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).
To go to this Home Page, please click here: www.age-end.com