I had a dream:

I was on the helm of a ship. The captain and his co-captain were standing together, looking out. There was a man behind them steering the ship on the captain's command ... "30^o stern", "Full speed ahead", etc. The captain knew where he was going. There was dense fog, and I could not see a thing.

Suddenly 2 huge green eyes came towards us in the fog. It made me jump. They were the eyes of the Statue of Liberty, which was falling headlong into the sea. It was so close to the ship I thought it was going to capsize the ship with its tidal wave.

As we have shared before, when the 5 ministry endowments "go bad", they yield the Jebusite, Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, and Girgashite spirits. Notice how, if you only consider these 5 evil spirits, the missing evil spirit of one phase "coincidentally" becomes the "undercurrent" evil spirit of the next phase, as if it were waiting "on deck" to play a role in the next phases, first as the "undercurrent" spirit in the very next phase, and then as the "primary" spirit in the phase after that. For example, the Hittite spirit is the only spirit not mentioned in the "white horse" stage, and it appears as the undercurrent spirit in the red-horse stage and as the primary spirit in the black-horse stage.

Undercurrent spirits in the righteous

Now, just as the enemies of God have an undercurrent spirit operating in them, so do the remnant of God. At each stage, the remnant "inadvertently" manifest this undercurrent endowment as they faithfully operate in the stage's primary and secondary endowments.

In every case after the white horse, the "undercurrent spirit" happens to be the "perfected" version of the "primary spirit". For example, as we have shared before, 2 Timothy 4:2 reveals that a "teacher" becomes "perfected" when he/she begins to act like a "prophet", and, in the red-horse stage, the primary spirit of "teacher" is "coincidentally" undergirded by God through the undercurrent spirit of "prophet". "Oddly enough", a "small" apostle becomes "perfected" when he/she begins to act like a "giant" evangelist, and, in the black-horse stage the primary spirit of "apostle" is "coincidentally" undergirded by God through the undercurrent spirit of "evangelist". In the same way, the primary spirit of "pastor" in the 5th-seal stage is undergirded by God's spirit of "apostle", and, as we have studied before, a "pastor" becomes perfected when he/she begins to act like a judgement-making "apostle" (this can be certified through a close study of Revelation 2:19). It is worth mentioning that an analysis of 2 Timothy 4:2 and Revelation 2:19 reveals a 5-stage growth pattern for all 5 ministries. As you walk through the 5 stages, your ministerial endowment receives an impartation from all 5 ministries (for example, as we studied before, at Stage 2, your teacher endowment receives an impartation from the evangelistic ministry, and, at Stage 3, it receives an impartation from the pastoral ministry). These 5 stages of growth involve travelling along the "ministries circle" using a specific pattern, and that pattern reveals that a ministry endowment is perfected when it takes on the qualities of the ministry 2 positions ahead of it in the "ministries circle".

We can therefore say that, in a sense, every ministry endowment's "Jordan crossing" involves transitioning 2 positions forward in the ministries circle in order to operate in the endowment that most "challenges" that ministry's "natural tendencies". For example, a pastor's "warm" and "soothing" endowment is most "challenged" by the "cold" and "heartless" nature of apostolic judgements; this is why a pastoral endowment is perfected when it operates apostolically. On the other hand, an apostle, who is geared towards being consumed and reduced to smallness in the fire of God's judgements, and who focuses more on blazing new trails by winning over a few converts in new and difficult terrain, is perfected when he/she operates in the "giant" evangelistic endowment that focuses on winning large number of converts unto God. By contrast, an evangelist's "strength" and "glamour" endowment is most "challenged" by the weakest and most "mundane" endowment of all, the teacher endowment; therefore, an evangelistic endowment is perfected when it operates in the procedural and "lowly-librarian" nature of a teacher. By the same token, a teacher's mind-centric and down-to-earth endowment is most "challenged" by the prophet's emotional and "high-flying" nature; this is why a teacher endowment is perfected when it operates prophetically.

{The pattern of growth for any ministry is the +1 +2 +1 +1 +2 movement pattern along the "ministries circle", as manifested in the "The perfect teacher" posting. For example, an evangelist's growth pattern involves a pastoral Stage 1 (+1), an apostolic Stage 2 (+2), a prophetic Stage 3 (+1), an evangelistic Stage 4 (+1), followed by a "perfecting" teacher Stage 5 (+2). The +2 leap from Stage 1 to Stage 2 in this growth cycle represents an automatic "Reed Sea" crossing, and the +2 leap from Stage 4 to Stage 5 represents a deliberate "Jordan" crossing. To "perfect" a ministerial endowment, you must go around the circle once (stages 1-4) and then move 2 positions forward in stage 5, for a total of 7 position movements around the circle.}

The depersonalisation barrier

For some reason, the perfecting of a prophet's endowment is a bit subtler in its nature than the perfecting of the other 4 endowments. A prophet is by nature geared towards fighting and sacrificing himself for high and lofty causes; thus, it is safe to say that most people deeply involved in social and political activism are prophets at heart. As we have shared before, prophets are also "egalitarian" and "communal" in their nature; this is why Scripture makes such repeated references to prophets gathering and walking about in "leaderless packs" (1 Samuel 10:5, 1 Samuel 19:20, 1 Kings 18:4, 2 Kings 2:3-15, 2 Kings 4:38, 2 Kings 6:1, Ezra 5:2, 1 Kings 18:19, 1 Kings 22:6) and why God's prophetic spirit shows a desire that all share in the anointing, not just a select few (Numbers 11:29, 1 Samuel 10:10-11, 1 John 2:20, 1 John 2:27). Therefore, we can conclude that prophets have a tendency to gather in groups in order to fight for a cause and promote an "equality" of some sort.

