There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true. —Soren Kierkegaard. "…truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity–it is simply true and that is the end of it" – Os Guinness, Time for Truth, pg.39. “He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God’s providence to lead him aright.” – Blaise Pascal. "There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" – George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. We live in a “post-truth” world. According to the dictionary, “post-truth” means, “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Simply put, we now live in a culture that seems to value experience and emotion more than truth. Truth will never go away no matter how hard one might wish. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their low information tabloid reality show news with a distractional superficial focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting – this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." – George Orwell “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
The Lord hath been mindful of us: he will bless us.
I can set my seal to that first sentence. Cannot you? Yes, Jehovah has thought of us, provided for us, comforted us, delivered us, and guided us. In all the movements of His providence He has been mindful of us, never overlooking our mean affairs. His mind has been full of us—that is the other form of the word mindful. This has been the case all along and without a single break. At special times, however, we have more distinctly seen this mindfulness, and we would recall them at this hour with overflowing gratitude. Yes, yes, “the Lord hath been mindful of us.”
The next sentence is a logical inference from the former one. Since God is unchangeable, He will continue to be mindful of us in the future as He has been in the past; and His mindfulness is tantamount to blessing us. But we have here not only the conclusion of reason but the declaration of inspiration; we have it on the Holy Ghost’s authority—”He will bless us.” This means great things and unsearchable. The very indistinctness of the promise indicates its infinite reach. He will bless us after His own divine manner, and that forever and ever, Therefore, let us each say, “Bless the Lord, O my soul!”
The First Book of Samuel tells of the change which came over Israel at the close of the period of the “judges.” The twelve scattered tribes, driven by the warlike necessities of their situation, united in a closer bond and became a nation. The old loose semi-religious government of the judge was abandoned for the stronger though more despotic rule of a single arbitrary monarch. The last of the judges, the man in whose days and largely under whose guidance the change occurred, was Samuel.
The tale begins before the birth of Samuel, with his mother, Hannah. Hannah has long been regarded by both Jewish and Christian commentators as typifying the Church of God yearning for the coming of the Messiah, enduring deep misery while looking forward to a period of beatitude. So Hannah yearned for the birth of a son. She was a childless woman, wife of Elkanah, a wealthy Ephraimite. He had another, less loved wife, Peninnah, who had many children and who avenged herself for Elkanah’s preference by repeatedly mocking at Hannah’s childlessness. Hannah endured in silent sorrow; but all the joy of life was gone from her under this worst curse which could befall a Hebrew woman. Rachel in similar case had cried: “Give me children, or else I die.” Hannah vowed that, if she had a child, he should be devoted wholly to God’s service.
4:7 Cain had to be acceptable according to God’s condition. “Sin” (the term hattah, Heb., appearing here for the first time in the O.T.; see Rom. 7:13, note) is personified as a wild animal, lurking at the door of Cain’s life, desiring to enslave him. The Lord urges Cain to overpower and master sin (cf. 1 Cor. 10:13; James 1:14, 15).
4:7 crouching at the door. The Hebrew suggests a threatening demon crouching outside the door of a house. Perhaps there is also an allusion to the serpent lying in wait to strike the heel (3:15; cf. 1 Pet. 5:8).
desire. See note 3:16.
rule over it. Knowing Cain’s heart, God warns him not to submit to the murderous temptation of the devil (cf. 1 John 3:12). Although unregenerate humans can rule over the ground and flocks, they cannot finally master sin (1:26 note; Ps. 53:3; Rom. 8:7).
4:7will I not accept you The Hebrew phrase used here literally reads, “lifting up?” Since the phrase “lift up the face” is very common in the ot as an idiom for “showing favor” or “accepting” someone, this may be the intended meaning (although the word “face” is not present). If this meaning is chosen, the phrase implies that Cain did not do well and that his offering is deficient in some manner (see vv. 4–5). Alternatively, the word translated “lifting up” can also be used idiomatically to describe forgiveness, but this would not seem to fit the present context.
is crouching The Hebrew verb used here, ravats, normally indicates lying down, as in resting (29:2; Isa 11:6); it can also refer to lying in wait like a predator does when waiting for prey (Gen 49:9).
The Hebrew word ravats is also associated with the Akkadian word rabitsu, which in Mesopotamian religion is used in reference to demons that were believed to guard entrances to buildings. Thus, it is possible that sin is being personified here as a demonic force, waiting to pounce on Cain. This fits with the curse of the serpent who God says will strike at the heel of people (3:15).
its desire is for you The Hebrew word used here, teshuqah, also occurs in 3:16 in relation to Eve’s desire for her husband. Both here and in the curse of 3:16, the context is negative: The desire represents something to be resisted, as it is connected to sin.
4:7 do well … countenance be lifted up. God reminded Cain that if he had obeyed God and offered the animal sacrifices God had required, his sacrifices would have been acceptable. It wasn’t personal preference on God’s part, or disdain for Cain’s vocation, or the quality of his produce that caused God to reject his sacrifice. sin is crouching at the door. God told Cain that if he chose not to obey His commands, ever-present sin, crouched and waiting to pounce like a lion, would fulfill its desire to overpower him (cf. 3:16).
