The Faith Against Faith

The false dichotomy between faith and reason

All thought must have a foundation of beliefs in order to process information for reasoning. Being that we are constantly forced into making decisions, other than being bipolar, we have no option but to embrace a set of beliefs to predicate our decisions upon. Although there are many ideologies upon which to form a foundation of thought, they can be reduced into two basic categories, herein referred to as spiritual and material, or sometimes distinguished as faith and reason(religion and science). Keep in mind that these terms are not precise seeing that the materialist will show a spiritual side and does place faith in something, and the spiritual man is not without reason or necessarily in denial of science, although a part of his reason is based upon a trust that there are things in existence which cannot be seen or proven by man, but nonetheless, are a reality. Therefore, there is a false dichotomy between faith and “reason”, because everyone who believes anything, or holds any ideology or belief system, embraces both. But even so, when faith is misplaced, reason becomes corrupted.

Because of conflicts between spiritual and material(worldly) foundations of thought, there becomes a necessity to choose one over the other as the predominate basis in making choices; for you cannot establish a direction in life based upon uncertainty. As it is written: “You cannot serve God and mammon”. It is easy for one to say they are agnostic, but in practice when making certain choices, some decisions must be made by faith; and the rejection of a faith often is in itself an opposing faith, or a faith against a faith. For if we are to believe anything, we must base trust in what knowledge is. And we cannot always do that solely on what is proven or accepted as fact because of the many unknowns. For even with all we know, there are gaps in our knowledge created by unknowns. It is often necessary to fill these gaps, which we attempt to do by reasoning. This means that along with provable certainties, we also all choose to believe some things which are only accepted by faith. This is true whether we believe in God or not. For while one can claim only to believe in science, it is almost impossible, because at this point scientific knowledge is too incomplete by itself to completely support an ideology. And because it is incomplete, one who believes only in science is often forced to interpret what the science means, which gives birth to theories. This too becomes faith wherein one puts trust in his own reasoning. For we cannot make any sense of anything without first laying a foundation of what we accept as knowledge. And without this foundation, we are tossed to and fro being unstable and confused. Herein lies the Great Division between the spiritual man and the carnal man sometimes referred to imprecisely as, science versus religion, or reason versus faith. In reality, those terms create a false dichotomy; for faith is hardly without reason, nor is secular reasoning completely devoid of faith.

A secular belief system based solely upon scientific reasoning places more limitations on knowledge than does a system based upon faith in God, in part because the secularist will reject knowledge received by revelation or through testimony of a personal experience. While often this can be the correct thing to do, there are cases where revelations, experiences, and testimonies are indeed true. Even an event that takes place with no witnesses still happens. So likewise, the rejection of all things that cannot be proven also will include some truths. Nonetheless, by doing so, secularists put academia in the position of being the exclusive arbitrators in determining what qualifies for knowledge and biases arise wherein there is often an exclusion of the beliefs and knowledge held by others if it dose not conform to their ideology.

Because of the gaps in knowledge, to connect the pieces together, secularists are themselves forced to resort to faith to manufacture links, often at best based upon circumstantial evidence. They rely upon theories to arrive at explanations and conclusions. In doing so, however, their explanations often tend to create even more questions, which in turn demands an even greater faith and an expansion of theories. Thus, in many cases, the materialist ends up being no less believing, no less devoted, no less fanatical, nor any less evangelical, and far more wildly imaginative than his religious counterpart.

Nonetheless, when popular ideas and theories gain enough traction in intellectual circles, they often become accepted as a reality and are incorporated and “certified” as knowledge, even without sufficient supporting evidence. Thus, pure science is undermined and in many cases, the occupation embraces faith and becomes a profession with a ‘religious’ nature. Agenda driven ideologies become dogma and are embraced by the academics, creating numerous instances wherein things are treated as indisputable fact when at best they are unknown. But then too, many things which are indeed true are treated as falsehoods or dismissed. The end result is science ceases to be as scientific as it claims.

H.G. Wells, whom I have often cited, a man sold solely on science and reason, exhibits his faith in the following words,

“There was no Creation in the past, we begin to realize, but eternally there is creation; there was no Fall to account for the conflict of good and evil, but a stormy ascent. Life as we know it is a mere beginning….“ “……We have still barely emerged from among the animals in their struggle for existence. We live only in the early dawn of human self-consciousness and in the first awakening of the spirit of mastery.”

This is a statement of faith and a religious expression of secular-humanism wherein mankind is essentially evolving to the status of being “God”. To further illustrate this religious aspect of secular humanism embraced by materialists we can continue with Wells’s writing where he says,

“Man’s soul is no longer his own. It is, he discovers, part of a greater being which lived before he was born and will survive him. The idea of a survival of the definite individual with all the accidents and idiosyncrasies of his temporal nature upon him dissolves to nothing in this new view of immortality…..……The first sentence in the modern creed must be, not “I believe,” but “I give myself.”

Thus accordingly, the secular mindset holds that creation is and of itself; there is nothing more. Man’s sole purpose is not as an individual but in being a “part of a greater being”(the collective). It is to give himself to the “being” for the advancement of mankind (the being) to higher levels. As individuals alone we have little to no value, but as a apart of the collective, we are as single cells in the immortal body of humanity. Our sole purpose of existing is to help advance the immortal body of civilization through the stages of evolution. Cells die, but they are replaced by new and the body lives. Collectively, we are the supreme being. There is no God above us. It is this vein of thinking that puts mankind above all and invites justification for man to act as God, to decide who is innocent and who is guilty, who should live and who should die. The lives of individuals become dispensable if deemed a liability to the advancement or benefit of the body of humanity. This rejection of faith in God creates a faith, albeit, an atheistic one with all the aspects of a religion.

Wells was an understudy of Thomas Huxley (“Darwin’s bulldog“) and his writing exemplifies the strain of thought that was widespread in academia in the early 1900s. Wells was not an originator of this thought but was indoctrinated into this line of thinking in the universities and rejected faith in God.

It was this worldview which gave birth to the eugenics movement to facilitate evolution in the process whereby the “superior” elements supersede the weaker. The ideology spread worldwide and particularly throughout institutions of “higher” learning. The introduction of this into Germany was inspirational in the Nazis’ determination that the Aryans were the most advanced race, and thus, not only had the right, but an obligation to the future of humanity to supersede the inferior elements which were destroying the world and slowing the evolutionary process. Only those deemed the most perfect had value, the lives of all others were disposable and worthy of life only as long and in as much as they were useful in the advancement of the Übermensch.

By this time, the Soviet Union also had already promoting the unrealistic concept of perfection in a material world, but more emphasis was placed on the march toward social perfection rather than genetic superiority. The result, however, was no better under Communism than it was under Nazism; but even though the Communists were responsible for many more deaths than the Nazis, communism has not not attained to the same degree of stigma. As a result, today even in western societies, Marxist ideologies are woven into progressive socialist agendas and Darwinism is foundational in governmental education.

The words of Vladimir Lenin, “We may regard the material and cosmic world as the supreme being, as the cause of all causes, as the creator of heaven and earth,” may be well and widely accepted throughout universities everywhere.

Well over a hundred million lives have fallen victim to materialists ideologies which are essentially based on the concept that man is the supreme being and that the supreme men are “God.” How this repeats itself in the future is yet to be seen, but it will be seen if man continues down that road.

Arbitrary Morality

According to secular humanism, not only have the species been evolving, but law is “living and breathing” and also evolving. For law, having no source other than from those persons who create it, is relative, arbitrary, and at this point incomplete. Thus, whatever seems the most expedient or beneficial at the moment is deemed acceptable. The problem however, is that what benefits some may be totally devastating for others.

