The Fast

 If Wednesday comes and there is a "red wave" like everyone says there will be, well I will feel rather silly. Happy, but silly. I don't know for a fact that there won't be. If my explanation for how I am feeling is correct however, then perhaps I can use what is happening to me for my edification.

For the last couple days, I have felt uncharacteristically depressed. Like I am in mourning. Food has lost its flavor, I have no appetite. These could have perfectly normal biological explanations and I would be happy for them to be true: the problem arises if this explanation is wrong. I have no obvious signs of sickness. It is like I am going through the Biblical description of a fast.

Fasting and mourning go together, fasting is a kind of mourning. Sometimes as with the Ninevites after Jonah's visit, it is remorse for one's own sin. While I have many sins in my past, I don't think I am particularly sinny lately.

There is another reason for which people fasted in the Bible. When Moses brought down the tablets of the Ten Commandments to discover the Israelites worshiping cows, after he threw down the tablets, G-d said he would destroy the Israelites and make of Moses the new line of Israelites. Basically making Moses the new Abraham. Moses went back upon the mountain and threw himself on the ground and fasted 40 days and nights. Moses, in other words, was trying to influence G-d to change His mind.

Now this sounds ridiculous on its face, that G-d having decided something even could change His mind. I mean, He's G-d. If He decided something, that's how it's gonna be, period. Nevertheless, not only Moses fasted like this. David fasted in an unsuccessful effort to save his son's life. After his son died, then he ate and drank and his attendants were puzzled and a little offended by this. You fast and mourn while your son is alive, and then when your son is dead, THEN you eat? David's answer is that while his son was alive, he fasted in the hopes of averting G-d's decision, but once he was dead there was no point to that.

So clearly, if fasting can sometimes change G-d's mind, David didn't have the holiness mojo to do that and Moses did, since G-d did decide to have mercy on the Israelites after all.

Now the whole idea that fasting could change G-d's mind is a little crazy to me. One might suspect that G-d, rather than mainly wanting to wipe out the Israelites, wanted to make Moses more responsible for them, and putting their continued survival on him personally would do that. It is vaguely reminiscent of Elijah basically wanting to wash his hands of the Israelites altogether.

And the word of the Lord came to him: “What are you doing here, Elijah?”

He replied, “I have been very zealous for the Lord God Almighty.
The Israelites have rejected your covenant, torn down your altars,
and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left,
and now they are trying to kill me too.”

~1 Kings 19:9-10

In other words, in Elijah's opinion the Israelites are altogether irredeemably evil. This declaration was prefaced by Elijah fasting, praying that he would die.

Elijah was afraid and ran for his life. When he came to Beersheba in Judah, he left his servant there, while he himself went a day’s journey into the wilderness. He came to a broom bush, sat down under it and prayed that he might die. “I have had enough, Lord,” he said. “Take my life; I am no better than my ancestors.” Then he lay down under the bush and fell asleep.

All at once an angel touched him and said, “Get up and eat.” He looked around, and there by his head was some bread baked over hot coals, and a jar of water. He ate and drank and then lay down again.

The angel of the Lord came back a second time and touched him and said, “Get up and eat, for the journey is too much for you.” So he got up and ate and drank. Strengthened by that food, he traveled forty days and forty nights until he reached Horeb, the mountain of God. There he went into a cave and spent the night.

~1 Kings 19:3-9

What happened after that? Elijah's mantle passed onto Elisha. Why did that happen? Perhaps because Elijah could no longer intercede for the people, having essentially written them off or at least declared that he couldn't face their evil anymore. So G-d wanted to make Moses MORE responsible for Israel and G-d recognized that Elijah COULD NOT be responsible for Israel any more so Elisha had to take over. And both were prefaced with fasting by Moses and Elijah respectively, although it does not state explicitly that Elijah fasted but rather that he was in need of food, which under the circumstances probably meant that he had been fasting. Elijah had a servant, he could have probably afforded something at Beersheba's version of Taco Bell if he were in any mood to eat. ;)

So if what I am going through is sort of unconscious fasting FOR something, what is it I am unconsciously fasting for? What am I wishing to change G-d's mind about?

I am very much afraid that my soul, having perceived something that my mind has not, is fasting to avert a terrible disaster. The Midterm Elections. That the Democrats will win a great victory, by means fair or likely foul. And that G-d will let it happen. THAT is what I am very much afraid of.

I have not eaten all day, and now it is night. If this is what my body is fasting for, then perhaps I should eat. Accept it, accept it, that things are gone much farther than you thought. That horrible consequences are forthcoming, and nobody can stop it. If we win now, if we win in 2024, will that turn the tide of evil in this country? No, nothing short of calamity can turn it now. If we win and are smiling now, we are only setting ourselves up to mourn and cry in 2024 or 2028. America is still evil and godless, regardless. Nothing will change on Nov. 9, not really. The only medicine that will fix America now, is the road of pain.

I hope very very much that I am very mistaken about all of this. Nobody will be happier than I to be made the fool of. But I think I am fasting to change G-d's mind about Nov. 8. Or I am fasting, because He needs to change MY mind about what will happen on Nov. 8. That I have to accept that I am hoping for a lost cause.

"The anger of the Lord will not turn back
Till it has fulfilled and completed His purposes.
In the days to come, you shall clearly perceive it."

~Jeremiah 23:20

What do you do with all the Woke commies?

I usually go with more spiritual topics on this blog, but since I have been banned on Facebook for 24 hours for CRACKING A FRIKKING JOKE, I guess I have to put this here. 

The Nation, once a semi-respectable magazine of sorts, recently went with an article entitled, "Do We Really Have to Care About Miserable White People? Sadly, yes, because they wield disproportionate political power." Read it if you have the belly for it. This is how you say you are a racist without saying you are a racist.

Also, here's their new cover. Think they are sending a message here?

I think maybe they don't like Christians too much, whaddya think?

Now, just as the profoundly odious Joan Walsh asks the question of what they can do about all the hateful unhappy white people, I am going to ask: what the hell do we do with all the woke commies?

If I could push a button and export them all permanently to China, with a Biblical curse that their skin will melt if they ever set foot in the United States again, I probably would. But mass teleportation and Biblical curses are not in my tool box. What's the solution, then? Because if they aren't stopped they are going to wind up making the Third Reich look positively sane.

Total urban meltdown. I hate to recommend Armageddon as a solution to anything, but honestly we're there. We either have to find a way to disenfranchise the Woketards permanently - very undemocratic of me, I know - or else the cities just have to completely melt down and since they can't survive anywhere else, they'll die. Now Putin might make that prescription literal, and that might be a fix as long as Putin and Xi get the same treatment, but we don't have to wait on Crazy Vlad to push the button. The Woketards are shitting their own beds as we speak. The cities they need to continue their parasitic way of life, are the cities they are destroying. Nice symmetry, that.

Now either cheering on their self-induced destruction or politically castrating them both sound like very extreme solutions, and they are. If these solutions were available in the 1930's to stop Hitler from rising to power and initiating the deaths of innocent millions (as versus woketards who are not innocent,) would you want to use them?

