EZEKIEL

 

and YHWH’s

 

 Judgment

 

 

for the

 

Good News

 

PEOPLE

 

 

 

VOLUME VI

 

Pervasive Pride

 

 

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

 

 

Judgment for the

 

 

 Good News People

 

 

 

 

Volume VI--Pervasive Pride

 

 

 

 

 

by

 

an unworthy servant

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you shall know the truth,

 

and the truth will make you free.

 

(John 8:32)

 

 

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho.  The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States.  Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

 

Volume VI--Pervasive Pride

 

 

CHAPTER                                                                              PAGE

 

 

      -                  Cover Page                                                                                                         1

 

      -                  Title Page                                                                                                             2

 

      -                  Contents                                                                                                              3

 

      -                  Publisher’s Preface                                                                                           5

 

 

Part Q--Other Aspects of Pride 

 

      74               Pride in Religious Leaders                                                                               6

 

      75               Hypocrisy and Hate                                                                                         17

 

      76               Arrogance                                                                                                          29

 

      77               Pride in Looks                                                                                                   43

 

      78               Pride in Clothing and Dress                                                                           48

 

      79               Pride in Seats and Chairs                                                                              55

 

      80               Pride in Possessions                                                                                       62

 

      81               Intellectual Pride I                                                                                            72

 

      82               Intellectual Pride II                                                                                           79

 

      83               Pride in Denying Responsibility                                                                    92

 

      84               Other Views on Pride                                                                                      99

 

      85               Ingratitude and Pride                                                                                     106

 

 

Part R--More Background on Pride

 

      86               The Reality of Pride                                                                                      118

 

      87               The Primary Purpose of Pride                                                                      131

 

      88               Pride is Evil                                                                                                    137

 

 

Part S--Historical Changes 

 

      89               Iyov                                                                                                                   146

 

      90               Moshe                                                                                                              159

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

 

 

Publisher’s Preface

 

Greetings!  The following presentation is volume six of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site. 

 

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world.  In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one. 

 

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material.  It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message! 

 

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1.  It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins:  left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers). 

 

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope. 

 

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers.  May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him.  Shalom (peace) to you and yours! 

 

an unworthy servant, Sukkot 2005 CE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 74--Pride in Religious Leaders

 

 

Pride Easily Surfaces 

 

The essence of the comments in the former chapters is that the evil and wickedness of pride and vanity can be manifested in anyone in any position or state of life.  And clearly, in the case of would be teachers, pride and vanity can easily be the motivation, source and reason for the teaching and dissemination of false information to others. 

 

There is little benefit in now discussing and belaboring the more apparent examples of false preachers or teachers in the large world of heathen religions--present about wherever one might go on this planet.  The earth has such an abundance of outright pagan religions and their many spokesmen that there is little to be gained here by an extensive focus upon them. 

 

Additionally, it would seem to be of little utility to dwell extensively on the huge assortment of pagan, Christian denominations and their attendant false teachers, preachers and leaders, all busy proclaiming Gee-Zeus, Lord Chrishna and blatant false worship to an ignorant and gullible public.  Obviously, most of this trash is patently false and is not apt to be much of a challenge to the very elect.

 

 

More on False, Sardis Teachers 

 

But it does seem fruitful at this time to direct some remarks to some of the ways false Sardis teachers have surfaced to cause confusion in the ranks of that entity.  And here, of course, the motivation for such teaching is pride and vanity (which will now be assessed).

 

In the context of Sardis "big shots" in Pasadena, California and Bethel, Pennsylvania, mentioned in previous chapters, one sees two glaring examples of pride and vanity.  They are some of the most proud people of all.  But the big shots in these two groups do not have a monopoly on the pride problem.  It is very manifest throughout the religious world (especially in Christendom). 

 

Real students of the Word are acutely aware of the fact that there are otherwise a host of false teachers elsewhere in the various Sardis Sacred Name, Church of God, etc elements scattered across the US, like in Tyler, Odessa, Abilene, Columbia, Holt, Muldrough, Emory, Cisco, Jackson’s Gap, Clarksville, Van Buren, Denver, Meridian, Caldwell, Santa Cruz, Rock City, Henryetta, Edmond, Bethel, Eugene, etc. 

 

Many such groups are now all over the globe.  But beyond these organized groups and their false organizational teachers, there is a constant surge of independent Sardis types out in the world also trying to win converts and proselytes to their particular warped brands of religion. 

 

Most of these independents are former members of one of the Sardis groups and often with the "Sacred Name" and "Identity" ideologies (at least, as popularly taught, but not necessarily with the correct Scriptural viewpoints). 

 

Almost without exception, these independent Sardis teachers, preachers, pastors, and spokesmen generally seem to be SP's (sensation and perceiving) in personality, temperament and character.  With this nature, most of them have just not been very bookish or strong on book learning for truth.  The Scriptures have not always been their source of authority. 

 

But while such people have not been inclined to do much book learning, it is worthwhile to note that a number of them have learned some Scriptural truths from other people who are more capable of original study. 

 

Therefore, many of these independent Sardis types have acquired some good (and bad) teachings on several important topics--like pagan names and words, beards and hair lengths, clothing and dress, identity and race, etc. 

 

 

But Nothing Original 

 

To the extent that any one of us learns truth, it is good.  And clearly, it is well that some of the Sardis types have acquired some verity.  However, this writer now mentions this phenomenon (and it is one) because the Sardis people being referred to, herein, seem to have "learned" original, new material from others and not from their own, personal, Scriptural study, expertise, ability and/or capability. 

 

Consequently, here, it must be significant that these self professed Scriptural teachers, preachers and elders have been unable to come up with any original, new teachings of truth or revelations from the Word on their own; but have had to depend upon the study abilities and capabilities of other individuals (mainly J's in temperament). 

 

Frankly, of the many Sardis SP teachers, preachers, prophets, elders, pastors, evangelists and leaders (independents or organizational) known to me, this writer has never observed a one of them who has ever come up with any important new revelations or truths from his own, individual, personal study of YHWH's Word.

 

Significantly, of whatever important truths they themselves have come to be aware of, such teachings and revelations appear to have come from the study abilities of other persons (evidently of a J type). 

 

Now, admittedly, once learning of new truth from others, these Sardis SP's have sometimes been able to personally go to the Word and verify if the teachings have been true or not.  But this verification of the teachings of others is far different than original study producing new truth.  It's just not the same thing. 

 

 

So--Why? 

 

So the question must remain.  Why is it that so many of the religious big shots, in this category of discussion, never are able to produce new breakthroughs with the Word?  Why is it that whatever they do seem to come up with usually appears to come from other people's research and study and not from their own original work? 

 

Why must such supposedly "great" religious elders, chiefs and leaders know and understand so incredibly little in terms of their own personal abilities and capabilities to break original ground and discover new truths from the Word?  Why is it such persons have to turn to others to learn new truth? 

 

Maybe the verity of all this is that these self appointed religious leaders are, in fact, not in personal contact with The MOST HIGH.  Maybe they are not personally very strong on Scriptural study, knowledge and understanding (except as such benefits have come from others).  Maybe, in fact, these big shots, by and large, have enormous problems with personal cases of intellectual pride and vanity. 

 

Of course, this charge against self appointed religious leaders applies in some degree to perhaps the general population at large, although possibly not in the context of religious knowledge and comprehension.

 

Actually most, if not all persons, have or do possess intellectual pride and vanity to some extent from time to time, as will be assessed in later chapters.  Because our human hearts are deceitful and desperately wicked (Jer 17:9), it is no surprise that human beings do gravitate to intellectual pride and vanity.  This sickness affects the whole population generally. 

 

 

The Idaho Elder 

 

Here, it will be well to mention again a specific SP individual in North Idaho, who was commented upon previously.  In time, he learned the words "Yahweh" and "Yahshua" and immediately decided to become a Sacred Name elder and leader.  So he sent some money to the Assembly of Yahweh in Holt, MI for their “pastor” to come to his home and lay hands on him to become a Holt Assembly of Yahweh elder. 

 

The man involved then started holding himself out to the general public as "Elder" so and so.  He next chose to start signing his name as "Elder" so and so.  In fact, his desire to be the "elder" led him to even put "Elder" so and so on the return addresses on the envelopes of any letters he mailed to others. 

 

This writer once went with this Sacred Name "leader" to a religious meeting in another state.  This Sacred Namer specifically requested that i introduce him to other people as "Elder" so and so.  He felt that with this title, other persons would show him the respect and honor which he believed that he was justly due. 

 

Well, the absolute pride and vanity of this man in wanting to be called and recognized as "elder" was glaringly obvious to me.  Anyone with any brains at all could easily perceive the quest for elevation, status and position by this Sacred Namer. 

 

An observer just couldn't miss it in his personality, not only from his use of the title, but also from his equal obsession with the idea that "he" had "Yahweh's Spirit" and had special insight into Scriptural truth--evidently because he was an “elder.”

 

By the way, on this topic of a title, this writer has never found or read a text, ever in the Word, which suggests, implies or says that the real leaders in YHWH's work are to be called or addressed and/or referred to by any appellative or title at all denoting rank, position or authority.  Nowhere has this writer ever seen properly commissioned elders called and addressed as "elder" so and so in the Book. 

 

The only thing read on this theme is that in terms of the very elect, they are to call each other "brother," as the Word seems to declare (Matt 23:8; Acts 9:17). 

 

In fact, YESHUA expressly condemned the Pharisee big shots who sought out status, position and prestige by being called with titles like teacher, master, leader, “rabbi” and others to apparently include elder, evangelist, pastor, bishop, reverend, etc. (Matt 23:7-10).  The HIGHEST correctly identifies such practices for what they are--pride and vanity. 

 

 

More on the “Elder” 

 

Before leaving this “elder” under discussion, it should be noted that along with the several good truths he learned from others, he also acquired some very bad doctrines and ideas which he likewise felt compelled to teach to others in his role as elder and since he supposedly had "Yahweh's Spirit" and "special" Scriptural insight. 

 

Some of his false teachings are commented upon in other chapters herein and need no explanation now.  But in one important instance, the self appointed elder came to believe that the Passover occurs on Aviv 15 and not Aviv 14, as the Book repeatedly proclaims. 

 

And since this very detrimental teaching has been held by numbers of persons for vast ages, it is likely that the "elder" involved came into this nonsense from the teachings of others.  It absolutely is not original with him or anyone else known by me. 

 

 

More of His Thinking 

 

Another sample of his "special" ability and insight into the Word came about when another third party sold him on the idea that The MESSIAH was not born of a virgin woman.  This thinking, like the above noted nonsense, is held by a number of persons and has been around for ages.  It seems to be Jewish in origin, as is the just mentioned Passover theory. 

 

To support this non-virgin speculation, one has to find a means of doing away with the early chapters of Matthew, for sure, as well as some other texts.  This question of the virgin birth has been elaborated upon in a prior chapter and will receive no further comment here on the issue of pride. 

 

So the "elder" (either through his own initiative or more likely through the influence and teaching of others, since he was an SP) took a close look at YESHUA's genealogy, as recorded in Matthew and compared it to Luke's presentation.  There are, of course, some differences, as any reader can easily tell and as outlined in a former presentation herein.

 

Specifically, the "elder" discovered (possibly for the first time) that from the time of David, the two lists are not the same; that Matthew drops three names between Jehoram and Uzziah (or Ozias), as compared with the genealogies in Kings and Chronicles; and that the genealogies of Luke have several more generations (beyond the dropped three) than Matthew. 

 

These differences (alone and evidently without further research) prompted the "elder" to decide that the early chapters of Matthew were false and the work of a forger.  And here, this writer can never understand why the "elder" chose to discard "just" the early chapters of Matthew and not the whole book or why he condemned Matthew and never allowed that the problem could be with Luke. 

 

On learning of the “elder's findings,” this writer discovered that the "elder" had formed these very, profound conclusions after only a limited perusal of Matthew, Luke, Kings and Chronicles and without any particular deep research (which he probably never would have done anyway, since he was an SP). 

 

For example, this writer pointed out to the "elder" many of the facts, data and information on this question, as outlined in the former chapter herein on the “Genealogy of YESHUA.”  It was pure and simple ignorance and prejudice for the "elder" to be making a big issue over something that could be explained. 

 

 

Problems From the Pastor 

 

Still later, the "elder" came into contact with another religious leader who also felt he had "special" Scriptural knowledge and insight; though he, too, was obviously a man of limited Scriptural ability, research and study. 

 

This other leader, who called himself "pastor" so and so, pointed out to the "elder" that the dating arrangement (through the mentioned kings) in Daniel shows that the prophecies there are not arranged sequentially in time by their dates of occurrence.  In other words, they are out of order.  This dating problem and its solution have been outlined in other remarks herein. 

 

Apparently, the “elder,” in his many, many years of having "Yahweh's Spirit" and "special" Scriptural insight, never knew this fact about Daniel before.  So, armed with this new teaching from the “pastor,” he concluded that something was wrong with the book of Daniel, along with Matthew.  Maybe they both were forgeries, as he saw it. 

 

Over the years, this writer has seen and read a number of Scriptural commentaries and studies on Daniel, as prepared by various and sundry authors and critics who have tried hard to condemn and nullify the book of Daniel--not because of the "elder's" new charge; but rather, because of the book's incredible prophetic accuracy over the ages. 

 

In perhaps 25 studies or so, i have never read of a complaint from a one of the critics over the timing scheme in Daniel.  Surely, if there was any scholarly grounds at all to criticize and condemn Daniel for the dating arrangement, the critics would have done so years ago and long before the "elder" and "pastor" were even born. 

 

And really, from a logical and sensible point of view, no intelligent, educated person with any brains at all would ever try to question a book on prophecy because the prophecies were recorded out of sequence.  Actually, several other Scriptural books and even secular books on prophecy (like Nostradamus and others) have the prophecies recorded out of sequence. 

 

 

Daniel Has Stood the Test of Time 

 

Truly, Daniel has stood the test of 2,500 years of time against real critics, linguists and scholars who have tried to attack it for other reasons (like because it was too accurate in the historical sense of the time of Antiochus Epiphanies to have been a prophetic writing from 400 years earlier; or at least, that’s one of the arguments which critics use to attack Daniel). 

 

Many of these alleged scholars are generally J's and far more qualified and capable of deep, involved, scholarly research and critical study, as compared with the “elder,” an SP, who would only read the texts involved casually, and then make a hasty, unfounded decision. 

 

With this background, this writer asked the "elder" who he was or what was his qualifications to be criticizing the truly great book of Daniel, which has stood the test of time against real scholarly opponents.  The "elder" got mad at me, charged that he was a “somebody,” left in his car, and discontinued all further contact with me. 

 

Actually, these issues, strangely enough, prove the authenticity of both of the books.  If Mattityahu was a forger, would he be so naive, incompetent, sloppy and incapable to have "accidentally" left out three names from a list which anyone could verify from the readily available books of Kings and Chronicles? 

 

It is obviously unthinkable that a forger, this irresponsible and careless, could ever have successfully pawned off a forged book of Matthew to a world with some real critics and scholars ready to do battle whenever and however possible. 

 

In terms of Daniel, can any intelligent, thinking person actually suppose that a forger would forge the book of Daniel and then directly write into it a dating scheme which shows the dates of when the prophecies were received in an out of order sequence. 

 

Surely, a forger as smart and clever as the writer of Daniel would have had to be, would clearly have arranged the prophecies in their proper time sequence--if he was trying to fool someone.  The very fact that Matthew and Daniel have these minor and insignificant problems goes to prove and verify the authenticity of both books. 

 

No forger, above the moron level, would have permitted such issues to creep into his work and open up the possibility of a later question.  Obviously, the writers of both Daniel and Matthew were men of intelligence.  They weren't as limited as the "elder" and "pastor" would have us believe.

 

 

Another Sardis SP Leader 

 

Next, it would be well to mention another Sardis Sacred Name SP individual who thinks that he is similarly commissioned by “Yahweh.” 

 

And actually here, this "elite" man must not be too convinced of the “deity” he is dealing with because he has changed his pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton YHWH some five times that i am aware of.  One would wonder how in the world that a person in direct contact with The MOST HIGH could exist long without knowing the name of The MOST HIGH. 

 

But this "spirit filled" big shot also found a way to buy a leadership title when he, some years ago, went to Odessa, Texas and gave the head man there with the House of Yahweh a gift of $500.  In return, the chief "elder" there responded by designating him as the "evangelist" for the House of Yahweh. 

 

With his new title of prestige and position, this individual began to use and disseminate his symbol of recognition to other people.  He quickly proclaimed himself “Evangelist so and so.” 

 

This individual under discussion is also a very proud person over his supposedly advanced religious knowledge and understanding.  But interestingly, here, like with the other SPs, he seems to have learned his essential truths from other people and not from his own Scriptural ability and capability. 

 

Now, while he is a classic SP in temperament, as are the others, it is fair to give him credit for doing a lot of personal Scriptural study, although it is questionable to what extent his study is productive.  As an SP, he is highly unorganized and unproductive in book study.  He seems to largely learn important new teachings from the work of others and not from his own efforts. 

 

Tragically too, this big shot evangelist, like the heretofore mentioned big shot elder, has acquired some screwball religious ideas which are totally foreign in the Book.  And since he believes he is commissioned from “Yahweh” to teach others, he naturally spreads a lot of confusion and chaos around (which appears to bring harm, hurt and injury to his students). 

 

To the extent that his instructions have been wrong, he has clearly taught others to sin.  For example, as noted above, this "evangelist" has changed his pronunciation of the "name" some five times that i am aware of. 

 

Tragically, for his students, he has never went back to inform them of these changes.  Evidently, the names he taught them and baptized them into, being wrong, would surely prove to be detrimental to the persons involved.  Isn't this teaching others to sin? 

 

This “evangelist,” believing that he has "the spirit" and is in close communications with The ELOHIM, has recently come to believe that he is a second “Moses” and has almost went off the deep end.  There is no question about it, this man is very proud and vain.  He is certainly seeking for ways to be elevated and lifted up through these titles and special offices which he thinks he has. 

 

 

One More Sardis Leader 

 

While this discussion so far has centered on "independent" Sardis Sacred Namers and their quest for elevation and status through the use of titles, it would be well here to mention also one more such false teacher who seems to have had somewhat more success in gathering followers than the independents just described. 

 

This person has a House of Yahweh work ongoing in Abilene, Texas.  He believes that he is a special, elite prophet for the age end with extraordinary links with The HIGHEST and unusual insight into the Scriptures because of his calling and commission. 

 

This big shot even goes so far to assert that he and his brother in Odessa, Texas, are (or were, since the brother later died) the two age ending witnesses of Revelation 11. 

 

This writer knows little about this self appointed "leader" --except for a few of his writings in which he claims to be “Yahweh's chosen.”  In one book, he actually goes to some length to take parts of different Hebrew words (like Abel and others) and try to put them together in a new word to sound out the name of “Abilene.” 

 

He then charges that the Scriptures prove that Abilene is the chosen location for “Yahweh's work.”  In reading this ridiculous nonsense about Abilene, i wondered to my self if it was actually conceivable that any rational person could be stupid and gullible enough to believe such garbage. 

 

Well, of course, the answer to that question is an astounding “yes.”  There are people out in the world who are just dumb enough to fall for the likes of this false prophet.  Hopefully, there aren’t many near the moron level to fall for him.  But please remember, the public is capable of believing anything--regardless of how stupid and ridiculous it may be. 

 

Besides these several religious "leaders, just described, this writer has known a host of other people who likewise like titles and believe that they are elders, pastors, and other big shots. 

 

 

Pastor is Popular 

 

In fact, pastor is a profoundly popular title among professional religious people.  Many persons choose to set themselves up as pastor.  However, many of these self appointed pastors have no congregation, group or followers to be pastor of.  So here, one might ask--pastor of what? 

 

So, with all these examples of people setting themselves up with extraordinary titles, offices and positions, there must be some question over the "why" for such actions?  And the “why” is fairly simple if one knows and understands the very basics of human behavior and thought. 

 

 

We Like to be Lifted Up 

 

Clearly, we wretched, pathetic humans are always on the lookout for ways to be elevated, lifted up, have status and gain recognition.  We sorry humans have desperately evil hearts that are filled with pride and vanity. 

 

Many persons allow this excessive pride to drive them to the point of assuming titles, offices and positions which The MOST HIGH has never authorized.  People just want to be big shots in front of others. 

 

Tragically, there is this tendency of people not only wanting to be big shots; but also, to have the best things in life, as well as to be recognized and to have the praise and acclamation of others. 

 

This is classic pride and vanity in action.  False religious elders and leaders strive to be elevated and lifted up.  And as pointed out in previous comments, pride and vanity are the reasons that the world has false, religious teachers, as the Book charges.

 

Some 2,000 years ago, earlier people also liked the ideas of titles and offices of honor and status, just as today.  The MESSIAH made that point very pungently (Matt 23:7-10).  In those days, just as today, people were seeking recognition, elevation and honor by being greeted, addressed and spoken to with titles like master, teacher, “rabbi,” etc. 

 

Of  course, classic, pagan Christianity has followed suit with its constant uses of various titles--like father, reverend, right reverend, pastor, evangelist, elder, etc--as pointed out earlier.  Tragically, some of these appellatives are very questionable because of their meanings, if for no other reason.  But beyond this, all of them have as their purpose, pride and vanity. 

 

 

More on Important Titles 

 

Hence, notwithstanding the cause for concern over this subject in Christendom, more knowledgeable Scriptural types (especially independent Sardis SP's) have turned to distinctive titles, offices, and positions to try to have status. As outlined in the above remarks, the result here then are the popular words--elder, pastor, evangelist, prophet, preacher and teacher. 

 

As pointed out above, the Scriptural basis for calling upon and addressing the elect in a true group (and this includes the really commissioned elders and leaders) is to call them "brother," as the Word seems to proclaim (Matt 23:8; Acts 9:17).  If brethren should be calling each other brother, why is it that the false leaders want other distinctive titles beyond what the brethren have? 

 

There is no logical explanation for this phenomenon--except to charge it to pride and vanity.  Pride is such a nasty sin because in our evil hearts and minds, we humans are always on the lookout for ways to be elevated and to have confidence and satisfaction.  By being addressed and called elder, pastor or something, some mentally feel that they have achieved success.

 

 

Again, Nothing Original From Them 

 

A repeat of an earlier remark is in order before closing this chapter.  As noted before, this writer has never known or been acquainted with a one of these self chosen (SP) elders, pastors, evangelists, apostles, prophets, etc, who has ever come up with any important new, original truth from their own, individual, personal, Scriptural study, capability or ability. 

 

Whatever truth each one has seemed to have, he has evidently gotten it from others.  They may brag and boast about how great they are and what experts they are and how much they have learned from the Word in order to teach others.  But upon a close scrutiny of their words versus reality, they are sadly lacking. 

 

An exception here, would be the few men who have come up with the incredible belief that they each are age ending prophets, Moshe or something else.  And here, while these status seekers have come up with some "new" religious ideas, it must be acknowledged that these "original" ideas are too far-fetched to be ever linked to Scriptural truth. 

 

One might ask--if these elders and leaders, with their fancy titles of importance, are such big shots linked into The HIGHEST and possessing special truths and Scriptural abilities, why is it then that they are never able to come up with important new revelations and teachings from the Word? 

 

Why is it that they must depend upon the Scriptural study abilities of other persons in order to learn any new truth at all?  Why don't they know the true name of YHWH?  Why are they so ignorant of such a vitally important doctrine which is powerfully linked to salvation? 

 

Maybe, the truth is that these self professing leaders are not, in fact, very strong on personal Scriptural study and understanding.  Maybe, they have to depend upon the abilities of other people.  Maybe, they don't have the special links with The MOST HIGH that they claim to have with their big shot titles of elder, evangelist, pastor, prophet, etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 75--Hypocrisy and Hate

 

 

Two Primary Christian Problems 

 

The purpose of this chapter is to address pride and vanity from the standpoint of what this evil does to Christian people from at least two perspectives.  The first effect of pride and vanity upon most Christians, with few if any exceptions, is that it makes them absolute and outright hypocrites of the worst kind. 

 

And second, pride and vanity has historically had an enormous impact on Christian thinking, so much so, that Christian Israelites, who believe about the same thing (in doctrines and theology), are filled with bitter hatred, strife and division among themselves. 

 

 

Hypocrisy, Pretense and Pride 

 

This matter of hypocrisy in Christians has been briefly broached in a former chapter, but it needs further expatiation.  It seems to surface in all of us at one time or the other and some of The MESSIAH’s most pungent words of criticism often seemed leveled at hypocrites. 

 

Because of this strong correlation between hypocrisy and Christians, it is probable that hypocrisy has the greatest impact on Christians of all in terms of pride and vanity.  In the presentation to follow, this writer has chosen to link in a review of pretense and pretending since these two concepts are so interrelated with hypocrisy. 

 

Former chapters have noted how President Slick Clinton is a master at deception, pretense and hypocrisy.  There is no need to repeat those remarks.  But one must always think of him in any discussion on this theme.  Truly, he has been and is an expert at pretense and hypocrisy. 

 

For a takeoff on this topic, “Webster’s English Dictionary” says for hypocrisy-- “a pretending to be what one is not, or to feel what one does not; esp. a pretense of virtue, piety, etc.”  In regards to hypocrite, Webster gives “one who pretends to be pious, virtuous, etc. without really being so.”  Consequently, a hypocrite, in English thinking, is a pretender, living in a world of make believe, put on and pretense. 

 

In terms of the Scriptural languages, one finds about the same situation.  In the main, and in the Hebrew, the various words of hypocrisy, hypocrite and hypocritical all derive from the prime root “chaneph,” which Strong’s “Hebrew Dictionary” defines as “to spoil, espec. in a moral sense:--corrupt, defile, pollute, profane.” 

 

William Wilson’s “Old Testament Word Studies” gives the adjective form of this word as “one defiled in mind and conscience, yet concealing it, and pretending to be outwardly what he is not inwardly; to have zeal and affection toward God, when his heart is far from him; or dividing his heart between God and the world.” 

 

Furthermore, in Old Testament usage, this word chaneph and its derivatives seem to be used in the context of hypocrite and hypocrisy some eight times in the book of Job, once each in Psalms and Proverbs and some five times by the prophets Yeshayahu and Yirmeyahu. 

 

 

Specific References 

 

Of course, one would expect that the word would be very relevant to Job, because the essence of the theme of that book is on pride and self righteousness (to be assessed in detail in a later chapter).  Obviously, a proud, self righteous person is a hypocrite in every sense of the word.  It is no wonder then that the man Elihu, in Job, would point out that hypocrisy exists in the hearts and minds of evil people (Job 36:13). 

 

In addition to Elihu’s insight on the presence of hypocrisy in the hearts and minds of man, he also offered another gem of wisdom when he specifically linked chaneph with the Adam kind to question the right of Adamites to reign/rule over others (Job 34:30). 

 

Here, the Hebrew text literally reads the “hypocrite Adam man.”  This interesting remark by Elihu could be a far reaching one which opens the door to the possibility that the Adam kind, collectively, are all proud, vain hypocrites and liars in every sense of the word. 

 

However, it really was the prophet Yeshayahu who got to the heart of the matter with his focus on hypocrisy, as being a primary sin of the people of Yisrael--historically and prophetically. 

 

For example, Yeshayahu wrote that judgment will come on all of Yisrael, including even on the widows and orphans, because every one of them is a hypocrite (Isa 9:17); and that Yisrael, generally, will be judged and punished because she is a “hypocritical” nation (Isa 10:6).  Please note here in these texts that the prophet is describing a future condition of Yisrael and not just her historic situation in the 8th century BCE. 

 

In respect to the NT, one finds that the translators have translated the Greek “hupokrisis” to hypocrisy and “hupokrites” to hypocrite.  Clearly, the English hypocrisy and hypocrite connect to these Greek words both in pronunciation and meaning, as the reader will shortly discover. 

 

Regarding hupokrisis, Strong’s “Greek Dictionary” says it means “acting under a feigned part, i.e. (fig.) deceit (hypocrisy).”  For hupokrites, Strong’s has it as “an act or under an assumed character (stage-player), i.e. (fig.) a dissembler (hypocrite).” 

 

An “Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words,” by W. E. Vine, defines “hupokrisis” as “primarily denotes a reply, an answer (akin to hupokrinomai; to answer); then play-acting, as the actors spoke in dialogue; hence, pretense, hypocrisy;” and “hupokrites” as “primarily denotes one who answers; then, a stage-actor; it was a custom for Greek and Roman actors to speak in large masks with mechanical devices for augmenting the force of the voice; hence, the word became used metaphorically of a dissembler, a hypocrite.” 

 

In addition to these several usages of hupokrites and hupokrisis, it should also be noted that the Greek word “anupokritos” (meaning “sincerity, undissembler and unfeigned,” per Strong’s) is, on one occasion, translated “(without) hypocrisy” in the KJV at James 3:17. 

 

 

The NT 

 

Respecting NT usages of these words, the so-called “Synoptic Gospels” reflect that some 28 times The MESSIAH YESHUA chose to specifically identify certain religious Jews in His days of 2,000 years ago as either being outright hypocrites or of practicing hypocrisy (in the vein of pretense). 

 

Interestingly, in two of those situations (Matt 23:14 and Mk 12:40), the NT also went on to identify them as hypocrites in the Greek “prophasis” (meaning an “outward showing, i.e. pretext:” and translated as pretense, per Strong’s). 

 

Furthermore, Kefa, Yakov and Shaul additionally used hupokrisis some five times to generally describe and identify various corrupt people whom they were in contact or relationship with.  These writers all put hypocrisy into a category of evil and cast a warning against such conduct on the part of believers. 

 

 

YESHUA’s Insight 

 

But perhaps the most poignant description of what a “true” religious hypocrite is, in heart, actions and deeds, comes forth in the 23d chapter of Matthew which presents a fairly long dissertation by The SON OF ADAM against certain religious big shots of His time. 

 

Without repeating this outline, which each reader can read on his/her own from the Scriptures, it should also be noted that YESHUA specifically elected to charge certain scribes and Pharisees back then with being classic hypocrites and pretenders who went to great length to be like a cup which was sparkling clean and lily-white on the outside; but which, on the inside, was corrupt, profane and dirty (Matt 23:25-26). 

 

In this same outstanding chapter, but in another graphic illustration, SALVATION went on to charge these fake hypocrites with being like white washed and beautiful tombs on the outside, in terms of appearance and show.  However, on the inside of these white washed tombs, they were full of dead men’s bones and utter corruption (Matt 23:27). 

 

And in another classic allegory, The MESSIAH noted that outwardly, these same religious people seemed to be just and upright persons in terms of appearance and show, as viewed externally.  But inwardly, they were full of pretense, lawlessness and iniquity (Ps 5:9; Matt 23:28). 

 

Actually, in the crux of Matthew 23 and perhaps all of the rest of the Scriptural uses of hypocrisy, hypocrites and pretense, the verses are discussing and describing people who are basically corrupt, sorry and profane in heart, mind and spirit; but who, otherwise, appear outwardly to be religious, good, holy, saints, etc. 

 

In respect to such persons, they are, of course, living in a world of make believe, put on and play acting.  In short, it is a life of deceit and lies. 

 

 

Pride in Hypocrites 

 

But beyond all of the sin and iniquity present in such individuals, there is another facet to this whole thing which also acts to cut them off from realizing their true states and their real need for grace.  This other reality is, tragically, the possession of pride and vanity in these same persons. 

 

And in both cases, pride and vanity, as well as in hypocrisy and pretense, we all seem to have the problem and to be largely blind and ignorant of our possession of such evil.  This reality and true situation in man has been amply discussed in previous comments in this work on pride and vanity. 

 

Moreover, The MESSIAH poignantly hurled the charge (in Matthew 23) at the religious ones of His day by bringing up the issues of pride, vanity and self exaltation versus the need for humility and meekness--precisely in the context of hypocrisy and pretense for the subjects under discussion therein (Matt 23:2, 5-12). 

 

The point being from that presentation is that YESHUA precisely linked hypocrisy and pretense in with pride and vanity.  In other words, hypocrites are, in reality, very proud and vain people, seemingly without exception.  The two themes go together since all men seem to be infected with these problems. 

 

Perhaps here, it would be well to pause for a minute and take note of the fact that religious pride, vanity and hypocrisy are not and have not been just phenomena out of history to describe the Jews of 2,000 years ago. 

 

Ignorant, proud, vain hypocrites of today like to read texts like Matthew 23 and suppose that the message was one only for the “evil” Jews of those days.  But friend, that’s not the way it is with the several references shown in this study. 

 

 

For Today As Well 

 

On the contrary, those Scriptures are just as much for so-called humanity today as they were for the Jews of ages ago.  The truth is that these very charges apply to multitudes of people today and particularly to those of the House of Yisrael, both historically and presently, as Yeshayahu so powerfully declared (Isa 9:17; 10:6). 

 

Yes, as hard as it is to grasp by persons alive in our time, the truth is that modern Christians (to include Identity and Sacred Name types) of today’s House of Yisrael presently are just as sorry and guilty of hypocrisy as was the Jews of 20 centuries ago.  Hypocrisy and pride affect persons today, as much as ever.  Truly, all of so-called humanity has the problem. 

 

Incidentally, on this theme, it is worthwhile to observe that a 1991 book on “The Day America Told The Truth,” by James Patterson and Peter Kim, said that some 58% of Americans say things which they don’t really mean; about 42% won’t stand up for what they actually believe in; and finally, around 29% admit to being a clear and certain hypocrite most of the time.  Those numbers are up in 2003. 

 

As one can readily perceive from these findings, vast numbers of people generally acknowledge that they are outright hypocrites.  Besides these honest confessions, one should also recognize that there are huge numbers of individuals who are stupid, uninformed, misinformed, deceived and/or dishonest; so much so that they won’t or can’t admit that they are hypocrites. 

 

The point being from all of this is that hypocrisy is as bad today (if not worse) as it ever was in historic times.  The essence of this is that hypocrites and pretenders are, in fact, proud and vain people who are commonly found all over the world. 

 

It is probably verity that the very motivations and inspirations for hypocrisy and pretense are, in actuality, due to the presence of pride and vanity.  Thus, when pride and vanity are present in us, as they are in all of us, it could well be that we are all likewise fake hypocrites, as Elihu may have observed many ages ago (Job 34:30). 

 

 

Pride--A Barrier to Unity 

 

The next important aspect of pride on numbers of Christian Israelites has been the prevailing disunity among many of them who believe the same basic doctrines and teachings.  In mentioning this disunity, there is no intent to legitimize or justify the specific doctrinal teachings, most of which are false and contrary to truth, as will be demonstrated in succeeding chapters.  

 

One of the primary, descriptive aspects of the historic Sardis organization(s) and people, discussed in this study, has been their absolute propensity for disunity and the impossibility for the collective Sardis types to ever find and promote any degree of unity among themselves except in isolated cases.  In the main, Sardis people seem to thrive on division; and of course, on the resulting confusion and pandemonium. 

 

Now, the subject of Sardis divisions and fragmentations can be an extensive one and one which this writer would not want to broach to any extent in the present work.  But despite the vast scope of this historic Sardis problem (and Baptist problem as well), it is possible to focus somewhat on the issue of "why" for the resulting disunity and lack of togetherness.  This will now be done. 

 

While there might be several different reasons for the constant Sardis separations, it does seem evident that, in the main, the problem can be recognized as one of pride and vanity. 

 

Specifically, the evidence is persuasive that Sardis individuals, by and large, have been plagued with an excessive dose of intellectual pride and vanity (to be later assessed), coupled with a ballooning surge of stubbornness.  In this environment, the combination of intellectual pride and vanity with stubbornness inevitably spells out one thing and one thing only--self will. 

 

Of course, any discussion and approach to these terms--intellectual pride and vanity, stubbornness and self will--fit into the broad classification of carnality, pride and vanity, as observed in preceding remarks.  Additionally, please note here that it might be argued that in many ways, self will is one of the worse forms of pride and vanity, if not the worst form. 

 

Self will is a particularly bad condition of carnality because it seems to affect all of us from time to time without exception. In effect, we all want our way and especially in intellectual matters since we all think so highly of our supposedly great minds and abilities to think, judge and deduce right and wrong (this reality will be described in later chapters). 

 

 

Adam and Eve, Revisited 

 

By and large, most of us are just not prepared to be wrong or to admit that we are wrong--on anything.  Generally, we'll go to any length of lying, cheating, stealing, deceiving, etc in order to avoid having to say "I was wrong" or "I am wrong."  On this, please consider the situation with Adam and Eve, as commented upon previously herein. 

 

This Adam and Eve problem will be broached again in some detail in later remarks.  But for now, it can be said that Adam first blamed Eve.  Then he went on to imply that it was YHWH's fault for giving her to him (Gen 3:12). 

 

Likewise, when questioned, Eve naturally refused to admit she was wrong.  Instead, she tried to shift the blame to Satan (Gen 3:13).  Effectively, we all are like Adam and Eve in terms of carnality.  In short, we are just not people of real character and integrity. 

 

 

Self Will 

 

Also, on this theme of self will, it's worth noting that many children grow up spoiled rotten and never having to hear the word "no."  Naturally, in this environment, the spoiled child (and later adult) is totally devoted to self will.  He (or she) must have his way and there is no other allowable alternative. 

 

Here, this writer has seen and observed these mentioned children--just as you probably have seen and observed such spoiled brats who are willing to lay down on the floor and kick and scream until they have their way in something with a weak and ineffective parent. 

 

And it isn't only that some spoiled brats have temper tantrums in order to have their way; but also, it is quite true that many "supposed" adults are of the same caliber.  Besides the blatant example of the spoiled brat (or adult), one can actually see the phenomenon of self will surfacing in almost everything done or experienced in life.  All of us make decisions, by and large, on the basis of what we want for ourselves. 

 

We do this in terms of diet (we eat what we want to eat and not necessarily what we should eat), entertainment (on TV, we watch what we want to watch and not necessarily what we should watch) and usage of our time (we expend our time, energy and money on things that interest us or things we want to and not necessarily things which truly benefit us or grant us truth),

 

We do this in terms of marriage (we marry the person we want to marry and not necessarily the person we should marry--by the way, this seems to be the reason that the Scriptures teach the value of having parents decide on a marriage mate since parents may be less influenced on the will of the child versus who might be the best mate), jobs (we choose an occupation based on what we want in terms of pride and vanity and not necessarily because it is right), and on and on. 

 

Self will seems to affect all of us in various ways and to various degrees.  Tragically, none of us in the flesh are able to avoid it.  Indeed, it is a rare person who would really expend the time, energy and money to find out YHWH's position for himself in anything he is faced with--like diet, entertainment, usage of time, marriage, job, etc. 

 

In fact, because of the constant stream of lies told to us by Christian teachers and friends, we conduct our lives on the premise that YHWH has no position for us on anything.  By this thinking, all people are free to choose whatever path they want to follow for their lives; or, as our earlier ancestors had done when every man did what was right in his own eyes (Jud 21:25). 

 

 

Self Will Dominates Us All! 

 

Consequently, man allows self will to completely dominate his wishes and thinking.  We all try to experience life on our terms (by eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, as was addressed in a former chapter), instead of accepting rote learning from YHWH's Word (of eating from the tree of life). 

 

Incidentally, this idea of having to “experience” life brings up an old saying an older man told me about many years ago.  He said-- “Experience is a dear school and fools will learn from no other” (quoted earlier). 

 

In the discussion so far, the comments on self will would seem to conjecture up in our minds the condition of us humans just having to have our way in the secular life here on earth.  And this is verity.  But the matter of self will is far more extensive and profound than just in our secular lives. 

 

In truth, most of us also must have our way and to display self will in our religious lives as well.  It is no wonder then that the Book would assert that we sorry humans like to have our ears tickled with lies and deceptions and to be told smooth things which elevate and propel us up (Isa 30:10; II Tim 4:3). 

 

Yes, self will can and does dominate religious people in their religious lives--just as much as it infects and contaminates all of us in our secular lives.  Obviously, self will is amply present in the religious lives of Sardis (and Baptist) people who all clearly are still carnal and have had no experience with the grant of true repentance and grace. 

 

Many years ago, when this writer first learned of the Sabbath and a "few" other truths, i tried to have some fellowship with some of the Sabbathkeeping groups. 

 

After an initial membership in one of them, i eventually resolved to be just an independent, as i found "all" of the groups sadly lacking in terms of truth.  As an independent, i tried for a while to have some contact with other independents of similar persuasion; which, in the main, were Sardis, Identity and Sacred Namers. 

 

 

Sardis Divisions 

 

These linkages, over the years, gave me some appreciation of the Sardis division problem which probably could never have been received in any other way.  It always was fascinating to me to see how incredibly difficult it was to ever achieve any unity with these Sardis people because of their total devotion and dedication to self will. 

 

And in saying this, this writer does not want to be the pot calling the kettle black.  Maybe some of them would have the same condemnation about me as i have stated about them.  Maybe we all have been obsessed with self will to perpetuate the divisions.  Of course, only YHWH can judge. 

 

Howbeit, by and large, most of the Sardis independents whom i have known were SPs (sensation and perceiving in temperament, discussed in the Prologue) and not really very good in using the Scriptures for extended, critical and thorough study and research. 

 

Being SPs, many of them formed their beliefs from dialogue with others or on reading limited, simple tracts which were usually inadequate in respect to a comprehensive study of the issues involved on a particular theme. 

