Why the World Hates Prophets

 I watch a lot of Alfred Hitchcock's work with my older boys. I recently introduced them to the Alfred Hitchcock Hour, which is a series of short mysteries made for TV. 

In one of the episodes, a wealthy woman is seduced by a man she then believes is killed and is communicating to her through a medium who convinces her to give up her entire fortune to aid his work in the paranormal. Her concerned caretaker intervenes and discovers that the two are frauds in cahoots with one another. When the charade is revealed to her by her caretaker, the young woman kills her in a case that is literally that of shooting the messenger. The moral of the story is, of course, that some people are not grateful for being brought out of harmful delusions. They are in love with them, and the person who is attempting to love them by bringing them out of those harmful delusions is seen as their greatest enemy. All messengers eventually get shot. 

Of course, everyone who has ever worked in the hospitality industry as a customer service agent already knows that the messenger gets the brunt of someone's unhappy wrath when beliefs about reality do not match reality.

In our postmodern culture, the real world cannot be obtained by subjective observers of it, so as it is often said, the world is what you make of it, or rather in this case, the world is what you make it. You are the creator of your reality. You are the god of your world. You decide what is true and what is not; and this world is constructed primarily to maximize your personal happiness. 

Now, of course, we are poor gods and what we make is often self-evidently trash, but we still keep going like little Energizer bunnies as servants of our self-fabricated prisons because we have believed the lie that they will make us happy in the long run even when the evidence tells us otherwise. 

And if my understanding of reality makes me comfortable enough, I am happy to live there; and after all, who knows what's true anyway, right?

In comes a prophet of God. Say goodbye that reality. And is he received with joy as a liberator? Far from it. He is the enemy of my comfort, and therefore, of my happiness. How evil do you have to be to try to take away the peace and happiness of another? Such people need to be canceled out of your life in one way or another. Exile/death is the only right response for such a vile foe as is this messenger from God who now contends with our own deified status to see reality as we see fit. 

This is, of course, why the world hates the prophets of God even though they are just messengers. But it really isn't the messenger with whom anyone is angry. It is reality itself that is brought in to crush the delusion that something that does not exist exists. We are all like Cipher from The Matrix. We just want to be plugged back into the system of delusion because a reality over which we have no control is much harder to accept. It's harder to accept because it is scarier. We are not the gods of it. We must come into contact with the actual God of it and be accountable to Him for our actions, and this is not what the wicked mind wishes to do.

Hence, we suppress the truth in unrighteousness, and as Romans 1, states, our delusions that give us excuses for our rebellion become our views of reality that are so distorted they distort and destroy us and our children. God is the God of truth, and neither delusions nor deluded people can live in a world where He is the sole Creator and Ruler of it. 

Of course, no one can kill reality because no one can kill the God of that reality, but what you can kill, what you can unleash absolute hate upon by murdering him, is the messenger. Like tearing down a picture of an old ex when expectations are met with the disillusionment of reality, the messenger is a representative of the thing (i.e., reality), or the One (the Creator of that reality), hated. Hence, he is murdered as a sacrifice in an effort to save the delusion of self-deification, and only when he is removed can the beguiled rest in his blissful matrix.

No amount of being nice, no amount of saying words the "right" way, no amount of previous loyalties, no amount of little bribes through giving, will stand in the way of such hatred because shooting the messenger is nothing more than a misguided attempt at self-preservation. 

Should the prophet be nice? Sure, as long as he isn't compromising the tone of God's message, as it is a part of that message. Should the prophet maintain loyalties in his relationships? Sure, as long as they do not compromise the message. But his tone must be God's if he is to communicate the message accurately. And if the person does not wish to be freed from their delusions, the response will be the same for the messenger as God has received from the hearer of that message. Any other attempt by the prophet to put such a one at ease through fleshly means is simply to fall into a happy delusion the prophet has now built for himself. 

The prophet is a sacrifice, but unlike the wicked who sacrifice him for themselves, he sacrifices himself to God so that God's message concerning the nature of reality will reign supreme as the breaker of the bonds of false realities. The prophet cannot make himself more likeable by those who are deceived because he is the enemy of all false worlds, and as such, his enemies wish nothing upon him but his absolute and total destruction. 

To love a prophet is a gift from God because the love of God is a gift that can only be given by God. Any attempt by the prophet to fabricate a love for himself out of straw will prove either that he is not a prophet of God or that he will be a severely disappointed prophet when the time of his execution comes.

The prophet is a messenger, and all messengers eventually get shot.

