“Write the vision and make it plain, so that those who read it may run with it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time, and at the end it will speak and not lie; even though it may tarry, wait for it, for it will surely come. (Hab. 2:2, 3)

Although the appointed time of which Habakkuk speaks remains a mystery, its importance is underlined by the following reference. — “But of that day and time, no one knows; not the angels in Heaven, nor even the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36-44) For that reason I would argue that while describing separate events, they are nonetheless connected, as one precedes the other. What Habakkuk is describing is in effect the lull before the storm, a seemingly interminable time of waiting, in faith, for the vision to occur. Prophetically it’s a given; the vision is an ordained event, but only for those alive on earth at that time, waiting in faithful anticipation of its occurrence. Apparently, it’s concurrent while being preparatory to the “The Day of Wrath,” a day wherein God’s patience finally gives way to judgement.

Yet, while the Church is quick to read: “God has not appointed us to wrath, but salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thes. 5:9), for the vast majority of Christians it may only be a “stay of execution,” as their faith, like their baptismal water remains somewhat tepid. As the Apostle Paul said: “Into what then were you baptized?” — Unto repentance by water, through the baptism of John, or by fire through the baptism of Jesus, and the anointing of the Holy Spirit, for service. In consideration of the fact, the preceding reference might better be read as – God has not appointed us as believers to suffer the wrath to come, as we are servants of the Most High God, to work according to His purpose in leading many souls to salvation before that fateful day.

Yet, what about Habakkuk’s vision? While we’ve touched on its intended audience, Last Days believers, I believe that the vision will not only be informative and instructive, but compelling, a test of faith, requiring a direct response, through personal action. Interestingly the scenario described reminds me very much of a vision I had back in 2000.

Having been asked to preach at a little Indian church on a reservation somewhere in the outback of Nevada, I had only just begun when an elderly Indian woman jumped straight up, raising her arms and dancing in place, while at the same time praising God in her own language. Those who could understand what she was saying were dumbstruck, as her testimony was only secondary to her activity, living proof that she had in fact been healed from some infirmity. Yet that was only the beginning, as thankfulness began to give way to what one might call a reverential fear in anticipation of what would come next. Nothing short of pandemonium I might say, as individuals were being healed right and left in what might be described as a pop-corn revival. – They went down only to pop back up again, transformed. With everybody running around, it was inevitable that their cellphones would soon be ringing…off the hook!

Not surprisingly the word was getting out, and as the afternoon wore on and people began arriving the sagebrush out back became a makeshift parking lot that was filling up fast, with Indians in pickup trucks, lots of Indians. You could both feel and see a spiritual groundswell began to build, to the point that it began to back up traffic on the old two-lane which stretched off to the horizon. At some point, I heard someone say: “They’ve called out the State Troopers!” But to what effect was anyone’s guess, as the powers that be had only the worn out repertoire of the past to draw upon. What to do, arrest the Indians and corral them again on reservations, forbid them to speak their own language and practice their native religion, bus their kids to Christian boarding schools for another attempt of “forced assimilation?” They did all that and then some back when, and yet, the Indian still remains…and Indian, and necessarily so, as the Red Man has a supernatural purpose in Creators plan. – “If Native America ever awakens to the vision that God placed within them as a people, they will run with it, and when they do, a multitude will follow, a revival that no power on earth will be able to stop.”

“Life without war is impossible, either in nature or in grace. And whether physical, mental or spiritual, the fact is that the basis of all life is antagonism.” (Chambers)

In following the warriors road, many of our Veterans have become its victims, attested to by the simple fact of the rising number of PTSD cases and suicides. And whether its effects are physical or mental, trauma knows no bounds, having symptoms ranging from the commonplace to the complex. Often central to questions of “moral injury,” regarding just cause and mortality, it follows then that something other than standard practice is often required to effect recovery. Hozho, a Navajo (Dene) word, referring to balance and harmony, connotes to just such a process, one which recognizes that recovery must include the agency of the spirit. Routinely overlooked in modern medicine, “spiritual-wellness” remains of significant importance in Native American healing traditions, most of which retain purification rites and ceremonies to cleanse the human spirit, which is seen as foundational to recovery. Interestingly, a similar emphasis can also be found in Asian traditions, as expressed for instance in the historical Bushido Code of feudal Japan. Apart from being instrumental in the formulaic development of the Samurai class, Bushido served not only as a code of ethics for the warrior society, but a spiritual treatise which promoted the “inner work” required in remaining “fit-for-service.” In addition, we can also find parallels in Sun Tsu’s The Art of War, with one commentator noting: “What is notable throughout and what raises this work far above that of a simple military manual is not only the elegance of its prose, but the underlying Taoist principles; the depth and meaning of which serves to impart an element of mysticism which is no doubt responsible for its continuing and universal appeal.”