 

With this incomplete input from others, the typical Sardis SP would get locked into a theory without personally having had to spent vast sums of energy, time and effort to do a thorough and complete study of YHWH's Word on the issue. 

 

On this, Sardis SPs are just like the average John Doe SP on the street.  They are just not prepared to spend the hours and hours needed in deep study to read, research and consider all, 100%, of the relevant Scriptures on a complex point. 

 

The next problem many of these Sardis independents have is that they think, assume and presume that they have "the spirit," which automatically gives them special insight and revelations into truth. 

 

Some of them furthermore have been ordained or have just (self) appointed themselves as religious leaders, elders, pastors, bishops, prophets, etc.  Of course, a layman nobody, like this writer, has found it very hard to converse with any of these religious big shots who believe that they have "the spirit."  Such people look upon themselves as teaching “rabbis” and lay persons as their students. 

 

With this background, it is readily apparent that these Sardis elders and leaders were all dominated by the pride and vanity of self will.  Therefore, it was very hard to talk to them and harder to convince them of anything to promote unity.  Generally, their minds were made up and they just had to have their way in any dialogue just as a spoiled brat must prevail in a temper tantrum. 

 

Clearly, in the situation being described, one can see how utterly impossible it is for Sardis independents to ever attain complete unity.  Of course, the barrier always is and always has been the presence of pride and vanity in some or all of the parties involved.  Intellectual pride and vanity, coupled with stubbornness, bothers Sardis independents--just like it contaminates the rest of so-called humanity. 

 

 

The Sardis “Elder,” Revisited 

 

To demonstrate the extraordinary difficulty which can be faced in trying to achieve some measure of doctrinal unity, this writer will share with the reader now a situation which arose some years ago as i tried to resolve some existing divisional problems with a Sardis, Sacred Name, Identity, "elder" (he claimed to be one) and friend of mine who i had many beliefs in common with (as mentioned earlier). 

 

We were both supposedly feast day observers.  But there was a hang up between us on a couple of points about the calendar (which by the way has been a real divisive problem for many of the Sardis types who have tried to observe the feasts). 

 

Because of these differences and my desire for unity, i "foolishly" wanted to try to convince my "elder" friend of what appeared to be truth to me from YHWH's Word.  Of course, both he and i should be interested in and striving for truth and unity. 

 

After all, there is much Scriptural authority which clearly demands that true believers must be unified in their faith in order to have correct fellowship and experience proper brotherly love (Ps 55:14; 133:1; Isa 45:20; Amos 3:3; Acts 1:14; 2:1; 4:32; Rom 12:36; 15:5; II Cor 13:11; Eph 2:1-3; 4:1-5, 13; Phil 1:27; 2:2; 3:8; 4:2; Col 1:9; II Thes 2:1-2; Heb 10:25).    

 

On this theme, perhaps Shaul wrote out the need best of all when he said that "I urge and entreat you, brethren, by the name of... (YESHUA), that all of you be in perfect harmony, and full agreement in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you; but that you be perfectly united in your common understanding and in your opinions and judgments" (I Cor 1:10, per the “Amplified Translation”). 

 

With such a powerful declaration as this, why is it then that so many alleged believers, especially Sardis types, are so incredibly opposed to unity and agreement?  Thus, i pursued the subject causing the division with the "elder."  Our first point of contention was over the question of which day to start the count to Pentecost. 

 

He argued that the count was from the day following the weekly Sabbath of Unleavened Bread while i stated it was the day following the High Sabbath of Aviv 15 (this question will be addressed in a later chapter).  His position was that since my thinking was the same as the Jewish Pharisees, i was wrong. 

 

Since he was Identity, he would not allow that the Jews could be right on this matter or anything else.  In his eyes, they were evidently children of the Devil and thus wrong.  Quickly, it developed that neither of us would budge from our choices.  So the matter was dropped and no more efforts at unity were pursued in the next several days and meetings. 

 

 

One More Try 

 

In time, i once more had an opportunity to visit with my "elder" friend and again tried the unity issue on another point of disagreement between us.  This issue was over the question of dating the Passover.  Was it Aviv 14 or Aviv 15?  i said the 14th and he argued the 15th (this whole question also will be addressed in a later chapter herein). 

 

His position was that in the year of YESHUA's death, The MESSIAH kept the Passover a day early--effectively saying He kept it on the wrong day.  The "elder" pegged the timing for slaying the lamb about 3 PM on the afternoon of Aviv 14 and the eating of the Passover meal that evening at the start of Aviv 15.  My understanding is that the lamb was slain early on the 14th and the meal was eaten the same night. 

 

Interestingly, my friend's argument was based essentially on the Jewish position which says that the Passover falls on the 15th.  Effectively, he was saying that the Jews were correct on Passover in the year of YESHUA's death and not wrong as i contended. 

 

i found this argument from the "elder" incredible because it completely countered his position on the count to Pentecost which he had argued with me on several days earlier.  In the first instance, he argued against the Jews, implying that they were of the Devil and had to be wrong.  Then, in the second situation, he argued with the Jews saying that they had to be right. 

 

 

He Was A Hypocrite

 

When i finally was able to convince him of what a hypocrite he was on this topic, he simply dropped the argument about the Jews and then proceeded to switch his whole strategy to another issue. 

 

Next, he argued that in Leviticus 23:32, the day of Atonement is described as starting on the ninth day (of the seventh month) at even as it approaches Aviv 10.  Therefore, in his reasoning, a reference to Aviv 14, at even, would mean as it approaches Aviv 15. 

 

Again, he was shot down on this by my pointing out that the Hebrew at Lev 23:32 is entirely different with different wording than the other texts on the Passover (per Young's “Analytical Concordance”).  This issue will be addressed in later chapters. 

 

Many of the references associated with the Passover, like at Exodus 12:6 and elsewhere, describe the slaying of the lambs as "between the evenings," which is just not the presentation at Lev 23:32.  Rather than admit he was wrong on Lev 23:32, he shifted his position again and seized what i had said as his new argument. 

 

His next approach, using my mention of Exodus 12:6, was that between the evenings in that text meant about 3 PM in the afternoon.  Again, he had no authority or basis for this claim except the word and interpretation of the Jews (this argument thus threw him back to the Jews, which i thought we had covered at the start). 

 

This writer then tried to show him that the Scriptures actually go on to provide one key definition on exactly what "between the evenings" means--as at Exodus 30:8, where it clearly is not 3 PM in the afternoon.  Of course, he would never admit he was wrong.  After all, he had "the spirit" he thought and was an “elder.”  Obviously, too, the self will in him was regulating his entire thinking. 

 

From this dialogue, it soon became quite apparent to me that his reasoning was circular in motion and never ending.  As i dealt with one point, he would just shift to another one until we eventually came back to the beginning on the question of the authority of the Jews (thus, a circle).  And this seemed to go on and on with no ending. 

 

 

The Difficulty of Study 

 

Additionally, it was evident to me that the man had never taken the time to write out, study and contemplate all, 100%, of the Scriptures involved. 

 

Obviously, he had been exposed earlier to some limited teachings on the subject, either orally from someone else or perhaps a small tract or writing.  But wherever he got it, he failed to get all of the information he needed in order to approach truth and understanding.  What he got was just wrong. 

 

The above illustration of the "elder" has been mentioned only to bring out the point that the man was filled with self will (based on intellectual vanity and stubbornness).  And here he was, claiming to have the spirit and be an elder over YHWH's people. 

 

Since he was a Sardis SP in mentality, it was manifest to me that there would be no way we ever could sit down and find common ground, agreement and unity on any of the points which separated us.  Of course, this is the basic problem facing all of the Sardis types.  They are just not about to let go of their self will--even in religion. 

 

Before closing this discussion, mention needs to be made on how a person should tackle a complicated Scriptural question like those two mentioned above.  Frankly, this writer is convinced that the student of truth must be willing to spend a great amount of time and energy to find truth.

 

To do this, one probably should be willing to get a good concordance out and write down, compare and study all, 100%, of the relevant Scriptures until he is able to harmonize all of them and make them all say the same thing in truth.  This method has been elaborated upon in preceding chapters herein. 

 

For a summary, YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.  Question, can a self willed Sardis big shot, leader, preacher and "elder" ever have experienced and/or be operating under grace? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 76--Arrogance

 

 

The Arrogance Problem 

 

One of the most apparent and recognizable forms and manifestations of pride in action surfaces in people in their display of arrogance.  This aspect or manifestation of pride has been briefly mentioned in the prior chapters.  But it is so incredibly important that it will be discussed again in some detail at this time. 

 

And while many of us can often perceive some presence of this evil in others, by and large, we usually remain in a blinded state in terms of its true dimension and prevalence.  Possibly, part of the problem with arrogance is that it frequently exists in thoughts and very subtle actions and not necessarily in obvious direct words and speech. 

 

An understanding of arrogance also seems complicated because the word is somewhat difficult to readily define and describe.  So often, people think that they know what it is.  However, in trying to use words to tell what it seems to be, a problem inevitably surfaces for many individuals over much of the time. 

 

 

Some Definitions 

 

To examine the arrogance concept, it would be well here to take a look at “Roget's College Thesaurus,” which gives us these synonyms:  “pride, haughtiness, self-importance, insolence, and presumptuousness.” 

 

“Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary” goes on to define arrogance as "a feeling or an impression of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or presumptuous claims."  For the related word “haughty,” Webster's says it means to be "blatantly and disdainfully proud." 

 

In turning to the Hebrew, one finds a host of words which carry similar meanings, and which the King James translators have chosen to translate as arrogancy, haughty, haughtiness, excellency, and of course, pride, proud and proudly.  Without attempting to look closely at all of the Hebrew words involved, it would be useful to single out and consider a few of the more important ones. 

 

First, for the Hebrew “gaown,” William Wilson's “Old Testament Word Studies” says:  "elevation, exaltation; excellence, swelling pride; as of waves, and of self-exaltation, arrogance, pride, and haughtiness."  Incidentally, this word gaown is from the Hebrew prime root "ga-ah," which Strong's “Hebrew Dictionary” defines as "to mount up; hence in gen. to rise (fig.) be majestic--gloriously, grow up, increase, be risen, triumph." 

 

Another important Hebrew word in this area is "athaq," which the “Old Testament Word Studies” book defines as "that which is grown old, hard, and durable; it seems to denote an obstinate, unrelenting disposition, showing itself in insolence, pride and violence." 

 

Finally, Strong's “Hebrew Dictionary” addresses the Hebrew word "rum" as "to be high act. to rise or raise (in various applications, lit. or fig.):--bring up, exalt (self), extol, give, go up, haughty; heave (up), (be, lift up on, make on, set up on, too) high (-er, one), hold (up), up, levy, lift (-er) up, (be) lofty, (X a) loud, mount up, offer (up), + presumptuously, (be) promote (-ion), proud, set up, tall (-er), take (away, off, up), breed worms." 

 

With this background and with a realization of the sometimes difficulty or uncertainty in recognizing arrogance, this writer will share some instances of this phenomenon in action, as apparent over the years. 

 

 

William Shakespeare 

 

Elizabethan England produced one of the most famous playwrights of all time in the vein of William Shakespeare (1564-1616).  “The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia” (p. 767) calls him the greatest of all playwrights.  While Shakespeare wrote plays on all kinds of themes, it is evident that he had a certain fascination with history and especially ancient Roman history. 

 

Accordingly, in the year 1599, Shakespeare wrote one of the most famous tragedies of all time in his work on “Julius Caesar” (evidently first produced in 1623, after the date of the death of its author).  In historic America, the works of William Shakespeare gained popular support and many of them were presented on the live stage.  In the case of Julius Caesar, Hollywood produced at least two film versions of the story. 

 

The first of the Hollywood efforts came out from MGM studios in 1953 with Marlon Brando, James Mason, Louis Calhern and others.  This MGM production received five Academy Awards nominations.  Despite its huge success, it somehow may not have really portrayed the idea involved (at least, as far as the evil and plotting of the conspirators).  This film will be shortly assessed below. 

 

Otherwise, in 1970, Republic Pictures entered the Shakespeare arena when it put out the second version of “Julius Caesar,” with a cast of top starts--including Charlton Heston, Jason Robards, Robert Vaughn, Richard Johnson, Richard Chamberlain, John Gielgud and others. 

 

This Republic film version possibly may have better captured the image that Shakespeare had in mind in depicting the enormous hate and arrogance in the plotters and murderers of Caesar, in comparison with the MGM version (at least, as this writer can best determine).  

 

 

The Background on Julius Caesar 

 

Per “The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia” (p. 125), Caius Julius Caesar was born in Rome in about 102 BCE of one of the oldest patrician families.  He spent his life in the democratic or popular party and seems to have had much support among many of the Roman citizens. 

 

After sharing power over Rome with Pompey and Crassus during the First Triumvirate (which he helped organize in 60 BCE), Caesar continued to gain fame with his production of the Julian calendar (to be addressed in later chapters) and with his military leadership in the Roman wars in the West. 

 

In the waning days of the First Triumvirate, Caesar crossed the Rubicon and entered Italy to successfully defeat Pompey in 48 BCE in a raging civil war.  Thereupon, Caesar took over the Roman Empire.  In 44 BCE, the Roman Senate made him dictator for life (which office the US will likely bestow upon its president in a coming year). 

 

Despite his many military and political successes, Caesar was a very controversial figure in Roman history.  Some thought that he was a defender of the rights of the people against the oligarchy, while others looked upon him as an ambitious demagogue who forced his way into power and destroyed the republic. 

 

 

The Conspirators 

 

Thus, some of Caesar’s former friends and allies came to hate him and the turn of events.  This list included Cassius, Cimber, Casca and Marcus Junius Brutus (c85-42 BCE), who entered into a conspiracy to murder Caesar.  Whether these conspirators were honest, dedicated Romans, pursuing a noble cause, or something else, may not be fully understood in the context of history. 

 

It might be said that some of them did believe that their actions were patriotic.  But it also could be established that they, themselves, were greedy, ambitious people who were each trying to take over the Roman Empire and become the head man or one of the head men, as the case may be. 

 

In any case, Brutus came to be the leader and the most important figure in the group.  He had once been a friend of both Pompey and Caesar.  During the Caesar-Pompey conflict, Brutus sided with Pompey.  Therefore, he could have been in serious trouble when Caesar gained power.  But Caesar pardoned him and he was restored to being a big shot in Rome and the Roman military. 

 

Perhaps it was this former Caesar-Brutus friendship and the eventual conflict and the pardon or something else which combined to convey the image that Brutus was the classic double-crosser of all history.  Certainly, the word “brutus” has come to convey the message of a deceiver who secretly plots to destroy or hurt a friend. 

 

Perhaps this was the image shared by Shakespeare.  Because, in his play, he built the role of Brutus, Cassius and the other plotters into being the deceitful evil ones, opposing the more righteous and publicly beloved Caesar.  The Republic Pictures- Hollywood version picked upon this same theme when Caesar and his colleague, Mark Antony, became the heroes in opposition to Brutus and the villains. 

 

In this presentation, Charlton Heston played Mark Antony while Jason Robards played Brutus.   One of the characteristics of both Robards and Heston was that somehow they both always seemed to convey an image of arrogance and insolence in their screen performances.  While Heston often played the hero, somehow this idea inevitably came through on him.  He just seemed to be arrogant. 

 

Jason Robards, now deceased, typically played the bad guy and this profile fit his image to the T.  He easily conveyed the role of the arrogant, bad guy.  Hence, he was right at home in playing the deceitful, evil Brutus.   Since Robards could so easily be the villain, he completely illustrated and communicated what Shakespeare (and history) must have had in mind on Brutus. 

 

The essence here is that in Republic’s production of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the studio chose a perfect actor in the form of Jason Robards to be one of the most vile, evil, deceitful, arrogant, nasty, double-crossing people in history (or at least, as Shakespeare and history have come to believe--whether true or not). 

 

Robards performed masterfully in this role.  He was the perfect actor (making one wonder if he had Amalekite genes, as will be later described herein) to supposedly be a friend of Caesar--while he simultaneously was plotting behind his back to murder him.  On the planned day in 44 BCE, Brutus accompanied his friend Caesar into the Senate and was one of the conspirators who plunged his own dagger into his friend. 

 

 

A Word on the MGM Version 

 

Though the MGM presentation came out first, it somehow never offered the realism or work of Robards in characterizing the incredibly diabolical evil of Brutus and his co-conspirators.  In the MGM issue, James Mason played Brutus while Louis Calhern portrayed Caesar and Brando took the role of Mark Antony. 

 

James Mason was a great actor and one who usually did not have to take a back seat to any of his colleagues.  But Mason was never an inherently arrogant or insolent person.  At least, this image never came through on him in his films.  In his attempt to be Brutus, he just wasn’t a bad guy at all. 

 

Conversely, the very Amalekite appearing Louis Calhern (with his pronounced Hittite nose) was historically like Robards in portraying an image of arrogance and meanness.  Calhern just seemed to be naturally arrogant and this image clearly came through in his attempts to act as Julius Caesar. 

 

As elsewhere noted herein, Brando has some semblance of that same classic Hittite nose as well.  He, too, often appears to be an arrogant and insolent man.  Or at least, this idea came across for him in his film presentations. 

 

So, in the MGM version on Julius Caesar, Caesar and Mark Antony turned out to be arrogant and nasty people while the real supposed villain, Brutus, turned out to be a fairly decent man--at least, in demeanor and how the actors came across in the movie.

 

The point of this is that Robards (in the Republic version) really delivered in terms of what probably was involved with Brutus.  Manifestly, Brutus was a plotter and diabolically evil.  Clearly, he very likely was an arrogant man, as Robards communicated. 

 

Obviously, this problem of arrogance seems to come across in some people automatically (as in the cases of Robards, Calhern, Brando, Heston and other actors in films and on the stage).  Conversely, other people somehow just don’t seem to project that image and even if they try to do so in the context of stage acting. 

 

Again, Shakespeare and history have generally painted the picture of evil for Brutus and his colleagues.  Whether they were this bad or not is not that clear from history.  But what is clear is that Caesar, Mark Antony, Octavian (Caesar’s grandnephew and successor), Brutus, Cassius and the others were all probably very arrogant men and each of them was filled with pride in trying to take over and rule the Roman Empire. 

 

 

The Marianas Example 

 

The next example of arrogance concerns the Chamorro native peoples (a racial mixture of White, Black, Yellow and Red) of the Northern Mariana Islands (in Micronesia) where this writer once lived and worked for a number of years. 

 

It appears that in the historical vein, the native Chamorros of the Mariana Islands in the North Pacific were probably once a fairly humble people and particularly while they were in slavery to the Spanish and Japanese over a period in excess of 400 years. 

 

Of course, in those days of bondage, the ruling powers looked upon them as low-life animals, hardly worthy of any favorable consideration or decent treatment.  Regularly, and often, they were beaten, worked, killed, (women) raped and mistreated routinely.  Then, in 1945, the United States took over the Marianas and things began to change for the Chamorros. 

 

For a start, the American administration granted them US Commonwealth status with a host of welfare and give away programs (including, of course, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid and everything else imaginable).  Washington entered into a contract with the locals to grant them tens of millions of dollars annually in aid and assistance (effectively bribes and payoffs for their allegiance and political support). 

 

Also, while it had been Japan that abused and hurt these natives for years, it was good old Uncle Sap who elected to pay the several hundred surviving Chamorros from WWII and their descendants (now numbering around 15,000) war repatriations in the hundreds of millions of dollars.  And to top everything else off, the decade of the 1980s saw a boom develop in the Marianas in Japanese tourism. 

 

To meet the needs of this huge influx of wealthy visitors, a number of large companies and big money interests began leasing up the available land and buildings for hotels and other facilities.  Naturally, the land prices went up and soon many of the Chamorros were quite well off financially (over 100 millionaires in a population of 15,000). 

 

Now, whatever else may be said about the wealth and prosperity that have come to a population in a 50-year period, it is patently obvious that the Chamorros today are perhaps some of the most arrogant and proud people one will ever come across in a lifetime. 

 

And how does a person describe this arrogance and insolence in the collective sense?  Well, it's not an easy proposition, although it is blatantly present when one comes into contact with or have dealings with these local, indigenous people. 

 

Perhaps the best way to broach it is to mention that most Chamorros at large (unless it is the very old ones who lived under the Japanese administration) walk, talk and conduct their affairs and lives as if they were the greatest things on earth. 

 

They just seem to exhibit an arrogant display of superiority toward others (clearly, from the food stamps, money and wealth that have come their way).  They think and act like super big shots. 

 

 

One Chamorro Big Shot 

 

One man this writer recalls, in particular, always seemed to epitomize the concept of arrogancy in action.  This person was the local government’s personnel officer for many years. 

 

This position gave him some power and authority which most of the rest of them never ever had and particularly since the only Chamorros who hold down jobs are government workers (which require little or no work and allow much time off for high salaries). 

 

And although the subject man wasn't a tall or dominate type of individual from a physical point of view, he liked to strut about and hold himself out to others as a very superior big shot gifted with all sorts of wonderful attributes.  He really thought he was the greatest (as Muhammed Ali claimed to be for years). 

 

The individual under discussion tended to be an introvert and thus not really much of a big talker.  But boy, in the presence of others, he acted and carried on as if he was the most important and authoritative person in the world. 

 

It always seemed to be his air, his way, his attitude, his snide remarks and his insolent manner of acting which made one want to stay away from him.  He was an obnoxiously arrogant, belligerent, nasty person to have to deal with.  Categorically, he was extremely proud and vain--evidently much so over his job and the power and authority he possessed over the many other Chamorros. 

 

 

A Black Big Shot 

 

This writer’s work in the Marianas also brings to mind perhaps one of the next most blatant single example of arrogancy in action.  This one surfaced in the life style of a Negro man from Trinidad, who was the chairman of the Business Education Department at a small college on Saipan Island. 

 

As is so often true with Blacks, in general, this one was not particularly bright, competent or able in his job; although he was an extrovert and fairly capable as a big talker (to fool people about his own abilities and qualifications) and a braggart and boaster to elevate himself.  Classically, he was a dud, par excellence.  But nevertheless, he was in a position of power and authority over others. 

 

And be assured, he was proud, vain and arrogant over his authority and position in terms of his relations with the other instructors and contemporaries he dealt with.  He was incredibly rude, bossy, discourteous, inconsiderate and obnoxious to most of the persons he came into contact with and especially those under his supervision. 

 

But most of all, he was arrogant and abusive to subordinates and others who may have crossed him in some way.  It was not good for subordinates to become his enemy.  Soon, he became one of the most disliked persons on the campus. 

 

The subject of this sketch had certain mannerisms which definitely set him apart from other individuals.  For example, when he was walking about the halls and grounds, he seemed to be pompous and to strut about like he was a cocky, little, black, banny rooster (he was only a little over five feet tall). 

 

He liked to convey the image that he was an extremely important person and everybody should back off and admire how great and wonderful he was. 

 

In contacts with people he didn’t like or with his subordinates, if they were not in his grace, he had a habit of seeming to project a very harsh, hateful frown on his face by wrinkling his forehead, closing his mouth, (possibly) gritting his teeth, throwing out his chest and closely approaching his adversary in a provocative, intimidating, obnoxious and offensive manner with contempt and arrogance in his eyes, as if to dare or defy anyone to challenge him and his authority. 

 

In regards to subordinates, he would hatefully order them around and in terms of people he just didn’t like, his stance would arrogantly ask--who are you and what do you want? 

 

Clearly, this person was one of the most arrogant and nasty persons that this writer has had the unhappy experience of being associated with in many, many years.  He truly was a man who one just wouldn’t want to deal with.  Of benefit to numbers of people under him, college officials, in time, began to realize how absolutely bad he was.  So they relieved him of his management duties.     

 

 

Arrogant Americans 

 

Besides the proud Micronesians, described above, in the context of the Saipanese, about the only other modern national population this writer has observed, which are about as arrogant and proud in the collective sense, are the American people. 

 

Like the Chamorros, the Americans over the years seem to have achieved some status and positions of wealth and affluence.  Perhaps in the former colonial days of America, many of the early settlers were humble and modest.  This attitude may have continued for some years in the formative history of this nation. 

 

But as prosperity and affluence came to the United States, attitudes and thinking began to change.  The once humble and meek persons began to be transformed into blatantly proud and arrogant individuals, certainly by the time of WWII or shortly thereafter.  And this situation has persisted and expanded from the time of the food stamp and welfare give-a-way programs until well into 2003. 

 

Possibly, it was this arrogance and insolence which slowly began to make peoples of other nations dislike and even hate Americans and their ways and attitudes of superiority. 

 

For sure, it seemed to materialize whenever and wherever affluent and wealthy US citizens would travel abroad and throw their money and arrogant demands around as if they were "gods" on earth.  In this environment, it wasn't long before the affected foreigners began to develop some animosity and ill feelings toward the big shot American visitors and their proud, arrogant attitudes. 

 

Still today, here in the early 21st century, Americans seem to be almost at the top of the list (maybe just behind or in front of the Chamorros) with their blatant pride, arrogance and haughtiness.  By and large, many are belligerent, prejudiced, proud, arrogant and overbearing in their beliefs, attitudes and motivations in terms of deportment with others. 

 

 

The Bully of the Block 

 

Even the US government comes under the same indictment.  What other nation in modern times has used its wealth and power to try to impose its beliefs and values on other peoples? 

 

What nation in modern times is the bully of the block, as is true with the US in its foreign affairs--using the US State Department, the US Army, the CIA, other government agencies, etc; and of course, stacks of US dollars. 

 

If the US can't buy its way with money (to serve the super rich plutocrats, operating from behind the scenes, to be later assessed), then it turns to the CIA and the military to impose its way by other means. 

 

But as suggested previously, the founders and early settlers of the North American continent were likely persons of a different mentality; at least, in respect to pride and arrogance, in comparison with inhabitants of the early 21st century. 

 

 

George Custer, Revisited 

 

There are numerous reasons to believe that before WWII, some Americans did have some measure of humility and meekness, from time to time, notwithstanding the fact that many did not.  In terms of those who did not, this writer has read about one important character from history who seems to have been on the high side with arrogance and pride--probably in the ball park with many individuals of today. 

 

Here, reference is made to the previously mentioned George Armstrong Custer, born in Ohio in 1839 and graduated early from West Point in 1861 (at the bottom of his class), about the time of the start of the American Civil War.  By 1865, the twenty-six years old Custer was a Brevet Major General in the Union Army and in command of a cavalry division. 

 

Beyond his pride and vanity over his gaudy uniforms (to be discussed in a later chapter), Custer had some more pride problems.  For sure, George Custer was an exceptionally proud individual (as almost all historians will agree). 

 

At Appomattox Court House, Virginia, in April 1865, he decided that the Confederate Army should surrender to him rather than to General U. S. Grant, even as Grant and Lee were on their way to their historic meeting at the McLean house. 

 

With his obvious arrogance, Custer contacted Confederate General James Longstreet and demanded the surrender of the Confederates to him.  Of course, Longstreet declined since he was in no position to override Robert E. Lee.  As Lee and Grant were conducting their meeting in Appomattox, Custer got mad and rode away in anger and hurt pride. 

 

Clearly, this record from history goes a long way to prove that people in those times were as proud and vain as those of us today.  Despite his obvious, arrogant, proud and vain personality, other evidence is available reflecting that Custer was also a very flamboyant, colorful and gung-ho type of individual throughout most of his career.  For sure, he was a fighter. 

 

For example, in 1868, he led his cavalry force to attack a band of Northern Cheyenne Indians under Black Kettle at the Washita River in Western Oklahoma (Indian) territory.  In the fight, Custer's force slaughtered most of them--including men, women and children.  This action, plus his believed personality, has never set very well with American historians.  Therefore, he is often described as a very cruel, brutal, evil man. 

 

This jives with the fact that during the Civil War, Custer routinely hung captured Confederate prisoners.  He stopped only when the Confederates retaliated by hanging his prisoners.  However, for sure, his evident arrogance, pride and vanity seem to be sufficiently recognized, so that no one could seriously doubt their presence. 

 

In 1876, he seems to have combined these traits with some incredible carelessness and utter stupidity as he divided the US 7th Cavalry Regiment at the Little Big Horn River in Montana. 

 

With a portion of his split forces, he proceeded to launch an attack against several thousand hostile and well armed Sioux and Cheyenne Indians.  The result was that the savages annihilated Custer and some 263 troopers, who were cursed to have accompanied him in his foolish maneuver and assault. 

 

 

John Wayne 

 

As a boy and young man, this writer grew up when John Wayne was the par excellence star in Hollywood most admired by young males.  Since Wayne was in the big leagues, in terms of stardom and leading roles in the 1940s to the 1960s, it seems that he would not do a film unless it showed him as being the perfect model of truth, righteousness, honor and he-man stuff.  Thus, American men liked him. 

 

But there were some things about the John Wayne character which most Americans simply never knew about or grasped.  His choice of wives and women was not good.  As it is covered herein in other commentary, it need not be repeated here. 

 

Yet, there remains one more key problem in his character and demeanor which relates to the pride subject at hand. 

 

This writer met a man some years ago who worked as an extra on the “McQ” John Wayne movie in Seattle.  As he was on the set with Wayne on several occasions, he was able to see the star first hand and deal with him in ways that most of the public never sees. 

 

In terms of Hollywood and the production and making of a film, there are, of course, the big stars and directors on the set.  But additionally, there are huge numbers of extras (actors with minor and insignificant parts in the overall plot), and by all means, the presence of stage hands and people involved in preparing the set and doing the filming. 

 

It seems to be a fact of life that in terms of the big stars and their relationships with the extras, photographers, stage hands, general flunkies and go-fors (persons who go and get things as needed by the directors and stars), the leading actors and actresses usually cultivate a good relationship. 

 

Obviously, the stars want and expect these people on the set to reciprocate and treat the stars with extra care and concern.  For example, the camera crews and persons setting up the set and doing the filming can give the stars some extra attention and focus.  The stars know of this need and therefore treat these people very decently. 

 

Possibly too, the big time actors have made it.  Thence, they simply find it desirable to treat the extras and stage hands with some common courtesy, fairness and concern.  So generally, the stars are fairly good on the set with the flunkies present. 

 

However, my acquaintance pointed out something which he was surprised about.  John Wayne, instead of being like the other big time actors, was a very different persona on the sets in contrast to how the other lead actors reacted vis-à-vis the stage hands and extras. 

 

John Wayne was a very rude, nasty, arrogant and mean spirited person toward these stage people on the sets for the shooting of the scenes (possibly John did not have a Christian preacher background; but his actions and demeanor certainly sounds much like some Christian preachers who also can be awful proud, pompous, arrogant, and mean spirited). 

 

Per this observation, of a man who was in a position to see and have contact with Wayne, this reality of his character and personality does not speak well for the man.  There is simply no reason for a star like him to be nasty to the minor and insignificant people around him who were there merely to help him and to serve him in his efforts to be a super, big shot, Hollywood star. 

 

After hearing this first hand account and report on the real John Wayne, as opposed to the fictional Hollywood John Wayne, this writer lost his admiration and respect for Wayne. 

 

 

An Arrogant Neighbor 

 

This writer had a unique neighbor in recent years on this theme on arrogance.  While sometimes, he could be a pretty good neighbor, he could also be awfully proud and arrogant at other times.  While not attempting to illustrate all of his manifestations of arrogance in my presence, one interesting incident will be highlighted. 

 

The man in question became acquainted with me in 1998.  Several times, it appeared that he was a little unnecessarily arrogant in my presence.  But little thought was given by me to the man’s problem. 

 

Over the next couple of years, the man and this writer had one key point of agreement.  We both could mutually agree and accept the fact that President Bill “Slick” Clinton was a man of incredible evil and wretchedness.  Based upon my limited Scriptural understanding, it seemed to me that Slick would not be leaving office on January 20, 2001 (this point was discussed earlier). 

 

This belief was mentioned to this arrogant man back in 1998.  He said little about the point at the time, but obviously didn’t believe it (which was his prerogative and he was clearly entitled to his opinion, the same as me).  Time passed, and around November 1, 2000 (a few days before the November election), the idea was discussed again. 

 

However, being this close to the election and with the man’s personal confidence and certainty that George W. Bush would soon be the next president, the man involved pooh-poohed my remarks--in a very arrogant fashion and almost insultingly in the way they came out from him (he acted as if this writer was stupid, suspicious and backward for daring to mention the idea of Slick staying in power). 

 

Well, Bush was not exactly elected outright, as my friend thought he would be elected (the 2000 election will be covered in later chapters herein).  And even in January 2001, just after Bush was sworn in, there was some question about how long he would be in the White House and whether Slick could return to power in the US/UN or not (and if so, how soon?). 

 

It was no trick for an American citizen to believe and accept that there would be a newly elected president in early November 2000 and January 2001.  For the last 212 years, this nation has routinely selected new presidents who did take power.  The probability was great (almost a certainty) that it would happen again.  It was almost statistically out of the question to allow that Slick could in some way remain in power. 

 

So the man looked upon me as being stupid and backward while he was intelligent and advanced in perception (and in pride and arrogance).  Well, time will tell the tale on the future of the US and Slick Clinton.  He can always return to power over Americans in either the US or the UN (as described earlier in the Prologue). 

 

In other words, when push came to shove and this man’s beliefs about Clinton and the future were seemingly being upheld over my wrong thinking (with the passage of time and just before the November 2000 elections), the reality of having apparently been right in his views went to his head.  He responded with pride and arrogance on how right he supposedly had been. 

 

 

Arrogant Christian Preachers 

 

This discussion of arrogant Americans, past and present, brings up a need at this point to focus on perhaps some of the most arrogant and vain persons in the modern house of Yisrael nations.  Here, reference is being made to some of Christendom's false preachers, teachers, elders and pastors. 

 

Previous chapters in this publication have addressed proud teachers in some detail.  Thus, there is no present need to broach that theme, per se.  However, a few comments are worthy now in respect to arrogance and preachers.  And here, a couple of examples will be shared with the reader to demonstrate the point. 

 

Some years ago (in the 1980s), this writer was visiting with a very fine friend in Wenatchee, Washington.  He invited me and his cousin, the local Church of God Abrahamic Faith pastor (who was mentioned in a preceding chapter herein), out to dinner that evening. 

 

In the course of our discussion, this writer mentioned the NT usage of the Greek "ethnos" (meaning a people, nation, tribe or “ethnic") in connection with the supposed "great commission" of taking the so-called Gospel to the world (as discussed earlier). 

 

The big shot, Christian "pastor" present contradicted what i had said and effectively called me a liar in his disbelief and repudiation of my comments.  Thereupon, he rudely and arrogantly proclaimed that he was an "expert and authority" on Greek and that my suggestions were absolutely wrong (since he knew everything or almost everything there was to know about Greek). 

 

Frankly, this writer is not an expert in Greek, nor do i know of anyone else who is one--despite the claims of this proud "pastor" and many others like him.  Nevertheless, this writer remains completely convinced that this so-called expert was categorically wrong in his arrogant charges.  With arrogant "reverends," like this Christian, it is no wonder that Churchianity is so incredibly locked in ignorance and confusion. 

 

 

Another Christian Example 

 

In another instance of some years ago, this writer planned a visit with a "Christian" Identity preacher in Southwest Missouri with a church and small group (at Schell City, MO).  Before going there, a friend of mine, who knew this “pastor,” pointed out that when you enter his presence, you quickly learn what an arrogant, nasty, big shot he thinks he is. 

 

He lets everybody know right away, through his mannerism, conduct, speech, words and actions, that he definitely is the man in charge and the leader of everything of significance in his neck of the woods.  He is a very proud, arrogant and mean spirited man. 

 

This particular case is rather tragic because the man involved is an evident J (in temperament) and is far more capable and able as a teacher than the typical SP in the Sacred Name and Identity movements. 

 

Notwithstanding his false teachings and doctrines, founded on false pagan Christianity, he has produced several useful articles and tapes on Identity (although it must be recognized that he does plagiarize/steal ideas from other ministries, as is a common problem among the shallow Christian Identity preachers).  It is too bad that he is so classically arrogant, proud and mean-spirited. 

 

Before going on, it must be noted that the better forms of Christianity also have their share of arrogant preachers.  As noted earlier, the Sacred Name motion has one of the most arrogant and mean spirited persons of all in the form of the Directing Elder at Bethel, PA. 

 

The Christian Identity entity also has the “Pastor” at LaPorte, CO (who is near the top in personal arrogance and general meanness).  The point is that arrogance is not limited to secular people. 

 

 

YHWH Zeros In On Arrogance 

 

Perhaps in recognition of how proud and nasty modern Israelites have become, The MOST HIGH inspired certain messages for His prophets to record.  These communications seem to thoroughly describe some of the peoples under discussion in this study. 

 

Yeshayahu seemed to have had the most to say on this theme.  For example, he wrote that the daughters of Zion are haughty and walk about with outstretched necks to show off their pride (Isa 3:16).  He also zeroed in on the population of Ephraim (probably the modern USA) by noting that they talk with arrogance and pride (Isa 9:8-10). 

 

The Volume 8, Number 3 issue of “Bible Light on the News” (p. 5) offered an interpretation of Isaiah 25:5-12 as saying that “all mankind is covered with a veil.  And the veil everyone is covered with is the veil of pride and arrogance.”  This is a profound indictment against all men.  And assuredly, it is truth because all of unconverted so-called humanity is adversely plagued with pride, arrogance and vanity. 

 

The prophet Yirmeyahu focused in on Moab for her extreme pride, loftiness, arrogance, conceit and haughtiness of the heart.  All of these charges were sufficient to place these peoples under judgment for destruction (Jer 48:29, 42).  And if this pride and arrogance doomed Moab, what do you think it will do to modern Chamorros and Americans? 

 

 

Yechezkel, Revisited 

 

The captive Yechezkel also had some pungent remarks for modern Israelites--obviously Christian Israelites of our time.  He recorded that all Yisrael is impudent, insolent, arrogant and hard hearted (Ezek 3:7).  (Does any of this sound familiar in terms of the modern USA?) 

 

No wonder Yechezkel would go on to use the next several chapters of his writings to describe and discuss a (still) future, coming destruction of Yisrael in an apparent nuclear war. 

 

But there is still more to come on this subject because the New Testament writer Yehudah wrote that "arrogant talk is evil" (Jude 1:16).  The wise Shlomo noted that YHWH hates pride, arrogance, the evil way and perverted and twisted speech (Prov 8:13). 

 

The prophet Yeshayahu concluded that The EVERLIVING will punish the world for its evil and that haughtiness and boasting will one day cease and be no more (Isa 13:11).  And that's saying a lot.  In terms of a summary, Shmuel wrote that arrogance is pride (I Sam 2:3).  Additionally, Yechezkel added that haughtiness is pride (Ezek 16:49-50). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 77--Pride in Looks

 

 

Manifested Pride 

 

As pointed out previously herein, one of the most obvious and apparent manifestations of all of pride and vanity occurs in our deceitful, wicked hearts because of certain physical assets, strengths, abilities, and attributes which we humans have or supposedly have in life.  To demonstrate this point, some examples of this classic case of pride and/or vanity in action will be now shared. 

 

Very early in life, most of us grow up in an environment and household where from our days of being a small infant on up, we develop and mature hearing frequent words of praise and flattery about our superior looks, charms, abilities and strengths. 

 

We hear and absorb such nonsense from our ignorant, proud, vain parents; who, of course, are praising themselves when they brag and boast about "their" wonderful, superior offspring.

 

Many children progress through early life with a constant diet of how great, pretty, handsome and marvelous they are.  Some never hear the word "no" in terms of their wants and aspirations.  Many truly progress into various stages of being spoiled brats because their uninformed parents know little or nothing about the raising of children; although they proudly think, act and carry on like they know everything about it. 

 

When a child grows up in an environment where he (or she) is constantly told how pretty, darling, handsome and wonderful he is, it is no wonder that by the time the child becomes a teenager that he actually believes it. 

 

Naturally, many humans think and suppose that they look good and are attractive to others--generally, even if they are as ugly as homemade soap. 

 

In this situation, there is no doubt but that by the time we are teenagers, we almost all, both boys and girls, literally spend hours in front of a mirror, admiring ourselves and combing our hair and preparing our faces; so that other people can admire, adore and glorify our persons.  And this phenomenon brings up the need of asking an especially relevant question at this juncture. 

 

If such young girls are such natural beauties with so many inherent qualities from their genes, why is it that so many of them find it necessary to have to spend so much money, time and effort in buying and using large quantities of lipstick, powder and paint to mark, mar and mask their otherwise fantastically appealing faces?  Why would anyone find it necessary to try to change or alter his or her "perfect" face? 

 

Of course, this problem of pride and vanity over appearance doesn't end with just being young.  On the contrary, the idea often continues for some people well into their mature, married lives.  In fact, for some, it never ends at all until they are six feet down under in a grave. 

 

 

An Example 

 

Years ago, this writer had a "religious" friend who had four pretty daughters.  My religious friend was one of those independent Sacred Name and Identity types who thought that he was a religious elder or prophet of some sort with the "spirit" and special insight into the Scriptures.

 

In this interesting situation, a young man took up with this Sacred Namer and his family and started visiting with them regularly and often.  Ostensibly, the reason for the frequent visits and social get togethers was for the young man to learn some "truth" from the Identity and Sacred Name “elder.” 

