Strategy For Men of the West: Asymmetric 4th Generation Warfare Threat

This begins another series of posts, Strategy For Men of the West, which is linked in the blog header.

A Prophecy Of Destruction

As a rule I don’t write about prophesy because in many cases the prophesy only becomes clear after the fact.  There are exceptions.  I previously wrote about a Bible prophesy that applies to the US right now.  There is another prophesy that might play a part in the outcome of that prophesy but it hasn’t occurred yet.  That will be the subject of this post and will probably be my last post about prophesy in the Bible.

In what follows, I’m not claiming this is what will happen to the US, but the fit to the current situation is far closer than most are comfortable with.  Some view this as an end-times prophesy and perhaps it is.  In order for the end-time events to occur the US must be removed from the world stage.  In fact, it is reasonable to say that the end-times events might be triggered by the power-vacuum that results from the US being removed from the world stage.

One of the interesting things about Biblical prophesy is that some of them have a near/far application.  Meaning, there is a near fulfillment of the prophesy that proves it to be a prophesy as well as a far fulfillment.  In this case I’m talking about Isaiah 3:1 to 4:2.  The near prophesy was to Judah, but “in that day the branch of the Lord will be beautiful” designates this as a far prophesy as well.  The branch of the Lord is the Church, the wild olive branch of gentiles that was grafted into Israel.  The other illustration was that Christ is the vine and the church branches out from the vine in order to bear fruit.

There are many who would see this as an end-time prophesy of the destruction of Jerusalem at the beginning of the tribulation, the mid-point of the 70th week of Daniel.  The problem is this prophesy doesn’t fit that application at all because there is no invading army and the church plays no part in the destruction of Jerusalem.  The near prophecy was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem in 597 by the Babylonians.

The Prophesy Applied To The Current US

In verses 1-3, God says He will remove the supply of food and water, but take note of exactly what He says:

Both supply and support, the whole supply of bread
And the whole supply of water;

The supply and the support.  Removing the supply is as easy as cutting off the electricity because that cuts the transportation supply line.  Payments don’t get processed, fuel stations don’t pump fuel and trucks don’t roll.  Water well  pumps don’t lift the water out of the ground so the water is cut off and stores are cleaned out within 48 hours.  The cities start burning within 96 hours.

How does He remove the support?  The people who know how to get things done will be removed.   Those in leadership positions, those who command respect, those who are in charge.  Those with experience in keeping the infrastructure working and get it fixed when it breaks.  When it breaks it will be broken and the bloodbath will begin.  Keep in mind, the supply of food and water has been cut off.  Where are all these people described below?  In the cities and areas with no food and no water.  They will die.

The mighty man and the warrior,
The judge and the prophet,
The diviner and the elder,
The captain of fifty and the honorable man,
The counselor and the expert artisan,
And the skillful enchanter.

Then, in verses 4-5 He describes the breakdown of a society characterized by a destructive civil war.  There is no invading army, no outside force to come in and take charge.

And I will make mere lads their princes,
And capricious children will rule over them,
And the people will be oppressed,
Each one by another, and each one by his neighbor;
The youth will storm against the elder
And the inferior against the honorable.

Verses 10 and 11 are a comfort to the righteous and a warning to the wicked.

Say to the righteous that it will go well with them,
For they will eat the fruit of their actions.
Woe to the wicked! It will go badly with him,
For what he deserves will be done to him.

This is restated in Galatians 6:7-8

Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.  For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.

Back in Isaiah 3 and starting in verse 12 we get a different view of the process from the social perspective.

O My people! Their oppressors are children,
And women rule over them.
O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray
And confuse the direction of your paths.

That is an excellent description of what we have today.  Keep in mind, those who “lead you astray and confuse the direction of your paths” aren’t just government leaders, they include all the media and churchian whores who maintain the status quo.

The Lord arises to contend,
And stands to judge the people.
The Lord enters into judgment
With the elders and princes of His people,
It is you who have devoured the vineyard;
The plunder of the poor is in your houses.
What do you mean by crushing My people
And grinding the face of the poor?
Declares the Lord God of hosts.

