Projection for the Economy 2020/Covid-19 year.

My humble take on the future of the economy:

Bottom line: it will recover sooner than later because there is no “structural weakness in the economy “ that moves money away from pockets of consumers and business.

The strength of the economic structure and foundation was enhanced by Trumponomics with laws enacted the last 3 years . It is based on instituting reforms on regulatory impediments that stifle business growth, lower tax on federal personal income, business and investment, USA FIRST policy providing incentives to manufacture in USA, repatriation, border control to prevent illegal immigration and illegal drugs, trade policies based towards “fair and reciprocal trade”, reciprocal tariff, foreign expenses to “allies” right-sized relative to fairness, strengthening USA military and NATO, prison reforms, outreach program to minorities, “Right to Try”, foreign affairs policies, etc.

Congress and Federal Reserves are ready to support “whatever it takes”.

It may not be V-recovery but can be W-recovery.

Self-interest towards risk-rewards will dominate people’s actions. Tiptoeing into #OUAA (OpenUpAmericaAgain)and #TTG (TransitionToGreatneas) is starting and will continue. Every old/new case is bad but Covid-19 cases will increase because of increased testing and transmission leading to “herd immunity. But, mortality rate will still be 5-6% and per USA population will still be <1%. Preventive, protective and treatment modalities against SARS-CoV-2 will accelerate. All these factors will bend-down, level-off Fear/Panic; that “initiated lockdown”; thus will “power up the markets, business, consumers and all engines of US and global economy”.

Ultimate endpoints will be determined by “who wants USA” to succeed or fail? Who will be proud to wear the monicker “home of the brave” and evaluate rightly or wrongly “risk-vs-rewards” within the context of 1 A.

God bless🙏😇

Original post:May 17, 2020

Please tap on hyperlinks for references.

Holy Eucharist, What is the Message?

From an official Catholic teaching “The Holy Eucharist (aka, giving thanks to God) is a sacrament and a sacrifice… under the appearances of bread and wine, the Lord Christ is contained, offered, and received.

It is common for Christians to observe this tradition on a daytime every Sunday as others have come to do. Some celebrate this occasion on the night of Nisan 14, while most Jews do this on the night of Nisan 15 of the Jewish calendar on the first day of Unleavened Bread. We were advised by Christ himself to continue as in “do this in remembrance of me”. Notice that the event is to be remembered and that the bread and wine, respectively, represent his body and blood shed for all of us.

A common predicate of this teaching is in

John 6:50-59 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.  I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

Note that anyone who eats the “manna” as the partriarchs did and died, so will all who eat the “natural bread” that represented the flesh and drink the “blood” will also die. It is not the natural bread and wine, but the “living bread” that should be taken in, as in-dwelling of Jesus by “spiritual in-dwelling in the mind/spirit-of-man”.

 The above “bread/flesh-and-blood” is a “metaphor, an analogy , a figure of speech highlighted in:

Luke 22:9 “And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

It is an occasion to proclaim Jesus’ death, resurrection and his 2nd coming as the apostle Paul recorded in 1 Corinthians 11:23–26:

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you:The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

As vital as they are, still, all of these remained symbolic proclamation and nothing else. Any extension beyond that can be controversial .

The tangential question posed, refers to whether there is really “transubstantiation” of Jesus’ actual “blood and body” into the natural bread and wine? Is there “communion” between Christ and bread/wine or, by this teaching, are we missing out on the “real communion? Or, is there another meaning of “transubstantiation” that we need to understand. Did “All Christians, with but few minor exceptions, hold the true doctrine of the Real Presence from the time of Christ until the Protestant Revolution in the sixteenth century? To get to the bottom of that question requires going back in history. And, this is not an exercise to “shame, berate, discredit, minimize” those who believe in transubstantiation or anything similar. Instead this is an honest and respectful quest for what really is the message of this tradition.

