Convenient Christianity Kills
Whether you realize it or not you are on an assassination list. Expansive Big Data is being collected for your dossier. While your assassination is in process you are contributing to your demise by way of convenience. Let me blunt, convenient Christianity kills. We have embraced forbidden ancient knowledge resulting in technology manifesting evil for the sake of convenience. Convenience is dictating many peoples lives right now, maybe yours.
- You eat products that God did not make. Genetically modified abominations that kill because they are convenient.
- You embrace technologies that kill through various means such as lethal frequencies because they are convenient.
- Human biblical relationship other than one you have super-power over is not convenient.
- Are you engaging in spiritual warfare or is no convenient to take a biblical stand?
- Are you using your gifting bestowed to you by God for His Kingdom or is not convenient?
- Do you attend a church that is lukewarm because it is convenient?
- Do you pray fast, intercede, take communion, advocate for vulnerable, as defined by God or is it not convenient?
- Many of you do not dig deep into your Bible as the ultimate preparedness tool for the physical and spiritual realms because it is inconvenient.
You pick and choose like a buffet of sorts which instructions of God you want to obey and what you will disobey. You act a gatekeeper or god of God's Word for yourself rippling out to family, friends, acquaintances. This some instructions are convenient while other instructions are more difficult and you do not want to go there.
On the Precipice of the Eden Sequel
Image: Mad Scientist Presentation
In the beginning there was pure Truth. Falsehood did not ascend until the snake's encounter with Eve. Once Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil it opened portals such as death, and every evil and vile thing which opposes God.
To understand what is happening at the End of the Age we need to understand the dynamics of four fruits. I know this is a tedious list but we need to know who the actors are by their fruit. If I had the time I would insert a hyperlink for each entry. Each of these has at least one Scripture and oftentimes more, elaborating on these four characteristics:
True-faithful, trust, loyalty, to marry, a pact, to stay, to rest, to dwell, conformable to fact, being in accordance with actual fact or state of things. True history. Genuine. Pure. Real. Not counterfeit. Not adulterated or false. True love (Christianity). Faithful. Steady. Not false or fickle. Free from falsehood. True witness. Honest not fraudulent. Exact. Right to precision. Conformable to pattern such as a true likeness. Straight., Right. Not false, or pretended.
False-Comes from to deceive. Not true, not conformable, not well founded, not true by lawful standard, substituted for another, counterfeit, not solid or sound, not agreeable to rule, not honest or just, not faithful or loyal, treacherous, unfaithful and inconsistent, hypocritical, to defeat
Good-In Saxon means god, fit, suitable, strong, advancing, abundant, strong, firm, valid, efficacious, to overflow, to become better, best, valid, legally firm, not weak or defective, strength, support, valid, sound, not weak of fallacious, complete, sufficient, perfect, having moral qualities best adapted to design and use, virtuous, pious, conformable to moral law, proper, fit, convenient, seasonable, well adapted to the end, useful, expedient, conducive to happiness ,sound, undamnable, suitable to taste of health, wholesome, palatable, not disagreeable or noxious, suited to produce salutary effect, adapted to abate or cure, medicinal, beneficial, suited to strengthen or assist health, pleasant to the taste, full, complete, equal, adequate, favorable, convenient for any purpose, qualified, able, skillful, performing duties with skill and fidelity, ready dexterous, kind, benevolent, affectionate, kind, promotes happiness, pleasant, cheerful, gratifying, agreeable, prosperous, honorable, fair, unblemished, great or considerable, elegant, polite, real, serious, seasonable, commendable, festive, companionable, social, brave, comely, well formed, mild, pleasant, mild, calm, friendly, humane, confirm or establish, to prove, to verify, to indemnify, to stand, to fulfill, diminishes or removes pain, increases happiness, welfare, advancement of interest or happiness ,spiritual advantage or improvement, earnest, moral works and actions, best fruits
Evil-Vile, bad, selfish, having bad qualities or morals, malignant mischievous, wicked, corrupt, perverse, wrong, defames, defective, destroys, displeases, distresses, grievous, harmful, misery, misfortune, sad, unfortunate, unhappy, produces sorrow, injury, calamity, misfortune, injury, treacherous, troublesome, ugly, unpleasant, wild, wretched, depravity, corruption of heart, malady, not well, not virtuous, not happy, injurious...