As described in verses 1-3, God will remove the leaders who have destroyed the economy, crushed His people and ground down the faces of the poor.  But God isn’t done after that. Recall that I asserted the “depraved passion” of the women who gave up the natural for the unnatural was feminism.  God also deals with the proud, arrogant women.

Feminism Will End With Bloodshed

Moreover, “Because the daughters of Zion are proud
And walk with heads held high and seductive eyes,
And go along with mincing steps
And tinkle the bangles on their feet,
Therefore the Lord will afflict the scalp of the daughters of Zion with scabs,
And the Lord will make their foreheads bare.

In that day the Lord will take away the beauty of their anklets, headbands, crescent ornaments, dangling earrings, bracelets, veils, headdresses, ankle chains, sashes, perfume boxes, amulets, finger rings, nose rings, festal robes, outer tunics, cloaks, money purses, hand mirrors, undergarments, turbans and veils.

Now it will come about that instead of sweet perfume there will be putrefaction;
Instead of a belt, a rope;
Instead of well-set hair, a plucked-out scalp;
Instead of fine clothes, a donning of sackcloth;
And branding instead of beauty.

Your men will fall by the sword
And your mighty ones in battle.
And her gates will lament and mourn,
And deserted she will sit on the ground.

These proud, arrogant women will be humbled, stripped and branded.   Their men will be killed violently as feminism is thrown down.  There will be a bloodbath.  Many will die. The totality of what is being described in chapter 3 is more than just civil war, it’s chaos.  Observe the order in which this takes place.

First comes the hit on the infrastructure and supply chain.  Then comes the bloodbath as people start dying.  I suspect there will be a lot of street-lamp decorations in that day and it would not be a good time to be  a cop.  Or an IRS agent.  Or a family court judge.  The fighting will become racially genocidal.  Payback is a bitch and there will definitely be some with a grudge to settle.

Woe to the wicked! It will go badly with him,
For what he deserves will be done to him.

Perhaps the righteous should heed the warnings of the preppers and have a good supply of food and water, as well as the means to defend it.  Observe the words of verse 10:

Say to the righteous that it will go well with them,
For they will eat the fruit of their actions.

And When The Bloodletting Has Ended…

Anyone who understands just how fragile the infrastructure of the United States is can understand how quickly this prophesy could take place.  And then in the aftermath of the bloodshed, look at how the women treat men…

For seven women will take hold of one man in that day, saying, “We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach!

In the day (period of time) that the women are humbled and their men killed.  A rope, sackcloth and branding?  Sounds like slave girls will make a comeback.  And in that day it will be a reproach for a woman to not have the name of a man.   Think of the pendulum that has been pushed so far away from the point of equilibrium by feminism and understand it will swing the other way just as hard when the power of feminism is broken.  One can easily see that following the bloodbath, women will be desperate to belong to a man who can protect her.  So when does all this happen?

In that day the Branch of the Lord will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth will be the pride and the adornment of the survivors of Israel.

The reference to the Branch of the Lord puts this prophesy squarely in the Church age and this has not happened yet.  Which means it’s coming.  When God is ready He will take away the supply of food and water, then remove the rulers and after that it will be a free-for-all.

 

A Final Note

I’m not saying this prophesy is how things will work out for the US.  Because the text does not say that.  I do say the prophesy is a near-far prophesy that has already been fulfilled in ancient times and will be fulfilled again in the church age at some point in the future.  Which could be next week.

None of the end-times prophesies have anything to say about the West; and by that I mean the US, Canada, the UK, Australia and NZ.  The end-times stuff all revolves around Europe, Russia, the Middle East (Israel, Egypt, Persia, the Assyrians) and even China.  Nothing about the English-speaking West.  Logically, the only reason for this is the West is no longer a player on the world stage, either because it’s been destroyed or because it’s completely unimportant.