 

Of course, my acquaintance really was flattered and elevated by all of this attention and interest of a young man seeking truth from him.  He thought he had a real, genuine follower that was coming over to his house to study and learn. 

 

The several times this writer visited with the family over the years and observed the dialogue and exchanges of the involved parties, it was very clear to me that the young man participating really had little or no concern about his chosen religious teacher or the teachings. 

 

 

The Real Reason for the Interest 

 

Instead, it was quite evident that the motivation and actual cause for his visits was the fact that his teacher had four daughters and he had ambitions of getting one of them for his own.  No one could miss his obvious focus; unless, of course, one was extremely stupid, naive and/or gullible.  

 

In regards to this situation, it should be noted that the young man apparently had some behemah genes in his makeup from his Southern European ancestry (as will be later described herein).  His problems were furthermore complicated because he had some possible mental problems (he had spent some time in a mental hospital), which may not have helped his situation in trying to latch onto a female for a mate. 

 

Maybe, these factors were part of the motivation which propelled him to come over for "religious" instruction on topics which he appeared to have little interest in at best (of course, the flattery filled the pride and vanity of my friend). 

 

 

More

 

But despite the reality of the environment and his limitations, it is worth noting that the young fellow involved was an incredibly proud and vain person over his looks. 

 

The young man wore extra long, disgusting hair and either shaved his face daily or perhaps just couldn't grow hair with the existing gene problem.  However, regardless of what the truth was, he regularly and frequently went to various mirrors in the house to comb, massage, prepare and take care of his long, effeminate hair. 

 

It was apparent that he thought he was a very handsome, appealing man to the opposite sex.  And while he probably understood little or nothing about what the Book says on men wearing long hair, certainly he was proud and overjoyed with his long, flowing locks.  None of this seemed to bother the “elder,” who knew about the need for men to wear beards on their faces and short hair on their heads. 

 

Consequently, the one thing that this writer remembers most about this individual and the one thing which really stands out glaringly was his absolute obsession and vanity over his hair and looks.  The word vanity does apply; because, in fact, he was not a handsome man.  He seemed to have very little to offer to an eligible young woman, with some of his problems. 

 

But like so many of us, he was proud and vain.  By the way and as a side light, he did eventually get to marry one of the girls.  So perhaps his interest in my acquaintance's religious ideas paid off from that point of view.  He received what he sought.  Too, my elder friend was happy in believing that his student was now part of the family. 

 

 

My Guilt 

 

Now, having made this indictment against this person for his obvious pride and vanity, i must likewise confess and acknowledge some of the same sins in my life.  This writer, too, used to go to the mirror regularly and often to comb my hair and admire my appearance and the many benefits i supposedly had in terms of appeal to young women. 

 

If there is any appreciable difference between his actions in front of the mirror and mine, it is only that i always wore short hair while he wore long, effeminate hair.  But both of us were proud and vain over what we had or thought we had. 

 

And like this young man tried to do, in dishing out flattery and nonsense to a self appointed religious teacher and his often false teachings, i too have dished out flattery and nonsense to another equally proud religious teacher and his (largely false) teachings--all because he had a very pretty daughter who i was interested in. 

 

Therefore, when i first saw this whole situation in process, i realized and knew what was going on at once--since i had also participated in the exact same depravity years before. 

 

As this writer can now look back on the whole thing, i realize that it was foolishness and sin on my part, as well as the long haired fellow i later observed.  Categorically, there is no end to the wretched vanity in our wicked, deceiving hearts and minds. 

 

 

Common

 

In addition to these two situations cited, this writer must also, in all fairness, point out that this phenomenon outlined is not something rare or strange in our culture. 

 

On the contrary, it is extremely common and routine in virtually all of the modern, secular society.  It is a rare individual, especially among teenagers, who does not spend vast amounts of time primping and trying to look good in front of a mirror. 

 

And the motivation and cause for all of this motion is categorically pride and vanity.  There is no denying this except in the minds of idiots or people with definite mental limitations. 

 

Clearly, there is no limit on the extremes that our wicked, deceiving hearts will lead us all in the quest for personal status, elevation, position and recognition.  There is no end to it.

 

 

Some Examples From the Word 

 

On this precise theme of linking pride and vanity to looks and especially hair, it might be useful here to pause and review from the Book the first recorded record of this wretched sin in history.  In this context, it should be noted that the prosecutor Satan apparently became vain and obsessed over his physical appearance and looks in the distant past (Ezek 28:17). 

 

As this study elsewhere notes herein, there is every reason to believe that the exact problem which the Adversary had with pride and vanity involved his long, effeminate hair, like that of a woman, and perhaps even a clean shaven face, again like that of a woman. 

 

There is an ancient Jewish legend which describes some of the pride of the evil Achav (item 135, “The Book of Legends,” p. 132).  

 

Every day, Achav was said to adorn himself.  Then, standing in front of Hiel, who was in charge of Achav’s treasuries, he would ask--“How handsome am I today?”  Hiel would reply-- “Each day, more and more.”  Then Achav would turn over money to the shrines of idolatry. 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

The Scriptures elsewhere have several other cogent comments to make about this theme of people exhibiting pride and vanity over looks.  Firstly, David perceptively pointed out that YHWH cannot tolerate a proud and arrogant heart and a haughty look (Ps 101:5). 

 

Secondly, Shlomo went on to more precisely label and designate the haughtiness of eyes and a proud heart for what they are in truth.  In fact, Shlomo called them "sin" (Prov 21:4)!  Like the Book also says--YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 78--Pride in Clothing and Dress

 

 

Pride in Clothing and Dress 

 

There is no question about it, vast numbers of people, both secular and religious, have found pleasure, satisfaction, status and elevation (in other words--pride and vanity) over the clothes and dress styles which they have worn (in order to fulfill the pride in looks, discussed in the former chapter). 

 

One normally thinks of this phenomenon in terms of women.  But please be assured that huge numbers of men are equally obsessed with their clothing and appearance in front of others.  The problem is not one just for women. 

 

Many individuals of both sexes have profound pride and vanity problems over this very topic.  But beyond these classic cases of pride in action, in the public at large, there is also the interesting situation where the same feelings and motivations can be found in so-called "religious" people. 

 

Historically, pagan priests and religious big shots, in particular, have had a propensity to wear unique and differentiating clothes and dress styles.  And while long, effeminate robes have been the most apparent presentation in this regard, one should not overlook even the resulting elevation and status obtainable by wearing and displaying a particular cap or cleric collar. 

 

Some of the hats, like the popular skullcaps worn by Catholic priests and Jews, may have had their origins in paganism in some way, as was suggested a few years ago in an article appearing in the “Sacred Name Broadcaster” (to be addressed later)  The traditional "cleric" collar worn by Christian preachers and leaders is another item which seems to tie back to heathen sources, as various students of truth have noted. 

 

And even the long, effeminate robes worn by Catholic leaders and Eastern religious professionals likewise have earlier pagan connections.  A later chapter herein will focus on the connection of religious clothes to paganism.  But for now, it must be acknowledged in terms of the real world. 

 

 

Color 

 

Beyond the styles and designs of clothes, generally, which promote pride, one must not ignore the subject of "color" in the generation of pride and vanity.  Over the years, black has been very popular as a religious color, in particular.  

 

In this regard, Catholic priests, Amish and Mennonite peoples and others have cherished black for ages, despite the fact that the color has historically been linked to evil in much of Western society. 

 

Also, in some circles, white is thought to be a "religious" color of importance.  Therefore, the pope and certain other big shots have leaned in the direction of white as their symbol of status. 

 

Some years ago, this writer met a couple in Southern California who liked to wear white.  To them, white was supposed to be an emblem of righteousness (as the saved ones are so dressed in the book of Revelation). 

 

At once, it was easy to see that the man was clean shaven and without tzitzityot and the woman was uncovered (besides the questions of pride and carnality).  Yet, this pair actually seemed to think that by being dressed in white, they were righteous and good.  The acts of fleshly, sinning people to dress in white in order to be righteous is both ridiculous and an affront to YHWH (thus, surely an act of sin).  

 

In another case, an apparent "kook"--who claimed that he was "Elijah" and dressed himself in a long, effeminate robe--became an acquaintance of this writer some years ago.  In still another instance, this writer knew another "kook" who thought that he was somebody special and wore a big hat with a long, bird feather hanging from it and a large leather girdle about his waist.

 

Several others (especially Sardis Sacred Namers) are to be noted for wearing black skullcaps or other distinctive hats with the name of Yahweh or the Tetragrammaton conspicuously present so that any and all people seeing the person would see the "name" and how religious the wearer appeared to be. 

 

 

The Church of God (Jerusalem Acres) 

 

On this theme, this writer remembers another extraordinary case that surfaced some years ago when i was visiting with some friends at the Church of God (Jerusalem Acres), with headquarters in Cleveland, Tennessee.  This writer now recalls a tour of their headquarters and seeing some pictures on the wall of their then deceased founder and former chief “apostle.” 

 

It seems that this once "great" church leader was addicted to uniforms and medals.  At least, the church had many pictures and photographs of him dressed in a distinctive, dark uniform covered by medals and ribbons of various sorts.  At first, i thought he looked like a tin horn dictator of some Latin America banana republic South of the border. 

 

Later, this writer learned that the "chief apostle" was wearing his "church uniform" in the pictures and that it wasn't for military or political purposes at all.  What a surprise!  It became obvious to me that this religious big shot liked uniforms with all types of paraphernalia attached to really show himself off as somebody special.

 

Besides this proud leader and all of his gaudy showmanship, it should be noted that this same church furthermore has several different internal church sub-organizations and sub-entities which also go in for distinctive uniforms and other show off dress styles (i.e. a motorcycle patrol, etc, something like the Shriners). 

 

 

The Essence Here 

 

There really seems to be no limit or restriction to the extent people will go in order to be elevated and lifted up in front of others in terms of their clothing and dress styles. 

 

And on this subject, please be assured that whatever The MOST HIGH spells out in His Word, we all should comply with it.  There is no discussion or issue from me over whether one should or should not conform to YHWH's dress code.  Categorically, we all should conform without question.  There is no condemnation to anyone for obeying truth. 

 

Thus, the purpose of these comments is not to denigrate truth and The ELOHIM's way.  Whatever He says for us to do, we should all do it--and this does include certain aspects of clothing and dress, as will be established in subsequent chapters herein. 

 

For sure, the focus in these comments is not on what is clearly right per the Scriptures.  Instead, the concern here is on dress codes specifically not outlined in the Book or those patently wrong--as in the case of a man wearing an "effeminate" robe, dress or skirt and the motives for such wear. 

 

And just like the answer to this concern is fairly obvious in any assessment of man's basic nature in secular society, so also is the reason quite manifest for the unique dress styles found in a religious society as well. 

 

 

The Focus From the Word 

 

This topic and the "why" for it is quite plain when one realizes that The HIGHEST addressed it some two thousand years ago on at least two different occasions.  And the “why” here is unmistakable to anyone who knows much at all about the greatest evil and sin of all in so-called humanity at  large.  And what is this greatest evil of all in man?  Why it is pride and vanity, of course. 

 

In the first sample of this wickedness, of some 2,000 years ago, YESHUA pointed out that certain scribes and religious big shots liked to wear long, robes out in public (Mk 12:38; Lu 20:46).  And why for this public display? 

 

Why to be seen, recognized and greeted by the public at large out in the market places and on the streets and sidewalks, of course.  The whole issue for these distinctive uniforms in those days is the same as of today--pride and vanity and nothing else.

 

In the second instance, The MESSIAH noted that various religious big shots in His day would "make broad their phylacteries and enlarge the borders (fringes--tzitzityot) of their garments" (Matt 23:5).  And why?  So they could "be seen by men," as the Book so pungently declares. 

 

Incidentally, on this topic, there is absolutely no condemnation or criticism in the Scriptures or from this writer over anyone obeying the law in terms of fringes or phylacteries.  Clearly, the problem is making them "broad" and "enlarged," so that they can be seen by men.  In other words, the issue here is on pride and vanity and not on the obeying of YHWH's Torah. 

 

 

Make Them Big--Still the Practice Today 

 

By the way, it is a distressing fact to have to acknowledge that over the years this writer has known many people who have done exactly the same above mentioned things--for example, Catholic religious leaders and their long, flowing robes (just like the scribes and Pharisees of old) and my acquaintance, mentioned above (who insisted on wearing a long, effeminate robe). 

 

And if the long robe wasn't enough, my acquaintance was told about the evil in making broad the phylacteries and fringes (which were not then present on his long, effeminate robe). 

 

Sure enough, he immediately made for himself his version of the prescribed phylacteries and fringes and put them on his robe.  Naturally, he made them broad and very enlarged, so that they could be readily seen by the public at large (in order for people to understand how religious he was). 

 

This writer has known others who took great pride in wearing and displaying a Jewish prayer shawl in public, as well as other distinctive items that would be seen and observed by the public at large.  Several individuals have also been known by me who have tried to display the name of Yahweh or the Tetragrammaton on their clothes or hats in some way (as well as on their automobiles, houses and you name it). 

 

It seems that such persons want others to see their religion in a public display.  There is no doubt in my mind.  These actions have been and were motivated for precisely one reason and one reason only--religious pride.  People gain satisfaction and feeling well by appearing to be religious in front of other persons. 

 

It is truly amazing of the extent man will go to elevate and lift himself up in front of others.  There is no end to it.  And perhaps the religious man is the worst offender of all.  Since the Book says that YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble, is it logical to believe that such proud, religious people have been granted grace?  No way, Hose. 

 

 

General Grant 

 

At this stage, a remark is needed on General Ulysses S. Grant, Commander of the Union Army in the American Civil War.  Historically, military people have went in for gaudy uniforms, medals and ribbons--as is true today, as was true 150 years ago and as was true with Idi Amin (to be discussed shortly below). 

 

But however bad Grant was personally (he was corrupt and sorry as the later 18th president of the US), he was somewhat humble in the military.  He always wore a simple private’s uniform with only his rank insignia attached and nothing else.  Flashy uniforms were customary for many officers in his day.  But Grant did not choose to follow that path of pride and vanity. 

 

Of course, there were other famous military officers of his day who did choose a totally different course on this subject in their lives.  For example, George Armstrong Custer, discussed previously herein, was one of the 19th century US military people who went in for showmanship and gaudy uniforms. 

 

Today’s United States military services are obsessed with rank and medals.  Private soldiers and seaman have just about vanished from the military--as almost all personnel want some rank and distinction.  In terms of service medals, a military person today gets a number of them whenever, wherever and however he goes (particularly overseas). 

 

A US soldier, sailor or marine can have a short tour of a few weeks or a few months in some overseas post (maybe in peace-keeping operations or whatever) and he will come back home with a chest full of medals and ribbons.  The unsuspecting public can come to believe that such persons had been faced with enormous trials of warfare to have earned that many medals and ribbons--but not so today. 

 

 

Idi Amin, Revisited 

 

One of the most famous and colorful leaders in the world in modern times has been the previously cited, “Field Marshal, Doctor, President Idi Amin Dada,” who was president of Uganda from 1971 until 1979.  Amin was a Major General in the Ugandan army when he overthrew the government of former president Obote. 

 

At some point in time, Amin apparently promoted himself to field marshal and some college somewhere must have given him an honorary doctorate (obviously, he was too limited mentally to have gotten one otherwise). 

 

The Israelis liked Amin in his early days and arranged for him to go to jump school in Palestine.  The result was that Amin was awarded an Israeli paratrooper badge--which he really cherished and was very proud of. 

 

Idi Amin gained some fame during his rule as president for life over Uganda when he joined with Arab terrorists to allow them to bring an Air France airplane load of passengers to Entebbe to hold as hostages.  Over 100 Jews were in the plane.  So the Israelis launched a commando raid to rescue the hostages (as will be addressed in a later chapter). 

 

Possibly, there were several facts and peculiarities about Idi Amin and his rule which would warrant a whole book.  Surely, anyone thinking about him or studying his life would be in for a few good laughs.  In a sense, the field marshal was a joke (though he was, admittedly, a brutal, evil dictator). 

 

During his reign in Uganda, the Western press found him popular to focus upon and colorful as well (as noted above).  The reason was that the evil Dada was obsessed with pride and vanity.  He wore a Ugandan military uniform with enormous medals, rank insignias, his Israeli parachute badge and on and on. 

 

The “doctor” was a Muslim and must have had the allowable four wives.  Accordingly, he also likely had a number of children.  But one of his little boys was his favorite, and Amin often took him along for public appearances.  This little Amin boy also had a gaudy, show-off uniform (complete with medals and ribbons) which he wore while dad wore his uniform and all of its paraphernalia. 

 

During the Israeli hostage crisis, the Western press was, of course, on the scene to note and record every move, motion, word, gesture, etc of the field marshal, as he liked to hog the newspapers, TV cameras and reporters to show off his greatness and glory.  As was Idi’s practice, he regularly appeared with his small son and both of them would be routinely dressed in their uniforms. 

 

Apparently, the boy didn’t say much.  But Amin took full advantage of the press occasions and bragged and boasted to no end about his own glory and greatness.  He was proud of his Israeli parachute badge.  So he liked to brag about getting it and his relationship with one of the Israeli generals. 

 

 

Two More Interesting Nations 

 

Beyond the military history of America and a need for some modesty, it should be noted that there are a couple of other nations which likewise started off with a humble, modest attitude on their military. 

 

In 1927, the Chinese Civil War erupted between the Communists led by Mao Tse-Tung and the Nationalist government (called the Kuomintang by the Chinese) under the Generalissomo Chiang Kai-shek.  Other than a brief interlude to fight the Japanese in WWII, this internal struggle continued until 1949 when the Communist finally took over the mainland and established the People’s Republic of China. 

 

The Generalissomo took his army and fled to Taiwan and established the Nationalist Republic of China there.  A conflict of sorts has continued since 1949 until today in 2003.  However, as things are developing, the Communists seem to be getting impatient and are making preparations to end the Kuomintang’s presence. 

 

While the Nationalists seem to have followed the Western Christian practice of gaudy and flashy uniforms, medals, ribbons, rank insignia, etc, the Communists never went in for the Western show of pride and vanity.  From 1927 and on forward for most of the succeeding years, the Communist army wore a simple, platted or quilted, field uniform--evidently with nothing else. 

 

This practice lasted for many years.  However, recent photos of soldiers and airmen of the Red Chinese military show a definite change.  The modern Chinese military now have and wear fancy uniforms with rank, medals, etc--much like the Christian West.  So things have changed in attitude in China.  

 

The last nation worth mentioning is Israel and her military forces.  In the beginning of the state of Israel in 1948, the defense forces were paramilitary forces.  In time, they were gradually converted into a formal military force.  In any case, one of the things which the Israelis never went in for was flashy, gaudy uniforms and insignias, ribbons, etc, as is common in the Christian West. 

 

Over time, this humble process changed--just as it did with the Red Chinese.  Today’s Israeli military also has leaned more and more in the direction of sharp uniforms, rank insignia, medals and so forth.  It’s hard to find a national military force today which expresses any form of humility and modesty.  Most all of them have adopted the Christian approach. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 79--Pride in Seats and Chairs

 

 

Pride Over Seats of Honor 

 

In 1963, this writer was in the US Army and had been assigned to the headquarters staff at Fort Stewart, GA, then a fairly small base with a minimum of troops and occupying a bunch of old, frame, substandard buildings built in WWII.  The Post Headquarters building was of the same class, except it was substantially larger than the others.  In a way, it looked a lot like an old, out of place, white elephant. 

 

In the first several weeks while there, this writer had numerous opportunities to go into many of the halls and rooms at the old headquarters building--including the offices of the Post Commander and Executive Officer. 

 

During this time frame, the thought never occurred to me that there could be any thing in the old building, or the others for that matter, which would seem to be worth praising from a physical appearance point of view.  Even offices of the top people at Fort Stewart weren’t much to talk about. 

 

 

The Room

 

Then one day, a duty fell on me to present a briefing on a new army program to the Commander and his staff at one of their regular, weekly briefing sessions--which was on a fifth day of the week, as i now recall.  To make some preparations and do a little rehearsing, this writer and one of the office noncoms went to the then empty briefing room a few days in advance of my presentation. 

 

Certainly, i expected the room to be as run down and unimpressive as was the rest of the facilities at Stewart--at least in terms of furnishings and physical well being.  But boy was this writer surprised on entering the briefing room that day. 

 

Although it was fairly large (perhaps 35’ by 50’), most persons entering the room would be utterly as shocked as i was after having viewed the building from the outside before entering.  Clearly, i was in a different world from normal or vintage Fort Stewart. 

 

The lectern was on an impressive, elevated stage (a huge podium area) at the front of the room beside a large, white, movie screen.  Behind the screen and in a position in a room directly to the rear of the briefing room, i found a quantity of sound and visual equipment including projectors for movies, slides, etc. 

 

This back room was completely invisible from the front of the briefing room.  But it was accessible from the side behind the lectern.  From the back room, staff assistants could operate the various equipment and produce needed sounds or movies, slides, transparencies and other objects on the large screen from behind and to the rear. 

 

Thus, persons in the audience out front would not see the people or equipment in operation in the back room.  All they would see is what they were supposed to see in terms of images displayed upon the visible screen. 

 

Quickly, i learned that from the podium, it was possible for the speaker to literally signal and control  everything coming from the back room.  One easy way was for the staff assistants in the back room to take actions and do things based upon prearranged words to be spoken at the lectern in the speech or briefing. 

 

 

Very Sophisticated 

 

But also, there were other methods of communicating instructions to the back room as it was close to the podium area.  And since a seated audience out front could not see what was happening behind the podium and in the back room, any presentation properly prepared became very impressive and professional to witness from the viewpoint out front.

 

The lectern and entire stage area was very sophisticated and technologically advanced from a communicating or teaching perspective.  There was a complete speaker and sound system throughout the facility with microphones and controls at the lectern.  Also, to the front of the screen and off to the sides, a number of large, rolling or sliding panels were emplaced in the wall. 

 

These could be brought out in the open by a simple procedure (even from the lectern, although i don’t remember now exactly how they were rolled out).  However, it was possible to have any particular panel extracted out of the wall to be placed in front of the audience.  The panels included a chalkboard and various maps and other items of relevance. 

 

Another unique feature of this unusual facility was the lighting arrangement.  While it was possible to turn on and off some main lights, on entering the place, all lights in the room were subject to an override control at the lectern. 

 

The room had no windows or external lights shining in.  But inside, there was a huge array of different toned lights, spotlights and colored lights to do just about anything one might want to do in order to project various effects on the stage or in the audience. 

 

Furthermore, the room was specifically built as a sound proof room.  So, when the doors were shut, you would hear nothing or see nothing from the outside.  People present were in a vacuum of sorts where total attention could be devoted to the stage and whatever else the speaker had to present over the installed visual and sound systems. 

 

 

More on the Room

 

Obviously, all of this sophisticated technology was capable of displaying very interesting and professional briefings and presentations.  But there was more to come in terms of layout. 

 

Because even the floors were something to behold.  They were carpeted by a large, thick, colorful carpet which was really plush and soft to walk upon.  The whole room, to include the stage, had this expensive carpeting.  Truly, in my entire army career and several years at a large US university, i had never seen anything like this before.  It was truly extraordinary and a pleasure, of sorts, to behold and to use. 

 

Standing at the plush, fancy lectern, one could look out over the audience from an elevated position and see just about every person present, individually.  And as i viewed it that first time, i recall the several rolls of chairs, all perfectly lined up and balanced between wide, spacious, straight aisles on both sides and down the middle. 

 

With this superb layout, you can imagine that the chairs were like the rest of the facility.  They were nice--since they were large chairs with medium sized backs, large armrests and of course padding and pure leather coverings.  Anyone would be pleased to have some of them at home in a living room.  They were not the typical army folding chairs. 

 

 

The President’s Chair 

 

On this first visit to the room, i recall stepping up to the lectern and looking out over the room for the first time and noticing two of these very fancy chairs setting out in front of all the others and just back from the stage.  The sergeant with me pointed to the chair on the right (to our left as we faced them) and said “that’s the President’s chair.”  i inquisitively asked-- “how’s that?” 

 

Sarge then proceeded to tell me the story of when and how this room came into being.  He remarked that when the 1st Armored Division was at Fort Stewart during the “Cuban Missile Crisis,” John F. Kennedy had notified Fort Stewart that he was coming there one day for a visit, a review of the troops and a briefing on readiness for a possible invasion of Cuba.

 

With this message, the Post Commander had little more than 24 hours to get ready for Kennedy’s arrival.  One of the things the Commander ordered prepared was the old briefing room. 

 

The Post Engineers went to work and spent something around $50,000 in those 24 hours to completely redo the briefing room and get it ready and into an acceptable state for the president.  Of course, they went to work on an all day and night crash basis to do everything they possible could do to the room with no thought on cost or expense. 

 

With this background, it would be well to now focus in on the two chairs, setting out front in the briefing room.  The President did sit one day in the right chair.  And of course, his host, the Post Commander, sat on the chair to his left during the briefing that was presented.

 

With the departure of Kennedy and the return to normalcy at Fort Stewart, the Post Commander or any higher ranking dignitary thereafter got the honor of sitting in the President’s chair at the right front. 

 

 

Seats Are Important to the Proud 

 

In terms of the US military, and perhaps others as well, the most privileged chair is always the right front one and it goes to the highest ranking officer present in any situation.  Lower ranking people sit to his left and/or behind him. 

 

The same is true when military people are walking.  Lower ranking persons walk to the left and/or behind higher ranking people. 

 

In a military vehicle, the highest ranking person enters the vehicle last, debarks first and always sits in the front, right seat opposite the driver.  Military sedans are an exception to this rule in that officers being chauffeured sit in the back seat, but on the right side.  Any lower ranking person would sit to the left in the back seat. 

 

This situation with the chauffeured military sedan seems to be about the same as any chauffeured vehicle in society at large.  The big shot riding in a sedan sits in the right rear seat.  A guest passenger would sit to the left or perhaps in a middle facing seat in terms of a large limousine. 

 

In WWII, the big band leader Glenn Miller was in the service as an officer in charge of an Army Air Corps band.  While his musicians were not much on military protocol, Miller had a reputation of taking some of it very seriously.  His former colleagues say that he was a stickler on the matter of entering, departing and riding in a military sedan in accordance with the issues of rank. 

 

 

The Christian Approach

 

All of this discussion on seats and chairs of prestige brings to mind some thoughts on how the environment of pagan Christianity operates.  Here, as is true elsewhere, big shots have a tendency of wanting to enjoy “seats of honor.”  This point can be proven from a look at some examples from the real world. 

 

A later chapter will discuss the impressive chair used by the pope of Rome.  Suffice to say, each of the popes have historically been addicted to important, big-shot chairs. 

 

The former Christian President of the United States, Lyndon Baines Johnson, had a special chair built for installation on his plane, Airforce One (“The Texas Connection,” p. 118) in that it had a power device and control button to allow him to elevate the chair above all other seats on the plane. 

 

This meant that when he was seated, Johnson could elevate himself up and be the center of attraction among all of his fellow travelers.  One military aide had the job of taking care of the chair and being sure that it was aboard the plane on all trips. 

 

During WWII, the old comic gang known as the Three Stooges had a skit in which all three of them got into barber chairs (while posing as Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo).  On discovering that all the chairs were of the same height, Moe (as Adolf) grabbed his control device and jacked his chair up above the others.  Then Curly Joe and Larry each followed suit to try to be above the others. 

 

Soon, they were in a race to see who could jack his chair up the highest.  Ultimately, they all three crashed through the upper ceiling while jacking their chairs up higher and higher. 

 

 

Buying Pews and Prayer Areas

 

Some years ago, this writer was exposed to one of the common practices in some Christian denominations of church members “buying” the pew or seats which they were accustomed to using during their weekly services.  This practice has historically been true in several groups--like the Church of England and the Episcopalians. 

 

Perhaps this selling of chairs and seats must have been an early gimmick to raise money--the name of the Christian game.  In many Catholic Churches, they go one step further up by selling private, exclusive areas for personal prayer in large Cathedrals to large donors (discussed by Mike Siegal on the Coast to Coast AM program on Jan 6, 2001). 

 

Of course, the pew of privilege, status, recognition and honor would normally be the front one in the building.  As one moves to the rear, from the front, the rows of pews become less and less honorable.  Persons sitting in the front can be seen, recognized and honored easier than those sitting to the rear. 

 

No wonder, some individuals find it desirable to shell out huge sums of money to buy the front pews for themselves and their families.  It is a great show off to not only be out in front of others; but also, to show how much money one has available to spend on important chairs.  Clearly, this context promotes the feelings of elevation, status, recognition and satisfaction. 

 

 

The Worldwide Church of God Example 

 

For another sample of this reality, a few remarks are now in order on the Worldwide Church of God (WWCG)--which are also relevant. 

 

Often, many of the Christian big shots like the important seats of honor at feasts and meetings.  They want to be recognized and seen by others (just like the Jewish big shots of 2,000 years ago).  This has been true with the WWCG and others as well. 

 

In terms of the WWCG, they have an interesting practice they follow (or used to follow) at the annual festivals (which they sometimes kept on the wrong days, because of the unscriptural calendar they used).  They had or have a procedure of giving chairs and seats to the persons present based on their rank and position in the church. 

 

For years, the church had these seats of honor for their church leaders--which were reserved and set aside for them exclusively.  The size and quality of chairs which a leader could use was dependent upon his rank in the hierarchy.  If he was a big shot, he got a big chair and so forth. 

 

For example, the "apostle" historically was privileged to have a big, fat, fancy, plush, red, executive chair with a huge, tall back which naturally set out in front of all the other seats.  The chairs of the evangelists were somewhat smaller, but also were noteworthy and had padding and arm rests.  

 

The other elders used still smaller chairs, but ones with padding for distinction and comfort.  Of course, all of these chairs were physically arranged at the feast sites according to the rank of the various church leaders.  Higher ranking big shots got to sit up front.  Lower ranking people sat behind them.  All of the chairs of the ministers were lined up in one reserved area right adjacent to the center stage. 

 

Now, you probably can guess what the peon, "dumb sheep" (that's what the lower church members were sometimes called by the leadership) had to sit on out in the congregation.  The flock had to sit on hard, medal, folding chairs.  In the Worldwide Church of God, big chairs were reserved and set aside in the privileged area for the big shot leaders. 

 

With this discussion so far, it is quite apparent and unmistakable that the public at large finds certain chairs and seats as being more desirable than others because of the motivations of elevation, status, position, prestige and honor.  Since specific chairs and seats in specific situations seem to be distinctive and important, some individuals will go to almost any length and spend huge sums of money to occupy them. 

 

 

The Old Gent, Revisited 

 

Former chapters herein have discussed an old gentlemen acquaintance of this writer who seems extra ordinarily proud.  One more incident happened with this man which is especially relevant here on this discussion of seats of honor. 

 

The writer of this study has been with the old gent on a few occasions while riding in an automobile being driven by a third party.  The first time the three of us were in the same car, the old gent grabbed the front seat (the seat of honor) opposite the driver without hesitation at each opportunity being presented.   

 

The second time the three of us were together occurred sometime after the old gent had his run in with his Italian neighbor in which he bragged and boasted about his great Scriptural knowledge since age 17 (discussed in a prior chapter).  This incident must have toned the old man down somewhat and made him take a second look at his excessive pride. 

 

In any case, the next time the three of us were together, the old gent refused the front seat of honor to sit by himself in the back seat.  In several trips on that day, he declined to sit in the front though that seat was offered to him each time.  Instead, he routinely jumped into the back to sit by himself.  Though being in the back seat, this position did not infringe on his talking as he talked (and bragged) throughout the trips. 

 

This whole seating exercise would have been good except for one little feature.  When he jumped into the back seat, he once or twice had to pause and brag about himself and his supposed humility in sitting in the back rather than up front.  He even referred to the back seat as the seat of humility and that he was humble to sit back there. 

 

Even in trying to be humble, he allowed his mouth to establish that he was, in fact, proud--proud over trying to be humble on a few occasions.  Yes, as outlined in former comments, various people can even possess pride and vanity when trying to be humble.  Clearly, some persons are proud of their humility. 

 

 

Scriptural Illustrations 

 

It seems that this phenomenon of persons seeking out chairs and seats of privilege and honor is not anything new, unique or unusual for our time.  Actually, as strange as it may appear to some readers, this reality is a very common practice dating back many, long centuries ago.  For sure, it was commonly done at least 2,000 years ago when YESHUA saw fit to comment upon it on more than one occasion. 

 

In particular, The MESSIAH focused in on the proud, vain, hypocrite, religious leaders of His day who loved the “front and best seats" in the synagogues and the “places of distinction" at the feasts and other get-togethers (Matt 23:6; Mk 12:38-39; Lu 11:43; 20:46). 

 

The problem over this evil and wickedness was so serious that SALVATION elected to tell a parable about it.  He noted that when one is invited to a feast, he shouldn’t seek out the seat of honor, lest a more distinguished individual shows up and he would be humiliated when asked to move to a lower level seat. 

 

But when invited, YESHUA said that one should recline at the lower place, so that the host may choose to move him or her up to the higher seat of honor (Lu 14:7-10).  The KING of ALL summed it up for us by observing that whosoever exalts himself will be humbled and whosoever humbles himself will be exalted (Lu 14:11). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 80--Pride in Possessions

 

 

The Greed and Selfishness Problem in Pride 

 

Over the centuries, some people have formulated the concept that the essence of sin can be traced to human greed and selfishness.  And certainly, there is little or no way to deny the fact that the carnality factors of greed and selfishness represent enormous and great extremes of sin and wickedness. 

 

However, in assessing this subject, it would be best to address it from the standpoint of what really is involved to motivate, encourage and promote the sins of greed and selfishness in man. 

 

As this production has elsewhere suggested--the real causes or reasons for even the evils of greed and selfishness can be traced to pride and vanity.  There is absolutely no other explanation for this reality.  Consequently, the essence of sin clearly has to be pride and vanity, as certain people have discovered over the ages. 

 

 

Pride in Possessions

 

It can correctly be charged that all of us take great pride and confidence in having, owning and enjoying wealth, riches, abundance, possessions, strengths and physical assets (and even mental assets to some degree). 

 

Of course, it isn’t only the aspect of the wealth factor alone, but it is also the reality that wealth gives one much power, influence and authority over many things.  This motivation is powerful in our deceitful, wicked hearts. 

 

And while it is an axiom that all of us are fully capable of being very elevated, proud and vain over specific types of goods, especially luxury items like a new car, washing machine, furniture, new home, etc., the broader perspective of the concept of wealth, possessions and assets needs some comment. 

 

Surely, everyone fully understands that pride and vanity may surface very easily in terms of owning specific items of luxury and envy (like a new car, boat or something else).  Now, money typically represents the worldly acceptable means to obtain, receive and get such desirable things. 

 

Money therefore usually becomes the "apple" of men’s eyes in this pursuit of life and the good things which men suppose that they should have and enjoy in this life.   Of course, it's not that money is intrinsically evil and sin (although some people may dispute this argument); but it’s the "love" of money which seems to give rise to the evil and wickedness. 

 

 

Silver and Gold 

 

Some years ago, investment advisor C. V. Myers wrote a little booklet on "Silver," in which he argued that “since earliest history the two most potent forces motivating man have been gold and women.” 

 

Myers went on to suggest that "gold is part and parcel of the drive supplied by women...that man has aspired to his highest potential because of a desire to please and to earn the affection and respect of women.  The rewards of such efforts have usually resulted in material possessions, or in power through military might which led to material possessions...

 

"And to get the most highly prized type of woman one had to compete with the most able, determined and courageous men.  At first, it was physical force.  Later brain power entered the picture, adding leverage to physical force, so that a combination of brain power and physical force was able to triumph over mere physical power. 

 

“Now, these men, whether they acquired more caves, more hides, or killed more enemies, rose above their fellows in the eyes of the most desirable women.  Eventually their success came to be measured quite incidentally in terms of gold... So gold was the homage of love." 

 

As Myers and numerous other students of human personality have correctly observed, gold (possessions, wealth, riches, money, etc) is the means or method of man being able to obtain his heart's desires in terms of what (sexually normal) man wants most--a beautiful woman or women.  

 

 

The Delights of Men 

 

In this regard, Shlomo correctly noted that the delights of man are women (Eccl 2:8).  A preceding chapter on pride briefly outlined the many proud and vain feelings which enter the hearts of an evil man when he has possession of a beautiful and enticing woman (or women, plural).  But the subject is so profound, it needs further comment. 

 

Clearly, with wealth and possessions, man is able to fulfill his heart's desire in this matter.  Thus, while few people can ever begin to grasp it, it is a fact that one of the primary forces and motivations for the quest that men have had for the acquisition of money, wealth, property and possessions is that it allows them an opportunity to have their pick of the finest and most desirable of women. 

 

It seems that men are elevated and lifted up mentally and psychologically when they can go to bed with a most beautiful and enticing woman.  And believe me, when a man can walk down the street or go inside a public place with a stunning woman on his arm, the resulting personal pride and vanity rapidly accelerates. 

 

In those situations, the man involved just wants people to see what he’s got and what all he gets to enjoy life with--both in and out of bed.  Truly, a lovely woman can do all kinds of things to a man.  It is said that an old man gets a new lease on life when he marries or sleeps with a pretty, young woman. 

 

Furthermore, on this topic, a point from heathen Christianity is worth highlighting.  Here, mention must be made of the historic Mormons.  Although the Mormons are noted for their propensity to use big shot titles and appellatives (as facets of pride), this is not their biggest problem with pride.  The Mormons historically have had still bigger problems. 

 

Their real pride dilemma surfaces in another way.  For, as the reader may know, the Book does spell out very powerfully that "true" elders, leaders and deacons (helpers) in YHWH's assembly can only have one wife (I Tim 3:1-12; Titus 1:6)--obviously disallowing polygyny to leaders. 

 

 

Joseph Smith, Revisited 

 

Well also, as may be known, the early Mormons did exactly the opposite in this matter.  A reader of Mormon history must come to grips with why polygyny was introduced and promoted by the founding Mormon "prophet," Joseph Smith, back in the 19th century.  And the "why" here is quite interesting. 

 

As noted earlier, the "why" was because Joseph Smith was married to perhaps an old hag and as he gained position, status, elevation, prestige and position in the evolving Mormon church, his eyes fell on a pretty, young pullet in the congregation.  Now, there was seemingly just no way that old Joe could have the girl; despite his big shot position, title and rule over the dumb sheep under him. 

 

So he conveniently had a vision that they should be practicing polygyny as “God's way.”  This new thinking allowed Joe to quickly get in bed with the more pleasing young thing as wife number two.  Thus, the early Mormon big shots got to choose the cream of the crop for themselves. 

 

By the way, if the early Mormons were Scripturally informed, instead of being Scripturally illiterate, they would have known immediately that old Joe’s vision had to be a fraud which he was perpetrating upon them. 

 

Again, as outlined in the above comments, Joe’s scheme was totally contrary to the Scriptures.  Hence, he could not possibly have had a valid vision from The MOST HIGH.  If he was in contact with a spirit, it is manifest that he was in contact with a demon spirit. 

 

 

Why 

 

This very situation of religious leaders trying to take all of the pretty, young women for themselves is probably the reason why The HIGHEST had Shaul write that restriction on one wife only for the leaders (I Tim 3:1-12; Titus 1:6).  Without that text, many religious chiefs would find polygyny highly desirable, since the big shots can normally have their way in the flocks that they rule over. 

 

So while gold, wealth and riches represent the primary methods men use to have their pick, enjoyment and pleasure of the most beautiful and enticing women, it is evident from the Mormon example that certain religious big shots can also use their positions of power and authority over their dumb sheep followers to likewise have their pick of the pretty, young things. 

 

A similar situation also surfaces in the world of politics, government and social intercourse, in general.  People in positions of power, who get to enjoy and benefit from even wealth that is theoretically not their own (as in government), can additionally have their choice of most of the available women (like with the two scoundrels, John F. Kennedy and Slick Clinton). 

 

 

An Example from China 

 

An example of this came to this writer’s attention when introduced to a man from Beijing, China, who was possibly a big shot in the Communist government there or at least just someone from China who had been able to accumulate some money.  He was accompanied by an attractive Chinese woman who appeared to be his wife. 

 

In our conversation, i asked him if she was his wife since they seemed to be traveling together.  As her English was better than his, she interrupted and said “no” and that he had a wife, a mistress and possibly a girl friend or two (maybe several) in China.  So even powerful persons in Communist governments get to do a lot of picking and choosing on the women question. 

 

Consequently, men can obtain and possess the delights and pleasures of men (women) through power, wealth, riches and gold.  And the reason for all of this is, of course, for the attainment of status, recognition and most of all, self satisfaction. 

 

And don’t be so naive to suppose that men, generally (except demented fags), don’t find self satisfaction with a lovely woman.  They do.  At this point, it is patently clear that pride and vanity is the name of this game.  After all, self satisfaction is pride and vanity.

 

 

Women Like Money As Well 

 

Additionally, there is another view on this theme.  In terms of women, it seems that the number one reason that many women use to choose and select a mate also involves power, money, wealth, possessions, property and gold if you will. 