From this conflict of interests comes the concept of the “common good” wherein the benefits for society as a whole are weighed against the rights, freedoms, or even the lives of those whose suffering would seem small in comparison to the benefits reaped by society. In all actuality, however, the benefit of the elite ruling class carries more weight than the “common good” of society, and it is arrogantly viewed by them as being the same.

In the elitists mind, if a few years of holocaust purges out the “corrupt” and “inferior” elements of humanity and brings a thousand year reign of a superior and more perfect civilization, then so be it, it was merely a part of the process. Besides, how much future suffering will be avoided by eliminating the “sub-humans” and their posterity who were spared being born? The overall gain is a plus. This type of rational is the direct result of reason absent a faith in God. It is the place reason always ends when it travels alone.

Faith or Reason

Reason absent faith has proven itself a force of destruction. By the same token, faith absent reason is no less destructive than reason without faith. Man cannot live without faith; he is intellectually paralyzed without it. On the other hand, by faith alone without reason, man is also lost. Only when knowledge is perfect can reason be perfect; and a faith that is not misplaced possesses the same virtue as knowledge; for indeed, it is knowledge.

As many have been destroyed by the reasoning of the Godless, a great many have also been destroyed by faith in a “God”. What the two have in common, however, is materialism. For the as the Godless have based their ideology upon the physical world, those religions responsible for the murder of countless individuals did the same by establishing their faith in the physical realm. For although they professed to be spiritual, in practice their deeds were physical, aimed at fulfilling worldly ambitions. This is as true of the Church of Rome it is of Islam today.

Although the evangelical Christian may preach about hell, the Islamic fanatic believes it his duty to expedite your arrival as soon and as horrifically as possible. The faith of the former is in the spiritual; he awaits a kingdom, and judgment is carried out by God alone in his time. On the other hand, the latter acts in the place of God, to execute judgment and establish a physical kingdom of “God” on earth. The pursuit of an earthy kingdom was the ambition also of Roman Catholicism, of both the Nazis and Communists, and it is also the vision of “progressive” elitists today.

Thus, religions that base their actions on the establishment of a kingdom in the physical realm have more in common with communists, fascists, and other secular collectivists who seek to do the same, than they do with those who base their faith on an everlasting omnipotent Creator, who has endowed men with a free will and inalienable rights!

Reason alone did not bring freedom, it did not create rights, nor did it bring justice; it has always done the opposite. For reason never travels alone; it is always accompanied by ideology. And reason is to be a servant of faith, a helper to bring invisible principles into the knowledge of a physical world as a constant foundation. For, if we are to avoid catastrophe, we must balance faith with reason, reason with faith, but the redeeming virtue of reason comes from faith.

RAS – 2007

The Restortion of Jewish Truth

What is Christianity? Where did it originate? Is there a difference between Christianity, The Church, and the true “Body of Christ”?

The first believers in Yeshua, today more commonly known as Jesus, were called “Followers of the Way”; and they were Jews living in Judea. In other nations, variations of the Babylonian religion of the sun god had for centuries become established as the foundation of belief. It was upon the foundation of Babylonian religion that virtually all nations and people would build their beliefs and systems. In different cultures and among different peoples and nations, this ancient religion would evolve, mutating into various versions, adding, subtracting, and interjecting different ideas, often substituting different names for the same deities, idols, and gods. In Rome up until the time Christianity became the official state religion, “Sol Invictus Mithras” — “The Unconquered Sun Mithra” was worshiped. This religion disappears around the 4th Century A.D. Is this time frame coincidental? Or, did the practice of idolatry even disappear? Contrary to common belief, Rome did not convert to Christianity. It would be more correct to say it was Christianity that was converted into being Roman. By incorporation of the Gospel with existing beliefs and practices, Roman idolatry was given a face lift, maybe more like a face transplant. Thousands of Christians whose Christianity was at odds with Rome’s version were put to death by Constantine. Was that very Christian? This would become the rule for hundreds of years to follow.

It was a brilliant plan by Satan to incorporate the truth of Yeshua into his lie. It would become the lie whereby Christianity would become characterized for hundreds of years, even until today. But Satan made one fatal mistake. By incorporating some truth into his idolatrous Babylonian religion, he provided for its demise. Indeed, for there is something within the truth that is so powerful, it fights to restore itself to the fullness of truth. Even in the midst of lies, truth cries aloud to be heard and to come out. There are those who hear truth’s voice for it tugs at their hearts and they cannot escape its pull. Truth draws these people continually unto the fullness thereof. Line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, truth is restored. This is how we have come to arrive where we are today. And the restoration of Truth is not finished. The Truth was spread around the whole world within a lie and has been fighting its way out of that lie ever since — often at the price of the lives of those who dared declare it. No, the restorationists were not perfect, but they were moved by the Spirit, and those who would follow after would bring truth, each one, little by little, closer to home. As it was foretold by the prophet Joel:

Tell ye your children of it,
And let your children tell their children,
And their children another generation.

That which the palmer-worm hath left hath the locust eaten; And that which the locust hath left hath the canker-worm eaten; And that which the canker-worm hath left hath the caterpillar eaten.

Awake, ye drunkards, and weep,
And wail, all ye drinkers of wine,
Because of the sweet wine,
For it is cut off from your mouth.

But in chapter 2, Joel proclaims the restoration of the truth.

“And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, The canker-worm, and the caterpillar, and the palmer-worm. . .”

The Bible is a Jewish book, both parts. It must be restored and understood in its Jewish context if it is to be understood by anyone. There are over 40,000 different Christian denominations and sects. What has not been corrupted or devoured, all or in part, by 40,000 armies of palmer-worms, locust, canker-worms, and caterpillars? Doctrines left in tact by one have been perverted by another. Yet, even within those institutions there have been those who came to know Him through faith in Him, in spite of many false doctrines — to whom He says, “Come out from among them my people. . . “

A Story Of The City On The Hill

Truth is a great city sitting high above all realms. Truth gives light to our world of darkness, and without it, we would be in absolute spiritual darkness. The children of men have a natural aversion to spiritual light, for it is in the darkness that worldly desires may be fully embraced. Humans realize that the nearer they approach to the light, worldly ideas and ambitions are exposed and dispelled. This drives many away from the light into the nether regions of darkness; for only in ignorance are they able to continue their pursuits and embrace those things wherein they take pleasure.

With fulfillment of lusts, and with an increase of power, wealth, celebrity, and fame comes a greater tendency of aversion to the light; for knowledge of the truth threatens to deprive one of a full pursuit of worldly pleasures. The temptation for those who are rich in worldly goods, or rich in the spirit of their own ways, is to travel away from the city of light into the most remote and darkest regions of worldliness — the realm of ignorance. Is it any wonder then that often it is the rich of this world: the most powerful, the most famous, the wealthiest, who are the greatest adversaries of the truth and the most detached from reality? And who is more outspoken against truth? They band together to create an institution of darkness for which to impose upon others. They create a throne of self-righteousness whereupon they may sit as royals. Above all others they set themselves as judges, kings and queens. In their minds they are the wise. Notwithstanding, Yeshua said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

On the other hand are the poor in spirit who hunger and thirst for righteousness. These are they who grope in the darkness for hope. Looking around the world about them, they see no true source of light, only reflections in the glass flickering for a moment, and the torches of worldly fires that are soon to burn themselves out. Looking upward, they are drawn by the Light they see atop the hill. From near and afar off they behold the light atop the hill, and being captivated by its brightness, are moved to travel toward it. From every region they come, and as each one begins their ascent up the mountain toward the great city, they enter the city limits and are given a lamp for their travels. They have now become a citizen of The City on the Hill, and those below still living in darkness can see their lights as they ascend upward. Still, quite a journey remains to the very top of the hill and to the gates the city. As the travelers press upward and onward, each traveler has a personal walk; for not one has started in the same place as another. Seeing then that each one begins from a unique place, how then in the beginning of the journey can any travel the exact same path? Indeed, for some coming from completely different places, may even need for a time to travel in a different direction. How is it then that one on this side of the hill can say to another on the opposite side, “Brother, you are going the wrong direction”? For it matters not the direction you come from if you are traveling upward. I say this in regards to those who demand adherence of others to their interpretations of doctrine.