History of “Breaking of a Bread

In the Jewish calendar, the day includes the darkness-part when it starts and daylight-part when it ends from “evening to evening or sunset to sunset”. Biblically, the “passover meal” every year occurs on the night or beginning of Nisan 15, the first day of Unleavened Bread, which is in itself commemorated for 7 days. In contrast, the timing of Jesus’ “last supper” was nighttime of Nisan 14, the night of his betrayal by Judas. This was also the night before Jesus was crucified which was on the daytime of Nisan 14, the preparation day of Passover; “preparation” in the sense of preparing the lamb for killing and for people to prepare the meal that night. And, this was done obviously because he could not eat the “passover meal” on the night of Nisan 15, even when he “eagerly desired” as he would be crucified the day before. Jesus said in Luke 15:22 to express his intention:

And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer.

Instead of eating the traditional passover lamb on the night or start of Nisan 15, Jesus commanded his disciples to prepare the meal on the night or beginning of Nisan 14.

Since then, his disciples have continued this commemoration of Passover meal on the night of Nisan 15, every year and not on the night of Nisan 14. And, it goes without saying that they commemorated Nisan 14, the “preparation day” as the day of Jesus’ crucifixion when the “true Lamb of God was sacrificed”, as in:

At that time no small controversy arose because all the dioceses of Asia thought it right, as though by more ancient tradition, to observe for the feast of the Saviour’s passover the fourteenth day of the moon, on which the Jews had been commanded to kill the lamb.” (Eusebius, Church History, Ch. XXIII.)

Early church fathers like Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, Tertulian, Origen and Augustine were thought to have taught by other historians to have embraced transubstantiation. In actuality, according to Nathan Busenitz, they may have misinterpreted the meaning of their writings at that time when there were people who rejected the incarnation and humanity of Jesus; they may have believed that the bread and wine as symbols.

Other historians noted absence of transubstantiation teaching since Jesus “broke bread”. When did it start, then?

Berengar of Tours, French theologian rejected the then-current view of transubstantiation credited to the 9th-century abbot of Corbie, St. Paschasius Radbertus, who professed that the bread and wine, after consecration in the mass, became the real body and blood of Christ. 

Most well-known and influential work of St. Paschasius, De Corpore et Sanguine Domini (written between 831 and 833), is an exposition on the nature of the Eucharist. In it, Paschasius agrees with 4th century anti-Arianism Bishop of Milan Ambrose (Aurelius Ambrosius) in affirming that the Eucharist contains the true, historical body of Jesus Christ. He thus believed that the transubstantiation of the bread and wine offered in the Eucharist really occurred. “Only if the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ can a Christian know it is salvific.”

So, it appears that it may have been a teaching of the 4th century, like the teaching of “trinity” at the Council of Nicea. The affirmation of this doctrine was expressed, using the word “transubstantiate”, by the Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215 and extended through the 9th century to this day.

Altogether, transubstantiation does not appear to be based on original or actual teaching. Rather, it has evolved from perception and interpretation.

What is the truth and message?

It was about the “transubstantiation of Jesus, not into the natural bread and wine, but into the mind/spirit-of-man” by the “spirit- power” given to him by the Father. It was his “in-dwelling in humans” by and through the power of the Holy Spirit. This is “power” unlike any other, e.g., gravity, mechanical, electric, nuclear, wind, solar powers we have learned through centuries and which was given first to man-Jesus at River Jordan and subsequently to his disciples specifically and generally to others at Pentecost and on. Without this power, he would not be able to re-mold and re-create the “marred clay” as in Jeremiah 18:3-6 and Isaiah 64:8 as the “kingdom of God” is being created.

The “breaking of bread” on that night of Nisan 14, is the “breaking of his body and giving his blood at crucifixion to die; it was to proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes back.” to in-dwell in humans. It expressed what was planned from the foundation of the world.

This is a plan for the future in-dwelling of Christ in us but only after his death and resurrection and receiving that power from the Father. This in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit in humans first occurred to our “trailblazer and origin of our faith/salvation“, Jesus Christ, then to his disciples and subsequently to others in a general way, from Pentecost on. It was not about “transubstantiation of Jesus into the natural bread and wine,” which detracts and distracts from his actual plan for mankind.