4:7 — “If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”
God told Cain that obedience always brings blessing, but Cain allowed his anger to lead him into terrible sin.
4:7 Because Cain’s jealous anger was incipient murder, God spoke to him in loving warning. Verse 7 may be understood in several ways:
1. “If you do well [by repenting], you will be able to look up again in freedom from anger and guilt. If you do not do well [by continuing to hate Abel], sin is crouching at your door, ready to destroy you. His [Abel’s] desire is for you [i.e., he will acknowledge your leadership] and you will rule over him” [i.e., if you do well].
2. “If you do well (or, as the Septuagint reads it, “If you offer correctly”) will you not be accepted?” The well-doing had reference to the offering. Abel did well by hiding himself behind an acceptable sacrifice. Cain did badly by bringing an offering without blood, and all his after-conduct was but the legitimate result of this false worship.
3. The RSV says, “If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.”
4. F. W. Grant says in his Numerical Bible, “If you do not well, a sin-offering croucheth or lieth at the door.” In other words, provision was made if he wanted it.
4:7 “sin is crouching at the door” In this verse sin is personified as a wild animal whose desire is to destroy (cf. 1 Pet. 5:8). There is a possible Akkadian connection with the word “crouching” which was used of the demonic (BDB 918, KB 1181, Qal PARTICIPLE). This shows the true nature of sin in our world.
■ “and its desire is for you” This same term “desire” (BDB 1003, KB 1802) is used in Gen. 3:16. It shows that the purpose of evil is our destruction (i.e. “to control” and “to dominate”).
■ “but you must master it” The VERB (BDB 605, KB 647) is a Qal IMPERFECT. This shows that we are not a puppet in the hand of evil, but we have the ability, with God’s help, to resist evil (cf. Eph. 6:13; James. 4:7; 1 Pet. 5:9), to repent and be restored! Cain was not bound by Adam’s sin (cf. Ezek. 18:2–4). We are affected by Adam and Eve’s rebellion, but we are responsible for our own choices.
7. In the Hebrew, accepted (7) is literally ‘a lifting up’ (cf. rvmg), an expression that can indicate a smiling as against a frowning (fallen, 6) face: cf. Numbers 6:26. The sense may be that the very look on Cain’s face gives him away; more probably it goes further, to promise God’s restoration (cf. 40:13) on a change of heart. The picture of sin … crouching at the door (rsv) is developed in the striking metaphor of taming a wild beast: so rsv, its desire is for you (Moffatt ‘eager to be at you’), but you must master it. The phrase is adapted from 3:16b, on which it throws back a sombre light.
7. If thou doest well. In these words God reproves Cain for having been unjustly angry, inasmuch as the blame of the whole evil lay with himself. For foolish indeed was his complaint and indignation at the rejection of sacrifices, the defects of which he had taken no care to amend. Thus all wicked men, after they have been long and vehemently enraged against God, are at length so convicted by the Divine judgment, that they vainly desire to transfer to others the cause of the evil. The Greek interpreters recede, in this place, far from the genuine meaning of Moses. Since, in that age, there were none of those marks or points which the Hebrews use instead of vowels, it was more easy, in consequence of the affinity of words to each other, to strike into an extraneous sense. However, as any one, moderately versed in the Hebrew language, will easily judge of their error, I will not pause to refute it. Yet even those who are skilled in the Hebrew tongue differ not a little among themselves, although only respecting a single word; for the Greeks change the whole sentence. Among those who agree concerning the context and the substance of the address, there is a difference respecting the word שאת, (seait,) which is truly in the imperative mood, but ought to be resolved into a noun substantive. Yet this is not the real difficulty; but, since the verb נשא, (nasa,) signifies sometimes to exalt, sometimes to take away or remit, sometimes to offer, and sometimes to accept, interpreters vary among themselves, as each adopts this or the other meaning. Some of the Hebrew Doctors refer it to the countenance of Cain, as if God promised that he would lift it up though now cast down with sorrow. Other of the Hebrews apply it to the remission of sins; as if it had been said, ‘Do well, and thou shalt obtain pardon.’ But because they imagine a satisfaction, which derogates from free pardon, they dissent widely from the meaning of Moses. A third exposition approaches more nearly to the truth, that exaltation is to be taken for honour, in this way, ‘There is no need to envy thy brother’s honour, because, if thou conductest thyself rightly, God will also raise thee to the same degree of honour; though he now, offended by thy sins, has condemned thee to ignominy.’ But even this does not meet my approbation. Others refine more philosophically, and say, that Cain would find God propitious, and would be assisted by his grace, if he should by faith bring purity of heart with his outward sacrifices. These I leave to enjoy their own opinion, but I fear they aim at what has little solidity. Jerome translates the word, ‘Thou shalt receive;’ understanding that God promises a reward to that pure and lawful worship which he requires. Having recited the opinions of others, let me now offer what appears to me more suitable. In the first place, the word שאת means the same thing as acceptance, and stands opposed to rejection. Secondly, since the discourse has respect to the matter in hand, I explain the saying as referring to sacrifices, namely, that God will accept them when rightly offered. They who are skilled in the Hebrew language know that here is nothing forced, or remote from the genuine signification of the word. Now the very order of things leads us to the same point: namely, that God pronounces those sacrifices repudiated and rejected, as being of no value, which are offered improperly; but that the oblation will be accepted, as pleasant and of good odour, if it be pure and legitimate. We now perceive how unjustly Cain was angry that his sacrifices were not honoured, seeing that God was ready to receive them with outstretched hands, provided they ceased to be faulty. At the same time, however, what I before said must be recalled to memory, that the chief point of well-doing is, for pious persons, relying on Christ the Mediator, and on the gratuitous reconciliation procured by him, to endeavour to worship God sincerely and without dissimulation. Therefore, these two things are joined together by a mutual connection: that the faithful, as often as they enter into the presence of God, are commended by the grace of Christ alone, their sins being blotted out; and yet that they bring thither true purity of heart.