Some travelers who come from afar often face a longer journey, some roads they travel may be more difficult, and others may have a much much darker path with very little light to guide the way. How is it then that one coming from a much different place can say to the other, “Your way forward is wrong, you must travel my way and in my understanding and by my light”?

No one can travel your path, nor can you travel the path of another. Everyone’s walk is personal. Everyone’s walk must be one step at a time, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little there a little. Yet, dissension breaks out among many of the travelers as they each claim to be on the right path. Some even demand that others leave off walking their path to travel with them up the hill in order to be saved. And too often there is contempt for those who, “follow not us”. The disciples rebuked a man for casting out devils in the name of Yeshua because said they, “he followed not us”. Yet, Yeshua said unto them, “Rebuke him not, for he that is not against us is own our part”.

There is no doubt that some paths are clearer and are lighted much better than others, but how can someone far away who started in a totally different place travel a better path without first traveling another path that leads to it? As we all travel the unique path before each of us, we must take heed not to overstep the boundaries of judgment in regards to the walk others are walking. When we see others apart from us who have come from a completely different place traveling up the hill, we need to realize, true understanding is not in judging the perfection or imperfections of the path, but rather the direction the one on the path is traveling. Is he headed up or down the hill? If he is headed up the hill, even imperfectly, he is a brother. Counseling one another, reproof, and sharing with one another is profitable for all, but judgment should be held for those heading downward.

The purpose of this writing is to point out the importance of bearing with those who hold doctrinal differences which are at odds with own. Truth be told, we all hold imperfections we are not aware of. We should be careful not to reject those who believe somewhat differently unless they cross the point they compromise salvation. This too takes much discernment. There is no doubt that some doctrinal errors are critical, even fatal when falsehoods are embraced that are a nest for sins which damn the soul. It is only by the word of God and Holy Sprint that these things can be weighed and judged. The important thing to remember is that although we are on a straight and narrow path, each one has a personal walk that should be taken up with fear and trembling. Your personal walk is yours alone. No one can walk it for you; nor should you demand others walk your walk. The lamp you have been given may be brighter or dimmer than some others; do not judge others by the light you carry as they may be walking in all of the light that they have, or in some cases, more than you have. The personal paths of true followers continually become closer as they near the top of the hill; and at the top, all roads must converge into the city. As this happens, differences disappear; and the closer the travelers come to the center of the city, the closer the travelers also are to each other in every way. Indeed, for all paths of those who follow The Truth end in one place. At the end of the journey, all meet and all are gathered together in the city square. There will be no more differences then.

The Puzzle of Truth

The full knowledge of the truth is like unto a great puzzle. All truths are puzzle pieces. The Scriptures serve as the picture on the box top that aids us in putting the puzzle pieces of truth together. But in our case much of the picture is obscure. Yeshua is the Center Piece, and with him, come all the pieces that connect to the peripheral pieces in the Hebrew Bible. Generally, when beginning an enormous puzzle with many pieces, work begins with the peripheral pieces. It is true also in this case. There are four corners, which even among a multitude of pieces, are readily identifiable. Once all four corners are set, the work proceeds connecting the pieces that form the most outer edge, and from there the work begins to converge inward to the center. But in our case, the work on the puzzle stopped; and the caretakers who began the work ceased. The prophets went silent. The puzzle was abandoned and left with a large hole right in the middle.

The silence lasted over 400 years, until one day, a voice began crying in the wilderness; and then the Center Piece appeared. But many did not accept the Center Piece. Nonetheless, a few did recognize Him, and they began working to connect other pieces to Him. They were persecuted and killed, still, the work continued. Thereafter, others came also with other pieces and box top pictures of their own. Working recklessly they began forcing pieces together adding in their own strange pieces, while taking other true pieces away. They disregarded the four corners and outlying pieces and created a picture of their own.

One day a great ruler came. Beholding the puzzle, it became desirable to him and he took it from those who had it and declared it his own. He too had other pieces and pictures of strange puzzles which he put into the puzzle and declared “This is the true puzzle. All people shall believe and worship it”. Thereafter the two parts of the puzzle became irreconcilable. For the children of those who had given them the first part, held to it; while the others who came later held to the newer part. As the two caretakers grew further apart and enmity increased, they both devised means whereby to make certain that the two parts would never be joined together. There was even greater division than ever before, and it was accepted by all, there were two separate puzzles, and two entirely different pictures. The first part of the outer pieces was seen as a picture of beautiful landscaped gardens, walls, gates, walkways, fountains and waters. The more recent corrupted part also was viewed separately. It was accepted that the picture was that of a very impressive house built atop the landscape, and thus, replaced the landscape as the true picture.

After no small passage of time, others came along also, who beholding both puzzles, were amazed at how many pieces appeared to connect the two parts into being one of the same. They began working fervently to throw out the strange pieces, and to find the missing pieces that connected the two parts. But they too were persecuted and killed as those before them who had made the same declarations. Much more time would pass, but piece by piece, the puzzle was coming together. And indeed, it was becoming clearer with each new piece that the two parts are separate parts of one puzzle. For when the center pieces were placed in the middle of the outer pieces, the beautiful landscaped gardens, walls, gates, fountains and waters surrounded the House; and all walkways converged into one that lead up to the Door. And then, looking closely into the fountain waters in the outlying pieces, it was realized; there is a reflection of the House that has been there all along.

Creation: The Mystery of God

The Mystery of God revealed in Creation

When Lucifer became lifted up with pride, he said in his heart, “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High”. He then set about, spreading accusations and gathering others unto his rebellion against God. It was the first communistic message of class-warfare and equality. Heaven was corrupted by evil. But God is holy. And evil cannot dwell in his presence. For this reason, a place set apart from Heaven was prepared for the Devil and his angles — a holding cell. Although God could have justly destroyed Lucifer and his followers utterly and eternally, he did not.  But why? May it have been that the many accusations Lucifer had hurled at God needed to be answered before he was destroyed?  Was there a means whereby those angels whom God had created could know if there was any truth in what Lucifer had declared?  Might it be wondered if all should indeed be equal?  Would the question remain if it were possible that the All Mighty had set himself up unfairly above all?  Would the remaining angels who fell not, serve God out of terror rather than love? To resolve all questions and doubts, there was need for a trial. But first, before Judgment Day, all the evidence must be gathered; for who goes to trial without evidence? And not only so, but there were other co-conspirators to the rebellion, yet to be born, who would later join the ranks of evil. They too must be rounded up before the Final Judgment, to make an end of all evil, once and for ever.

Creation: The gathering of evidence

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

At this point, the fullness of all knowledge exists as an invisible and remains exclusively the knowledge of God. God, in his willingness to make things known to his living creations, creates images of expression to bring the invisible truths into the realm of their understanding.  Ignorance is expressed as Darkness, while true knowledge is expressed by Light. Lucifer being cast out is henceforth referred to as Satan(adversary), and expressed by darkness. God speaks his Word, “Let there be Light”, It is the Day. “And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness”.  Remember, the sun, moon, stars, all heavenly luminaries are not yet created until the Forth Day.  Notwithstanding, God, on the First Day, creates Light in the Darkness. He exposes Darkness, He judges Darkness. Lucifer and his followers are indicted, arrested, incarcerated, and held in “chains of darkness” awaiting trial. It is therefore, we can find in the very first verses of Scripture, that God reveals his mystery unto us.  For the purpose of his creation from the the beginning to the end, is that those things that are not seen, may be seen by those things that are; and thus, ignorance is dispelled by knowledge, Darkness by Light, and falsehoods by The Word of God. The Light has come; darkness is divided out. The evidence of truth is being made manifest in our world, and it is recorded.  Next up, God divides the Heavenly realm above, from the worldly realm where Satan is in holding until the Final Judgment of all things. Satan has been cast out of the Heavenly realm. God has His Heavenly turf back!