Sudden Invasion of the Nephilim and their Offspring
Image: Mad Scientist Presentation
Evil falls upon mankind to defraud and invades suddenly. Where have we seen a falling upon before? The nephilim, fallen angels, who fell from their first estate. They fell to earth bringing ancient knowledge to pollute mankind with God, each other, and to bring death to God's creation. Today we find the forbidden fruit of knowledge invading suddenly. We are being told we must rush towards autonomous systems and other technologies not thinking about the consequences. We are being trained for evil with a hardwired Hebb circuit of Pavolvian response.
My personal take is that the serpent is supernatural evil incarnate. That said, there is an incremental downgrade to our technological upgrades. We go from our God given estate, to animal, to pure evil embodiment when we forsake Jesus Christ. How does this happen? As we give of our body, mind, soul and strength to the beast system, little by little, until there is no humanity left in us. Keep this in mind as I discuss this process.
Evil is either natural or moral. Natural evil is anything that produces pain, distress, loss or calamity, which disturbs the peace, impairs happiness, destroys perfection of natural beings.
Moral evil is any deviation of a moral agent from the rules of conduct prescribed to him by God or legitimate human authority, violation of the plain principles of justice.
Civil evils are injurious destroying peace and prosperity.
Political evils injure nations.
All wickedness, crimes, violations of law and right, are moral evils. Up until recently diseases were natural evils, but often proceeded out of moral evils.
Image: Mad Scientist Presentation
Curiosity can be a good thing although unbridled curiosity leads to temptation in the Garden of Eden resulting in sin.
Each one of you is born with a human curiosity for knowledge and intellectual inquisitiveness. In a mere 25 verses the whole human world was impacted. But it was eating of the Tree of Knowledge that brought sin into the world and can having destructive consequences which we are seeing being revealed today.
The verses in Genesis are a layered and encoded narrative, just as we see the final wickedness event of history converging into a layered and encoded message to mankind.
The Bible employs various techniques to help it encode meaning. One of those techniques is a device that's come to be known as the leading word.
It just so happens that the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden contains such a repetitive word.
Well, ready or not, here it is:
The word is arom -- the Hebrew word for nakedness.
Nakedness appears everywhere throughout our story. Human beings, created by God were: and they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed.
God made Adam and Eve's first clothing and it was during the process of sin-eating the forbidden fruit that the couple discovered: And the eyes of both of them were open and they knew that they were naked.
Strange, isn't it? If someone asked you to imagine how eating a fruit that imparts knowledge of good and evil would affect mankind, what would you have said? By eating this fruit you would assume that the first human beings would have been able to solve the worlds biggest dilemmas. Does it not seem odd to you that the immediate effect when they ate from the Tree of Knowledge they knew they were naked? Why does knowing good and evil affect our perception of nakedness?
Adam eats from the tree, and he immediately hides from God. Now you ask, why is he hiding? Why it is that you would think Adam would be hiding. How do you explain Adam's act of seeking refuge?
He you are in the Garden of Eden, in Paradise and God has asked you one thing of you-not to eat from a certain tree. And then you had to go and eat from it! You feel filled with shame; you've disappointed your Creator, and can't bear to face Him.
But the narrative says something altogether different. When God asked Adam why he was hiding, this was his reply:
I heard your voice in the Garden and I hid because I was naked.
God was asking, "Do you realize how far you have fallen? You were so high, but where are you now?" Adam's consciousness of being naked was so profound it overcame his sense of shame at having disobeyed the one command of his Maker.
Why is nakedness so important to this story? Why is humanity's realization of it the one natural consequence of eating from a Tree of Knowledge? And why would this realization be so disturbing that it is the only reason man can think of to explain why he is hiding?
This concept of hiding is critical because there are many times hiding is highlighted in Scripture and hiding will play an important role in the sixth seal of terror in prophecy:
In our story, it may have been because you were reading the story in English. As it happens, most English translations, conceal the missing occurrence of nakedness.
The sky receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place. Then the kings of the earth, the nobles, the commanders, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and free man, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains. And they said to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the One seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb. Revelation 6:15
And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed. Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field... Genesis, 2:25-3:1.
As you read these words, you surely noticed that Adam and Eve were described as unclothed. When we use the Hebrew word for naked we get a clearer picture into the narrative. Hebrew now, when we substitute the Hebrew word for naked -- arom -- in place of its English counterpart:
And they were both arom, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed. Now the serpent was more arom than any beast of the field... Genesis, 2:25-3:1.