Summary

The Eucharist is a major teaching of Christianity that must be commemorated. It has to be remembered but as to the day and time, there was no specific mandate to follow for that Nisan 14, except the Passover meal on the beginning or night of Nisan 15. But the message can not be ignored nor sidelined. Transubstantiation of Jesus into natural bread and wine is an interpretation that detracts and distracts from the actual message and process of “in-dwelling” of Christ in humans ( in the real you) through the Holy Spirit of power.

This transubstantiation” is actual “in-dwelling of Jesus by the empowering Holy Spirit in the mind“, the “spirit-of-man”. And, this is an ongoing process from the time of man-Jesus’ receiving the Holy Spirit of power from the Father and subsequently ( ldeclared as Son of God” by the resurrection from the dead)to be given to us. Remember what John said, “He will baptize you in Spirit”. Instead of transubstantiation into natural bread-and-wine, the message of Eucharist is Jesus in-dwelling in humans at predestined time appointed. , with the goal of “oneness” and “ongoing creation”, the “real communion with God“.

God bless 🙏😇

Original post: May 14, 2020

Please tap on hyperlinks for references.

Critique is welcome at foundationacts@yahoo.com

The Message of Christmas

Throughout the world, most of those in the Christian world celebrate December 25 as the birth of Jesus. However, some have it acknowledged as dating that momentous event sometime in September or thereabouts. While my personal leaning is this September date as the historic and biblical events are compelling and harmonized, the emphasis by some on date, pales in significance the “good news” (gospel) of what this date was about.

Whatever the true date was, the message should not be lost as one celebrates Christ’s birthday. What really is the message?

Incarnation

A major teaching that can not be relegated to the dustbin of history, is that the YHVH-Creator gave up his spirit-composition and spiritual powers to come as a human (man-Jesus) on this earth, in Bethlehem. This he did to fulfill the eternal plan of the Father for him to start, by being human, the process of salvation of humanity from eternal death. His advent as a human was prophesied hundreds of years before Jesus was even born. More than 300 prophecies were recorded to tell of His coming and repeated in:

Matthew 1:21New International Version
“She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.

Devoid of “spirit-in-dwelling” and therefore lack of spirit-powers, this “anthropos/man/human Jesus” (I Timothy 2:5) nevertheless followed all the commandments on his own human/mortal powers , much like man/anthropos-Job who was “blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil”

The difference is, that while Job “came from the dust of the ground like Adam and therefore earthy“, Jesus originated from above and therefore heavenly“. Being both “blameless, upright and perfect in his ways“, still, both of them died; Job died because of imputed/counted sin of one man Adam whereas Jesus died because of sins of all humans from Adam on. And, the most crucial and defining difference between them, while being both humans, was that Job did not receive the “in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit”, before he died, whereas Jesus did at baptism after coming out of water baptism in river Jordan. Therefore, all the goodness of Job was not what the Father required; not the “fruits that come from flesh, though righteous they may be. Only the Father God decides what is a “savor and favorable to him” that pleased him as explained in the narrative of “offering by Abel and Cain“. On the other hand, Jesus was gifted directly and fully with the Holy Spirit of power by the Father at River Jordan and subsequently all his works were “fruits of the Holy Spirit”, which are “offering” that pleased and accepted by the Father. And, he was the first human who received this gift as a trailblazer, author and beginner of our salvation.

Summary

This is the message of Christmas that YHVH-Creator, in Genesis, incarnated to be the first human, for him to be the author/trailblazer towards salvation from eternal death. As “anthropos/man-Jesus”, he was mortal, yet still classified as “god”, like any human (like Job) without spirit-powers until he was given at River Jordan, tempted and overcame Satan with that power, overcame the temptation at garden of Gethsemane, crucified and died (being mortal), resurrected and subsequently attained immortality. And after resurrection,(not before) he received the promised “Advocate/Comforter” to subsequently be given to us to empower us towards salvation, so shall other humans, being “in the body of a Christ“. We will not develop, overcome and mature to be born as “sons/daughters of God” without this “empowering Holy Spirit in/dwelling in us”.