That said, the U.S. Military and its Allies, after more than twenty years engaged in the Global War on Terror (GWOT), and a disproportional number of veterans having suffered the negative effects of multiple deployments, not to mention personal injuries to themselves or their families, many Vets struggle in readjusting to civilian life, as well as in finding the help they need in dealing with mental or physical complications arising from combat. Yet due to the nature of combat itself, with its overwhelming emphasis on the physical over that of the spiritual, it’s little wonder that parallels can be found within the Veterans Administration itself? And in that regard it raises and even greater concern – the VA’s lack of confidentiality when it comes to the reporting of mental trauma cases to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). A systemic issue that not only serves in adding further complexity to a process which begs for simplicity, but has left veterans so disillusioned with the process that their actively seeking alternatives. And they’re out there! Whether found in Native American healing traditions, clinically administered psychotropic programs, or the increasingly popular wilderness experience, where the natural world is often the best physician. Of some interest then is the fact that these alternatives all have one thing in common, an emphasis on spiritual solutions for psychosomatic problems. This in turn begs the question. If the common link for the creature that is man can be found in the realm of the spirit, it follows that restoring a connection with one’s own spirit, and the God of creation, should be of primary interest to anyone seeking recovery and restoration in a holistic sense.

The question of moral duplicity often arises in relation to war, particularly when it comes to the political end-game, with the debacle of the US and Allied forces withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 serving as a prime example. Apart from leaving an untold number of Afghan allies literally hanging, not the mention the billions of dollars spent to no good advantage, it speaks volumes about the use of disproportional force in pursuing a so-called lasting peace. Ultimately playing out in contradiction to that intended purpose, it might be well be worth asking what about its impact on military morale, as well as the enlisted’s growing disenchantment with business as usual? As a nation founded upon the mantra of “liberty and justice for all,” potential recruits now give pause to question just what they might be getting themselves into?

Yet, while there may be an undercurrent of disillusionment with America’s faltering lack of foresight and leadership, there are those who, while acknowledging the fact, see in that problem a unique opportunity; believing that they can make a difference by choosing the honorable path rather than one that may only lead to further disappointment. That, and the very fact that a nation comprised of every race, culture and creed could be fashioned into a singular people is not only something worth celebrating, but defending. Yet going a step further, when we consider those select few within our military that have closed ranks to uphold and defend those very principles, they are not unlike the advance guard of the Lord’s host itself, preparing the ground for the main event, while wreaking havoc on our adversaries in the interim. A scenario which in fact has biblical support. – “…From the days of John the Baptist until now there has been war in Heaven, while on earth the Kingdom continues to advance, albeit violently, as violent men lay hold of it. (Mat. 11:12) 

And yet, while it can be argued that the best defense is a good offense, many of our soldiers have returned home to find increasing divisions over the future of our military and this country. The question then arises, how can hard men stand idle when necessity demands an appropriate response? And in that regard, perhaps it was Churchill who said it best: “We shall fight them on the beaches and on the landing grounds; we shall fight them in the fields, we shall fight them in the streets and in the hills; we shall never surrender!”

Although the Hydra has many heads, its nature remains the same. Its origins are of the Pit, while the agent of chaos itself is the false pretender and not the natural heir. And, while God may have brought us safely home, it was not for nothing that we survived. And with a sword in one hand and a plowshare in the other, we’ll defend this “land of the free and home of the brave” until the eventful harvest.

“When the Most High divided mankind, he set the boundaries of their lands according to the number of those in his heavenly court.  (Deut. 32:8 NLT) 

Regarding the above reference, some may find it of interest to note that while the majority of biblical translations regarding Deut. 32:8 are consistent with the Hebrew translation, which reads: “When the supreme one gave the nation’s their inheritance, when He separated the children of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the Children of Israel,” (Deut. 32:8 / Chumash, Stone Ed.), there are exceptions, such as that found in the NLT, or New Living Translation. This can be problematic, as it not only sows confusion in the minds of many as to the purported innerancy of the Christian Bible, but can serve to compromise our willingness to contend for the Faith “sola scriptura,” or by scripture alone.