Lets take stock of where we are for a minute:

· We have corporate censorship in this country and the executive branch of the US government has eagerly offered to help them do that. I got censored just today.

· We have people in positions of political power demanding total control over your body and whatever they may want to inject into it.

· We have a news media almost entirely controlled by the Woke commies. It is Democrat State Media at this point, an American Pravda.

· The US government is intentionally opening the borders to all comers in order to dilute the vote of current American citizens. That might backfire because basically nobody in the world is as Woke as some Americans are. Those who become citizens are not that likely to go along with it.

· The entire American educational establishment is controlled by the Woke commies. Universities are leftist indoctrination centers. The Teacher's Union is run by Woke commies. Children are being taught in schools to embrace sexual deviance and white self-loathing.

· We have parents drugging and in some times getting surgery for their "transgender" children, with permanent consequences.

· Thanks to the Patriot Act and other such laws, the US Government can spy on its own citizens with impunity.

· They want to disarm us. Gosh, wonder why they want that?

· They want to legalize the murder of the unborn until birth.

· The media suppresses news stories and calls them disinformation when they are critical of Democrats (such as with the Hunter Biden laptop) and then will turn around and say it happened after all, no apologies. They spread disinformation about Republicans, such as that concerned parents at school board meetings are "terrorists."

· Many many more such things.

The hour is way too late to play patty-cake with these monsters. If I could push that magical button that would cause them all to die, aside from a few that I for some unaccountable reason take a liking to, I totally would, because the alternative could be a dystopia the likes of which the Earth has never yet seen. 40 million dead Woketards is a small price to pay for saving humanity. They already chose death anyway.

ANYTHING that we can do to stop them is justified. There may not be shooting in the streets, but it's a war. There is no fair play in war. Now there is a good chance they may self destruct and we don't have to do anything, they seem pretty good at that, but anything else we have to do to stop them we must do. If they win, say goodbye to your life, your country, your freedom and probably anything else you value.

It was true then and it is true now. There is only one kind of good communist. Hell, it's an insult to historical communists to call them communists, the focking Soviet Union was practically wholesome compared to these guys. The Soviet Union wasn't trying to cut your kids nads off. The Soviet Union didn't have Pride Parades where naked pervs march down public streets. I should call them Woke Satanists because that's what they are, the commie bit is just one feature of a much larger package. Their movement needs to be put down like the rabid dogs they are. With extreme prejudice.

In Praise of the Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah

 Those who are looking for reasons to judge G-d to be cruel according to "modern, conventional morality" (the same morality that has condoned the slaughter of 60 million infants in this country since 1973,) do not have to look very far to find examples in the Tanakh. While G-d very specifically commands that the Israelites during the invasion of Canaan not wage war against any nation that claims descent from Abraham or Lot; for the rest the fate is not so kind. The Israelites are commanded to completely destroy them, every man woman and child, along with their personal possessions and especially any religious idols. They are all basically to be piled in the center of town, the inhabitants along with all their household goods and idols, and burned. How intolerant!

Now as time goes on, things get modified a bit, whether at the command of G-d or more likely despite it. Frequently the Canaanite towns are allowed to surrender and serve as slaves. Arguably it is the self-interest of the Israelites to blame, not the command of G-d, that this is sometimes an option. G-d is pretty unambiguous about the "no prisoners" thing, and constantly warns of the ill consequences of Israelites associating with the Canaanites in any way whatsoever. Total destruction is specified.

However in the Tanakh, G-d does not always delegate mass destruction to His servants. Sometimes He takes action directly. The first and most notable example of this is the destruction of the ante-diluvian world in the Flood. Now you can think what you like about the historicity of such things, but what is undeniable is that the Tanakh SAYS G-d destroyed them. So for the people who are looking for ammunition against the G-d of the Tanakh, grounds for an accusation of cruelty, that is what the Tanakh said He did. We don't know what numbers were involved, but it was clearly depicting a mass death event.

The second most notable example is the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, or rather the destruction of the whole Dead Sea valley because it was not strictly limited just to those two cities. In terms of total dead, probably 100,000 is not too high a number. And this again was the destruction of every man, woman, child, cow, donkey and chicken. It was a holocaust, which originally meant a burnt offering to G-d to the point of complete destruction.

And again you can argue one way or the other about the historicity of such an event. That's not the point. The point is that the Tanakh says G-D HIMSELF DID IT.

And I am about to argue that this was an act of kindness, a mercy towards humanity. In fact, if you are living in an era where Sodoms and Gomorrahs are NOT destroyed in such a way (as is currently the case,) that this signifies that G-d is really really very very unhappy with Mankind and we should be very very concerned. This is not to say that the Sodoms and Gomorrahs of the 21st Century will not meet destruction: they absolutely will, but through the fruition of their own evil. In other words the full fruit of the wicked cities of America and the world will be allowed to manifest, and that fruit will destroy them. Rather than G-d pruning those branches before they are allowed to fruit.

Evil is incapable of creation and can only destroy in the end. Comparing evil to a virus, the virus of evil eventually destroys the cell that allows it to replicate and so it must find new cells to destroy. America's most wicked cities will eventually lack even the most basic structures that allow them to continue, such as the rule of law and the protection of property and life.

It is a mercy of G-d to clean up Humanity's mistakes for it, and nothing cleans like fire. Like, clearly mistakes were made and G-d is going to clean up that mess for you, Humanity. You get a fresh start, a clean slate. That is in some ways the greatest of mercies: a second chance. Or in this case a third or more chance.

What would have happened if G-d had not destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? What is happening now, to us, today?

Future generations would have been raised completely saturated in evil and abomination. Opportunities for children to grow up to be righteous would have been very slim indeed: in fact without the grace and intervention of G-d there would be no chance of that whatsoever. The evil, the power hunger, the arrogance and the deviance of Man would have grown unbounded, distorting and blaspheming the image of Man who was made in G-d's image. The Devil likes nothing better than to blaspheme G-d by twisting His image into a perversion and a mockery. Those who have eyes to see can already see that happening so clearly. The innocent, those who have not yet seriously sinned, are a special target: either for destruction or for corruption. The Devil kills babies and those who are not killed he makes a special target for moral corruption. We should wish that America's cities be absolutely destroyed rather than for dozens of future generations to live as slaves to wickedness. You may call me evil, and according to "conventional, modern morality" I probably am, but I have often prayed for this. That G-d would give us the kindness that he showed the people of the age of Sodom and wipe out evil from the land. Scourge it from the land with fire. But that seemingly is not what is going on in this era. Evil is going to full flower and fruit.

Death is infinitely preferable to slavery to wickedness. It is infinitely better for the human race to be decontaminated from that evil. It was better for the future generations of Sodom not to be born, than to be born deeply entrenched in spiritual slavery. And that is why the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was a blessing: to the rest of the human race that survived, and to the future generations who would now not be born into complete spiritual oppression.