Because of their left-handed, emotional nature and their propensity to seek "communal kinship", prophets would seem to be naturally compatible with people of the pastoral endowment, given that pastors are also left-leaning, prone to following their emotions, and are big promoters of "soul communion and unity". However, even though the attraction and affinity may be there initially, the relationship between a prophet and a pastor will have a tendency to deteriorate with time. As a prophet progresses in his spiritual walk, he will become more and more driven by the cause, by the purpose burning in his heart. Along the way, the greatest threat to his prophetic calling is the subtle Canaanite contamination that he can "pick up" whilst in the black-horse wilderness, especially if he rejects the full nature of God's apostolic judgements. If he does fall prey to this contamination, he will become "more than comfortable" around (Canaanite) pastors, but his prophetic anointing will wither and morph into Hittite manifestations. If the prophet does escape this Canaanite sand trap, he will be confronted with an even subtler barrier, the "depersonalisation barrier", and this barrier will cause him to reject the pastoral impartation essential for the perfecting of his prophetic endowment.

As the prophet abides in the black-horse wilderness without his soul becoming contaminated by the Canaanite spirit of "emotional blessings", he develops an ever bolder, more proactive, "male" nature, and he will be driven to fight and die for his "cause" with even greater fervour. However, as he does this, the "cause" will tend to become his consuming passion, to the point that he may start forgetting that the "cause" is irrelevant if it does not bless people in a transcendental way. In other words, the cause may become an end in itself and not a means to fundamentally transform people for God's glory. This will lead to the cause becoming depersonalised and more important than the people it was originally being fought for.

"¹ Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. ² And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I am nothing. ³ And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not love, it profiteth me nothing." (1 Corinthians 13:1-3)

[To the possible chagrin of the pathetic "Christians" who worship the King James Version (cursed be those who eternalise the temporal thoughts of men operating in a natural understanding), we have changed the gruesome word "charity" in this passage, which was pathetically, woefully, and shamelessly mistranslated from the Greek word agape, replacing it with the correct translation, "love". How dared the KJV translators inject their own personal twist into their translation of God's Holy Text, as if to help God explain Himself better? How dared they twist God's Holy Text, arbitrarily injecting a different word into their translation with absolutely no linguistic justification. A translator's job is to translate, not to add personal commentary. A translator's job is to stay as faithful as possible to the speaker's use of the original words, not to inject improvements, unless, of course, he thinks that the speaker is not "too bright" and is incapable of expressing himself in a better way. The translators who endeavour to correct and improve God's words are like an Uzzah daring to "straighten" the Ark (2 Samuel 6:3-7). Even though natural man (and even a half-hearted David) finds it difficult to understand why God's wrath is stirred against the Uzzah's of this world, that wrath is real, and, if you disagree with the God of Israel on this matter, you should stop calling yourself a Christian and fashion a new "religion", an improved version of "Christianity", just as most matriarchal pastors already have done, without their followers realising it.]

Notice how verse 2 lists 3 attributes under 2 verbs after the first appearance of the word "though": "the gift of prophecy" under the verb "have" and "all mysteries and all knowledge" under the verb "understand". The "gift of prophecy" (translated from the single Greek word propheteia) clearly points to the prophetic endowment, and "understanding all mysteries" clearly points to the apostolic endowment, since, as we have shared before, the apostolic endowment is the one most related to wisdom and the revelation of new things (the word "knowledge" in verse 2 was translated from the Greek word gnosis, which is related to knowledge of the heart as opposed to mental knowledge; hence, the fact that it is grouped along with "all mysteries" under the verb "have" points to the apostolic Zebulun heart of revelation wisdom that we have tweeted about before). Thus, we can say that verse 2 speaks of people operating in both the prophetic and the apostolic, which correlates with the black-horse anointing, since black-horse riders are apostle-prophets. Hence, the passage above bears out the fact that black-horse riders who believe that there is no next stage to advance to will lose the ability to operate in true sacrificial love, even if they are strongly prophetic. In such cases, they will begin to carry out their prophetic endowment through sacrifices that will mean nothing to God. Why? Because they will be sacrifices for the sake of an impersonal cause, with no understanding of the people the cause is for. Only the prophetic endowment can motivate you to voluntarily "give your body to be burned" (v3), yet, if that sacrifice is merely out of right-handed, apostolic commitment to the "cause", it shall not be pleasing unto God. This is where the pastoral (i.e.- the "shepherd") endowment comes in:

"¹¹ I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. ¹² But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. ¹³ The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep. ¹⁴ I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. ¹⁵ As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. ¹⁶ And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. ¹⁷ Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. ¹⁸ No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father." (John 10:11-18)

[The word "shepherd" in this passage was translated from the Greek word poimen, the same word translated as "pastor" in Ephesians 4:11]

The word "good" in "good shepherd" was translated from the Greek word kalos, which, as we have shared before, speaks of "prophetic usefulness or purpose". Thus, when the Lord says "good shepherd", He is speaking of a pastoral endowment imbued with prophetic purpose. Notice also that the good shepherd "knows" the sheep (v14), meaning that a good shepherd establishes a relationship with the "sheep", seeing them as individuals, as persons, not just as a mass of nameless, generic animals. A kalos shepherd begins to appreciate the individual qualities (and recognise the individual flaws) of each sheep, and, even though he may be sacrificing himself for a "general" prophetic cause, he never turns the sheep into generic pawns intended to make that cause successful. This is why Yeshua could say, "My Father loves Me" (v17) because the prophetic sacrifice He was about to make was a sacrifice birthed in true, personal love (1 Corinthians 13). Notice also that Yeshua did not feel "compelled" to lay down His life; this is why He declares "no one takes it from Me" (v18). In other words, He was not carrying out His sacrifice out of a sense of "legal duty" in order to satisfy a requirement that God's apostolic Law was placing upon Him. The "commandment" that He received from the Father (v18) was not to lay down His life; instead, it was a commandment that gave Him the exousia, the authority (mistranslated as "power") to take His life again after laying it down. Hence, the difference between a black-horse prophet and a green-horse prophet is that a black-horse prophet carries out sacrifices out of apostolic duty to an impersonal cause, whilst a green-horse prophet carries out sacrifices out of pastoral love for individuals he has come to know and values. A black-horse prophet sees his cause in the context of the black-horse wilderness's dryness and sterility. By contrast, a green-horse prophet is filled with the hope of resurrection, of "taking back his life" after laying it down. A black-horse prophet can see his cause "fulfilled" in a dry and empty desert where the sheep must unconditionally submit under and sacrifice for the higher cause, even if it means scarcity and void. A green-horse prophet, by contrast, sees his cause fulfilled only if it unleashes an explosion of resurrection life, not only for himself, but for the sheep he sacrificed himself for (because the sacrifice is for the sheep's sake, not the cause's). To a green-horse prophet, the cause cannot be considered "accomplished" if he sees the sheep mired in limitation and resigned failure, for He visualises a land "across the Jordan" that flows with "milk and honey", a land where God's sheep are overflowing with the resurrection life of God.

From all of the above, it is evident that most diehard communists and left-wing socialists are prophets who never matured out of their black-horse stage. The "cause" becomes so important to them that they are willing to sacrifice millions of their "beloved" sheep at its feet. The "cause" of so-called "equality" becomes so fundamentally important that they are willing to make everyone poor in order to achieve that end. That is why they can look over the barren failure of Cuba, with its rundown cities, its 60-year-old cars, and its senile dictators, and sigh with great satisfaction because the "communist cause of equality" has prevailed. They can read about the massacre of millions performed by Mao and Stalin and simply shrug their shoulders, saying in a soft and deliberate voice, "It was needed to keep the revolution alive". Like the whore Anita Dunn (that tongue-flicking snake), they can stand up in front of the next generation of Americans and teach them to revere the blood-drenched name of "mao", extolling him as a brilliant leader and thinker.

When prophets stagnate in the black-horse stage, they not only see the sheep as expendable, they begin to see the truth as expendable. That is when they turn radically Hittite, resorting to outright lies and fabrications to further their "holy cause". Thus, the once high-flying prophets turn into Korah snakes that operate in Hittite deceit and use Girgashite/Jebusite ingenuity to fabricate their lies, all for the purpose of upholding the Canaanite dominion of the soul over the Spirit (which is always at the heart of any cause they pursue, whether they realise it or not).

It is worth noting that the black-horse prophet becomes so steeped in the "apostolic" component of the black-horse, apostle-prophet walk that he turns Jebusite and loses his "first love". This is utterly ironic because, out of the 5 ministry endowments, the one most naturally "endowed" to understand love is the prophetic endowment (due to its inherent understanding of sacrifice). It is also ironic that the endowment required to prevent this distortion of the prophetic turns out to be the pastoral endowment, given that the prophet-pastor green-horse rider comes with the intent to obliterate the pastoral matriarchy of the soul (meaning that the pastoral endowment in the green-horse rider helps to end the domination of the pastoral endowment of man's soul). It is through the green-horse rider's pastoral endowment that the prophet breaks the "depersonalisation barrier" and is able to sacrifice himself for the sake of people and not just for the sake of a high and abstract "God" and an impersonal cause.