“And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. “And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day”

Again, remember in Scripture there is metaphoric usage.  Waters often are used to demonstrate, Word and Spirit.   However, particularity in Revelations, there is also usage as “many peoples” and “many spirits”, or voices of many. In light of the latter usage, might we consider that the Heavenly spirits were divided from all other spirits that are not Heavenly? Is this division between God’s Kingdom above and the realms below? For there is an impenetrable barrier fixed between the Most Holy Place and all others that no one can crossover but he that is sent? — those sent being God’s Messengers and servants, and the Mediator between heaven and earth who lived in both, died in one, and is risen again to live in both through those who are redeemed. All this not to say that all things written are only spiritual; but rather, the physical creation is patterned after the spiritual, which is the eternal.

Blood Moons: Signs of the Times – Part II

It is troubling that many people dismiss great signs and wonders as nothing. But a herd mentality can be just as bad when something seems to make sense and people swallow the whole, hook, line, and sinker. Sometimes you can take theories and find things in them that resound with scripture. But just because something has some truth, it doesn’t mean it is all true. The best understanding often comes from taking truths you find in a theory away from the theory, and begin a search for the other truths that go with them. It is a careful spiritual process that takes patience and time.

Some say blood moons are ominous warning of war, bloodshed, and famine. Others are saying they are a good sign for Israel, but a bad sign for the nations. And then another group says, forget it, it means nothing. I was ask the last group; does a rainbow also mean nothing?

I believe absolutely God does everything for a purpose. I don’t think blood moons were created just to make us say, “Cool!, Awesome!” They are a sign, and they are saying something.

Here is one thing that keeps coming back to me about blood moons. I wonder it but I hesitate to write it because there are so many interpretations. However, I will write it as something to ponder, not as “The Divine Interpretation”. The moon in the bible is an often used symbol for: a woman, The Bride, God’s chosen. At night, the light in darkness in the absence of the sun is the moon, which, having no light of its own, reflects the light of the greater light upon the world. Likewise, Yeshua reflects his light upon his chosen, to give Light to the world in his absence.

The last total solar eclipse which took place, took place directly over the North Pole. As of now, no nation owns the North Pole; under international law the area is under administration of the “International Seabed Authority”. Thus being the area is international, is the total eclipse of the sun a warning to all the nations? Is it a sign of an absence of God? Only destruction can follow if God withholds his Light and mercy.

I can be more brief about the blood moons if indeed we understand the Bride metaphor and the moon as a feminine “help mate” of the “Light Of The World” to bring Light at night– Remember Yeshua’s words:

“We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work. “While I am in the world, I am the Light of the world.”

What is the light of our world? The sun. We are not to worship the sun as pagans do; but it is a sign, and along with the moon, together they are teachers wherein lies truth that when reveled, we can understand and worship God with greater understanding. The Sun is the Greater Light, and the moon the lesser “help mate” — a symbol of the Groom and Bride. If the total solar eclipse over the North Pole was a sign of Judgement upon all nations, what then is the significance of the blood moon? —- and not merely a blood moon, but a super blood moon appearing over Jerusalem on Sukkot(the Feast of Tabernacles)? I will leave you with a verse to ponder regarding this mystery:

Exodus 12:13 “. . . and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. . .”

In that light, a super blood moon appearing over Jerusalem on the Feast of Tabernacles would be of the greatest significance to his people.

Blood Moons: Signs of the Times – Part I

Over the past few years, much ado has been made over the occurrence of the tetrad of blood moons which is divided into two sets of two by a total solar eclipse directly over the North Pole. The events began on Passover 2014 and will end on The Feast of Tabernacles 2015. There are various interpretations as to the meaning of this rare occurrence, and as well, detractors who claim it is nothing. I take issue with both groups: those who take theories and run with them, and those who dismiss everything in its entirety as having no significance whatsoever. Therefore, falling somewhere in between, I am ready and also willing to be hammered by both.

First, Who created the heavens and the earth? Who made the stars, the sun, the moon and all the heavenly host? Were they created without understanding, without purpose, without meaning?

I believe, EVERYTHING, that exists, exists by design—with intention. God is not random. The fullness, depth, and meaning, of these things goes far beyond what we can comprehend. We do well when we are able to in part gasp meanings and purposes. Not a leaf falls to the ground wherein there is not a lesson. There is NOTHING in nature wherein lies no significance. Nothing is incidental—nothing.

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse”

Yeshua spoke in parables using examples of physical creations to bring spiritual truths into the realm of understanding. Furthermore, Scripture states, “. . .and without a parable he spake not”. Yeshua always used physical creations to explain spiritual truths. The physical world is a parallel representation of the spiritual world. It is not merely the sacrificial laws that were a shadow and a physical representation of the True. Everything existing physically expresses a spiritual truth of invisible principles — and nothing can be created without there first being an invisible concept and a possibility of being. Hebrews, 11:3 –

“For by faith we understand that the worlds were fashioned by the word of God, and these things that are seen came into being out of those things which are unseen.”

Does God do anything without reason? Is anything an accident or mere coincidence, or even an unnecessary side-effect?

Now, for those on the other hand. There has always been a problem among believers with those, who either with good intentions or in pursuit of gain, take scriptures and apply their on interpretations to support a theory they wish to advance. This in turn has lead many astray and driven others away from Truth altogether. However, it need be said, just because there are so many prolific false interpretations of God’s works, it does not mean that there is not a true. It should be of no question that there is a meaning and lesson in all things. However, the question should be, what is the meaning. When someone comes who portrays to know, there should be much skepticism. Try all things, prove all things. Do not become one in a stampeding herd.

Obama’s god:

What religion is Obama?

The true answer to that question is, Obama worships himself. Obama is homosexual. He is also a hardcore leftist. Thus, his relationship with Islam is complicated. Further complicating Obama’s relationship with Islam is the status of Allah as, “The Greatest”, which is in conflict with Obama’s narcissism. However, it is Obama’s narcissism that is actually the key of comprehending his Islamic sympathies.

Obama is a religion and a god unto himself. He sees no other living God. He worships no other God. Men who worship God seek to become a part of God through obedience. If Obama viewed himself as subservient to Allah, he would keep all of the Koran, which he does not. Nonetheless, Obama was raised Islamic. It is a part of who he is, and remember, he worships himself. Obama serves Islam, not to be a part of Islam, but because Islam is a part of him.  He worships himself and therefore must show regard to Islam

Pseudo-reality’s Collision with Reality

The dominion belongs to reality, however, for the time being, reality seems to be largely absent. There is a manipulation of information on such an immense scale today that most people now live in a pseudo-reality. As more and more people adopt a false reality, the perception of it as truth becomes greater, and others are also persuaded to accept a false reality as reality.

Finally, when a delusion gains enough momentum, those who do not subscribe to it are intimidated, ridiculed, and given derogatory labels by the true believers of pseudo-reality, so that by their sheer numbers the true-believers cause even many clear thinkers to begin questioning themselves.

At that point becomes possible that for a finite period of time, pseudo-reality can work with the same power and affect as reality itself by the control of perceptions. If enough people are convinced that markets are going up they invest in the markets and they do indeed go up, even if there is no physical foundation for it. However, this manipulation of reality will not be sustainable.

For although a pseudo-reality can bring forth a seemingly positive effect, that effect is doomed, having no foundation in reality. More often than not, however, a pseudo-reality is likely to have a negative result, bringing a destructive end to what otherwise could have been a positive outcome.