Evil Always Makes You Happy . . . At First

 In Return of the Jedi, when the emperor arrives on the second Death Star, the emperor's theme is played while he walks with Darth Vader through an army of Stormtroopers and officers. You see the end of his plan to dominate the galaxy, and the power he has accumulated since the beginning of his plan. It's ominous music. It sounds evil. The darkness of what this man has done, the lives he has ruined and the destruction he intends to do is obvious and the music gives you a really bad feeling in your gut. 

What some may be unaware of is that when Lukas made The Phantom Menace, he chose to show the beginning of Palpatine's reign which the rest of the galaxy thinks is a victory for them. They celebrate at the end of the movie when he begins his rise to power, and Lukas chose to do so with the same tune playing. But not many noticed.

Not many noticed because the song is sped up to sound joyful. It's played in celebration with added instruments, but at its core, it is the same song. 

This hidden foreshadowing reminded me of what most evil looks like. It's not usually recognized as evil. Excuses are made for it so that we reason why it isn't evil this time. This time, we reason to ourselves and others, it's actually a good. We take the song that evil sings and we add our excuses for it like Lukas added those instruments. We make it sound like a different song than what it really is, the song of our doom.

No matter how hard we try, however, no matter how we play it, it remains the same song. It is not meant to benefit us but to destroy us in the long run. 

We do this because we really, really want something. Yet, it is in those times when we really, really want something that we should step back and take a hard look through the lens of the revelation God has given us through the counsel of the church Christ has gifted us to microscopically evaluate whether what we really, really want is evil that should be cut from us like a gangrenous limb.

If we fail to do so then our victory song we sing because we acquired something we think will make us happy is nothing more than our funeral dirge.

You Shall Know Them by Their Anathemas

 If you are confused about what churches are a the sinful schismatics, you only need look at the anathemas they pronounce.

For instance, anyone who receives Nicea II must believe that all who do not receive icon veneration as a viable and necessary means of worship are anathema. Although, idolatry is a hudge issue, anathematizing those who don't practice it is actually the biggest problem with Nicea II.

The anathemas in Scripture cannot violate what the Apostle John says concerning how one knows he is saved and has eternal life. John states,

And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. The one who keeps God’s commands abides in Him, and He in them. And this is how we know that he abides in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us. (1 John 3:23-24)

So one can know that God abides in Him and he in God because he has obeyed the command to believe in the Son and to love the brethren. Any anathema given cannot contradict this. Paul's anathema in Galatians 1:8-9 is due to the Galatians disobeying both of these commands. They were denying the gospel and receiving another one in its place that allowed them to divide the people of God into ritually acceptable and ritually less acceptable Christians. 

Likewise, the only other anathema given in Scripture is also Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:22:

"If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be anathema."

Again, this has to do with not loving the Lord, and hence, deals directly with a rejection of both elements John has mentioned.

If you have a church that anathematizes people who both have believed in the person of the Son, Jesus Christ, and love the brethren in the way that John describes in the epistle, then you have identified your sinful schismatics. 

Eastern Orthodox? Sinful schismatics. Roman Catholics? Sinful schismatics. The Fundamentalist Baptist Minister telling everyone they're damned for not believing in one of his pet issues that don't have anything to do with believing in the person of Jesus and loving the brethren? Sinful schismatic. Dividing over views of Genesis 1-11? Sinful schismatic. Dividing over views of who wrote Daniel, whether Jonah is a parable or literal, whether Joshua actually teaches geocentricism, modes of baptism, classes and expression of classes in the church, etc.? Sinful schismatics.

We should divide over people being in unrepentant sin. We should even divide from unrepentant sinful schismatics. We should divide from every cult and heretic who denies the apostolic teaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ. We should divide from people who unrepentantly remain in sexual immorality, adultery, slander, partial judgments, revilers of authority, those who dishonor their fathers, etc. because these are people who either reject the gospel or do not love fellow believers in some way, and are thus not included as known Christians in John's scheme of things.

These are the truly anathematized churches and inviduals according to the Word of God. Anything else is using ecclesiastical authority to condemn those who Christ does not condemn, and this is to be separated from the mind of Christ and to not love many who are of the brethren. And those who do not love the brethren in such ways, do not love Christ. Be careful what group you align yourself with, so that you do not hear these words applied to you, "I was anathematized and you did not defend Me."

The most frightening irony is that those who sinfully anathematize seem to be the ones who are actually anathematized in Scripture. “ Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him, knowing that such a man is perverted and sinning, being self-condemned.” (Titus 3:10-11)

You Will Know Them by Their Judgments: The Sin of Partiality

 If I were to ask you what the three most prominent sins in the Bible, you might mention idolatry or sexual immorality, and you would be right. However, we tend to have superficial views of these so that we draw small circles for what constitutes idolatry or sexual immorality. Today I want to bring out a form of idolatry that is mentioned throughout scripture in the form of partiality.