All “overcomers” will be immortal spirit-composed beings like our “elder brother” Jesus ( in a twinkling of an eye) in the “kingdom of God”, not a kingdom of man/human mortal flesh. By being human himself as a “builder/pioneer“, El SHADDAI/YHVH-Creator Lord God, showed us the “way, truth and the life” about the process that humans can attain salvation, i.e., be “born of the flesh“, be empowered by the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit, sanctified, die as mortals, be resurrected, “born of the spirit with spirit-composed bodies” towards eternal life.

Indeed, Jesus is a “trailblazer”, the author and finisher” for all of us to follow his lead towards salvation through faith and grace of God.

God bless 😇🙏

Original post:December 25, 2019

Hyperlink version (please click on hyperlink)

Critique is welcome at foundationacts@yahoo.com

Temple is the Church: What, Why, Where and How to build it?

The world is in a dilemma: going to “church or not”, follow religious leaders to attend church mass/meeting or “stay-at-home” as mandated by “Caesar” to prevent transmission. Similarly this extends to decision-making about “life vs livelihood”

On this Holy Week 2020, church gathering has been advised against, due to “social-distancing” guideline to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2. On-line and other technological methods of providing church masses become a norm on this unprecedented time.

What Satan and atheists did not like to have and could not prevent, i.e., church gathering of believers, has been achieved by this “invisible enemy” through no fault of anybody. No more “social-bonding”, unlike before this global pandemic. Indeed, times have change.

Pre-2020 pandemic, many of us “go to church“. Some, 2-3 times a week while others attend once a week, consistently. Yet, for those who don’t go at all, many begin to wonder why others do and have made false assumptions in their thinking process, thus defaulting to “Hanson’s razor”. Why, and is there anything wrong with continuing to meet fellow believers in a church? At least for social bonding, while following guidelines? What about the risk of virus transmission? Or, instead forgoing traditional church attendance and still “attend” mass or service through other technological means like FaceTime or zoom? Responses by church leaders and lay members can be varied and everyone exercises or not 1A right; the ubiquitous consonance and dissonance continue to exist. Similarly, this extends to dilemma in choosing “life vs livelihood”.

Whatever, there should be no fault-finding nor finger-pointing among fellow believers as all actions have consequences, good or bad; still, avoid “confirmation bias”. This gives us a reason to delve into this subject of “temple is the church“. What, why, where is it and how to build it…really?

Church History and what is it?

The earliest form of a “temple/church” is called a “tabernacle” found in Exodus 25:8-9 and commanded by God to be built precisely according to the pattern, also as in Acts 7:44, Exodus 25:1-27:21 and Exodus 40:17-33.

The word tabernacle is an English rendition of the Hebrew word miskan, or “dwelling place”; also comes from the Hebrew word “ohel moed” or Tent of the congregation. More than 50 Chapters in the Bible were solely devoted to the tabernacle.

But even before the tabernacle was constructed, there was “tent of meeting” where God met with Moses as recorded in Exodus 33:7-9. Many assumed that God actually dwelt in it. But, notice this, that as Moses went into the tent, the pillar of cloud would come down and stay at the entrance, while the Lord spoke with Moses. Notice that Moses was “into” the tent but the Lord “was not”; the “pillar of cloud was at the entrance.”

This “tent of meeting” could be taken up and moved each time they changed locations while wandering in the wilderness. Other names in the Bible for the tent of meeting are the tabernacle of the congregation, wilderness tabernacle, tabernacle of witness, tent of witness, the tabernacle of Moses.