Additionally, further attempts at clarification can become quite convoluted, which is the case with both of the preceding translations. Essentially, the context of Deut. 32:8 is in reference to the the survivors of the antediluvian saga, Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, Japheth and their families, who in turn became the new progenitors of the human race. And, while the Hebrew translation describes the distribution of mankind according to their appointed territories, it renders the verse somewhat obfuscate by virtue of emphasis on: “the children of Israel,” making it appear as if they only beneficiaries, when actually they are only one of the beneficiaries, as decedents of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (Gen. 11:10), through the lineage of Shem, a son of Noah. Again, while at first glance, Deut. 32:8 seems to be referring to humanity as a whole, when it comes to the division of the territory in question, it not only appears vague, but is somewhat misleading. And, while the general consensus maintains that the verse is in reference to “The Table of Nations (Origines Gentium), which are seventy in number, it appears that the author(s) of the Hebrew translation have reached a different conclusion.

Compounding the problem, there remain alternate explanations, such as that found in the Jewish Midrashic literature, which attributes this division of mankind and, the number of territories in question to the Tower of Babel epic, as recorded in Genesis 11:1-9. In response to the tower’s architect, Nimrod, and his apparent motive: “(it was)…to ascend to heaven in order to wage war on God. (Midrash / Sages) Accordingly, “Hashem came down to look at the city and tower which the son’s of men had built, saying: Behold, they are one people, and with one language for all. And now, should it not be withheld from them all that they proposed to do? Come, let us descend then and there confuse their language, that they should no longer understand one another.” (Gen. 11:5-8) It is said then that Hashem had asked for assistance from seventy angels, each to be appointed as overseer over the individual territory appointed to each of the original seventy nations. Yet, it didn’t quite turn out that way, as these so called “ministering spirits” ultimately succumbed to their own sense of self-importance, in turn contending among themselves for hegemony, through territorial expansion and power, but increased recognition of their exalted status and worship from their earthly admirers.

Interestingly, in defense of this somewhat novel explanation, we find confirmation in the book of Daniel. “For from the first day that you set your heart to understand and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard and I was dispatched from heaven in response. Yet, the prince of the kingdom of Persia resisted me for twenty-one days, until Michael, one of the chief princes (Elohim) came to my aid. Saying: now, having completed my mission here, I must return to contend with the prince of Persia (again), after which the prince of Greece will also come.” (Dan. 10:12-13, 20) This in turn leads us back to the initial subject at hand, the apparent contradiction between the NLT translation of (Deut. 32:8) and that of a number of other translations.. Apparently the NLT version, in attempting to render the passage more accurately, utilized the Midrashic literature, in reference to the Babel narrative, which is consistent with the passages noted in Daniel. And yet, while somewhat unorthodox, this interpretation makes perfect sense, as many scholars agree. The point being that scholarly consensus aids in bringing greater clarity to the subject at hand, even if it comes at the expense of tradition. Which in turn in brings up an interesting point. The Hebrew translation of (Deut. 32:8) in the Chumash, would appear to be rather anthropocentric in its translation of: “…according to the Children of Israel.” Rather, it appears to be a joint inheritance, distributed among the descendants of Noah and not to Shem exclusively. Which, in and of itself is quite understandable, as the Hebrew Bible, as the name implies, is a historical narrative of the descendants of Shem, Israel.

In either case, two things become readily apparent. One. Non-Jewish readers due to their lack of familiarity with the depth and breadth of Hebrew literature, are constrained by conclusions which lack foundational support. Two. In contrast, the vast majority of Jewish readers are better informed, even in regard to the early Christian church, as this passage from Acts 17:10-12 (NRSE) would sees to indicate: “…the believers in Thessalonica sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea, who upon arriving, went to the Jewish synagogue. They found the Jews there much more receptive than those in Thessalonica, as they welcomed the message eagerly, even as they searched the scriptures daily to see if these things were true.” (NRSE) To add emphasis, while the Jewish community of Beroea (Ber-ea) appear to have been more open to inquiry, they were also better informed, as the scriptures referred to were from their own Hebrew Bible and not that of New Testament, as most Christians believe.