What?!? The snake is also naked (arom) and as in the Hebrew, can mean other things also, it can also mean it was cunning.
Well, what are you to make of this? In its simple meaning, the text is telling us about the crafty intentions of the snake -- that he is cunning; sly and deceitful. Is the snake's intentions coincidence?
Image: Mad Scientist Presentation
The mystery in all this deepens when you ask the question: Are the two meanings of arom -- naked and cunning -- related conceptually in any way? Are they two entirely unrelated ideas, or is there some essential connection between them?
At first blush, the ideas naked and cunning don't seem to have much in common. But on reflection, they do seem related in a curious way. Mull the terms over -- naked and cunning -- what comes to mind? These words just happen to be opposites of one another.
When someone is naked, unclothed, there is no hiding. That person's self is laid bare for all to see. On the other hand, when one is cunning -- he is sly and devious; he cloaks his true intentions and hides behind a facade. Its truly fascinating that the two meanings of arom, are mirror images of each other.
The word arom adds another dimension to the biblical text. Why does the Divine Author use the word naked and then with the snake twist the meaning to convey the very opposite idea of cunning? I would submit to you this is a prophetic code used to expose Dual Purpose technology and words. Dual purpose is defined, in that it can used for good or evil.
Biologically, a snake is naked. What does it mean for the snake for the snake to be naked and cunning?
If naked is really the opposite of cunning, then it seems to follow that the snake had both, opposite, qualities: He possessed both honesty and stealth. In other words, the snake really is deceptive -- but on a deeper, level, he's very straightforward. It all depends upon the perspective of Adam and Eve or the snake. There are clues to the snakes perspective embedded within our story.
Forbidden Fruit and Assassination
Out of the ground God caused to grow every tree pleasant to the sight and good for food; the Tree of Life in the middle of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (2:9). And the Lord God commanded Adam, saying 'Of every tree of the garden you may eat freely. But of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil you shall not eat.
And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. Genesis 2:16-19
Did you catch it? Why is Adam's search for a mate interrupted with the story of the Tree of Knowledge? Juxtaposition is everything.
After introducing the trees the text digresses to God declares that "it is not good for man to be alone," and the Almighty then sets about trying to find a helpmate for him. The Almighty creates all the beasts of the field and parades them before Adam. Adam names all the creatures, but has no success finding a mate among them. Finally, the Lord puts Adam to sleep and takes a rib from him, out of which He builds Eve. And only then -- after the text tells us about the creation of both Eve and the animals -- does the story return to the Forbidden Fruit.
This is a strange path for the text to take. Why does Adam's search for a mate interrupt the story of the Tree of Knowledge? At face value, it would seem more logical to get the creation of Eve and the animals out of the way first, and then begin talking about the Tree of Knowledge; that way, the narrator can bring each story to its conclusion without interruption. For some reason the Bible doesn't do this. It places the creation of the animals and Eve right in the middle of the Tree of Knowledge narrative. Why?
If you were Creator and you saw Adam needed a helpmate would you create Eve or the beasts of the field? This is very bizarre. One by one, Adam rejects them. In the process of that effort, Adam names each of the animals. Are we to believe the Great Matchmaker did not know the right helpmate for Adam?
This digression would seem to be an integral piece of the big picture of our story. Adam's rejection of these beasts of the field is crucial to understand the Forbidden Fruit narrative including the snake and his temptation. Was it perhaps Adam's rejection of the snake which propelled the snake into action?
The phrase beasts of the field (chayat hasadeh) is rare in Scripture only occurring one other time in Genesis in the description of the snake. When we meet the primal serpent Scripture describes him as "more cunning than all the beasts of the field-chayat hasadeh."
Does this reveal the snake's motivation? All the chayat hasadeh had been unsuccessful in providing a companion for Adam. The snake was more cunning than all the chayat hasadeh: The snake was seeking to convince mankind that at least one "beast of the field" could be his companion after all.
There is an ancient Hebraic Midrash that says the snake was on an assassination mission. The snake, knowing that the forbidden fruit harbored the promise of death, hoped that Eve would pass the fruit to Adam before partaking herself. Why? Because according to the Midrash, the snake wanted to assassinate Adam and marry Eve. This was the fallen angel agenda all along for if they could corrupt mankind and their offspring, the pinnacle of God's handiwork, then they could terminate God and His creation. All bet's are off in war, so let us examine how the narrative plays out.