After the tabernacle was built about one year after leaving Egypt’s slavery, Moses no longer needed his temporary tent, and the term tent of meeting began to be applied to the tabernacle. This was the “tabernacle in the wilderness” before Israelites went to Canaan 400 years later.

In Exodus 25:22, it says “There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from the two cherubim that are on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you about all that I will give you in commandment for the people of Israel.” Here again, God was not “in” the temple but “from above the mercy seat”.

Numbers 9:15Now on the day that the tabernacle was erected the cloud covered the tabernacle, the tent of the testimony, and in the evening it was like the appearance of fire over the tabernacle, until morning.” Note: God was not “in” but “cloud covered the tabernacle” at daytime but at night it was “fire over the tabernacle”.

Moreover, the tabernacle was a temporary and portable dwelling place for the Ark of the Covenant and the other holy items that the Israelites were instructed to use in the worship of and sacrifice to Yahweh. It represents a portable earthly dwelling place of Yahweh (God) used by the children of Israel from the Exodus until the conquest of Canaan. This was then superseded by the Temple in Jerusalem when it was built by Solomon which was destroyed in 586 BCE by the Babylonians; was re-built in “stages” until destroyed by the Romans in 70 C.E. Currently, there is no 3rd Temple until prior to the 2nd return of Jesus Christ.

Noticeably, the “tent of meeting” and the “tabernacle” were representative of a mobile and temporary dwelling of God’s presence. And, while the original Jerusalem temple was stationary, it was destroyed as well as the 2nd Jerusalem temple, making them also temporary representation of God’s dwelling, although “not actual”. All of them were “types” until the “anti-type” is revealed.

What do they represent and why?

In the New Testament, Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:1–5 also mentioned the “tent of meeting” or the tabernacle, revealed the “anti-type” and compared it to the earthly human body:

For we know that if the tent that is our earthly home is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this tent we groan, longing to put on our heavenly dwelling, if indeed by putting it on we may not be found naked. For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee”.

From the preceding verses, one can see that all of them, i.e., tent of meeting, tabernacle and Temple in Jerusalem, represented our mobile and living temporary earthly mortal body that must be replaced. The tent/tabernacle/Temple represents our “home”, our “clothing” and without it, we are “unclothed or naked”. The narrative in Genesis 3:1-13 explains why Adam and Eve found themselves “naked”. This, they found themselves “naked/without clothing” as a consequence, only after they sinned and not before. It dawned on them about death of their mortal body and their “real you would be separated from that mortal body at death.

Again Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:2 referred to as “church”: To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be His holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ – their Lord and ours: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ”.

But, notice that God was never actually in any of these representations. So, where will God in-dwell?

Where does God actually in-dwell?

It is without doubt as to where the “dwelling place” of God is, in heaven as stated in 2 Chronicles 6:21. But, he also promised to “in-dwell” in man.

We know this mortal body is temporary and must be replaced. This “mortal body” is a “tent/tabernacle/Temple”, our “clothing” and without which we are “unclothed” or “naked”. And, that God promised to in-dwell at “time appointed”. Is this “temporary mortal body” where God promised to in-dwell?

Here are the verse-requisites of where actually God will “in-dwell”:

1. Not made by human hands as in Acts 7:48-49However, the Most High does not live in houses made by human hands. As the prophet says: “ ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me? says the Lord. Or where will my resting place be?

Remember, the “tent of meeting,tabernacle/Jerusalem 2 temples” were made by human hands and therefore God will not dwell there. Also, among the 2 components of man, only one directly comes from God himself. Here is where actually He will in-dwell, the “breath-of-life” aka “spirit-of-man; whereas, the other component came “from the ground, earthy”. And, this “in-dwelling” in man first happened at River Jordan to the “human trailblazer”, the “author/finisher”, man-Jesus Christ.

2. God has to “pitch it” himself as in Hebrews 8:2 “…true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.” Clearly, He choses where and He pitched it himself.

How does God “pitched” his church?

Now that the “anti-type” (the spirit/of-man) has been revealed, where God will in-dwell through the Holy Spirit and He did into the “first chosen human Jesus”, now comes the process how his church is going to be built.