 

Women, generally, are more concerned over the financial status of a prospective husband than just about any thing else--even more than race, looks, temperament, personality, etc.  And one can bank on it, a man's morality, integrity and/or religious convictions does not normally carry much weight with the bulk of women. 

 

As an example of this phenomenon, this writer can cite a unique case which surfaced several years ago.  This is a story of a fairly likable young woman who was a Sardis Sacred Name, Identity, Sabbathkeeping believer (supposedly).  In her religious mentality, she thought that she had the "spirit" and was very proud and self righteous over her religious knowledge. 

 

But one of the most interesting facets of her personality was her honesty and candor in stating very plainly and forcibly that her desires in terms of a husband, was that he be making $40,000 a year.  She just was not interested in marrying a Sardis Sacred Name, Identity person, per se.  In her eyes, religion was not a factor.  It strictly was an issue of money. 

 

Such a statement from a "supposedly" religious person is most incredible if one stops and thinks about it.  Surely, a person in the Sardis Sacred Name movement, keeping the Sabbath and believing that she had the "spirit" would want a religious husband of like persuasion.  But not her.

 

Obviously, her statement plainly painted a picture that she really wasn't converted to anything except herself since The MOST HIGH's position on marriage was not high on her agenda.  Well, in time, the young woman met a man who she must have thought was making $40,000 a year and one she thought would give her the financial well being she was seeking. 

 

And while initially, he may (or may not) have been bringing in the money she was searching for, he wasn’t much on any religion, as one would suppose she would seek out and be happy with since she claimed to be “very religious” and possessing the “spirit.” 

 

However, things didn't work out the way she had planned and schemed.  Instead of rolling in money and having the "good" things of life, she and her new husband woke up one day broke, down and out.  He lost his job, business, and/or $40,000 a year income immediately upon or at least soon after marriage and it seems that they started to live out of a parked car as street bums on the handouts of welfare. 

 

The later progress of their marriage was that she separated from him for a time since he could not make enough money to satisfy her.  She was full of despair and unhappiness and her "happy" marriage, founded on money, was in shambles.  The religious factor might have been divisive as well to cause further problems since she was a proud, Sardis Sacred Namer and he didn’t seem to be a man of any faith. 

 

 

A Utah Group 

 

Another situation on how far people will go to get possessions, wealth, property, and physical assets came to this writer’s attention one time on a visit to a communal group in West-central Utah, which was thought to be a Sabbathkeeping group.  At least, they claimed to be Sabbathkeepers and advertised and held themselves out as Sabbathkeepers.  

 

However, they had some major theological problems which would alert most any true believer that something was grossly wrong with the group.  Their doctrinal problems and linkage to pagan sun worship will be assessed in a future chapter.  Suffice to say here, their religion was extremely questionable. 

 

On this visit, this writer learned that the group had some years earlier made contact with a Sacred Name teacher in Indiana, who had visited their commune and had taught and advocated the names of Yahweh, Yahshua, etc, in preference to the names and titles they were accustomed to using. 

 

Well evidently, the group's leadership was not impressed with this name business and they continued to use the Lard and Gee Zeus words in their worship.  However, the story didn't end there. 

 

It seems that while the Sacred Namer from Indiana couldn't convert the Gee-Zeus people, he chose to instead join up and affiliate with them.  When first told of this, i just didn't know what to think.  Is it possible that a Sardis Sacred Namer with "some" advancement in the Word, at least beyond that of typical, pagan Christendom, could join in with a classic pagan group and fellowship with them? 

 

 

The Printing Equipment 

 

But then, later, things began to fall into place and i at last could understand why and how it all came about.  It seems that the Utah people had some printing equipment and had been publishing a quarterly and some other religious literature in Utah on it. 

 

Perhaps as a condition for joining or maybe as a later agreement, the Utah people turned the equipment over to the Indiana man who took it back East to use in his business. 

 

In turn, the Utah people sent their printing requests for their periodicals and literature to their new convert in Indiana.  i don't know how much or to what extent the Utah people paid for this printing being done in Indiana.  But surely, he was getting something out of it, besides just the use of the equipment. 

 

It's truly amazing how far we human beings will go to gain some possessions, property, wealth, riches and assets.  Clearly, there are people out in this world who will gladly compromise their religious beliefs and principles for money or something else in return. 

 

How then could a person or persons somewhat advanced in the Word abandon that belief for stark paganism?  Well, it isn't hard to do when money is involved.  Money is the name of the game in much of organized religion.  There seems to be no doubt about it whatsoever in regards to the theme of this work. 

 

 

Pride Promotes Greed and Selfishness 

 

Pride and vanity promote and encourage human greed, competition, selfishness, get and acquire.  Possessions, assets, riches and wealth build up, inflate and expand all of us.  And there are no exceptions to this assertion.  Yes, all of us are affected by this affliction.  Truly, there is no limit to the extent that pride and vanity can and does enter our deceitful, wicked hearts. 

 

With possessions, riches and wealth, we gain power and become self sufficient, independent, confident and assured of our own being and worth.  We lose sight of our real needs in terms of spiritual things since we focus upon and set our sights on material things. 

 

With riches and property, it is very hard for humility and meekness to break through.  No wonder The MESSIAH taught that it is almost out of the question for a rich man to enter His kingdom (Matt 19:24; Mk 10:25).  Of course, the Book does have an abundance to say on this very common form of pride and corruption. 

 

For example, David noted that some wicked men trust in and rely upon their own riches for refuge and security (Ps 52:7).  Several other texts declare a condemnation or woe upon persons who have pride and trust in their own works, strengths, treasures and possessions (Job 31:23-27; Jer 48:7; 49:4-16; Hos 5:5). 

 

Yirmeyahu even went on to say that we are not to glory in our strengths and wealth; but let him who glories, glory in understanding and knowing YHWH (Jer 9:23-24).  Also, it should be noted here that Yehudah's king Uzziah (Uziyahu in the Hebrew) became very proud and wicked in his strength and power (II Chron 26:16; Isa 1:8). 

 

Additionally, some 2,000 years ago, YESHUA came into contact with this very manifestation of pride and vanity when He was here in the flesh.  In this context, He chose to say that whosoever is bent on obtaining, possessing and serving the pleasures, comforts, and security of this temporal life is doomed to lose out on the important things in the long pull (Matt 16:24-25). 

 

Like The KING of ALL also said--what profit is it to a man to gain the whole world and yet to forfeit his own life in the kingdom (Matt 16:26).  Obviously, the answer is nothing.  All of the wealth, riches, assets, treasures, possessions, etc. here on this earth are all small change and unworthy of even discussion in comparison with a right relationship with The ELOHIM and the future of the kingdom. 

 

Clearly, there is no limit or restriction on how far our deceptive and wicked hearts and minds will go to obtain, own and control wealth, riches, possessions and goods.  Somehow with such temporal things, we get it in our wretched minds that we are lifted up, have elevation and status in this system of things. 

 

 

Another Word

 

One more note needs to be covered on this subject before proceeding forward.  In modern America, many people now believe that they're on easy street because they receive a regular retirement or social security check in the mail each month. 

 

And while some of them may not find these checks to be sufficient to cover all of their heart's desires and lusts for all of the goods and things they want, they do generally receive a certain sense of satisfaction, sufficiency, well-being, contentment, confidence and assurance in these periodic checks. 

 

Persons receiving such payments believe that they have security and independence in their status.  Consequently, most recipients of such disbursements come to be very proud, vain and lifted up over their self assurance, confidence and satisfaction. 

 

Some go to the extreme of regularly patting themselves on the back and boasting on their great wisdom, work, effort and intelligence in doing things over the years to provide for these retirement checks and social security payments.  Some others go to the point of praising the government or some business entity for their efforts in making these checks available.  There is little doubt about this condition. 

 

It becomes a virtually impossible task for humility and meekness to break through when individuals have prosperity, wealth, possessions and riches in this life which go together to give them satisfaction, independence, security, confidence and assurance in this system of things.  They really become filled with pride and vanity.  Like the Book says, YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. 

 

 

Pride Causes Jealousy and Hate

 

As outlined in the above comments, pride causes greed and selfishness.  But the dilemma of living in the flesh (carnality, worldliness, fleshliness, etc) is far greater than just greed and selfishness and the possession of evil eyes (as defined in previous chapters herein). 

 

There are enormous reasons to believe that the evils of jealousy, envy and even hate are actually prompted, motivated and caused by pride and vanity.  In the case of jealousy, envy and indeed the whole essence of violating the tenth commandment in the Decalogue, it should be plain enough that pride and vanity have to be the motivational factors which lead a person into these sins. 

 

Many of us go through this gyration of being jealous, envious or lustful over the possessions, benefits, blessings, happiness, etc. of others.  Clearly, it is pride and vanity which propels this whole motion forward. 

 

Furthermore, the case can even be made that pride and vanity propel the wrong presence of jealousy in a married person (admittedly, a married woman or man may have some concern about a mate, but it should not translate to sin as it so often does.  Correctly, married people should not be doing things which promote jealousy in a mate and the marriage partner should not allow improper jealousy to surface). 

 

 

The Hate Factor 

 

Hate is more subtle.  But the evidence seems available that hate can often be traced to jealousy, envy and lust and frequently in the context of pride and vanity.  Other chapters herein have illustrated the enormous presence of hate in human beings.  It is true that hate surfaces in all kinds of people and for all kinds of ostensible reasons--certainly, in Amalekites, Christians and so forth. 

 

In 1983, a television mini-series of ten hours was made based upon the epic novel by Colleen McCullough on “The Thorn Birds.”  The setting for this informative and interesting book was the Australian outback and a huge sheep ranch owned by a wealthy widow woman. 

 

The film version of McCullough’s work was actually shot at a Hollywood studio in Southern California.  But it was convincing and the viewer could easily suppose that he or she was physically in the Australian outback. 

 

The wealthy woman was an older woman in the story.  But in her day, she was supposedly a very attractive woman who had her way with men.  Maybe her wealth, combined with her looks, gave her an edge on this theme over the years. 

 

With this setting, she was Irish Catholic and became acquainted with a new young priest in her parish.  She decided that she wanted to seduce the priest and thus proceeded to actively work and pursue her lust and even as he continued to rebuff her advances.  It soon became apparent that she could not accomplish anything with him. 

 

Thus, she laid it on the line with him that upon her death she would give her estate to the Catholic Church if he would just forget his celibacy vows  The receipt of such a huge bounty would help him in his advancement up in the Catholic hierarchy (and pave the way for him to become a bishop and later a cardinal).  Though he was ambitious, he refused her offer. 

 

In the meantime, she brought in her Irish brother and his family to help her run the ranch and benefit from it.  It was generally accepted and agreed by all concerned that upon her death, her wealth and assets would pass to the brother and his family for his years of work and devotion.  She even prepared a first will on this premise. 

 

While the elderly woman could not succeed with the priest, it soon became apparent that the adult priest had developed a strange interest and fascination with the woman’s eight-year old niece. 

 

So the years passed and the woman faced death without an encounter with the priest. Therefore, she developed quite a passionate hatred for him and particularly so since he maintained a close relationship with her maturing young niece (who was slowly turning out to be a very beautiful, young woman) while spurning her.

 

 

The Double Cross 

 

Accordingly, the woman made out a new will in a strange way. 

 

She left most of her wealth to the Catholic Church, but with a smaller provision for her brother and her nephews and niece (and with a provision that her brother’s family could continue living at the ranch).  Furthermore, she put in a condition that the priest would have to manage, administer and control all of her property (including that granted to her brother and his family). 

 

With her death, her lawyer consulted with the priest, and noted her double crossing act.  He offered to tear up and destroy the second will, but the priest insisted that it stand. 

 

So, as could be expected, the niece and her siblings had to constantly go to the priest to obtain and use the money and assets willed to them.  By the design of the plotting and vindictive woman, the girl and the priest were incredibly linked together.  And with time, the priest forgot his celibacy vows (as he moved in on the girl).  His career as a priest and cardinal was shattered (he was a cardinal by then). 

 

The point of this exercise was that the woman had such fantastic hatred for him that she was willing to sacrifice and destroy her own niece and family in order to see him fall.  She hated him so much that the future of her own niece and family mattered not at all. 

 

The question must be asked--why did she hate him so much?  The answer is obvious--she hated him because of her “hurt pride.”  Since she could not have her way with him, her pride and vanity were punctured.  She responded with hate and bitterness.  Surely, hurt pride promotes all kinds of jealousy and hate manifestations in people. 

 

 

A Modern Phenomenon 

 

One of the tragedies in the modern age of the 21st century is the fact that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to carry on a conversation or have dialogue with many people. 

 

The problem is that the least little thing said now-a-days that may infringe upon their greatness, glory and status creates a response of hate and bitterness.  Many people can’t handle anything unless it boosts their pride and vanity. 

 

This writer has acquaintances, friends and relatives who are impossible to talk with in an extended conversation.  One has to walk the extra mile and be very careful of what is said because they get mad and respond with hate and bitterness.  They love flattery and anything which will promote their elevation and importance.  But otherwise, they cannot hack a personally questionable or negative comment at all. 

 

In terms of a later presentation herein on the extraordinary hate and animosity which Christians have for Judaism (the Jewish religion and not Jewish people), could this hatred be traceable to hurt pride?  Could it be Satanically motivated in that the Jewish religion emphasizes and promotes the Torah while Christendom goes in another direction (as will be discussed in subsequent chapters)? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 81--Intellectual Pride I

 

 

One of the Greatest of Evils in Pride 

 

This and the following chapter will focus on perhaps one of the worst forms or manifestations of all of the greatest of iniquity and wickedness in the deceitful, evil, human heart.  Here, the topic is on intellectual pride and vanity. 

 

As noted in earlier comments, the person with true intellectual pride may have some "real" knowledge, information and intelligence about a particular subject.  This genuine intellect and comprehension may go on to simultaneously elevate, inflate and lift him/her up in attitude.  This is, of course, pride. 

 

However, there is a far worse case scenario than this just described intellectual pride.  This situation involves intellectual vanity where people "think, assume, and presume" in their evil hearts that they know all or all they need to know about a given theme; when, in fact, they are to a large extent, absolutely ignorant and uninformed about it. 

 

Vanity is far worse than the more legitimate intellectual pride where people “do have some knowledge and information,” but are just being proud over it.  In the case of intellectual vanity, such persons don't have any worthwhile knowledge or information at all, but they very proudly believe that they do.  Vanity is clearly empty pride.

 

In other words, they don’t know and/or understand at all what they think they know and understand.  Effectively, they are totally hoodwinked and deceived about their own condition.  Certainly, in the religious vein, if not in all cases, the problem involves demonic messages being placed into their limited minds to deceive and mislead them. 

 

Once a person comes under demonic control by mental telepathy, it is very hard for him to break free of this control and deal with real facts and truth.  Clearly, this offers a major case of intellectual vanity which is extremely evil and wretched to deal with. 

 

 

For Instance 

 

Have you ever met people who just had to have their say about something and to express their ideas and thinking on it to in time discover that they just didn't know what they were even talking about? 

 

Being able to make this determination of vanity in others, of course, requires that observers themselves, have some knowledge, information, perception and realization of the verity of the matter under discussion in order to make such a judgment. 

 

Too often, most of us are ignorant and unable to judge the intellectual vanity in others--perhaps because we know so little about the overall theme of pride.  And categorically, we are all blind to pride and vanity in our own lives.  We usually just can’t see it in ourselves at all. 

 

Perhaps there is a question here to be asked to the effect--do you have some intelligence and ability yourself to "think" and are you truly informed or can you become informed to evaluate the bragging and blowing coming out of intellectually vain, ignorant fools who think, believe and assume that they know all about something; when, in fact, they are locked in gross ignorance? 

 

 

Bragwell 

 

This writer was once in the army and served with a man named Bagwell (briefly mentioned in a prior chapter).  Bagwell thought he knew everything about everything.  One just about could never bring up a topic for discussion where Bagwell didn't intervene to tell what a great authority and expert he was on the issue. 

 

He always was there first and/or did it best of all--whatever it was.  He was the expert on everything or at least he thought he was.  Bagwell liked to brag and boast so much about himself that his fellow soldiers soon began to call him “Bragwell.”  The interesting thing about Bagwell was that in some discussions, he was truly informed and did know something about the points he was making. 

 

He was not a stupid man at all.  In this regard, he was intellectually proud.  But also, in other cases, it was quite apparent that he simply did not know what he was talking about.  Yet, he continued to pretend that he was informed.  This was intellectual vanity.  Clearly, intellectual vanity is worse than intellectual pride, although both are wrong. 

 

 

Introverts Too 

 

So far, this discussion has focused on big talkers with big mouths (extroverts) who are more prone to publicly and verbally brag on themselves and tell what all they know or think they know. 

 

However, it is also possible for quiet, reserved introverts (who largely keep their mouths shut) to likewise have just as much of a problem over intellectual pride and vanity, except it will not normally be visible to others around them. 

 

Thus, the introvert may believe in his heart, mind and mentality that he knows all about something or all that he needs to know just as much as an extrovert and with just as much evil and wickedness present.  Both can be filled with intellectual vanity.  But one will show it while the other will have it buried.

 

 

The SP 

 

Besides the character and temperament facets of introverts and extroverts, one must not ignore or pass over lightly other temperament qualities which also greatly affect pride and vanity in action. 

 

In former comments in this study, mention was focused upon perceiving people (50% of the population) and especially the SP (sensation and perceiving) personality who is so incredibly opposed to closure and having things settled. 

 

The SP is just not very prone to do much book study or reading on anything.  Consequently, most SPs must come to knowledge and understanding from other sources--such as radio, television, VCRs, cassette sound recordings, speeches and talks in meetings; and of course, from dialogue, conversation and exchanges with other persons. 

 

In prior comments, reference was made to an SP "elder" who liked to be called and addressed as elder.  He was very proud and thought that he was an expert on the Scriptures, though he had some major problems in his theology. 

 

He had obtained a limited, VCR recording from the John Birch Society on the alleged safety and benefits of nuclear power plants.  Although this SP man apparently had had no former exposure to the vast realm of knowledge and complexities associated with nuclear energy, he watched the tape and became an instant expert and authority on this involved subject. 

 

In his view, nuclear power was harmless and was the answer to the world's supposed power needs (despite the fact that at least 10,000 people were then dead in the USSR, as of early 1991, just from the Chernobyl nuclear accident.  A later report on the Internet suggested that the death toll from lung cancer from Chernobyl will ultimately reach 97,000). 

 

This SP person became "intellectually proud/vain" over this three hour John Birch society tape and over the fact that he believed, assumed and supposed that he knew all about nuclear power and/or all that he needed to know. 

 

This man didn't need to be a graduate engineer in physics, nuclear energy, the environment, ecology or anything else (of course, being an SP, he wasn’t).  That short tape made him an instant expert and authority. 

 

 

Another Uninformed Expert 

 

This present presentation also brings to mind a case in modern Yisrael where two men were discussing the achievements of Blacks in history.  One pointed out that the modern AIDS plague had come out of Black Africa, at least as far as medical science was concerned, and that contemporary rock or rock n’ roll music is essentially a Negro invention in terms of origin. 

 

The other man flatly denied both assertions (saying that they were not true) and thereby called the speaker a liar.  Yes, anytime one of us disbelieve, refute, or deny something someone communicates in writing or in speech; the result is a method of calling the communicator a liar. 

 

Now, many people putting out lies, deceit and false information should be known and recognized as a liar.  But how about the person putting out truth.  Is it good to falsely accuse him of being a liar? 

 

Of course, this doesn’t mean that a listener or reader must always believe everything coming to him in speech or writings.  So, if in doubt, it is best to merely say “I don’t know” or “maybe yes or maybe no” without taking a firm position and dogmatically denying or affirming the remark.  In other words, people in doubt on communications, should be open minded about what is truth and what is not. 

 

This is one of the problems in reading and studying the Word.  Whenever a person or student of the Word refuses to accept and believe what the Scriptures plainly say, he makes Its AUTHOR out to be a liar.  It is no light thing to call The MOST HIGH a liar.  It is a very serious charge. 

 

But now, let’s go back to the two men.  And why would a person call another person a liar all the while that he was in a gross state of ignorance and misinformation?  Why, intellectual pride and vanity, of course.  We humans have just got to be authoritative and big shots on things in front of others--even to the point of calling someone else a liar by denying statements made. 

 

 

A Classic Case 

 

This writer is acquainted with a very elderly man (he was 85 in the year 2001), who was an engineer in his younger, working days.  Though elderly, the man is not senile and he truly is intelligent.  He seems to have a strong personality on intuition, thinking and judgmental matters.  Furthermore, he is a very evident introvert.  He is not a braggart or boaster on his own personal qualities (whatever they are). 

 

Moreover, he is a dedicated Charismatic believer who relies heavily on his Holy Roller demon for spiritual truth.  In this sense, he is actually much opposed to a literal reading of the Scriptures.  Instead, his demon seems to lead him into a profile of esoteric teachings about mysticism or some other illogical and incomprehensible interpretation of many of the texts. 

 

In any case, this writer has attempted to have some fellowship and dialogue with him several times over a couple of years.  Normally, he will not initiate much conversation.  So, if a person wants to dialogue with him, it is necessary to use a little tact and diplomacy to open him up and get him started talking. 

 

In starting a little conversation, two methods can be followed.  A person can ask another for his opinion or ideas on a subject with a view of following up with his own opinion in an exchange type of dialogue.  Or alternatively, one can just outright offer an opinion or idea and then ask the other person for his ideas on the issue. 

 

Usually, either of these two methods work out quite well to create a little conversation with someone on a friendly basis.  The presumption is always made that such an exchange will not lead to hate and bitterness between the two parties--especially if both contributors are sensible and open people who can listen to the ideas of others without getting mad and upset--even over contrary and disagreeing ideas. 

 

However, with the elderly man, it has worked out on a few occasions that he has become angry and cranky to the point of being obnoxious, rude, hateful and inconsiderate.  This response can “sometimes” happen with him in either attempt to open dialogue on a theme. 

 

For example, if one brings up “certain” subjects with him and asks for his opinion, he will respond and be very dogmatic.  If the other person attempts to disagree and offer a contrary opinion, the elderly man sometimes becomes very visibly angry and upset.  He will immediately retort that he doesn’t want to argue and to drop the subject. 

 

In order to avoid this periodic response, this writer has on occasion, brought up an issue and offered my position and then a request for his position.  In this case, he will listen and then give his ideas on the theme. 

 

If a person attempts to say anything more to the elderly man, which could be classified as disagreement or a contrary position, he again gets mad and says he does not want to argue the matter. 

 

He has one more adverse quality which has at least affected him in his conversation with this writer.  Sometimes, if one says something to him which he disagrees with, he will not be tactful or courteous to express his disagreement in his opinion.  Instead, he very rudely will completely contradict what was said to him--in the vein that the remark was a lie and he is the total authority on the matter. 

 

 

He is the Final Authority 

 

In other words, in his view, he is the final authority on the truth of at least the religious subjects which a person tries to bring up and have dialogue on.  The man not only wants to be the final authority, but he must have the final word.  Thus, once he states his position, the conversation on that item is over.  He has said all that needs to be said and nothing further can be discussed. 

 

Thus, the elderly man is often very intolerant of any position other than his own.  Once he stakes out his ideas, he will not listen to other thinking or even anything which might contradict or prove him wrong.  It appears that he takes this hateful, inconsiderate and rude approach only on issues which he has a definite position on.  He is a little more flexible on things which he is not informed about. 

 

In my contacts and discussions with him, the focus has been primarily upon religion.  There has been no broaching of the weather, sports or any of the other trivia matters which most men are obsessed with.  In the vein of religion, the elderly man is very heavily influenced by his demon(s).  Hence, it is hard for him to entertain any interpretation from the Scriptures which does not meet his esoteric interpretation.   

 

Omitting the demon problem, the truth is that the man involved has an enormous dose of intellectual pride.  He thinks he knows it all and he will not entertain any conflicting opinions on issues which he has staked out a belief upon. 

 

 

Another Christian 

 

This writer has known another Christian man over the years; who, too, seems to have an exceptional dose of intellectual pride.  In difference to the above stated elderly man, this second case involves a person who is substantially more likable and easier to get along with (in contrast to the above proud Christian). 

 

This second Christian is not over-bearing, hateful or arrogant in his manifestations of intellectual pride.  He generally handles his pride fairly well, but it does seem to periodically surface. 

 

This man has a nasty habit of reading and discovering in some book some very complicated, technical, obscure and largely unheard of fact--usually out of history.  He likes to put people on the spot by asking a question about this complicated fact from history.  He will often say--have you heard of so and so or do you know about so and so? 

 

Often, this writer has to respond “no” that the term or point of reference is unfamiliar to me.  This gives the Christian man an opportunity to rush in and display his great intellectual level and reservoir of facts. 

 

Conversely, if you say yes that you are familiar with the term, he then wants you to explain the term and define it for him (or sometimes, he merely asks for the explanation in the beginning). 

 

Sometimes in trying to dialogue with this man, you end up feeling like a fool that you don’t have this important information from history.  He, of course, gets to charge in and offer a complete explanation (based upon what his study or research had ascertained).  Anyway, his exhibition is nothing but pure and simple intellectual pride. 

 

Actually, if he wanted to share or bring up something relevant or of interest to discuss, he could just mention his research and what he has found without asking a person for an explanation of some unheard of fact or terminology.  By asking the question(s), which usually can’t be answered, he is able to rush in and show his great intellectual achievement. 

 

 

More on My Acquaintance 

 

Incidentally, this man under discussion knows about the Sabbath and a few other things which the traditional Christian is totally lost on, in trying to understand.  With his level of knowledge, he likes to attend worship services with a local Sunday keeping Christian Church (a Church of Christ, which knows almost nothing). 

 

My acquaintance says that he likes to ask questions or raise issues of truth with them to put them on the spot (evidently, he is somewhat disruptive in their meetings).  Being more advanced than his Christian Church friends are, one must wonder why he attends services with them at all (in view of John 4:24).  Surely, the pagan services involved do not give him any spiritual uplifting. 

 

Perhaps the reason that he goes to this church is that it gives him an opportunity to shine in front of them.  This man seems to like to shine in front of others with his supposed level of knowledge and understanding.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 82--Intellectual Pride II

 

 

No Limits 

 

In terms of intellectual pride and vanity, as described in the preceding chapter, there is no limit on how far and fast it can go.  We sorry, wretched humans can believe that we know about anything and everything.  And it isn't only that we think we know all, 100%, about a topic; in fact and often, we just “think” we know all we need to know. 

 

And in either case, where people assume they know all or all they need to know, their proud, vain minds become closed and barred from further inquiry, investigation or focus on the acquisition of further knowledge and information.  After all, why should they waste time and energy on getting knowledge and data on a subject which they already think they know all about or at least all that they need to know? 

 

Perhaps at this juncture, mention must again be made to a remark by the prophet Yirmeyahu to the effect that all of us (yes, both you and me) have desperately wicked hearts which lie to our mentalities and deceive us as to our own intellect and thinking about reality (Jer 17:9).  And how can anyone of us ever break through our own evil, deceiving hearts?  Well, it's not easy, that's for sure. 

 

But as bad and terrible as intellectual pride and vanity are in the secular society and regarding secular subjects, there are worse case scenarios and far more damaging occurrences of such in the religious context and on religious topics. 

 

Here, the problem often surfaces in areas of knowledge about truly complex and difficult themes--like pride and vanity, brotherly love and affection, carnality and worldliness, sin and repentance, righteousness and salvation, etc.  And friend, all of these issues are tough to address. 

 

We all grow up in an environment where our parents, teachers, preachers, friends and others all try to teach us and convince us of the supposed "truth" of these variously difficult subjects, of course, as they perceive and believe the issues to be.  Too, there is the mental telepathy problem of demons funneling bad information into our limited, wretched, weak minds to deceive us. 

 

 

Christians Are Bad 

 

Moreover, Christendom, at large, and its offshoots have been busy over the centuries supposedly teaching the world about these themes ostensibly from a Scriptural point of view.  Consequently, all of these teachings, whether true or false, have materially affected our minds and have made us very prejudiced in terms of acquiring further information. 

 

Furthermore, to additionally complicate matters, Christianity has generally missed the point in understanding the truth and verity on a number of very complex subjects (as already illustrated in previous commentary herein). 

 

Simply stated, Christendom and its Sacred Name and Identity fragments, by and large, just don't grasp the truth of what's involved in a huge assortment of Scriptural topics.  Now admittedly, Christendom and its offshoots claim to know all about the Scriptural subjects, as well as just about everything else.  But their claims do not make for truth.

 

Incidentally, as proof of this assertion, one might want to read and study the various chapters outlined so far on pride alone which prove beyond a doubt of the extent of the collective ignorance in Christendom on this important theme. 

 

With this prevailing condition and exposure to a huge assortment of false teachings, we all grow up to be largely ignorant, uninformed, prejudiced fools with little or no true perception and understanding about the really big issues in life which are addressed and dealt with at length by YHWH in His Book. 

 

 

We Become Proud 

 

In a word, we all become intellectually proud and vain fools over profound topics which we, in fact, know little or nothing about. 

 

And since we grow up, mature and go through life believing a lot of nonsense that just isn't so, we become intellectually proud and vain, thinking we know all or all we need to know about the biggest issues of eternity.  Our minds become closed and barred from accepting any new truth about these themes or even investigating and considering other knowledge. 

 

Now, one can understand why people are so incredibly tight, selfish and evil eyed about spending or giving away any of their money to obtain truth.  After all, most persons pretty well think they know it all; or that, as a minimum, they know all that they need to know. 

 

And when one adds in the factor of the lies and deceptions which Christendom has taught about receiving the "spirit" from some man prompted action, then many persons become vain, ignorant fools.  For a fact, our intellectually proud, vain minds are tough to crack and break through, unless The MOST HIGH elects and chooses to intervene and crush the pride and vanity in our wicked, uncircumcised hearts. 

 

In terms of the real world of reality, the Apostle Shaul pretty well summed it up when he wrote to the proud, vain, Sardis types at Corinth that he who thinks he knows and understands a lot about things, actually knows and understands little in terms of what he should know and understand (I Cor 8:2). 

 

The truth is, most of us are extremely limited and sadly lacking in terms of what we really should know and understand.  And despite this tragic fact, most of us are obsessed with our personal worth and mental powers.  What a paradox it is in reality. 

 

 

Christian Failures 

 

As noted above and earlier, one can mention some of the really big issues in life which worldly religions (including Christendom and its Sacred Name and Identity offshoots) seem largely incapable of understanding and comprehending.  These issues are pride and vanity, carnality and worldliness, sin and repentance, righteousness and salvation, brotherly love and affection, etc. 

 

Literally, in the many years that this writer has tried to study and learn things from Christendom and its fragments, i have never found any publication or source which truly seemed to have any real perception or understanding on those big issues--although i ignorantly thought they did. 

 

Now, it is true that Christendom and its cousins and daughters have tried to explain these subjects and have discussed and talked about them for ages.  But all of their efforts seem to be just talk and hype.  Most Christian writings fail to get to the heart of the matter and to what the Book actually says. 

 

A lot of people talk about brotherly love, pride, repentance, etc, but how many really have any understanding and appreciation of what all is involved in the matter? 

 

On the premise that Christendom and its Identity and Sacred Name fragments are all false and wrong, this publication has attempted to approach these topics with a brand new assessment and approach which does not seem to have been published over the years in various and sundry Christian papers. 

 

And without even attempting to make a decision on the propriety of these findings, even the most ignorant and Scripturally shallow person should have brains and intellect enough to readily see that the presentation herein represents a significant and profound departure from the "supposed truths" of pagan Christianity and its divisions, just mentioned. 

 

 

Study is Needed 

 

Despite the fact that this work has produced some very lengthy and involved conclusions with some major new understanding and fresh perspectives on these complex subjects, it is amazing how many readers of this study will casually read or skim through it one time and promptly toss it into a trash can or give it away to a third party (which is better than just throwing it into the trash can). 

 

Such people seem to be filled with apathy, indifference and don't care.  Doesn't it logically take some study, rereading, thought, contemplation and meditation to really grasp a fresh, new approach to these things which our minds have been deceived on for all of our lives? 

 

For sure, this writer has spent literally many, many, long years studying some of these themes and it is quite evident that the surface really hasn't even been scratched in terms of what all is available and can be and should be known. 

 

Most of these subjects are so great, vast, extensive, and profound that it must be true that anyone of us could spend an absolute lifetime on them and still not fully understand what all is involved--and that is with extensive study, rereading, meditation and contemplation. 

 

In this regard, the point must be made that a casual reading does not really constitute a comprehensive study for understanding.  To study means to read, think about, meditate upon, reflect on, consider, reread, check references, compare, etc, over and over again.  It takes time, sometimes huge amounts of time. 

 

Too, it takes energy, effort and work--something that most people are just not prepared to put forth.  SPs especially aren't going to pour over books for hours upon hours and days upon days to get much of anything.  Casual reading and involved study are just not the same thing.  There is a difference. 

 

 

A Sardis Visitor 

 

Another example, which very dramatically illustrates how apathetic, indifferent, lethargic and don't care people are on important, big issues, surfaces in their attitude and response toward profound teachings from the viewpoint of obedience.

 

In this regard, a reader of some of this material once paid this writer a personal visit in Parma, Idaho.  He continually expressed his agreement and harmony with the several teachings presented.  Seeing that the man didn't have hair on his face, he was given some material on "beards" to study as he was leaving. 

 

In a subsequent visit some months later, the same man still claimed harmony, agreement and accord.  But there still was no hair on his face.  So, for a second time, more material on beards was given for him to “study.”  Never once then or later has he ever even brought up the topic of the beard. 

 

Seemingly, the message just never sunk in.  Obviously, he never studied the papers to see what they really said.  Surely, his intellectual pride and vanity told him that he already knew everything he needed to know on the subject. 

 

He didn't have to spread any nonsense or flattery at this writer about this material.  Frankly, i don't need and don't want any flattery because it represents a bad thing.  But he could just as well have told the truth.  He could have said that he never read the papers since he "thought" he already knew everything about the subject (if this is what happened).  He certainly would not have offended me with the truth. 

 

In reflecting upon this situation, it seems doubtful that the man would come out and tell a deliberate lie about agreeing with the papers; if, in fact, he disagreed with the beard one.  Most likely, he never even read it and if he did, it was a casual reading without any study or comprehension.  For sure, nothing sunk in. 

 

 

A Proud Woman 

 

Another similar situation surfaced about a woman and former reader of some of this material, discussed herein.  Repeatedly, she mentioned her agreement, harmony and support of the various teachings.  In time, she obtained a copy of a study on the environment and sin (to be covered in later chapters herein) which incidentally is a fresh, new approach to a phenomenally important topic of our time. 

 

Again, her response was complementary.  Then some weeks later, she wrote again outlining her plans to get a job as a stewardess on a major airline.  The job would require extensive travel and the necessity of leaving her small child with other people while she was flying over much of the globe. 

 

Well, this writer was truly amazed--for several reasons.  First, how could a woman reader of this material, who supposedly had read and studied all of the presentations, ever entertain the idea of leaving her child with someone else so she could go flying all over the world. 

 

It probably wasn't even necessary since she had a husband and he could have went to work, despite the fact that their family was then on welfare (which was feeding them). 

 

 

The Dilemma 

 

But there was more to this because one must ask how in the world could a person who claimed to be religious would want to work with male airline stewards who, very often, are homosexual queers.  And then there is the AIDS explosion and the probability of it being very contagious.  Who would want to risk working with faggots and run the possibility of taking AIDS home to his or her family? 

 

And finally, how about the environment and the destruction of the earth, as covered Scripturally in the subsequent chapters on this subject.  Airliners have to be one of the most important and worse polluting mechanisms in the world. 

 

So, with all of the above considerations, one must wonder to what extent the woman involved had read these writings and whether she had, in fact, studied them at all or not.  Maybe when she wrote and proclaimed her assent and agreement, she meant that she really had not studied the material; but instead, had casually read and skimmed over it. 

 

Frankly, there is no logical explanation for this paradox--other than it has to be apparent that the teachings were just not sinking in.  She literally was getting little or nothing out of the presentations. 

 

So, why do people even look at writings like this one (with its very complex and involved teachings of radically new approaches on profound topics), and merely skim over it or, at best, casually read it and toss it into a garbage can, without any effort to study and comprehend the issues?  Why intellectual pride and vanity, of course. 

 

Proud, vain people believe that they know all about things or that they know all they need to know about things--even in terms of very complicated and difficult subjects.  Thus, when they pick up a paper, which they already think they know all about, the most that they will put into it is a brief skim or casual reading. 

 

Study is out of the question and naturally nothing sinks in or makes any impact at all on them.  It’s all just a waste of time.  It never dawns on such individuals that the paper could have a brand new interpretation which they have never heard about before in their proud, vain lives. 

 

 

My Friend 

 

Years ago, this writer had a good friend who was heavily involved in the Sardis Sacred Name movement and was somewhat committed to that faith.  At the time, both of us were attending some of their festivals and we had much in common.  Then with the passage of years, this writer went overseas to work on Saipan.  Our contact was limited to an occasional letter. 

 

My friend knew that i had some major reservations about the Sardis Sacred Name motion in those days, although not much had been said between us on that line of thinking.  Anyway, in one letter, a question was posed to my friend, as follows--If you were right in the middle of the Sardis people, would you be able to recognize them as being Sardis? 

 

My friend never bothered to answer my letter and our communications broke off (along with our friendship).  While i could never be absolutely positive on what he got mad about, the best guess is that it was over the question i posed to him.  He must have taken it as a question about his intellectual level and intelligence.  Once this theme is broached, the problem of pride and vanity surfaces with a vengeance. 

 

Of course, the man was so brilliant, so spiritual and so intellectually advanced that this question should never have been raised to him.  i stupidly meant the question in sincerity.  The best that i might have wished about it was that he might start thinking and wondering about the Sardis subject and whether the Sacred Namers were in that category or not. 

 

Apparently, none of this thinking entered his mind.  He responded with hatred and chose to break off all contact with me.  In later years, i tried to resume contact.  However, he did not respond.  i never apologized because there was nothing to apologize over.  Certainly, there was no intent to question his brilliance or intelligence.  The whole purpose of my concern was to generate some thought and discussion. 

 

But he was a proud man and he could not handle anything which might raise a question over his intellectual capacities and capabilities.  This writer has found the same resulting reality with other people if the wrong words are said to them (which would allow any question or doubt over their brilliance and greatness). 

 

 

The WWCG Dilemma 

 

At this point, it would be well to pause here and also take note of a situation which surfaced in the Sardis Worldwide Church of God (WWCG) some years ago that vividly demonstrates how far intellectual pride and vanity can reach to destroy people’s capacity to think and use their heads. 

 

In the period 1970-71, the WWCG had a major flare up and disruption in its theological thinking when one of her leading ministers in Ohio (named Carl O’Beirn or O’Birn) chose to read the Scriptures once about the Feast of Tabernacles or Booths, in difference to just continuing to accept Herbert W Armstrong’s interpretation on this subject. 

 

To O’Beirn’s shock and amazement, the Book describes a process where observers or participants of this festival should actually obtain and use certain vegetation and tree foliage to build booths to dwell in for the seven days of the feast.  Armstrong’s position had been historically that motels sufficed in this regard. 

 

So O’Beirn took the matter up with HWA and contended that the Word should be obeyed in this matter and not the historical idea that Armstrong had taught.  HWA refused to address the problem.  Thus, O’Beirn flew from Ohio to Los Angeles to confer with his leader.  But the old man refused to even see him.  So O’Beirn caught a flight back to Ohio.  While enroute, Armstrong send a telex to O’Beirn in Ohio. 

 

On arrival in Ohio, O’Beirn found the Armstrong telex waiting for him.  It was short and to the point--you are fired!  Naturally, in those days, Armstrong was a very proud man and was in no mood to listen to any contrary thinking to his theories and leadership.  Consequently, O’Beirn was “defrocked” and kicked out of the WWCG for daring to question the old man. 

 

 

The Pasadena Follow Up 

 

This confrontation in Pasadena and O’Beirn’s disfellowshipment and subsequent effort to establish his own work produced some gossip in church circles and precipitated Pasadena headquarters to eventually follow up with a letter to all WWCG ministers and churches with Armstrong’s explanation of how the Devil had taken over O’Beirn. 

 

This letter was supposed to be read to each of the WWCG congregations, so that the dumb sheep (as the WWCG headquarters sometimes called the flock out in the field) could be held in line, lest they take some of the gossip seriously. 

 

In time, this letter was read one Sabbath to the Asheville, NC WWCG group of 325 or so members by the pastor there, as well as elsewhere.  As the pastor was “supposed” to do, he praised and glorified Armstrong’s great intellect and “Bible” insight on the motel theory and simultaneously belittled, mocked and made fun of O’Beirn for daring to suggest that “booths” were the intent of The ETERNAL. 

 

While this writer does not have factual information on what all happened in the other Worldwide churches over this headquarters letter, it is probably a good guess that most of the pastors in the field did precisely as the one in Asheville. 

 

In 1971, there were around 50,000 WWCG, adult, baptized members or so.  Question--how many of those members went home after having heard the O’Beirn controversy and actually bothered to spend any time or effort to look into the question from a Scriptural point of view?  How many, really cared one way or the other on this topic? 