The snake's offer of forbidden fruit follows naturally from the immediately preceding story about Adam's choice to reject the animals in favor of Eve. Perhaps, on some deep level, the animal world -- was leveling a challenge to Adam.The Almighty had given Adam dominion over the animal world. As such, he had been set apart from that world in a very fundamental way. Mankind was king of natural world - but he was all alone in this powerful and dominating position...
And God said: It is not good for man to be alone. I will make him a helpmate to join with him...
To be alone, the vastness of loneliness, is truly a great temptation. The temptation of loneliness is to seek solace where it ought not be sought. For Adam this could mean seeking companionship among the animals.
The animal world, for its part, might be seen as only too happy to oblige. Animals have challenged our right to dominate and in early 2000 due to the wickedness of man, animal's attained primacy, not bestowed upon them by God, but by bestial individuals.
The implicit challenge of the animal world is: "Are you really so different from us, that you stand above us? " We almost heard these very same words in Korach's rebellion against God's anointed, Moses in the Wilderness:
The entire community is holy, and G‑d is amongst them; why do you raise yourselves above the congregation of God? Numbers 16:3
You can almost hear the snake whispering, "Why not choose a soul-mate from our world?" We asked facetiously what the children of such a union might look like. But that's precisely the point. They would be snake-men. The snake would have hybridized the world of man and made it part and parcel of the demonically empowered and embodied animal kingdom.
God gave Adam a chance to intimately experience the animals by naming them to inoculate mankind against the temptation that he would face to engrave in Adam's mind that he could never be truly one with the animal world. Throughout Scripture we find that a name does not only identify a person or animal but also describes the role and nature of that being named. Only then could Adam appreciate his compatibility with Eve and his trial by serpent.
Image: Mad Scientist Presentation
What, really, is the dividing line between man and animal? This primal serpent walks, talks, and is clever. So in what sense is he really a snake and not a human? Why couldn't he be a fitting mate for mankind, after all?
The answer lies and is pivotal for an overcoming walk during these End Times, what Divine voice do I listen to? The voice of God in His Word or the voice of God that pulses inside of you and animates your very being?
A key to the essential difference between snake and man takes place during the conversation or engagement with the snake. Once again, I submit to you that today you are being lured into the very same conversation that the snake engage in with Eve--while today it is a discourse with AI and other ancient forbidden emerging technologies.
Even if God said don't eat from any trees of the garden...
The snake is saying: "Even if God said don't eat, so what? Do it anyway!"
But it can be looked at from a different perspective. This comes from Rabbi Hirsch and Hebraic commentator:God may have said to avoid the tree, but the question is: Do you want to eat from the tree? Do you desire it?
And let's say you do desire the tree. Where do you think those desires came from? Who put them inside you?
Wasn't God the one who put them inside you?
Certainly He did... He is your Maker...
What a terrible contradiction: On the one hand, God's voice instructs you not to eat of the tree. But on the other hand, another voice of God -- His voice inside you; your passions, your desires -- beckons you to indeed eat of the tree.
So which voice should you listen to? The voice of God that comes to you in words -- or the voice of God that pulses inside you, that animates your very being? Which divine voice is more primary?
I don't know about you, the snake says, but if I were in your shoes -- here's how I would see it: "Even if God said don't eat of the trees, so what?"
Snake in the GrassTrue to his snake nature, the snake is being straightforward and very naked.
How does God make His will known to a snake or any animal? The Almighty doesn't instruct animals intellectually. He doesn't speak to them in words. There is no Bible for snakes, birds and lizards. But just because a snake doesn't have a lawbook, doesn't mean there are no laws. To the contrary -- animals follow the Divine Will quite faithfully. God speaks to animals through the passions, desires and instincts they find within themselves. Every time an animal acts naturally, obeying the voice of instinct or desire within itself -- the animal follows the will of its Creator.
For the snake, the way out of the contradiction is quite clear: "Even if God said don't eat from the tree, so what?" The real voice of God is not to be found in words. The real voice of God doesn't speak to you from the outside, it beats insistently inside of you.
This is the essential temptation of the serpent. It is a temptation that cuts to the core of our very humanity.
Image: Mad Scientist Presentation
Does our uniqueness as humans lie in the fact that we can talk? Perhaps. But if we met a talking animal, would we grant it human rights? From biblical animals such as Balaam's donkey to modern communication with animals, we know that animals communicate or talk.
