Things that Matter, Really?

The 2013 book “Things that Matter” by Dr. Charles Krauthammer is a must-read. It is a “window into the master polemicist’s habits, mind and technique”. It is an eye-opener on so many “things that matter” the way he saw it.

My particular interest was in Democratic Realism (2004) ,A Unipolar World, pp. 334-351. Here, he gave a persuasive argument why USA must embrace “democratic realism”.

Accordingly, he posits that post WW I/II, and Cold War, ended “everything— the end of communism, socialism, of the Cold War and of the European (and Pacific war)”. But, “it was also the beginning of a “unipolar world” where USA has “unipolar power”, a “single superpower unchecked by any rival and with decisive reach in every corner of the world”. What to do with that power becomes a challenge that was “so new, so strange, that we have no idea how to deal with it… our first reaction was utter confusion…the next reaction was awe”.

Paul Kennedy saw what America (at a distance of 8,000 miles) did in the Afghan war; nothing has ever existed like this disparity of power, not Charlemagne empire confined merely to Western Europe in its reach, not even the Roman empire, great empire in Persia and a larger one in China”.

We are “unlike Rome, Britain, France Spain and other empires of modern times in that we do not hunger for territory”; the “use of empire in an American context is ridiculous” since our demand upon arriving in foreign soil was an “exit strategy”.

For “five centuries, the Europeans, as in Lawrence of Arabia, did hunger for deserts, jungles, oceans and new continents. Americans do not; we like it here: McDonald’s, football, rock and roll, GrandCanyon , Graceland, Silicon Valley and South Beach…Las Vegas, Iowa corn , NY hot dogs and if we want Chinese or Indian or Italian food, we went to food court; we don’t send the marines for takeout.” That’s because we are not an “imperial power but a commercial republic in that we don’t just take food ; instead we trade for it”.

By “pure accident of history, (USA) has been designated custodian of the international system. The eyes of every supplicant from East Timor to Afghanistan, from Iraq to Liberia, Arab and Israeli, Irish and British, North and South Korea are upon us.”

What to do?

Dr Krauthammer then enumerated and analyzed each one, what to his mind were options we have as a nation:

1. Isolationism: To “hoard that power and retreat ; the oldest pedigree as we are isolated by 2 vast oceans” . It is an “ideology of fear of the other, withdrawal from our military and strategic commitments around the world”, except for self-defense as in the Afghanistan war. It is “radical retrenchment of American power—pulling up the drawbridge to Fortress America”. But, aside from “brutal intellectual reductionism, it is obviously inappropriate to the world of today with the reality of no barriers brought on by modern technology” (that would have exposed us to another 9/11); this is “not just intellectually obsolete , it is politically bankrupt as well…moribund and marginalized.”