 

Well, one man for sure did so from the Asheville, NC congregation.  And this exposure was one of the main reasons (among others) which prompted this individual to quit and resign from the WWCG some time later.  But except for this one case, how many other people do you suppose cared one way or the other? 

 

As a matter of information, it was not until perhaps 1974 that any major membership losses occurred in the WWCG.  Even in 1972, after Armstrong’s end date failed, few members quit.  Thus, of the 50,000 of so members in 1971, at best, there may have been only a handful of people who would have even looked into the booth matter.  Obviously, most could have cared less. 

 

 

Why? 

 

Why the apathy and indifference from so-called “believers” over an issue of such enormous importance in respect to obedience?  Shouldn’t real followers of YESHUA (like these Worldwiders were supposed to be) be concerned over every thing affecting truth? 

 

Undoubtedly, the answer to these questions has to be “no.”  The presence of intellectual pride and vanity served to blind these individuals and make them think, assume, presume and suppose that they knew everything or everything they needed to know (without having to bother to check the Scriptures on the question).  After all, they had confidence (pride) in Mr Armstrong’s judgment. 

 

Surely, this story must blow our minds.  But it is the real world.  Perhaps the explanation in the present tense for these phenomena mentioned so far is that most of such proud, vain people really don't know what they do believe--despite the fact that they think they know everything or everything they need to know. 

 

Apparently, most of such persons have never bothered to take the time to analyze their theological positions.  In their great intellectual pride and vanity, they have perceived no further need for any more information on important topics--like laws and obedience, pride and vanity, brotherly love and affection, sin and repentance, righteousness and salvation, carnality and worldliness, etc. 

 

Therefore, they seem to operate on the premise that they already know everything or everything there is to know about these subjects--or at least, that they know all they need to know. 

 

 

It Closes Our Minds 

 

The essence here is that intellectual pride and vanity act to close the human mind to further inquiry, investigation and the acquisition of truth--even on the most profound topics of all.  Such proud people become walking zombies of apathy, indifference and don't care since they think they know it all or know all they need to know. 

 

Intellectual pride and vanity is possibly one of the most tragic of the many different manifestations of carnality in all of us because it acts to close our minds and mental capacities to even consider any alternative thinking about subjects of potentially enormous importance. 

 

Somehow, we can just become too ignorant and dumb to even consider truth because our minds are locked in a state of apathy and indifference, as a result of intellectual pride and vanity. 

 

As noted in the above remarks on this theme, intellectually proud and vain people "suppose, believe, assume, presume and think" that they know all about a subject or, as a minimum, that they know all they need to know about it.  Consequently, this situation acts to become a barrier to close their minds and thinking capabilities to the infusion of differing ideas. 

 

In fact, such persons become apathetic and indifferent toward any real investigation, inquiry or study about topics which could be of enormous benefit to them.  Of course, the result here can be catastrophic in terms of their true religious development. 

 

And why is it that religious people become intellectually proud and vain over important topics like brotherly love and affection, pride and vanity, sin and repentance, righteousness and salvation, and carnality and worldliness? 

 

There may be several reasons for this phenomenon.  But part of the problem seems to surface in individuals when they incorrectly and falsely assume that they are “saved,” have received grace and now possess the “spirit.” 

 

In effect, they are self righteous because at one time or the other in their wretched lives, they complied with the false teachings of salvation, as enunciated by a fake teacher or preacher in Christendom or its Sacred Name and Identity offshoots. 

 

Once a person thinks, assumes, and presumes that his/her ticket is punched, in a religious vein, it is inevitable that intellectual pride and vanity will find roots and a place to grow and develop. 

 

Of course, the interesting thing in this regard is that there is absolutely no Scriptural reason or justification to believe one is saved, converted and has the "spirit" based on his or her words and beliefs and the fact that he or she has been baptized at the hands of Christianity or one of the Sacred Name or Identity fragments. 

 

 

Some Scriptural Samples 

 

To demonstrate how The MOST HIGH feels about the evils and wickedness of intellectual pride and vanity, some quotations from His Word will be considered next for consumption.  In the main, the following presentations will be taken from the “Amplified Translation” of the Book. 

 

For a start, the writer of Job had two important comments.  First, he wrote that a stupid man will only get wisdom when a wild donkey's colt is born a man--like which he thinks himself free because he is lifted up in pride (Job 11:12).  Elsewhere, he wrote that The ELOHIM does not respect or regard people who are wise in their own hearts, in their own understanding and conceit (Job 37:24). 

 

The prophet Yeshayahu perceptively pointed out that there is a woe pronounced on those persons who are "wise" in their own eyes and prudent and shrewd in their own eye-sights (Isa 5:21).  Yirmeyahu the prophet added that the wise and skillful person should not glory and boast in his wisdom and skill (Jer 9:23). 

 

And the prophet Yechezkel condemned the wicked prince of Tyre for believing that he was wiser than Daniel; that there was no secret that was hidden from him; and that his heart was lifted up and proud because of his wealth which he believed he had gotten from his great wisdom and understanding (Ezek 28:2-5).

 

Shaul the apostle wrote to the Romans and told them about rebellious people who, claiming to be wise, became "fools" (Rom 1:22).  To the Corinthians, he said to let no man deceive himself to suppose that he is wise in this age; but let himself see how dull, stupid and foolish he really is (I Cor 3:18). 

 

He also wrote to the Corinthians that if any individual imagines that he has come to know and understand much (of Scripturally important) things (without love), he does not yet perceive, recognize or understand what he should (I Cor 8:1-2).  Finally, to the Galatians, Shaul wrote that if any person thinks he is a somebody when he is a nobody, he deceives and deludes himself (Gal 6:3). 

 

 

Testing the Proud 

 

This condition is interesting in view of a situation which surfaced in 1989 when a number of American and Korean students were given a test on mathematics.  But before commencing the examination, the students in both groups were asked to rate and evaluate themselves on how much they individually thought they knew about mathematics. 

 

By a ratio of about three to one over the Koreans, the Americans thought and believed that they knew a lot about math.  Manifestly, the more humble Koreans were more circumspect regarding their intellectual and mathematical qualifications. 

 

But in the real world of actuality, the truth manifested itself when the test results were in.  The examination findings painted an entirely different picture of reality than what the individual students had assumed, believed, thought and presumed when they had first rated themselves on what all they thought they knew.  In terms of results, the Koreans out scored the Americans in an amazing ratio of also about three to one. 

 

Obviously, the Americans had a big problem with intellectual pride and vanity in their hearts.  It should be said not just hearts; but rather, in their "wicked and evil" hearts because pride and vanity constitute sin.  It is interesting that the more modest and humble Koreans really did have some intelligence, knowledge and understanding on the subject; more so than the proud, vain, arrogant Americans. 

 

 

Another Report

 

“The Washington Times,” of Feb 7-13, 2000 (p. 2), had a news story on “Incompetent folks don’t know they don’t know.”  It laid out the reality of stupid and/or ignorant people who don’t know, but believe that they do know (there is a difference between being stupid and being just ignorant/uninformed).  Tragically, many of the persons not knowing, think highly of themselves in believing that they do know. 

 

This report centered on a study by a pair of social psychologists at Cornell University.  The analysis found that time and time again, people who perform poorly, relative to their peers, tend to think highly of themselves.  On a student test at Cornell, many students rated themselves as doing well on it when they flubbed all of the questions. 

 

The writer of this production at hand has found that this problem is very common among Christians and even Christian preachers.  Most of them think they know so much; when, in fact, they know so little.  A person really familiar with the Book can often be astounded to discover how inadequate most Christians are in any worthwhile discussion on the Scriptures. 

 

It is so tragic that most Christians know very little or nothing.  And yet, they parade around and live in a world of self-delusion, believing that they know everything of importance.  Manifestly, they think highly of themselves and what they think they know.  Most can talk for hours on end about subjects which they know little or nothing about.  Yet, in their conversation, they tell lies and act like they know everything. 

 

Christian preachers tend to shoot out their ideas and beliefs in a stream of words.  When, upon examination of what they say, it becomes apparent that they simply don’t know what they are talking about.  Of course, they are sincere people--sincerely wrong.   Persons who really are Scripturally illiterate can easily get taken in by a fast talking, lying preacher and especially one who has some charisma and charm. 

 

 

Sebastian Roch Nicolas Chamfort 

 

This discussion on how little we know despite the fact that we think we know all about things or at least that we know all we need to know brings to mind a real gem of truth from out of the past of some 200 years ago.  In this regard, the French writer, Sebastian Roch Nicolas Chamfort (1741-1794), once wrote that "many blunders are made by intelligent people because they can never realize how stupid the world is." 

 

Certainly, the world proudly believes in the intellect and merits of man and what all man supposedly knows and understands about reality.  Of course, even intelligent people can get trapped into likewise exhibiting pride and vanity in the form of confidence and assurance in the intellect and information levels of the worldly population at large. 

 

It must be a real fluke or paradox of sorts when one finally recognizes how utterly uninformed and indeed ignorant man is in respect to the profoundly important issues of eternity.  It appears that it is a rare individual who can grasp how little man does know.  Chamfort's perception of reality was truly amazing. 

 

It is, indeed, strange that man believes that he knows everything or everything he needs to know.  Yet, in reality, man is an incredibly ignorant and misinformed fool who knows very little.  Tragically, this indictment fits all of us--even “supposedly” intelligent persons, as Chamfort demonstrated. 

 

We all think that we know so much.  But in actuality, we know so fantastically little, again, as Chamfort reflected.  And why do we think we know so much?  Why intellectual pride and vanity, of course.  Yes, we all think highly of ourselves and our “hypothetically” great intellect. 

 

 

Telling Lies, Revisited 

 

Here, it would be well to pause and note some statistics on telling lies which have come to light in 1991 from at least two different sources--a study by the J. Walter Advertising Agency and a book by James Patterson and Peter Kim, who were quoted earlier.  Significantly, both agencies claim that 91% of Americans acknowledge that they “lie” regularly and routinely. 

 

Patterson and Kim also indicate that 58% of people “say things which they don’t really mean.”  J. Walter found that Americans will lie at the drop of a hat--86% admit to lying regularly to parents, 75% to friends, 73% to siblings, and 69% to spouses. 

 

Incidentally, these 1991 figures are now sadly out of date because lying is exploding upward with the revelations of former President Slick and his constant lies (to be assessed in later chapters). 

 

 

Yes, All Are Liars 

 

However, in this context, it is worth noting that the Scriptures poignantly declare that all men (100% and not just some part) are liars (Num 23:19; Ps 116:11; Rom 3:4).  Obviously, this all or 100% is far more extensive and profound than the 91% who admit to lying, as described above. 

 

So, what is the difference between the human studies of people who admit to lying and what the Book proclaims in terms of all of us? 

 

Well, the verity here is that probably 91% of the population does willingly, consciously and with foreknowledge tell lies regularly and routinely to others.  But beyond what lies are told by this 91%, we all (100%) tell lies without mental awareness and foreknowledge because we all have a propensity to “assume, presume, suppose, guess, believe and accept” things which may or may not be true at all. 

 

And in the case of false information, which we have come to believe, we repeat this same false information and pass it along to others as “truth, fact and reality” when it is really blatant lies.  These remarks were mentioned in a prior chapter herein in the context of presumptuousness and lies by Christians. Of course, the problem is widespread throughout society.  It covers more persons than just Christians. 

 

On this idea, it must be noted that our sincerity and attitude have nothing whatsoever to do with the basic truth or false aspects of the information.  Sincere people can tell lies just as easily and just as often as insincere ones. 

 

Nowhere can a reader find a justification in the Scriptures for sincere people to tell lies while condemning insincere persons.  The truth is “all” liars are condemned, to include both the sincere ones as well as insincere ones. 

 

Therefore, we all can be very sincere and well meaning and not intending to “lie,” per se.  It’s just that we humans presume false things and then intellectual pride and vanity take over our wicked and deceitful hearts and minds to propel us into passing bad information and data on to others, including our parents, children, friends, etc. 

 

Of course, we don’t have to pass bad thinking on to others.  But then there is the allure and appeal of intellectual pride and vanity which deceive us into actually believing a lot of such trash and nonsense as being factual.  On this, the bottom line is that we all (100%) are liars--just like the Word declares.   

 

 

In Conclusion 

 

On this theme, of intellectual pride and vanity, The MESSIAH makes it patently clear that truth is hidden from people who are wise and intelligent in their own eyes (Lu 10:21). 

 

Furthermore, the problem with the Laodicean Assembly was that she was proud and rich with no apparent needs--yet she was blind in her own evil, wicked heart (Rev 3:17).  No wonder, the Book says that YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 83--Pride in Denying Responsibility

 

 

The Modern Problem 

 

In order to maintain our position, our importance and our status, we all have a tendency to deny responsibility for our actions--at least those subject to condemnation or criticism.  This phenomenon has found enormous popularity in the modern, Western, Christian culture where most people usually refuse to accept any responsibility for their wrong actions. 

 

Government is helping this entire motion along in the sense that under the New World Order, government is taking over the raising of children and providing for the needs of people in general. 

 

To accomplish this takeover, government has had active programs telling parents that the government carries the responsibility for children and not the parents.  This whole motion will be described below in the following comments and in future chapters on humanism.  But for now, it just needs some recognition. 

 

 

The Sardis Sacred Name Woman, Revisited 

 

There once was a woman living in the modern territory of Yisrael who thought she was very pretty, intelligent and religious. 

 

But while she thought very highly of herself and her attributes, it was evident for an unbiased observer to perceive very plainly that she did not measure up as high on those qualities as she thought she did.  In fact, she was sadly lacking and was just grossly inflated in her own eyes because of pride and vanity. 

 

For example, in her religious mentality, she was a classic Sardis Sacred Namer without any evidence whatsoever that she had ever come to grips with carnality in her life.  Thus, she was still existing under the flesh; and consequently, not converted although she proudly thought she was. 

 

In her self righteous state, she came to believe that she had special and unique links with The SOVEREIGN.  She believed that she was so special that the “spirit” communicated with her and gave her “special” messages about life and how she should live and pursue goals (much like the Pentecostals, to be discussed in later chapters). 

 

To demonstrate how far this influence went in her life, she claimed on two different occasions that the “spirit” had communicated a need to her to change her name which her parents had given her at birth.  She believed that this “spirit” power told her she needed a more religious sounding name. 

 

After receiving the first name change, she came to believe that the “spirit” changed its mind and came back a second time to give her still a different “religious” name to go by.  Since the Book says that YHWH does not change and is the same forever, one must wonder what kind of a “spirit” this woman was in contact with that changed its mind on what name she should have. 

 

The person under discussion was born as an only child.  And tragically, for her life, her parents spoiled her rotten and allowed her to have her way in many things.  This condition followed the woman into adulthood to the point that she usually got mad whenever her way did not prevail in social intercourse with others--regardless of the circumstances and the relevance of right or wrong. 

 

One time, when she was in her late thirties, her father decided to move himself and her mother to another location.  She didn’t approve of the move.  So she got mad at him and wouldn’t speak or write to him for several months until she finally got over her temper tantrum.  And all the time that this condition lasted, she persisted in believing that she was a religious “saint” in direct contact with The MOST HIGH. 

 

 

The Love of Money 

 

This woman’s love of money was previously broached in a prior chapter.  The short of it was that though she claimed to be religious, a Sabbath and feast day keeper and a believer in the basic Sardis Sacred Name ideology, she decided that religion was of no importance in her next marriage (she was a divorcee), but that her husband to be would have to meet a special money test she had devised. 

 

So she married a man for money and the man didn’t have the money he was supposed to have.  So the marriage ended.  The interesting thing about this “spirit filled” woman was that in whatever she did or whatever was to happen in her times of sorrow and unhappiness, it never was her fault.   She always blamed others. 

 

She was totally on the defensive and in her eyes, never did bear any responsibility for any of her problems.  Even her friends that tried to offer advice and help quickly learned to keep their mouths shut because she would even blame them in preference to accepting responsibility for her actions.  She never liked to hear any criticism.  All she wanted to hear from friends was praise about how great and wonderful she was. 

 

Actually, this situation with this woman and her self righteousness is not a strange thing to behold in the environment of our time.  In fact, it is the real world of almost everyone.  Incredibly so, we sorry humans are not about to stand up and admit that we have done anything wrong in our lives. 

 

We will fight, argue, deceive, lie, cheat and steal in order to maintain our innocence and righteousness.  In the general context, men and women are in no mood to say:  “I was wrong” or that “I made a mistake.”  It’s always a “no way, Jose (Ho-say)” on admitting personal guilt. 

 

 

The Clinton Example 

 

Slick Clinton, the once president, is one of the most glaring examples of a very evil man who has done and does do much wickedness over time.  Yet, he consistently refuses ever to admit any wrong-doing.  When accused, his normal reaction is to accuse the accuser. 

 

Another former president, Harry Truman, however good or bad he was, used to have a sign on his desk which read-- “the buck stops here.”  The point being is that Truman not only accepted responsibility for the achievements of his administration, but also its mistakes and failures.  He never tried to blame other people when things went wrong. 

 

Slick Clinton categorically always refused to admit any wrong doing.  If the IRS was doing something wrong, it was not his fault (though he was the ultimate boss of the IRS).  If grave sites were illegally given to Slick’s campaign supporters, it was the fault of the Pentagon (though he was the boss of the Pentagon).  If people were illegally fired in his office, it was not his fault (though he was the boss at the White House). 

 

If the Chinese obtained American nuclear secrets, it was not his fault.  But rather, it must be blamed on Ronald Reagan or George Bush.  This goes on and on as Clinton denied (and still denies) all responsibility for wrongs occurring from his actions or the actions of his administration.  Effectively, America had a president who bore no responsibility for the wrongs and evils done in the executive branch of government. 

 

But there is another interesting side-light to Clinton.  While he personally never admitted any wrong-doing or mistakes (for things going wrong in the executive branch), Slick proved to be a great apologizer for wrongs committed by other people in former administrations.  For example, he often apologized for alleged wrongs done to Black people centuries ago when they were in slavery. 

 

There was a scandal of sorts connected to the famous liberal leader Franklin Roosevelt, when his administration conducted medical experiments on Negro people at Tuskegee, Alabama--back in the 1930s and 1940s.  Of course, Slick was anxious to apologize for these incidents--since they did not directly involve him. 

 

 

Adam and Eve, Revisited 

 

This tragedy under discussion brings to mind a similar occurrence about 6,000 years ago in the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve both disobeyed The EVERLIVING ONE and partook of the forbidden fruit (as described earlier).  This point has been discussed in previous remarks, but it is so relevant that it needs mention again. 

 

When The ELOHIM appeared before them and asked “why” for their evil deeds, they each, of course, had some excuses and reasons (Gen 3:12-13).  Neither of them would accept responsibility for their actions.  Both tried to shift the blame and put the responsibility somewhere else. 

 

And you know how people react when confronted with their acts of evil, wickedness and stupidity.  We all have followed in the paths of Adam and Eve.  The woman of Yisrael, described above, followed in this path.  You have followed it and i have followed it.  It seems that we all have deceitful and desperately wicked hearts that make us run from accepting responsibility for our actions (Jer 17:9). 

 

Thus, we all are always on the look out for ways to avoid the responsibility for sins.  We like to deny guilt and shift the blame and responsibility to someone else whenever and wherever possible.  To have the guts and integrity to stand up and say “I’m guilty” or that “I did wrong” seems to be just about out of the question for almost all carnal, unconverted people. 

 

 

David, An Exception? 

 

In terms of what has just been described, the Book does outline one classic exception to the norm, however.  This one happened some 3,000 years ago in the life of the man named David.  You probably remember the story of David's sin with Bat-Sheva and his actions in having her supposed husband Uriah murdered (II Sam 11:4-27).  Well, in this context, the Word tells us that Nathan (Natan in Hebrew) the prophet called on King David one day.

 

Nathan told David a parable about a man who owned a lot of sheep and yet went and stole the one lamb owned by a poor man (II Sam 12:1-7).  Well, David, being a shepherd, was outraged and demanded to know who the man was that would do such a nasty deed.  Nathan told him-- “you are the man” (II Sam 12:7-10). 

 

In this instance, David could have gotten mad at Nathan and caused him all kinds of trouble.  After all, he was the king.  He could have denied the incident and no one would have dared question him as the king.  But instead of all this, David showed his true colors when he replied “I have sinned” (II Sam 12:13).

 

Irrespective of how right or wrong David was over the years, surely his acknowledged honesty and integrity when the chips were down has to be one of the most profound stories of human character in the Word.  Perhaps this event must have had something to do with the fact that The ELOHIM elected to call David "a man after His Own heart” (I Sam 13:14; Ps 89:20; Acts 13:22). 

 

 

Our Defensive, Justifying Posture 

 

Why is it that most of us will lie, cheat, steal, deceive, and try to be clever and crafty in order to avoid accepting responsibility for our wicked deeds and actions?  Why is it that we are always on the defensive and constantly on the look out for ways to shift the blame and place it even on someone else instead of accepting it and confessing our shortcomings and guilt? 

 

Why can’t we just stand up and say “i was wrong.”  Yet, this honorable course of action is typically disregarded or otherwise thrown to the bottom of the heap of options in our wicked and deceitful methods of approaching life. 

 

Well, there are reasons for all of this human nature in action.  And the reasons are quite obvious and evident to any person who has perceived the great evil and wickedness of pride and vanity in the deceitful hearts of carnal people. 

 

Pride and vanity will not allow us to stand up and say we’re wrong and accept responsibility for our deeds.  Truly, there is no limit to the extent of pride and vanity in our wicked personalities. 

 

 

A Recent Manifestation 

 

There is something else going on here in 2003 in modern America and among contemporary Americans which is adding a new twist to this whole discussion on pride and vanity in denying responsibility for our actions or lack of actions, however the wrong-doing is to be defined.  

 

This new movement will be discussed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein with discussions on Christian humanism.  There is no need to try to cover this whole issue here.  But at least, it must be mentioned. 

 

There are powerful forces at work to make the American population totally dependent upon government for virtually everything.  This motion seems to be a part of the plans and efforts of the super rich (who will be discussed also in later chapters) to bring about and impose a New World Order. 

 

One of the features of this coming New World Order will be a great emphasis upon the pride of life (I Jo 2:16), described in former comments.  The essence of the pride of life is a dependency upon the government and human institutions for all privileges, benefits and blessings of life in the context of confidence, security and trust in the government and human institutions. 

 

To carry this purpose forward, there is a strange thing going on right now.  As noted earlier, it is a fact that the government and national leaders are trying to impress upon the population the fact that people are not responsible for anything--for their children, what their children do or even what they personally do. 

 

 

An Example 

 

A classic illustration of this concept surfaces whenever there is a crazy shooting by some nut or brainwashed and zombiized person (these shootings and why they seem to be occurring will be addressed in subsequent chapters herein).  Historically, most Americans would blame the person doing the shooting for the shooting and call it a criminal act of irresponsibility and evil. 

 

But not so in the modern, Western, Christian culture.  Now, the person involved is not to be blamed.  Instead, guns are almost always the problem--unless the shooting is done by a stupid, right-wing, Christian Identity type (who the controlled media can call and identify as a racist and a White supremacist). 

 

Even then, the problem is not so much on the person doing the shooting.  But rather, the cause must be placed with his beliefs that he obtained from some politically incorrect group in America (like the Aryan Nations in North Idaho or one of the Ku Klux Klan entities). 

 

The point is that from government and society’s perspective, the cause of an irresponsible shooting is guns; or if the perpetuator is a person linked to certain groups, then the cause is the identifiable group and its teaching.  In no case, are modern Americans willing to blame such an irresponsible act on the person doing the deed. 

 

This is strange that modern man has found excuses to use to blame for wrongs done in his society and culture, rather than establishing responsibility with the persons doing the wrongs.  People are no longer to blame for anything.  It is always something else which is the problem. 

 

In this context, parents have lost all responsibility for raising and disciplining children, as noted above.  And since parents are not responsible and since wrongs continue to occur, the Big Brother government theoretically has to step in and assume responsibility over children and indeed over the whole population. 

 

So government passes all kinds of new laws to take away guns and oppress and persecute politically incorrect people who do not toe the line of the ruling plutocrats.  This whole motion is being carried out in the context that man is no longer personally responsible for his misdeeds, shortcomings and wrongs. 

 

 

Avoid Responsibility is the Goal 

 

This new government position and theology (from the pride of life) fit into the mentality and mental reasoning of almost all persons controlled by the government.   Most humans, because of pride and vanity, are more than anxious to shift the blame or avoid responsibility at all costs when they do something wrong. 

 

As elaborated upon in several passages in this production, Adam and Eve introduced this concept in the Garden of Eden--because it is pure and simple human nature or carnality (specifically pride and vanity) to avoid personal responsibility for wrongful actions. 

 

Of course, we all like to accept responsibility when things go right and are done well.  Our shunning and fleeing responsibility occurs whenever things go wrong and we are responsible for the wrong. 

 

Perhaps there is a deep meaning to this whole dilemma.  Our wrongs typically constitute sin.  We therefore become guilty of sin and deserving of death for our wicked acts.  However, if we mentally can blame someone or something else, we rationalize that we are not responsible for the resulting sin.  We are innocent in our own eyes. 

 

 

A Parable 

 

Many years ago, this writer heard a short parable which always seemed to convey quite a message of truth.  It concerned a rich, successful lawyer and a derelict bum off of the streets, who was an open and great sinner.  Both of them supposedly came before The MOST HIGH to offer repentance and seek forgiveness. 

 

The lawyer prayed long and hard by pointing out that he was not responsible for wrong doings.  He blamed others in his society and culture.  For hours, he pleaded and argued his case for his justification and righteousness.  He maintained that he was not responsible and was, in fact, innocent and a victim of circumstances. 

 

Conversely, the known and open sinner offered no justification or argument for his wrong doing.  Instead, his position was simple.  He accepted his responsibility for his wrongs and pled guilty! 

 

There is a great text in the New Testament (among many).  This one is relevant here because it relates that YESHUA came to call sinners to repentance and not righteous people (Matt 9:13; Mk 2:17).  It is very hard for a self-justifying person to repent and receive reconciliation.  Maybe that is the reason The MESSIAH came to call known sinners who knew they were responsible and were wrong. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 84--Other Views on Pride

 

 

What Others Say About Pride 

 

Since pride and vanity are such absolutely profound topics affecting all of so-called humanity, one can be sure that the Scriptures have an abundance of words to say about them.  Of course, this is true.  In fact, much of what is said is in plain and unmistakable language. 

 

However, some of the references are more veiled and hidden in a mystery of sorts--at least a mystery to proud, vain people who could care less about truth and righteousness.  Over the years, various Scriptural students, scholars, etc have perceived that the themes of pride and vanity were extremely important in the Book. 

 

As has been true with this writer, many of these students have failed to grasp the overall significance and aspects of the issues which are veiled and largely hid from view of unconverted persons.  Nevertheless, based on what can be read and understood by even proud, unconverted individuals, some scholars have written about some of the relevant Scriptural teachings on this subject. 

 

In preceding chapters, the point was made that centuries ago, such students as Augustine, Aquinas and others have made it that pride is “the very essence of sin.”  This writer has come to the precise, same determination. 

 

 

The English 

 

This fact must be true because the Book has an assortment of words to prove this exact point as certain savants have observed.  However, before looking at the words and thinking of various Scriptural scholars, one should take a few minutes here initially to review the English language's position on pride, proud and vanity. 

 

For this view, “Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary” says for “pride” -- “n...  1. an overhigh opinion of oneself; exaggerated self-esteem; conceit.  2. the showing of this in behavior; haughtiness; arrogance.  3. a sense of one's own dignity or worth; self respect.  4. delight or satisfaction in one's achievements, possessions, children, etc.  5. a person or thing in which pride is taken; as, his daughters are his pride. 

 

“6. the best of a class, group, society, etc; pick; flower; as, the pride of the Yankees.  7. the best part or time; prime; flowering; as, in the pride of manhood.  8. mettle (in a horse).  9. (a) magnificence; splendor; (b) ornament (archaic).  10. sexual desire, or heat, especially in a female animal (obs). 

 

“11. wantonness; extravagance; excess, (obs); expanded; as a peacock in his pride.  13. a group as of lions (archaic).  14. lameness. (Brit. Dial.).  v...to be proud.  prideful a. full of pride, insolent, proud, haughty." 

 

On the English word “proud,” Webster gives the following-- “1. having or exhibiting pride; specifically, (a) having or drawing inordinate self-esteem; possessing an unreasonably high conception of one's own excellence of body or mind, of one's achievements, position or importance; hence, arrogant; haughty; supercilious;

 

“(b) having or showing an aversion to whatever is considered unworthy of one's reputation, character, or self-respect; (c) feeling or showing great pride or joy; elated; exultant; highly pleased; as proud of one's country's greatness; proud to receive commendation. 

 

“2. that is an occasion or cause of pride; exciting pride; grand, magnificent; as a proud day for Rome; proud temples; a proud array.  3. spirited; of high mettle; as, the proud Arabian steed.  4. arising from or caused by pride; presumptuous; as, a proud glance.  5. turgid or swollen, as a river in flood.  6. excited sexually; used of a female animal; as a cat. (obs. or Dial.).  7. valiant (obs.)." 

 

Regarding the English “vanity,” Webster gives-- “1. anything or act that is vain, futile, idle, or worthless.  2. the quality or fact of being vain, or worthless, futility.  3. the quality or fact of being vain, or excessively proud of oneself or one's qualities or possessions, self satisfaction.  5. a vanity case.  6. a dressing table.  7. (V-) in the old moralities and puppet shows, a personified vice...” 

 

 

Some Views on the Word

 

Turning now to the Scriptural savants, the “Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible,” edited by Merrill C. Tenney, quoted earlier, notes that "Pride is more easily recognized than defined and is more easily detected in others than in self.  The concept embraces many synonyms that reflect attitudes as well as acts--such as arrogance, presumption, conceit, and esp. vanity and self satisfaction.  

 

“Pride is incessantly selfish, and a proud person thus loses any balance that might grow out of a recognition of his true position as over against God or over against the ability and worth of others... All satisfaction from pride is self-satisfaction, and it is endless: pride of evil, pride of goodness, pride of birth and position, even pride of humility.  No moral suasion or guidance can break in because self-satisfaction always feels complete in itself." 

 

The “Schaff Herzog Encyclopedia” tells us that pride is "An unwarranted feeling of self-sufficiency, usually manifested by an arrogant bearing and a disregard of the worth of others... While humility is that feeling of dependence which necessarily accompanies faith and love toward God, pride is that self-assurance, or self-righteousness, which prevents one from feeling the need of the grace...

 

“In the religious field the worst form of pride is intellectual pride, which carries with it the danger of hypocrisy... Since the normal religious consciousness includes absolute trust in God, while pride is characterized by trust in one's own powers... It is made to account for the fall of the first man and even of the devil." 

 

The “Seventh-day Adventist Dictionary” points out that pride is "An inordinate self-esteem making its possessor blind to weaknesses and dangers, and paving the way for his humiliation and destruction... It is one of the attitudes that God hates." 

 

The “Hastings Dictionary of the New Testament” observes that pride "beclouds the moral sense and destroys self-control... In I Co 13:4, where we read that love 'vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up' the first verb appears to denote the arrogant or forward manner of one who sounds his own praises, the latter the disposition of self-conceit which loves pre-eminence... the English 'pride' is too vague and colourless; and Beza's 'gloriosus' is a better rendering (of the Greek)." 

 

 

“McClintock and Strong Cyclopedia”

 

The “McClintock and Strong Cyclopedia” has it that "Pride is inordinate and unreasonable self-esteem,... is the high opinion that a poor, little, contracted soul entertains of itself...

 

“manifests itself by praising ourselves, adoring our persons, attempting to appear before others in a superior light to what we are; contempt and slander of others; envy at the excellences others possess; anxiety to gain applause; distress and rage when slighted; impatience of contradiction; and opposition to God himself.  The evil effects of pride are beyond computation. 

 

“It has spread itself universally in all nations; among all characters; and as it was the first sin, ...so it seems the last to be conquered.  It may be considered as the parent of discontent, ingratitude, covetousness, poverty, presumption, passion, extravagance, bigotry, war, and persecution.  In fact, there is hardly an evil perpetrated but pride is connected with it in a proximate or remote sense...

 

“To be proud of knowledge is to be blind in the light; to be proud of virtue is to poison ourselves with the antidote; to be proud of authority is to make our rise our downfall... how disgraceful it renders us in the sight of God, angels, and men; what a barrier it is to our felicity and communion with God; how fruitful it is of discord; how it precludes our usefulness, and renders us really contemptible." 

 

 

“New Bible Dictionary” 

 

The “New Bible Dictionary” reports that “The emphasis placed on pride and its converse humility, is a distinctive feature of biblical religion unparalleled in other religions or ethical systems.  Rebellious pride, which refuses to depend on God and be subject to Him, but attributes to self the honour due to Him, figures as the very root and essence of sin... man's entire nature was infected with pride through the fall...

 

“Hence, we find a sustained condemnation of human arrogance throughout the Old Testament, especially in the Psalms and Wisdom Literature... Greek teaching during the four last centuries BC was at variance with Judaism in regarding pride as a virtue and humility as despicable.” 

 

These remarks of the “New Bible Dictionary” deserve a few highlights and comments.  Please note that the Greek culture and civilization regarded pride as a virtue and humility as something to be scorned. 

 

One must realize that the Greek civilization of the last four centuries BCE came to be the Roman civilization; which, in turn, came to be the basis of the entire, Western, Christian civilization of Europe and America for the last 2,000 years. 

 

Even the Christian religion is founded on earlier Greek teachings, as will be proven in later chapters herein.  This is a most fantastic reality of the past.  Consequently, this condition from history has come to equate pride with something good and to be cherished.  It is this motivation and thinking which now dominates in modern America. 

 

 

The “New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology” 

 

The “New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology” has an analysis of the Greek words in the NT commonly translated as pride or one of its related words.  This source states that in the OT, a central theme of the prophetic message and the Wisdom literature is that "God's judgment destroys all man's pride." 

 

In commenting on the Greek “hybris,” the point was made by this source that it stands for "formations from (the Hebrew) gaah, be high, arrogant at Lev 26:19;... It also stands for (the Hebrew) gewah, arrogant speech at Jer 13:9; for (the Hebrew) zadon, insolence, presumptuousness at Prov 11:2; 13:10...; for (the Hebrew) lason, boasting, prattle, at Prov 1:22;

 

“for (the Hebrew) alliz, wanton, presumptuous, at Isa 23:7; and (the Hebrew) fum, haughtiness, at Isa 2:17.. (The Greek) alazoneuomai stands for  (the Hebrew) hada, dignify oneself at Prov 25:6;... departure from the Lord is the beginning of pride... comes from the heart which must be dealt with at that level and cannot be cured by mere external ablutions...

 

“Jas 4:16 takes up the thought of Jas 4:6... 'you boast in your arrogance... All such boasting is evil.'  The plur. here may suggest the numerous instances of confidence in one's cleverness, luck, strength, or skill which may have brought material advantage...

 

“The context  deals with laying plans for material gain without regard to God.  Jas. counters this with a twofold remedy  'Instead you ought to say, If the Lord wills, we shall live and we shall do this or that'...the pride of life is not of the Father but is of the world." 

 

 

The “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” 

 

The “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” says for pride, in the context of Greek usage, "the meaning is outstanding, distinguished:  courage... wisdom... work... deeds... the empty boaster who deceives himself and others by making the most of his advantages, abilities and achievements... is the one with pride, arrogance and foolish presumption...

 

“In Macc. all the Gentiles, foreign kings and generals and sometimes typical figures of the past like Pharaoh, are characterized as 'insolent'... (in various Scriptures) arrogance is traced back to a spirit of error, to the spirit of hate or to Satan himself... is against God and stands in contrast to the humility which is proper in relation to God and which is full surrender to Him. 

 

"It is pride in one's own being and work which already in the OT tradition... denotes resistance to God and the haughty disdain with which others are treated... The proud are visited by God's wrath (Nu 15:30 LXX). 

 

“But He shows His grace to the humble, and in due time this means their elevation... (The proud one) is the one who makes more of himself than the reality justifies, ascribes to himself either more and better things than he has, or even what he does not possess at all;  who promises what he cannot perform... (In mentioning this very common sin of people not fulfilling promises, this writer must confess this evil many times over.  Now, i try to be careful about making promises). 

 

“In I Jn 2:16 this denotes the attitude of the cosmic man who does not ask concerning the will of the Father but tries to make out that he himself may sovereignly decide concerning the shape of his life, whereas in actuality the decision lies with God, as is seen in the passing away of the world." 

 

 

The “Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament” 

 

Likewise, The “Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament” (v. II, p. 344-350) addresses the subject of pride and its nuances from the standpoint of the OT Hebrew.  This book says that in terms of etymology, “The root g'h is widespread outside of Hebrew, especially in Aramaic.  In Syriac it appears in the pael and aphel, and especially in the ethpail, 'to exalt oneself, be arrogant,' and in a number of derivatives. 

 

“This root also occurs in Mandean, where we find a peal and pael only in the active participle, the ethpael, 'to be shining, outstanding,' and substantival forms.  In Jewish Aramaic we find the peal, 'to be high,' and the ethpeal, 'to be exalted, boast.'...it means 'the glorious one, the high one, the exalted one'... 

 

“In Akkadian, we find gaum 'to be presumptuous,' once as a Canaanite word, and adj. gaum 'presumptuous'...(the) Egyp q'y, 'to be high' corresponds in form... in Cushite... ‘to stand up, be exalted.’  Possibly a biradical root g' with polar meanings, 'to be or become high, deep, lies behind these forms.  If so, Heb gai, 'valley', originally could have been connected with the root g'h. 

 

"(Otherwise) we read ge'e, ‘the proud ones of,’ the plural construct of ge'eh, instead of ge' shemanim, valley of oils,' in Isa 28:1, 4 has also received unexpected support from (Qumran literature)... In Sirach, in which the meaning can pass from 'prosperity' to majesty to pride, arrogance... the OT verbs saga, 'to grow, hiphil to make great,' and sagah, 'to become great, hiphil to make great,'... 

 

“However, Heb. goy, 'nation', is probably not to be connected with the root g'h, because the loss of the aleph as the middle radical could hardly be explained if this were the case... The verb ga'ah appears in the literal  sense, 'to be or become high', in Job 8:11, in connection with the growth of plants, especially papyrus,... in Isa. 9:17 (18) ge'uth has the literal meaning of 'high-towering, ascending': ge'uth 'ashan is a column of smoke... 

 

"The Wisdom Literature has repeated warnings against pride.  Therefore, personified Wisdom can say, 'Pride and arrogance (ge ‘ah vegha’ on) and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate (Prov 8:13).  Yahweh tears down the house of the ge'im, 'proud' (Prov 15:25), casts down the throne of the ge'im (Sir 10:14), and cuts off pride (gevah) (Job 33:17). 

 

“Pride (ga'on) goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.  It is better to be of a lowly spirit with the poor than to divide the spoil with the proud (ge'im) (Prov 16:18f). 

 

“To depart from God is the beginning of pride (ga'on) (Sir 10:12).  It is not likely that we should read ge'im, 'proud ones', instead of goyim, 'nations', in several passages in the Psalms, ...and that ge'im refers to a specific group, namely, the Sadducees. 

 

“Pride and arrogance are characteristics of the wicked.  Thus they are depicted in the laments in the Psalter.  They pursue the poor in arrogance (Ps 10:2; read begha'uth);... In some striking passages in the prophetic literature, Yisrael's self confident attitude is condemned as the essence of pride (ga'on). 

 

“Thus Amos announces that Yahweh abhors the pride of Jacob (Am 6:8).  That which other passages describe in detail as ‘despotism, unrighteousness, luxury, and military self conceit,’ is summed up here in the word ga'on. 

 

"Hosea says that the presumptuous pride of Israel testifies as a witness against Israel (Hos 5:5; and as a gloss in 7:10a).  Yeshayahu also knows that on the day of Yahweh all that is proud (ge'ah) and lofty will be humbled (Isa. 2:12; 13:11).  Moreover, according to Zeph 3:11 the proudly exultant ones will be removed. 

 

“Pride and arrogance of heart prevent the inhabitants of Samaria from recognizing their true situation (Isa 9:8/9).  Yirmeyahu weeps because of the pride (gevah) of the stubborn ones of his people (Jer 13:17).  In the threat of punishment in Lev 26:14-38, v. 19 declares that Yahweh will break the proud power (ge'on 'uzzekhem) of Israel, as he will make the sky over Palestine like iron..." 

 

 

The Curses in the Law 

 

This last reference and remark from the “Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament” is particularly germane.  The famous 26th chapter of Leviticus outlines the curses in the law which are destined to come upon the House of Yisrael nations in the age end because of their continuing sins.  Please note that the coming drought is specifically linked to the pride of the people of the House of Yisrael. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 85--Ingratitude and Pride

 

 

McClintock and Strong, Revisited 

 

The previous chapter quoted some remarks from the excellent “McClintock and Strong Cyclopedia” which indicated that among other bad features, pride is the parent of ingratitude.  This is a most profound sin among people and particularly Christian Israelites. 

 

So often, people do good deeds for others and never even rate a thank you or anything else in the way of acknowledgment or appreciation (as pointed out a couple of times in previous comments herein). 