And if thou doest not well. On the other hand, God pronounces a dreadful sentence against Cain, if he harden his mind in wickedness and indulge himself in his crime; for the address is very emphatical, because God not only repels his unjust complaint, but shows that Cain could have no greater adversary than that sin of his which he inwardly cherished. He so binds the impious man, by a few concise words, that he can find no refuge, as if he had said, ‘Thy obstinacy shall not profit thee; for, though thou shouldst have nothing to do with me, thy sin shall give thee no rest, but shall sharply drive thee on, pursue thee, and urge thee, and never suffer thee to escape.’ Hence it follows, that he not only raged in vain and to no profit; but was held guilty by his own inward conviction, even though no one should accuse him; for the expression, “sin lieth at the door,” relates to the interior judgment of the conscience, which presses upon the man convinced of his sin, and besieges him on every side. Although the impious may imagine that God slumbers in heaven, and may strive, as far as possible, to repel the fear of his judgment; yet sin will be perpetually drawing them back, though reluctant and fugitives, to that tribunal from which they endeavour to retire. The declarations even of heathens testify that they were not ignorant of this truth; for it is not to be doubted that, when they say, ‘Conscience is like a thousand witnesses,’ they compare it to a most cruel executioner. There is no torment more grievous or severe than that which is hence perceived; moreover, God himself extorts confessions of this kind. Juvenal says:—
“Heaven’s high revenge on human crimes behold;
Though earthly verdicts may be bought and sold,
His judge the sinner in his bosom bears,
And conscience racks him with tormenting cares.”
But the expression of Moses has peculiar energy. Sin is said to lie, but it is at the door; for the sinner is not immediately tormented with the fear of judgment; but, gathering around him whatever delights he is able, in order to deceive himself, he walks as in free space, and even revels as in pleasant meadows; when, however, he comes to the door, there he meets with sin, keeping constant guard; and then conscience, which before thought itself at liberty, is arrested, and receives double punishment for the delay.
And unto thee shall be his desire. Nearly all commentators refer this to sin, and think that, by this admonition, those depraved lusts are restrained which solicit and impel the mind of man. Therefore, according to their view, the meaning will be of this kind, ‘If sin rises against thee to subdue thee, why dost thou indulge it, and not rather labour to restrain and control it? for it is thy part to subdue and bring into obedience those affections in thy flesh which thou perceivest to be opposed to the will of God, and rebellious against him.’ But I suppose that Moses means something entirely different. I omit to notice that to the Hebrew word for sin is affixed the mark of the feminine gender, but that here two masculine relative pronouns are used. Certainly Moses does not treat particularly of the sin itself which was committed, but of the guilt which is contracted from it, and of the consequent condemnation. How, then, do these words suit, ‘Unto thee shall be his desire?’ There will, however, be no need for long refutation when I shall produce the genuine meaning of the expression. It rather seems to me a reproof, by which God charges the impious man with ingratitude, because he held in contempt the honour of primogeniture. The greater are the divine benefits with which any one of us is adorned, the more does he betray his impiety, unless he endeavours earnestly to serve the Author of grace to whom he is under obligation. When Abel was regarded as his brother’s inferior, he was, nevertheless, a diligent worshipper of God. But the first-born worshipped God negligently and perfunctorily, though he had, by the Divine kindness, arrived at so high a dignity; and, therefore, God enlarges upon his sin, because he had not at least imitated his brother, whom he ought to have surpassed as far in piety as he did in the degree of honour. Moreover, this form of speech is common among the Hebrews, that the desire of the inferior should be towards him to whose will he is subject; thus Moses speaks of the woman, (3:16,) that her desire should be to her husband. They, however, childishly trifle, who distort this passage to prove the freedom of the will; for if we grant that Cain was admonished of his duty in order that he might apply himself to the subjugation of sin, yet no inherent power of man is to be hence inferred; because it is certain that only by the grace of the Holy Spirit can the affections of the flesh be so mortified that they shall not prevail. Nor, truly, must we conclude, that as often as God commands anything we shall have strength to perform it, but rather we must hold fast the saying of Augustine, ‘Give what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt.’
