms in this situation, and start to use the laws of the land to combat and reverse what has been done. That is what you ought to do. And trust me, even you kids who are uncomfortable with Christian or other religion ought to fight for reversal of the prohibition of school prayer and Bible mention. Why? Because you were riding the draft, to use a sports and aeronautical term, of the benefit of the daily school prayer and Bible mention, even if you did not believe. Yes, all of you benefited, just as the charities benefited from the children's donations, even if they didn't know Dad or support his occupation whereby he got that paycheck!
Young people, and older people.... how can you have genuine freedom and spiritual blessing when a minority of people, with force, removed the source of one third of your routine blessings from God? Sure, you "still have" God in your silent heart and in the "allowable" places such as churches, but huh? Why is THAT OK? It's not. That's like saying that you will thank God for your allowance "someday" when it is "safe" and the "coast is clear." But if Dad keeps giving you the allowance with the armed cop in the room censoring you, is he teaching you the right thing by continuing to do so under coercion? No. And that is why God will not do so either.
God doesn't "continue" to bless schools and all who attend when an armed cop has muzzled everyone because quite simply it is teaching everyone that behavior, faith, goodness and freedom don't actually matter, as you will "get the goodies anyway" and that just is patently false in not only being faithful to God but in life. It took little time for people to accept the banishing of God from the public schools, sadly, shockingly little time.
Young people, your parents did not silently protest what was done by giving you "extra prayer time" once you got home from the prayerless school, did they? And you didn't come home and say "Hey mom and dad, we can't pray in school anymore, or mention the Bible, so let's have that five minutes we were deprived of in school each evening here at home, or in the morning." Very, very VERY few of you even went guerrilla and underground to protest and compensate for what was taken from you. You "adjusted" and very quickly even started to agree it was "fair" not to pray in school.
Want a good cause? I sure suggest this one.
PS What would I have done? I'd have had the daily prayer in protest each day right outside the school's grounds, just one inch over the property line I'd have parents and children gather before school for the daily prayer that the school denied. And I'd have done that nationwide and year after year until this egregious ban was withdrawn.
A father dispenses a generous allowance to his children. So his kids line up in front of him once a week (after dad has received his paycheck) and he hands each child their weekly allowance. Two things happen. One is that each child thanks their father. The second is that the child tells their dad at least one thing good that they did with the last week's money. (For example a daughter may have spent money on clothes, and dad doesn't want to hear about that, but tells her dad about the dollar she gave to a charity for Haiti). So dad has only two conditions for the generous allowance: one is that each child thank him as he or her receives it, and two that they tell him the one charitable or wise thing that they did each week with even the smallest portion of the money.
One day the Supreme Court, in following all the previous courts, decides it is "mean" and "cruel" that the father expect 1) thanks from his children as he dispenses his money to them and 2) requires them to spend at least a dime or something for a wise and/or charitable action. The courts have all ruled that this is a cruel thing to do, as it is "forcing" children to "thank" the father for something they already were going to receive! Also, it is "unfair" that those "evil" charities and wise actions receive a percentage of the allowance. I mean, how unfair is that? Those kids would be giving a portion of money in good or wise actions only to the places they know about locally! How unfair is that to some charity that exists maybe halfway around the world and tattoos kangaroos? Why don't they get the money? So the courts rule that dad cannot receive thanks from the children, and they cannot donate a percentage of their money to a good cause because it is "unfair" that they are not having a list of every good cause in the entire world.
So the next paycheck day dad is sitting at his home desk and the kids line up. Glancing up at the local policeman with a gun in his holster staring at him, dad hands each child the allowance and the child, also looking at the policeman with the gun, silently takes the money and silently leaves.
***
That is what happened when school prayer and the ability to discuss the Bible at all was taken out of the schools. The courts ruled that children were not allowed to in a school premise (their place of "work" if you think about it) address and thank God, even briefly. Further, the ability to do good was taken from them because it was "unfair" to learn how to do good from the Bible, and it's so meeeeeeeeaaaaaaan that the neighbor's children might have to actually listen to a few words of what Christians do and believe. In other words, don't do ANY good with the allowance if one is selecting only from one's own list because goodness gracious, that's so "exclusionary" and "mean."