2. Liberal internationalism: This was in the 1990’s, the “foreign policy of the Democrat Party and the religion of foreign policy elite”. It traces its “pedigree to Woodrow Wilson’s Utopianism, Harry Truman’s anti-communism and John F. Kennedy’s militant universalism”. But, after the Vietnam war, it was “transmuted into an ideology of passivity, acquiescence and almost reflexive anti-interventionism”. In the 1980’s, they gave us “nuclear freeze movement, a form of unilateral disarmament in the face of Soviet nuclear advances. This “liberal passivity in the last half of the Cold War was so militant that outlived the Cold War”. When Kuwait was invaded, the question was “Should the US go to war to prevent the Persian Gulf from falling into hostile hands?” The Democrat Party joined the Buchananite isolationists in saying “no”; “Democrats voted 2/1 in the House and more than 4/1 in the Senate.” And yet, quite astonishingly, when “liberal internationalism came to power just 2 years later in the form of Clinton Administration, it turned almost hyperinterventionist, as in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia and Kosovo.” The “doves” of Cold War and Gulf War transmutated into Haiti/Balkan “hawks” for “humanitarian interventionism” devoid of “national interests”; morally pristine “to justify the use of force”. The “history of the 1990’s refutes the lazy notion that liberals have an aversion to the use of force —they do not”. Instead, the “aversion is in the use of force for reasons of pure national interest, which is not a “simple self-defense as in Afghanistan, but as defined by a Great Power: shaping international environment by projecting power abroad to secure economic, political and strategic goods”. Thus, “no” to Kuwait which merely is a form of “grand national self-interest and “yes” to Kosovo (as a humanitarian use of force). The “other defining feature of Clinton foreign policy was multilateralism expressed in a mania of treaties, viz., anti-ballistic missile treaty amendments aimed squarely at American advances and strategic defenses, Kyoto Protocol exempted China and India, nuclear test ban seriously degraded American nuclear arsenal”. The “whole point of multilateral enterprises is to reduce American freedom of action by making it subservient to, dependent on, constricted by the will and interests —-of other nations. In other words, “ to tie down Gulliver with a thousand strings”. It manifests itself “ in the slavish pursuit of international legitimacy —that opposes American action without universal foreign blessing”, i.e., of the UN, Security Council or “allies”. Do we lack “moral legitimacy” because our action lacks the blessing of the “butchers of Tiananmen Square or the cynics of the Quai d’Orsay?” This liberal internationalism is misplaced “higher moral standing”. The “liberal aversion to national interest” stems from an idealism, a larger vision of country, a vision of some ambition and nobility—-the ideal of a “true international community”; and not anti-Americanism, or lack of patriotism or a late efflorescence of 1960’s radicalism. In short, it is a transformation from the “very idea of state power and national interest into a democratized international system where all live under self-governing international institutions and self-enforcing international norms”. And, this requires abolishing “American dominance”.

3. Realism; recognizes the fundamental fallacy in the whole idea of the international system being modeled on domestic society. This is so because domestic society is held together by “supreme central authority wielding a monopoly of power and enforcing norms “ that in international arena is nonexistent. It “rests on shared goodwill, civility and common values of its individual members” which is a fiction as all nominal members of “international community” are not really shared. It is an “illusion to think that relations with all nations, regardless of ideology, culture, even of open hostility can be transacted on EU model of suasion, norms , negotiations, and solemn contractual agreements.” The realist believes the definition of peace Ambrose Bierce offered in The Devil’s Dictionary: “Peace in international affairs is a period of cheating between two periods of fighting.” The reality is that the stability we enjoy today is owed to the overwhelming power and deterrent threat of the USA. Those “uneasy with American power have made preemption and unilateralism the focus of unrelenting criticism—attacked for violating international norms. Realism is a valuable antidote to the wooly internationalism of the 1990’s but one cannot live by power alone. Our “foreign policy must be driven by something beyond power and America cannot and will not live by realpolitik alone.”

4. Democratic Globalism: foreign policy that defines national interest not as power but as values and that identifies what JFK called the “success of liberty”. This is the US foreign policy that guided this decade(2004). The credo is “beyond power, beyond interest and beyond interest defined as power.” This is a “value-driven foreign policy” that seeks the “advance of freedom and the peace that freedom brings.” Its attractiveness is precisely that it shares realism’s insights about centrality of power and has appropriate contempt for the fictional legalisms of liberal internationalism. The spread of democracy is not just an end but a means , an indispensable means for securing American interests. And, the reason is simple as democracies are inherently more friendly to the USA, less belligerent to their neighbors and generally more inclined to peace. Realists are right that to protect your interests you often have to go around bashing bad guys over the head. But even that has limits; at some point, you have to implant something organic and self-developing. And that something is democracy, but where?

5. Democratic Realism

The danger of democratic globalism is its universalism, it’s open-ended commitment to human freedom, it’s temptation to plant the flag of democracy everywhere. It must learn to say “No” or “Yes” depending on this axiom:

“We will support democracy everywhere, but will commit blood and treasure only in places where there is a strategic necessity— meaning, places central to the larger war against the existential enemy, the enemy that poses a global mortal threat to freedom”

Where does it count? “Fifty years ago, Germany and Japan counted” because of the global threat of fascism. Today, the new existential enemy is Arab-Islamic totalitarianism that has threatened us in both its secular and religious forms for the quarter-century since the Khomeni revolution of 1979.