“I believe it and therefore it is,” This seems to be the philosophy of the elitist media, those who regard them, and also many of those in high places of power today. They believe that if they can control perceptions by the manipulation of information, that they can in turn control the world and create or manipulate reality. This is a folly of catastrophic proportions that has put the world on a collision course with the truth. When reality inevitably collides with false perceptions the end result shall be the devastation of that which is not. Reality always comes back to claim its domain.

Truth and Science

Science as the guardian of truth

Has the scientific community set itself up as the arbiter and guardian of truth? I believe it has.  In “science” there is a pretension not only to know, but to also be able to classify what is unknown. The assumption is that because science does not know something, know one else can it know either. The fact is, just because scientists don’t know something, that cannot be counted as proof that nobody knows it.

There are people who know things that science cannot know, because the information falls outside the realm of scientific experimentation and measurements. It is knowledge that is perceived rather than proven.  A conflict arises between invisible truths and science, when the “scientific” community determines that because a thing cannot be demonstrated, it cannot be known. It is then, that by the designation of things being an unknown, they think to have a monopoly on knowledge. Thus, they categorize all things ‘known’ or ‘unknown’, and thus they imagine they are the ones who ‘know’ all things that are known.

“Science” cannot know what I am thinking, but I do, and only I do. Nor by “science” can I prove all my thoughts or the many experiences only I experienced. Even if I reveal secrets only I know to be true, it doesn’t prove them, it merely proves what I am saying they are. Indeed. The private secrets I hold are mine. Does it mean they did not exist because only I know them and science cannot prove them?

It is absurd to say because something cannot be proven by science it therefore does not exist or it is an unknown. It is presumptuous to assume that because something is not known by almost all, that it is unknown by all. It is presumptuous to say that because a majority of people who profess a faith are deceived, all who profess a faith are deceived.

By “science”, one may assume there is no God.  On the other hand, by science one can assume there is. Moreover, by a personal experience one may be deceived, then again, one may come to know something intangable—and that which is known by one, may be something beyond the knowledge of all others.

By believing that things unknown to science are unknown to all, there is a temptation to imagine knowing everything knowable, This in turn is followed by the temptation to establish “the truth”,  which in turn, becomes something that is expected to be accepted by all and questioned by none.

The “scientific community” can only imagine to know all it does and does not know, but it cannot truly know what anyone else knows, personal experiences, invisible knowledge, and God are not subject to science. And, “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

Psalm 21st Century

O’ God, save us from the “love” of our enemies and protect us from the “compassion” of those who hate us. Deliver us also from those who would force their “wisdom” upon us. Let not those who seek to “save” us succeed O’ Lord. Neither let them “bless” us with their “wisdom”, or prevail in making us all “equal”, or in establishing their social justice upon us.

As with an overflowing flood which drowns all they have determined to quench our thirst. As a goldfish at a sorority party they imagine to swallow us whole.  For our own safety they bind us tightly in a straitjacket of “compassionate” laws and regulations; for our own “protection” they wrap us securely in swaddling cloths of tyranny.  O’ save our lives from the health care system they imagine for us.  For the benefit of society they have also vowed to rob us, our posterity, and our posterity’s posterity for generations to come.

O’ Lord, let those coming to ‘save” us be confounded and confused. Let terror seize upon them like unto that of a bleeding sailor fallen overboard into shark infested seas. Cause them to go round and round in circles as a dog snapping at ticks on his most hinder parts. Yea, let them melt away as a candle burning upside down. As maggots upon a rock in the noon day sun let their power dry up and be no more. As a snail lost in a salt mine, let them dissolve away into nothing and cease.

The Past is not Past

                         The Past is not Past

                              “The past is not dead, in fact, it is not even past.” –  William Faulkner

The axiom underlying the statement the past is not past is the reality that regardless of cultures, circumstances, or even time, the natural tendencies and impulses which are the motivators driving civilizations do not change. What follows from one generation to the next since the beginning of world history, is essentially the same plot with a variety of nuances in different settings with different characters—from Babylon to Alexandria, to Rome, to Berlin, among others—and finally, to Washington DC, is driven by internal forces, both spiritual and natural, within mankind. That will not change as long a mankind exists.

During Hitler’s rise to power in the 1930’s a great part the ideology he embraced was popular in intellectual circles, not only in Europe but internationally. In fact, Hitler had great financial support coming from powerful American corporations, which, even after the war broke out continued to supply Nazi Germany by using Argentina as a go-between to launder trade. He also relied upon American technology such as the tabulation technology sold to Hitler by IBM that was used to help track Jews and carry out the Holocaust. Citizens whose data is being collected and stored today should also be concerned about the extent the population is being monitored and tracked.

Most of Hitler’s fascist ideology was not as original as one might imagine, but rather, it was formed from a combination of ideas derived from ancient philosophers, pagan and esoteric beliefs, mix with a collection of modern worldviews and philosophies held by prominent thinkers and academics of the day.

In fact, many core beliefs upon which the Third Reich was built were part of, what at the time, was considered a widespread progressive worldview. There were a number of prominent individuals of great recognition, influence, and power who also shared similar views, some of which, quietly sympathized with Hitler, while others supported him openly. There were also those who opposed Hitler, not because of the endgame he imagined of a world order, but of the way he proposed to get there and his personal ambitions of being top dog. Before the war, FDR was a huge fan of Mussolini throughout the 1930s.

Proponents of fascist thought were scattered throughout the Axis nations and also were present in America, England, and throughout the world, proliferating societies in both hemispheres. In their ranks were corporate giants, international bankers, academics and renown intellectuals, politicos and other celebrated individuals of great power and influence.

Indeed, much of Germany’s international support structure before, and even during the war remained intact after the war. Some even continued aiding Nazi war criminals in the aftermath by providing escape routes, documents, and sanctuary to prominent Nazi war criminals. Even governments which fought Nazism took in and gave prestigious positions to German scientists and experts in order to obtain advanced knowledge and capabilities to stay on the cutting edge of technology and gain an advantage in a modern world.

After the Third Reich utterly collapsed, its global base of sympathizers which remained intact immediately set out recasting their image. They seized the day using the very catastrophic events they had help to create as a reason to establish what they hoped eventually would become an effectual world government with an elitist ruling class of philosopher-kings running the show.

The founding of the United Nations in 1945 was their attempt to do this by establishing international laws and controls; however, conflict over the extent of power the body should possess thwarted the UN from having any real authority. Thus, the UN became a quasi-governmental institution serving only as a forum for discussion and coordination between sovereign governments, until such a time nation-states would gradually yield sovereignty and melt into the international body.

Although the UN failed to become the New World Order, it became an institution of change to bring about a global government by working in increments and creating inroads. This has continued unto this day and is now an eminent danger of becoming a reality.

Internationalists realize that in order to establish international controls, the current power of the nation-state must be diminished, especially the power of the United States. However, attempting to undermine laws and governmental systems is an arduous task that takes time. Therefore inroads are needed, and some of the most effective inroads are those outside of government which promote social agendas. These groups in the form of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private voluntary organizations (PVOs) are created as a power base to influence government and shape laws from the outside in.

Likewise, by the creation of think tanks, tax exempt activist foundations, community organizations, academia and teachers unions pushing manipulative curriculum and the like, the mentality of society has been transformed. It has been a lengthy process taking generations, but in reality the most efficient way to overthrow a system of government is to gradually change the culture until the people overthrow the system themselves or simply allow others to do so.

On the other hand, the transformation of society is not only left to NGOs and PVOs which are but tentacles of international corporations and activist billionaire philanthropists who create and fund them. Many corporate giants also actively work as change-agents and are openly involved in social engineering.