The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was an event worthy of thanks and praise, not our all-too-human judgments about the "cruelty of G-d." Our hearts should pine and pray for fresh starts, for clean slates, for the mistakes and deliberate evils of humanity to be wiped away from the Earth. For the possibility of children being raised uncorrupted and clean, and old men going to their graves in peace, reconciled to their G-d. Amen.

By Daderot - Own work, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=62711574

 

Eye and Cheek

 Theology has often struggled to reconcile the "eye for an eye" morality of the Tanakh, the Old Testament, with the "Love your enemies" and "turn the other cheek" morality of the New. Did G-d change His mind? In the past, my solution has been simple: they cannot be reconciled. Indeed Christians frequently mix Old and New Testament morality rather eclectically, something the liberals (who might prefer an extreme surrender to evil theology) have tended to be quick to point out. To them, Jesus is only the man who forgives adulterers, not the man who yells at pharisees. Yet the issue remains: the Tanakh demands death for adulterers; Jesus rescued one who was lined up for exactly that punishment.

I think now that this conflict actually can be resolved somewhat harmoniously by looking at the very differing conditions of Moses and Joshua on the one hand, and Jesus on the other. G-d didn't change, but circumstances sure did.

While of course the germ theory of disease was not known then, the Tanakh can be thought of as kind of operating on a "germ theory of evil." In other words, you have to nip the contagion right in the bud and quarantine those affected, either by exiling them or in more extreme cases killing them. Evil has to be opposed vigorously and violently, or else it will surely spread and cause even more suffering.This was regarded as a communal obligation: both an obligation of the community and an obligation of the individual towards it.

And of course this theory is quite right: we see all the time how evil spreads through families and communities, the sins of the fathers do indeed rebound onto the sons and daughters. When you look at prison populations, virtually all of them have extensive family histories of violence, drug and alcohol abuse and other disorders. Sure, all of us have our family issues, but prisoners often have profoundly crippling ones.

Evil does spread like a disease. And the Tanakh's approach to that disease is like the approach to gangrene: when the finger gets gangrene, you chop it off to save the hand. But this chopping is not something that is left up to the individual, it is a responsibility of the community. When a crime calls for stoning to death, everyone is supposed to throw the stones. Not just one person. In some cases like idolatry, it specifies that even the closest next of kin of the condemned is to throw a stone; in fact they have to throw the first one.

But you have to ask the question: who was in charge of that community, that ancient Jewish society? Moses and Joshua. Who was in charge of them? G-d. This was, at least ideally, a society almost unique in human history. One in which G-d was in charge, when G-d was recognized as the authority.

What was the situation in Jesus' time? That disease control horse has long bolted the corral. The population was thoroughly infected. The disease was rampant and uncontrolled. The Hebrews had failed to live up to the opportunity to be a holy people led by G-d. The real people of G-d were not in charge of that society, they were refugees in it. Judea had been taken over by the Romans, a violent pagan torturing empire that watched people suffer and die for entertainment. The Jewish establishment had carved themselves out a niche of comfort and wealth and didn't have to give a damn. They made rules without caring what burdens they placed on the people. The Temple might not have had pagan idols in it as in times past, but it was still a corrupt institution run by self-serving elites.

Satan was in charge of the Earth. Satan was the authority. In that context, the communal authority authorized by G-d, which was required for much of Old Testament morality, didn't exist anymore. Sure the Sanhedrin existed, under Roman rule, and was about as representative of the "community" as today's elites are of the American populace. All of the individual obligations still existed: you were still supposed to not lie, covet or kill, and Jesus never once contradicted any of that with the possible exception of Sabbath observance. And you could argue that Sabbath observance was a communal obligation too. That community as an extension of divine rule functionally no longer existed.

What did Jesus change? Communal obligations. Stoning adulterers is a communal obligation, not an individual one. The COMMUNITY was supposed to put that person to death, not the individual. The community prosecutes thieves (if someone takes away your coat, give them your cloak.) The community prosecutes assault (turn the other cheek.) If a Roman slaps you, are you going to take it up with the Romans which are the authority in place? They will probably beat you for your pains.

So in Moses' time, G-d was in charge, of that community at least. In Jesus' time, Satan ruled the Earth. And still does.

Jesus evidences a point of view of the people of G-d as refugees in the world. Outcasts. The offscourings of the Earth. The dregs, in the eyes of the world.

If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.
If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own.
As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world.
That is why the world hates you.

~John 15:18-19

This is the world of Jesus, and this is our world. Now, for a long time in Europe people sought to establish "Christendom," people in early America did too, and this no doubt had many good effects along with some not-so-great ones. But ultimately, this is the Day of Satan, and I don't believe that anything we do is going to change that until the end.

I really feel like this understanding is the resolution for me for the conflict between the Tanakh and the New Testament. While I believe that the idea that anyone other than G-d was G-d is contrary to the Torah (and it is,) I have often felt drawn to what Jesus taught regardless, and tried to figure out a resolution between conflicting Christian and Torah morality, and I believe this is it. I was a Christian for some years, and I often felt drawn to the refugee motifs in the New Testament that were largely lacking in the Old. We ARE refugees and outcasts in the world. Satan is "the prince of this world" as the Gospel of John says. These ideas are not present in the Tanakh because the Tanakh was written in a time when the rulership of G-d was either already established (Moses, Joshua) or was trying to be re-established. Well that horse had fled to Alaska by the time Jesus was born.

So then does that mean that I now accept the New Testament, despite its many differences from the Old, as being from G-d? Yes. Does that mean that Jesus was the Son of G-d? Quite possibly, whatever that exactly means. Some of these expressions are rather lacking in explanations. A prophet? Quite possibly.

Do I believe that he is the same as G-d? No, and there are many quotes in the gospels which indicate he didn't believe that, either. He always defers to his Father. If that is functionally the same as deferring to himself, that is a peculiar way of deferring. You defer to the other. Jesus defers to the Father. Jesus was a man.

However he was a man that seems to have had a revelation from G-d for these satanically-dominated times. We are not in charge of this world. Satan is.

Conservatives often fight for the establishment of at least some degree of holy authority over the United States, and that is both well-meant and probably would be good in its effects. But just like Christendom in Medieval Europe, it is a stopgap against a satanic world and often the forces that are supposed to be fighting on our side wind up fighting on theirs. Corruption in the Church, you just have to look at the Catholic Church to see how that works. Politicians who run on "family values" who wind up grabbing for the shiny baubles that Satan hangs down to lure the weak. That doesn't mean we stop trying, it means we understand our position. We are refugees and outcasts trying to seize back authority for G-d, and we are going to lose in that effort more often than win until G-d decides to wrap the whole thing up. 

 

This is the verdict: Light has come into the world,
but people loved darkness instead of light
because their deeds were evil.

~John 3:19

Redeemed from Slavery

 We all have an idea of what slavery is. Many people don't have any idea of what true spiritual oppression and slavery is, the horror of it. To be surrounded by an environment that doesn't just hate you and is toxic to you, but is toxic to your soul. That oppresses your soul. This is not because we don't have such an environment readily at hand: we absolutely do. It is because people have put their souls on mute.