Now realize the man with the allowance is God. He now has a man with a gun telling his children that they cannot thank him and that they cannot use their own judgment to give a portion to a wise use or charity. What will the man do? What are his responsibilities?
***
Back to our analogy. The man stops giving allowances to his children at all, so the man with the gun and the courts that sent him will get the hell out of his house.
That is why this analogy is so apt. The moment school prayer and Bible mention was taken out of the schools, God stopped that particular allowance. Period. So the children suffer through loss of the allowance and the wise/charitable funds expenditure recipients also lose their financial blessing. This is the bottom line: without school prayer and Bible mention in schools, God withdrew from ALL that particular form of blessing he had been giving to the nation and to individuals.
This does not mean, of course, that there is no blessings anymore, but think about it: besides 1) one's personal relationship with God and 2) one's worship community's relationship with God, what is the third largest relationship with God? In the "public square" and workplace, which for many are the schools. God basically cut off one third of the blessings allowance to the United States when school prayer and mention of the Bible was prohibited.
***
Young people, I bet you are pissed off reading this, as you should be, if you understand and believe my analogy, which you should understand and believe because it is the cold truth. Yet, all children (say nothing of teachers, etc) have lost one third of the blessing allowance from God that had been previously dispensed, whether you as kids agreed with that decision or not. (Most of you don't remember the time when prayer and Bible mention was OK in school, say nothing of the olden days when it was a fundamental part of education and daily activities as your mind and character were grown in schools, your place of work).
What can someone do who has been cheated of this? Use the analogy for a minute.
1) The dad can stop giving the allowance, but put it in a bank for the kids to get when they are older. Yikes because how do they buy what they need when they need it now?
2) Dad can move out of the country that has that law. That's not practical or cool either but I mention it because I'm telling you, boys and girls, men and women, it would be better to quit the public schools and attend a private/parochial school where Bible and prayer are allowed. Young people.... what is being cool in a "free" and "hip" school mean when you are cheated out of your blessings from God? But that is a solution that is full of pain (leaving classmates, football teams, etc) and often not practical (can't afford to pay for a nearby parochial school, etc).
3) The children can silently keep taking the money and find a way to thank Dad when the cop has gone away. But it still means that cop is standing there every day in your home, censoring the family. They become persecuted refugees in their own home during allowance time.
4) The children can obtain knowledge, understanding and righteous indignation about this treatment of Dad, and all dads and moms in this situation, and start to use the laws of the land to combat and reverse what has been done. That is what you ought to do. And trust me, even you kids who are uncomfortable with Christian or other religion ought to fight for reversal of the prohibition of school prayer and Bible mention. Why? Because you were riding the draft, to use a sports and aeronautical term, of the benefit of the daily school prayer and Bible mention, even if you did not believe. Yes, all of you benefited, just as the charities benefited from the children's donations, even if they didn't know Dad or support his occupation whereby he got that paycheck!
Young people, and older people.... how can you have genuine freedom and spiritual blessing when a minority of people, with force, removed the source of one third of your routine blessings from God? Sure, you "still have" God in your silent heart and in the "allowable" places such as churches, but huh? Why is THAT OK? It's not. That's like saying that you will thank God for your allowance "someday" when it is "safe" and the "coast is clear." But if Dad keeps giving you the allowance with the armed cop in the room censoring you, is he teaching you the right thing by continuing to do so under coercion? No. And that is why God will not do so either.
God doesn't "continue" to bless schools and all who attend when an armed cop has muzzled everyone because quite simply it is teaching everyone that behavior, faith, goodness and freedom don't actually matter, as you will "get the goodies anyway" and that just is patently false in not only being faithful to God but in life. It took little time for people to accept the banishing of God from the public schools, sadly, shockingly little time.