They have a great affect directly on the culture being the owners and controllers of major media outlets, music, television and movie studios, production companies, publishing houses, major internet search engines, and a long list of many other entities, which not only have a tremendous impact upon society, but also make billions of dollars to further their agendas while doing it. One of the wealthiest and most predominant of these social-engineers is George Soros who funds the Open Society Institute (OSI) along with various other NGOs, but besides Soros there are many others.

Determined to micro-manage global social and economic conditions, these elitist individuals, corporations, and organizations have engaged in a cultural revolution to overthrow traditional beliefs and systems. This culture war began decades ago and has gained momentum since, but a great shift took place particularly during the 1960s and ‘70s under the banner of world peace.

The current transformation of the world’s diverse cultures into the modern age of high technology is evidence that while humanity has come a great distance in some ways, in other ways it has remained in the same world. The elitist social warlords of today have evolved since the days of those before who gained dominion through brute force by way of the sword. Today they conquer their subjects with ideology, propaganda, and even entertainment, enticing whole societies into submission. Satiating the minds of their prisoners through lust into apathy, they have brought the culture into mental bondage by way of manipulation into the chains of their own desires.

Regardless of the ways and means between the past and present, the same aspirations of world domination remain constant, the same spirit remains in control. In terms of objectives, the past is not merely yesterday, it is today and tomorrow. The engineered transformation of society today is but a continuation of the war for the souls of mankind.

It may also be said that somewhere, whenever we are not at war, someone is in the process of building up to it, either intentionally or in blind ignorance out of an attempt to create a perfect world order—one where they are in charge of everything. The more things change, the more they stay the same. I wrote this in 2009, have things changed, or have they only become more evident?

Super-Power and Stupor-Power

“The terrorists today have the will to destroy us, but they don’t have the power. We have the power to eradicate them, but we must now show that we have the will.” – Benjamin Netanyahu – Sept. 14th, 2001

The United States has often been referred to as the world’s only super-power, but what does that really mean? The potential of a nation is only that. More often than not, the destiny of a nation is determined by will power and unity rather than potential or physical power. Potential will be realized only to the extent of the will and unity that exists among the people to achieve the fullness of what is possible.

History shows that greatness often begins with a small group of determined people. Certainly in the case of America this is true. Many of the people who came to America’s shores were the poor persecuted and despised rejects of Europe. Still, what drove many of these these individuals was a God inspired self-determination which in the end proved to be the greatest resource they brought ashore with them.

When the War of Independence broke out, approximately one third of colonists supported the revolution while the remaining two thirds were divided between those who were indifferent and those whose loyalties remained with the British crown. In the end the resolved minority not only prevailed over the other two thirds of their fellow countrymen but also against the world’s super power of the time.

There is more than one important lesson in this: first, a determined minority, although small, like a rudder on a ship can decide the course; second, a great power can be defeated by an inferior power under certain circumstances if a minority is unified and has the greater strength of will. America presently faces the fate of one or the other. If America prevails it will again be by strength of a minority within.

Rarely has it been the majority of a nation that initiated the greatness of that nation, even if the majority later enjoyed the benefits of that greatness. The inspiration for movements leading to greatness has always been initiated by a minority who persevered while enduring the vehement opposition of their antagonists, while the remainder of society largely in self absorption existed in a stupor of apathy.

Presently not only are there international threats posed by terrorist and state sponsors of terrorism, but there is also a resurgence of communistic socialism world wide—fascism to be more precise. Authoritarian governments and quasi-democracies through international treaties and organizations are seeking to consolidate the power of many to compete against a few by creating a global monopoly of power. However, for the United States threats are not limited to external elements, for the greatest threats today come from within our own system.

We grew from being a poor nation to a wealthy one, but we are still reviled, despised, and rejected by many other nations of the world. Because of this, there are some among us who willingly accept collective guilt on our behalf for everything that is wrong with the world today. They do this believing that because America is a super-power, not only is she responsible for all problems and their respective solutions, but she also holds an unfair advantage in terms of wealth and power.

Proponents of these views work to weaken America in every aspect and bring her under submission to prevailing world views in an attempt to create equality among nations. They hold that the road to world peace is only possible through capitulation by effectively surrendering our status as a super-power among the nations.

At the same time, the moral minority who reject capitulation are categorized and labeled among other things as: bigots, warmongers, dividers, unilateralists, fanatics, extremists, and cowboys. Even so, if this group will not only endure but be proactive, they will join in the greatness of those who came before them.

Because more than half of the nation is uninvolved and would rather exist in a stupor, battles are decided by the minority groups who do engage. During the next decade not only will the course of America be decided; but the course of the world. If America were to fail, virtually all of humanity will also fail for America is the stability of the world. She is the shinning city on a hill, the last best hope for mankind. Over forty years have past since the following words were spoken, but never have they been any truer than they are today:

“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.“ – Ronald Reagan, 1964

Will a minority rise to the occasion as in the past? I believe a minority will, and at the very least, they will retain their honor.

RAS – 2009

World Crises in Retrospect

What follows was first posted in 2006. It remains applicable to the current crises, if not more so now than then. There have been some grammatical corrections and editing for clarity, but the content is essentially consistent with the original.

I believe we are living in an age [2006] of transition when the world as we know it today will see a radical change. This global transition is brought on by modernization and globalization combined with the unification and consolidation of powers. Unfortunately, although knowledge has been built upon from generation to generation, giving mankind more power than in any time in history, at the same time, mankind is reverting back morally, and tribal impulses are becoming the guiding force. These primitive impulses, although cloaked in sophistication and newly acquired knowledge, inspire ideologies that are eroding the foundation of our rights and freedoms. They also devalue individual rights and promote forced collectivism (fascism, communism, socialism, and almost all other “-isms”).

Collectivism has long been the rule in many cultures. However, the natural impulse for such rule is not exclusive to tribal cultures, undeveloped societies, or civilizations of the past. Moreover, regardless of how seemingly civilized, there is a natural tendency in all collective communities, regardless of ideologies, to become totalitarian. In the modern collective society for example, independent character development of individuals is replaced by mass social programming. The individual conscience is replaced by a contrived group-conscience of politically correct social decrees of the state. I believe that in a final analysis, these societies are every bit as barbaric and cruel as any other primitive tribal culture—even if only through sophistry and a charade of fastidious “compassion” and “goodwill”.

Other than an appearance of sophistication, the main difference between the neo-tribal modern society with advanced sciences, vis-a-vis primitive tribal cultures, is the amount of power the former is able to amass through wealth, knowledge, and science. Nazi Germany stands as a prime example where intellect was worshiped, while the focus on moral character and the value of life were disregarded or sacrificed for efficiency—the goal: assimilating the citizenry into a “superior” collective being—a godstate. The end result was scientific and educational advancement devoid of morality, which, in that case as always, was a human catastrophe.

Intellect, being perceived as the greatest power is a concept which holds in contempt the principle that good is the greatest power. However, the greatest and freest societies ever known to mankind were those which were built upon a foundation of righteous principles, not mere intellectualism. The words, “when America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great” are not without merit.

While there are many dangers facing the world today, the greatest threat is not posed by religious fanatics or terrorists threatening mass destruction. This statement is not to diminish the terrorist threat which is very real indeed, but to indentify the true source of most global dangers and magnify a threat that is much greater within the global economical system and governmental workings of the world’s most powerful nations today.

Adherents to radical Islam would have little wherewithal whereby to achieve their ambitions without sponsoring nations. To whatever degree terrorists succeed in the future it will have only have been made possible by state governments which harbored and supplied provisions whereby terrorists could exist. Moreover, nations sponsoring terrorists are also given their power by the most powerful nations in the world. It is therefore that Islamic fanaticism could be defeated if the will of the nations were to do so.