Spiritual oppression and the physical manifestations of spiritual oppression are different but not separable, they go together like hand and glove. We often feel spiritual oppression most keenly through its physical manifestations. The physical expression of that oppression is how oppression communicates itself, and spiritual oppression HAS to communicate or else remain impotent. Not only that you are a nothing, not only that you are a slave in fact, we own you, but that we are going to tell you and show you over and over and over that you are a slave and we own you. Despair and die, the devil says. There is nothing else but me.

So imagine G-d: he is looking down on the Israelites in Egypt, and they are not just physically abused but surrounded by and actually forced to work on images of false gods. Contrary to their own devout beliefs. Meanwhile to the Egyptians, they are less than dirt. They are deplorable and alien. They are oppressed in body, but possibly even worse, they are oppressed in soul. A man can withstand many hardships if through them his heart is singing. If he is free of spiritual oppression. All the people in America who commit suicide, who get addicted and die of overdoses and many other such sad fates: it is not their physical conditions that killed them. In these kind of cases they could have survived. It is succumbing to spiritual darkness that killed them, just as surely as if the Devil had come up to them and put a bullet in their heads. Bam, splat.

The truly horrible thing is, some people collaborate with the darkness. Some people give in to it and work with it and even celebrate it. We can imagine that some of the ancient Israelites really wanted to be Egyptians and were doing everything they could to suck up to them. In fact we know they did.

So anyway G-d in His mercy frees the Israelites from slavery. Not simply free from Egyptian polytheism and any other terrible behavior they might have had. Not simply free from the dictates of that particular government and king (a man who claimed to be a god.) No: free from all of it. Free from all the physical manifestations of spiritual oppression. You will have no king but G-d.

And then when G-d is talking to Moses on Mt. Sinai, a very large number of these same people who were redeemed from slavery go: lets go back to Egypt. Lets abandon G-d's ways. Can you imagine? You do this beautiful thing for a people, and they are like, "no we would rather be slaves. We like Egypt." What can you do with such people?

I think in some ways this is the hardest part of human nature to take. We all at times think, "well these people who are sinning in all these awful ways, denying G-d, they're just ignorant. If they really knew, if they knew what I know, they wouldn't be like that. They'd try to be good, not evil." And no, that's not necessarily the case. Yes there are some people who go astray through ignorance and repent of it when they know better. But there are others who love Egypt. Who love slavery. Who feel triumph with the Devil when he triumphs. Who wish to dominate other souls like the Devil dominates their own selves. And that's hard to take.

And don't imagine this is just a story about Egypt and Israelites. This is here, now.

I left the city for many good reasons, many of them very practical. I also left because the city, the kingdom of Man which sadly functionally means the kingdom of Satan, oppresses my soul. I feel a very palpable almost visceral oppression fall on my spirit whenever I am in an urban area. The concrete parking lots, the fluorescent lighting of the big box stores, the complete absence of any beauty or humanity (in the good sense,) sets a weight on my spirit that does not lift until I leave. I can't even drive in Dallas anymore, it's literally traumatic to me. All these little boxes driving around so frenetically with zero care for the risk to human life involved, frenetically driving themselves to what? To more slavery.

If you will excuse the crude expression, they are like someone furiously jacking off who can never orgasm. That's slavery. Furiously desiring something you can never have, because you don't even know what's good or what is holy anymore. Lemmings. A living, moving expression of the Devil's hatred of Mankind. And they are apparently willing participants in it.

We are taught by our "betters" in the World that hate is a bad thing. Not always. I hate, hate with every possible fiber of my being, this oppression. This spiritual slavery. I hate it utterly and completely. Hate for it fills every corner of me.

The thought that makes me sad is the thought of people who might one day be redeemed who at the moment are still stuck in that slavery, confused and oppressed. My potential brothers and sisters. I feel the oppression in their souls because I was there myself. I pray for them to be free. But I know that the Lord will not abandon anyone who truly turns to Him completely. He didn't abandon me. I know that however much I yearn for the liberation of these souls who can be free but who are now trapped in the oppression of the evil empire, G-d is jealous for them more.

Despite everything, despite all the things Mankind has done, despite all the turnings back to Egypt, He hasn't given up. He had a plan for Man, He always did, and He always wins in the end.

A Hole In The Flames

 Why is it that I seek to be happy, to be entertained,
in a hole in the flames
a hole in the flames of a dying world?
A hole in the flames of perdition?

And I am, I am entertained
with hobbies and games and current events
The vexation of the World can only vex me from a distance
I am not vexed to my face, by G-d's grace.

Forgive, O Lord.

I have been entertained when treasures of the Spirit could be opened to me.
I have been contented when revelation could come in it's place.
I have used your Sanctuary as a house of rest and peace, but not enough prayer.
I am a cow in Your fields, not a man.

A man... as if that were better!
The World is the world of Man
The World I hate
The flames I am protected from.
If being a man means being of that, I cannot want it.
Better a cow in Your field than a man.

Silence, you know not, I say to me.
You are not potter but clay.
G-d acts, you are acted upon
G-d will do, not you.

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise;
God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.
God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things
—and the things that are not — to nullify the things that are

~1 Corinthians 1:27-28

The Good News About Christians

 Now as followers of this blog, to the extent they exist, would know, I do not believe in the divinity of Jesus. G-d made it pretty clear that He is One G-d. What is often considered the holiest prayer in the Torah, the Shema, states: G-d is ONE. Three-In-One or some variation thereof does not qualify.

However, I have come to a renewed appreciation of the fact that Jesus at least on some things was one perceptive cookie, whatever else he was. Read his imprecations against the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew. That was true then, and it still is. Rabbinical Judaism is directly descended from the Pharisees of that day. Every single attempt at moral renewal in overall society in recent centuries was led by Christians. Very very few of them were led by religious Jews.

Who cares if you or society as a whole winds up in moral perdition? Not many Rabbinical Jews, apparently. G-d and the Commandments are their property, didn't you know? If you are not a Jew, G-D (and His law) IS NOT OPEN TO YOU. Go take a long ride off a short pier, Goy.

Not only that, but legit ethnically-Jewish practitioners of Judaism who are not Rabbinical Jews, like the Karaite Jews, are not considered to be Jews at all by most Rabbinical Jews. And what is the signifying characteristic of Rabbinical Judaism? The reliance on rabbis, to the point where their word is considered nearly equal or actually equal to the words of G-d in the Torah. The Karaites are exactly the opposite, which is why Rabbinical Jews don't consider them Jews.

“But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven."

~Matthew 23:8-9

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to."

~Matthew 23:13

Never has a single Rabbinical Jew ever responded to my interest in Judaism other than negatively. Matthew 23:13 was true in the First Century and still is.

Christians, whatever my doctrinal differences with them, actually do care if EVERYONE gets on the right path. The idea of a Christian saying to a sincere inquirer, "your interest in Christianity is not sincere, go away" is ludicrous on its face. It is nothing if not a universal religion. The color of your skin doesn't matter. The language you speak doesn't matter. They want you on the team. They believe, as I also do, that G-d is no respecter of persons. G-d doesn't think better of you because of your ethnicity. The special status of the Jews was to achieve an end, to be the bearer of G-d's Light and Word to the world. But then Christians, not Jews, did that. If there had been no Christians, the overwhelming majority of the world would only have heard of the Ten Commandments through comparative religion classes in colleges. If that.