7 God continues to speak to Cain. It is fair to say that this is one of the hardest verses in Genesis to translate and to understand. Skinner speaks for many commentators when he says that “every attempt to extract a meaning from the verse is more or less of a tour de force.”
Looking at the Hebrew of the verse, one detects immediately three oddities. First, what does one do with the fourth word in the verse, śeʾēṯ? In form it is an infinitive construct from nāśāʾ, “to lift up, raise,” but there is no following word to which it bears a construct relationship. There is a nomen regens but no nomen rectum! Thus the first few words read literally, “if you do well, a lifting up of … (?).” To be sure, there are a few instances where an infinitive construct acts as the nominative of the subject, but these are rare. Second, why is there lack of gender agreement between the subject and the predicate in ḥaṭṭāʾṯ (fem.) rōḇēṣ (masc. sing. participle), often translated “sin is crouching” (NIV; cf. RSV, NEB, AV)? Third, why are masculine pronominal suffixes used in both tešûqāṯô (translated above Its urge) and ʾattá timšol-bô(you are the one to master it) when the antecedent is ḥaṭṭāʾṯ(sin), which is feminine?
Scholars have sought to resolve these conundrums in the following ways. Some change the MT’s word order, placing ḥaṭṭāʾṯ, “sin,” after śeʾēṯ, “to lift up.” The phrase nāśāʾ ḥaṭṭāʾṯ then refers to the forgiveness of sin: “look, if you do well, there is forgiveness for sin.…” The main appeal of this suggestion is that it supplies a nomen rectum for śeʾēṯ. There is, however, no textual support for revising the word order. This suggestion may be a case of changing the text to conform to our understanding of Biblical Hebrew’s syntax.
Another approach is to insert words into the passage. For example, adding pānîm or pāneyḵā after śeʾēṯ enables one to translate: “if you do well, there is a lifting of the (or your) face.” This line then contrasts with the earlier falling of Cain’s face. If Cain refuses to capitulate to this moment of temptation, there can be a reversal of his feelings. He who now bows his head will be able to hold his head high.
A third position resorts to emending the text, both the consonants and the vocalization. Thus G. R. Driver makes the following five changes in the text. Following Gunkel and some ancient versions, he emends śeʾēṯ to tiśśāʾ. He supplies pāneyḵā after tiśśāʾ. He reads ḥaṭṭāʾṯ rōḇēṣ as dittography for ḥaṭṭaʾṯ tirbaṣ. He emends the Qal timšol into the Niphal timmāšel. Finally, he changes the two masculine pronominal suffixes into feminine ones. Thus Driver’s translation is: “If thou doest well, dost thou not lift up (thy countenance)? But if thou doest not well, sin will be crouching at the door, and its impulse is towards thee, and thou shalt be ruled by it.” The fact that such a translation requires at least five changes in the MT makes it unlikely.
A fourth approach is to emend only the vocalized text. Thus Dahood changes MT śeʾēṯ to šāʾattā (assimilation from šāʾantā, the 2nd masc. sing. perfect of šāʾan, “to be at ease”). He translates: “Look, if you have behaved well you will be at ease. But if you have not, sin will be lurking at your door.” The root to which Dahood refers—šʾn—is a rare one, occurring only in Job 3:18 and Jer. 48:11. In other words, he is prepared to reject a normal form of a very popular verb and replace it with an unusual form of a very rare verb. Such a proposal seems to compound the problem rather than resolve it.
Can sense be made out of the verse without alterations of any kind? Following the lead of Andersen, we suggest that the interrogative ha, though appearing only once, covers both the first ʾim (“if”) clause and the second one. Thus God’s speech in v. 7 consists of two rhetorical questions and one statement.
Hebrew śeʾēṯ then takes on nominative force, meaning “acceptance” (Gen. 19:21) or “forgiveness” (50:17), two common meanings of the verb nāśāʾ. As such, śeʾēṯ is an abbreviation of śeʾēṯ pānîm. There is no real problem reconciling feminine ḥaṭṭāʾṯ with masculine rōḇēṣ. Speiser has a long note to the effect that Heb. rōḇēṣ is to be connected with Akk. rabiṣum, “demon,” and it is rōḇēṣ that supplies the proper antecedent for the two masculine suffixes. Speiser goes on to say that in Mesopotamian demonology the rabiṣum could be either a benevolent being that lurks at the entrance of a building to protect the occupants, or just the opposite, a malevolent being that lurks at the entrance of a building to threaten the occupants. To be sure, the normal meaning of Heb. rāḇaṣ is “to lie down (in rest).” See, for example, the verb in this sense in connection with sheep (Gen. 29:2), with other animals in tranquility together (Isa. 11:6), and with people (Isa. 14:30; Ezek. 34:14). Gen. 49:9 is the one other clear instance, besides Gen. 4:7, that permits the translation “lie in wait for, lurk.” Little attention has been given to the fact that, in Hebrew, nouns that are feminine morphologically are sometimes treated as masculine. The best example of this point is the title given to the author of Ecclesiastes, certainly a male figure; he is called qōheleṯ, a feminine noun, and this title is always coupled with a masculine form of the verb.