Young people, your parents did not silently protest what was done by giving you "extra prayer time" once you got home from the prayerless school, did they? And you didn't come home and say "Hey mom and dad, we can't pray in school anymore, or mention the Bible, so let's have that five minutes we were deprived of in school each evening here at home, or in the morning." Very, very VERY few of you even went guerrilla and underground to protest and compensate for what was taken from you. You "adjusted" and very quickly even started to agree it was "fair" not to pray in school.
Want a good cause? I sure suggest this one.
PS What would I have done? I'd have had the daily prayer in protest each day right outside the school's grounds, just one inch over the property line I'd have parents and children gather before school for the daily prayer that the school denied. And I'd have done that nationwide and year after year until this egregious ban was withdrawn.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Bible Reading: Luke 23:33-34
What the Bible says:
Luke 23:33-34
And when they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, and the robbers, one on his right hand and the other on his left. And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." Now in dividing his garments they cast lots.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary):
And then the skies parted and God said, "Oh, well, then OK! I forgive all these people who are torturing, mocking and now killing you. Carry on with the crucifixion since Jesus asked Me to forgive all of you, go right on ahead with what you are doing."
God does not grant all of Jesus' requests.
What the Bible says:
Luke 22:42-43
Saying, "Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; yet not my will but thy be done." And there appeared to him an angel from heaven to strengthen him. And falling into an agony he prayed the more earnestly.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary)
And the angel who comforted Jesus said, "Psst! Keep it secret but God has granted your request and you are not going to be betrayed, arrested and crucified. We are just totally faking them out and Judas was just part of the punking reality show."
Only God decides regarding forgiveness. I don't know how so many people today think that if they can get a victim to "forgive them" that God will automatically do so. Further, I don't know how so many people today think that because Jesus asked God to forgive his tormentors and killers that God automatically did so. That is why I included the second passage to show that immediately before the request for forgiveness by Jesus and his crucifixion, Jesus asked something else of God which was denied. An angel was sent to comfort him, so God of course heard Jesus' prayer, but God did not grant his request to remove the cup of suffering from Jesus. That would not be done until Jesus had died and resurrected, and will himself pass judgment on humans with great strictness at the Second Coming.
Luke 23:33-34
And when they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, and the robbers, one on his right hand and the other on his left. And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." Now in dividing his garments they cast lots.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary):
And then the skies parted and God said, "Oh, well, then OK! I forgive all these people who are torturing, mocking and now killing you. Carry on with the crucifixion since Jesus asked Me to forgive all of you, go right on ahead with what you are doing."
God does not grant all of Jesus' requests.
What the Bible says:
Luke 22:42-43
Saying, "Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; yet not my will but thy be done." And there appeared to him an angel from heaven to strengthen him. And falling into an agony he prayed the more earnestly.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary)
And the angel who comforted Jesus said, "Psst! Keep it secret but God has granted your request and you are not going to be betrayed, arrested and crucified. We are just totally faking them out and Judas was just part of the punking reality show."
Only God decides regarding forgiveness. I don't know how so many people today think that if they can get a victim to "forgive them" that God will automatically do so. Further, I don't know how so many people today think that because Jesus asked God to forgive his tormentors and killers that God automatically did so. That is why I included the second passage to show that immediately before the request for forgiveness by Jesus and his crucifixion, Jesus asked something else of God which was denied. An angel was sent to comfort him, so God of course heard Jesus' prayer, but God did not grant his request to remove the cup of suffering from Jesus. That would not be done until Jesus had died and resurrected, and will himself pass judgment on humans with great strictness at the Second Coming.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Bible reading: Heeding God's warnings
God explained to the prophet Ezekiel that genuine prophets are like watchmen who warn of danger, while false prophets are like watchmen who do not warn the people of an impending threat.
Ezekiel 33
1 Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying
2 Son of man, speak to the children of thy people and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman:
3 If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet and warn the people;
4 Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning, if the sword come and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head...
5...But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul.