I cannot agree with what Christians think is the means of salvation, of coming to G-d, but I could not agree with them more that G-d's message is for -

E V E R Y B O D Y .

Not just a special few, not just for one ethnic group. Now not everyone will accept the message of the Tanakh, but everyone is the intended recipient. No one is beyond the pale of G-d's mercy just because they were born into the wrong ethnic group or culture.

“What do you think? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard.’

“‘I will not,’ he answered, but later he changed his mind and went.

“Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. He answered, ‘I will, sir,’ but he did not go.

“Which of the two did what his father wanted?”

“The first,” they answered.

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did."

~Matthew 21:28-32

Another of Jesus' criticisms of the scribes and pharisees, and spot on. Now I believe that believing in the divinity of Jesus is idolatry, and I also know that many Christians would say that not believing in it, I am going to hell. Idolatry is indeed bad, it is one of the most frequently criticized sins of the entire Tanakh, what Christians call the Old Testament. Believing in the divinity of any created being definitely qualifies.

Despite this, do I believe that Christians who otherwise sincerely keep the Commandments especially the Ten Commandments and do what is right are eligible to enter the Kingdom of the Righteous if such will exist?

ABSOLUTELY. Why? Because while they may not say exactly the right thing or believe exactly the right thing, a righteous Christian in fact does what is right. Like the first son, a righteous Christian walks the walk even if his facts aren't exactly straight or his mouth isn't saying exactly the right words. Someone who, on the other hand, says "yes" to G-d but isn't actually righteous in his conduct, his "yes" is useless.

Surely G-d wishes us to spread knowledge of right and wrong and His Laws, not keep them to ourselves. Surely such an act is both righteous and kind. But if we left it to the Rabbinical Jews, keeping it to themselves is exactly what would have happened. Who has done the most to spread knowledge of G-d's Laws, even if sometimes they incorrectly say they have been superseded? Christians. Why is there a Bible in homes all over the world, even if they are not read? Because of Christianity.

So I think that while G-d definitely does not like idolatry, He does like Christians. I don't even hold it against them that they think I am going to hell, I know the Lord and I know that I know. Why is it that everywhere Christian civilization has held sway, it has tended to advance and advance significantly? What does G-d say about those who keep His ways? He will bless them and protect them. In the Tanakh, every single time the Jews were conquered, it was attributed to them becoming immoral and losing G-d's favor. When the Jews regained their freedom and succeeded, it was attributed to the revival of the sincerity of their faith. Well on average they have been doing rather poorly for the last 2000 years. To what should we attribute THAT? According to the same logic that is present throughout the Tanakh, they do NOT have the Lord's favor. Christians, at least until they lost control of "Christendom," DID and the proof of that is that they succeeded beyond any peoples on this Earth.

Now some would say that the idea that G-d blesses and protects those who love and obey Him in sincerity is a fossil of Iron Age thinking. Well the Tanakh absolutely repeatedly says it is true, and I believe what it says, whether it is "modern" thinking or not. While this does not limit G-d's freedom of action to act otherwise (which the Book of Job would seem to indicate it does not,) on the whole the Tanakh upholds the idea that the righteous who love G-d are generally both blessed and protected. Those who are not righteous and don't love G-d are not. They are cursed.

Some people regard the idea of America becoming a Christian Nationalist nation appalling. I don't, even though I am not a Christian. Why? I want children to be taught morality. I want them to not be taught perversion. I want a country where people will never again be persecuted or run out of business because they won't bend the knee to the secular doctrines. I want to live in a country where law and order are considered to be good things, not oppression. Christians are the only group that can actually potentially make this better America come about. If they don't, then get used to an America where the official doctrines are Woke corporate communism, atheism, corruption, slavery, lies, and moral deviancy. I would not be very happy about America becoming such, but we are well on the way to it.

Christians, whatever I think about their religion's idolatrous tendencies and their habit of using grace as a cover for lack of obedience, are the only ones who can save us from that (G-d willing and with His help.)

So we better hope, all of us, that America becomes a more Christian nation because if it doesn't, we're all screwed.

Faith and Faithfulness

 Many religious leaders emphasize FAITH, and it is all well and good that they do. However, faith is merely one aspect of something more fundamental: FAITHFULNESS.

If faith is an intellectual rational assent to a proposition, that assent can change. Reason is a slave to deeper motivations: if you want to believe something, you can find your reasons. Reason is a castrated impotent fop that is in bondage to the deeper realities of how human beings work. So if your faith is because you rationally consent to the idea that a god exists, it is fickle and useless.

FAITHFULNESS is a bond, a covenant, between one person and another. G-d, for everything else that He is, is also a person in this sense.

You COVENANT with HIM. You LOVE Him, and by love I do not mean merely an emotion. Emotions too change with the wind, human emotions are as fickle as Reason is. You are bonded with Him. You demonstrate faithfulness, not just faith, with Him and He shows His faithfulness to you. Love that is only an emotion is worthless. Love that is a bond: that is the love that matters. A mother (one would hope) does not merely love her child. She is bonded with him. She will attend to him through thick and thin, bad times and good. Her lot is cast with his.

The G-d of Sinai tells us time and time and time again, throughout the Tanakh (for Christians the Old Testament,) that faithfulness is a thing He values exceedingly highly. In fact many of his Commandments are expressions of how much He values faithfulness. Thou shalt not commit adultery: that is about faithfulness of one human being to another, their spouse. Some days you might not in fact love your spouse very much, but you must always be faithful to them. Not bearing false witness is a form of faithfulness to the community. Loyalty that goes much further than lip service. Loyalty in ACTION. The First Commandment, thou shalt have no other gods besides Me, is the ultimate expression of faithfulness to G-d. And He prefaces it by saying that He was faithful to you, Israel. He led you out of bondage in Egypt. G-d is faithful. Are you?

Faithfulness to G-d is a transcendent value that can and sometimes must overrule faithfulness to even the dearest human. The Torah states that even if your wife or brother induces you to worship other gods, you must report them immediately and at their stoning YOU must throw the first stone.

Why would G-d have you perform that wrenching act? An act that must fill your eyes with tears and your heart with agony? This is human thinking: doesn't G-d love me? Why would he make me do such a horrendously agonizing thing?

To say, that though G-d wants you to be faithful to your wife and family and community, everything comes second to faithfulness to G-d. And it has to be that way, because without faithfulness to G-d, the family and society and everything else will come apart. Keeping faith, keeping covenant, with G-d is FUNDAMENTAL. Everything whatsoever is second to it. The G-d centered society is a pyramid based on faithfulness to G-d, and if the base shatters the whole thing will shatter. First faithfulness to G-d, then faithfulness to spouse and family and faithfulness to community. If the base is right, the whole thing will be right.