 

The modern contemporary society seems to be especially plagued with ingratitude today--since so many modern people look upon favors, benefits and blessings bestowed upon themselves from others as being their inherent, human rights. 

 

Moreover, this mention of ingratitude seems especially common now--primarily because Americans have been spoon fed some bad information from the social-welfare state that they are automatically entitled to benefits. 

 

Accordingly, the present welfare state talks about entitlements as if people are automatically entitled to hand-outs from the welfare state.  And these entitlements include good deeds from others--whether deserved or not. 

 

Many, many persons today simply cannot or will not express any appreciation or say thank you when someone does them a favor or a good deed.  Too often, they look upon such events/situations as if they are somehow owed good deeds and benefits or they effectively give the person doing the good deed the finger (figuratively speaking, of course). 

 

This brings to mind the situation with YESHUA when He healed the ten lepers (Lu 17:11-17).  Only one even bothered to look back and offer thanks.  The others went their happy, selfish ways.  Otherwise, the Scriptures are full of numerous other illustrations of the ingratitude of people.  So the problem goes back a long way in time. 

 

 

Ingratitude Comes From Pride 

 

Yes, as hard as it is to understand, the state of ingratitude and lack of appreciation are strictly acts of pride and vanity.  It is proud, vain people who will not even say “thank you” or express any appreciation at all for acts of kindness and/or consideration extended to them.  Perhaps it would be humiliating for some to have to say “thank you.” 

 

Many people are simply not willing to take that step down from their lofty perches of pride, vanity and status.  They are too proud and big to appreciate the efforts of others to serve or help them.  Perhaps, this ingratitude is a little understandable (but not completely) when someone is laying out money for service.  However, it extends beyond the money stage to surface whether payment is involved or not. 

 

Many individuals willingly will look the other way and act as if a good deed shown them was somehow deserved on their part.  Too often, proud persons believe that the purpose of the presence of other people is to serve them and their interests.  Therefore, they expect good deeds from others and are in no mood to express appreciation.  This sickness is the reality of the Western, Christian civilization. 

 

 

A Modern Sample 

 

In the summer of 2000, when it looked like things were starting to approach the commencement of trouble, this writer wrote a personal letter and/or made one phone call and two personal visits to some fourteen people (including some preachers/leaders in the Sacred Name and Identity motions), with an offer to send a copy of this study, then in draft (“Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People”), free to them if they would read it and consider the message. 

 

A fifteenth person (a leader of a local Christian Identity Church) was given several draft chapters of this production with a subtle hint that he could have the rest of it if he was interested.  He must have not been interested because he never wrote back to get the rest of the work.  Importantly, he didn’t even bother to say thank you for the chapters sent.  He completely ignored me, the gift and the offer. 

 

Incredibly so, some seven of them (including the just mentioned one Identity leader) never bothered to write back and acknowledge my offer, thank you or anything else.  They were all so proud, knew so much and were such big shots that they would not even step down from their lofty perches or waste their precious time in writing back with a yes or no.  Instead, they completely ignored my attempt to be generous to them. 

 

Manifestly, they didn’t have to say “yes.”  But it would have been decent, courteous and honorable to at least write back and say “thank you and no” --in the vein of the kindness being extended to them.  Actually, two of the fifteen did respond with a “no.”  One of these two was even gracious enough to also say thank you (this was the honorable thing to do). 

 

The other “no” offered a flat, hostile “no” --with no thank you or any other expression of gratitude for the offer.  In fairness, this man is a Identity neighbor, who did read some part of the first volume.  So he saw some of the production.  Obviously, he didn’t like what he saw.  Hence, he was hostile and a little rude to me. 

 

Of the remaining cases, some five were mailed and one was hand delivered (based upon the “yes”).  Four of the recipients so far have never bothered to write back and say that the books were received, thank you or any acknowledgment at all--as of this writing (in the summer of 2000). 

 

Since they didn’t at least write back with a thank you and/or a notice that the box of books were received, there is no way of me knowing whether the dispatched packages were ever received or not (and it does matter because they were sent by insured mail).  Whether they even bothered to look at the material or not, if received, is still more of a subject to wonder about. 

 

Incidentally, for each set of books mailed, this writer wrote a separate, personal, courteous, first-class letter saying that the books were mailed by insured mail and to advise me if they were not received.  Since no communication was forthcoming from the recipients, the assumption has to be made that the material did reach the addressees. 

 

 

A Late 2000 Similar Offer 

 

In the late fall and winter of 2000, this writer again offered the same set of books to another dozen or so people--with the same provision as the earlier offer in the summer.  Again, most people never even bothered to acknowledge the offer, say thank you, no, yes or anything else.  Absolute apathy and don’t care resulted from most of them. 

 

However, a few did write back and say yes.  One man sent $5--which probably was a fluke to get anything from the typical person at all (most people are too evil eyed and selfish to part with any money for almost anything).  One of these mailings cost me as a minimum around $300-$400.  So the $5 was not very generous.  But at least, it was something (which is more than what most people would or did send). 

 

Another man produced an interesting request.  He sent $20 with a request that the box of books be sent UPS.  He implied that the $20 was to cover the UPS charges. 

 

Well, the interesting thing about this person is that he is a millionaire and could have afforded to at least pay the full UPS charges if that was what he wanted.  The books weighed about 43 pounds and it costs over a dollar a pound to ship them via UPS any distance.  The box of books would have cost some $40 to $50 by UPS while the postal book rate with insurance was under $20. 

 

Now, all of this matters little, but this writer is an old man living on a small social security check.  i own no land.  i have no houses, property or assets of value.  So it is strange that a millionaire would send me a few dollars and want me to spend substantially more than that out of my pocket to accommodate him. 

 

Evil eyed people will do this routinely.  This person was no different than many other carnal people who are so tight that they squeak when they walk.  They will ask for something and pretend to want to cover the cost--but then only provide a small amount of money as needed to cover the (larger) costs.  Generous, good eyed people would step forward and provide more than enough to cover the added costs. 

 

Frankly, i must confess this sin of shortchanging others as well.  Because, in my life, i have done the same thing.  i have sent a few dollars--asking someone to go to substantially more expense to send me something.  Thus, many of us will try to cheat and beat people who are trying to help us.  The difference between me and the man just noted is that i have been poor all my life while he is a millionaire and can afford it. 

 

 

Another Interesting Response from One 

 

In one more case, the books were shipped and the recipient received them.  He wrote back a letter of acknowledgment with a request for more material (that was not mentioned in the context or offered)--which would necessitate some expense and effort by me to obtain and supply (again, the extra costs would be hard for me to contemplate since any expenditure of size is a problem for my small income). 

 

The one thing that was missing in this request was any money to cover the added expense.  Of course, no money was asked for in the original mailing.  Assuredly, i didn’t expect any money to necessarily prop me up (although it would have been courteous and appreciative to have sent back something--in view of the obviously large cost of the undertaking). 

 

Yet, when the recipient received the books and writes back for still more material/data (which was not mentioned or offered), it looks like that there could have been a little money enclosed or an offer of money to cover the additional requested information/material (as a minimum). 

 

There wasn’t in this instance.  If there was a statement of being broke or not having money, accompanying the request, it would have made sense and i would have appreciated it.  But there was not! 

 

The person involved is actually a generous person with good eyes.  Likely, this oversight was probably a simple case of neglect in a careless moment of being carnal (by a person with relative good eyesight).  It is mentioned to show that even generous people can allow the carnal flesh to take over momentarily and motivate them to be irresponsible and fail to exhibit gratitude, care and concern. 

 

 

Total Ingratitude 

 

There is another tragic aspect of this problem that this writer has faced with the incredible ingratitude from most of the readers who have read this production so far.  Of course, the typical recipient is not about to part with any of his money in an expression of gratitude and thank you.  Moreover, as noted above, many receivers have never even bothered to write back and say thank you or anything else. 

 

However, this cold, icy ingratitude extends even beyond these easily addressed responses one might anticipate upon rendering some help and service to someone else.  There is something even more profound. 

 

This writer has mentioned to a couple of friends who are on the Internet that i am not on the Internet.  Accordingly, if they see something of interest, would they make me a copy of it?  One neighbor on the Internet, and supposedly a good friend of mine, acted like he would, so i gave him a part of a ream of paper to use. 

 

Frankly, it seemed that he would help me (and especially since i had done many favors and good deeds for him over the prior three years with no reciprocation so far from him at all).  Well, he used the paper--in his own family’s work on his computer.  Otherwise, i heard nothing more from him or any of the others who i could have used some help from. 

 

You’d think that someone would have enough care, concern, interest and attempt to help someone else where possible that he would look for opportunities to do a good deed.  But no, not so!  And this pretty well tells the tale about modern, ungrateful Americans.  They generally care about nothing except themselves.  They are totally devoted to self and self interests! 

 

Of course, the best situation would be someone who has genuine care and concern and who looks for ways to help other people--on a voluntary basis without being asked or reminded.  But you can just about forget it in this instance.  There are few people out in the world who will voluntarily do much of anything (other than voluntarily going out of their way to get for themselves). 

 

Modern Americans today are generally just not interested in doing acts of kindness or good deeds toward others.  No one in modern times, in the generic sense, is going to go out of his way to do anyone else a favor.  Forget it--people are just so engrossed in their idols and gods that they serve and focus their attention upon that they have no time, energy or concern for anything or anybody else.  No way, Hose! 

 

 

Back to These Mailings 

 

In mailing out printed copies of this huge production, you would think that there must be some readers out there who would have enough interest, fire and energy to write back and make a contribution in terms of providing me with some further information on one of the topics.  Surely, there must be thousands of other points, facts and data which others have that would make an excellent contribution to this effort. 

 

Furthermore, it is highly probable that there are all kinds of citation errors and busts in the data.  As noted in the Prologue, it is so incredibly easy to make a mistake in trying to cite thousands of Scriptural verses and texts.  Surely, some reader found something wrong which should generate enough interest and appreciation to write me back with a message to point it out (later, one woman did offer some help in 2002-2003). 

 

Again, this writer has not been on the Internet.  In today’s world, there are all kinds of good things popping up on the Internet.  It seems like a person of good will and some genuine interest would write me a note and share something else which could benefit me and add value to this study.  But no, no one seems to have cared one way or the other (at the time of this writing). 

 

If any of the readers have really cared, they have not seemed to express it to me--at least not so far (except for the one woman in 2002-2003). 

 

This dilemma of total apathy, indifference, don’t care and so forth absolutely overwhelms the logic of supposing that such persons might be in the very elect category.  Maybe they are, but it seems that they will have to get some passionate love of truth at some point of time in the future. 

 

 

A Related Incident 

 

Having mentioned the above situation with the millionaire who sent me $20 with a request for me to spend $40 or $50 to send him this production in print--via UPS--it is true that any number of us (including those persons who have money and can afford to be good eyed instead of evil eyed) will look for ways to get a lot out of others without giving much in return.  This writer must confess this sin, as noted above. 

 

However, one of the most extraordinary cases of this thing happened to me some years ago in Council, Idaho.  At this time, this writer had a small store renting largely educational and informative videos on the New World Order and other topics of educational value or at least clean entertainment possibilities (and not in the vein of the typical trash and evil carried in most video stores). 

 

For some strange reason, it has worked out for me to get involved in things which no one wants--like videos on the New World Order or religion or truth.  There simply is no market for stuff like this--nor is there a market for this some 6,000-page study at hand.  The public is simply not interested in these things that yours truly has tried to put over. 

 

At that time, an acquaintance was struck with an older man who lived alone in Council--much like me.  The big difference between us is that he did own some property and had some income while i was incredibly poor and in poverty (as has been my state for a lot of years now). 

 

In time, we sort of became friends--perhaps because of the similarities in our backgrounds.  One day, he came by my store and suggested that i come to his house and he would cook me a steak.  While normally, my financial situation would have made such an option out of the question, i did relent and say yes, but only if he would let me buy the steaks. 

 

This happened long before the problems with clean meats came to my attention.  So i would eat beef then--but sparingly, because i could not afford it.  In the case of buying the steaks, i thought a couple of small steaks would not wreck my finances. 

 

Thereupon, we went to a local store.  i picked out a small sirloin (costing a couple of dollars) and thought he would do the same thing.  But no, he chose the most expensive and largest cut of US choice T-bone he could find.  It was as if--that since i was buying, he was going to take full advantage of everything he could get from me. 

 

He then pointed out that we would need some potatoes, salad and other essentials--all of which I ended up buying and paying for.  At this late stage, my memory does not reflect what all he provided--although he apparently did have some salt and pepper and maybe a loaf of bread.  Otherwise, the food all came from me (in my state of poverty and need). 

 

The importance of this story is only the mentality and make up of some people.  If they see a chance to rip off and get a lot from someone else, they will fully pursue that option and never exercise any restraint or consideration for the person putting up the money.  Pure and simple, this is a story of pride and ingratitude. 

 

 

Some More History 

 

For years, this writer sent out a religious newsletter free to those who would write in and request it (with many supplemental offerings).  Many thousands wrote for the letter.  However, in the generic sense, you could forget it if you looked for a response from the vast majority of people who received the letter. 

 

Almost all recipients could have cared less about sending back any money or even a thank you.  Some few would write back for further material and sometimes include a “thank you.”  But it was a rare individual with good eyesight who would thoughtfully include a contribution. 

 

One couple, who once bragged to me about being millionaires, asked for everything offered in the newsletter (which would involve 24 to 26 mailings per year); but then they were tight and stingy with their money (though they otherwise seemed to be hospitable people).  They would send a few dollars (nickels and dimes figuratively speaking) which never really began to cover the cost of the mailings. 

 

Somehow, some of us want to go out of our way to give and be charitable to people who truly have no money or assets.  But conversely, it is no fun to give to millionaires and people who are well off and yet are tight and stingy with their money and assets. 

 

In the general sense, most proud, vain Americans are utterly indifferent to acts of charity, service or benefit extended to them.  Most seem to expect such extensions as their “right” or “entitlement” (as the Clinton Administration informed us).  Since they deserve it, why should they bother to say thank you or express appreciation? 

 

When a person chooses to provide service, help, assistance or benefits to others, you can just about bank on it that the recipients are not going to expend any effort to say thank you at all. 

 

 

Give Money to Truth?  Forget It! 

 

And by all means, virtually all persons are bitterly opposed to the parting of any of their money unnecessarily (most are very evil eyed).  They may willingly throw out the bucks for vain idolatries and pleasures.  But they quickly become evil eyed, tight and stingy beyond that. 

 

Above all else, they are not prepared to lay out money for truth and what the Book says about profane issues of everlasting importance.  Despite this stinginess, when it comes to truth, a paradox now seems to surface because part (not all, but a sizable part) of the majority Christian population will gladly shell out money to their Christian Churches and preachers. 

 

It’s just that such persons are not interested in giving money to truth and righteousness (unless one wants to naively suggest that Christian Churches are synonymous with truth and righteousness).  So the question must be asked--why will Christians willingly and sometimes eagerly give money to the Christian Churches and Christian preachers (especially those on radio and/or television)? 

 

The answer to this enigma was briefly touched upon in previous comments in a prior chapter.  Many people will allow themselves to be totally hoodwinked and tied to a Christian tithing concept or giving system for essentially one reason and one reason only.  Christians will diligently tithe and/or give money to false, pagan, Christian operations for pride and vanity purposes. 

 

As discussed previously, Christians and Christian supporters like to give money when they publicly can give it and be seen by other people or have their acts of charity and giving advertised and made known to other people. 

 

Yes, Christians love to put money into the collection plate as it comes by them in church services (yes, publicly before others).  They thrill when the church groups will broadcast their giving in the church paper and/or when they are allowed to march up front of an audience and give. 

 

The Pentecostals, Seventh-day Adventists (SDA) and many others are particularly crafty about having people march up front during Christian services and put money into the church coffers.  The Pentecostals, some Charismatics and many others find that this public exhibition often raises a lot of money. 

 

The Adventists are absolutely mean spirited and hostile to any idea that any of their people should keep and observe the festivals of YHWH (like Passover, Shavuot, Sukkot, etc).  They fight the Scriptural feast days and occasions with tooth and nail.  Yet, in the fall (when true believers are building booths and observing Sukkot), SDA Churches are having their in-gathering ceremonies. 

 

During these SDA in-gathering operations, Adventists and others present in their congregations march up front and give money to the church--publicly, so all present can see them and behold their giving process. 

 

 

More on Christian Giving 

 

There is even an enormous element of pride present in the Christian practice of paying tithes to their false churches.  The reason for this is that most Christian preachers have cunningly made tithing mandatory for Christian Church members.  Thus, to be a good church member and maintain a state of alleged salvation (per the Christian definition), the person has to pay tithes. 

 

So Christian Churches have successfully linked paying tithes to alleged salvation.  Obviously, all good, loyal, church members will pay the tithes, so that they can feel good about having and maintaining supposed salvation.  They feel good by believing that if they die, they will go to the Christian heaven.  It’s all a con game built on pride and vanity. 

 

But there is even more to the Christian giving practices.  Many Christian preachers very craftily teach their gullible sheep a theory that by giving to the church, even more will come back to the giver in some way.  Some have called this “seed money.” 

 

It seems to be predicated upon a Christian theory of making the “Christian God” return double or at least more to the Christian giver.  Regardless of how deceptive and cunning these Christian preachers are in their actions against truth and righteousness, they do succeed in raising vast sums of money from gullible Christians.  Christians just love to give money and pay tithes to false worship. 

 

The whole purpose of much, most or all of this Christian giving and paying tithes is totally one of obtaining and possessing pride and vanity.  People will do anything to obtain a feeling of elevation and being lifted up.  Christian Churches and preachers capitalize on this basic human nature.  The Christian preachers dole out flattery to the givers; and consequently, they then can take the money in from the Christian suckers. 

 

 

Money Appeals 

 

Besides religious and so-called humanitarian efforts, there are some organizations which function on the basis of public contributions of money.  While there are several issues here which could be cited, perhaps the semi-annual money appeals that National Public Radio (NPR) has would be the best. 

 

This writer has been located in a remote area of the US for the late 20th century and early 21st century (in NE Washington and North Idaho).  About the only radio station available here and accessible during daylight hours is NPR. 

 

Just as the rest of the controlled media is totally biased and very evil and deceitful in its handling of news, the same charge can be made about NPR (although NPR may not be as totally bad as some of the others). 

 

In any case, the local NPR station has these twice a year appeals for public support (beyond the benefits from government and several large businesses).  In listening to the appeal in Aviv of 2001, the incredible fascination with pride and vanity quickly came to my attention. 

 

This station seems to be extremely professional in the different tactics it uses to con money from potential donors.  They seem to have a whole series of clubs (i.e. the $91 Club, etc, based upon donation levels); give away premiums, certificates, plaques, gifts, challenge grants and on and on in terms of gimmicks to get money out of very proud and vain people (who otherwise would give little or nothing). 

 

One of the primary methods of getting money is to mention (advertise) the names of donors.  Many contributors get their names mentioned on the air.  The challenge grants involve much advertisement and focus upon a big donor who gives a large grant with the stipulation that the public match it (i.e. $2,000 or some other figure). 

 

The give away certificates and plaques always identify the donor (with the donor’s name in big print).  One of the clever little tactics is to continually talk about the need for someone to become a donor, so that he or she can become the first person in his or her town or neighborhood to get one of these certificates or one of the premiums. 

 

One day, the give away involved a T-shirt with the name of the local radio station and evidently recognition of the person being a donor to the drive.  The professional huckster on NPR suggested several times that a person could be the “first person” in his neighborhood to receive and wear one of the T-shirts (by being first, the donor gets to presumably wear his new T-shirt out in public and show off that he is/was a donor). 

 

Over and over, the hucksters stressed the benefits of being first and of receiving personal recognition and acclamation in some way in making a contribution to NPR.  Of course, the achievement of having one’s name in print (on a certificate or something), of being a member of the $91 Club and/or of having one’s name mentioned on the radio station combined to motivate lethargic people to give. 

 

The point of this is that people who would give little or nothing can be conned and motivated to really shell out a lot of money if they are appropriately rewarded with pride and vanity (in being lifted up and elevated in some way before other people).  Hucksters know this and accordingly use this approach to raise money.  It’s all a shell game of pride and vanity--which the Christian public loves and cherishes. 

 

 

One More Sample 

 

In another case, this writer extended much help (financial and otherwise) to a very needy individual over some years.  This assistance was given largely in secret (as the recipient probably never really understood or realized its source, although it was not very hard to figure out what was happening and where the money was coming from).  In this case, i truly owed no moral obligation at all to the person involved. 

 

The help extended was extended based simply upon compassion, love and concern to a rea (while this writer has been enormously evil in most of my life and failed many times over, i did do the right thing in this instance and gave much help to this needy person). 

 

Some years later, in a conversation recognizing one of the favors done in a few, brief comments (at a time when i was down and out and could have used some help myself, though that was not the reason for the discussion), the person involved responded by saying-- “Look, I don’t owe you anything!”  This retort came spontaneously--although i had not asked for anything or suggested anything about owing me anything. 

 

This individual operates totally on the basis of gross selfishness and an attitude of “what’s in it for me” and “I don’t owe you anything” --not only with me, but with some other people who also extended much help and assistance to this person over the years.  Effectively, one can almost anticipate the response from this individual--the finger! 

 

Yes, it is tragic that so many people operate on the premise of “I don’t owe you” and “what’s in it for me” (which beliefs pretty well sum up the modern, carnal, human spirit).  With people like this, one can be sure that about all they will give the needy is the finger.  They are totally evil eyed, selfish, tight and stingy. 

 

 

Finally  

 

All of this ingratitude brings up the question of showing gratitude and appreciation to The CREATOR for His love and affection to all of us.  How many people pray prayers of real gratitude and thanksgiving (from the heart) for the benefits extended to them by The MOST HIGH. 

 

Many will get up in a false, pagan, church operation and mumble a memorized prayer about “thank you Gee-Zeus” (or thank you “Lard”).  But how many really care?  It is easy to mutter a memorized prayer or chant about “thank you Gee-Zeus.”  But it is another thing to say it from the heart in heartfelt appreciation. 

 

The essence of the above is that it is proud and vain people who refuse to show some gratitude when good and favor have been extended to them.  Since pride is the essence of sin, are such people in sin?  It would seem so. 

 

The above described ingratitude and lack of appreciation, regarding the points made, is the reality in 2003.  As things eventually break loose with Yakov’s Trouble, maybe some of the mentioned lethargic and could care less people will, all of a sudden, change their attitudes (maybe, by even saying thanks or expressing some gratitude on appropriate occasions). 

 

 

Exodus 19:8

 

After getting instructions from The MOST HIGH and communicating YHWH’s Words to the people and getting their assent, Moshe returned up the mountain to confirm what had happened (Ex 19:8).  Though The Omniscient SOVEREIGN perhaps needed no message from Moshe on what had happened (since He knows everything), the great prophet did make another trip up the mountain to make his report.

 

The “Soncino Chumash” (p. 453) notes that while the second trip might seem unnecessary, “this statement is designed to teach a lessen of good manners, that every inquiry merits an answer.” 

 

In today’s world, this writer has found that people generally (including so-called religious people) never respond one way or the other when inquiries are made to them--especially by mail (perhaps the record is a little better when inquiries are made orally and in person). 

 

A previous chapter noted a personal letter this writer wrote to two acquaintances about a coming Sukkot.  One man for sure (and the other partially) never even returned an answer. 

 

So, many times, this writer has written various religious leaders about some matter--sometimes offering them some free literature or material which could reveal some new truth to them.  But as noted in the Prologue, religious leaders are very careful about ever revealing how inadequate that they are in terms of the Word.  Thus, they are careful about accepting information/truth from others--especially nobodies, like me. 

 

Rarely do any of them ever bother to answer a letter (unless the letter is from one of their supporters; or otherwise, they receive money with the inquiry, receive an offer of money, or are otherwise somehow elevated with some flattery to allow them to “lord over” the inquiry and its source). 

 

Religious leaders generally are very evil people.  It seems that only money motivates them.  For sure, they almost never say thank you and a yes or no.  You might get the finger from them, but you will rarely ever get anything otherwise in terms of a thank you or an acknowledgment of your communication. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 86--The Reality of Pride

 

 

Pride Deceives 

 

In the previous chapters on pride, efforts have been made to explain and discuss exactly how pride and vanity affect every one of us by being manifested, regularly and often, in our daily lives to actually go on to cut us off from The EVERLIVING ONE--since He resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. 

 

In the following remarks, an attempt will be made to summarize the reality of this theme in each of our deceitful and desperately wicked hearts and minds (Jer 17:9). 

 

This writer purposely uses the words "an attempt will be made" because the thrust of this study is perhaps one of the most difficult, complex and obscure topics ever to be approached in an intellectual fashion, evidently by any one of us at large (to include this writer). 

 

While many individuals may proudly speculate, theorize, guess, assume and presume that they know a lot about pride, the truth is obvious that man, generally, knows little or nothing about it, and has known little or nothing about it for the last 6,000 years.  Significantly, even if we sorry humans can see a "little" of the blatant, wicked pride and vanity in a few others, we typically cannot see it in our own worthless selves. 

 

The reason we can't perceive this wretchedness in our own selves is because our hearts and minds are deceitful and desperately wicked (they lie to us and deceive us about reality), as the prophet Yirmeyahu so correctly wrote (Jer 17:9).  Thus, we are largely "blind" as to the reality of pride and vanity in our own personal mentalities, even though such wickedness may be abundantly present. 

 

Since we have such great difficulty in recognizing pride in ourselves, in particular, and even in others, in general, it is no wonder then that we know so incredibly little about the subject (even though we proudly think and believe that we know and understand just about everything we need to know about ourselves and life on this planet). 

 

 

The Essence of Sin 

 

Despite this confusion and ignorance that most of us face on this theme, it is fair to note that through the ages a few individuals have come to see that pride represents the "very essence of sin."  At least, people like Augustine, Aquinas and certain others have personally come to that comprehension and understanding, as noted earlier. 

 

In terms of this assessment, this writer is in absolute agreement and harmony.  Pride clearly is the root cause of all or at least almost all sin that one may find on this globe and in our pathetic, lost lives. 

 

From what this writer and certain others have come to appreciate, it is readily apparent from the Scriptures that in order to address and focus on the sin question, one must deal with the reality of pride and vanity.  There is no other way.  It is unavoidable. 

 

 

Pride Cuts Us Off 

 

Consequently, pride and vanity cut all of us off from The MOST HIGH because the Word wisely reflects that YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.  Friend, it is categorically impossible for a proud person to experience grace if we accept what the Book so pungently declares.  So, for any one of us to receive grace, the pride question must be dealt with in our lives.  There is no other way. 

 

And by the terms of YHWH's provision for grace, it is Him, alone, Who is capable, able and willing to address the pride and vanity issues in any one of our lives and deal with them as they should be attacked. 

 

Surely, this state of change/reality occurs in the lives of the very elect in the context of true repentance and conversion--which none of us alive and breathing in the flesh presently on planet earth seems to have experienced, although many persons (particularly Christians) proudly and arrogantly claim to have this transformation. 

 

Of course, many of these proud, vain people claiming "to be converted and saved" have based their assertions upon assumptions and presumptions about certain Scriptural messages taken out of context, misunderstood and misused by themselves and certain worldly religions at large. 

 

Frankly, this writer cannot presently claim to be saved.  Nor have i ever known or been acquainted with a person who was saved or could be saved without successfully and properly dealing with the pride issue.   No such person has come to my attention and knowledge, beyond the descriptions of such people in the Scriptures. 

 

 

The Klassens 

 

And just as most Christians have a concept of being important (saved) because of some fetish, act or action on their part, Judaism likewise has some similar feelings of status and importance. 

 

On this, Frank and Glenda Klassen of Fort Davis, Texas attempted to put the Jewish dilemma into the proper perspective in their Jan 1, 1992, “Overcomer” paper when they commented upon YESHUA's Words that certain, alleged Jews were of their father, the Devil (Jo 8:44). 

 

As the Klassens saw it, The MESSIAH was not referring to the Jews’ genetic makeup, per se.  But rather, on this issue, He was referring to the Jews’ religious teachings, concepts, beliefs and practices. 

 

Consequently, this couple went on to charge the Jews with having a mind set that they were a superior and chosen (by The ELOHIM) people over all others (although such a belief is Scripturally untenable).  Of course, this idea has been so promoted and advertised by the collective Jews that most of the world has come to accept this thesis (that the Jews alone are EL’s chosen people), whether it be true or not. 

 

Naturally, there are cogent reasons of human nature, pride and vanity which would seem to add credence to this conclusion enunciated by the Klassens.  Clearly, the Jews have had a propensity and push to be important and to be elevated above others, as also has been true with Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and all other groups in man’s history. 

 

Of course, all men are filled with carnality and the desire to be elevated and lifted up above their contemporaries.  There is no question but that Jews generally fit into this same category, as is true for all other peoples.  But that’s not the problem that YESHUA addressed (as Yohanan recorded it for history). 

 

Incidentally, the Klassens broached John 8:44 from the traditional Christian perspective--that the problem with the Jews was one of religion and not genetics or race.  This dilemma will be assessed in later chapters and needs not be elaborated upon in this context of pride and vanity. 

 

Suffice to say, the problem with those particular Jews in dialogue and/or confrontation with YESHUA was precisely over genetics and not their religion.  Those Jews, who were conclusively proven to be Amalek-Edomites, were actually members of the synagogue of Satan and were truly children of the Devil (as will be proven in later chapters herein). 

 

Whatever pretense they had for Judaism was all fake, false and put on--just as many of them have pretended to be Christians or something else over the years.  The Amalek-Edomites are masters at deception and fraud.  While many of them have pretended to be both racial and religious Jews, the truth is that they are neither.  Instead, they are classic Satanists/Luciferians, both genetically and religiously. 

 

 

Many Falsely Claim to be Saved, Revisited 

 

In terms of the here and now, this same indictment of wanting to be important in our religious faiths applies to all of man and there are no exceptions, as far as this writer can see in the present context.  Everybody i know (particularly Christians and Sacred Namers) are still filled with pride and vanity and consequently cannot possibly have experienced grace or be truly changed. 

 

While this writer has known hundreds and perhaps thousands of people--all claiming to be chosen, converted and saved (as discussed earlier in the vein of bragging and boasting about being saved)--i am absolutely assured that their assertions are all really only manifestations of pride and vanity since they are not founded on truth. 

 

Although we worthless humans may not be able to define, recognize and perceive the presence of pride and vanity in our own wretched personalities, be assured that it is there and present in all of us with no exceptions (except, of course, YESHUA The MESSIAH, Who was the epitome of true humility). 

 

Constantly, this carnality and human nature problem is pushing and propelling our hearts on forward to be elevated, exalted and lifted up--at least, in some fashion and/or manifestation.  We sorry humans just want to be important.  We want to be big shots. 

 

We want others to sit up and take notice.  We want to be recognized and acclaimed.  We want to be praised and bragged upon.  We want to have status and position.  We want to appear to be righteous and good (even though our deeds are evil).  We want to have self confidence, self will, self satisfaction, self esteem and self contentment in this life.  In short, we want to shine and show off in front of others. 

 

Typically, in striving for this elevation, status and shining appearance, we effectively become like the Adversary, who also let pride enter his heart and mind to lift him up and exalt him, as the Book powerfully communicates (Isa 14:12-17; Ezek 28:12-19). 

 

This has to be a paradox of sorts that we sorry humans denigrate and demean Satan so much for his wickedness; when, in fact, the same phenomenon affects everyone of us with no exception (beyond YESHUA The MESSIAH) to prompt us to follow in the exact same footprints of the Adversary.  In this sense, we all become hypocrites! 

 

Since the subject of these comments has focused upon being important, the reader may be interested in a few, prime examples of this wickedness surfacing in us sorry humans in such a dramatic way that it really drives home the point. 

 

 

Avoid Facts and Concentrate on Attacking 

 

Several times in this study at hand, this writer has discussed the liberal/leftist modus operandi of avoiding facts in a discussion and attacking opponents who try to cite facts.  Without attempting to beat this theme into the ground, it must be commented upon once more here in the context of pride. 

 

Again, it is such an important topic that it cannot be overemphasized.  It is the real world out there in terms of politics, religion and many other issues of interest. 

 

It is so discouraging to try to talk about many subjects with liberals, leftists and other people of the same mode.  If a person brings up some point or points they disagree with, they inevitably will begin an attack upon personalities and particularly the person trying to cite facts, truth and reality in the conversation. 

 

Of course, the Amalekites are the worst kind of persons to pursue this course.  But political janissaries (to be defined in a later chapter) and ignorant and uninformed Christians like to follow suit and do the same thing.  Among people of this thinking, they will not deal with contrary facts and truth in a discussion on topics of interest to them. 

 

Almost without exception, the person broaching facts, which leftists don’t want to hear, will cause them to respond with hate and an attack upon personalities (usually, the talker or person involved in the dialogue).  It just seems that people in this category cannot handle a discussion at all which criticizes and casts doubt upon things which they passionately believe in.  Hence, they get mad and respond with hate. 

 

In thinking about this dilemma and the difficulty of trying to have dialogue and respect with people like this, it became evident to me that these people are extremely proud and vain.  In their minds, they are very elevated and lifted up because of the opinions and beliefs they possess.  When facts and truth surface which casts doubt upon those beliefs, they simply cannot handle them at all. 

 

They become irrational, illogical, paranoid and ridiculous as they ignore the facts and truths and switch the conversation to an attack upon the talker or other personalities with such contrary beliefs.  This is particularly true in discussions with liberals and leftists on politics and religion.  Many Christians are notorious for this type of reaction. 

 

 

Saipan, Revisited 

 

Next, from the secular world, this writer remembers an incident involving a former friend and associate.  In the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, this writer spent something over six years living and working on Saipan island in the North Pacific, as noted in preceding comments.  At that time, i had (or thought i had) some reasonably good friends among the local population. 

 

In particular, i had become acquainted with one, big, fat, likable Carolinian who i thought was a fairly good friend.  After my departure in 1985 and by the time i came back to the place in 1990, this Carolinian had moved up in the world (in man’s view) and had become the president of one of the local Saipan banks. 

 

Shortly after returning, i also became acquainted with a Chinese man who represented some investors abroad with over $200,000 to invest in a Saipan business.  This writer suggested to the Chinaman that one of the first things he should do is become acquainted with a local banker, who he could trust and relate to and one able to give him some good advice on the local economy and business opportunities. 

 

This writer furthermore suggested that in years past, i had had a friend who now was the president of one of the banks.  It was suggested that the two of them should get together to discuss the mutual advantages of knowing each other. 

 

The Chinese investor agreed so i called the Carolinian’s office to set up an appointment for the three of us to meet at the convenience of the banker to discuss some local investments (but without mentioning the exact amount of $200,000).  Frankly, it appeared that i was doing both of them a favor. 

 

But boy was i surprised when it developed that the banker turned out to be such a big shot and so important, he could not even work a meeting in with the Chinaman (or me as well).  Of course, the Chinese man merely went to one of the other banks and had a discussion there on the relevant issues.  Well, it’s no big deal that a big shot could not or would not take of his time to visit with me for a few minutes. 

 

But of course, one would think that a banker with any brains at all would be interested in a foreigner with a bag of money to invest in the local economy.  Certainly, the big shot banker never really understood the issue of the money.  If he had been told that the investment amount was $200,000, perhaps he would have been a little more accessible, instead of trying to be important and a big shot.  But so be it. 

 

 

The CUC Illustration 

 

Another excellent illustration of this idea of wanting to be “important” also surfaces from a situation which i was likewise acquainted with on Saipan Island. 

 

This case concerns the Commonwealth (Saipan is a part of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a political subdivision of the United States) Utilities Commission, CUC, which is a public corporation responsible for all power and water utility services in the Northern Mariana Islands. 

 

It seems that this entity had an interesting policy and practice regarding the painting, identification; and of course, recognition of their vehicles, automobiles, trucks, and other items of equipment.  Generally, they are painted white with big letters, reading CUC, painted in black on both sides in very bold type. 

 

Well, all of this sounds good, except that there are at least a couple of primary exceptions to this painting and marking rule.  These exceptions concern the company vehicles (a Jeep Cherokee) of the “Executive Director” and another car or two which were used by him and/or his deputy/administrative officer (as they are marked “administration”).

 

The two exception vehicles, seemingly all alone, were painted a pure, shiny black with a very large, identification sign, in bold, white letters, on each side, which read CUC Executive Director and/or CUC Administration.  This very apparent coloring practice in CUC couldn’t be missed.  It stood out like a sore thumb. 

 

And why would the big shot boss or bosses want to have the above mentioned two vehicles painted in a different color from the others?  Why pride and vanity, of course.  Naturally, big shots wanting to be important have to be distinguished, set apart and elevated in some fashion from lower ranking employees, so that everybody seeing them can realize and appreciate how big they are in the world. 

 

Before leaving this CUC case, it must be noted that there might could be a few more instances of where the normal coloring practice has not been followed.  At least, there is some evidence indicating that perhaps certain other colors have also been authorized as an exception in rare situations. 

 

Whether this later condition is because the vehicles originally came in other colors and simply were not promptly repainted or whether the vehicles had been sold and had been repainted by the buyers when i saw them; or again, because some big shots are involved wanting distinctive colors, this writer cannot say.  However, whatever the case, pride could well be the motivation for the colors chosen. 

 

 

Exclusive Offices 

 

One more classic example of relevance concerns a former reader of some of the messages now being presented herein.  He lived in Canada and periodically wrote me to tell what a great “Bible” authority he was and what his views were on things.  In time, this person actually wrote this writer a letter saying that he was really an “angel” on earth. 

 

Evidently, he believed this nonsense and therefore would have to be classified as a quack, par excellence.  And why would some kook get it in his head that he was an “angel” on earth?  Why to be important, of course.  Pride and vanity is the name of the game. 

 

The fourth, prime instance of this propensity in man of wanting to be important has to focus on Herbert W. Armstrong, deceased, founder of the Worldwide Church of God, and his successor, Joseph W. Tkach, now also deceased.  Both of these men seem to have had it in their heads that they were, in reality, true "apostles" of "Jesus Christ" and on the order of Shaul, Kefa, Yohanan, Yakov and the others from apostolic times. 

 

Tragically, it isn't only that Armstrong, previously believed, and Tkach, more recently supposed, that they were "apostles," but rather, that they each were "the one and only apostle" at one moment in contemporary time--Armstrong the first one in almost 1,900 years and then Tkach, a later number two. 

 

This problem has been discussed in a former chapter in the context of certain religious people wanting to be known as and referred to with the more generic terms of elder or pastor. 

 

But for Armstrong and Tkach, neither of them would allow themselves to be merely an elder or pastor, much like other elders and pastors in Christendom.  They insisted upon some more exclusive and important title which could be singularly held by them. 

 

The Sardis Sacred Name group at Bethel, Pennsylvania is also unique in this regard.  The head man there used to go by the important, big shot title of “presiding bishop.” 

 

Something made him change his mind about using the bishop title (which sounds so much like the rest of pagan Christianity).  So he changed his super title to “the directing elder” --apparently, in order to differentiate himself from the other so-called, peon elders in his organization. 

 

And why would mere men hold themselves out to such super big shot claims?  What motivates and propels people to such ridiculous feelings?  Why do people want to have exclusive titles and offices?  Well, the answer is pride and vanity, of course. 

 

We humans just like grand and glorious titles and positions which will make others look upon us as important.  Armstrong, Tkach and the Bethel big shot (and he is big--at least, in weight) have been and are just like the rest of us in this regard; which, naturally proves that they are not commissioned apostles or anything else since they have been and are still carnal and unconverted. 

 

 

The Missouri Man 

 

Another classic example of pride surfaced in my life when i stopped in Missouri to visit a Sabbathkeeping friend who i had known and fellowshipped some with in the Bible Sabbath Association for some years. 

 

Interestingly, i thought well of this person and had some respect for him, although i truly was fairly ignorant and uniformed about many things about him and even life in general.  At that time, this writer foolishly supposed him to be a "brother in the faith" and particularly so in the earlier years of our contact and when i understood him to be an independent, Sabbathkeeping believer as i was. 

 

But over the years, the man involved had come into some form of Pentecostalism and therefore had joined up with the Church of God (Jerusalem Acres) of Cleveland, Tennessee.  Just before my visit with him, this Cleveland Church of God had had its meeting hall blown down by wind and had had several major organizational, personnel and doctrinal changes take place in its leadership and church. 

 

Over the years, my involvement with the Bible Sabbath Association had thrown me into contact with these Tennessee people and i personally knew many of them fairly well and naturally would be curious when word began to leak out of some extraordinary changes taking place within their church. 

 

Thus, on this visit to my supposed friend's house in Missouri, i was anxious to find out about the windstorm and the organizational, doctrinal and personnel changes on going in the group. 

 

My so-called friend and supposed "brother in the faith" looked me straight in the eyes and refused to answer any questions or discuss what all was going on in his church (beyond acknowledging the windstorm), even though i had heard some rumors and talk from others. 

 

He said he would not discuss such things with someone like me who was outside the "body of Christ" (in the sense that he was in the body and i was outside the body).  Obviously, this response has to be sufficient to expose his incredible pride, vanity and personal feelings of being important and righteous with his membership in the Tennessee church and its excessive brand of Pentecostalism.   

 

It seems that there is just no limit to our wickedness and desire to be elevated, lifted up and to be important in front of others. 