Regardless, as Christians, having been grafted into the same spiritual branch as that of Israel, we have become not only “believers,” but brothers in arms so to speak, “ …wrestling not against flesh and blood, but principalities and powers in high places; against the rulers of the darkness of this age and spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenlies.” (Eph. 6:12) Even so, it would appear that mankind has become somewhat of a pawn in this epic struggle of celestial proportions, unwittingly conscripted into a supernatural proxy war, and for good reason. As believers, we have become far more than just expendable board-pieces in an inter-dimensional game of chess. As a consequence, the elect now find themselves not only entrenched behind enemy lines, but functioning as the rear-guard in a heavenly pincer-movement. And, considering the current geopolitical crisis, believers may soon find themselves with little option but to actively contend for the faith, or simply abandon the proposition altogether. In view of that, it might then be worth asking: Is our personal faith just a passing fancy or are we in it for the long run? Not surprisingly, God himself has something to say: “I am God and there is none other like me; declaring the end from the very beginning and from ancient times those things not yet done, saying, my counsel will stand and I will do all that I have proposed.” (Is. 46:10)   

“…For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generations of those who hate me.” (Ex. 20:5)    

While we find echoes concerning the doctrine of “original sin” in the preceding verse, note that the object of the sentence is directed to “those who hate me,” not those who love me. An important point, as it suggests that free-will has been and will continuesto be a primary factor concerning an individual’s relationship with God. And from that perspective it challenges elements of Christian tradition, not only the doctrine of “original sin” itself but “the atonement,” as in popular Christian polity they are invariably interlinked. Begging the question, are we missing something here, or has the church read something into the the biblical narrative that is clearly inconsistent with the Hebrew Bible? To provide clarity and for the sake of consistency we must first acknowledge the Old Testament’s foundational credentials regarding “the word of the Lord.” Not only is it fundamental for a closer reading of the New Testament, but remains the primary source and therefore essential for sound Biblical theology: “Think not that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets; I have come to fulfill it.” (Matt. 5:17)

And standing upon that “Rock of Salvation,” the words of Jesus himself, I would offer this. The phrase remission of sins pertains to a debt past due and not what might be accrued, post-salvation. As the apostle said: “…who God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith, in the shed blood of Jesus, to declare his righteousness, for the remission sins (past debt) and through the forbearance of God.” (Rom. 3:25) The crux of the problem is that sin remain’s a hurtle for most, a bar too high, if you will, regardless of the cost paid or unmerited favor vouchsafed to believers. Obviously, and in most cases, despite assistance from the Holy Spirit, sin remains a problem which can only be remedied by a willful turning away; as Jesus said: “…go and sin no more!” It may be worth asking then, has anything changed that would alter the fundamental sin equation? Yes, one might say, everything has changed since the advent and resurrection. Will true, we cant sidestep the essential contradiction; if the sacrificial the Lamb rendered the corporate debt of accrued sins null and void, while providing believers with a clean sheet, so-to-speak, why does the stain of sin remain? And, in consideration of the fact that the New Testament Epistles abjure believers from turning back to sin after having once been saved, the common understanding of “once saved, always saved” becomes nothing more than an oxymoron for repeat offenders.

Are we tracking? “For if by one man’s disobedience many became sinners, so also by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous.” (Rom. 5:19) Note the emphasis on many, and will be made righteous, indicating that salvation from sin is a process, one through which believers will be made righteous. As the apostle said: “…we are being saved.” (1 Cor. 1:18) Again, “… brothers and sisters, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and is brought back by another, …whosoever brings a sinner back from wandering will save that sinners soul from death, and in so doing, cover a multitude of sins.” (James 5:19-20) While this verse may seem to suggest that salvation can be lost, and even restored, it remains obvious that salvation is something that must be actively pursued by avoiding sin.

In the same token, but on a completely different track, we read from the scriptures: “…As Jesus was passing by, he saw a man who had been blind since birth. His disciples then asked him, who did sin, this man, or his parents that he was born blind? And Jesus answered. Neither did this man sin, nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.”( Jn. 9:1-3) Interestingly, the Lord’s response to the disciples’ inquiry brings into question once again the doctrine of “original sin.” To parse this out, let us turn once again to the Hebrew Bible, and the specific passage wherein the Lord God of Israel is arguing that very point with the prophet Ezekiel, saying: “Why should the son not bear the guilt of the father, you say?” “Simply because the son has done what is lawful and right in My eyes, keeping all of my statutes and observing them–he shall surely live. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. But if a wicked man turns from all his sins and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live and not die. None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him because he has turned to righteousness and therefore shall live.” “Do I take any pleasure in the fact that the wicked should die and not turn from their evil ways and live saith the Lord?” “Yet, if a righteousness man turns away from righteousness…shall he live? All of the righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered because of his unfaithfulness and iniquity which he has committed, because of them he shall surely die.” (Ez. 18:19-24) There is a lot to unpack here, so let us focus on one particular question. How is it then that “The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself,” if not by works, right thinking and a through a contrite heart?