Will Middle East democratic change lead to peace like flipping Germany and Japan, thus changing the strategic balance in the fight against Arab-Islamic radicalism? The “undertaking is enormous, ambitious and arrogant …a bridge too far, and may yet fail.” But, “we cannot afford to try.” It is not about “taking out one man” (or others with him) as it is a belief-system that is a “cauldron of political oppression, religious intolerance and social ruin in the Arab-Islamic world—transmuted into virulent, murderous anti-Americanism”. This is “war and in war, arresting murderers is nice; but “you win by taking territory—-and leaving something behind”.

He summarized these 5 options with:

Isolationism ignores unipolarity, pulls up the drawbridge, defends Fortress America; but current technology makes moat unrealistic. Liberal internationalism is aware of unipolar power but using it for anything other than humanitarianism or reflexive self-defense is an expression of national selfishness; it yields that power piece-by-piece by subsuming ourselves in a global architecture in which America becomes, not an arbiter of international events, but a good and tame international citizen. Realism understands this new unipolarity and its use—unilateral and preemptive if necessary; but it fails because it offers no vision; has all means but no ends and cannot define our mission. Democratic globalism rallied the American people to struggle over values, vindicates American idea by making the spread of democracy the success of liberty, the ends and means of American foreign policy, though it needs temperance. On the other hand, Democratic realism is targeted, focused and limited; we are friends to all but we come ashore only when it really counts. Arab-Islamic fundamentalism with Iran as head of the Beast, does not draw back and seeks nirvana in dying for their cause; the rationality of the enemy is beyond our control; but use of our power is within our control. And “if that power is used wisely, constrained not by illusions and fictions but only by the limits of our mission—-which is to bring a modicum of freedom as an antidote to nihilism—we can prevail”.

My Take

All the preceding enumerated options have one thing in common: they depend on any human endeavor, ability to discern on their own and wisdom to decide precisely, timely and consistently the correct path to take. Even the Hobbesian and Lockean philosophy depend on human’s intellect and wisdom to decide. In that predicate and fundamental basis, they also suffer as a specific and particular human(Jesus Christ) is needed to start the process. As written in Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

International order that comes with an “ideal government”, will not be achieved until the “kingdom of God” is established. And this was known, planned for from the beginning of time and promised in an “unwritten covenant” to start with a “human trailblazer” embodied in the “gospel” of the true and credible witness

Man is composed of flesh which is “weak” and needs to be changed and “equipped”. It was a “perfect clay” when made but “got marred” by sin so the Potter has to re-make it. And this process will come and is coming through the aegis of God’s empowering Holy Spirit in-dwelling in us, individually making up eventually collectively, and expanding worldwide.

Summary

The world has to be “one” with one another. But with much diversity in interests, needs, wants and expectations that are inherent among humans, this is a “dilemma” that cannot be resolved until the focus veers away from each other and on “change of mind” from within. Undoubtedly, “oneness” is with the Father and through this mechanism will we be “one” with one another. Even God timed it well, viz., Yahweh be incarnated as human Jesus, receive the Holy Spirit of power himself at River Jordan to develop, be guided and empowered, die for our sins to reconcile us with the Father, to be the trailblazer and builder, resurrected to receive the gift of Holy Spirit to be given to us individually at “time appointed” also for our spiritual growth and development, his return and 1st spirit-bodied resurrection to start the Millenium by defeating the proximate existential enemy the Beast, then after the Millenium to defeat Gog and Magog, Satan and evil angels, then the new heaven and earth. All of these events take planning, timing and patience to give rise to a “new world order”—-the kingdom of God.

Dr Charles Krauthammer passed at age 68 on June 21, 2018 as a consequence of small bowel cancer. Our deepest condolences to the bereaved wife, family, friends and readers worldwide. He will be resurrected at the “time appointed” for him. And, at that time his mind will open up to the truth that his ideals will only be achieved consistent with God’s plan. This book is a capitulation of his decades as a columnist, his legacy to all of us.