Is it our advanced intelligence is what makes us human? What if we met a really smart animal? And if we discover such a creature should they be entitled to the right to vote or be baptized?
If the key to our humanity doesn't lie in our capacity for speech, for walking on two legs, or for intelligent thinking -- all of which were shared by our friend, the primal serpent -- in what does our humanity lie?
How does God speak to you? Which is the primary voice of God?
If God speaks to you primarily through passion and instinct --well, you are an animal. If God has expectations for you beyond acting on your instincts and passions; if God addresses Himself to your mind and asks you to rise above your desires -- then you are a human.
What the snake is really doing, then, is forcing Adam and Eve to confront what it means for them to be human beings and not beasts.
At the end the snake really is arom -- in all senses of the word. When he asks, "even if God said don't eat, so what?" -- he is being straightforward and honest, the epitome of naked. But his nature inside and out is different that our nature.
The snake's challenge takes the form of a proposition to eat the Forbidden Fruit. If we look carefully, we'll find that this proposal follows naturally from the serpent's suggestion that the voice of desire is the primary way in which God speaks to us.
Before taking the fruit Eve contemplated the choices before her.
And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable as a means to wisdom... Genesis 3:6
This is how most English and commentator's render the text. The Hebrew is a little more complicated. A more literal translation of the last phrase, venechmad ha'etz lehaskil, yields not that the tree was desirable as a means to wisdom, but that:
... the tree was desirable to contemplate... Genesis, 3:6
Desirable to contemplate. It's a strange phrase - and maybe that's why many translations shun it. What does it mean? For that matter, how does this last phrase fit with the first two? Are the three phrases -- good to eat / delight to the eyes / desirable to contemplate-- all related somehow?
All three of these phrases describe how the tree appealed to Eve aesthetically -- at the level of beauty; or more precisely, at the level of desire. Each description portrays how the fruit was desirable -- and each description is more sophisticated and more subtle than the last.
- Candy tastes good to eat. Even a two-year-old can appreciate that.
- A ten year old to appreciate the beauty of a rose -- beauty that is a delight to the eyes, not to the mouth.
- Things which are desirable to contemplate...This is beauty that appeals not to any of our physical senses, but to our mind. They appeal to the mind but not because they are true, but because they are beautiful and then we desire.
A poem may or may not express a truth, and a good debater can be impressive even if he's lying through his teeth. But that's irrelevant. The mind appreciates the beauty of such things -- and desires them accordingly.
The tree appealed to us at all levels of the aesthetic -- from the most obvious to the most subtle and refined. The fruit of the tree was dripping with desire. Whether this be true or not, but I purpose I am not certain but I believe that is why Jesus Christ was not comely for if He was attractive no man or woman would have been able to resist His Truth.
The snake beguiles you through the snare that: Desire and instinct are more trustworthy indicators of God's will than His words. Eat from the tree, bring desire ever deeper inside you -- and you shall truly be godly. Surely, at this very moment, the spirit of the serpent through AI and Emerging Technology manifestations are attempting to beguile you to enjoin with him as a trustworthy partner. He wants you to consider him trustworthy and he wants you to be trustworthy and pledge fidelity to him.
You might ask, does all this have to do with knowing good and evil? Why would a battle over the proper role of desire in the human psyche be waged over a tree that contains, of all things, knowledge of good and evil?
Knowledge: Nature of Good and Evil
Image by Celeste
The forbidden tree is known in Hebrew as the Etz HaDa'as Tov Vara. What do these Hebrew terms really mean. The conventional translation of the phrase is knowledge of good and evil. Is there anything more here than meets the eye?
Let's begin with the first phrase, da'at -- conventionally translated as knowledge. Interestingly, the meaning of this word is not limited to knowledge in the conventional sense of the word. One of the first times the root is used in Genesis conveys an experience that, at first blush, few of you would call knowledge at all:
V'ha'adam yada es chavah ishto...
And the man knew his wife...
In the Bible, the word da'at doubles as a synonym for sexual intimacy. The Bible's use of this word for both knowledge and sexual union is significant. There is a core understanding of da'at that gives rise to both these meanings.
When a man knows his wife, what is he really seeking? Beyond sheer, physical pleasure -- and even beyond procreation -- is there not something more, something deeper, that he seeks? Perhaps, on some level. He is indeed after knowledge -- knowledge of the mysterious, alluring feminine nature that is so different from him and yet so much a missing part of him, all at the same time.