See, God is using several analogies that people of those times would have well understood. God compares his righteous wrath-God's punishment of humans for sin and disobedience-to a sword bearing raider.
This would have resonated to those times where people lived in great danger of raids and attacks, especially from along the sea and coastline. So the people would have understood that God's wrath can come very quickly and without warning.
However, because God is fair and perfect in his justice, God sends legitimate prophets to warn the people of their sin. So the second analogy is that a prophet such as Ezekiel is like a night watchman who is alert and on guard while the people are asleep.
This would also have resonated with people of Biblical times, as people then could not sleep with the security that many take for granted today. A gated city with a trusted watchman was a great comfort and indeed a necessity. So a prophet like Ezekiel who warns exactly what God is wrathful about and will righteously punish transgressors allows people who are just to know that the "watchman" will warn in time to find safety.
So the third analogy is that those who hear the watchman's warning that the "sword" is coming (punishment for sin is nigh) but do not flee (run from sinning, but "remain" in sin) have only themselves to blame for the chastisement.
In other words, those who ignore the legitimate Biblical prophets, not only during their time but in the future as scripture is read, are like people who ignore the warning call of the watchman, and thus, in not fleeing to safety, have only themselves to blame for the shedding of their own blood (or whatever form God's chastisement takes, which may well be in the form of being cast into hell upon one's sudden death).
Then God compares the good watchman to the negligent watchman.
6. But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.
The only negligent prophet is the false prophet, as God has just explained that the true prophet is like a watchman who sounds the warning. False prophets do not warn the people of either their sins or of the impending certain chastisement. So they are truly like a watchman who looks the other way and does not warn when the sword comes. God explains that both the sinners AND the watchman-the false prophets or, to put it in modern terms, the negligent preachers or deniers of God-will be chastised.
Notice, then, how clearly God speaks and explains the role and responsibility to Ezekiel. Anyone who lived during those times would have totally understood this analogy. God then summarizes to Ezekiel.
7. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me.
In other words, God has appointed Ezekiel the watchman for all of Israel, meaning that all the faithful MUST heed Ezekiel's warnings, given in full authority from God himself.
Far from being mysterious, you can see how clearly God explains not only his "doctrine," in the sense of how and what he expects from the faithful, but he also helps those he calls upon to fully understand their responsibilities. If you read the rest of Ezekiel 33 you will see that God continue to explain for many verses this very analogy of responsibility, repeating examples of those who heed the watchman and those who do not, and of the good watchman and his responsibilities, and the punishment that will be meted out to the negligent watchman.
There is no reason moderns cannot understand quite fully and clearly this warning. One need only think of the modern watchman, such as the technology of the burglar alarm, for a similar analogy. Who wants to sleep with a false burglar alarm, trusting in it when it does not work? That is what the assurances of the false prophet, or the unbeliever, or the "soft" preacher who does not understand that God can and will chastise for sin is like, a burglar alarm that says that the perimeter is safe and that one's family is secure, when in fact the very opposite is true. Blame must also be put on those who put their family in reliance of a faulty system, if one is to use this analogy in modern terms. In this case it would be like the family who deliberately does not place batteries in their fire detectors.
But you see, this is one reason the Bible is ageless. You should not update the Bible to modern analogies because they just do not, as you see above, capture the nuance of the personal relationships of citizens/watchman. It is the responsibility of the Bible reader to understand the analogy in the terms that God himself placed them in in the first place and thus one will be more likely to avoid error. There is no misunderstanding a negligent watchman, a human being, while moderns can split hairs over technical analogies (such as placing batteries in fire detectors) and thus try to word smith and tech analogy their way out of salvation and righteousness through inadvertent or deliberate misunderstanding.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
Ezekiel 33
1 Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying
2 Son of man, speak to the children of thy people and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman:
3 If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet and warn the people;
4 Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning, if the sword come and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head...
5...But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul.
See, God is using several analogies that people of those times would have well understood. God compares his righteous wrath-God's punishment of humans for sin and disobedience-to a sword bearing raider.