 

Of course, this person under discussion clearly believed that he was an important individual with very confidential information which could not be shared with outsiders, who he looked upon as lowlife sinners from his lofty perch of pride and vanity.  Consequently, here is another case of a fantastic feeling of a person trying to be important and a big shot in front of others. 

 

 

More From Tennessee 

 

Before proceeding on to the conclusion of this chapter, a few remarks will be shared on the Tennessee Pentecostal Church and what might have prompted my alleged friend and “brother-in-the-faith” to be so exclusive and righteous in front of me.  Many Pentecostals are very sexually permissive (as will be demonstrated in other remarks to follow herein). 

 

With this propensity, the Church of God (Jerusalem Acres) people had had a major adultery scandal erupt in the highest levels of their church (almost exactly at the same time that the windstorm stuck and blew their primary meeting building down).  It seems that the head bishop was fornicating with the wife of another church bishop.  Whether other church leaders were involved in adultery or not was unclear to me. 

 

In any case, this whole thing blew up and it caused a wholesale loss of the main church leaders--the head bishop plus his immediate successors. 

 

A whole new leadership team came on board and began initiating a series of changes in their church administration and evidently doctrines and organization as well.  The whole group was quite shook up when the scandal broke open.  Many, many church members quit in disgust. 

 

My alleged friend wanted no discussion with me on any of the happenings.  Obviously, the Missouri man and i were not real friends or brothers in the faith as i had incorrectly believed.  And i do respect his wishes to avoid discussing the adultery.  But he could have used a little humility, discretion and tact and talked about the rest of the incident and changes to avoid openly offending me (with his cold, aloof pride and vanity).  

 

 

An Example From Tokyo 

 

A news commentary program from BBC, on Dec 26, 2000, offered a survey of conditions in a slum area in Tokyo, Japan.  One of the features of the program was a human interest focus upon some of the people living in the slum. 

 

Admittedly, rent prices are extremely high in Tokyo (as indeed, many things are high in modern Tokyo).  The very basics of economics certainly contribute to explaining why some people do live in this slum area and other poor and depressed areas around the globe.  But the BBC interviewer discussed one man living in the Tokyo slum which really hit home on the subject of pride and vanity. 

 

On the question of why the man chose to live in the slum, the man’s response was, of course, directed first to the economic factor of not having sufficient money to afford a better living situation.  Thus, he could not afford anything better presently.  But the man went on with more of an explanation of his condition which really was revealing. 

 

He was a would be actor who was not yet established in his field.  Historically, some people who were in this situation often have had little money to live on in their early years.  One finds this reality not only with actors; but also, artists, musicians, writers and other people in the entertainment industry who are trying to become established on the basis of their own, human talents. 

 

But the man went on to make a profoundly important statement.  He said that he was there while he was trying “to make a name for himself.”  Yes, he was sacrificing much or all in order to make a name for himself and gain some fame and notoriety. 

 

Of course, that reality is the quest of not only actors, writers, artists, musicians and so forth.  It is the quest of many people in life. 

 

 

Yes, Many Want Fame 

 

Many persons want to establish themselves as being known, important and elevated in this lifetime on earth.  One can see this tragedy in all phases of living on this planet.  Politicians, of course, are notorious about trying to establish a name and fame for themselves.  They not only devote their working lives to this quest, but many are just as obsessed about it when they are dead and long gone. 

 

In the year 2001, there has been much fanfare, publicity and public comment about the wishes, work, effort and quest of former President Bill “Slick” Clinton to leave a legacy about himself.  Obviously, he wanted something that would long endure for the coming generations (and something to detract and take the public’s minds off of him and his many scandals and acts of depravity and evil). 

 

One of the things chosen by Clinton to focus upon in an effort to establish a legacy of greatness has been that he has tried to establish himself as a promoter of peace. 

 

In the years 1993-2000, this proved to be quite a paradox because Clinton contrarily proved himself to be one of the more war mongering presidents (along with GWB) in all of US history (as will be later described). 

 

In any case, Slick has made some efforts to gain a Nobel peace prize in the context of promoting peace in Northern Ireland and in the Middle East (in the vein of the Israelis and the Palestinians).  These efforts will be discussed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein. 

 

Suffice to say here, his efforts have been questionable primarily because he has tried to be a player in both areas while promoting his own concepts and ideas of right and wrong.  In other words, he has never been a fair and impartial man trying to promote peace between two hostile adversaries.  In Northern Ireland, he has been on the side of the Catholic revolutionaries and in Palestine, he is tied to Israel. 

 

 

Clinton is Very Proud 

 

Of course, this whole effort by Slick to enhance his legacy is nothing but pride and vanity.  However, there are still other gross examples of how proud this man was and can be--perhaps over his entire life. 

 

For instance, while president, Slick required the presence of the Marine Corps band to play “Hail to the Chief” at every presidential event.  He used a hulking “Blue Goose” armored podium and was typically followed by a large presidential entourage which followed him around.  Clearly, Clinton thrilled at this gross exhibition of pride and vanity. 

 

“US News & World Report” (p. 7) of Feb 19, 2001, noted that all of the pomp and circumstances that Clinton required in his presence is now gone.  Bush has put a decidedly more humble stamp on the White House.  GW uses a simple toast lectern and stopped all the “Hails to the Chief” and large entourages. 

 

 

Real Pride and Vanity 

 

Many years ago, this writer was an auditor auditing colleges, universities and technical institutes in Western North Carolina.  One of the tasks of an auditor is to read and abstract relevant remarks from boards of directors of an entity being audited (like a college or university). 

 

In those auditing days, many of the NC institutions of higher education were very actively involved in huge building programs--classrooms, laboratories, dormitories, etc.  Typically, such building efforts obtained financing and money from about three primary sources.  First, there were big donors.  Second, there was often state, federal or local financing.  And third, bond issues could be floated. 

 

In those days, when this writer was busy reading and abstracting the minutes of the boards of directors’ meetings of those institutions, one thing in particular seemed to always stand out in importance on these big, building efforts.  One of the huge problems that the directors always had to face, grasp and deal will was what to name a projected new building or facility. 

 

 

The Reason 

 

The reason it was such a profoundly important subject was because of the question of pride and vanity.  In the real world, there are vast numbers of people who will walk the extra mile and put forth enormous effort to have a building, a bridge, a road or some other construction project named after themselves.  People are just like that.  Of course, Bill Clinton is in that profile--along with many, many others. 

 

In the vein of big donors, this name business is often the reason that they are willing to contribute huge sums of money to some institution to have a particular building or facility built.  

 

Almost without exception, the fat cat donor makes the grant, but with a provision that the name of the donor will go on the building, classroom or whatever (yes, even if it is only a matter of establishing a chair at a university). 

 

The people putting up this money are not always concerned about what the building or project will do or be used for--in terms of truth, righteousness and justice.  But they are profoundly concerned with what it will be named.  If the donor is not big enough to have the whole building named for him, then he generally will settle for having a classroom, an auditorium or a sidewalk so named. 

 

In the case of the public financing of projects (from taxpayer funds), these efforts typically demand that the project be named after the key or principle politician who initiated or led the political action to get the project financed and started.  All kinds of buildings, bridges, auditoriums and public facilities are named after prominent politicians. 

 

However, the biggest dilemma of naming a building or something else seems to usually surface when it is being financed from several different directions without any primary, main contributors. 

 

 

Names Are Important

 

In those days of yesteryear, when this writer was reading those boards of directors’ minutes, the question of a name in multi-financed efforts really took center stage among the directors. 

 

It was amazing that these so-called important people, leaders and big shots in their communities, could spend such a huge, vast amount of time debating and discussing a project name. 

 

In some instances, two or more names would have to go on a project.  Or different facets of it would have to bear different names.  Obviously, this whole game is nothing but one of gross pride and vanity. 

 

 

The Reality of History 

 

As an after story on the big building projects of public facilities back in the 1960s and 1970s, this writer learned of something which almost makes the whole effort a total joke and disgrace.  This report focused upon the comments of the current president of Washington State University made in a NPR interview in December 2000. 

 

This gentleman acknowledged that the university had plans for some huge new building programs--some of which were to “replace” buildings constructed back in the 60s and 70s, during the mad splurge of taxpayers’ moneys to build the gross effort then underway. 

 

As the university president subtly noted, many of those buildings built back then were not built on the basis on long range planning and real needs.  Therefore, over the years, they were found to be poorly planned and of limited or questionable value.  The solution the university now faces is to tear down and destroy some of these buildings and build new ones with more planning and insight (supposedly). 

 

In other words, many or some of these vanity building projects (which were constructed at much expense and with much hoopla) were all stupid and ridiculous; or as a minimum, questionable efforts when undertaken back in the 60s and 70s.  The president did not address the possibility that the ones now planned for 2001 and 2002 would be any different.  In other words, the present efforts could be more of the same. 

 

So there has to be some wonderful teachings about reality and the limitations and shortcomings of man in this whole discussion. 

 

Like the Word declares, it is not in man’s capacity to direct his own footsteps or paths (Prov 16:9; 20:24; Jer 10:23).  We all need YHWH’s government and a complete change in direction.  For sure, the useless and evil presence of pride and vanity in limited men must end. 

 

 

A Summary 

 

The famous Jewish writer “Philo” (p. 858), previously quoted, wrote 2,000 years ago that pride “is what keeps men back and hinders them in improvements; since it will not exhibit that honesty which it really possesses, thinking that it is itself an adequate cause for anything.” 

 

Also, in respect to a summary, the Mishnah has these most perceptive words: “If one humbles himself, the Holy One, blessed be He, raises him on high; and if one raises himself on high, the Holy One, blessed be He, brings him low” (Erubin 13b). 

 

Though this production has already quoted one of the greatest texts in the Book, it is so important that it needs a final mention.  YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble (Lev 26:40-42; II Sam 22:28; II Chron 7:14; 12:7; Ps 18:27; 51:17;  Prov 3:34; Isa 57:14-19; 61:1; 66:2; Matt 23:2; Lu 4:18; Jas 4:6; I Pet 5:5-6).  Therefore, have proud people tasted grace yet? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 87--The Primary Purpose of Pride

 

 

The Objective is to Rule 

 

Of course, we sorry humans (all of us, including you and me) have this propensity of wanting to be elevated, lifted up and to shine.  In short, we get great pleasure of having smoke (correctly vanity) blown into our nostrils to puff us up and make us appear big and important over others.  And this reality opens the door to one of the primary purposes of pride--that of trying to rule over others. 

 

Politics is a rough, hard and sometimes very vicious and cruel pursuit for a person to be involved in.  For US politics, in particular, it is no game for the weak and sissy minded, as they would often be chopped to pieces very rapidly by their hard, harsh, deceitful and dishonest opponents. 

 

With the reality of the world of politics, one would wonder why extremely wealthy and powerful people--like the Roosevelts, Kennedys, Rockefellers and others--would routinely toss their hats into political campaigns to participate in the dog eat dog life of a politician.  Surely, one must wonder why the rich are so interested in the turmoil, trial, stress, trouble, and tribulation of a political effort. 

 

Yet, the rich do follow this game, regularly and often.  In fact, in America, it is just about the rich alone who can even afford to financially enter politics and especially at the national level.  Campaigns cost so incredibly much money and the legitimate, honest pay to be received after election is frequently low for capable people. 

 

Of course, many politicians after election need little or no legitimate pay since they can and will steal and dishonestly obtain huge payoffs on the side.  But omitting the stealing and dishonest gain factors, which may or may not affect all rich persons so much, one must still pause and ask why do the rich generally, regularly and frequently enter the political arena to face a vicious den of political lions? 

 

 

The Greatest of Evil 

 

Interestingly, the answer to this enigma has to be one of the most important topics of evil discussed in YHWH's Word.  And what is this apparently greatest of wickedness?  

 

Augustine, Aquinas and many others over the centuries have wisely perceived it to be “the very essence of sin,” as commented upon earlier (“Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible” by Merrill C. Tenney).  The issue is, here, of course, pride and vanity. 

 

And while this discussion so far has focused on politicians, it must be pointed out that this exact same phenomenon is present in all aspects of the past and present of human directed effort--including government, business, science, agriculture, and even religion.  Yes, men try to dominate and rule over other men in all pursuits of life. 

 

 

Sardis Divisions, Revisited 

 

Some years ago, a Sardis Sacred Name friend of mine attended a Sacred Name "unity" meeting in Van Buren, AR where a number of independent Sacred Namers were gathered to supposedly bury their divisions and become united. 

 

And actually, in terms of their theological differences, there was very little to be divided about since they all generally held and believed the same essential doctrines with but minor variations. 

 

But there was another far more profound reason for the existing divisions between themselves.  This problem was the historic problem in Sardis which has continued to plague the numerous Sardis Churches of God and Assemblies and Houses of Yahweh (plus variations) for most of the last century. 

 

Of course, this Sardis dilemma in the present context is also the same issue that Shaul addressed to the evident Sardis types in Corinth--that of division and disunity (I Cor 1:10-17).  The problem in Sardis divisions has never been one in particular of real theological differences.  But rather, the difficulty usually surfaces over "who" will be the captain and boss of the uniting fragments of the Sardis confusion. 

 

Consequently, the meeting in Van Buren was to assume the same stance as other earlier (and later) ones.  Many or perhaps all of those present in Arkansas wanted to be the captain at the helm.  And because most of these prospective captains had already appointed themselves elders, pastors, prophets, teachers, preachers, evangelists, and leaders, they had problems from step one. 

 

Moreover, since the same big shots were mostly or all SPs (sensation and perceiving in personal temperament and character) and generally not very bookish or seemingly capable of real book research, despite the fact that they generally thought they had the "spirit" and special insight into The ELOHIM's will, the minor and insignificant theological differences could and did get blown all out of proportion very quickly. 

 

So, with this existing environment and with the abundant presence of the normal carnality found in unconverted people, most all of these big shots wanted to be the leader of whatever unification they were to achieve. Naturally, they wanted to dominate over others to feed the pride and vanity feelings in their hearts with some status, position and recognition.  

 

Obviously, not all of them could be the boss at the same time.  So it was only logical that their SP minds and mentalities would quickly blow some or all of the minor theological differences out of proportion to create further strife, division and confusion. 

 

Of course, too, most (unconverted) SPs are fundamentally opposed to closure and having things settled and agreed upon.  Thus, unity was truly out of the question from the beginning, although they did talk about it and supposedly wanted to pursue the desirability of unity in their meeting. 

 

 

No Unity 

 

Therefore, in time, the unity proponents discovered that there was to be no unity.  And this finding was clearly not the first time that such an eventuality overtook a Sardis meeting, nor was it to be the last time as other unity meetings have followed the same path.  It is the real world of unconverted, Sardis people. 

 

Certainly, pride and vanity were and are the basic problems in unity efforts, as just described.  As noted above, pride and vanity evil translates into a situation where the proud person involved wants to dominate and lord over other people in order to have status, recognition, and position. 

 

Simply stated, they want to be the big shot leaders in charge with dumb sheep followers behind them--the same way that Franklin Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Rockefeller and multiplied numbers of other persons have done over the years. 

 

And when one adds in the SP personality dimension into the equation (which is basically opposed to closure), a proud, vain individual wanting to be the captain of the ship will never allow any agreement, harmony or unity to surface (unless he can be the boss of the enterprise).  Such efforts with SPs are usually doomed to failure at the outset and continuing division will persist. 

 

Truly, there is no end to the wickedness of pride and vanity in each one of us--yes even you as well as me.  By human nature, all of us are always on the lookout for methods of obtaining for ourselves status, position, recognition, honor, possessions and other such things.  There is absolutely no end to it. 

 

 

The Disciples 

 

But there is more to be said over this theme of people seeking out status for themselves and on their own.  For instance, 2,000 years ago, The MESSIAH's Own twelve disciples (before their real conversion with the receipt of The RUACH HA KODESH, c30 CE) frequently argued among themselves over "who" among them was the greatest (Matt 18:1-5; Mk 9:33-37; Lu 9:46-48). 

 

Before these disciples received the ultimate gift of repentance, their minds were still carnal and filled with pride and vanity.  As YESHUA noted, great people in the kingdom must be converted and changed from carnality and must become as small, humble children (Matt 18:3-4). 

 

This frequent arguing and strife over which one of the twelve was the greatest eventually prompted YESHUA to finally share with them (and us) one of the greatest of all of His teachings. 

 

Here, The MESSIAH powerfully declared that in the worldly system of things, men are constantly on the move and lookout for ways to exercise dominion and lordship over other people--obviously, to satisfy their pride and vanity motivations (Matt 20:25-26; Mk 10:42; Lu 22:25-26). 

 

And friend, please note that His indictment at this point was not necessarily directed at worldly, secular people only, who think in this mode in terms of secular activities.  Because, in fact, YESHUA went on to point out that religious leaders were of the same mold in wanting to lord over others (Matt 20:25; Mk 10:42). 

 

This very situation of religious leaders trying to be big shots and ruling over others was also commented upon by the Apostle Yohanan when he wrote to Gaius about Diotrephes, who liked to be the big shot leader and put himself number one and first in dealing with the brethren (III Jo 1:9). 

 

Hence, it is no wonder that one can find confused, rebellious, unconverted, Sardis people in the 20th and 21st centuries wanting to argue and have strife and division over who among them is to be the number one boss (or captain of the ship). 

 

 

More From YESHUA 

 

But The KING of ALL didn't just stop with His condemnation of men wanting to rule over others.  No!  He  furthermore went on to succinctly point out that in terms of His people, such was not to be the case (Matt 20:26; Mk 10:43; Lu 22:26).  As hard as it is for us carnal people to understand, the truth is that the Scriptural method of rule is entirely different from the worldly ways of man. 

 

The teaching in the Word on this topic of Scriptural authority and leadership is that the real people to be in charge in YHWH's system must become humble servants serving others (rather than bossing and dominating over others, as is the worldly way).  And believe me, friend, it is in the context of a true servant serving others, as YESHUA pungently declared (Matt 20:26; Mk 10:44-45; Lu 22:26-27). 

 

First, it should be noted that this issue of who would be greatest among the twelve did not quickly end.  No!  As late as YESHUA's final Passover, one can find evidence of its lingering presence. 

 

So, in order to demonstrate and give an example of what humility and serving others really meant, The KING of ALL got up from the Passover table, took a towel, some water and a washing basin and proceeded to wash the feet of His disciples (Jo 13:4-16).  And for sure, this method of service is clearly not in the vein of human institutions and human methods of doing things. 

 

Interestingly, here, one can be sure that the disciples' feet were truly dirty and smelly and needed to be washed for their personal benefit, comfort, looks, and smell.  Consequently, it is evident that YESHUA simply did not splash a little water on some lily-clean feet and dry them off with a towel with a hypocritical show.  No!  Anyway a person might try to cut it, the whole process was genuine and based on need. 

 

But there is more to come on this theme.  Because next, The MESSIAH's remarks about service were actually more extensive since He placed them in context of service and in the same mold as the law seems to describe.  In that view, service was also meant to include waiting on tables as a waiter or household, domestic servant (Matt 20:28; Mk 10:45; Lu 22:26-27).

 

 

Moshe 

 

In this regard, another excellent example of real humility in action can be found in the life of one of the truly great men who has lived on planet earth.  Here, mention is made of the man Moshe, who will be described and commented upon in more detail in a subsequent chapter.  Suffice to say, Moshe was truly a big shot until YHWH struck him down to humility and meekness. 

 

One clearly sees this humility and meekness present with a more careful look at this man Moshe (who had once stood at Pharaoh's side, but who later had evidently been cleaned up and corrected through the 40 years of exile).  For when one views him in the Sinai, he himself said that he was not an eloquent man, but one with an awkward tongue (Ex 4:10).  So Aaron was appointed to be his mouthpiece (Ex 4:14-16). 

 

At a still later time, after he was commissioned to be the very personal representative of The SOVEREIGN of the Universe and leader of the two million or so Israelites, one finds that the Book reflects that Aaron and the elders of Yisrael came to eat bread with Jethro, Moshe’s father-in-law (Ex 18:12). 

 

In the description of the setting, The Word does not communicate the whereabouts of Moshe.  The question must come to a reader's mind--where was the man Moshe? 

 

“Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael,” one of the most ancient Jewish works of the Midrash, with comments and interpretations on the book of Exodus, suggests that the great man Moshe was not named as "sitting" and participating at the festive meal because it was this man Moshe who was "standing" and serving those in attendance. 

 

 

More From YESHUA on Service 

 

But there is a more profound outline of fantastic humility in action from The Greatest MAN of ALL.  Significantly, at the future wedding supper of the bride, it will be The ELOHIM, Himself, Who will prepare the table (Ps 23:5).  The BRIDEGROOM YHWH YESHUA will wait on tables and serve the guests (Mk 10:45; Lu 12:35-37). 

 

Therefore, the  Scriptural basis of serving others really goes to the extreme points of serving tables and washing feet, as The MESSIAH so pungently declared and illustrated by example. 

 

Consequently, it is no wonder then that Kefa would finally get the message and later write that in the real Assembly, leaders are "not" to lord over YAH's people.  But rather, they are to offer examples of the right living of service (I Pet 5:3). 

 

Humility and service is the name of YHWH's game and not status, pride, vanity, position, recognition, etc., as men try to obtain in their domination over other men.  Again, YESHUA, Who was no sissy or weak person, was the epitome of true humility, as the Word makes abundantly clear (Matt 11:29). 

 

Whosoever among us human beings, wanting to become really great, must first become a servant (Matt 23:11).  And in respect to human ideas, this process is absolutely contrary thinking not found in human politics, government, business, or even religious institutions (to include the Sardis groups). 

 

Like the Book says--YHWH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble (Lev 26:40-42; I Sam 22:28; II Chron 7:14; 12:7; Ps 18:27; 51:17;  Prov 3:24; Isa 57:14-19; 61:1; 66:2; Matt 23:12; Lu 4:18; Jas 4:6; I Pet 5:5-6). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 88--Pride is Evil

 

 

The Effect of Pride 

 

In the presentations on pride in the former chapters, attempts were made to examine in some detail the manifestations and causes of the wickedness of pride and vanity in the lives of human beings (correctly, in the lives of all human beings who live past the state of infancy--where there are obvious physical limitations in the surfacing of pride). 

 

In this chapter at hand, the focus will shift to the "effects" or results of that pride and vanity on our lives and mentalities.  In other words, what impact does the evil of pride and vanity have on our functioning, in the flesh, here on earth? 

 

As noted previously, real or supposed prosperity and satisfaction have a strange means of causing pride and vanity to surface in our hearts and minds as a part of carnal, human nature.  This reaction in our personalities makes our hearts grow fat, callous, course and hard as stones and difficult to manage and control.  In this environment, the Book reflects that we become stubborn, stiff-necked and rebellious. 

 

Of course, all of this translates to gross evil, wickedness and sin (Ps 10:2; Prov 21:4; Lu 16:15).  Also, in this context of sin and depravity in man, “Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael,” an ancient Jewish Midrash, says that "He who is proud of heart causes the earth to become defiled and the shekinah to withdraw" (v. II, p. 274). 

 

Obviously, to precipitate a withdrawal of The RUACH HA KODESH, there is a  suggestion of a very terrible sin.  Or as Yeshayahu wrote it, YHWH's ear is not deaf that it cannot hear; but our sins have hid His face from us so that He will not hear (Isa 59:1-2). 

 

 

The Depravity of Sodom and Gomorrah

 

Many religious people have some awareness of Sodom and the great evil, wickedness, depravity and sexual perversion associated with it.  But there is quite a story behind Sodom that is largely unknown or unrecognized by most people who have some conception of this ancient, Canaanite town in the Dead Sea area. 

 

Actually, there were five towns in the area of the vale.  But evidently, Sodom and Gomorrah were the more important geographical sites.  Apparently, the whole geographical area was referred to as Sodom, or at least was under the government of Sodom (Ezek 16:49-50; Jasher 19:44). 

 

In the Dec 2000 “Yavoh” newsletter (p. 1), Monte Judah broached the question of “The Outcry of Sodom,” which addressed the issue of exactly what event finally precipitated YHWH’s action to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah.  Judah turned to the ancient book of Jasher to assess the problem.  Because of its significance, this historic book has been quoted several times throughout this study. 

 

As The ELOHIM put it, the “cry of Sodom and Gomorrah” was indeed great and their sin exceedingly grave (Gen 18:20-21).  The account of the two messengers’ visit to Sodom goes into some detail on the evil of those people and especially in the vein of sexual perversion/homosexuality (Gen 19). 

 

While there are some Scriptural justifications to establish some or many of their sins, the issue of the “outcry” (or cry in the KJV) does not appear to be as clear as the student of the Book may wish.  This is the thrust of Judah’s turn to Jasher (in Hebrew “Sefer ha Yashar,” meaning the book of righteousness). 

 

 

More on the Book of Jasher 

 

It is important to note initially that the Word itself mentions the book of Jasher a couple of times and in the vein of an authoritative writing (Josh 10:13; II Sam 1:18).  There are a couple of different versions of the book of Jasher in evidence in modern times.  It is unclear when these works were first compiled.  The more interesting one was translated from Hebrew into English in 1840. 

 

Several respected Hebrew authorities of 1840 (to include Isaac Nordhiemer, Professor of Oriental Literature at the University of New York) endorsed this translation and noted that it was made from a Jasher text of pure Hebrew.  As a minimum, this one is terribly interesting in presenting a Midrash of early information or Jewish tradition, as associated with many of the characters of Genesis. 

 

In any case, this text of Jasher goes into some detail to describe several examples of the enormous evil and wickedness of Sodom.  It wasn’t only that gross homosexuality and sexual depravity bloomed in the land.  Actually, it was that all types of sin, wretchedness and evil prevailed there as well.  The Sodomites were grossly wicked and pathetic people. 

 

 

The Specifics 

 

Four times a year, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah would assemble for a time of partying and playing.  At that time, they would turn the occasions into giant celebrations and sexual orgies (Jasher 18:13-15).  They would engage in wife swapping and even give up their own virgin daughters for sexual abuse. 

 

From the Genesis 19 record, it is clear that these parties involved gross sexual depravity and homosexuality. 

 

If strangers passed through their area, the locals would plan and scheme methods of stealing their possessions and bringing hurt and death upon them.  Yasher told the tale of one merchant who made the mistake of accepting some hospitality from one Sodomite named Heded.  This Heded stole the merchant’s property on the guise that it was for services rendered (Jasher 18:16-43). 

 

The merchant complained and brought the question before a local judge who ruled for Heded (quite naturally).  This merchant escaped with his life and without further loss of property.  But it could mean death to have a conflict with them.  The judges were very partial and in support of the local Sodomites. 

 

Beggars might be given some money, but then no food, nor would the locals even sell them food (thus, they were doomed to die by starvation).  They were taunted and laughed at as they died from lack of food (Jasher 19:8-9).  As the poor died, their few possessions (clothes or whatever--money, if some had been given to them) would be stolen by the Sodomites. 

 

One tradition had it that Lot had an older daughter named Paltith, who married a man of Sodom. She would go to the city well and draw water.  One day, she saw a beggar there starving and pleading for food.  So she began sneaking some bread to the man whenever she went to draw water.  The Sodomites found out about it and burned her alive in a bonfire (Jasher 19:24-35).  But all this was not the outcry of Sodom. 

 

The final great evil which Yasher recorded happened when a woman of Admah (one of the five cities of the plain and likely a suburb of Sodom--Gen 10:19; Deut 29:23) took in a poor stranger and gave him some food and water and helped him to escape with his life and property.  The locals found out and covered her with honey and placed her near bee hives where she was stung to death (Jasher 19:36-43). 

 

With her tragic ordeal (just before she died), Yasher 19:43 records that she cried out and no one took notice of her plight or pitied her.  Her cries ascended into the heavens where The ELOHIM took notice.  As Judah concluded, this was the outcry (cry in Gen 18:20-21) of Sodom and the other four cites of the plain. 

 

 

The Problem in Sodom 

 

That the people in this area were enormously evil, there is no question.  Surely, they were some of the most vile and wicked people of all time (perhaps unequaled until the arrival of America in the year of 2003--where the wickedness is very similar). 

 

Jasher 19:44 described the Sodom area as having  “had abundance of food, and had tranquillity amongst them, and still would not sustain the poor and the needy, and in those days their evil doings and sins became great before” YHWH.  Yes, the people had grown fat and prosperous.  And with it, they became proud and vain. 

 

This same conclusion was outlined by the Prophet Yechezkel when he said:  “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom:  she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food, and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy.  Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me.  Therefore, I removed them when I saw it” (Ezek 16:49-50). 

 

“The Book of Legends” (p. 36) adds that the “people of Sodom were arrogant because of the bounty the Holy One had bestowed upon them.”  The Sodomites had an attitude that they lived in peace and plenty--which must have contributed to their excessive pride and vanity (just as happened in America). 

 

There is no question about what happened.  The people were blessed with prosperity and abundance.  They became prosperous, fat, arrogant, proud and vain and would not extend a helping hand to the poor and needy.  Instead, per Yashar, they robbed and murdered the poor and needy (and any strangers who passed through the area). 

 

This is the essence of the problem over pride and vanity.  It promotes great evil and wretchedness in people.  It promotes sin, wickedness and transgression of YHWH’s Torah. 

 

 

Yes, Pride is the Essence of Sin 

 

With this background, one can correctly surmise that pride is truly the "very essence of sin," as several earlier students of the Book have correctly perceived.  This is a profoundly important point to keep in mind--always.  Pride is the very foundation and basis of sin (because it exists in our hearts and minds to mentally motivate, push, prod and encourage us to commit sin). 

 

And above all other aspects of sin, pride and vanity constitute the most gross forms of idolatry (in that the proud or vain individual progresses to self glorification, self adoration and self adulation).  Clearly, pride is a terrible form of idolatry, as was broached in a former chapter.  Pride and vanity equal blatant self worship.  They are horrible sins and surely the most difficult of all to deal with in the flesh. 

 

Consequently, sin has to be perhaps the primary effect or result of pride and vanity.  It is no wonder then that the Word has such profound and sharp condemnations for proud and vain individuals.  But beyond the sin issue, there is still more to this subject. 

 

To address another significant aspect of this sad state, which all of us enter into (except, of course, YESHUA The MESSIAH), the prophet Yeshayahu had several very relevant messages of enormous importance. 

 

In one of his most revealing and far reaching texts, Yeshayahu wrote that the proud people of Ephraim (maybe even to include all of the House of Yisrael) are in a "drunken state," as if they were reeling with wine, staggering with strong drink and stumbling in judgment at the head of a fat, prosperous valley (Isa 28:1-8). 

 

Clearly, the gist of the above Scripture is that the Israelites, in possession of rich, prosperous land, did grow and have grown fat, rich and proud--so much so that in terms of mental knowledge, understanding, comprehension and judgment, they collectively look and act like persons in a drunken stupor, incapable of understanding reality. 

 

 

Comprehension is Closed 

 

A similar presentation was made again by Yeshayahu in his next chapter when he furthermore pointed out that people are in a drunken stupor; not from wine, but from a spiritual stupor with YHWH's Word closed to them--with no understanding among the average people on the street or even in the more educated and learned scholars in the halls of academic institutions (Isa 29:9-16). 

 

In a word, comprehension was and is closed to Israelites, generally, all the way from the normal, average or stupid John Doe on the street, all the way up in so-called intellect to the highest and most important scholars and brains in the land.  Other writers likewise saw the same tragic condition prevailing in Yisrael. 

 

Shaul put it well by declaring that Yisrael had become blind in a stupor without understanding (Rom 11:7-10) and that the people are in a drunken state (I Cor 15:34).  Hosea noted that spiritual fornication makes one drunk and takes away spiritual understanding (Hos 4:11-18). 

 

No wonder Yohanan was to later observe that the whole world was and is drunk from the false teachings of the whore woman of Babylon (Rev 17:2). 

 

Of course, this is additionally the exact, same message which Yeshayahu had earlier transmitted to Yisrael.  In the year that king Uziyahu died, Yeshayahu was shown the true condition of Yisrael--that Israelites have eyes to see and ears to hear, but that they just cannot comprehend and understand because their hearts are gross and fat (from pride and vanity) and their minds are closed to apprehension (Isa 6:1-10). 

 

Per this condemnation, this resulting state of mental confusion and ignorance will persist until Yisrael finally faces her ultimate and last period of chastisement, mentioned previously and to be later described (Isa 6:11-12).  Actually, the reality which Yeshayahu spoke of is abundantly revealed and repeated throughout YHWH's Word many times over. 

 

For example, the Book often declares that our evil, proud minds are closed to the knowledge and understanding of truth (Ps 14:2; Isa 42:19-20; Jer 5:4-5, 21; Ezek 12:2; Acts 17:30; Eph 4:17-18).  Furthermore, there are a number of other Scriptures which communicate that certain writings are expressly closed to human comprehension for a period of time (Isa 29:11; Dan 12:4, 10). 

 

 

Pride Closes Understanding 

 

Obviously, the reason that our wretched minds are so dull and so closed to spiritual understanding is because of the presence of pride and vanity in our hearts and minds, as Yeshayahu asserts (Isa 6, 28). 

 

In fact, several texts in the New Testament even go on to point out that our state of spiritual ignorance and confusion directly links to Isaiah 6 and the report on the pride and vanity in our hearts (see Jo 12:37-41; Acts 28:21-27). 

 

In addition, Shaul charges that there is a veil over people's minds and hearts which prevents understanding (II Cor 3:13-15).  It is no wonder then that a host of Scriptures declare that "none understand" (Ps 14:2; 53:2-4; Mk 9:32; Rom 1:31; 3:11). 

 

Since we all have the pride problem and are all largely incapable of seeing pride and vanity in our own wretched lives, then it follows that we all face the same dilemma in regards to Spiritual understanding.  We proudly think, assume, presume and believe that we know it all or that we know all we need to know or that we know all of importance to us. 

 

However, in the real world of truth, we are largely blind and ignorant as to the reality of YHWH's Word.  This condition is repeatedly brought out in a number of Scriptures.  For example, Iyov questioned if we understand what is in us (Job 15:8-9)?  The Psalmist asked who can understand his own faults (Ps 19:12-13)? 

 

Yirmeyahu noted that our hearts are very deceitful (they lie to us) and desperately wicked and cannot be understood by ourselves (Jer 17:9).  Hosea likewise argued that our hearts are deceitful and evil (Hos 10:2).  Shaul charged that when one thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself (Gal 6:3). 

 

 

What on Understanding 

 

Perhaps at this juncture, it would be useful to look more carefully at this “what” it is which cannot be understood.  Some persons suppose that the public at large can’t understand the Sabbaths, feast days, Hebrew names and titles, clean foods and a host of YHWH’s other mitzwot--all because they are blinded to Scriptural truth. 

 

Some individuals actually speculate that it takes a special revelation and action of The RUACH HA KODESH to grasp The MOST HIGH’s laws of righteousness.  But despite the prevalence of this view, is it verity?  In this regard, Moshe wrote some very far reaching words. 

 

First, he noted that YHWH’s laws are given for wisdom and understanding (Deut 4:6).  And second, he charged that these laws are not difficult to understand, not far off, not in secret, not across the ocean, nor shrouded in a mystery; but instead, they are near us and can be understood so we can obey and be held accountable (Deut 30:11-14). 

 

Obviously, YHWH's laws can be understood by any and all of Yisrael, if not by any and all of people generally.  They are not hid and far off or in a mystery.  They are quite plain and clear.  Consequently, we cannot claim ignorance for our sins on any pretext that The MOST HIGH’s mitzwot were blinded to our comprehension. 

 

No!  The judgment of not being able to understand was and is far more profound and extensive than just a focus on certain specific laws and subjects, such as pagan names and titles, identity, race, prophecy, etc, which multitudes of practicing sinners have had some knowledge and understanding of for most on the past 6,000 years. 

 

Even the Jews in YESHUA’s day knew and understood many of these things, as well as some data on more complex subjects--like the resurrection, salvation, belief, faith, righteousness and even information on the name of salvation (Ex 15:2; II Sam 22:2-3; Ps 14:7; 62:1-2; 106:21; 118:14; Isa 12:2; 25:9; 35:4; 45:15; 49:26; 60:16; Hos 1:7; Acts 23:8). 

 

 

Pride Blinds Us 

 

The essence here, on “what” was hid, as it relates to apprehension, is brought out by Yeshayahu in his discussion on the reality of pride and vanity in people’s hearts and minds which has acted to blind all of us today as well as in ages past. 

 

Of course, we are not necessarily blind about the Sabbaths, feast days, identity, race or names.  Again, many individuals, including the Jews of 2,000 years ago, understand much about these themes.  However, we are blind about the wickedness of pride and vanity in our own personal lives. 

 

We don’t see the stubbornness and evil in our hearts.  We have little or no comprehension of how utterly dirty, rotten and decadent that we each are in our carnal, human natures.  We never can see the evils of pride and vanity present in our own selves.  We are truly blind to our own pride and vanity problems, as various persons have noted over the years. 

 

For a powerful summation of this idea, the prophet Yirmeyahu wrote that the fierceness and pride of heart deceives one's self (Jer 49:16).  The point being is that pride acts to deceive us as to our own true state and condition.

 

It prevents us from understanding our own selves and the spiritual truth we each need in order to live acceptable lives and to obtain the free gift of repentance which is necessary in order to obtain grace and salvation.  Thus, on this point, the wicked cannot possibly understand, as the Book so pungently declares (Ps 82:4-5; Isa 56:10-11; Jer 4:23; Dan 12:10). 

 

 

Pride Causes Apathy and Indifference  

 

Before proceeding on this present path on pride, a few remarks are in order on the effect pride has on attitude in terms of apathy and indifference, as opposed to enthusiasm, passion, zeal and commitment.  These subjects will be addressed in some detail later on in this study.  But for now, they must be acknowledged. 

 

For sure, apathy and indifference are the backbones of Christianity.  Too many Christians erroneously believe that their tickets are punched for salvation.  Once a person reaches this mental level and disposition, he becomes extremely self righteous, proud, apathetic and indifferent about truth and righteousness. 

 

In broaching this sad condition of apathy, Yeshayahu (6:9-11) noted that the inability to understand is linked to fat hearts, smeared eyes and heavy ears.  In a discussion on this teaching, the “Pulpit Commentary” reflects that this very condition produces an attitude in people of being apathetic, indifferent and lethargic towards truth, which is exactly what Yirmeyahu was to later assert (Jer 2:19). 

 

Categorically, it's hard for understanding and comprehension to break through when an individual just doesn't care about it.  In this context, Psalms 125:5 has it by stating that iniquity is the same thing as or equal to "indifference to YHWH.” 

 

Additionally, in this regard, Samson Raphael Hirsch, in his Jewish Commentary on the Pentateuch, said of the hardness and rebellion of Yisrael in Leviticus 26:18, that if "you remain in such indifference to My (YHWH's) will that you still do not find it worth while even to take trouble to learn what My (YHWH's) will really is...then chastisement will come." 

 

 

YHWH’s Judgment on the Proud 

 

The next remark needing mention on this theme focuses on a number of texts which relate that YHWH has not given people hearts of understanding, but has acted to close their eyes and ears to comprehension (Deut 29:4; Isa 44:18-19; 63:17; Jer 5:21; 13:23; Jo 12:39-40; Rom 9:18; I Pet 2:8).  Here, we might ask--why has YHWH done this? 

 

For an answer to this enigma, one needs to go back and look once more to Isaiah 6:10 and the smeared or seared eyes and heavy ears of apathy and indifference.  The “Pulpit Commentary” notes that in ancient times, ruling kings often acted to blind (by searing) the eyes of their enemies as punishment and judgment. 

 

On this, see II Kings 25:7, where Nebuchadnezzar blinded the eyes of Yehudah's king Tzidkiyahu.  Consequently, the Word seems to communicate that the blinding process, which comes upon all of us, is from YHWH and is because of our sins of pride and vanity. 

 

Effectively, He blinds us as a type of punishment and judgment in terms of spiritual understanding and truth about our own proud and vain personalities and the repentance we need in this age because of the pride, vanity and evil in our wretched hearts. 

 

Thus, it is no wonder then that Hosea would write that spiritual fornication and drunkenness take away understanding and comprehension from people who then will stumble and fall (Hos 4:10, 11, 14).  Shaul also goes on to add that “hard hearts bring on a judgment" (Rom 2:5). 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

In terms of a conclusion, pride and vanity generate two undeniable effects, results and outcomes in the lives of all of so-called humanity.  It makes us sinners, par excellence, and acts to bring on us a blinding judgment in respect to the spiritual understanding of truth.  Obviously, anything this profound has to be the "very essence of sin" and the primary problem all of us face in this life here in the flesh. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 89--Iyov

 

 

Iyov, A Classic Example 

 

There once was a man who lived in the land of Uz, many, many years ago.  He was a blameless and upright man--who feared The ELOHIM and abstained from evil and wickedness.  He was, according to human standards and measurements, an extraordinarily "good" person and one who most of us would be quite privileged to have as a relative, friend, neighbour or acquaintance. 

 

Moreover, he obviously was a very industrious and hard working individual who was abundantly blessed by The MOST HIGH in perhaps all the things which he undertook to do and accomplish.  The subject at hand was called the greatest man of the East.  He was prosperous and owned 7,000 head of sheep, 3,000 camels, 500 yoke of oxen, 500 female donkeys and a huge body of servants. 