Notwithstanding, the will of the nations to seriously confront the dangers posed by Islamic extremists does not exist for various reasons. In Western democracies, capitulation is founded upon the fear of global crises and economic disruption which would ensue at home and abroad in a full scale confrontation with extremists. In some other nations the reason for supporting hostile regimes is much more nefarious. Some governments with malevolent ambitions have found it to their advantage to use Islamic extremism to their advantage. By proxy they hope to displace American influence globally and assert themselves as global powers. This is true of Russia and China which both profit financially off rogue entities and are fighting an asymmetrical war against the West in general, but primarily against the United States. These ambitions, which are all but ignored by the West are harder to deny in the case of Venezuela where Hugo Chavez is much more blunt about his beliefs and goals.

Russian and Venezuelan economies are based primarily on energy resources; both reap greater profits form higher oil prices due to a Middle-Eastern crisis and global terrorism. Both work to corner the market on supplies. This alliance, however, between these nations and other hostile regimes goes beyond economics and establishing global control of energy supplies for financial gain. There is also the tactic of confronting the West through Islamic proxies. This not only drains the resources of the West, but also offers a means diverting attention away from the rising threats of their own nations which have totalitarian underpinnings and global ambitions.

American wealth through global enterprise has built and empowered much of the world. Nations such as Russia, China, and others who have been empowered by the West are now to the point they can together readily challenge the West. Although these nations are often alluded to as though they are aspiring democracies, the political and economic reality is that the structure and philosophies of these formally so called communist nations now resembles the fascist regimes of the 1930’s.

The West currently [2006] is faced with an intense asymmetrical war which involves economics, technology, politics, and confrontation by proxy. Nevertheless, Westerners in large choose to live in denial. There will come a point however, when these nations which oppose U.S. hegemony openly assert themselves in a challenge to U.S. power. What takes place between now and then on their part is merely positioning and maneuvering in order to gain an insurmountable advantage.

Possible scenarios

Russia and China are emerging global powers. They have no aversion to formation of a world order on their terms; the main obstacle in their view has been the United States and to a lesser degree Europe. On the other hand, there are also elitists in the West who have no aversion whatsoever to formation of a world order with these totalitarian countries, insomuch, that they have set about dismantling and condemning Western sovereignty and power from within at every opportunity. Many proponents of a global order believe so fool-heartedly in it, they disregard any risk involved and would be pleasured to see a world order regardless of the initial cost to humanity.

I have a premonition [2006] that the world is on the verge of a two part catastrophe. It arises out of the attempt to merge nations with incompatible ideologies into a global system and it is further compounded by the adopted solutions to rectify the discord. It is very possible that in the aftermath of an event or chain of events, such as global economic upheaval, international terrorism with WMD or a nuclear devise, or some other catastrophe, the catalyst may exist to form a multi-polar global society. In any case, the end result will be catastrophic.

The West has been the stabilizing force in the world for decades. Over time, however, western civilization has been sold out by its politicians, international elitists, and global corporations. Media-elitists have worked to condition the citizenry to accept this or to be ignorant of it. This shall manifest itself in no small way. The erosion of the power of free nations is evident; and, at this point irreversible. Once US hegemony ceases from being the stabilizing force, conflicts and global chaos will follow; world stability today as we know it will cease.

I have, however, another premonition also, for there has always been a people somewhere, some place, who arise to stand for Good. And the children of Light shall be drawn unto them; for Good will sustain them. In the end it always does. Keep an eye on Israel.

The New World Order: US Ceding Sovereignty?

Will the US Cede Sovereignty?

The above link in the caption will take you to a youtube video of the presentation Lord Christopher Monckton gave in St. Paul, MN on October the 14th of this year. At the time of this blog post 12 days later, it had been viewed over 1,100,000 times. The subject of his speech was global warming and the United Nations Climate Change Treaty which is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in early December of this year. The seriousness of the threat of this treaty cannot be understated. It effectively creates a global government, supposedly preempting the U.S. Constitution by making US sovereignty subject to international law.

As the news spreads of the December meeting in Copenhagen and the potential consequences of ratifying such a treaty, it is now being reported that Obama is unlikely to attended. From the UK Timesonline today we get this headline:

President Obama won’t talk climate change in Copenhagen
Quoting from the article:

President Obama will almost certainly not travel to the Copenhagen climate change summit in December and may instead use his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to set out US environmental goals, The Times has learnt.

With healthcare reform clogging his domestic agenda and no prospect of a comprehensive climate treaty in Copenhagen, Mr Obama may disappoint campaigners and foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, who have urged him to attend to boost the hopes of a breakthrough.

The White House would not comment on Mr Obama’s travel plans yesterday, but administration officials have said privately that “Oslo is plenty close” — a reference to the Nobel ceremony that falls on December 10, two days into the Copenhagen meeting.

The White House confirmed that the President would be in Oslo to accept the prize. . .
Article

Here is my concern: Are articles like these a ruse? Being that Obama will be in Europe when he goes to Oslo to receive his Nobel two days before the meeting, he could easily jaunt over to sign the treaty. Indeed, if there is a “last minute decision” to attend on his part, he avoids a fight until after the treaty is signed. The benefit of having stories put out like this one in the Timesonline, stating he “likely will not attend”, preempts debate and stymies scrutiny. But, the Obama administration wouldn’t feign he is not going, then at the last moment have him go stating that circumstances had changed. . . would they? They are not that cunning or low down. . . are they?

Still, any such treaty would require ratification by a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Although, the United States House of Representatives would not have a vote on it at all. Even so, the requirement for Senate advice and consent to ratification makes it considerably more difficult in the US than in other democracies to ratify international treaties. Nonetheless, considering the current crop of politicians currently in Washington, there is less comfort in that now than in times passed.

Still, this is not the first attempt at this type of maneuver. In 2000, another treaty relinquishing US sovereignty was signed, as time expired, by then US President Bill Clinton.

Clinton Signs Treaty Just Before Deadline
Tuesday, January 02, 2001

US President Bill Clinton on Sunday signed the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC), just hours before the 31 December signature deadline. The action is seen as a tactical maneuver to keep the United States involved in negotiations over the court’s potential establishment, the Washington Post reports. Sunday was the last day nations could sign the treaty without first having ratified it.

“We do so to reaffirm our strong support for international accountability,” Clinton said in a statement. “We do so as well because we wish to remain engaged in making the ICC an instrument of impartial and effective justice.”

Clinton added, however, that his administration still has “concerns about significant flaws in the treaty,” in particular that the Hague-based court could claim jurisdiction over citizens from countries that do not ratify the treaty, which may include the United States. These were the same concerns that had been expressed by US conservatives and the Pentagon in their objections to the US signing the treaty. . .”

UNWIRE

Fortunately, The Rome Statute never came before the US Senate for ratification and the incoming Bush administration opposed the treaty.

Be advised America, this is the means by which the US Constitution is being proposed to be overthrown.

Will the Left Self Destruct?

Not all—in fact, most Democrats did not know what they were buying when they bought Barak Obama. Most did not expect a totalitarian; they were envisioning a moderate politician or imagining a Liberal Utopia. The kicker for those hoping for a Liberal Utopia is—Liberal Utopia only exists in the mind. Nowhere else has it, nor will it ever exist. It is not possible; it is a pipe dream.

To further compound the fact that Liberal Utopia is a fanciful delusion existing in the mind only as an unattainable dream—each one of its adherents, inside their little liberal heads has a different vision of what this Liberal Utopia looks like. But they don’t know that until they finally get together after they have power and try to make it work.

That is why when they finally obtain power they always begin falling apart. Many of them don’t really agree on details, even though they thought they would because they agreed on the surface of the issues. Many of them never really thought through the details. Why should they have? It all sounded good and those making it sound good also sounded like they had it all figured out. Still, when it comes time to bring everything into being, the visions they each have inside their heads collide, first with each other, and ultimately with reality.