{Fellow believer, we strongly encourage you to read the following page on Kant's moral philosophy in the context of the "depersonalisation barrier": http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/, especially the "Humanity Formula" section. We also recommend that you consider Kant's philosophy in the light of what the Lord has had us share on the 10 commandments on Twitter, particularly the 4th commandment, and how this all relates to America's black-horse stagnation.}

The man behind

From all of the above, we can conclude that the man behind the captain and co-captain in sister Annie's dream represents the "undercurrent" pastoral endowment operating in green-horse riders. This means that the captain is the "prophetic endowment", the co-captain is the "pastoral endowment", and the man behind both of them is the "pastoral endowment" again. If you revisit the "spirits table" for the righteous above, you will notice that the green-horse stage is the only stage where a spirit "repeats itself". Whereas the other stages have 3 distinct spirit endowments, the green-horse stage is the only one with just 2 distinct endowments. This begs two questions, "Why does the green-horse stage need the pastoral endowment both as a secondary spirit and as an undercurrent spirit?", and, "Why is the green-horse stage the only stage with support from 2 distinct spirits, as opposed to the other stages, which have support from 3?".

The answer to the first question is the following:

1. The co-captain represents the components in the pastoral endowment that propel you to a sacrifice pleasant unto God, and

2. ... the man behind them represents the components in the pastoral endowment that undergird your soul as you walk through that sacrifice.

As opposed to the pastoral-matriarchy spirit, the co-captain pastoral endowment remains subservient to the "male" ministry anointings of God. This is why it appears in the dream as the "co-captain" and not the captain. In other words, the co-captain pastoral endowment is there to support the captain and complement the captain, not to overshadow him.

As we share above, the pastoral endowment's co-captain role (bullet "a" above) is described in John 10:11-18. The other role (bullet "b") is explained in the following passage:

"¹ The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. ² He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters. ³ He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. ⁴ Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. ⁵ Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over. ⁶ Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever." (Psalm 23)

Notice how the Lord does not use His pastoral (i.e.- shepherd) anointing to shield you from the "valley of the shadow of death". Why? Because, oftentimes, it is the Lord Himself who is taking you there, especially if you are a green-horse rider since, as we have said before, God's green-horse riders are shackled by God and taken through Death and Sheol. Even though the Lord may deliberately take you through Death and Sheol, He will equip you with enough of His pastoral comforting to sustain you through the journey. This is the purpose of the "undercurrent" pastoral endowment represented by the man behind the captain and co-captain in the dream. Hence, the answer to the first question above is,

"The pastoral endowment is needed as a secondary spirit to motivate the prophet to make a green-horse sacrifice of self for the sheep and not just for an impersonal cause ... and it is supplied by God as an undercurrent spirit to comfort the green-horse prophet through his ultimate sacrifice."

The answer to the second question above can be gleaned from the following passage:

"³⁶ Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder. ³⁷ And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. ³⁸ Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me. ³⁹ And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. ⁴⁰ And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? ⁴¹ Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. ⁴² He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. ⁴³ And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. ⁴⁴ And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. ⁴⁵ Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. ⁴⁶ Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me." (Matthew 26:36-46)

Notice how Yeshua was agonising over His impending green-horse death, yet the passage above shows no answer from God. Unlike other occasions, no cloud from Heaven appeared over Him; no heavenly voice from the Father could be heard comforting Him or declaring how blessed and beloved He was. Luke 22:43 does declare that an angel from Heaven appeared to strengthen Him, yet, even after that, the agony remained so intense that His sweat was like great drops of blood falling to the ground. Humanly speaking, you would expect the Garden of Gethsemane to light up with the blinding glow of the Father's Glory, and you would expect a legion of angels (not a single angel) ascending and descending upon Yeshua, exalting Him and praising Him for the transcendental feat of heroic sacrifice that He was about to carry out. Yet, the Garden remained notoriously silent, and the atmosphere remained so dark and heavy that Jesus' close disciples had a difficult time remaining awake in it. All of this bears out the fact that, as the green-horse sacrifice draws near, the Father (who seemed so close during the black-horse stage) will suddenly appear more and more silent, and His presence will appear more and more distant. In a sense, as the moment of green-horse death approaches, you will become more and more "forsaken", until, eventually, you will say what Yeshua said:

"⁴⁵ Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour. ⁴⁶ And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:45-46)

As you cry out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me", you will feel the full weight of the name "Naphtali" (i.e.- "my struggle"), for you will feel that you are struggling all on your own. All of this explains why the green-horse phase only has 2 distinct spiritual endowments, as opposed to the other stages, which have 3. As we mentioned above, the "undercurrent" spirit at each stage is a ministerial endowment "externally" supplied by God that "inadvertently" operates in and through the life of the believer during that stage without him or her even realising it. In the case of the green-horse rider, the "secondary spirit" endowment, which you are to act out, is the same as the "undercurrent spirit" endowment, which the Lord God supplies without you realising it. As your green-horse walk continues, that undercurrent pastoral support from God begins to blend in with the secondary-spirit pastoral endowment that comes out of you, to the point that you will eventually feel as if there is no undercurrent support from God, and you will be "on your own". It is as if the store of pastoral support you need to get through the journey will be left by God as a "deposit" inside your secondary-spirit endowment, and you will have to consciously provide for yourself from that deposit, without God being there supplying it for you (behind the scenes) as you need it. After leaving you that deposit, God will, in a sense, "leave you to yourself". In a long-term sense, He will not have "left" you or "forsaken" you (Hebrews 13:5), for He will come back to resurrect you from your green-horse death, and He will have left you enough of a pastoral deposit for you to complete your journey. But, in a short-term sense, He will have left you and forsaken you, just as Yeshua declares in Matthew 27:46 above.