This would have resonated to those times where people lived in great danger of raids and attacks, especially from along the sea and coastline. So the people would have understood that God's wrath can come very quickly and without warning.
However, because God is fair and perfect in his justice, God sends legitimate prophets to warn the people of their sin. So the second analogy is that a prophet such as Ezekiel is like a night watchman who is alert and on guard while the people are asleep.
This would also have resonated with people of Biblical times, as people then could not sleep with the security that many take for granted today. A gated city with a trusted watchman was a great comfort and indeed a necessity. So a prophet like Ezekiel who warns exactly what God is wrathful about and will righteously punish transgressors allows people who are just to know that the "watchman" will warn in time to find safety.
So the third analogy is that those who hear the watchman's warning that the "sword" is coming (punishment for sin is nigh) but do not flee (run from sinning, but "remain" in sin) have only themselves to blame for the chastisement.
In other words, those who ignore the legitimate Biblical prophets, not only during their time but in the future as scripture is read, are like people who ignore the warning call of the watchman, and thus, in not fleeing to safety, have only themselves to blame for the shedding of their own blood (or whatever form God's chastisement takes, which may well be in the form of being cast into hell upon one's sudden death).
Then God compares the good watchman to the negligent watchman.
6. But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.
The only negligent prophet is the false prophet, as God has just explained that the true prophet is like a watchman who sounds the warning. False prophets do not warn the people of either their sins or of the impending certain chastisement. So they are truly like a watchman who looks the other way and does not warn when the sword comes. God explains that both the sinners AND the watchman-the false prophets or, to put it in modern terms, the negligent preachers or deniers of God-will be chastised.
Notice, then, how clearly God speaks and explains the role and responsibility to Ezekiel. Anyone who lived during those times would have totally understood this analogy. God then summarizes to Ezekiel.
7. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me.
In other words, God has appointed Ezekiel the watchman for all of Israel, meaning that all the faithful MUST heed Ezekiel's warnings, given in full authority from God himself.
Far from being mysterious, you can see how clearly God explains not only his "doctrine," in the sense of how and what he expects from the faithful, but he also helps those he calls upon to fully understand their responsibilities. If you read the rest of Ezekiel 33 you will see that God continue to explain for many verses this very analogy of responsibility, repeating examples of those who heed the watchman and those who do not, and of the good watchman and his responsibilities, and the punishment that will be meted out to the negligent watchman.
There is no reason moderns cannot understand quite fully and clearly this warning. One need only think of the modern watchman, such as the technology of the burglar alarm, for a similar analogy. Who wants to sleep with a false burglar alarm, trusting in it when it does not work? That is what the assurances of the false prophet, or the unbeliever, or the "soft" preacher who does not understand that God can and will chastise for sin is like, a burglar alarm that says that the perimeter is safe and that one's family is secure, when in fact the very opposite is true. Blame must also be put on those who put their family in reliance of a faulty system, if one is to use this analogy in modern terms. In this case it would be like the family who deliberately does not place batteries in their fire detectors.
But you see, this is one reason the Bible is ageless. You should not update the Bible to modern analogies because they just do not, as you see above, capture the nuance of the personal relationships of citizens/watchman. It is the responsibility of the Bible reader to understand the analogy in the terms that God himself placed them in in the first place and thus one will be more likely to avoid error. There is no misunderstanding a negligent watchman, a human being, while moderns can split hairs over technical analogies (such as placing batteries in fire detectors) and thus try to word smith and tech analogy their way out of salvation and righteousness through inadvertent or deliberate misunderstanding.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Bible Reading: Proverbs 3:25-35
Be not afraid of sudden terror, of the ruin of the wicked when it comes; for the Lord will be your confidence, and will keep your foot from the snare.
Refuse no one the good on which he has a claim when it is in your power to do it for him. Say not to your neighbor, "Go, and come again, and tomorrow I will give," when you can give at once.
