Sin

The Evil Inclination–How to catch a Snake before it Bites

Posted by

0

The Power of Choice

Among religions that embrace the Bible as God’s word, there are two approaches that attempt to explain the nature of man. Christians for the most part embrace Original Sin and this belief is backed by the current understanding which comes from the writings of the New Testament. Jews however do not embrace this theory, as the belief put forth in the Old Testament or Tanakh does not support it. We call what came upon humanity after eating of the tree in the Garden, the Evil Inclination. In this paper, I want to open discussion of these two beliefs and their effects on humanity.

So first off, what is Original Sin, and when was this doctrine formalized in Christianity?

The following quotes cite what is generally believed to be timing for the development and the definition of Original Sin:

“While the Genesis story lays the foundation for the concept of the Fall, St. Augustine was the first to use the term “original sin” and articulate its transmission through human reproduction. The Roman Catholic Church later formalized the doctrine at the Council of Trent, while figures like Martin Luther and John Calvin contributed to its development and spread, especially during the Protestant Reformation.” (See Reference here).

“The doctrine of original sin was developed by Saint Augustine in the 4th and 5th centuries and gained official acceptance in the Western Church at the Council of Carthage in 418 CE, leading to its incorporation into Roman Catholic doctrine. The doctrine was then formalized further by the Councils of Trent in the 16th century.” (Web Reference here).

“Original sin is an Augustine Christian doctrine that says that everyone is born sinful. This means that they are born with a built-in urge to do bad things and to disobey God. It is an important doctrine within the Roman Catholic Church. The concept of Original Sin was explained in depth by St Augustine and formalized as part of Roman Catholic doctrine by the Councils of Trent in the 16th Century. Original sin is not just this inherited spiritual disease or defect in human nature; it’s also the ‘condemnation’ that goes with that fault.” (Reference)

But is this an acceptable approach in the process of salvation?

I would guess that the majority of Christians accept the doctrine of Original Sin as undeniable truth.  I am uncomfortable with it.
The belief that Adam and Eve, by choosing to eat of the forbidden tree, now had no alternative but to receive a fallen nature– inherently sinful for their descendants from birth. It continues that all of humanity has carried this curse from that moment in the garden until this day. This obviously demands interference from Heaven in providing a substitute who cleans up the record of whomever will accept it. However, if we think through this theory and what it actually reveals, we will see things that do not fit the picture.

Sins that pass down:

There is the verse given in Exodus 20 in the command to abstain from idol worship which claims that the sins of the fathers pass down.

Exo 20: “5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I YHVH, thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;” Note that these are passed down from those who hate God.

So how do we fit that into our views? We know that an alcoholic or drug addict often passes down tendencies toward addictions to his or her children. We see it all the time. And a mother or father who justifies lying in their own life will see the same trend in the lives of their children. Is this a genetic weakness? Or is it learned behavior? If it is not genetic, then why do children who are adopted out as infants to different home often have the same traits? It is almost like hereditary weaknesses to disease. But regardless of our parents weaknesses and actual sins, we are challenged to overcome these things, no matter how difficult.

There is the question of why the Eternal would even place that tree in the garden and allow Eve to be seduced and lied to in her status of innocence. This creates a picture of a cruel and unjust God who purposely created mankind to fail. It also leads to a need for another substitute god who understands mankind by taking on human flesh and is able to present them to this angry God and justify them by his own blood.  But I cannot accept this theory because of what it does to distort the character of the God of the Universe!

If my last two articles are correct (See Here and Here), when the Creator said, Let US make man in Our image, after Our likeness, He was speaking to the man who would play a part by his own choice of which nature would dominate him. It also indicates that mankind, though created by the hand of God, was still made from the dust of the earth, which meant that he was created to be human and not in the image of the angels. His choices would decide if he would reflect the divine image, or if he would merely be as the beasts that perish. 

Those who strive for the divine image struggle with difficulties placed upon their nature by the choices their first parents made at the forbidden tree. Is this struggle all bad? It surely would have been easier for humans to live here on earth in luxury, not having to work, having everything they want bestowed upon them without a struggle on their part, but was that the divine plan?