Quite interestingly, the preceding dialogue between the Lord and Ezekiel seems to infer that there was no need for a priestly intermediary, or even a substitutional sacrifice as a propitiation for personal sin. Not to say that the Levitical priesthood was a human fabrication. On the contrary, it was instituted by God as a means of corporate restitution, as the nation of Israel was not yet conformed to the precepts of the Law. IE. It was a work in process, as we can see for example in “The Binding of Isaac.” (Genesis: 22) The knife of obedience was already at Isaac’s neck before the Angel of the Lord stayed Abraham’s hand. The fact that God intervened serves to illustrate that his ultimate intention was not for Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, which would have only served to validate the need for a substitutionary blood sacrifice for a remission of sins. Instead the Lord used the ordeal to demonstrate Abraham’s unwavering faith and obedience to God. In addition, the event also served as a signatory for the future in which animal and human sacrifices would no longer be acceptable to God. And regarding that particular point, what He was really driving at was a willful transformation of the human heart, resulting in, not only voluntary conformance to the dictates of the Law, but the spirit of the Law.

From that perspective then, Christians should be able to draw a parallel between the previous event and the following passage: “Although he was a son, it was meet for him that he learn obedience through those things which he suffered, and being made perfect, became the author of eternal salvation for all those that believe and obey. (Heb. 5:8-9) Even so, this passage is typically misconstrued by insisting that Issac was but a type and shadow of the sacrifice to come. — “Behold the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world.” (Jn. 1:29) Although Christ suffered, and by doing so demonstrated obedience, much like Abraham, but a king that could overcome even death itself, while at the same time founding a priesthood of believers that would follow in his footsteps, even unto the cross itself. In any event, there is nothing in either the scenario of Abraham and Issac or the willful suffering of Jesus that might suggest a “scapegoat” theology. Rather “the buck stopped there!” In turn, placing the weight where it rightfully belongs, on the shoulders of the individual believer. Yet, in truth, it is no longer a solitary endeavor, as Emmanuel is with us: “Behold, I am with you always, even until the end of the age.” (Mk. 16:1-8)

While the scriptural continuity between the Old and New Testament is a given, the Christian doctrine of original sin and the atonement have become substitutionary for a requisite personal accountability that in turn produces fruit after righteousness, earning for New Testament. As for those who take issue with the fact, scripture is quick to remind us. — “The Lord remains the same yesterday, today and forever.” (Mal. 3:6, Heb. 13:8) That said, don’t think that Christians are the only ones who have the goods on salvation, as Jesus said: “Salvation is of the Jews!” (John. 4:22) In other words, while God may have revealed himself to the world through His creation and to Israel through His miraculous interventions and revelation through Moses, God’s standard remains as it has always been, a stretch for the casual adherent. Likewise, putting Jesus in the archetypal position as a “fitting sacrifice” for Christian and Jewish indiscretions is not going to cut it. Unfortunately, it seems that humanity itself continues to be something of an exercise in futility. As Jesus said: “If you believe not in me, at least believe in the miracles you’ve seen, which in themselves testify to the fact that the Father is in me and I in Him.” (Jn. 10:38)

“Pride is the deification of self, and among the majority of Christians this is not along the line of a Pharisee, but that of a publican.” (Chambers)

What does faith demand? When asked, most Christians will respond by saying–”Oh, I’m no saint!” And yet, while the life of a saint need not be a crucifixion per se, our immersion into the life of Christ is, for all intents and purposes, a progressive immolation of the ego for the sake of the spiritual. As Paul said to some believers he happened upon: “Unto what baptism were you baptized with? And they said: unto John’s baptism. Then Paul said: “John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, yet it was John himself that said that they should follow him who would come after”. (Acts 19:3,4)”- ”…For he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire….” (Mat. 3:11; Lk. 3:16). In the same token, the New Testament makes it abundantly clear that Jesus willingly sacrificed his life, not for the sake of a false sense of security and a lukewarm salvation, but to produce a radical change and transformation of the self that would ultimately produce saints–”…For those who are in Christ are called to be saints…” (1 Cor. 1:2); again, ”…For this is the will of God, your sanctification…(1 Thes. 4:3) Which in turn raises the question, are not all who respond to the Gospel called“…to be conformed to the image of His Son…the firstborn among many, the progenitor of a holy family, that they too might be glorified, with Christ?” (Rom. 8:28-30). If so, how can the church continue to discount sanctification and the scriptural demand for holiness, in that believers are called to follow Jesus through fire, and in turn be transformed into his very image?