Shortly before His sacrifice, as He saw what lay ahead for them all, Yeshua tried to reassure His disciples that they were not going to be abandoned by God in the long term (John 14:18). However, they were unable to absorb the Lord's words, and they were unable to understand the nature of what was transpiring. This is why they felt so abandoned, so "shepherdless" (Matthew 26:31), when Christ was crucified and disappeared for 3 days. They did not understand that they were now to survive from the pastoral deposit that God had left with them before departing, and that they were to face the next few days "struggling by themselves". Whereas in the other stages, you seem to have a "3rd leg", a "backup leg" to stand on, the green-horse stage leaves you with just 2 legs, and the "backup leg" becomes your second leg. No Zimmer frame is allowed when you are crossing the River Jordan. You must walk on your own 2 legs. You must stand on your own, by yourself. As you carry out your green-horse sacrifice, you will look behind you, and you will find no "man behind you" backing you up, for that "man behind" will have blended into you.

Why does God do this? Why does God suddenly "disappear"? Why does God leave you and forsake you in the short term? Because, when you cross the Reed Sea, God carries you. When you cross the River Jordan, you carry God:

"¹⁴ And it came to pass, when the people removed from their tents, to pass over Jordan, and the priests bearing the ark of the covenant before the people; ¹⁵ And as they that bare the ark were come unto Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bare the ark were dipped in the brim of the water, (for Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest,) ¹⁶ That the waters which came down from above stood and rose up upon an heap very far from the city Adam, that is beside Zaretan: and those that came down toward the sea of the plain, even the salt sea, failed, and were cut off: and the people passed over right against Jericho. ¹⁷ And the priests that bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD stood firm on dry ground in the midst of Jordan, and all the Israelites passed over on dry ground, until all the people were passed clean over Jordan." (Joshua 3:14-17)

As you may know, the Ark of the Covenant represents the presence of God Himself. Therefore, when the priests carried the Ark of the Covenant across the River Jordan, they were carrying God's presence across the River. When the Israelites crossed the Reed Sea, God parted the waters for them without them having to do anything, and the river bed was made dry for them before they set foot on it. By contrast, when they crossed the River Jordan, the priests had to get their feet wet in the water as they carried the Ark, and that is when the waters stopped flowing and the river bed dried up. Unlike the Reed Sea crossing (Exodus 14:15-31), the Jordan crossing involved no majestic walls of water on either side; there was no pillar of fire shielding them from the Egyptians as they crossed. When they crossed the Reed Sea, the presence of God was shielding them on all fronts, enveloping them, protecting them, carrying them across in relative tranquillity, like a child wrapped in swaddling clothes. By contrast, when they crossed the River Jordan, God's presence was enveloped in the Ark of the Covenant as they carried it across and was in no way visible around them. When the Israelites crossed the Reed Sea, they had the enemy behind them, with God covering their backs and freedom in front of them. When they crossed the River Jordan, the enemy, Jericho, was not behind them but ahead of them (v16), with its renowned walls menacingly staring at them as they crossed. As opposed to the pomp and majesty of the Reed Sea crossing, the Jordan crossing was silent and almost sombre in its tone. That is the reason why the waters of the Jordan rose up at "Adam, the city that is beside Zaretan" (v16). The name "Adam" literally means "man" and points to man in his bare humanity, and it also points to the potential that man was to assume from the beginning but lost at the garden of Eden; the name "Zaretan" means "their distress", which speaks of a God who has "distanced Himself" from their heartache, leaving them to fend for themselves and fight on their own ("Naphtali"). In order for man ("Adam") to fulfil His God-potential, he must carry the presence of God across the Jordan (the Ark of the Covenant) with "no help", being left to his own distress ("Zaretan").

Notice also that the waters were stopped "very far" (v16) away from where the Israelites actually crossed. This means that the Israelites did not see the majestic walls of water that they had seen at the Reed Sea. There was no visible, overwhelming sign of God being with them. There was no rushing wind blowing over the waters. Simply and suddenly, as the Ark-bearing priests began to get their feet wet, the River's water level silently began to lower until the river bed became dry enough for the rest of the Israelites to walk across. There was no One behind them, for that One had now blended in with them and was being carried inside of them. Let him who has ears understand what all of this means.