So what actually happened at the tree? Is it possible that rather than God being harsh and exacting, He was planning through the cooperation of mankind after the fall to become the strongest race of beings that were ever created? Was the Yetzer Hara (Evil Inclination) really a condemnation of doom to the human race, or was it actually a test and process for the creation of man in the image of God? A program for the creation of people who would be trusted to rule the world and maybe even part of the universe?

A case was made by the serpent to doubt God’s word and His very character. Eve chose to offer the same temptation to Adam, who might have resisted but for her insistence, joined her in disobedience. At this point they opted for the right to choose for themselves against the instructions of the Creator. Was it right to choose for themselves at this point in their time on earth? I can’t answer that. The choice they made was clearly based on doubt towards their Creator and desire for something new and exciting. Isn’t this what is behind nearly every bad choice that humans make?  If we think of the sins that usually tempt us, most of them are irrational based on good judgment. Sins of lust, exploitation, self gratification, murder, thievery, abuse of drugs and every other temptation.

Judaism claims that the Yetzer Hara came into being when the couple chose to eat of the fruit. But how is the Evil Inclination different from Original Sin? 

So what is the difference in the two views?

Original sin is a burden mankind cannot deal with unless he has a substitute. He is born with a sinful nature and cannot be righteous by his own choices nor by suppression of his evil nature, nor of locking oneself in monasteries where self chastisement is practiced. 
The Evil Inclination, is an inherited tendency to obey one’s passions and lusts, that is, like Original Sin passed down from generation to generation, but contrary to the view of the helpless condition of mankind under Original Sin, the evil inclination can be suppressed by obedience to the Torah and humbly seeking help from the Almighty. So the Yetzer Hara can actually be a testing agent to prepare us for greater things. We think of kings who sent their young sons to learn sword fighting in past ages. They had to become strong and clever to be able to fight the wars that they must win when they became king themselves.

From Sefaria (a Jewish Reference website), the Way of God by the RaMCHal:
“Man is the creature created for the purpose of being drawn close to God. He is placed between perfection and deficiency, with the power to earn perfection. Man must earn this perfection, however, through his own free will…Man’s inclinations are therefore balanced between good [Yetzer Hatov] and evil [Yetzer Hara], and he is not compelled toward either of them. He has the power of choice and is able to choose either side knowingly and willingly...” Reference

There is a proof text for the idea that sin can be overcome before the evil inclination is acted upon in Genesis, where God interrupted Cain before he slew his brother:

Gen 4:”5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. 6 Then the YHVH said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

So before Cain acted on his anger, he was told that he could and must rule over it. This does not sound like Original Sin, of which it is claimed that humanly we can do nothing about it and that is the reason for the need of a substitute to overcome for us.

Very early on in the history of the world, God Himself tells Cain that he can “do what is right”: and if he does, he will “be accepted”. Note that he is not condemned for his anger. This is that evil inclination that he received from his parents genetically. But Elohim continued:”you must rule over it.” Can we as humans rule over our passions? Christianity says we cannot without a substitute. The Bible says we can do it with God’s help and our own determination. This is how righteous men and women of old were formed–man rising above the dust of the earth to reflect in himself the divine image!

Before the flood, there were two distinct classes of people. The righteous Sons of God who exercised control over their passions and submitted to God’s leading, and the wicked rabble –those who chose to follow their passions. The world came to an end at that time for all but eight people. 

Are there other examples?  Does God offer strength to overcome?

So how do we explain Psalms 51:5?

“5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And in sin did my mother conceive me.” 

This verse is used to support the doctrine of Original Sin, yet, the Evil Inclination, (the desire to do evil) is also passed down from generation to generation. So what is David saying? That the temptation was overwhelming and he blew it. That it was natural for him to be tempted and though he does not excuse it, he reminds the Creator of this as if reminding Him of his human weakness, but David goes on to express his gratitude for God’s mercy. In a way, he blames his parentage for passing this temptation down to him. But in the words that follow, he takes the entire blame. 