Unlike the Romans 1:18-32 prophesy, there is nothing in the prophesy that allows us to nail it down on a timeline other than the “branch of the Lord” reference which puts the far application in the church age.  However, the degrading passion of feminism and the depraved minds described in Romans 1:18-32 have already created the situation that is so perfectly described in verse 12.

O My people! Their oppressors are children,
And women rule over them.
O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray
And confuse the direction of your paths.

Anyone who looks at just the economics of the current system understands that this system cannot continue as it is.  The US infrastructure is at its breaking point and a few hundred well-trained men could bring the US to its knees in a weekend and there is nothing that could be done to stop it from happening.

The US is the most insanely well-armed nation on earth.  Weapons and ammunition are everywhere while at the same time there is only a few days worth of food in the houses once the electricity goes off.  No food and no water but the people have weapons.

God will remove the supply and support, taking away the food and water.  He will remove the leaders.  The people will be oppressed by one another, young against old, lower classes against the upper classes.  It will go well with the righteous and they will eat the fruit of their actions.  It will go badly for the wicked and they will get what they deserve.  The women will be stripped of their position of privilege and brought low, made captives and branded.  Those who have prepared will be sought out for leadership.  And in the day it is a reproach for a woman to not have a husband, feminism will die.

Is that the future for the US?  Possibly.  It’s certainly a viable scenario.  Scripture doesn’t say how it works out for the US, but wisdom says that having a secure place to hide that will keep you warm and dry with a supply of water and food  would be a good thing.  When the killing settles down things will get interesting.

The righteous will eat the fruit of their actions and those who are prepared will have something to eat and drink.  When this happens it will be too late.  The day before there was still time, but when the power goes out the clock stops for preparation.  At that point most won’t even be able to flee and even if they could, where would they go?

In a previous post I explained the prophesy Paul made in Romans 1:18-32.  Because the people knew God but refused to worship Him as Creator, He gave them over to their evil desires.   I used major milestones in the US that related to the prophesy to mark the coming of new generations.  The timeline started in 1945 and the first generation went to 1973.  The second generation went to 2001.  That puts the 3rd generation ending at about 2029, but there are no guarantees we will make it that far.  In Numbers 35:33 God commanded:

So you shall not pollute the land in which you are; for blood pollutes the land and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.

In 1973 abortion became legal in the US and 44 years later almost 60 million innocent children have been murdered by their mothers.  If we consider those women who were 36 years old in 1973 (at the end of their fertility), they are 80 years old this year.  The women who were 26 in 1973 are 70 years old this year.  This cohort is either already in nursing homes or they are rapidly being moved into assisted living.  All the other women who have been murdering their babies are younger.

If God is planning on cleansing the land by killing those who shed the blood, the timing is now ripe.  Somehow it seems like poetic justice that the women who opened the door to the killing of helpless children will be killed themselves at the end of their lives when they are helpless.

The pedophiles and the rest almost seem to be a sideshow in comparison, but it’s time for them to get what they have coming to them as well.  They tend to conglomerate in positions of power and authority and God said He will remove those men.

God told Abraham that his descendants would return in 400 years to go into the land because at that time the sin of the Canaanites had not yet reached its full measure.  When the time was right, God told the Israelites to go into the land and kill everyone.

We don’t know what God’s timetable is, but there are indications that He’s ready to clean house.

This was to have been the last post in the “Theology For Men of the West” series, but I decided it was a better fit for the “Strategy And Tactics For Men of the West”.  This series will allow me to examine ways to deal with the reality of the world we live in, rather than the fools paradise it’s painted to be.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Theology For Men of the West. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Strategy For Men of the West: Asymmetric 4th Generation Warfare Threat

  1. Pingback: Strategy For Men of the West: The Best Field To Have | Toad's Hall

  2. Leukos says:

    There is no hermeneutical or textual warrant for inserting a millennia-long parenthesis in between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel. You’ve been led astray by faulty American dispensationalist eschatology. Daniel’s prophecies were all fulfilled by Christ’s ascension to the right hand of God and his destruction of the Mosaic age in AD 70; as Jesus himself predicted at the end of the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24:34, Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32).