Remember that Jesus said to Peter that on that identified “rock” , he will build his church. And, this is through the Holy Spirit that Jesus got for us only after his death and resurrection. Indeed, after this, he then breathe the Holy Spirit into his disciples and later generally to others he chose at Pentecost.

We have a stony heart that was why the Ten Commandments were given in “tables of stones”. But, the “stone” will be removed from our heart and back to flesh as the Holy Spirit will open our eyes and ears by in-dwelling in the “spirit-of-man”(mind) to discern spiritual truths. Only with the guidance of the Holy Spirit will anyone “see, hear” spiritual truth. Then will be fulfilled on an individual basis as chosen by God, the prophesy in Ezekiel 36:26 “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.”

And this process is an “ongoing creation” now underway since that time.

Summary

What the tent of meeting/tabernacle/temple represents is a mobile and living temporary mortal body. Why it must be replaced is because it was meant to be originally created perfectly but strictly temporal as a “template” to be changed in the future “time appointed”. Where the in-dwelling of God will be, is not in the “mortal component of man which was made by hands” but in the “spirit-of-man”(the mind) that was “breathed into man’s nostrils”, the “real you”. Here, in this “spirit-component” of man, the “kingdom of God” is and starts. And how this happened occurred first to the trailblazer/author man-Jesus and after his death/resurrection, he got directly from the Father, this Holy Spirit of power to be given thereafter to whoever he chose.

Church is composed of people, believers, who by being human have deficiencies. Indeed frustrating, as we are all flawed people to experience his work on earth, as alluded to in 1 Corinthians and 7 churches in Revelations. No one should dislike any church member so much as to diss church attendance.

Going into a building where fellow believers meet is not wrong, except in specific situations. Remember, Jesus went to the temple, too. To diminish its value is a dismissive line of thinking that leads nowhere constructive. Truly, “you’d have to get rid of the majority of the New Testament to argue that the church was a parenthetical, made-up organization.”

The early believers were essentially in-house churches, where immediate family, extended family and friends were already living in deep, meaningful community together. But with the reality of Covid-19 global pandemic, each one of us has to use the wisdom from God. And, decide the risks involved, modify and innovate as we can, using technological advances that we are all blessed to have. Currently, most of us are “attending” or participating in mass or church service by watching it in TV.

Hopefully and prayerfully, “normalcy” will return sooner than later. The bottom line is written in John 4:24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth”. And that means, wherever we are.

No need for second-guessing, finger-pointing, shaming nor blame-gaming. Let us all be one” with the Father.

Hopefully, this post helps the world in a dilemma: going to “church or not” or choose “life vs livelihood”. Either choice taken, pro or con, has consequences that we will all experience. Risk vs rewards?

God bless🙏😇

Original post: May 7, 2020

Please tap hyperlink for references

Dedicated to everyone with dilemma on church attendance, life vs livelihood during this global pandemic.

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 ..”. These desires then lead to actions 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), be sustainable? Are we really “empowered” to do that? As much effort we come to bear, it does not appear to be. 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 to all…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.

Why do we sin?

Everything revolves around the word “sin”. This dates back at the garden of Eden where Adam and Eve sinned and were driven off paradise as a punishment. Why did they sin when they were created by an “Almighty God”, who never made mistake? Weren’t they created to follow? They were even clearly given the command in Genesis 2:7 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” .So, why didn’t they obey?

Human history is replete with evil people. And Genesis 6:5 highlighted the state of wantonness on earth, as in “The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.

As to the person who sinned, everyone blamed him/her and rightly so. After all, action (mental or physical) has to be actuated by the person before anything happens; brain works through the physical body. But, the “blameless and upright Job” proved he did not sin at all, and that therefore Adam did not have to sin. Although, Job did not realize till the end that he still needed (Job 42:1-5) a “Savior” because Adam’s sin was “imputed on him”.