Psa 51:”3 For I know my transgressions; And my sin is ever before me.  … 7 Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.  8 Make me to hear joy and gladness, That the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice.  9 Hide thy face from my sins, And blot out all mine iniquities.  10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within me.  11 Cast me not away from thy presence; And take not thy Holy Spirit from me.  12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; And uphold me with a willing spirit. “14 Deliver me from the guilt of bloodshed, O God, you who are God my Savior, and my tongue will sing of your righteousness. 15 Open my lips, Lord, and my mouth will declare your praise. 16 For you do not delight in sacrifice; else would I give it: Thou hast no pleasure in burnt-offering. “

It is interesting that while David pleads with God to forgive him and to restore to him a clean heart, he shows it has nothing to do with a blood sacrifice. This shows the trusting human response to God when after we have sinned. And the truly righteous God we serve who needs no middle man to stand for us as an advocate. Our Creator Himself is our Savior and the only one who can forgive sin. 

Mic 7: “18 Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy. 19 You will again have compassion on us; you will tread our sins underfoot and hurl all our iniquities into the depths of the sea.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nineveh: In the story of Jonah, the people of Nineveh put on sackcloth and repented from their sins after Jonah told them of the forthcoming destruction of their city. Then God repented of the wrath that he had towards them and forgave them, though it angered Jonah:

Jon 3: “6 When Jonah’s warning reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. 7 This is the proclamation he issued in Nineveh: “By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let people or animals, herds or flocks, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. 8 But let people and animals be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. 9 Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.” 10 When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.”

Jon 4:”1 But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry. 2 And he prayed unto YHVH, and said, I pray thee, O YHVH, was not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish: for I knew that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the evil.”

Are babies born sinners?

This belief, one of the most damning of them all, places sin in the genetics which cannot be overcome. It takes sin out of the realm of acting and places it in our flesh. In the case of Cain, above, when Elohim spoke to him, he was already angry and ready to kill his brother. But that thought and attitude was not sin, he was reminded to overcome the tendency to do evil. When we blame ourselves or others for what we or they think, then we are missing the entire picture. Sin is what happens after the temptation. 

How to stop smoking! Just do it? 

One desires to stop smoking (I am not referring to smoking here as sin). 

The urge is extreme. “Just let me have that next cigarette.” But you resist it this time. The urge gets stronger, You stop for two weeks, then someone lights up and offers you a rolled cigarette. This time you light up and enjoy it, but then you feel ashamed, but you don’t give up. You try again. Two months later the same thing happens, and you hate yourself for your weakness, but you determine to try again. Two years later the urge is a little less though still desirable, and you have learned to stay away from people at work who are taking a smoke break. Avoidance.

Ten years later, the smell of tobacco still affects you, but you have learned to resist and to avoid it. And now you are no longer a smoker. So good for you! Some people never muster up the courage to quit, and some don’t want to quit. But this is about choices and change. You can do anything, almost, that you set your mind to do!

What about words? What about an angry temper and cussing? If words unjustly hurt people, are they classified as sin? If cussing makes us look weak and evil, with no self-control, then maybe start a cuss jar. Put money into it each time. When it adds up, give it to charity. Turn something bad into something good, and if it hurts enough, maybe you will see a change. 

So, I believe that the evil inclination–the temptation to do things that are wrong, is not sin. It is what you do with it. And as to Original Sin, no baby is destined to hellfire without sprinkling. We die for our sins, not for our tendencies! 

May your path to the Divine Image be successful,

Please subscribe to my blog. like and comment when you have an opinion. It really helps.

Ariella Golani

Parashat Chukat

Posted by

Introduction by Ariella Casey

In the following articles, we focus on the Red Heifer of Parsha Chukat, Numbers 19:1-22:1. The first article explores some of the studied beliefs of Jewish sages, as well as gives over some of the thoughts of our guest author. The second article, also from Serafini’s research, is strictly Karaite. Your comments are appreciated.