The Syrtis Maior unwelcome mat

As we have seen so far, understanding the "undergirding" nature of the man behind the captain and co-captain is essential to understanding the spiritual nature of this "green ship" dream. Interestingly enough, the word "undergirding" appears in the following passage in reference to the ship on which Paul was being taken as a prisoner to Rome:

"¹⁷ Which when they had taken up, they used helps, undergirding the ship; and, fearing lest they should fall into the quicksands, strake sail, and so were driven. ¹⁸ And we being exceedingly tossed with a tempest, the next day they lightened the ship; ¹⁹ And the third day we cast out with our own hands the tackling of the ship. ²⁰ And when neither sun nor stars in many days appeared, and no small tempest lay on us, all hope that we should be saved was then taken away." (Acts 27:17-20)

The word "undergirding" in verse 17 was translated from the Greek verb hypozonnumi, which is derived from the prefix hypo meaning "under" and the verb zonnumi meaning "to gird"; hence, it literally reads "under-gird" in Greek as well. Curiously enough, verse 17 above is the only time that this word ever appears in all of Scripture. As evidenced by Acts 21:11, Paul's trip to Rome to see Caesar was a "green-horse trek". Hence, the one-and-only use of the word "undergird" in the passage above correlates with everything that we have studied so far, since Paul and those on board the ship were forced to "help themselves" and "undergird" the ship on their own. Notice also how the situation worsened and worsened, with no sign of anyone (whether "human" or "divine") coming to the rescue, which emphasises the "forsaken" nature of the green-horse trek.

The word "quicksands" was mistranslated from the Greek word Syrtis, which is actually the name of 2 different places in the Libyan Sea full of shallows and sandbanks, making them very dangerous for ships. The western Syrtis was known in ancient times as "Syrtis Minor", and is currently known as the "Gulf of Gabès". As indicated on wikipedia.org, the Gulf of Gabès is a gulf on Tunisia's east coast in the Mediterranean. The other Syrtis, the eastern Syrtis, was known in ancient times as "Syrtis Maior", and is currently known as the "Gulf of Sidra" or the "Gulf of Sirte". As indicated on wikipedia.org, the Gulf of Sidra lies on the northern coast of Libya, and has, in modern history, become an area of conflict because of delusional dictator Qaddafi's territorial claim on it. Given that Paul's ship was coming from Crete, it can be assumed that the passage above is referring to Syrtis Maior, since Crete is closer to Lybia than Tunisia. There is prophetic significance behind this. As we said above, Paul's trip to Rome was a "green-horse trek". Thus, the shallows and sandbanks in the 2 Syrtis places clearly point to stagnation in the black-horse wilderness, a stagnation that leads to an overdose of "self-empowerment" that sees oneself as above the control of "external wills". In this stagnation, otherwise-faithful believers begin to oversimplify God's message and to reject God's fractal green-horse teachings, causing them to adopt shallow paradigms that lack God's green-horse depth. Such a self-willed and shallow stagnation is reflected in the behaviour of the helmsman of the ship, its owner, and the Roman centurion when they refused to heed Paul's voice (Acts 27:9-14). However, the fact that Paul's ship suffered damage in Syrtis Maior (and not Syrtis Minor) reveals that it was a major stagnation, a stagnation that caused major unnecessary suffering and delay. As you go through your green-horse journey, the Syrtis experience is, in a sense, inevitable, but the will of others determines whether it shall be a "Syrtis Minor" or a "Syrtis Maior" experience. This stubborn American generation has, through her foolish will, caused God's green remnant to go through a very unnecessary Syrtis Maior experience, pushing God's patience to the point of losing the opportunity of a green-horse visitation in this generation. This explains why the green ship's journey was suddenly interrupted in the dream:

Suddenly 2 huge green eyes came towards us in the fog. It made me jump. They were the eyes of the Statue of Liberty, which was falling headlong into the sea. It was so close to the ship I thought it was going to capsize the ship with its tidal wave.

The green eyes clearly point to the green-horse visitation. The fact that the eyes belonged to the Statue of Liberty points to New York, which, as we have shared before, is God's designated epicentre for His latter-day revival in America. The Statue of Liberty is a symbol of New York and America welcoming foreigners into its midst, which therefore speaks of New York and America welcoming God's green-horse visitation. This is evident not only in the greenness of the eyes but in the fact that, as we have said before, green-horse riders are "foreigners", i.e.- they are believers who speak a fractal language that is totally foreign to the natural understanding of man, a language that speaks of things that are ineffable to the first Adam (2 Corinthians 12:4). Hence, when the Statue of Liberty fell headlong into the sea, it was a sign that America had definitively decided not to welcome God's green-horse visitation. No longer was the visitation just being delayed, it was being cancelled for an entire generation, so much so that the Statue of Liberty that was intended to welcome them fell into the "green" sea.

As we have shared before, when green-horse riders stare out into the sea, they see the God-potential in the peoples of the Earth that others fail to see. Therefore, the Statue of Liberty gazing out into the sea with her "green eyes" represents America's ability to see the nations of the Earth with "green-horse eyes", visualising the God-potential in the sea that is "just waiting" to be harvested. As we have also said before, green is also the colour of hope. Therefore, the Statue's "green eyes" point to the "vision of hope" that green-horse riders become enamoured with. These were indeed "green days", for which reason the word "hope" became so relevant in the spiritual atmosphere. This is why, as God's green-horse riders were rejected by America, the spirit of Korah began to offer a counterfeit "vision of hope" with the satanic slogan, "yes, we can"; and, unlike her reaction to God's green message, America quickly embraced satan's "pseudo-green" message, and that is when the Statue of Liberty's foundation began to crack. Since America refused to correct the foundational issues that led to the crack, the Statue of Liberty eventually fell headlong into the sea, with its green eyes staring intently ahead, like the eyes of a man who fell and died with his eyes wide open.