G-d tells us over and over and over and over and over again that He values loyalty. Loyalties that are subjected to G-d's law and loyalty to Him first. Thank Him that He does! Can you imagine what situation we would be in if He didn't care, or changed His regard and care on a whim?

LIKE HUMANS DO?? What is more fickle than a human being?

No, He is not like that. His loyalty is constant to those who are covenanted to Him. Sometimes when adversity strikes we do not see that loyalty, but it is there, to all who keep covenant, keep faithfulness, to Him. Looking back on my life I see a constant thread of G-d's faithfulness, though I might not have seen it at the time and indeed it stretches back to a time when I was not at all faithful to Him and didn't even know Him. For the sake of my future self, He was faithful to the wretch that I was.

Even death does not break G-d's faithfulness. What is G-d's explanation for why he saved the Israelites from Egypt? Because He loved Abraham.

ABRAHAM HAD BEEN DEAD 400 YEARS! It doesn't matter. Elisha raised a man from the dead THOUGH HE HIMSELF WAS DEAD BONES! Doesn't matter. Even death does not end G-d's faithfulness. How many of G-d's people have been saved from a life of darkness because He loved one of their ancestors? G-d only knows. The prayers of those long dead have not lost their potency in His eyes.

G-d was at one point so angry with the Israelites that he wanted to destroy them utterly. Moses prayed that He would spare them for His name sake. Because Moses asked Him, He did not destroy them.

So do not tell me of your faith in an intellectual proposition. Do not tell me of your emotion of love. Tell me of your faithfulness, your covenant, to a person who is G-d. Be faithful with all your strength and soul.

Am *I* The Crazy One?

 THIS IS A REPOST OF A FACEBOOK POST. I am copying it here because nobody knows what FB might do in the future or if I will be able to be on it. Nobody knows what Google might do in the future either, but at least now it is in two places.

**************************************************

Am I the crazy one? I don't think that I am. I think I am one of very few making any sense.

Without avidly and sincerely seeking the ways of G-d and seeking to implement them, humanity is without hope. There is no hope even of the kind of consumer lifestyle that the atheist materialists want, for very long.

How are you going to have your lifestyle, or at least how are your children going to have your lifestyle, when deranged, UNNATURAL, power-hungry, neurotically-control-freakish and quite possibly genocidal leaders have no curbs, no traditions, no restrictions on the power of the idolatrous false god GOVERNMENT, no obstacles to their path to blow the whole thing up?

If it is not clear yet, THEY DON'T CARE. They sure as hell don't care about you. They don't even care about THEMSELVES! There is Nancy Pelosi, marching us all to WW3. A suicide cult. They don't even have the spiritual sight to know that is what they are doing! They are morally and spiritually completely blinded. They don't have eyes to see what they are doing anymore, if they ever did.

Why? Because they hate G-d. So like Pharoah, G-d blinded them and hardened their hearts.

Let us reason together for the moment, atheists. Is there anything less trustworthy on this Earth than human governments? Is there anything less trustworthy on this Earth than human beings and human "wisdom" PERIOD? Lets count it up.

There is the 40 MILLION DEAD in WW1

There is the 85 MILLION DEAD in WW2

There are the millions dead in the Korean, Vietnam and all the subsequent wars we were so fond of at the time.

And these deaths are 100% attributable to the power of human governments. This is human wisdom in action!

So tell me, how is it that you trust humans and their governments again? I don't see it.

Oh wait, I can answer that question for you! It is GOOD THAT HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS DIED IN THE 20TH AND EARLY 21ST CENTURIES. Why? Global warming. I have literally heard liberals argue that anything that kills millions of people is good, or even that human extinction is good.

Like I said, it is a suicide cult. It will get us all killed one day.

There is ONE AND ONLY ONE RIGHT WAY, period. That way is G-D's WAY.

Which G-d? The G-d of Sinai. The G-d of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. YHWH.

I will say it again. ONE AND ONLY ONE RIGHT WAY.

I am only a man, my knowledge of that way is not perfect, but I sure am gonna try to learn it because that is our only hope.

SEEK THAT WAY WITH ALL YOUR HEART AND SOUL AND STRENGTH. SEEK HIM WITH ALL YOUR HEART AND SOUL AND STRENGTH. Maybe, just maybe, He will give you sanctuary in the storm of absolute human wickedness and insanity and depravity.

No, *I* am not the crazy one

How I Took My "Red Pill"

 For most of my life, I was not the Conservative I am now. I was anywhere from libertarian to kinda-liberal to proper liberal. In 2015 I was liberal enough to support Bernie Sanders. What happened?

1. ABORTION
---------------------------------

Abortion was really the wedge that opened up everything else. I never thought abortion was morally acceptable. I thought it was something that government shouldn't involve itself in beyond certain parameters. Granted that it was logically inconsistent to believe that abortion was immoral (hence by extension actually murder) and believing that it shouldn't be illegal like other murders. But I was skeptical enough of government power to make the case to myself that even if immoral, government shouldn't be involved or at least that legislation against it should be limited to certain parameters.

I remember very vividly many years ago visiting a tiny Catholic church in Eureka Springs, Arkansas that contained on its grounds a memorial to the unborn. This moved me very deeply and planted a seed in me, I think. Never be skeptical of even the smallest act of witness that comes from the heart, and this memorial was a witness to me. 

Abortion memorial, St. Elizabeth's Church, Eureka Springs Arkansas

Then came Facebook, and on it I interacted with "Christians" (Progressive Christians) who were not only willing to have the limited abortion prohibitions that were then law, but who believed in expanded abortion "rights." They did not believe that abortion was immoral but best tolerated. They affirmed abortion as a positive good.

This blew my mind. I had always assumed that ANY Christian who tolerated abortion, tolerated it as a very bad thing that it was nevertheless not worth it for government to outlaw completely. I viewed it a bit like Prohibition: its intentions were good, alcohol destroys countless lives, but it was never going to work and was going to encourage criminality. In this case presumably, outlawing abortion encourages illegal coat hangers.

But here were these "Christians," who did not think abortion was immoral. And here I was, with my reasoned if wrong approach to the problem, and I was unintentionally supporting the positions of people who believed that what was in my view fundamentally wrong was right. Murder is okay. Abortion is good.

When I re-evaluated my position on abortion, this opened the door to re-evaluating EVERYTHING I believed to see if it matches up to the Biblical view on things. And in a great many ways it did not.

2. THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS TO THE TANAKH (THE OLD TESTAMENT)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had first become a Christian I think in my late Thirties or maybe in my Forties. It was a very rocky relationship, characterized by a number of fits and starts. I had two main problems with Christianity: the idea that a man was G-d, and a problem with the Old Testament. The Old Testament, despite its very different outlook, is considered by Christians to also be holy writ along with the New Testament. What is relevant for the purpose of this post is the latter.

I admired the philosophy of Jesus. When I wanted to broaden my understanding though, I looked at the Old Testament and saw a dramatically different picture. Jesus said "do not resist an evil person." Here was the OT advocating the extreme opposite, that any evil MUST be resisted, violently in many cases. Jesus was a man of peace, and I liked peace.