On the other hand, the man-Jesus died 2,000 years ago and the only human that resurrected into life with an immortal body. His legacy that lasts as a human on earth is embodied in his gospel.

This is our “destiny” that was planned out of God’s love.

“Things that really matter” take us to the “bottomline”, wrapped in code word “salvation” which is a process that takes time. This is the “legacy that lasts” .

🙏😇😊

Original post: April 28, 2020. A very special “stay-at-home” day for me.

Please tap on hyperlink to expand the underlying fundamentals.

Acknowledgement: Immense gratitude to my wife, Evelyn, for giving me this book to read and learn , thereby providing me an opportunity to post alternative take on the subject.

Predestination, what really was pre-destined?

Predestination is a topic that is controversial among theological circles. To begin with, “Basically, predestination is the belief that God has predetermined who will receive salvation and who will not. Sometimes the term is used to refer not only to salvation, but to express the idea that God is in control of the universe in general, even over mundane things.”

The predicate comes from the principle of God’s sovereignty and omniscience which no one can deny, although the interpretation of these teachings needs context and reflects God’s wisdom. Is it really about “who will receive salvation” or the timetable when the power gifted to Jesus towards the process of salvation that all of us have to go through, starting with the “trailblazer”?

And, intrinsic to this topic are many questions. If someone commits suicide, was that predestined? How about calamities, accidents, cancer, sickness, injuries, were those destiny, too? If a person becomes poor, rich or otherwise, is that destiny. Or, a profession or job of a person? And, for that matter, your spouse, children, divorce etc.? If everything is predetermined, where is the role of freewill and choice?

Remember Newton’s 3rd law of motion? For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. Indeed, there are consequences with what we do and some can be predictable as secondary to what we did. Nevertheless, undoubtedly, some have been done by Lord God himself directly or indirectly through angels and some are prophesied by prophets for the future.

This really can be complicated. But, how did this topic become a religious tenet?

Predestination origin

In Romans 8:28–30, Paul writes, “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.”

From the above verses, the “assumption” was that those called are justified and glorified, automatically. What was missed was the emphasis on “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son,” which is futuristic and aspirational; it was not automatic. To be “conformed to be the image of his Son” is a process that takes time.

It is all about “timing”. Predestined time to have the first opportunity to receive the Holy Spirit was alluded to in the narrative about the firstfruits and latterfruits“. God has chosen who will “be calledat their own time, like in Israel harvest for the “first(spring), and latter summer and fall harvest”. These harvests are opportunities that God provides to receive the empowering in-dwelling Holy Spirit. Jesus was the “first of the firstfruits, Jesus, being the “wave sheaf offering”(NLT), first order of resurrection.From Pentecost through the first trump“, humans are receiving the Holy Spirit of power to guide, protect and sanctify the elect“, the firstfruits, the first (after Jesus) to resurrect as “spirit-composed living beings“. Then the latterfruitsduring and after the Millenium

Summary

Predestination is a controversial subject that needs to be understood and drawn out clearly and specifically from its complexity. While God historically has power to act anytime, every time and on all people, his wisdom enables him to be deliberative and precise in his judgment and action. True, those he prophesied will undoubtedly happen as an end-point but not necessarily every step-of-the-way. Not everything that happens is because God wills it to be, otherwise, why fault man? His omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence does not preclude “time and chance happen to all”,

Predestination is not about who will “actually and finally receive salvation. Instead, predestination is the time at which the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit will occur on a person, individually. On the other hand, salvation is based, not only on the “gift of in-dwelling” at a particular predetermined time, but also on the freewill and choice made by the person to follow its guidance to be “one with the Father”. Moreover, predestination is about the time at which this power was gifted to Jesus in the “ongoing creation” of other humans which requires a process of salvation. This is how Jesus became the Son of God and those after him will be “conformed to the image of his Son”

God bless😊🙏😇

Original post: April 14, 2020

Please tap on hyperlinks for references.

When to re-open with fear/panic of Covid-19, May 1, if:

When to re-open?