    • I’m not a dispensatinalist, I hold to covenant theology. As far as eschatology goes, I believe the “pre-wrath” model is correct (Van Kampen, “The Sign”), so you’re assessment is incorrect.

      Consider that the Isaiah prophesy in question didn’t stop at the end of chapter 3, it continued into chapter 4, where you should notice the text says

      “In that day the Branch of the LORD will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth will be the pride and the adornment of the survivors of Israel.”

      The branch of the Lord is the church and includes the descendants of Israel who are in Christ (the natural branches) as well as the Gentiles who were grafted in. As Christ taught, He is the vine and we are the branches and if we abide in Him we will bear much fruit.

      Given that the Church Age did not begin prior to the coming of the Holy Spirit, your claim that this particular prophesy was fulfilled prior to or in AD 70 is ludicrous. I believe it to be similar to the prophesy Paul made in Romans 1:18-32, a prophesy for the Church Age, but not an end times prophesy.

      The critical details of the prophesy have not been matched in the Church Age until now and history tells us the events described in the prophesy have not happened in the Church Age. Therefore, logically, the “far” aspect of this prophesy has yet to be fulfilled.

      That’s about as far as it goes, for me. As I’ve stated before I don’t like writing about prophesy because on one hand it’s very easy to get wrong and on the other hand, my area is sexual morality.

      If you’d care to discuss what the church can do to get back on track and in obedience with respect to sexual morality, go for it.

  3. Leukos says:

    Thanks for the quick response, but I’m afraid you didn’t actually address my point. I didn’t say you were a dispensationalist; I said you’ve been led astray by dispensational eschatology with regards to the unwarranted parenthesis between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel. This parenthesis is a dispensational fantasy that you have clearly incorporated into your own exegesis. I didn’t mention the Isaiah prophecy at all; primarily because your interpretation of it is misguided due to your faulty hermeneutic (btw Van Kampen is a fraud on the order of Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsay, he’s not a biblical scholar; you need to read better material). For example, no serious scholars read צֶמַח (“branch”) the way you’re doing. Basically, it is taken to be either a messianic title or a parallel to פְרִי הָאָרֶץ (“the fruit of the earth”–that is, “earth” as in “ground,” not “earth” as in “world”), making it a sign of divine blessing on the harvests of the future “cleansed” Israel.

    As for the church and sexual morality, what can one say? Our morality should be biblical morality. It’s clear that, until we live in a theonomic nation (attained through the application of Christian Reconstruction), we need to go back to enforcing church discipline regarding breaches of biblical moral law by church members as much as we are legally allowed (1 Cor 5:13).

    • Actually, I did address your point, but perhaps you couldn’t see it. I’m interpreting the text in light of the rest of Scripture, you’re interpreting the text according to your doctrine.
      You stated:

      “There is no hermeneutical or textual warrant for inserting a millennia-long parenthesis in between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel”

      As I previously stated, eschatology is not my area. The reason I mentioned Van Kampen is he believed that Scriptural prophesy should be taken in the literal sense (allowing for obvious figures of speech, etc), interpretation should be by using Scripture itself and all the end time prophesies had to fit together in a coherent manner with no contradictions or antinomies. You can read about it here.

      I not only agree with that hermeneutic, I took the same approach to the study of Biblical sexual morality. Like Van Kampen, I searched out all the relevant passages and set out to arrange them such that they made sense with no contradictions or antinomies. With time and a great deal of study I achieved that goal.

      I can now safely say that virtually all of the accepted doctrines of the church concerning sexual morality are NOT Biblically correct. I also learned where the various doctrines came from as well as a lot of evidence as to why those doctrines were put in place.

      Interestingly and relevant to this discussion, I perceive you are of the amillennial school of hermeneutics concerning eschatology, a belief that began with Augustine of Hippo.