What are we to say then? What about all those who seem to be running in place, almost as if in a state of suspended animation, neglecting the demands of faith to —“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you.” (Mat. 28:19-20) How can one remain idle when so many are lost? Are we to believe that the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ is of no effect, that God is unable to perform through us that which he proposed through Christ? How can those who are called by His name believe that the life of a saint is only for a select few, or the elect as it were, as if any can be counted superior? “For all have sinned and fallen short of the grace of God? (Rom. 3:23) If that is one’s perspective, they have their spiritual wires crossed — ”For it was fitting, in bringing many sons and daughters to glory, that God should make the founder of their salvation (Jesus), perfect through sufferings.” (Heb. 2:10). Do we really think that we, as recipients of the eternal reward, are justified in receiving it without ever lifting a finger? Christian sedation masquerading as salvation is an affront to God himself, even as our reticence to get out of the religious boat negates the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice and the power of the Holy Spirit to enable us to do so. As it’s written: “While…all manner of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven mankind, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.” (Mat. 8:31) In other words, when the spiritual agency that equips us to be saints is routinely impeded by our own reticence to respond, we are not only mocking God, but placing our own souls in jeopardy by demonstrating the pattently obvious. — We have no greater interest than that of our own self-interest in becoming Christians. Friends, that is not the gospel Jesus preached! As he said: “There is no greater love than this, that a man would willingly lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13)

“After Thirteen Heavens of Decreasing Choice and Nine Hells of Increasing Doom, the Tree of Life will blossom with a fruit never before known in The Creation — The New Spirit of Man.” (Zapotec prophecy)

Having spent most of my young-adult years living on a Rez. in the inter-mountain region of the American west, I availed myself of frequent excursions into its more remote areas. In doing so, I can say I was either blessed or cursed, as the case may be, in having a number of waking visions. Of these, one in particular stands out, as it had to do with things to come regarding future of the United States. And, as prophetic biblical narratives go, I found myself “taken up in the spirit.” Yet, I wasn’t alone, as two angels accompanied me, one on my right and one on my left. I soon realized were flying, as I saw the earth extending to the horizon far below.

Abruptly, the angel on my right spoke to me, saying: “Son of man, what do you see?” As soon as those words were spoken, I found myself focusing like a laser on some event happening down below. In this particular instance I saw a car stopping at a northern checkpoint between California and Nevada. Shockingly, I then found myself standing right there. I not only saw the people in the car and the station attendant approaching, but heard the conversation now taking place between them. “ID’s, permit and papers, please,” the guard said. Minutes passed before he returned. “All in order” he said, with a nod.” As the car pulled away, I was startled to find myself a silent passenger, now listening to the driver vent: “This is total BS; America the f…g Gestapo. Give me a f..g break; I now need some kiss-ass”s approval to go on a vacation with my family!” “Approval my ass!”

As soon as the implications of the event began to sink in, my sight returned to normal and I found myself was once again in the presence of my angelic hosts. The one on my left then spoke to me, saying: “Son of man, what did you see?” In response to my reply, he said: “Write it down and remember, so that when these things come to pass you”ll know that our word was true.” And it has been, every word, for many years now, with the events I witnessed, transpiring in real time, sequentially, exactly the order in which I saw them – one major event every ten years, with every fifth year serving as a precursor for the next major event to come. Although the particular episode I’ve described would not happen until much later in the sequence of events, it remains of particular importance, as I can now see it was a turning point in the final sequence of events to come in these five and ten-year cycles – “The emergence of the police-state,” preceded by a percieved need for greater enforcement – Ice!

That said, the first two events I witnessed, in real-time, remain particularly relevant, as they not served to confirm what was to follow, but would erase any doubts I might have had as to the veracity of the vision. The first being the Oil Embargo of 1971. A shot over the bow, as some might say, informing Americans that they were more vulnerable to adversarial intentions than once thought. Serving as a percursor for what was to follow, the Energy Crisis of 1979, which left a much greater impression on me. I stood in line with countless others, standing in a line that stretch for blocks, while ruminating over the fact that gas cans had already sold out, and that fist-fights and shoot-outs over gas were now a common occurrence.