When to re-open? Requisites and action plan, just thoughts from a humble CVT surgeon, not an ID-specialist/expert:

Open by May 1, 2020 if:

1. Number of cases and deaths continue to decline by data the past 2 weeks. Bend/flatten the curve and level it off

2. To enhance trust and move away from “fear/panic”, all healthcare workers (including first-responders and volunteers exposed to general population) must be tested; if + and asymptomatic or with mild-moderate symptoms,then stay-at-home and follow guidelines to prevent transmission. If -, then continue to take care of patients and people. Before reporting for office-work, all non-healthcare workers,must be tested and if + or -, follow same. Guidelines to be followed by business and consumers.

3. For business, use rolling process, sector-specific and state/local specific depending on risk of exposure. This has to be modifiable as changes may have to be made along the way. Those business that can be done on-line continues.

4. All (people/business) must continue the best they can to follow POTUS45’s Coronavirus Task Force guidelines.

5. Most importantly, continue to pray for God’s blessing of safety, protection and guidance.

Original post: April 14, 2020

Please tap on hyperlinks for references.

Why have you forsaken me?

During this Lent season, many are asking about the meaning of Matthew 27:46About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).

Was Jesus forsaken by the Father?

Already, many shared their take on this verse and it is appropriate at this time to review them. The late Billy Graham said, “And in that moment He was banished from the presence of God, for sin cannot exist in God’s presence. His cry speaks of this truth; He endured the separation from God that you and I deserve

Another take on the subject is contrary, viz. “No, God did not forsake His Son,”

And others have their various understanding on the subject with reasons behind it.

Considering all the reasons for which well-known preachers based their interpretations, they all come down to these facts:

1. Sin separates us from God. Verses to ponder:

Isaiah 59:2But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear.”

2 Thessalonians 1:9“Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Romans 3:23 – “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Isaiah 53:6 – “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”

Romans 6:23 – “For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Matthew 25:41 – “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:”

Romans 5:12 – “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:”John 3:3“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God”.

Isaiah 59:1-2 – “Behold, the LORD’S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: (Read More…)


Acts 17:30 – “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:”

John 3:36 – “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

2. Jesus was accounted as the chosen man to represent humanity and to whom the consequence of sin (death) will be imputed for our reconciliation with the Father. He is the “sweet savor/aroma/fragrant offering that the Father required. Verses to ponder:

2 Corinthians 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Romans 5:12-21 “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification”

Ephesians 5:2And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.”

2 Corinthians 2:15 “For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing,”

. Genesis 8:21And when the Lord smelled the pleasing aroma, the Lord said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth. Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done” (Here is a projection into the future, that God choses who will be saved at their own time.)

3. Jesus will not be forsaken forever but will be remembered as promised. Verses to ponder:

Isaiah 49:15-16: “Can a woman forget her nursing child And have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, but I will not forget you. “Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands; Your walls are continually before Me.

Hebrews 8:12For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

Summary

Taking all verses into consideration , it becomes clear that the controversy about whether Jesus was forsaken by the Father or not, depends on time-duration, i.e., whether it is “temporary or permanent”. Theologians on either side of this issue are both correct although context was missing. Truly, sin separates us from God, who had forsaken us , although temporarily as planned and not permanently. Since Jesus bore our sins” to die as a consequence thereof, the Father likewise had to forsake him at the cross. Be that as it was, God remembered the promises projected from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc to his promise to Jesus before the foundation of the world. Our reconciliation by the death of Jesus, and his resurrection to life fulfilled those promises.

And, this promise included giving him the gift of the Holy Spirit that will empower him for our “ongoing creation. As Jesus was resurrected to eternal life, we will also be at “time-appointed” predestined as to our promised in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit”.

God Bless🙏😇

Original post: April 8, 2020 Crucifixion day till sunset and before the Passover meal

Please tap the hyperlink for references.

Critique is welcome

Husband and wife fight, why?