Partiality is when one "considers the face" over the type of biblical justice that God has required as a means to worship Him. Sometimes it's just that we like some people over others. Sometimes, one person has something we want and the other person doesn't. Maybe what we want is money, a position, influence, or just to be accepted by a group. These are all sorts of little bribes that tempt us to make unrighteous judgments.

One of the major problems with Israel in the Old Testament and the Jews who contend with Christ is that they think that God is partial toward them. Since they are His people, they have special privileges that allow them to get away with more sin than others. The Bible teaches us that they actually have a smaller leash when it comes to sin than others precisely because they are God's people who need to represent Him in His character to the rest of the world, so God is not partial to His people. 

Since God is not partial, no one who represents Him should be partial. This is why the Bible talks so much about hearing the case of the widow or orphan, groups of people who have no influence in the community, no money, no clout. Hence, crooked judges do not hear their side of things. They automatically render favorable judgments for other people within the nobility, a class to which judges tend to belong. 

Pagan worship is bound up in bribing the gods, so that the gods give to the individual with money, a powerful sacrifice, a king with influence, whatever he desires. Pagan rulers then mimic their demonic gods. But God requires His character displayed back to Him as an act of worship and refuses to honor those who take a bribe, regardless of whether it is monetary or that which gets approval from the crowd, is detested by God because it is a means of demonic worship.

Instead of partiality, a man of God is to listen to the testimony of two or three witnesses, regardless of whether they are of one's group, friends, enemies, rich, poor, etc. Justice demands truth and truth will not be granted to the man who looks to exonerate his friends or benefactors from any crimes they may have committed.

This includes what often happens in Christian circles where some sin is committed by someone considered "godly" so they must be the person in the right, even when multiple witnesses can testify to the contrary. This has the aroma of loyalty and is therefore often received as a form of godliness even though, scripturally speaking, it is a dark demonic offering of worship often given to the individual human in question rather than to God who demands that a judgment be made based on all of the testimony of both parties involved. 

Some of the greatest evils done in the church have been excused because "I know so-and-so is in the right because I know him and he is a godly man." In fact, lots of pretenders know that people are partial and will judge this way, so they will feign a sort of godliness by being the "bigger person" amongst others in sort of Machiavellian effort to control people's thoughts on the matter when in fact he is guilty of the evils of which he is being accused.

We have Lady Justice as a symbol of what justice looks like and why we blindfold her.  Justice is blind. If it isn't, it isn't justice. It's demonic idolatry that seeks to worship God through a demonic partiality. This is what it means to hear the case or judge the poor, the widow, the orphan. It means to be blind to who they are and who your friends are, and to just make a judgment based on the testimony of the witnesses to the crime. Justice is not established by your feelings about someone. It is established by evidence.

Hence, a wicked people are a partial people who do not worship the true God. Indeed, it may be that people judge this way because they have a different god. The God of the Bible has made Himself very clear.

"For YHWH your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the fearsome God who does not show partiality or take a bribe. He executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and shows love for the resident alien by giving him food and clothing." (Deut 10:17-18)

"You are not to pervert the judgment of a stranger, nor of the fatherless; nor take a widow's garment as a pledge." (Deut 24:17)

All partiality is a crime with which Israel is charged over and over again, and one of the reasons God does not accept any of their other sanctioned worship. In short, idolatry is an act of apostasy, and partiality is idolatry. Hence, partiality is an act of apostasy in the form of demonic worship. 

Those who would claim to be the people of God must repent of their partiality and learn to judge justly through the only just means God has provided: the evidence, including the evidence of two or three witnesses of the crimes alleged. 

This also goes the other way when it comes to slander and gossip. Anyone can make accusations and say they are a witness, but more than one witness is needed, and it needs to be independently received. Any group can suddenly have a supposed feeling or knowledge of someone else because they have been conditioned through gossip and slander rather than actually witnessing concrete actions themselves. 

This is why no accusation is even to be received against an elder unless the accusation is established/confirmed by two or three witnesses. Not even a trial is to come about in the first place if three are not at least two independent witnesses. This is how biblical justice is done, and this is what true worship of the true God looks like. 