Its urge is toward you. Sin’s urge is aimed at Cain. The word for urge here, tešûqá, is the same word used in the previous chapter for Eve’s feelings toward Adam (3:16). Similarly, what Cain can do to sin—you are the one to master [mšl] it—is described with the same verb used for Adam’s actions with Eve (“he shall be master over you,” 3:16). This is one illustration of the number of key phrases and ideas that are repeated in these chapters. Just as Adam and Eve knew they were naked (3:7), Adam knew his wife (4:1). God’s question “where is your brother?” (4:9) balances his earlier question, “where are you?” (3:9). There is a cursing from the earth for both Adam and Cain (3:17; 4:11). Both sinners are banished from God’s presence (3:24; 4:14), to east of Eden (3:24; 4:16). Such parallels, and there are many more, suggest either an original unity for chs. 3 and 4 or an unusually skilled redactor who has given the two chapters the guise of unity through the creation of verbal parallels. If the latter is the more cogent explanation, then those who inherited these two narratives have so changed the records as to make the original, if ever recoverable, unrecognizable. It is highly unlikely that the redactors tampered with their texts that drastically.
Cain is not to give in to this lurking sin. He is to master [timšol] it. The sense of the Hebrew form (2nd masc. sing. imperfect) is ambiguous; it may be read as a promise (“you shall master it”), as a command (“you must master it”), or as an invitation (“you may master it”). Although each of these is quite possible, notice that Cain does have a choice. He is not so deeply embedded in sin, either inherited or actual, that his further sin is determined and inevitable. The emphasis here is not on Cain as a constitutional sinner, one utterly depraved, but on Cain as one who has a free choice. When facing the alternatives, he is capable of making the right choice. Otherwise, God’s words to him about “doing well” would be meaningless and comic. Should he so desire, Cain is able to overcome this creature who now confronts him. The text makes Cain’s personal responsibility even more focused by its use of the initial emphatic pronoun: “you, you are to master it.”
 Criswell, W. A., Patterson, P., Clendenen, E. R., Akin, D. L., Chamberlin, M., Patterson, D. K., & Pogue, J., eds. (1991). Believer’s Study Bible (electronic ed., Ge 4:7). Thomas Nelson.
“Praise the LORD, who is my rock. He trains my hands for war and gives my fingers skill for battle.” Psalm 144:1 (NLT)
Every day you will face challenges that try to move you away from God’s plan and purpose for your lives. You will be tempted to act out of character. You will be tempted to give in to the pride of your own hearts; relying on yourselves rather than fully relying on God. Unfortunately, all of these decisions will put you in a position to lose the battle.
If you are to see victory over the obstacles you are currently facing, it will take you learning the battle strategy from the one who knows best. God has strategic weapons to dismantle every attack of the enemy. We find this true throughout the Old Testament readings.
Joshua won the battle of Jericho by marching around the city 7 times, then releasing a loud shout. Gideon was told he had too many men for the battle. He was then instructed to take 300 men with him. As they went blowing their trumpets, the Lord confused the opposing army and they began to fight themselves. Jehoshaphat was told by the Prophet of the Lord, you will not have to fight in this battle, the Lord will fight for you. They proceeded to battle worshipping their God and the other army began to destroy themselves.
As you can see from these accounts, God does not fight like we fight. His weapons are much greater than ours. They are weapons of mass destruction; tearing down every stronghold, piercing between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires.
Today, instead of cowering down to the enemy of doubt, fear and insecurity. Instead of giving into the temptation to quit. Instead of allowing the whispers of the naysayers stop you in your tracks, I encourage you to fight back! You must stand and gird yourself with the full armour of God. Endure hardness as a good soldier and see those very obstacles demolished in your path.
When you allow God to be your defense, your strong tower, He can perfect all things that concern you. After all, He has already equipped you with the weapons that work; prayer, worship, and the sword of the spirit which is the Word of God.
Do your battle on your knees today. Do your battle in worship. God will fight for you.
Father, thank You for teaching our hands to war. Too often, we fight from a place of our own strength not fully relying on, leaning into, and trusting You. As we begin to change course, thank You for Your patience with us. Thank You for your power being made perfect in our times of weaknesses. May we look to You when we are weak to help us win the victory in every area of our lives. In Jesus name Amen.
Most Holy Father, guard my heart from temptation and my life from sin. I want to serve you with wholehearted devotion.