Plot no evil against your neighbor, against him who lives at peace with you. Quarrel not with a man without cause, with one who has done you no harm.
Envy not the lawless man and choose none of his ways: to the Lord the perverse man is an abomination, but with the upright is his friendship.
The curse of the Lord is on the house of the wicked, but the dwelling of the just he blesses; when he is dealing with the arrogant, he is stern, but to the humble he shows kindness.
[Honor is the portion of wise men, but fools inherit shame.]
Refuse no one the good on which he has a claim when it is in your power to do it for him. Say not to your neighbor, "Go, and come again, and tomorrow I will give," when you can give at once.
Plot no evil against your neighbor, against him who lives at peace with you. Quarrel not with a man without cause, with one who has done you no harm.
Envy not the lawless man and choose none of his ways: to the Lord the perverse man is an abomination, but with the upright is his friendship.
The curse of the Lord is on the house of the wicked, but the dwelling of the just he blesses; when he is dealing with the arrogant, he is stern, but to the humble he shows kindness.
[Honor is the portion of wise men, but fools inherit shame.]
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Another point about praying
Truly holy people are contributing only good, even when they are not praying. They leave it all in God's hands, and thus allow God's justice to prevail.
Evil people who pretend to be "spiritual" do not retain this neutral stance. They agitate and allow evil thoughts to fester, which is a sin (yes, the Bible is clear that sinful thoughts that are harmful toward another are sins in God's eyes, who sees and knows all). Thus it is common to have people who "pray" for good causes, yet are more evil than someone who has pure and good thoughts, wishing ill toward no one else, even if they are not "praying."
The difference can be seen in the case study that I mentioned where I stopped my habit of praying daily for the planes and passengers that I saw from my previous home. Just because I stopped praying does not mean I cultivated negative thoughts. However, I know plenty of people who direct evil thoughts hoping for suffering and calamity against those they envy, or due to their warped "beliefs" (cultists who seek "vengeance" since they think they are someone special and empowered to do so). Not only do they have ugly and harmful thoughts, which they have the nerve to then bracket with prayer to God, or to Jesus, but they actually seek to put actual stumbling blocks in life in front of those that they hate or "disapprove of." No gesture is too petty, and thus, God allows them to happen, but he will have his vengeance, and that is inescapable. So even as people do evil against me, in literal deed, not just evil thoughts, I do not hope for them to be harmed and I'd never even think of using sacred prayer to pray "against" them. Rather I glorify in God's own choosing of his vengeance, his justice, his smiting. I know that will happen even if it only happens after they have lost their "fat cat" lives of plenty, and then find themselves in shock burning in hell for all eternity. I don't mind that at all, but I'm not the one from whom certain judgment comes. I'm just the handmaiden cheerleader of God's. I've had to get used to the reality that people I once cared about (and many I did not know) are now or will certainly upon their death be thrust into hell by angels who ensure that God's will is done, and who will suffer at the hands of Satan and his own for all eternity. But trust me, I'm used to it and the thought does not bother me at all, and is, rather, my last comfort. God is great and he is never deceived, and his justice is perfect, even as it may seem to be slow.
*snap* *crackle* *pop*
Think about it.
Evil people who pretend to be "spiritual" do not retain this neutral stance. They agitate and allow evil thoughts to fester, which is a sin (yes, the Bible is clear that sinful thoughts that are harmful toward another are sins in God's eyes, who sees and knows all). Thus it is common to have people who "pray" for good causes, yet are more evil than someone who has pure and good thoughts, wishing ill toward no one else, even if they are not "praying."