Even the “chosen Israelbroke the covenant made with God and was punished. Theologians look at sin as the reason why Jesus Christ had to spill his blood and die “to reconcile us to the Father”. Like Job on his own, man/anthropos-Jesus did not sin at all and died, although unlike Job, Jesus “came from above” and did not warrant imputed sin of Adam. Will there still be a need for Jesus’ death if humans did not sin?

Yet in spite of all the punishments God exacted on sinners, humanity continued to sin, why?The omnipotent God continued to show humanity, the consequences of sin. But somehow, sin continued, in spite of his admonitions and command, why? In fact, as Paul said in

Romans 5:13 that sin was already there even before the Law was given to Moses at Mt Sinai and that in Romans 5:20, the Law was given to account for and highlight more of these sins. And, by extension, the covenant that was there 430 years before cannot be annulled/set aside by the Law given to Moses at Mt Sinai.

Is God to blame for creating man’s capability to sin or is this an experience in human history to send us a clear message? Really, there are so many questions surrounding this subject of sin that we need answers.

Predicate of the Message

Yes, there is a message that revolves around the predicate of hope. On whom, for what and why?

Jeremiah 17:7“But blessed are those who trust in the LORD and have made the LORD their hope and confidence”(NLT). And this was looking forward to the day of incarnation of the Lord Creator, our hope.

Romans 8:20 Against its will, all creation was subjected to God’s curse. But with eager hope”. (NLT).

Galatians 3:13-14 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole. He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.”

Yes, humanity from creation was “subjected to a curse and this for us to look forward to the hope of the coming Savior, the man/anthropos-Christ Jesus; he is at the center of this hope. The prophesied Israel’s redemption has to come first, to open up to the Gentiles, the “blessing to Abraham” And Paul explained why it had to be this particular man in Romans 5:5-21.

And this curse/crucifixion (his death) was accounted for sins of all humanity. Because first-Adam sinned, so the second-Adam’s (Jesus’) death (penalty) was accounted for that sin, and by extension to “all mankind as in Romans 5:12-20. as in “one man sinned that accounted for the sins of all and one man died for that sin but accounted to many sins of all humans.

In due time, YHVH ELOHIM(Lord God) disempowered himself voluntarily and incarnated to human Jesus for him to die in the cross for the purpose of humanity’s reconciliation with the Father because of our sins. And, Jesus having been resurrected, we “will be saved through his life”. But, how so? But, first he had to be alive to receive this gift for us. And having been empowered through this Holy Spirit, then the “clay that was marred” can now be re-molded as prophesied in Jeremiah 18:4

“But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.”

Remember, that Jesus said he had to die so that the “Comforter/Advocate/Holy Spirit” will be given to him after his resurrection, then was given first to the disciples and given to others generally at Pentecost, that same year and henceforth.

Same Strategic Plan

Even if the first-Adam did not sin, the strategic plan for salvation is the same, i.e., YHVH still had to incarnate and die, resurrected, receive the Holy Spirit for us. No need for reconciliation without Adam’s sin; love is still present for planning man’s destiny before we were created. As a human, with limited life span, Jesus would still die; all humans die, even as old as Methuselah.

But, in the course of history, Adam/Eve sinned, thereupon instituted the “accounting of that sin” to the death of Jesus. This same strategic plan to change humans from mortal to immortal did not change, was planned by the Father and has to be executed by YHVH/JESUS. But, why?

Here now is the crux of this plan, an essential point that needed to be resolved. What is that?

Going back to “how man was created”. In Genesis 2:7 it says:”Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” Notice that the body came from the ground and therefore earthy and temporal. Also, the whole body/matter that was created was not alive until the “breath of life was breathed-into him through his nostrils. This was the life-giving energy that was “infused into that body” to be alive…”a living soul/being”.