By Guest author Nathanael Serafini

Parashat Chukat begins with the laws of the *parah adumah* – the red heifer – including the process necessary for preparing the waters of purification and the purification ritual itself. The Torah introduces the topic in this way: “This is the law of the Torah” (Numbers 19:2).

These words evoke an obvious exegetical question: why did the Torah not say “This is the law of the red heifer”? After all, the subject that follows consists of the laws of the red heifer, not the entirety of the Torah’s laws.

Additionally, if a person touches a dead human body, they are considered *tamei met* (impure from death) for seven days. During this period, such a person cannot enter the Beit Hamikdash (Holy Temple), and it goes without saying that they cannot participate in the sacrifices offered there. The person is purified again when they are sprinkled with water mixed with the ashes of the red heifer on the third and seventh days of their impurity.

The red heifer had to be of a very rare color, completely red and free of black (or white) hairs. Furthermore, no yoke was to have been placed upon the animal. This was no small feat in a country where cows were among the most used animals for fieldwork. Finding such a cow was evidently an arduous task, and when it was found, its price soared. Our Sages tell us that over the hundreds of years during which our nation lived on its land, the red heifer was discovered only a few times, after which it was slaughtered so that the ashes could be prepared.

Anyone reading this passage for the first time must find it perplexing. And even those who read it year after year may feel uneasy trying to interpret this law. What is this law supposed to be? Why ashes? Why a cow? And why did it have to be red?

We should not feel uneasy if we have never succeeded in understanding how – or why – this works. It is one of the most peculiar laws of the Torah, and even our Sages testified that it is a decree made by God Himself, a decree that surpasses human understanding. Nevertheless, we will try to make sense of it all and evaluate what lies behind this enigmatic subject.

Two teachings will help us understand the topic.

In one of these teachings, we can ask the following question: “Why were all the sacrifices male sheep or goats, while this one was a female cow?” In the Scriptures, the responsibility of motherhood is often associated with the faults of their children, for example in the case of Hagar with her son Ishmael (Genesis 21:10), and other matriarchs like Leah and Rachel held the same responsibility regarding their sons (Genesis 30:16). Although we Karaites have faith only in the Miqra (Tanakh), it is interesting to read for informational purposes the opinions of the midrashim that sometimes illustrate Torah concepts. In this regard, we find: “Let the cow come and atone for the sin of the calf” (Bamidbar Rabba 19:8).

It would therefore be appropriate to understand that the burning of the red heifer is symbolically on the same level as the sin of the golden calf and the impurity it produced, and we now ask the cow to wipe it away, in the sense of erasing, of making *teshuvah*. How do we do that? And what is the connection between these two things?

Why could the red heifer atone for the sin committed with the golden calf? Isn’t this sin scarlet red? Aren’t all sins scarlet red? So it is this symbolic red color of sin that gives the desired dimension to this “red” heifer. Life is found in the blood (Leviticus 17:11) and is carried by the blood, which is its home; it is the bearer of life but also an indicator of death, which comes to an individual who has played with life (Genesis 4:10). And when the ashes of the heifer are burned, they become white, as it is said: “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow” (Isaiah 1:18).

These two symbols point us in the same direction: the sin of the golden calf is the most significant of all sins, especially since it was the first sin committed after the Torah was given at Mount Sinai. It serves as a model for other human failings. The essence of this failure is people’s attachment to a material and sensory world: in showing the golden calf, the people exclaimed: “These are your gods, O Israel” (Exodus 32:4).

The desire to cling to materialism has led us to imagine that material objects are what truly matter, while spirituality and the living soul are merely ephemeral phenomena. A confrontation with death could intensify this feeling: faced with death, man feels how ephemeral and arbitrary the physical world is.

Man might, unfortunately, come to think that material life is the foundation of our existence in the world, and that without the physical component, the world has no meaning. The feeling of emptiness one feels in the face of death is what the Torah calls *tumah* – impurity – and this is what the Torah attempts to eradicate. The red heifer reminds us that decay in the world is the product of sin.