“No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.” 1 Corinthians 10:13
TEMPTATION… We’ve all been there. Satan’s silver bullet designed just for us personally. “No one will ever know; besides it won’t hurt anybody!” some mysterious voice sounding like our own whispers. Even if those two statements were true, and they never really are, it would matter because something inside of us caved in to what we knew was wrong. One line of defense is to simply remind ourselves we are not alone in this temptation — others have faced it and conquered it, so we can too, by God’s help and the power of his Holy Spirit.
Most Holy Father, guard my heart from temptation and my life from sin. I want to serve you with wholehearted devotion. Forgive me for my past sin, and by your grace and through your word, strengthen me with your Holy Spirit so that I may overcome the temptations that Satan uses to separate me from you. Through my Protector and Redeemer I pray. Amen.
The story of Ruth is told at such length in the Bible because this Moabite woman, this stranger from outside of Israel, became the ancestress of David, Israel’s foremost king; and from David’s descendants was to arise the long expected Messiah.
The mother of Boaz had been Rahab, the Canaanite woman who saved the spies of Joshua and was adopted into Israel. Now the wife of Boaz was also an outsider. Yet so favorably had Ruth impressed the elders of Bethlehem that when Boaz announced his intention of wedding her, there was no opposition but only warmest blessing. “The Lord make the woman that is come into thy house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel.”
So they were wedded, and Ruth bore a son, “and they called his name Obed.” When Ruth placed her babe in his grandmother’s arms, the aged Naomi felt that her cup of happiness was once more full. Descendants, be it remembered, were a Hebrew woman’s dearest wish. So all the women of Israel rejoiced with Naomi, saying, “And he shall be unto thee, a restorer of thy life, and a nourisher of thine old age: for thy daughter-in-law, which loveth thee, which is better to thee than seven son, hath borne him.”
Arctic chill to bring 30s for first time in 11 years to Miami Floridians living Miami will be grabbing the blankets this weekend, as the coldest temperatures in over 11 years arrive Sunday morning. The chill will sure be felt with a low bottoming out to 38 degrees. The last time temperatures dropped below 40 degrees in Miami was on Dec. 28, 2010.
Attorney Renz’s Whistleblower, DoD Database Examined, Reveals They Knowingly Poisoned Troops Just within the last year, there have been numerous doctors, nurses, and experts coming forward, warning about the dangers of the COVID-19 drug that is currently being promoted all around the world. In America, Joe Biden even tried to force the jab on America’s workforce. Luckily, the Supreme Court blocked his mandate. But while the media continues to circulate news surrounding the Biden administration, COVID-19, and the supposed miracle drug, what appears to be one of the most significant pieces of data is simply being ignored.
“We are not going to vaccinate our way” out of the Covid-19 pandemic, Rep. Greg Murphy says
Murphy, a practicing surgeon, says the GOP Doctors Caucus is “infuriated” with the White House and its chief medical adviser, Dr. Anthony Fauci, for promoting Covid-19 vaccinations too heavily while ignoring potential therapeutic treatments.
“I’m a vice chair of the GOP Doctors Caucus. We are infuriated – infuriated – that this has all been about vaccination. Fauci has been, ‘Vaccination, vaccination, vaccination,’ rather than therapeutics,” Murphy told Breitbart News on Friday, adding that he believes there is no way for the US to “vaccinate our way” out of the pandemic.
“There should be something that we should be able to write and prescribe that’s not $800 a pill for people who test positive to try to get them better, not only keep them out of the hospital, but get them better, get them back to work, and let society function, I think this is a major problem,” Murphy said. He suggested drugs like ivermectin – most famously taken by podcaster Joe Rogan when he tested positive for Covid – should be studied to find alternate treatments to Covid to avoid continuous vaccines and subsequent booster shots.
Public trust in health officials has deteriorated during the pandemic, Murphy went on to say, and he puts the majority of the blame on Fauci’s “arrogance.”
“Fauci, I’m going to blame [him] as the biggest reason, his arrogance, [that] the trust of the American people in health care, and in doctors, in particular, has plummeted,” the North Carolina Republican said.
The GOP Doctors Caucus is made up of 18 congressional members who are also medical providers, and focuses on policy related to healthcare.
While Fauci has remained popular among Democrats, his approval ratings have plummeted among Independents and Republicans as the infectious diseases expert has become a target of critics of vaccine mandates and pandemic-era lockdown orders.
The GOP Doctors Caucus even previously requested an apology from Fauci for referring to Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) as a “moron” in a hot mic moment following a back and forth about the doctor’s financial disclosures.
Fauci argued at the time that all of the information the senator was requesting was publicly available. The White House medical adviser has maintained that vaccines are the best way to combat Covid-19 and to prevent mutations.
National security forces and intelligence professionals have been roped in to augment police ranks as the Freedom Convoy reaches Ottawa
The Canadian government has mobilized police and national security forces to bolster the police presence in Ottawa as ‘Freedom Convoy’ truckers protesting vaccine mandates make their way into the national capital. Around 50,000 truckers are thought to be part of the group, which will organize demonstrations over the weekend.