      As I said, eschatology is not my area, but from my study of Biblical sexual morality I can state for a fact that Augustine was one of the principal culprits in the effort to remove the Bible’s teachings about sex and replace them with a blend of Pagan belief, Stoic philosophy and Roman law.

      Given that our hermeneutics are completely inconsistent, I don’t believe we will be able to agree on matters of eschatology. You are correct in stating that biblical moral law must be enforced by church discipline, but the question is whether you understand what that moral law is. That is what I write about and I can assure you, what is commonly taught is completely incorrect.

  4. Leukos says:

    If you imagine you’re interpreting scripture completely free of doctrinal bias, you’re deluding yourself. I know better.

    Anyway, the problem here is how you determine exegetically which statements are prophecies, then which prophecies are so-called “end-times” and which are not. This must be done before you talk about consistencies between eschatological prophecies. For example, Jesus prediction of the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem was clearly not “end-times,” as it came true less than forty years later, but the signs of it’s occurring are (according to you and Van Kampen, et al) mixed in with signs of the end times in the Olivet Discourse. Your operating hermeneutic must legitimately justify separating those signs into their respective categories; which Van Kampen’s doesn’t do (I suspect he misapplies his own ill-defined “near/far” approach often–that’s how he can justify the ridiculous Rapture “doctrine”).

    As for the law, the moral law is the moral law as outlined in the OT. That is God’s perfect moral law (Ps 19:7), the moral law that Jesus followed and taught, and therefore the only moral law that matters. What other moral law is “commonly taught” in the churches you’re talking about?

  5. Leukos says:

    I’ve just spent the last couple of hours perusing your blog. Interesting stuff, and I now see better where you’re coming from, so no need to answer that last question of mine. I can also see how you’re on much surer ground with your exegesis of the verses around sexual morality; which makes sense since their categorization is far more overt than the prophetic ones. I’ve found most of your conclusions fairly solid, even though your textual critical work is weak and your methodology is too idiosyncratic for its own good (so far). Still, there’s no arguing that your central thesis is well defended.

    Later.

    • Thank you. I should mention that I welcome constructive criticism as well as other varieties.

      As to weak critical work on the text, I don’t write for academics. Just the depth that I go to is too much for many and the posts are often considered much too long. In addition to that, there are language issues. Just the word “fornication” should be demonstrative.

      If fornication is a sin, what act constitutes fornication in light of Romans 4:15 and 5:13? References to sexual immorality in the Law are covered by adultery, male homosexuality, bestiality, incest and idolatrous sexual activity, etc; so what specific sin is fornication actually describing that doesn’t already have a name? I argue that it is the forbidden act of a Christian man having sex with a prostitute. And there is a good textual argument on the Latin-English side of that.

      Yet, the commonly held definition of fornication is “sex outside marriage” and that has been taught by the church for over 1000 years.

      Adultery requires a married woman, yet the word has been redefined as applying equally to both men and women, even though that is not what Scripture says.

      If lust is committing adultery in the heart and adultery requires a married woman, then looking on a woman one is eligible to marry cannot be lust. I could go on and on, but the language has changed to reflect doctrines that are wrong.

      Just the word “marriage” is a nightmare of mixed meanings due to language issues and definitions.

      As to idiosyncratic methodology, what can I say? It’s similar to doctrinal schools in terms of who believes what constitutes correct hermeneutics or methodology. I don’t claim that I’m free of doctrinal bias, but I do my best not to be.

      A good example of that is marital commitment. You can find posts in which I describe the commitment of the man as permanent and non-exclusive and the commitment of the woman as permanent and exclusive. In later posts it’s described as the man committing to permanence but not exclusivity and the woman bound in marriage permanently and exclusively.

      That, I think, is a better description of what Scripture actually states because the virgin’s consent/commitment is not required in order for her to be married. It is only the woman who is not a virgin and not bound in marriage (for whatever reason) who must consent to marriage before the sex makes her married, but once she consents, she is just as bound as the virgin.

      Took me a long time to deal with that because of many years of conditioning.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s