What is eternal in man is shaped by his morality and by the model or image of the Creator that exists in each of us. By burning the red and turning it white, we are reminded that a person can correct their failures. Although these corrections are not enough to save a person’s life, the spiritual and moral aspects derived from the Creator are immortal.

This is why the section begins with the words “This is the law of the Torah.” This verse does not only address the laws of the red heifer. The true subject we are discussing is the essence of human life.

This life, do we place it under the control of the “red,” that is, of the materialistic, individualistic world, without faith or law? Or does each person understand that they have a vested interest in knowing what to do with the time allotted to them? Time that belongs to the timeless values of the Torah and the eternal divine spirit of the Creator, which is rooted in every human being He created and to whom He asks for an account, as a Judge full of mercy.


Nathanaël Serafini

The following article, also submitted by Nathanael Serafini, expresses a Karaite View from the Firkovich collection of Karaites of St. Petersburg 1876.

The Logic of the Red Heifer

Impurity is the consequence of the encounter between a living human and death. A stone cannot become impure because it has never known life. Death is the opposite of life, and the shock caused by encountering it shakes life. An Israelite is more impure than a non-Jew. Similarly, a woman who gives birth to a boy is impure for seven days because she carried a living body within her. When she gives birth to a girl, she is impure for two weeks because the girl herself has the potential to carry life. Her impurity is thus doubled.
The purification from the impurity of death is achieved through the red heifer by “resurrection.”
The Torah says: Warn the children of Israel to choose a heifer for you: A heifer – a female – a symbol of fertility, not a bull. The heifer gives life.
Red: the color of life.
Unblemished: perfect vitality.
Which has not yet borne the yoke: whose vitality has not been diminished.
You will give it to the priest Eleazar… it shall be slaughtered: the slaughtering is the annulment of life.
It is burned entirely: its skin, flesh, and blood, along with its dung, are burned. Absolutely everything.
Outside the camp: outside the place of life, where it is reduced to ashes. Ashes, unlike dust, do not coalesce and are not fertile. It is the absolute division.
Death also dominates the plant world. The largest tree is the cedar. The smallest is the hyssop. He shall take cedarwood, hyssop, and scarlet, and cast them into the fire burning the heifer (Num. 19:6). These are the extremes of the plant world. The heifer and the scarlet represent the extremes of the animal kingdom. The worm is what remains of man.
The maximum of life is reduced to the pinnacle of death.
A human being consists of a body and a soul. The body is like an earthen vessel, opaque. The soul is like a flow of living water. Man is a vessel containing living water.
We take the ashes, the trace of death, and resurrect them with living water – like the soul, in a vessel – like the body. That is why this water is used to purify from the impurity of death.
The mystery of the red heifer is elucidated.
If it is so simple, why did Solomon say: “I said, ‘I will be wise,’ but it was far from me” (Ecclesiastes 7:23), alluding to the mystery of the red heifer? It is because the key to the mystery is still distant. The transition from life to death and from death to life remains a mystery, as does the mystery of life within matter, as our sages, the Hakhamim, said: “Prodigious in action (creator) – who binds the spiritual to the material.”

Follow Take Hold the Tzitzit on WordPress.com

Evil Minds—Hamas, Sodom, the Antediluvians

Posted by

Why do certain people seem to be evil from the moment of birth and others have good deeds throughout their lives? Could it be that there is an inherited evil that passes down through the family tree? Is their actual DNA affected? For instance, if we consider the mindset of Hamas, we have examples of this evil being cultivated in the schools and by the parents, but is it only a cultivated evil? What if the children were adopted and raised in a peaceful environment? What then? Or would they still have tendencies to kill and deceive? Why do Arabs in the Middle East, for the most part, hate the Jews and desire to eliminate them? Has this attitude come down from Ishmael and Esau and the other sons of Abraham’s concubine Keturah? As one Christian Arab explained recently, people in the West do not understand the mindset of Arabs in the Middle East. They do not think like Westerners. These people often kill their own children and wives for any little disobedience or assumed disgrace. There is no compassion. Stealing is rewarded with cutting off a hand, and second occurrence cuts off the other hand. Then, of course they cannot feed themselves so they die. Women who are suspected of indiscretion with another man are killed even when there is no proof. Fear reigns where there is no mercy.