Fighting may be physical but mostly a verbal or rhetorical disagreements with one another. It may involve essential-to-living issues, but can include petty ones. This happens among spouses, with loving cultural and religious background, irrespective of sexuality. Just imagine, multiply this by population and you have the whole humanity’s woes to deal with,

Differences are resolved in many ways. Ideally, they talk about their disputes and resolve them amicably, hoping for the best, and only to find themselves back later in the same conversational rut. Some use “taking-deep-breath and move-on strategy”, ignoring the problem, staying mum, “spouse-distancing” and the like. Others enjoin the help of psychologist, psychiatrist and marriage counselor, but still may end up in divorce with its own inherent challenges.

Cause of a Fight?

Fighting is not limited to spouses. Even those without spousal relationship are not immune to disputes. But, why? What causes people to fight? Paul in James 4:1 “What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you?”

It is “desires/temptations that battle within ..”. Therefore, it is our action whether to take “right or left of the fork as Yogi Berra famously said.

Proverbs 29:22 “An angry person starts fights; a hot-tempered person commits all kinds of sin. Pride ends in humiliation, while humility brings honor.

And to stay away from fighting, many biblical refrains and advices are given, viz.,,

2 Timothy 2:24, Colossians 3:8; Ephesians 4:31; 1 Peter 2:1-3; Galatians 5:19-25; Proverbs 24:29; Romans 12:17-19; Romans 12:20-21; Matthew 5:39; Luke 6:29-31; Proverbs 17:9; 1 Peter 4:8-10; Ephesians 4:32; Matthew 6:14-15; Matthew 5:23-24; 2 Timothy 2:24; Psalm 37:8

With the advices and reasons given from the preceding references, still, are we empowered to act as God wants us to do?

But how to do? Aren’t ”they shall be one”?

Aren’t they supposed to be “one” as prophesied in Genesis? One with each other or “one with God”? So many things can be done by each other to be “one”. Talking, knowing, acknowledging each other’s needs, wants , expectations and just give in to one another can be a solution to be “one with each other”. As the good book says, love is giving your life( it preferences/predilections) to each other.

With many and diverse differences with males and females, genetically, anatomically, intellectually, emotionally, culturally, behaviorally and perception of what is at hand and confronting them, will this approach (doable as they maybe with patience and love), will this approach be sustainable? Are we really “empowered” to do that?

So, could it be with someone else and into that someone, that they have to be “one” with, not with each other?

In-dwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Galatians 5:16-18 “So I tell you, live the way the Spirit leads you. Then you will not do the evil things your sinful self wants. The sinful self wants what is against the Spirit, and the Spirit wants what is against the sinful self. They are always fighting against each other, so that you don’t do what you really want to do. But if you let the Spirit lead you, you are not under law”

Ephesians 6:13-15 “Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.” This “armor of God” has been identified to be the Holy Spirit that bears “fruits” as enumerated.

Ephesians 6:12 “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.” Our battle is against evil temptations and following the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we will overcome.

The above references punctuate the need for in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit at the time appointed for our “ongoing creation” and by a process started in and by Jesus Christ for our “salvation”, i.e., our immortality, and being “one with the Father”. Yes, “with the Father”.

This is what is spoken to also in James 1:12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.”

Summary

Disputes, misunderstanding, conflicts happen, not only to spouses but a “bane to humanity”. There are many interventions we can do to be reconciled with one another, especially with our spouse;those actions are salutary and we must continue on doing. But, while there are human ways to resolve the problem, our abilities are limited as there are so many permutations inherent in our creation. It has been planned to be solved by God, with what is “sweet savor” to him and through a process that started in and by Jesus Christ. The admonition of Paul takes on a new meaning when he said, “ follow me as I follow Christ”. In other words, let us be oneas Christ is one with the Father”. No longer should the question be whether either spouse is right or wrong on the issue . Instead, the question should be, “what does Jesus say about this issue that divides us”? Oneness is with the Father as prophesied in the “wedding of the Lamb and the Church” in Revelations. With this “oneness”, our own deficiency will be “non sequitur”.

We are thankful for this strategic plan laid out from the foundation of the world, truly the “destiny of man”.

God Bless🙏😇😊

Original Post: April 1,2020

Please tap on the hyperlink for references.