The OT was a book of WAR. Whatever their points of connection and however often Jesus quoted it, the Old Testament and the New were fundamentally at odds.

Here was a looking glass universe, in which all my calm pacifistic expectations were upended. I actually believed for a time that the Old Testament was the product of a different religion and a different God, and that this OT God was not like my Jesus at all. I did not like the Old Testament one bit, and that was a problem, because the Jesus I did like quoted it all the time.

Nevertheless I persevered in my studies, hoping to find a resolution. In the process, I entered through the looking glass into the Old Testament and a different world, a world in conflict with the world that I and basically everybody lived in. A world of pluralism of thought. A world of tolerance.

The Tanakh is fundamentally intolerant. In the Torah (the first five books of the Tanakh,) evil is described in ways very similar to how we now think of disease. When you have gangrene in a finger, you do not spare the finger and risk the hand. You lop the finger off and pray that the infection stops there. Evil in the Tanakh is fundamentally regarded as a contagion, an infectious disease that will inevitably spread if not stopped cold. The Torah's prescient ideas about actual disease and quarantine (in an ancient world without germ theory) is telling. The Torah treats with real disease and spiritual disease both. Later prophets would not deal as much with actual disease, but spiritual disease is treated much the same way. A king of ancient Judah, Josiah, is praised in the book of Kings above all other kings, even David. Why? Because he destroyed the pagan shrines in Judah, desecrated their altars, and murdered their pagan priests. The prophet Elijah is depicted doing the same sorts of things.

In the view of the Tanakh, the thing to do with pagans is not invite them to speak at your churches as is so often the practice today. The thing to do with pagans is to kill them. Terminate, with extreme prejudice. Granted you should not take this too literally as a guide to how to behave these days, as neither Elijah nor Josiah were thrown in prison for their actions (though they certainly tried worse with Elijah.) Still, the principle is stated repeatedly: sweep out the evil amongst you. Do not let evil take root with the Jewish people. Of course it did anyway.

Fundamental also to the Tanakh is a very alien way of thinking these days: that one way, G-d's way, is right and all ways in contradiction to it are wrong. It's not just, like, your opinion man. G-d's way or the highway, and the highway is death or other very unpleasant consequences. Which, we have all in this culture subconsciously absorbed ethical relativism. The Tanakh expresses a different view: that THE ONE ONLY GOD told us what He wanted, what was right and what was wrong. And if THE ONE ONLY TRUE GOD tells you something, it is not up to debate. He is right and everyone else is wrong. And not only wrong, but actually malignant. Spiritually damaging to society.

As an American, I absorbed individualism in the cradle practically. Americans love individualism. It's a foundational ideal. What is hard to wrap your head around in the Tanakh initially is that it is not at all individualistic. As an American, thoughts and beliefs are considered morally neutral. You can be a Wiccan and be a good American; you can be a Baptist and a good American. Pluralism of thought is considered good. Do your own thing, think your own thoughts. Anyone who knows me would probably consider me the most individualistic of people. My mother used to say of me, "he marches to the beat of his own drummer."

What the Tanakh was saying was, thoughts and beliefs are not morally neutral. Your thoughts and beliefs affect everything and everyone around you. Nor are actions which superficially do not seem to affect other individuals morally neutral. From the point of view of the Tanakh, if you are committing sodomy with the same sex, you are not just affecting yourself and consenting adults. You are doing injury to the very fabric of society which depends on stable opposite-sex families to prosper. Like it or not, everyone is morally connected to everyone else, and it is this worldview that can be the hardest to assimilate. Through the looking glass, there are no victimless sins.

And believe me, I did not want to believe that this point of view was right. No less than Jacob, I fought with an angel over this. But I had to finally admit that G-d was right and I was wrong.

Something that is hard to convey to people who are not truly immersed in the worldview of the Tanakh is the deep love that is embedded in this worldview. Tremendous concern for the well being of not individuals but everyone. Excessive love for any one individual is not present; G-d is no respecter of persons. What G-d respects is the health, well-being and happiness of the whole of society. When one person detracts from that, they should be corrected or pruned from the tree. Which, if evil is like a contagious disease, is what you have to do. If your apple tree has one infected branch, you cut off the branch and save the tree.

The worldview of the Tanakh is profoundly, fundamentally different from the modern worldview and opposed to it. It can take a tremendous work of self- re-education to reorient yourself towards it, but with G-d's help you can. Today, the "modern world" is through the looking glass to me, alien and dark.

3. POLITICAL SKEPTICISM
--------------------------------------------------------

It is subconsciously accepted as a given that government is the answer to many problems. Despite all the problems it seems unable to solve. People as a whole do not disagree with using government as a hammer to solve whatever the ills are, they just disagree with whether the solution is good in that particular case.

Well, governments are run by humans, and what does the Tanakh tell us about humans?

"The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?" ~Jeremiah 17:9


"The LORD looks down from heaven on the sons of men to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God. All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." ~Psalm 14:2-4

Humans, even the best of us, are corrupt and sinful. The more power that a human is given, the greater his temptation to evil will be. Therefore a HUMAN solution to our problems is precisely NOT what is needed. We need THE divine solution, not human solutions. No one who truly believes what the Tanakh says about human nature can ever imagine the government as the cure to all ills.

Like most Americans, I was raised on the idea of government solutions. This is the malignancy of the current order: what is allowed to pass muster in one generation is bred into the next as a fait accompli. Just as, if the Woke agenda is allowed to pass unchallenged in this generation, it will become the default philosophy of the next. Just as "communism lite" was allowed to pass muster in previous generations and schools and churches, and became the default philosophy now. Remember the mindset of the Tanakh: evil is a contagion.

What this reliance on government solutions leads to is an even worse evolution of sin: idolatry of the State on a national scale. That government is the human-made god. Previous nations tried it: Hitler tried to extend his control over every aspect of life as did Stalin. In one, the Volk is god. In the other, humans are god. In both, the State is god.

Well despite their greater body count, they got nothing on us. The current cultural and ideological regime in the West practices Stateolatry no less than they do. The modern idolaters of the State just find better ways to put it into practice without arousing suspicion.

So while I hold to the view of the Tanakh, that ONE way is right, I do not view human governments as a worthy tool to putting that into practice. The best government then is the one that extends its hand the least and intrudes, robs, controls, steals and kills in our name the least. The problem is that while limited government works exceedingly well for a moral, spiritual and righteous population, in one that is not it turns into "nothing is true, everything is permitted." Because unrighteous people still look to government for their guide and their father. So if their guide and father allows it, it must be okay.

So I cannot countenance an activist government and I cannot say that a laissez-faire government will have beneficial results in an immoral population, because it won't. Ultimately the spiritual commitment of the population to covenant with the G-d of Sinai is fundamental, and that spiritual commitment does not exist today on any widespread level.