Maybe this seems like a judgmental or even racist attitude, but what about Biblical texts that seem to go along with this?

Sodom and Gomorrah:

Abraham begged the Eternal to consider saving Sodom if only 10 righteous people were found there, hoping to prevent the destruction. As we can imagine, little children and babes were wiped out by the fire and brimstone along with all the guilty adults, except the five rescued by the two angels who visited Lot the night before. Those kids were not the innocent victims of God’s wrath—The Eternal knows what He does! And as we see later even the two daughters of Lot produced, through incest, two nations that continually provoked the sons of Jacob. What was the inherent evil of Sodom that cursed that generation to carry the same evil to the extent that there was no escaping the doom of a fiery destruction? Incest and immorality are like a cancer on society. Killing, rape, thievery…all these bring evil upon an entire population.

The Flood:

When the Creator saw before the flood that the thoughts of men on the earth were “only evil continually;” He declared to Noah:

Gen 6:13: “And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.”

Was there really no redemptive cure for the little ones who had not yet tasted the pleasures of outright evil? According to the story, there was no man, woman or child who boarded the ark with Noah and his family of eight. And regarding the account that Noah preached for 120 years to try to save some, this is not part of the story as given in Genesis. Noah and his family were the only living humans who were counted as worthy to be saved by the Eternal. What happened that the entire remainder of humanity had corrupted themselves to the point of being unredeemable? It is interesting to note the two lineages and their descendants. Cain’s lineage and Seth’s lineage. The sons of Seth were the ones who carried the line of the righteous…Enoch, Methuselah, Noah. And it seems that after the flood, the sons of Noah were split into the lineage of the righteous and the lineage of the evil Canaanites. Did Canaan do something that corrupted his lineage to the point that Israel was commanded to exterminate all of the Canaanites in the land? Why good lineage and bad lineage? Are some sins so evil that the following generations are cursed to the point that few if any escape?

Are there peoples on the earth today who are unredeemable? Is there something that has conquered the minds of the multitude so that they cannot choose good over evil? In the current was with Hamas and the atrocities that have been committed against innocent children, women, and elderly, as well as soldiers and civilian men, it is apparent that the evil is foremost in their thinking. There is nothing good left in a person who one brags about personally raping and killing innocent people. The person who does these things has gone beyond the ability to repent. A power of evil controls him and he is subject to this power of destruction. He is tied by the cords of his own sins and cannot release himself. He/she has gone too far.

Sin Passes Down from Generation to Generation:

When God gave the commandments at Sinai, he declared that He would “visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.” Exo 20:5. If the parents do not repent of their sins, is there hope for the children? There are rare instances for sure, but the tendencies to continue in the path of evil are overwhelming. Maybe there is such a thing as corrupted DNA. The science of how evil takes over a mind from habitual abuse and sin is horrific. Would I dare say there is no escape? There are examples of repentance, but few. No one knows the exact level at which a person cannot escape—nor repent.

On the other hand, it is written in Ezekiel:

Eze 18:20 – “The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”

I have always quoted this verse as giving hope for those with bad parentage, but this is not saying that the children will be righteous without an intense struggle. Perhaps it gives an inkling of hope that a son or daughter can mend his ways and turn from the evil of his parents. And we see that though the sins of the fathers are not charged to the children, their own sins continue to abound unless they find personal strength to resist. Finding strength in the outstretched Hand of the Most High God is the only path to overcoming.

The outlook of earth’s decline from morality to outright evil is grim. Are we to the point in earth’s demise that there is no returning from the evil rampant among us? Is there hope that a few bright lights will stand for truth and bring a final repentance and return to righteousness such as has not been seen for many generations? Or will Divine wrath again be necessary to cleanse the earth of the evil and prepare a home for those who hold onto the Divine Covenant which insures righteousness and justice in the land?

Yours in the Hope of a Better World…Soon!

Ariella