"³ And he took up his parable, and said, Balaam the son of Beor hath said, and the man whose eyes are open hath said: ⁴ He hath said, which heard the words of God, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open" (Numbers 24:3-4)

[When you turn away from crossing the River Jordan, you become susceptible to the entrapment of Balaam that lurks in the black-horse wilderness, even if you have successfully travelled through it]

Sandy present

As we shared above, this dream's implicit reference to the Syrtis sand traps is a figure of this generation's spiritual stagnation. The implicit reference to sand per se points to the Girgashite spirit of granularity. As we have shared before, during the black-horse stage, the Church's leadership morphs into a Balaam that detours prophetic and evangelistic grace towards temporal, Girgashite ends. When believers linger in the black-horse stage for too long, they become susceptible to Balaam's Girgashite distortion of God's grace. Therefore, the implicit reference to sand in this dream points to the Balaam contamination that affects believers that stay "black" for too long.

As we have said before, the Girgashite spirit is a spirit that stresses the past, a spirit that causes people to unquestioningly base their lives on old traditions of men. Therefore, the Girgashite spirit is the "prototypical" spirit of stagnation that causes people to live in the past and to think that the "old" is always better than the "new". It is the spirit that sees change with a suspicious eye and that sees the "same old, same old" with eyes of unconditional faith. Gripped by Girgashite doubt, America's vanguard believers were unable to let go of some of the old paradigms. They were disgusted with much of the old, but not disgusted enough to burn it down and adopt God's green paradigm. This is what happened to America, even in the political arena. When Korah obama and its cohorts filled the void left by the green-horse remnant's absence, America's conservatives finally rose up, but their displeasure with the current state of events was not enough to cause them to examine what they may have done wrong, what unrighteousness they may have carried out against God that could have prompted the rise of such a beastly creature to begin with. Instead, all they could limit themselves to was issue a cry to "take their country back" and return to "the way we were", as if everything had been hunky dory until babi obama came along. The rise of American conservatives from their usual indifference in order to battle against liberalism-run-amok was historic, but it was only triggered by the Leonidas remnant's sacrifice. Had there been no green-horse sacrifice, there would have never been enough impetus in the spirit realm to enable the rise of the Tea Party movement, and the damage inflicted by babi obama and his troop would have been so devastating that America, as a nation, would have never recovered from it. Unfortunately, all that the remnant were able to do was to hold off this permanent damage, for this generation was unfit for anything else.

As we have shared before, the nation on Earth most directly tied to the Girgashite spirit is the sandy land of Egypt, and, as a sister in Christ made us aware of, an Egyptian-style obelisk stands high and proud in the middle of America's capital, and it is known to its visitors as the "Washington Monument". According to wikipedia.org, the Washington Monument is the tallest obelisk in the world, and it is the tallest structure in Washington, D.C. Its name ("Washington Monument") means that it stands as a symbol of a Girgashite America bent on preserving the structures on which it was founded, with no interest in a deep re-examination of her social, political, and spiritual structures, for whosoever shall be found without unconditional faith in Washington and the Founding Fathers must stand and face the hounds of hell and rot inside a corpse's shell ... at least according to America's conservatives, especially if they are traditional "Christians".

Thus, it is no spiritual coincidence that God allowed a movement for political freedom to break out in Egypt out of nowhere in 2011. American conservatives were horrified at the thought of "change" in the Middle East, and they were willing to see the long and repressive regime of Mubarak remain rather than see any potential doors opening up for Muslim radicals to take over. Almost all conservative pundits were quick to admit that they did not know what was behind the movement, meaning that they had no understanding whatsoever as to its roots or nature. Yet, even when Egyptians were showing a desire for democracy and freedom, the very conservatives who touted the value of "freedom" from oppressive government during Tea Party rallies showed no sympathy for the Egyptians' cry. As Mark Levin, a conservative radio host in America, was quick to admit, they were only interested in viewing events there from an "America-centric point of view". In other words, Mubarak remaining in power may have meant heartache and repression for the Egyptian people, but it meant no harm to Americans, so it was in the conservatives' interests to avoid any of the risks that their beloved "freedom" always comes with.