From then on, all the components for chaos are present. You have the radical activists factions: gay rights, peacenicks, environmentalists, animal rights, socialists, ethnic activist groups (racists), etc., etc.—they all demand that their agendas be catered to first and foremost. However, their dilemma is that they had to unite with moderates, independents, etc., etc. to take power in the first place. Most of these people had no clue they were signing up for a fascist/communist revolution. They don’t want the totalitarian policies that it takes to try and make a radical socialist wet dream come true.

It seems apparent; the left can unite in hatred of the right to obtain power. But unity ends there. Every time they come to power they fragment right back into their separate special interests groups and attack each other. It always ends in chaos, and it will not be any different this time. They hold ideologies and employ means that doom themselves. Thus, the only way to prolong their days is by a radical takeover and tyranny.

A Liberal Utopia is a figment of the mind. Notwithstanding, when it becomes physical policy, it is an extremely destructive and futilely hopeless cause, wreaking widespread havoc upon all as it goes down in flames.

“Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize, but for what?”

And the winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize is . . . [drum roll] . . . Barak Hussein Obama! . . . Surprise!

It seems that a number of people are confounded by the choice of Obama as this year’s recipient for the Nobel Peace Prize. No one can clarify just exactly what he did to receive the prestigious award which is given to the individual who is considered to have contributed the most to world peace. For me the reason is clear.

Obama won the Nobel Prize because he is destroying America—plain and simple. Seriously, that is exactly what it is all about. Of course it won’t be stated in those words. But the bottom-line is that the people who make the decision despise the U.S. and for years have blamed all of the world’s woes on American greed and power. Obama shares their views, and he is in the position to do something about it. He is in a place where they believe he can bring the American people back down to earth. This of course will make all the people of the world more “equal.” He is also the first U.S. President to promise radical change in our Middle-East policy—a change that will not bode well for Israel and which will be a direct threat to the future and existence of the Jewish State.

So as you see, it should really come as no surprise that the same organization who awarded Jimmy Carter (an anti-Semite) and Yasser Arafat (the father of terrorism) the same award, would now give the award to Obama. Even though he has yet to do anything. It is a show of faith. No more Israeli oppressors! No more American hegemony. And presto-change-o, world peace! We’re all Marxists now.

Thus, the Nobel Peace Prize!

This award is a bad omen for America and the world. This is an omen that the whole earth will have Hell to pay.

ONE: An Abstract of History – The Words in the Stone

ONE: An Abstract of History – The Words in the Stone.

I will be the first to say that there are parts of this book that may present a challenge and be a difficult read for some, being that the writing is cryptic and abstract. Even so being, everything does have a meaning, represents, or relates to something most of us are familiar with. Then too, there are some parts that are by design thinly veiled.

The book may be broken into two distinct parts. The first lays a philosophical foundation with an overview of biblical and world history that reads as much like an abstract history book as it does a story. About midway, the book merges into a modern age. From this point the intensity increases as the story develops. It also begins taking on a more political aspect detailing various movements, governmental and non-governmental groups, agencies, organizations, and individuals. Here, the book becomes confrontational, and in some places, controversial. This part of the book moved me to add the afterword as a preemptive against any misrepresentations or misinterpretations of what is intended to be conveyed. You may do well to read the afterword beforehand to remove any doubt as to what is being said.

Lastly, this is a thinkers’ book. Again, for some it may pose a challenge, being that the writing contains numerous symbols, idioms, and obscure scriptural references which may confound those who are not familiar with them. It is an enigma (ainigma – Greek) written in the abstract to be deciphered. Although the story is comprehensive, not many readers are likely to grasp the depth of every single part. It is certainly a cryptic and unusual book; still, it will definitely intrigue some. I foresee three basic reactions to this writing: “I love this,” “I hate this,” and in some instances, “What is this?

Available now at Amazon

ONE: My Latest Work

Within the book ONE is an expression of the innate tendency of civilizations to descend into tyranny. The story is philosophical, written in allegory with parables and riddles. It begins with a “Tower of Babel,” and it ends with a “Tower of Babel.” In between is a shadow of world history. It is for this reason, the storyline is not contrived as much as it is comprehended, conceptualized, and then communicated in the abstract. The book ONE is also no less than two stories told with one set of words. It is a writing that must be deciphered, and which, in many instances contains multiple meanings.

The objective of the story is to present a picture of invisible principles by bringing them into mental imagery through physical representations. This is done with an array of diverse beasts and creatures; which, although they are endowed with human like attributes, at the same time, they reflect the animalistic nature of humanity.

As for the title, ONE represents a total consolidation—the united plurality of a totalitarian system. It is a monopoly of power on top and the subjugation of all beneath. It is the cord binding the axe with the rods to create a fasces consisting of masters, servants, and slaves. It is a synthesis of all and the suppression of nonconformity.

Throughout history, civilizations, societies, and cultures have endeavored to achieve oneness. Within them all, regardless of their time or appearance, the same motivators were at work, often causing conflicts between them. These motivators remain unchanged by time even as societies, cultures, and civilizations come and go; it is only faces that change. What remains is the ambition of ONE: to rule without challenge—and the seduction of ONE: the willingness to empower a supreme ruling authority out of insecurity, hoping to find sufficiency in servitude and some reward in bondage.

Today also, the same forces drive those who seek the complete surrender or total demise of all others who stand contrary to them. They may present themselves as cruel and fearless conquerors, or as caring humble servants. They may come in the name of love or hate. They may be practitioners of barbarity or the artists of sophistry. Their rhetoric may either threaten with destruction, or seduce with promises of hope and change. Regardless, this is the nature of the totalitarian.

On the side opposing the totalitarians reside those who are committed to resisting tyranny at any cost. They are almost always outnumbered; yet, they are never broken. This aspect of an unfaltering faith and a love for Truth is the crux of the story ONE. If it is not the most prolific component throughout the book, it is still the fundament.

At first glance, the impression may be that the allegorical story of ONE is intended for a younger audience. The fact is, while certain characteristics of the book may be presented in a fashion that would appeal to a younger set, it will often be the experienced and more knowledgeable reader that will grasp obscurities and the deeper bits contained in the writing. Regardless, the hope is that anyone who reads the book will be able to take from its story as much as they are able and walk away with a better understanding of life, human nature, and of our world. I would also hope that in light of the present darkness, inspiration and hope may be imparted to strengthen, encourage, and reassure in the days ahead those who read it.

Webpage:
ONE: An Abstract of History – The Words in the Stone

R.A. Sprinkle

Madoff Tapped To Head Social Security Administration

President Elect Obama announced the selection today of Bernard L. Madoff to head up the Social Security Administration. The pick came as a surprise to some, who would consider a recent scandal in which Madoff was implicated in the financial sector, a disqualifying factor.

A spokesman for the incoming administration defended the pick saying, “No one has been convicted yet, and, in any event, there is nothing here that a pardon cannot remedy.”

Other critics were quick to point out the role of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich as an adviser in the selection process, expressing fears that money may have changed hands for the appointment.

Rahm Emmanuel, who also worked with Blagojevich in the selection process, dismissed the criticism as partisan, citing Madoff’s experience as a primary factor for the choice.

“No one, and I mean, no one, has more expertise or understands the system better than Madoff – And I think he has the record to prove that!” Emmanuel said.

He continued by pointing out that if  Madoff was able to keep his organization afloat for so long, relying solely on the money of investors, “Imagine what he can do in a system where he will have access to an almost unlimited supply of tax dollars and everything is perfectly legal.”

Emmanuel also went on to say that no other candidate had worked a system that had so much in common with the way social security worked, and that any differences actually worked in Madoff’s favor.

The White House refused to comment on the appointment.