In hindsight, when you stop to consider the actual reason for those interruptions, is it any wonder that ultimately something more ominous was in the offing? As we later discovered, with the Al Qaeda attack on the Twin Towers in New York City, September 11, 2001. A wake-up call that not only affected America universally (I was without cell-service for the better part of a month), but set in motion a series of events that would culminate in The Global War on Terror (GWOT); signalling the beginning of the end.

Although caught off guard by the general malaise of a post-Cold War mind-set, in the aftermath of 9/11 the government adopted an altogether different rationale for state security – surveillance of the general public. In response, renditions became commonplace, while rumors of “Black-sites” and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (GITMO), served as maximin-security prisons for “suspected terrorists,” as well as facilities for extrajudicial torture techniques – “waterboarding,” if you’ll recall. The public paranoia was palatable, even as it became realized with the emergence of “the surveillance state.”

The fact that both foreign nationals and American citizens were now seen as equally suspect only added to the growing mistrust of The Federal Government. And while the unease was understandable, it soon became visible, with the creation of The Department of Homeland Security. With the honorable Tom Ridge as its initial director, he was quick to make this point in his first public address, and I paraphrase: “While America’s attention has been focused on the ‘axis of evil’ abroad, we need not remind ourselves that the terror attack of 9/11 took place on American soil. And while ‘Islamic radicals’ remain parcel to the fact, there are other ‘bad actors’ here at home, including those within certain Native American and Christian circles that we need to keep our eye on.” Talk about smoke-signals! As if that weren’t enough, it was soon followed by a virtual tsunami of legal precedents, which formed a cage of compliance around all Americans, whose sole purpose was to restrain remonstrance from so-called resisters.

Yet, when we consider attempts at so-called reform, whether for good or for evil, an appropriate response is in order, both spiritually and practically, to balance the scales as they say. A good place to start would be at the very bottom of society, pan-Indian America, the only actor capable of responding to a desecration of the sacred. That in itself is perhaps indicative of something far more profound and altruistic than the simple self-preservation of a disenfranchised social minority. As in doing so, their efforts would not only served to acknowledge the genesis of liberty itself, but a reasonable response in order to preserve it. For that reason, the ongoing fight for freedom is not only historical in Native America, but contemporary, serving not only as a warning, but a reminder to freedom-loving people everywhere — Freedom is not free! A case which was made abundantly clear by former Aim leader, Dennis Banks, who once said: “Our past, as Indians, will give you direction for the future.”

And he spoke to him as if to a knight embarking on a holy quest, saying: “…Make every effort in adding virtue to faith; for with it your spiritual knowledge will increase, as well as self-control and steadfastness, which in turn will produce godliness.” (2 Pet. 1:5)  

For those who have set their sights on Jesus, it may be worth noting that there is a marked difference between a motivation derived from a belief in God and one that arises from a heart-felt repentance and conviction that there is a God. For it is through faith in God that that compassion arises, which in turn compels one to act, thus forming Christ in us, one step at a time. For it is not in the sepulcher, of religion where Christ may be found, but in the sanctuary of action where Christ can be demonstrated. but. As the angel guarding his tomb said: “Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here; he is risen! (Pet. 24: 5,6) With Christ before us, the life of a saint is realized in us!

Contrary to popular opinion , the transformative work and mystery of faith is not an election process, with some destined for salvation, while others are not, but for anyone “…who loves God (and responds to his calling), according to his purposes, so that all things might work together for the good.” (Rom. 8:28) Yet, God has said: “You will only find me when you seek for me with all your heart.” (Jer. 29:13) An important consideration for Christians, as true faith is not a normative in the Christian experience, but a miracle of God, supernaturally expressed through activity of faith that produces holiness.