Claiming signs of “flagrant extremism” were being displayed by some protesters, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino told CBC News on Friday that various law enforcement bodies and members of the “intelligence community” were readying themselves to deal with potential threats.
He told the public broadcaster that “boundaries” would be drawn between free speech and risks to public safety, adding that the convoy was “not about freedom” and “certainly not about truckers.” Among the signs of extremism Mendicino pointed to were protesters allegedly equating vaccine mandates with Nazi policies, displaying US Confederate flags, and inciting the violent overthrow of the government.
Canada’s trucker convoy has arrived near Parliament Hill, Ottawa.
Meanwhile, the Ottawa Police Service revealed that its ranks would be augmented with officers from the Toronto, London, York and Durham regions, and from the Ontario Provincial Police. On Friday, Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly described the situation as “unique, fluid, risky, and significant,” and added that violence would not be tolerated.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau – against whom a lot of the anger is apparently personally directed – echoed the concerns about the potential for violence, telling the Canadian Press that a “small group of people … are posing a threat to themselves, to each other, to Canadians.”
However, convoy organizers have warned participants that the “movement is a peaceful protest” and does “not condone any acts of violence.” According to the CBC, one of those listed as a protest leader, B.J. Dicher, has warned demonstrators not to go into government buildings, show disrespect to police, make “any type of threat,” or escalate the tense situation.
One of the key figures in the convoy, Tamara Lich, has reportedly stated in Facebook videos that the protesters will not leave Ottawa until their demands are met. However, she has also called on demonstrators and supporters to obey the law and not make trouble.
The Freedom Convoy’s primary objective was to pressurize the Trudeau government into dropping rules requiring truck drivers to be vaccinated so as to avoid a 14-day quarantine after crossing the border from the US. The protest has apparently since expanded to cover other public health policies as well.
Republicans are demanding that the White House release a transcript of President Joe Biden’s conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, after unconfirmed reports alleged that Biden told Zelensky that Kyiv would soon be “sacked” by Russian forces.
This week has been eye-opening. Even for me – and I’m the guy who has warned for over a year, in commentary after commentary, and often 3 hours a day on my nationally-syndicated radio show, that the Covid vaccine is dangerous and deadly and will lead to catastrophe.
I stuck my neck out like no other talk show host in America to warn the vaccine would not prevent illness, in fact it would damage the immune system – thereby causing more illness and death. And not just from Covid-19, but also injuries and death directly from the Covid vaccine itself.
Eight months ago, I warned it was time to suspend the vaccine program, pending an investigation of the mounting deaths, grievous injuries and permanent disabilities. I titled my commentary, “What if this experimental Covid Shot is Killing People? Don’t Americans Have a Right to Know?”
Four months ago, I was courageous enough to scold New York Times medical reporters about the unfolding disaster that they have ignored. I titled my commentary, “What I Just Told the New York Times About the Complete Failure and Disaster of the Covid Vaccine.”
Three months ago, I was the first to warn that Americans were dropping in record numbers of heart attacks, strokes and blood clots. I titled my commentary, “If the Vaccine is So Great, Why are So Many People Dropping Dead?”
But even I was shocked by the plethora of stories coming out just in the past this week, from all corners of the world, proving the vaccines are a terrible failure, and are causing a mass die-off.
Here is a quick look at the FACTS that have come pouring out of the closet just in the past week:
*Israel is the most vaccinated major nation in the world. Almost the entire population is quadruple vaccinated. Yet right now Israel is #1 in the world for Covid infections. Over one half of one percent of their entire population is testing positive for Covid PER DAY.
*In Germany the most draconian Covid mandates and restrictions in the world were sold to the public with false data. Just like in America, the German government labeled this a “Pandemic of the Unvaccinated.” They claimed up to 90% of the infected and dead were unvaccinated. Newspaper investigations just found that none of this was true. The government simply classified every sick or dying person as “unvaxxed.” Government officials are apologizing, blaming the “mistake” on a “software error.”
*In Albert, Canada the government published, then quickly deleted health data exposing the fact that almost 60% of the Covid deaths classified as “unvaccinated” were actually among the vaccinated. It turns out everyone who got sick, hospitalized or died within two weeks of getting any vaccine (the first jab, or second, or third) was counted as “unvaccinated.”
I’ll bet you didn’t know the CDC plays the exact same trick here in the USA. They know most of the Covid deaths and injuries, not to mention deaths from the vaccine itself (mostly heart attacks) will occur within 14 days of any jab. So, everyone that gets sick or dies in that period is counted as “unvaccinated.”
*The most perfect control group ever is the US military. Every young soldier got the Covid vaccine in the past year. To follow the results is the very definition of SCIENCE. Military whistleblowers have come forward with Department of Defense medical data showing since the start of the vaccine program cancer is up about 300% among military members; female infertility is up 500%; miscarriages are up by 300%, and there is an astronomical 1000% increase in neurological disorders from 82,000 to 863,000 in one year.