 

This prosperous, wealthy and rare individual was likewise blessed in what the world would call a very fine, upstanding family of a "splendid" wife and ten (supposedly) "excellent" children--seven sons and three daughters.

 

This exceptional husband, father, friend and neighbour was very concerned with the moral being of not only himself, but also his family.  So, even when his children were busy feasting and having a good time (apparently on their birthdays), he would rise up early in the morning and offer sacrifices for them if they had sinned and done something wrong. 

 

He was such a phenomenally "good" man by human standards that his name and station in life became a topic for discussion in the court of The SOVEREIGN of the Universe.  There, in the highest heaven, it happened one day that Satan the Prosecutor (Accuser) appeared before the throne of The EVERLIVING. 

 

In the ensuing dialogue, The HIGHEST pointed out the exceptional integrity and moral standards of this man of Uz under consideration herein.  The KING of All went on to say that this man was a "blameless and upright" person who abstains and shuns evil. 

 

However, the Prosecutor was not at all impressed with that charge.  Instead, he argued that the man of Uz reverently feared The ELOHIM on the throne and shunned evil not for nothing.  So, according to the Accuser, the man was upright and blameless because he was blessed and made prosperous at the hand of The KING on the throne. 

 

Satan then went on to say to The RULER "put forth Your hand (against him) and touch all that he has, and he will curse You to Your face."  So The HIGHEST accepted the challenge and turned the man over to the Enemy with the stipulation that the man himself was not to be harmed. 

 

So the Devil departed the court and went to work on the possessions of the man of Uz.  He caused the Sabeans and Chaldeans to swoop down on the man's fields, kill his servants and steal his donkeys, oxen and camels; he ignited lightnings and fires to burn up the sheep and other servants; and finally, he caused a storm to strike the house where the children were gathered to kill all ten of them in one tragedy. 

 

After all of this, the man of Uz could only fall down on the ground and worship The EVERLASTING and proclaim that he came into this world naked and naked would he depart--since YHWH gives and YHWH takes, blessed be the name of YHWH.  And the Word of The ELOHIM asserts that in all of this, the man of Uz sinned not with his lips.

 

Not satisfied with the outcome of the engineered tests, the Prosecutor returned to the throne of The MOST HIGH and sought further permission to extend the terror and troubles to the very person of the man of Uz.  In granting this request, The SOVEREIGN said "Behold, he is in your hand, only spare his life." 

 

Thereupon, the Accuser undertook to smite the man with loathsome and painful sores from the sole of his feet to the crown of his head.  So the pathetic, wrecked man sat down in some ashes and took a piece of broken pottery to scrape himself.  Knowing the situation, his wife came to him and told him to renounce The ELOHIM and die. 

 

But his reply to her was that she was foolish; should they accept only the good from the hand of The HIGHEST and “not also accept misfortune?”  And again, the Word of The SUPREME declares that the man of Uz “did not sin with his lips.”

 

 

The Subject Identified 

 

Surely, by now, readers of these remarks recognize and perceive the subject of this discussion as the man Iyov (better known as Job) and his incredible ordeal and trial over righteousness (Job 1:1--2:10).  And it is correct to say that by our wicked, human standards and the way we all operate, Iyov was an exceptionally "good" man and extremely obedient and faithful to The ELOHIM.

 

In fact, he was of such high moral righteousness and integrity that the prophet Yechezkel was to later place him in a unique category, along with Noah and Daniel, as being men of high moral righteousness and integrity (Ezek 14:14-20).  And this is saying an awful lot in view of the wickedness and evil that dwells in the hearts and minds of limited, little men. 

 

Truly, in the eyes of his neighbors, friends, relatives and associates, Iyov must have been known as and thought to be a really "good" person.  In fact, his apparent impeccable moral standards eventually became a point of discussion and controversy at the court of The KING of the Universe, as just noted. 

 

Again, as the Adversary presented his case, Iyov was righteous and exemplary because The MOST HIGH prospered him in all things (Job 1:10).  In other words, Iyov obeyed because he was being paid off for obedience.  Obviously, any thing this serious had to be dealt with in a most appropriate and conclusive manner. 

 

The charge could not be ignored or overlooked and especially since the Scriptures go on to reflect that Iyov indeed had been blessed and did prosper at the hand of The SOVEREIGN. 

 

The Devil's argument was simple.  Take away all that prosperity and happiness and Iyov would curse and denounce The HIGHEST sitting on the throne.  The Prosecutor went to work immediately to use nature and other peoples to come into Iyov's life to destroy and/or abolish his physical possessions and kill all ten of his children.  In all of this horror, trouble and sorrow that was placed on him, Iyov “sinned not with his lips.” 

 

The outcome of this initial chastisement upon Iyov was not what the Adversary wanted or looked for.  In his state of disappointment and failure, he returned to the throne of The EVERLASTING to once more accuse Iyov. 

 

This time, Satan told The ELOHIM that:  "Skin for skin, yes, all that a man has will he give for his life.  But put forth Your hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse and renounce You to Your face" (Job 2:4-5). 

 

So, once more, The MOST HIGH responded and accepted this second challenge.  As mentioned above, He announced that He was turning Iyov over to the Enemy, but with the stipulation that his life was to be spared.  Thereupon, the Adversary went forth and smote poor Iyov with "loathsome and painful sores (boils) from the sole of his feet to the crown of his head" (Job 2:7). 

 

In great pain, agony and suffering, Iyov sat down among the ashes and took a piece of broken pottery to scrape himself, as noted above.  It  was then that his wife wanted him to renounce The ELOHIM and die.  As outlined above, he replied to her-- “what, shall we accept only good at the hand of The SOVEREIGN and shall we not accept also misfortune and what is of a bad nature" (Job 2:10)? 

 

In time, Iyov's four friends--Eliphaz the Temanite (possibly an Edomite, son of Esau), Bildad the Shuhite, Zophar the Naamathite, and Elihu the Buzite--came to console and comfort him in his suffering and trial (Job 2:11; 32:2). 

 

 

A Presentation of Truth 

 

Thereafter, the next 35 or so chapters of the book of Job describe the dialogue and exchange between Iyov, the man of Uz, and his friends.  With this conversation still inconclusive, The MOST HIGH YHWH enters the discussion (Job 38:1) and poignantly hurls at those present some of the greatest mysteries and wisdom which man can ever begin to grasp and contemplate. 

 

As many of these comments from Iyov, his friends and The HIGHEST may not directly apply to the subject of this study, per se, no effort will now be expended to consider the specifics of what all was said and discussed. 

 

However, since the essence of the book of Job addresses the theme of pride and vanity and how it must be dealt with, there is a need now to reflect upon several of the items found in this large book of many chapters. 

 

In terms of the background and situation for the ensuing conversation between the parties mentioned in the writing, it should be noted that Iyov's ultimate and final trial evidently lasted a total of seven days and seven nights (Job 2:13). 

 

 

Iyov Suffered 

 

And while some readers may suppose that Iyov and his visiting friends rested and slept during portions of the periods of darkness, such a prospect may have largely escaped the afflicted man, himself, because the Word communicates that he tossed to and fro till dawn with long (sleepless) nights of misery and suffering (Job 7:3-4). 

 

It is also of some significance that initially and thereafter for much of the seven days, no words were even spoken between Iyov and his four friends because his grief and pain were so terrible (Job 2:13).  Clearly, the pain was great as the seventh and sixteenth chapters of the book reflect. 

 

His flesh was clothed with worms and clods of dust.  The skin was broken and was loathsome as the boils continued to break out afresh.  His face was red and swollen from weeping and the pain was continuous, sharp and penetrating.  His evidently sleepless days and nights were spent largely without hope.  And until the climax, Iyov cried repeatedly unto YHWH and was not answered (Job 30:20). 

 

In his tragic state of agony, sorrow, depression and despair, Iyov cursed and condemned the days of his conception and birth (Job 3:1-12).  He wished that his mother would have miscarried or that he would have been a stillborn or that he would have died as a baby (Job 3:11, 13, 16).  He loathed his own life and desired that The ELOHIM would terminate it at once (Job 6:9; 7:16). 

 

And while he certainly understood the role of the Adversary in all of his troubles, he correctly placed the ultimate responsibility directly with The MOST HIGH (Job 6:4, 8-9; 12:9; 21:;8:4; 16:11; 30:4, 19; 36:13-15; 42:11).  It is manifestly evident that Iyov knew and understood that YHWH was a SOVEREIGN in total control of everything going on (this reality clashes with Christian teachings about the power of the Devil). 

 

From the beginning, the man Iyov turned to The ELOHIM to pray and beseech Him for deliverance and healing (Job 6:23-29).  He specifically asked what had he done wrong (Job 7:20-21)?  He pleaded for wisdom and understanding about his desperate plight (Job 6:23-24).  And as noted above, The EVERLIVING initially answered him not (Job 30:20). 

 

Furthermore, early on in his great test, Iyov seems to convey some suspicion and concern that maybe everything was not quite right in his life, despite his believed years of loyal and faithful service and obedience to The SUPREME--since he expressed his fears of such a trial coming upon him, as he was then experiencing (Job 3:25). 

 

In addition, he correctly knew and understood by YHWH's Word that a mortal human did, indeed, have a right and could bring The ELOHIM to court or trial over His actions if there was a cause against Him in anything He had done (Job 23:3-4; 31:37; 38:3; 40:7-9). 

 

Consequently, Iyov must have perceived early on that the dilemma he faced was in some way due to something in his own life and not something external to his person.  And as the reader is thrust into the powerful drama of Iyov's punishment and chastisement, the real problem that was in Iyov's life has to become apparent, as it finally did reveal itself. 

 

Early on, in his pleadings, he demonstrated his own "confidence" in himself and his own flesh (Job 6:11-13), and even after Eliphaz had asked him if the reverent fear of The ELOHIM was his confidence (Job 4:6)?  Later, Eliphaz raised the question of the wisdom involved in man who trusts in vanity (Job 15:31). 

 

But throughout it all, Iyov maintained that he had not made gold (riches and possessions) his confidence (Job 31:24).  Even lust after women and uncontrolled passions were not the problems, as he saw it (Job 31:1-12). 

 

 

The Issue 

 

Now, while many persons may be familiar with the horrible troubles, trials and tests that came upon Iyov (Job 2:13), few it seems are able to grasp what the real issue was in the story and why The EVERLIVING elected to turn a seemingly righteous and good man over to the Adversary for extreme punishment.  And what is this real theme of the book of Job that is comparatively missed by the public at large?

 

Well, The MOST HIGH, Himself, intervened out of a whirlwind to lay the problem before Iyov in a very dramatic and powerful declaration (Job 40:6--41:34). In short, the essence of the issue was that Iyov was so righteous and good and worked so hard at it, according to human standards, that he had become very proud and vain from self righteousness (Job 40:11-12). 

 

And while Iyov was elevated and lifted up in this state of self righteousness, The EVERLASTING was determined "to humble, abase and bring him down low" (Job 40:11-12) and show him how really little and insignificant he was--despite the fact that he thought so highly of himself because of his “righteousness and obedience.” 

 

In several declarations, Iyov's self confidence, pride, vanity and self righteousness were repeatedly asserted and laid out, so no one could miss them (Job 9:15-22; 10:7; 19:4; 27:5-6; 32:1-2; 34:5; 35:2).  Even Zophar could detect the pride and boasting in Iyov's speech (Job 11:3) and correctly perceived the evils of pride (Job 20:5-6). 

 

Finally, with the intervention of The EVERLASTING to lay out the problem precisely, YHWH thundered at Iyov that he was a hypocrite for trying to appear to be righteous and justified based on his own merits and works (Job 40:8). 

 

Consequently, the theme of self righteousness for justification was present to underlie much of the dialogue between the parties.  In fact, Bildad raised the issue fairly early by asking how could a sinful man be made "justified and righteous" (Job 25:4)? 

 

Also, some of the greatest mysteries ever shared with man surfaces in this fantastic book.  For example, one of the most profound questions of all appears in print to intrigue all men of all time-- “if a man die, shall he live again” (Job 14:14)?  The book powerfully addresses great subjects like the resurrection from the dead and exactly what true righteousness and justification really is all about (Job 14:1-22; 33:4-30). 

 

 

Pride 

 

Of course, the purpose of the entire trial and test on Iyov was to ultimately come out.  The shortcoming with Iyov was his pride.  It is the precise same difficulty which all of us face.  It involves our carnal, wicked, human natures which are ruled over and dominated entirely by the flesh.  We all face the problem of the deceitfulness of pride and vanity in our evil, wretched hearts and minds. 

 

Clearly, this tragedy is in all of us and all of us are absolutely and totally incapable of addressing it and solving it in our own lives.  We all need A DELIVERER.  And who can deal with this issue and be a deliverer?  Over time, this message of “who” will be a deliverer is thrown at the reader of Job in several powerful statements. 

 

For example, the Book tells us that YHWH reveals the sins of pride, arrogance, presumption and self sufficiency and opens closed ears to understanding (Job 36:9-10); makes "man give up pride from his heart" (Job 33:16-17, from the “Modern Language Bible”); and lifts up and saves the humble person (Job 22:29). 

 

It is no wonder then that YHWH YESHUA saves the humble because He resists the proud and gives grace to the humble, as this publication has mentioned so often before. 

 

As has been recounted time and time again herein, none of us limited, sinning human beings have the capacity and ability to approach the human heart and mind to effectively deal with pride, vanity and carnality and change and convert ourselves into useful beings of humility and meekness, as is typically found in newborn, infant babies. 

 

It is in this context that the Word asks-- “who can give understanding” (Job 38:36)? 

 

So now, we face the question of "how" does YHWH bring a proud man down and make him humble, little and lowly?  How does YHWH force a man to give up the evil in his heart, so that he might be able to receive understanding about his real problems that cut him off from grace and salvation (Job 28:28)? 

 

Of course, here, the "how" is closely tied in with the "what" which must be done.  And the what is that "unrighteousness/carnality must be broken and crushed" (Job 24:20).  Manifestly, in the Book, this what is done in the context of correction and discipline (just as a parent corrects a wayward child). 

 

 

YHWH Corrects 

 

The Book puts it well with these penetrating words-- “YHWH binds with affliction the sinner and delivers the poor (humble) in their affliction" (Job 36:13-15).  Put another way, The MOST HIGH pours forth His anger and chastisement on the "proud" ones to be called and proceeds to abase, humble and bring them down low (Job 40:11-12).  Please note the idea of calling and election in these texts.  It is important to remember! 

 

Therefore, in order to deal with the evil in Iyov's proud heart and mind, The EVERLIVING ONE had to bring a great calamity, trial and test of enormous proportions on him.  He had to be afflicted (Job 30:11, 17) and his spirit had to be broken (Job 17:1). 

 

Literally, he had to be crushed (Job 19:10; 23:16) and humbled (Job 30:11).  And eventually, in the time of his appointed affliction, the Book tells us that YHWH heard Iyov--just as He hears others in their appointed afflictions (Job 34:28). 

 

The culmination of Iyov's trial finally came when The HIGHEST pointedly asked him-- "Who are you, anyway" (Job 38:2)?  And since Iyov had all along thought he was a big shot because of his obedience and blessings, it finally dawned upon him. 

 

In his state of despair, he woke up and realized that he was a "nobody," although he had rashly tried to be a "somebody" because of all of his righteousness and good works (Job 42:1-5).

 

The whole purpose of this whole drama surfaces in a brief moment of time when Iyov finally deduces that he had become self righteous, proud and vain (which cut him off from The HIGHEST).  Thus, Iyov repented and came to abhor himself because of the sins of pride, vanity and the flesh that were in his heart (Job 42:6). 

 

Iyov was clearly a good man who obviously went to great lengths to obey The MOST HIGH in all things and that certainly included obedience of YAH’s mitzwot--at least, in a physical sense (Job 1:10; Jas 5:11). 

 

 

Iyov’s Ignorance 

 

But unknown to poor Iyov was the fact that in his obedience of the law, he had become self righteous and proud of that obedience (Job 4:6; 9:15-22; 10:7; 11:3; 15:31; 19:4; 27:5-6; 31:1-12, 24; 32:1-2; 34:5; 35:2; 40:6-14).  He had confidence and trust in his own righteousness and his heart lied to him and deceived him about his true status.

 

Yes, Iyov was trying to be a somebody; when, in fact, he was a nobody (Job 42:1-5).  In short, he was proud, vain, and carnal--despite being basically a good man by worldly standards. 

 

Beyond the numerous proofs of the sin of self-righteousness (pride) in Iyov, the Book reflects that Iyov was also guilty of presumptuous pride when he said certain things (lies) which were just not true and which he didn’t have the right information on (Job 42:3), although the Word is clear in the early days of his trial that Iyov sinned not with his lips. 

 

He correctly understood that all (both good and bad) that came upon him was from YHWH (Job 2:10; 6:4, 21; 8:4; 16:11; 30:4, 19; 36:13-15; 42:11).  And in attributing to YHWH all the good and evil that he experienced in his life, he sinned not with his lips.  From the eyes of The MOST HIGH, the issue was simple. 

 

The self-righteousness, presumptuousness, pride and carnality in Iyov had to be broken, crushed and destroyed (Job 24:20).  Again, as outlined above, Iyov was afflicted (Job 30:11, 17); his spirit was broken (Job 17:1); he was crushed (Job 19:10; 23:16); and he was eventually humbled and brought down (Job 30:11).  In time, YHWH heard Iyov’s cries from his afflictions (Job 34:28). 

 

In the process, YHWH revealed the sins of pride and confidence which Iyov had in himself (Job 36:9-10).  In short, The ELOHIM made Iyov give up those sins and become humble (Job 22:29; 28:28; 33:16-17; 36:13-15; 40:11-12).  In this context, he repented of his carnality and fleshliness (Job 42:6).

 

 

Change 

 

This story is a classic one which broaches the subject of changing and repenting from the carnality of pride and vanity.  The gist of it ultimately surfaces with the words--“happy is the man YHWH corrects” (Job 5:17), and “though YHWH slay me, I will trust Him” (Job 13:15).  As noted earlier, it is the persons “called” (the election) who face this correction and not necessarily others (Job 36:13-15). 

 

The reader probably remembers the end of this important and powerful story.  Iyov eventually was given more in possessions than he had had in the beginning. 

 

In time, he came to own 14,000 sheep, 6,000 camels, 1,000 yoke of oxen and 1,000 female donkeys.  He lived for another 140 years, long enough to see and enjoy once again seven sons and three daughters and a number of grandchildren and descendants (Job 42:10-17). 

 

Iyov was likely a son of Yissakhar (Gen 46:13) and possibly the builder of the great pyramid, as suggested by Worldwide Church of God leader Herbert W. Armstrong years ago (Job 38:6-7; Isa 19:19-20; Jer 32:20). 

 

However, of most importance for truth, Iyov was perhaps one of the best, classic examples of the process of true repentance and change.  But there were also many other people who were selected by YHWH to be reconciled in this life.  Future chapters will assess some of these persons. 

 

 

Self Righteousness 

 

Self righteousness is such a nasty sin.  It has to be one of the worse and most evil manifestations of pride and vanity in existence to have prompted The SOVEREIGN to devote the total of 42 chapters of Job in His Word to tell us about it.  It is an old problem in man and one that has continued to affect, plague and damage vast numbers of people even to our time.

 

It is so prevalent and easy to get entrapped into in this life.  Clearly, it has been evident in Jews for centuries.  And for the last 2,000 years, one can plainly see this same characteristic surfacing in Christendom and its many offshoots and fragments.  Numbers of church and assembly members and even independents become victims of self righteousness so easily (in fact, it can affect everybody without exception). 

 

Of course, this is precisely the reason that such "religious" people like to have their ears tickled and to be told smooth words of vanity to the effect that they are saints, holy, good, elect, chosen, etc; when, in reality, they are proud, self righteous hypocrites. 

 

But notwithstanding this gross presence of sin, rebellion, pride and vanity in contemporary Christendom (to include its Sacred Name and Identity offshoots), it is interesting that some 25% of these "church or assembly" people actually believe that they have the "spirit" and personal contact with The MOST HIGH. 

 

“Newsweek” magazine (p. 73), of Nov 1, 1999, had a story on “Millennium Madness,” by John Leland, which offered an outstanding illustration of the prevalence of self righteousness in the minds and mentalities of the majority of American, Christian people. 

 

In this Christian nation, with its beliefs upon the false teachings of dying and going to heaven or hell, it is fascinating that, per Leland, some 68% of American adults polled believe that they will go heaven when they die while only 3% expect to go to hell.  Yet, modern Americans are collectively sick, depraved and evil beyond all imagination and more so than any other people in all of history (to be proven in later chapters herein). 

 

It seems that most persons can never grasp the fact that not only does The ELOHIM resist the proud, but He declares in His Word that He will not even listen to the prayers of unrepentant sinners (Job 35:12-13; Ps 66:18; Prov 28:9; Isa 1:15; 59:1-3; Mic 3:4; Zech 7:12-13; Jo 9:31; Jas 4:3). 

 

Maybe Shlomo had such people in mind when he wrote about a generation which was "pure" in their own eyes (Prov 30:9-13).  And in terms of the modern Sardis people, described herein, it is interesting that Shaul wrote to the Sardis types in Corinth to point out that they had a particular problem with pride (I Cor 4:6-8).

 

 

A Sample 

 

For another example of self righteousness in action, the reader will be interested in a story about a really fine, wonderful, elderly couple who grew up as members of the Sardis Church of God (7th Day).  Evidently, they never knew any other religion all their many years except that of Sardis. 

 

And by our wretched standards of today, probably every person knowing this couple would readily agree and attest to the fact that individually and together they constituted two of the finest people one could hope to meet and be acquainted with in this age of people living by the flesh.  Consequently, they had many, good friends who thought very highly of them.

 

As one surveys this couple, he would have to actually doubt that either one of them ever smoked a cigarette, uttered a cuss word, participated in illegal sex or done any of the many overt acts of sin and rebellion which so many of us grow up doing. 

 

In this regard, this writer must confess that i have committed so many shameful acts of sin and rebellion that it is painful for me to even think about most of them.  But in terms of the subjects of this story, their lives followed an entirely different path from that of a lot of other persons, including me. 

 

However, as "good" as these individuals seemed to be and as highly regarded as they were among friends and religious contemporaries, one would have to wonder how in the world could they have been so incredibly apathetic and indifferent towards new truth, as they proved to be over the years. 

 

Being raised in and lifetime members of the Sardis Church of God, this couple did have some very obvious problems in their lives in terms of new light coming forth which was largely rejected in the Church of God, such as men wearing beards, women wearing a head covering, use of pagan names and titles in worship, and many other things which more advanced students are beginning to understand in our time.

 

Trying to understand why comparatively "good" people have been so absolutely indifferent and apathetic towards important new truths (ignored by the Sardis Church of God) seems to present a challenge to a thinking person.  How and why is that such seemingly "good" people just don’t seem to care about many of the aspects of righteousness that are very plain and unmistakable in the Word? 

 

But if one is familiar with YHWH's Word and how self righteousness, pride and vanity can affect any one of us, then the position this couple has been in makes sense and is clear enough without wondering over it. 

 

The truth is that this fine couple, in their view, really had all that they needed spiritually, and all that they believed was available for them and others in a religious context.  They thought that they knew all about salvation and that they then possessed salvation.  Everything else was extraneous and of no benefit for them to even bother thinking about. 

 

In other words, they were proud and self righteous over their religious background and raising.  In their eyes, they were good people since they had spent their lives obeying what the Church of God, their parents  and teachers had taught. 

 

Never once did they have to speculate or wonder about whether they still had problems in their lives or not and whether there was any lingering sins and iniquities which needed to be repented of.  They consistently seemed to believe in their own righteousness (since they had never done anything "wrong" in their lives, as they saw it and understood it).

 

 

2,000 Years Ago 

 

In respect to this situation under discussion, The MESSIAH shared with us an interesting parable some 2,000 years ago which pretty well tells all.  He addressed His comments to some persons who were very self righteous in their own eyes (Lu 18:9) and told them about two men who went into the temple to pray (one a Pharisee and the other an evil tax collector).

 

As YESHUA put it, the Pharisee took his stand on his righteousness and how thankful he was that he was not evil and wicked like other people; how he fasted twice in the week; how he paid tithes on all of his income; etc.  But the tax collector kept his distance and humbly prayed about what a wretched, lost sinner he was and how he needed mercy and forgiveness (Lu 18:9-13). 

 

And now, my friend, which one of these two individuals do you think went home that day justified--the Pharisee or the tax collector?  Well, The SON OF ADAM wisely pointed out that whoever exalts himself will be humbled while he who humbles himself will be exalted (Lu 18:14). 

 

In this context, it should be noted that Yohanan the Baptist came to baptize repentant sinners and not self righteous people who thought they were “holy saints” (Matt 3:1-2; Lu 7:29-30).  YESHUA's call and message are for sinners and not for good, self righteous people (Mk 2:17; Lu 5:32). 

 

Incidentally, this discussion on self righteousness brings up another consideration for the people of YESHUA’s day some 2,000 years ago, as well as for us today.  It must be recognized that the Jews whom The MESSIAH spoke to back then were by and large religiously practicing Jews. 

 

 

Many Jews Were Obedient 

 

The Jews did obey many of YHWH’s laws--laws which rebellious Christendom has largely rejected, ignored and made fun of.  In every sense, they were diligent Sabbathkeepers, kept the feast days, ate clean meats, knew and used the "correct" Hebrew names and titles for The HIGHEST, knew and understood much about identity and on and on in terms of the laws, doctrines and teachings covered in YHWH's Word. 

 

And while ignorant Christians may try to speculate, assume, presume and guess that the Jews of 2,000 years ago knew little about the resurrection, salvation, belief, faith, righteousness and the saving name (which is not Gee-Zeus or Yahshua), the truth is that they did have some information on all of these topics (Ex 15:2; II Sam 22:2-3; Ps 14:7; 62:1-2; 106:21; 118:14; Isa 12:2; 25:9; 35:4; 45:15; 49:26: 60:16; Hos 1:7; Acts 23:8). 

 

It is no wonder then that YESHUA spoke to some of them as being "(self) confident (proud) and sure of their righteousness" (Lu 18:9).  Thus, in their state of obedience, many Jews had become self righteously proud--just as Christian Sabbathkeepers and feast day observers have in our time. 

 

In other words, numbers of the Jews in YESHUA's day went to some effort to be like a cup or glass-- “clean” on the outside in terms of appearance, but dirty on the inside (Matt 23:23-28; Lu 11:39-41). 

 

 

Same Today 

 

Thus, these Jews were classic hypocrites with double standards--just like many religious people are hypocrites today (Ps 78:36-37; Prov 26:23, Isa 29:13; Ezek 33:31, Matt 11:16-17; 15:7-9; 23:14-15, Mk 7:6, Lu 7:31-35; 13:14-15; Acts 8:21-22). 

 

And while those Jews seemed to have obeyed many of YHWH’s laws, they clearly bypassed and ignored the weightier matters of the law--again, like many Sabbath and feast day keepers do today (Hos 4:1; Matt 23:23; Jo 7:19). 

 

Truly, this entire analogy applies fully to huge segments of Christian "church and assembly" people today--especially to those persons who are somewhat advanced in truth, such as Sardis Sacred Namers and Identity types.  The problem was never one of something involving the Jews only of 2,000 years ago. 

 

Stupid people actually come to believe that their tickets are punched when they are baptized in water; run down an isle; roll in the floor; stand up in a meeting; fall in front of a "supposed" altar; mutter some unintelligible gibberish (under the power of a demon); say the words “Gee-Zeus, Yahweh and/or Yahshua” several times a day; know a few things about Identity and race; keep the weekly Sabbath and/or annual feast days; and so on. 

 

But what most of the modern religious types fail to grasp is that they are virtually the same as the Jews of 2,000 years ago, who also were "religious" and did many of the same acts and actions; and in fact, often in far better, dedicated, professional and obedient ways than Christians and Sacred Namers ever have so done. 

 

Therefore, modern "religious" persons tend to become proud and vain over their "self righteous" pride and vanity--just as so many of the Jews did in YESHUA's day.  The point being is that wicked pride and vanity still affects individuals today, much like it always has affected people.    

 

If there is a difference between modern Christians and historic Jews, in the religious sense, it is that religious Jews really have had some works of righteousness to brag and boast about to others (since many of them have been fairly respectful toward and obedient of YHWH’s Torah).  No person with any brains at all can say that about many, if any, Christians.  In the generic sense, Christians are extremely disobedient. 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

In this context, the prophet Yechezkel had some perceptive advice for all of us.  He poignantly proclaimed that if a righteous person was to trust and rely upon his righteousness (for salvation), thereby sinning, then the person's previously performed righteous deeds would not be remembered and the individual would die in sin (Ezek 33:13). 

 

And friend, this admonition is saying an awful lot about the evils of self righteousness which seem to particularly affect religious people. 

 

Shaul the apostle penned a good conclusion on this theme for us when he wrote about people ignorant and uninformed about true righteousness and how they seek to establish their own righteousness (self righteousness).  He went on to say that they were not submitting themselves to YHWH's righteousness (Rom 10:3).  Like the Book says, The MOST HIGH resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 90--Moshe

 

 

Moshe (Moses), Revisited

 

In the last chapter, focus was directed on the man Iyov and his incredible trial and test when YHWH turned him over to the Adversary for punishment; so that his pride, vanity, self righteousness, self confidence and carnality could be crushed and destroyed.  This portion will continue the same vein with a look at the man Moshe and the very evident change which came upon his life in an apparent time of trial and testing. 

 

As the reader may recall from the Scriptures, Moshe was born a Hebrew slave in the land of Egypt some 3,500 years ago.  However, his life was to change significantly; when, as a three-month-old baby, his mother Jochebed placed him in an ark of bulrushes, daubed with bitumen and pitch--since she could hide him no longer from the Egyptians, who sought to kill all Hebrew boy babies (Ex 2:1-3). 

 

In a time of sadness and despair, his mother placed him and the ark on the Nile river, not knowing what the future would have in store for the boy.  So it came to pass that the daughter of Pharaoh, the ruler of Egypt, came with her maid servants to bathe at the river's edge.  She saw the ark and had it retrieved from the water.  On opening the vessel, she found the baby, who she took as her own son and named him Moshe. 

 

Consequently, Moshe grew up and was educated in the very household of the Pharaoh of Egypt.  Being the supposed son of royalty, he was in the direct line of succession to the Egyptian throne and with time might could have obtained that exalted position of power and authority over the people, both free and slave (Ex 2:10). 

 

While the Scriptures do not seem to give an abundance of information on the maturing Moshe, we can take what data is available in the Exodus account and draw some pretty good conclusions. 

 

 

He Was Proud 

 

Since Moshe was in the flesh, dominated by the usual carnal, human nature, and raised in the elevated and glorified status of a prince, it is evident that he did have some problems with pride and vanity, just as all of the rest of so-called humanity. 

 

From the Word, one can easily see that in the first forty years of his life, he could and did publicly talk and speak (Ex 2:13) and was not as careful, cautious and humble with his tongue as he later became.  In those earlier years of his life in Egypt, he does not seem to have been a timid person or particularly withdrawn in his conduct with others. 

 

In NT days, the famous Stephen was to later describe Moshe by saying that he was fair (White), learned in all of the wisdom of the Egyptians and mighty in words and deeds (Acts 7:20-22).  Manifestly, he must have been quite an orator and speaker. 

 

In fact, the available evidence is such to suggest that this man Moshe did actually have a very definite problem with pride and perhaps even with some presence of arrogance in his attempts to exercise authority over others, as he did with the Egyptian he killed and the two Hebrew men he tried to separate from fighting (Ex 2:11-14; Acts 7:24). 

 

Of course, a problem surfaced for him when he tried to help by intervening in the lives of his Hebrew countrymen.  In time, it caused him some concern, fear and anxiety.  When Pharaoh heard of it and sought to kill him, the situation precipitated his removal from Egypt to the desert at the age of forty years (Ex 2:15). 

 

 

But He Changed 

 

One can't be absolutely sure of the extent or intensity of the deprivations which Moshe faced in the wilderness or even how long he wandered as a destitute nomad before he eventually came into contact with the Midianite Jethro in the Sinai Peninsula (Ex 2:15). 

 

However, with his linkage to Jethro, perhaps his lot in life did improve some because he found some measure of safety, sustenance and even a wife in the household of Jethro (Ex 2:21). 

 

The Book reflects that Moshe was, in total, to spend the sum of forty years in exile in the wilderness--perhaps much of which obviously involved leading a fairly abased, downcast and humble existence tending sheep in a primitive and often very hostile environment (Ex 2:17).  For sure, things were substantially below the conditions and privileges which he enjoyed in Egypt for his first forty years. 

 

Over some part of the second forty years of his life, Moshe married Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro, and became the father of a minimum of two sons (Ex 2:22; 4:20).  One can't be sure of exactly when Moshe took Zipporah as his wife.  But it may have been sometime in the later half of his exile since there is reason to believe that one of his children was still quite small at the time he was 80 years old (Ex 4:25). 

 

In the primitive environment of living and subsisting in the desert wilderness of the Sinai, Moshe for sure underwent a transformation and change which has to be one of the most famous of all conversions, as recorded in the Scriptures. 

 

 

His Commission 

 

And it was in this condition that The MOST HIGH came to Moshe on Mount Sinai to designate and commission him to be His very personal representative and leader in the deliverance of Yisrael from Egyptian bondage (Ex 3:2-10). 

 

Interestingly, at the time of the dispensing of this enormous commission from YHWH, it is relevant to note that during the trial and test of the forty-year exile, the Hebrew Moshe had become an incredibly meek and humble person. 

 

In demonstrating what he had come to believe and think about himself, this man Moshe, who had once stood in Pharaoh's court, could only say that he was not an eloquent man, capable of talking publicly in a position of authority over Yisrael. 

 

As described in a former chapter, he could only say that he had an awkward tongue (Ex 4:10).  Again, as noted earlier, The EVERLIVING ONE appointed Moshe’s brother Aaron to be his mouthpiece (Ex 4:14-16).  This fantastic confession of humility and meekness from a once powerful, exalted man in Egypt has to be one of the most dramatic records of change and conversion in the life of a mortal human. 

 

In a way, this obviously heartfelt, sincere and honest expression by Moshe was to set the tone for most of the rest of his life (the next forty years), as he represented The ELOHIM and led the two million or so Israelites in the wilderness wanderings. 

 

 

The Jethro Visit, Revisited 

 

But there is still more to come on this extraordinary man.  In another illustration of true greatness, the qualities of humility and meekness manifest themselves in a most unique way.  As discussed in a preceding chapter, the Book is careful to outline a time when Aaron and the elders of Yisrael came together to eat a meal with Jethro, Moshe’s father-in-law (Ex 18:12). 

 

In the ensuing duration of this important event and time of fellowship, relaxation and enjoyment, the Word does not tell us where the man Moshe was.  The reader is left to wonder--where is Moshe?  This dilemma was answered in the just cited prior chapter.  But it is so fantastic that it needs mentioning again. 

 

In addressing this penetrating dilemma, “Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael,” one of the most ancient Jewish works of the Midrash, with comments and interpretations on the book of Exodus, has some most revealing comments. 

 

As quoted earlier, this interesting writing reflects that Moshe purposely was not named and identified as "sitting" and participating in the meal because he was actually the person "standing" and "serving" those in attendance. 

 

 

His Great Prayer 

 

Beyond this fantastic demonstration of evident humility and meekness in Moshe during the meal with Jethro, there is still a further classic case which is just about big enough in scope to blow the mind of an honest, thinking person.  For this example, one must turn to the second time that Moshe went up on Mount Sinai to receive the Word of YHWH after the Exodus. 

 

While on Sinai, for a period of forty days and nights to receive The MOST HIGH's instructions, the stubborn and rebellious people of Yisrael turned to Aaron and insisted that he prepare for them a molten calf image to serve as their god who brought them out of Egypt. 

 

Of course, Aaron complied with their stupid desires, made the image and proclaimed a festival (was it on a Sunday?) for them to eat, drink and make merry (Ex 32:1-6; Deut 9:12). 

 

This whole display of foolishness and iniquity angered The HIGHEST greatly and He proposed to Moshe that the Israelite people, collectively, be destroyed and that their name be blotted out from under heaven. 

 

Additionally, YHWH suggested that He would make of Moshe and his seed, a great nation and one which would fulfill His purposes and promises--as made to Avraham, Yitzhak and Yisrael (Ex 32:10; Deut 9:14).  Appropriately, Moshe was a bloodline Israelite and truly YHWH's Word and promises could be fulfilled completely in him and his line. 

 

Now, for most persons familiar with what all was involved, this proposal was an extraordinary offer of enormous import and magnitude.  Surely, most of us in our proud, vain, carnal states would have given our eye teeth and would have leaped at this opportunity of achieving the epitome of greatness by having YHWH's purposes and promises fulfilled in us and in our children. 

 

 

Moshe Was Different 

 

But interestingly, the mortal man Moshe was not exactly like the rest of us.  In this situation, he proved for all time what true greatness really is all about.  Dramatically, Moshe went on a complete fast, without food or water for forty days and nights, and prayed earnestly to YHWH to deliver the people and not to destroy them or change His Word and promises to them (Ex 32:11-13, 30-35; 33:1-34:28; Deut 9:18-20). 

 

Effectively, Moshe was turning down YHWH's offer of absolute greatness and praying that it remain with the rebellious, sinning Israelites.  At this point, we might pause to stop and ask who among us would have had the integrity and character that Moshe displayed at that extraordinary period of time in the history of man. 

 

Anyway we might try to cut it, this act of Moshe has to be one of the most exceptional of all time and perhaps second in scope only to YHWH YESHUA's own personal offer of Himself on Mount Moriah for the sins of the rebellious Adam kind some 1,500 years later. 

 

The bottom line on this self abasement by Moshe was that YHWH heard his prayer and responded favorably to it.  He relented and did not destroy the people or change His purpose in them (Ex 32:14; Deut 9:19).  

 

 

He Slipped and Fell 

 

Thus, while The ELOHIM has chosen to communicate to eternity the incredible humility and meekness of the great prophet Moshe, one must not lose sight of the fact that during the last forty years of his life, after the forty years of testing, change and conversion, Moshe tragically allowed carnal, wicked, human nature (evidently of pride and vanity) to surface its ugly head momentarily for a few seconds in a brief fit of anger on one sad occasion (as noted in earlier comments). 

 

Readers familiar with the Torah and the life of Moshe will recall at once what happened at Kadesh, in the wilderness of sin, when the people of Yisrael contended with Moshe over the lack of water (Num 20:1-5). 

 

So Moshe and Aaron appeared before The HIGHEST at the door of the tent of meeting and fell on their faces (Num 20:6).  YHWH thereupon told Moshe to assemble the people and to speak to the rock at that location to bring forth water (Num 20:7-8). 

 

However, in a short moment of anger, carelessness and stupidity, surely motivated by pride and vanity, Moshe told the assembled people "must we bring you water out of this rock?"  And thereupon, he smote the rock twice to cause the water to gush forth (Num 20:10-11). 

 

Not only here did he clearly disobey The EVERLASTING, but also he effectively stole credit from YHWH for producing the water with his unnecessary talking to the Israelites and claiming that it was him and Aaron who were bringing forth the water from the rock rather than The ELOHIM, as truth really existed. 

 

There is an ancient Jewish legend which has a revealing perspective on what happened to precipitate this outburst of anger form Moshe. 

 

The story is that Moshe smote the rock once and water began to trickle out.  The nearby people mockingly said “Son of Amran, is this water only for sucklings or infants just weaned from their mother’s milk?”  At that, Moshe lost his temper and struck the rock a second time to cause so much water that it swept everything before it (“The Book of Legends,” p. 93). 

 

This whole tragic situation was to ultimately cost Moshe his chance to enter the promised land (Num 20:12; Deut 32:51).  Moshe, the great leader and prophet of Yisrael, was to die at the end of the forty years of wandering on Mount Nebo in the land of Moab, just opposite Jericho (Deut 32:49-50).  He never got to enter and partake of the land across the Jordan.  He only saw it at a distance. 

 

 

He Was a Great Man 

 

Notwithstanding this terrible sin (perhaps of the chet classification--missing the mark, as described in a previous chapter) over the water at Kadesh, it is worthwhile to acknowledge that he was one of the greatest of men who has ever lived and whose attributes and qualities were described and discussed in the Scriptures. 

 

In this regard, it is useful to note that he was such an exceptional individual that The HIGHEST elected to tell us that Moshe was "very meek, above all the men on the face of the earth" (Num 12:3). 

 

And while one cannot be precise in determining what all happened to Moshe in the first forty years of exile from Egypt, one can be sure that the pomp and pride of power, authority, position, status, satisfaction, sufficiency and confidence in Egypt was crushed and destroyed from his personality, mind, spirit and heart.  By the time of his commission from The SOVEREIGN, he truly was a changed and converted man. 

 

Finally, the reader will be interested in some remarks from the book of Ben Sira (of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha) which sum up the greatness of Moshe and why The ELOHIM selected him--viz:  "For his faithfulness and meekness, He chose him out of all flesh, and He caused him to hear His voice and let him draw near unto thick darkness and He placed in his hand the commandment, even the Law of life and discernment" (Sir 45:4-5).