THE PROCESS
-------------------------------------

I did not snap immediately from a Bernie Sanders liberal to what I am now. I was indeed dragged kicking and screaming every step of the way. The force doing the dragging was my desire for intellectual consistency and truth and the spirit of G-d leading me. The dead weight was the whole inherited thought that I, as the child of liberal parents, had absorbed wholesale from my parents and society. So I will sometimes see my posts from 2017 or 2018 and go, "jeez, how could I have ever thought that?" However, and I am generally allergic to self-congratulation, but not everyone could have made the journey. Without a deep commitment to intellectual consistency and truth and simply thinking hard and long about things, I could not have made it.

However I think now my life journey as an intellectual Transformers action figure has now stabilized quite a lot. I am unlikely to make such drastic changes in direction in the future. What's true is true, and fundamental truth doesn't change.

Of Men and Tomatoes

 (This post is coming from someone who had a yield of exactly zero ripe tomatoes last year. I had big beautiful plants. I had flowers. No tomatoes. This post is actually not much about the care and feeding of tomatoes, and if I ever offer such please take it with a grain of salt. ;) )

Image by cogdogblog - https://www.flickr.com/photos/cogdog/5073842069/

 

There is, in essence, one right way to grow a tomato and all others are wrong. You either get a good harvest of tomatoes from what you are doing or you do not, so nature tells you when you are not following this one right way.

Now, that one right way may require different applications in variations of soil, nutrients, light and temperature, to achieve that one set of optimal conditions. No human being has ever read the secret user manual on tomatoes, revealing everything that the tomato needs to be happy and productive, but on the whole the science of tomato growing is fairly well known. The limits in OUR KNOWLEDGE (not the truth of the matter) are in the variability of conditions and genetics rendering experimental confirmation uncertain. I do not know whether it is known for a fact whether planting an aspirin tablet with your tomatoes increases yield. Some do it, some don't.

Tomatoes, as far as we know, do not have a social life. They do not chat with, love, or curse other tomatoes. If they did, then there would also be ONE TRUTH of the matter as to which social relations and rules were most constructive to tomato life and which more destructive. Our knowledge of that one truth would also be limited, just as our knowledge of their growth and productivity exists but is limited. On the whole however, the contents of the Tomato Social User's Manual could be approximated by science, if such social relations existed. Which, as far as we know, they don't.

HUMAN BEINGS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME WAY. There is one set of optimal conditions for human development, growth, strength, and intellectual improvement. Human beings, if you will, have a secret unseen instruction manual, and if you were able to read it and then followed it, what would result would be optimal human development and progress. Since humans are also social creatures, there is also ONE TRUTH of the matter of which social arrangements are most beneficial and which are not. The unseen Users Manual would include information on the most biologically beneficial conditions for humans, but also the most beneficial social rules and laws for them.

If you act contrary to the ONE TRUTH of how to grow good humans, there is no point in saying that your way is right for you. Your way is wrong, period, no equivocation about it. In this society you are free to be wrong, you are even free to cut your nads off and pretend to be a different sex, but this does not mean that your actions are not fundamentally destructive. They are destructive to YOU at a minimum, and to lots of other people and the social fabric potentially.

Just like with the tomatoes, there is ONE TRUTH of the matter of how to create biologically, intellectually, morally and socially prosperous humans. And all other ways are wrong. Period. There may not be agreement on what this one truth of the matter is, but if you deny that it even exists, you deny the evidence of your senses and indeed science that all living things have a set of needs and that some things are productive towards those needs and some things are not. You can argue all day long that pouring whiskey on tomato plants is good for them, but the evidence says otherwise. 

There exists an instruction manual for humans. It's called the TORAH: the first five books of the Bible. Now the Torah has instructions for other things too that are not currently relevant, like Tabernacle/Temple procedures, and instructions for things that were done in the past, like building the Ark of the Covenant. It also, interestingly, contains some environmental instructions. Instructions on how to deal with the natural world in ways that are constructive. However, among the instructions it contains are instructions on human biology (don't eat things that are bad for you or diseased,) human immunology (avoiding causes of disease,) and laws on human social relations. And these are laws that absolutely are the right ones, and any laws or instructions which contravene them are wrong, regardless of what anyone thinks about it.

Now back then they couldn't just have people sitting at computers for long periods of time typing and then print out all 6000 or whatever pages of a more complete instruction manual, but the existing instruction manual contains by implication enough information to reasonably piece out the whole thing. And the social instructions are pretty complete as is. Do not lie. Do not steal. Do not commit adultery. Do not covet what does not belong to you. Honor G-d. Honor parents.

If people did follow the instructions we have, this would be a drastically different world. They don't want to, and they really never wanted to, but the instructions are there.

They could be followed, if people wanted to.

Babel

 

 As is always the case, the stories of the Bible repeat themselves in history. They resonate like echoes in history. I don't think that there is any story in the Bible that doesn't. Cain and Abel isn't just a story about two brothers with bad blood. It is telling itself today. The stories keep telling themselves over and over.

This is the Time of Babel. Now you may say, I don't notice a bunch of people suddenly speaking different languages. Well you might not be paying attention. They are, even if the language roots are the same. But what does everyone suddenly speaking different tongues signify?

Their MINDS are different. Their mentality is different. Their very souls have become different. And suddenly we have gone from one country, to everyone is their own separate territory. Some as little akin to me as a space alien would be.

The Time of Babel is a time of confusion. That is the core idea of it. And what have the last three years been, but confusion? For me, the vaccine is a piece of performance art whose technology is powered by the stolen flesh of murdered children. You do not take the product of the stolen flesh of murdered babies into yourself. For someone else perhaps, it is pragmatism and "science" and how dare you not take it. For me, the quarantines and social distancing and shutting down social meeting spaces is tyranny. For others, it is safe and pragmatic and how dare you not mask?

Which of course, is not required anymore because confusion is nothing if not inconsistent.

Tyranny in Canada. How messed up is that? CANADA! Yet they are doing the things that tyrants do: freezing bank accounts, throwing people in jail on trumped up charges, making people unpersons. That is what we have been made, unpersons. To the people at CNN and NBC, the problem is people like me. Not them, no no no. Not the elites who actually rule and have been destroying this country with their corruption and their wickedness, their absolute sickness.

And those who cancel words and "unperson" people will sooner or later throw them in camps and burn people too. And we are back to the WWII era all over again, when scapegoats were approved for the masses and then ritualistically butchered. The colossal burnt offering to science and human materialist ideology in the 1930's becomes the colossal burnt offering to science and human materialist ideology in 2030, potentially. Demon worship and madness.

We cannot even agree that men are men and women are women anymore, that your biological reality is in fact reality. We cannot agree that math is math and not colonialism. We cannot agree that children should not be taught that it is okay to cut their genitals off and become a figment of imagination. We are living in the time of Babel.

However, reality has not changed. There is One G-d and one truth of the matter, and it does not matter how many people recognize it or not. That is how you survive Babel, you hold on to the one truth, truth which has never changed.

People in cities are cut off from nature so they think it does not apply to them anymore. They are living in "Meta-verses," man-made fictitious realities, both literal in terms of Facebook's Meta and metaphorically. But the only truth of matters is not abolished thereby, and sooner or later it snaps back.

Sooner or later truth destroys fiction.