It is not intellectual knowledge that he seeks. He is seeking raw, first-hand knowledge. He is seeking to experience the feminine in a direct, unfiltered way.
A discipline known as epistemology in philosophy has a raging debate on what is real knowledge.
Rationalists have argued that head knowledge reigns supreme. You know something is true when you can demonstrate it through logic or analysis.
Others says real knowledge is experiential. One can contemplate an idea in your head, but you only know it's real when it happens in the real world; when you demonstrate it, say, in a laboratory. If you see it, if you can feel it, if you experience it -- then you know it's real.
Mankind attains da'at of good and evil, not by intellectualizing about morality and what it is made of -- but by experiencing good and evil in a raw, direct way.
- Da'at seems to denote this latter kind of knowledge – knowing something by experiencing it.
- A scientist who performs an experiment attains da'at, even though he can't yet explain the rationale behind what he has experienced. A man attains da'at of a woman by joining with her and experiencing her, even though he can't express in words her mysterious essence.
- Mankind attains da'at of good and evil, not by intellectualizing about morality and what it is made of – but by experiencing good and evil in a raw, direct way.
In attaining knowledge of good and evil, we did not get a better intellectual understanding of right and wrong. We got an experiential understanding of these concepts. We began to know right and wrong from the inside now.
But what, exactly, does that mean? It sounds very abstract. What does it mean to know "good and evil" in a raw, experiential kind of way?
I know what it means to know a Coconut Cake experientially. I make the cake and eat it and then I have da'at of Coconut Cake.
The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil carried with it an implicit message of sexual intimacy and the serpent knew this because of the fall of a portion of the angelic realm who in Genesis 6 know earth women.
But what does it mean to know good and evil in this way? How does one take good and evil inside of oneself?
Good and Evil
A closer look at the words good and evil -- or in Hebrew, tov and ra -- provide the keys we are looking for.
Before eating from the tree Adam and Eve were beginning to become aware of right and wrong. The tree did not give us moral awareness where we had none before. Rather, the tree transformed our awareness from one kind into another. Before eating from the tree, we would not have chosen to call virtuous moral choices good or vile choices, evil. We would have had a different way of thinking about such things; we would have used different words. Today we stand before the same Tree of Knowledge, and if we allow ourselves, to will transform our moral awareness.
In the Pre-Tree world -- in the more pristine world -- virtuous choices would have been called true, and wicked choices would have been labeled false. In short, doing the right thing was called truth; and doing the wrong thing was called falsehood.
What does it really mean to see morality as a set of choices between truth and falsehood? And how does this differ from saying that morality means choosing between good and evil?
How are true things different than good things?
When something is true, it is describing an objective reality. I am telling you it is real. If we talk about morality as a matter of true and false, then, this might be code for saying that making moral choices involves discerning something objective. It involves figuring out what the right thing to do is; what my Maker expects of me -- and then trying to align my behavior with that truth.
How then, do we see virtue differently when we call it good rather than true? While the word true has a core meaning of real, the word good is not quite as objective a term, it is subjective. Its other meaning is: that which is pleasing. When I say something is good, what I am really telling you, in a subtle way, is that I approve of it; that it is desirable.
The shift from a world of true and false to a world of good and evil was a shift between a world where my essential choice was an objective one, to a more subjective world -- a world in which my desire intrudes and becomes an inescapable part of the moral fiber.
The world calls this ground-truthing, information gathered by experience or empirical evidence.
Tree of Knowledge was deeply associated with desire -- it appealed to us at all conceivable aesthetic levels, from the most base (taste) to the most profound (mind). Perhaps the mysterious tree of knowledge was really a tree of desire. And perhaps the most fundamental ramification to eat of it was simply this: The role that desire plays in our lives would become forever changed.
In the Pre-Tree world, desire was more easily controlled. It was a natural part of man -- but a part that was in equilibrium with the rest of us. It not likely to blind-side us. In the post-tree world, that can no longer be taken for granted. Desire is elevated within the profile of man's psyche. It remains ever present, in the background, always a force to be reckoned with. Desire becomes a lens through which I view things. I no longer see a clear world of true and false. I now see something that is ever so slightly different, I see good and evil. In essence, I see subjectivity rather than reality.