These are young men and women who were in perfect health…until the vaccines. The vaccines are literally crippling our national defense.
*One more control group of formerly healthy young men and women- FIFA soccer players in the EU. Deaths from cardiac arrest increased by 500% in 2021. An astounding 183 professional athletes and coaches collapsed “suddenly” in 2021.
*Worst of all is the news from the CDC that non-Covid deaths in the age range of 18 to 49 increased by 40% in the past year. No one has ever seen anything like this. Why are working age Americans dying in record numbers? Only one thing changed in 2021- vaccine mandates at the workplace.
The real story these numbers tell is we are experiencing a ”Pandemic of the Vaccinated.” The vaccine is doing catastrophic damage, but governments, politicians and bureaucrats the world over have falsely labeled the vaccinated who are sick and dying as “unvaccinated.” And the media covers-up the truth like it’s Hunter Biden’s laptop.
This is the greatest scam in world history. It would make Bernie Madoff blush.
Wayne Allyn Root is known as “the Conservative Warrior.” Wayne’s new book, “The Great Patriot Protest & Boycott Book” is a #1 bestseller. . Wayne is host of the nationally- syndicated “Wayne Allyn Root: Raw & Unfiltered” on USA Radio Network, daily from 6 PM to 9 PM EST and the “WAR RAW” podcast. Visit ROOTforAmerica.com, or listen live at http://usaradio.com/wayne-allyn-root/ or “on demand” 24/7 at iHeartRadio.com.
Conservatives are digging up a very, very inconvenient part of President Joe Biden’s past as he prepares to pick the first black woman to be nominated to the Supreme Court. […] The post appeared first on The Western Journal .
The UK government’s behavioral insights team will reportedly be investigated over claims of using ‘fear, shame and scapegoating’ to influence public
A parliamentary committee is reportedly set to investigate “scare ads” created by the UK government’s shadowy ‘behavioural insights’ team to “nudge” the public into obeying Covid-19 restrictions. The move comes amid concerns about the “grossly unethical” use of the unit to “inflate fear levels.”
The House of Commons’ Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee is expected to probe the so-called “nudge unit” as part of an ongoing investigation into government activities during the pandemic, The Telegraph reported.
Tory MP William Wragg, who chairs the committee, told the paper that the “central issue is how ‘nudge’ sits within parliamentary democracy and ministerial accountability.”
According to The Telegraph, the committee received a letter from a group of 40 psychologists this week, which warned that it was “highly questionable whether a civilised society should knowingly increase the emotional discomfort of its citizens as a means of gaining their compliance.”
Government scientists deploying fear, shame and scapegoating to change minds is an ethically dubious practice.
The signatories reportedly criticized the use of dramatic adverts featuring slogans such as “If you go out you can spread it, people will die.” One such ad had a close-up photo of an intensive-care patient wearing an oxygen mask, with the caption: “Look her in the eyes and tell her you never bend the rules.”
The use of “images of the acutely unwell in intensive care units” and the “macabre mono focus on the number of Covid-19 deaths without mention of mortality from other causes” were also said to have been condemned by the group, which warned of unintended consequences.
“Shaming and scapegoating have emboldened some people to harass those unable or unwilling to wear a face covering,” they reportedly wrote, adding that the “inflated fear levels” and “strategically-increased anxieties” had “[discouraged] many from seeking help for other illnesses.”
The letter also apparently cited a government memo from March 2020, which warned that a “substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened” by the virus and called for “hard-hitting, emotional messaging” to target the “complacent.”
But an unnamed government spokesperson told the Daily Mail that Downing Street had followed the advice of scientists and taken the “right measures at the right time” to tackle Covid-19. They added the government had used “every means possible” to inform the public about the severity of Covid-19.
Established by David Cameron’s coalition government in 2010, the ‘nudge unit’ is apparently designed to apply scientific principles to subtly influence public behavior without the need for legislation. Although its handiwork has been visible in government ads, The Telegraph noted that its operations are shrouded in secrecy.
The ruling class has been straight-up lying about this being a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” as well, considering those who took the shots are more likely to be hospitalized or die than people who are unvaccinated.
The data showed a rate of infection of 866 per 100,000 people for the double vaccinated and 481 per 100,000 for the boosted, or triple vaccinated. The unvaccinated had a rate of infection of 413 per 100,000. The death rate from COVID is drastically different too. The death rate of those who have had two shots is about 12 per 100,000 which is more than 50% higher than the rate for the unvaccinated.
Mainstream media is finally leaking information here and there telling people the truth about these shots and the CDC has admitted they don’t stop transmission.
CDC Director: “What Vaccines Can’t Do Anymore Is Prevent Transmission”
Earlier this month, the European Union’s top health agency warned that getting boosted every four months could harm the immune system’s ability to fight off the disease. The European Medicines Agency advised countries instead to mirror the seasonal influenza vaccination strategy tied to the onset of the cold season. -WND