The difference can be seen in the case study that I mentioned where I stopped my habit of praying daily for the planes and passengers that I saw from my previous home. Just because I stopped praying does not mean I cultivated negative thoughts. However, I know plenty of people who direct evil thoughts hoping for suffering and calamity against those they envy, or due to their warped "beliefs" (cultists who seek "vengeance" since they think they are someone special and empowered to do so). Not only do they have ugly and harmful thoughts, which they have the nerve to then bracket with prayer to God, or to Jesus, but they actually seek to put actual stumbling blocks in life in front of those that they hate or "disapprove of." No gesture is too petty, and thus, God allows them to happen, but he will have his vengeance, and that is inescapable. So even as people do evil against me, in literal deed, not just evil thoughts, I do not hope for them to be harmed and I'd never even think of using sacred prayer to pray "against" them. Rather I glorify in God's own choosing of his vengeance, his justice, his smiting. I know that will happen even if it only happens after they have lost their "fat cat" lives of plenty, and then find themselves in shock burning in hell for all eternity. I don't mind that at all, but I'm not the one from whom certain judgment comes. I'm just the handmaiden cheerleader of God's. I've had to get used to the reality that people I once cared about (and many I did not know) are now or will certainly upon their death be thrust into hell by angels who ensure that God's will is done, and who will suffer at the hands of Satan and his own for all eternity. But trust me, I'm used to it and the thought does not bother me at all, and is, rather, my last comfort. God is great and he is never deceived, and his justice is perfect, even as it may seem to be slow.
*snap* *crackle* *pop*
Think about it.
Friday, July 25, 2008
People might forgive too soon
Two nights ago just before my evening prayers I had an ominous feeling that people who had wronged me, grievously wronged me, around thirty years ago were going to be severely chastised by God. While these people have done nothing to indicate atonement and certainly have done nothing spiritually or materially generous in recompense in my direction, I was moved to pray to God for him to have mercy on them.
Even I, who knows God very, very well, was surprised at the rebuke that I received. I don't mean like I was yelled at or something went wrong to me, but I viewed a very swift chastisement of people who have benefited materially by my being wronged. I was given to understand quite clearly by God that I am not to forgive people who do not repent, atone, and ask for forgiveness. God describes it with this kind of image, that a person being beaten and tortured cannot have the torturers scream at her "forgive us" while they assault her further.
I thought I would share this communication because I wrote recently on this very topic, and there has been a pressure put upon pious people to "forgive," even before the sinner or criminal has made even nominal admission of guilt and regret.
So, sorry a-holes, but I'm not to forgive anyone for anything, even though I reluctantly, but sincerely, tried (half knowing the answer in advance but still surprised at how swiftly God responded to demonstrate that his chastisement, even decades later, will come to those who refuse to repent). Additionally, do remember that God promises that his vengence for wrongs to him and against the innocent will fall on multiple generations (since those who benefit, especially materially, from their parents' trangressions will also have to pay for the injustice). Therefore, a delay in chastisement often only means that God will chastise multiple generations, and I've seen some examples of that recently. It's not like the Bible hasn't made that abundantly clear. "Experts" ought to be more thorough in their Bible study and not cherry pick.
Even I, who knows God very, very well, was surprised at the rebuke that I received. I don't mean like I was yelled at or something went wrong to me, but I viewed a very swift chastisement of people who have benefited materially by my being wronged. I was given to understand quite clearly by God that I am not to forgive people who do not repent, atone, and ask for forgiveness. God describes it with this kind of image, that a person being beaten and tortured cannot have the torturers scream at her "forgive us" while they assault her further.
I thought I would share this communication because I wrote recently on this very topic, and there has been a pressure put upon pious people to "forgive," even before the sinner or criminal has made even nominal admission of guilt and regret.
So, sorry a-holes, but I'm not to forgive anyone for anything, even though I reluctantly, but sincerely, tried (half knowing the answer in advance but still surprised at how swiftly God responded to demonstrate that his chastisement, even decades later, will come to those who refuse to repent). Additionally, do remember that God promises that his vengence for wrongs to him and against the innocent will fall on multiple generations (since those who benefit, especially materially, from their parents' trangressions will also have to pay for the injustice). Therefore, a delay in chastisement often only means that God will chastise multiple generations, and I've seen some examples of that recently. It's not like the Bible hasn't made that abundantly clear. "Experts" ought to be more thorough in their Bible study and not cherry pick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