When we shoot an arrow that hits its mark, we sometimes speak of the arrow having flown true to its target. Conversely, the Hebrew word chet, which means sin, also doubles for "having shot at a target and missed" (see Judges, 20:16). In effect, when I see moral decisions as choices between truth and falsehood, it means that I am trying to hit a target when I make these decisions. I am trying to discern my Creator's expectations for me and I am trying to act accordingly. To sin, primarily is missing the mark -- failing to align myself with the reality called the will of my Creator.
When you say pizza is good and green beans are bad, you are not talking about quality and nutritional benefits of the food. You are saying what you like and do not like. In a curious kind of way, you are actually telling you more about yourself than he is about the food. Let that be a lesson for us to learn as far as social media. By your likes and dislikes you are exponentially adding to the growing profile for your assassination. Simply put, you are your own Caesar pronouncing your death sentence by your willing participation.
Quite possibly, from one perspective the Bible is telling us of knowing good and evil, as a code for a new way of looking at moral choices. Our potential for choice, the great ...I..., obscures our vision of what our Maker desires from us. My own desires are now an inescapable part of the picture. I am seeing right and wrong from the inside now. I can rise above these desires, but doing so is not as easy as it seems.
In the brave new world of good and evil, the picture I have might not be reality. That which is merely good and desirable to me, I can easily masquerade very righteously as the true. I am looking at life through the filter of my own subjectivity, I may think that "x" is what G-d wants -- but perhaps it's really just what I want?My personal view is that our dilemmas divide naturally into two groups. Some of these dilemmas, I think, are real. Some of them, though, are fundamentally illusory. Some dilemmas exist no matter whether you live in a world of true and false or a world of good and evil. The other exists only in the mixed up world of good and evil and we are catapulting towards this extreme at breakneck speed. The Good News is that when you abide in the world of Truth, these dilemmas will evaporate like smoke or vapor.
Celeste has worked as a contractor for Homeland Security and FEMA. Her training and activation's include the infamous day of 911, flood and earthquake operations, mass casualty exercises, and numerous other operations. Celeste is FEMA certified and has completed the Professional Development Emergency Management Series.
- Incident Command
- Integrated EM: Preparedness, Response, Recovery, Mitigation
- Emergency Plan Design including all Emergency Support Functions
- Principles of Emergency Management
- Developing Volunteer Resources
- Emergency Planning and Development
- Leadership and Influence, Decision Making in Crisis
- Exercise Design and Evaluation
- Public Assistance Applications
- Emergency Operations Interface
- Public Information Officer
- Flood Fight Operations
- Domestic Preparedness for Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Incident Command (ICS-NIMS)
- Multi-Hazards for Schools
- Rapid Evaluation of Structures-Earthquakes
- Weather Spotter for National Weather Service
- Logistics, Operations, Communications
- Community Emergency Response Team Leader
- Behavior Recognition
Celeste grew up in a military & governmental home with her father working for the Naval Warfare Center, and later as Assistant Director for Public Lands and Natural Resources, in both Washington State and California.
Celeste also has training and expertise in small agricultural lobbying, Integrative/Functional Medicine, asymmetrical and symmetrical warfare, and Organic Farming.
I am inviting you to become a Shepherds Heart Patron and Partner.
My passions are:
- A life of faith (emunah)
- Real News
- Healthy Living
Please consider supporting the products that I make and endorse for a healthy life just for you! Or, for as little as $1 a month, you can support the work that God has called me to do while caring for the widow. This is your opportunity to get to know me better, stay in touch, and show your support. More about Celeste
We live in a day and age that it is critical to be:
- Spiritually prepared,
- Purity in food and water can
- Secure protection against EMF and RF
- Deters radiation
- Supports Christian families
I use and endorse Helix Life products because they oxygenate the body, deters radiation, creates a healthy oasis bubble around your body. No outside power necessary, easily cleanable.
The Pendant is for personal protection $229-
The Tower will protect your home and structure and is also portable. $1895-
The Array will protect your home, land, or farm $10,200
Steve Quayle Bundles for deep savings and some of my handcrafted products.
Montana Plus-Pendant, Tower and some of my soap products $1849
Frazzled Mom Bundle-Pendant, Tower, Soaps and Cream $1589
Montana Bundle-Pendant and soap $258
HelixLife.com offers 0 % financing for 6 months. Telephone and Chat support for questions. They also have scientific studies and resources on why you need EMF protection. You can view testimonials from satisfied customers.
Special: Try the pendant for 10 days for $99! You can purchase the Pendant or return it, hassle free!