Unfortunately, from the time of the Advent until now, the written ‘Word” inevitably supplanted that of the lived experience, in turn becoming nothing more than an intellectual architecture. As truth can only be apprehended spiritually, and confirmed through direct experience in actuality, the supernatural remains a significant factor when it comes to the activity of faith. In reality, the initiate of faith is left with little choice but to internalize the supernatural, and in the process becoming not only an other-worldly intimate, but a friend of God, one who speaks with authority and “…not as the scribes.” (Mat. 7:29) To clarify, it might then be worth noting that many Indigenous peoples still consider direct experience as the only valid criteria for one who has acquired spiritual knowledge. As can be seen for instance in the “…Hawaiian concept of Ma ka Hana ka ‘ike (knowledge comes from direct experience), and Ma mum ka hana, ma hope ka wala’au (direct experience comes first, discussion comes second.” (University of Hawaii) In contrast, the mainstream’s growing dependence on the written “Word,” in lieu of the actual experience, has reduced what once had been a “lively faith” to simply that of a convoluted pharisaic interpretation. — “…forever learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth.” (2 Tim. 2:7) Ultimately, and tragically for many Christians, an internalization of truth through personal revelation has given way to academic inference and rote memorization of the Holy Writ, as if through the digestion of information we can somehow arrive at the moment of truth, where the supernatural activity of the Holy Spirit still remains the determining factor in a salvific process leading to redemption.

“The foundation of totalitarianism is an ideology made of lies.” (Solzhenitsyn)

“The problem with people is that they will do anything which serves their own best interests, whether out of fear or greed.” For example, in the years preceding the rise of Nazism in Germany one thing was certain, the Church of Luther had become but a shadow of its former self, with the true message of the gospel replaced by a tepid acquiescence–the salt having lost is Savior if you will! In the process, the cost of discipleship had been replaced by what Diedrik Bonhoeffer called cheap grace. As he described it, placing an emphasis on God’s abounding love and forgiveness to Christians specifically, at the expense of Christian charity and a collective conscience which called upon believers to hold the line when confronting. Interestingly, this was something that the vast majority of German congregants at that time had forgotten. Promoting the absolutism of God’s direct and perfect will in human affairs gave believers not only a false sense of security, but a cultivation disposition that no longer comprehended what it meant to be responsible for the very thing the purported to believe in–The Christian Faith. Consequently, that river of faith which had once flowed so abundantly through Germany had now slowed to only a trickle, easily diverted and now dammed to become a backwater of religious pollution.

“First they came for the socialists, and I didn’t speak out–Because I was not a socialist.”

“Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I didn’t speak out–Because I didn’t belong.”

“Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak out–Because I wasn’t a Jew.”

“Then they came for the Christians, and I didn’t speak out–Because I wasn’t a Christian.”

“Finally they came for me, and I was silent–Because there was no one left to speak for me.”

Niemoller, a Lutheran conservative, who at the beginning of the Reich was a supporter of Adolf Hitler, did an about-face to become one of the founding members of the Confessing Church, along with Bonhoeffer. Yet Bonhoeffer was convinced from the beginning that they would eventually be be left with little choice but to resist. And they did, with Bonhoeffer paying the ultimate price. A lesson from history that we can apply today, as we may soon find ourselves drawn into a similar set of circumstances, one where faith is incrementally eroded until the flame of freedom is extinguished. In any event, faith is not only the currency that can determine not only how things play out, but the litmus-paper that can serve to test the truth of our own salvation. And, as we still have time to mount an appropriate offense, we need to stand up and stretch before exercising our ethical muscle. We’ll need that strength, as our personal conviction can accrue a compound interest, motivating others to join The faith. And, if history tell us anything, it’s that resistance helps strengthen the backbone of society. As Christians, we need to rediscover that fact, even as those of Bonhoeffer’s time, becoming “salt and light” rather than simply bushel-baskets taking up space, hiding the fact that faith demands service, even as the gospel has the power to transform the lives of turtle-doves into that of shrikes.

“It was fitting for God, in whom and through whom all things were made, that in bringing many sons to glory He should therefore make the Captain of their salvation perfect through suffering. (Heb. 2:10)

“Ave Imperator, morituri te salutano.”

I see before me the Gladiator lie:

He leans upon his hand–his manly brow

Consents to death, but conquers agony.

As his droop’d head sinks gradually low–

And through his side the last drops, ebbing slow,

From the red gash, fall heavy, one by one,

Like the first of a thunder shower; and now

A the arena around him swims–he is gone. 

Ere ceased the inhuman shout which hail’d the wretch who won,

He heard it, but heeded not–his eyes

Were with his heart, and that was far away; 

He reck’d not of the life he lost, nor the prize he’d won,

As all rush’d with this his blood.

Shall he expire…and unavenged?

Arise, ye brothers-in-arms and whence?

Toward the distant sound of thunder,

for glory and honor of a life well-lived! 

(Lord Byron)