Creation of man was perfect and even angels rejoiced. But, from the time man was created, he was still “weak” in the sense of being temporal or mortal. He was “incomplete or not created fully”. While God’s presence was in the “mobile tabernacles and 2 Temples in Jerusalem, God will “not dwell in the temple/tanernacle made by hands” as in Acts 7:48-49

However, the Most High does not live in houses made by human hands. As the prophet says: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me? says the Lord. Or where will my resting place be?”

Instead, the prophecy was for the Father to dwell in the mind/spirit-of-man, in due time through the “empowering Holy Spirit”; this happened first to the “first of firstfruits/man-Jesus/wave-sheaf offering, then to the disciples, and henceforth to others as well, depending on their scheduled/planned time.

Moreover, this “weakness” was emphasized 3 x by Jesus regarding his disciples in the garden of Gethsemane. It took him 3x, seeing how his disciples who were determined to be “awake was still found sleeping”, for him to follow voluntarily the “Father’s will”.

Message about Sin

While Job and Jesus on their own human power have shun evil, as humanity, in general, we are “weak” to overcome evil. But we will be empowered to have the requiredfruits of the Holy Spirit”, not “fruits of the flesh” nor “fruits that come from our nature” that the Father/God could not accept as shown by YHVH Elohim. We are “incomplete and temporal”. Indeed, man needs a “Helper/Advocate/Holy Spirit”…. and that is the message about the role of sin to humanity. This is the “power” that had to be given by the Father to Jesus for him to “re-create” humanity, an “ongoing creation”. And this “power” was given only if he died and was resurrected; not before, as planned.

Summary

Our loving Father planned and YHVH ELOHIM/(Lord God)Jesus Christ was tasked to execute the strategic plan voluntarily for humans to change from mortality to immortality. This plan did not change, whether man would sin or not. God foreknew Adam would sin as the “Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.” and commanded him not to. Temptation starts and we must guard against before it devolves into sin. Since Adam sinned, the process changed to accommodate that into the main goal and “imputed Adam’s sin to one man, Jesus”. While Adam was created perfect, he was “incomplete/weak vessel”, although with the ability to choose the path to righteousness, like Job. On his own, he could have done so, but that “righteousness would still be as filthy rags”. The type that the Father required has to emanate from “fruits of the Holy Spirit”. This principle of required righteousness that is “sweet savor”/ “sweet aroma”, was shown to “upright and blameless Job”, who also learned he needed a Savior because of “imputed sin”. And, also learned by the man(anthropos) Jesus who came from above but still had to have “in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit” at River Jordan. God decides what offering he likes and this principle was narrated regarding Abel and Cain.

Since Adam sinned, the death/curse/crucifixion of incarnated YHVH ELOHIM into man-Jesus Christ was then “accounted” for the sin of Adam and by extension to the sins of all humanity. The strategic plan stayed the same whether Adam sinned or not. It was the “accounting that was added” in the same way that the “covenant made 430 years before the Law given to Moses” would not be annulled by that Law, even when that Law was “added to amplify the gravity of sin”. Similarly, the “unwritten covenant between YHVH ELOHIM and the Ancient of Days” will not be annulled by the Law given to Moses. Israel’s redemption came to open up to the Gentiles, the “blessing to Abraham” And Paul explained why it had to be this particular man in Romans 5:5-21.

The predicate of sin is for us to look forward to the “hope in Christ, the Redeemer/Savior”. There is a timetable for Christ to come and it came. He was the first human to receive this gift of in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit at river Jordan and from then on was empowered to overcome Satan and the first miracle of changing water to wine in the wedding in Cana. He died and was resurrected to receive the “empowering Spirit” for God to in-dwell to other humans, in the spirit-of-man”, the only component of man not “made by hands”. This “new power” will be used for “ongoing creation” and “create a new pot”.

The message that comes forth from sin is that the “perfectly created Adam” was “incomplete/weak”, mortal and has to be changed in the future to immortality. As Paul testified in I Corinthians 15:52-53

“In a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.”

God Bless🙏😊😇

Original post: March 28, 2020

Please tap all words/phrases/quotes in hyperlink for references.