God has revealed Himself. He has not been silent since the very first human mind became conscious.
The primary, fundamental fact of human existence here and now is we are fallen. It affects the totality of our human existence. No part of us is able to rise above the Fall without some outside assistance. The whole point of revelation is to serve as the beginning point of that outside assistance. Revelation is the gateway to redemption.
Fundamental to all human sin is arguing with God. It begins with Satan’s first comment in the Bible: “Is it really true that God said…?” His second comment was a blatant contradiction of what God said. All human evil today begins with the same trend of questioning God’s revelation.
Has God really said homosexuality is evil? Yep. It’s an evil desire, but that’s not the real problem. We desire a lot of things God said we shouldn’t have and that’s just one of them. If you cared to know, He also explains why He said that. I’ve explained that often enough in detail already, but the hint is social stability.
Sure, you can imagine all sorts of ways to keep social stability while doing things God said not to do, but your imagination excludes His revelation. He warned us that He designed Creation to do certain things, to operate in a certain fashion, and He said there were a lot of things that interfered with that operation. He referred to in terms best translated as justice. Gay sex is unjust. So is a lot of other sexual stuff we like to do.
No, you may not justly choose to have sex with just anyone you choose, at any time and place you choose. Most of them time, our profligate sexual sins results in conception of another human. God said a lot of things about why that is, but our modern society argues with Him about it. So we have lots of ways of preventing that conception. There might be good reasons for preventing it, but once it’s on the way, there is virtually no way to justify abortion.
Our massive legacy of abortion alone is all the justification God needs to destroy America, and we deserved to be crushed long ago. Same goes for the entire modern world.
It’s not about killing the baby. God can handle that; all murdered babies go to Heaven. They aren’t accountable. Talk of “age of accountability” is typically arrogant puffery, but the underlying principle is correct. There comes a point when God holds us accountable for our sins as humans, and it’s sometime well after birth. What a great way to end life, fully assured of going home to Jesus without having to live in this fallen world. It’s not so much the ending of life that makes God angry, but the injustice of it.
His wrath falls where His revelation is rejected. You can embrace His revelation voluntarily or you have it fall on your life involuntarily in the form of wrath.
You may recall His first comments about Law Covenants started with warning Noah mankind must take responsibility for taking the life of murderers. Yeah, it sounds crazy to our human reasoning, but that’s what God said. If someone takes a human life unjustly, according to the terms of His revelation, then that someone has forfeited his life. And it falls on other humans to take it justly. The difference is not in the killing, but whether it is justly done. People who insist God is against all violence are rejecting His revelation and lying just like Satan.
I’ve also spilled a jillion electrons explaining the context that He said must be firmly in place before we proceed with implementing such things as the death penalty. It’s that business of a Hebrew tribal social structure. Without that, justice according to God’s revelation impossible in the first place. This is why I’m not an activist for any particular cause but one: God’s prescribed tribal social structure. Yes, there are things we can do personally to mitigate His wrath in our lives even though we have no real leverage over the vast ocean of evil around us. Still, my only message to all humanity cannot be confined to one cause. It’s “repent” in the fullest meaning.
You see, if you have the Spirit, then His revealed Word serves to explain for our minds how to obey the Spirit. If you don’t have the Spirit — or more accurately, if the Spirit does not have you — then you desperately need His Laws because you can’t understand them on that higher level. Either way, you cannot possibly obey His Laws fully without that tribal social structure. You cannot hope to stop abortion and homosexuality until and unless people first submit to the Laws. So the only way I can be an activist is to restore that fundamental justice first. You see, what God told Noah about the death penalty was a good Hebrew parable that implied a lot more than what the words said.
Oh yeah; that business of thinking like a Hebrew is part of my activism. If you haven’t embraced the Hebrew intellectual foundations, you can’t possibly understand God’s Word in the first place. Western intellectual reasoning is wholly and utterly incompetent for the task. Without Hebrew Mysticism, you cannot hope to discover what God meant, because He created the Hebrew Mystical intellectual assumptions as the proper atmosphere for revealing Himself. I don’t care how expert you are in translating the original languages; without mysticism you have no idea what those words mean. So activism in favor of God’s Laws is double-barreled, harping on Hebrew intellectual traditions and tribal social structure.
Those things together are pretty much what John the Baptist meant when he called people to repent. It’s also what Jesus had in mind when He preached, “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!”
-
Contact me:
-
ehurst@radixfidem.blog
Categories
Hi Ed, I like what you’re saying. I do “get it”.
But, something seems amiss to me in your statement, “all…babies go to heaven” (I assume you didn’t mean ‘only the murdered ones’). So then, once you’ve established that, you say, “What a great way to end life, fully assured of going home to Jesus without having to live in this fallen world. It’s not so much the ending of life that makes God angry, but the injustice of it.”.
Don’t you see an incongruity here?
Where’s the injustice? Unless you mean that it’s unjust for all the rest of humanity to have to suffer in this life, make choices (mostly poor ones) and endure the consequences, and, ultimately (for most of mankind) to end up after a lifetime of hardship, sickness, and death, finally in eternal torment, forever apart from God and without hope of redemption… while a ‘select few’, having done NOTHING to merit it get a free ride—altogether avoiding this life’s “experience of evil” (Ecc 1:13).
Like you said, “what a great way to end life”—who wouldn’t choose that given the opportunity?
Otherwise, how could you mean it’s unjust for an (‘unaccountable’) baby to NOT have a chance to live out their life of suffering and more than likely choose NOT the way of redemption and thereby LOOSE their free ticket of salvation?
Incidentally, I was wondering where in “Hebrew intellectual foundations” do you find the notion of immortality–or conscious existence after death at all? Not to be argumentative, but, I’ve never seen that concept presented anywhere in the Hebrew scriptures. On the contrary, both for babies and adults, the Hebrew understanding of death was “sleep”– the dead “know nothing” (ecc 9:5); sheole and hades were both words conceptualized as “hidden” or the state of “unknowing”. That there was promise of resurrection(s) is not in doubt, but, before those (yet future events!) the dead are dead–Hebraically speaking.
Put another way, suppose you were a young man, a homeless nobody who somehow found yourself on the game show, “You Bet Your Life” and you’d won the grand prize of 1 million dollars. After the jumping, hooting and hollering, the Host then offers you a choice (double or nothing?). Your choice is, “You can keep what you’ve won and walk out of here a millionaire right now, OR, I can take your prize, you must then go back out on the streets, live out your miserable life of 70 or 80 years, and when you’re old and sick, return to me for a CHANCE to win back your original million dollars. But this time, you’ll have to buy the ticket to the contest, and I’m going to give you 1:100 odds (against) that you’ll win. Of course, if you do win, your prize will be your (formerly forfeited) million dollars.” Deal?
What you’re in effect saying is it would be unjust if the Host did NOT offer you this deal, and presumably, unfair (or foolish of you) if you did NOT take it.
Either that, or the Host is being unjust by offering it. Else, where’s the injustice?
I’ll reply to both comments in one with a following post.
Pingback: Fuzzy Hebrew Reasoning | Do What's Right