Pagans in our culture don't often look like the pagans of old. They don't have literal idols to which they are bowing down, nor do they have different names for their gods. They simply refer to their pagan god as God, and confuse and syncretize the God revealed in Scripture with their gods. You will know them by their judgments. Their partiality or lack thereof will tell you who they worship. Their idolatry is in their character. They are the image of their gods, not only via the decisions they make, but by the way they make those decisions.

And unjust people are a pagan people. I don't care what they name their church or how much they use the name Jesus. Their jesus is a partial one and so not the one who reigns on high. He is a pagan deity who excuses their unrepentant injustices. 

He who receives the word of his friend or benefactor over the plural independent testimony and evidence of others is an idolater, and idolaters will spend eternity with the demonic gods they worship.

In Defense of the Word "Whore"

 It was a word commonly used by the KJV Bible, and therefore, was not a curse word to our general culture. However, some today act like it is. In reality, the word "whore" is seen as a not-so-nice word, so any godly person should simply not use it. Let me push back on that because I use it all of the time, and purposely so.

I don't use it to try and shame the women who have already repented of a lifestyle our wicked culture had convinced them was not as bad as it really is, but rather to show the severity of the crimes committed in the act of having sex with a man who is not your husband, before or after marriage. 

The damage such an act does is overwhelming, and likely has far reaching implications that we have never even thought of before. When someone puts up a fence, only an idiot takes it down before he knows why it was put there. How much more are we the idiots for thinking we know better and taking down a fence God put up?

An example of a possible consequence we have never thought of is the ancient and sometimes modern idea that the children of your husband will never fully be his because you slept with another guy at some point in your life. Ever heard of telegony? It's considered pseudoscience by the mainstream and it may be, but there are a lot of questions surrounding how it exists in other species. Gene drift is certainly a thing, and it would make sense that if the two become one flesh, and the Bible talks about the child and the womb being spoiled when a woman lets another man in it, then there could be something beyond what we even know. I'm not a scientist and I don't frankly know (it could all be garbage science but our culture will never allow it to be anything but that because of their constant need to be an apologetic for the sexual revolution), but what I do know is that this is considered a horrible crime by God against the husband, far more horrible than our culture would ever want to admit or know about. 

Either way, a harsher word is likely needed for a horrible crime, not a softer one.

But there is even more to my use of the word than that, and it is bound up in how translations often translate the Hebrew word זונה and the Greek word πόρνη, often translated as "prostitute." The words actually don't mean "prostitute" in the Bible, although contextually, they can refer to a prostitute. That's a big difference. What they mean divorced of any further referent in the context is far more stripped down than that. They simply refer to a woman who has sex with a man outside of being married to him. This can be a prostitute, but it can also just refer to a woman who does not take money for sex.

This is made clear in a few different passages. The first is Deuteronomy 22:13-21, where the girl is called a זונה for "not being a virgin." And, of course, the common discussion about whether בְּתוּלָה means "virgin" here is obvious as the test is checking whether she has bled or not.

Likewise, God charges Israel with being a זונה in Ezekiel 16, where He does reference the idea that a זונה in the sense of a "prostitute" always takes gifts in exchange for sex, but here, the adulterous wife is called a זונה even though she refused to take gifts, gave herself away for free, and even gave gifts to her lovers instead. 

This is why some translate it as "played the harlot" or "acted like a prostitute," but this softens the blow a bit because it makes the woman "like" something, but not really that thing. Instead, God declares that she is that thing whether she took gifts for it or not. 

It is also interesting that the sacrifice of children is brought up once again in this discussion in Ezekiel 16 because it seems to indicate that the act of זונה is an act that sacrifices a husband's children in some way, as Leviticus 18:20, which reads "You will not lie with the wife of your neighbor for offspring to be defiled in her." 

It's interesting that the prohibition against sacrificing children follows this command in verse 21.

"Prostitute" connotes in our culture the idea that a woman is trading sex for money. That is why so many women don't think they are guilty of this horrible crime. However, if they knew that the Bible was talking about their sexual activity with any guy other than their future/present husband, and that it is labeled with a horrible word so that it is understood as a horrible crime, perhaps it would give at least some pause, and help future generations from casually committing this crime against the husband.

Ergo, I use the word "whore" because it is what we have become, a nation of whores and pimps that receive no money for these crimes, only the fleeting pleasure to be paid for by the pain and loss of the husband.

Catechism through Song

 I’ve been trying to figure out a way to catechize kids with songs that would get stuck in their heads (and some for parents too). Hymns don’t really accomplish this for our generation. Anyway, these two channels are my first attempts at it. The first is for little children and the second for young adults.

KidCat

time4atalk

Be Aware of the Misandric Cult We Are In

 The Brainwashing of Married Women