This worthless and self-centred attitude is typical of people stuck in the black-horse wilderness of independence, and it is typical of an American nation founded more on worthless Lockean pragmatism than on the disinterested struggle for higher principles. Hence, it is both fitting and ironic that, as the American freedom experiment was struggling to preserve its flawed, Washington-obelisk past, Egypt, the bastion of Girgashite conservatism on Earth, suddenly rose up out of nowhere to cry for sudden freedom and change. American conservatives' reaction to events in Egypt exposed their hypocrisy with regard to the so-called "Iranian Green Movement" of 2009 (as you may gather, it is no coincidence that it was called a "green" movement). The only reason why conservatives went "green" on Iran in 2009 was because it signified the potential downfall of a regime antagonistic to America. It really had nothing to do with a disinterested longing to see the Iranian people free from tyranny and oppression. Otherwise, their reaction towards the movement in Egypt would have been more nuanced and way more concerned about the freedom of the Egyptian people per se. It is no wonder, therefore, that the Statue of Liberty with "green eyes" fell headlong into the sea. The monument that supposedly symbolises America's support of liberty as a human principle became meaningless in God's eyes as He beheld America's inability to show a disinterested longing for freedom in other people's lands, even after Americans had gone through a (Tea Party) struggle for freedom of their own.

To American conservatives, the 2011 protests in Egypt were mysterious in their origin, and all they could worry about was the possible involvement of radical Muslim groups in those origins. Like ignorant know-nothings, these conservatives began to equate the movement in Egypt to the Iranian movement of 1979, not only because it made babi obama look like a pathetic Jimmy Carter on steroids (which he is), but because, to simple-minded conservatives, "all Muslims are alike". Completely unaware that Iran's Persian makeup is much more religiously oriented than the more secular and pragmatic Egyptian makeup, American conservatives hastily concluded that what happened in Iran in 1979 could just as easily happen in Egypt 32 years later, even when the Iranian people have so clearly been showing Egypt and the rest of the Arab and Muslim world that they regret their foolish decision from 32 years ago (i.e.- the previous generation's decision).

The reason why the brightest American conservatives were scratching their heads trying to understand the source of all the uprisings throughout the Middle East was that the actual answer went beyond their black-horse understanding. If they had been willing to stop their rhetoric and listen to something new, they would have realised that everything started in Tunisia, one of the most "stable" repressive dictatorships in the Arab world. As indicated on wikipedia.org, there was a 26-year-old Tunisian man in the city of Sidi Bouzid, named Mohamed Bouazizi, who was the sole income earner for his extended family of 8. His sole source of income was a vegetable cart that he had operated for some 7 years. On 17 December 2010, a policewoman confiscated his cart and produce for not having the appropriate licence. He had already tried to resolve his licence issue in the past, but all to no avail, given that the corrupt police force were demanding bribes that he was unwilling to acquiesce to. When he tried to pay the 10-dinar fine (equivalent to a day's wages) in order to get his cart and produce back, the policewoman slapped him, spat in his face, and insulted his deceased father. Frustrated by years of persistent police oppression and corruption, the humiliated Bouazizi went to the provincial headquarters to complain to the local municipality officials, but was refused an audience. Without alerting his family, at 11:30am, Bouazizi returned to the headquarters, doused himself with a flammable liquid, and set himself on fire. Bouazizi's self-immolation served as a spark that jumpstarted the long-dormant Tunisian population that had grown accustomed to the Tunisian dictator's 23-year oppression. Peaceful freedom protests erupted in the country, which were promptly suppressed with ruthless violence by police. This then led to riots in Sidi Bouzid and to greater unrest in the country, leading to the eventual ouster and self-exile of the dictator on 14 January 2011, 10 days after the eventual death of Bouazizi in hospital on 4 January 2011.

If you read quotes from Tunisians who were protesting against the government (at time.com, for example), you will not hear radical terrorists calling for "anarchy" and "death to America"; instead, you will hear the plight of a people tired of corruption, tired of being dependent on the whim of government officials to get ahead in life, tired of living under a system that did not allow them the freedom to work on their own and prosper. Aren't these the very principles that conservatives constantly argue for? Aren't these the very principles that inspired the Tea Party movement? Yet, American conservatives remained unmoved and uninterested by the Tunisians' cry for freedom. Since Tunisia was not a major oil producer that could affect America's economy, American conservatives could care more about a rodent's derrière (and I say this in the Spirit) than about what could or could not happen to the Tunisian people. To the American conservative, the motto has always been, "Out of sight, out of mind; if it don't affect me, I couldn't care less".

Inspired by what had happened in Tunisia, the people in other Arab and Muslim countries (from Morocco to Iran) began to rise up in peaceful protest against their respective oppressive governments. The ripple effect of Bouazizi's self-immolation was so powerful that it even reached China, whose cancerous Qain-sian government was forced to censor most media coverage on the Arab world's protests in order to prevent any further unrest. Interestingly enough, this freedom movement was dubbed the "Jasmine revolution", which is no spiritual coincidence, given that, as we have shared before, green-horse riders must be willing to expose themselves in "yellow vulnerability" in order to bait Korah into attacking them, which then triggers the events that lead to Korah's eventual downfall.

It is true that a few elements in some of the countries involved (including Egypt) have tried to take advantage of the movement in order to further their radical Islamist agenda. However, to see these opportunists as the source of the uprisings is to show utter BHS (black-horse-stuck) ignorance. Consider, for example, the AP photo that appears in this Daily News story: www.dailynews.com/ci_17456483. The photo shows a Libyan protestor stomping on a face of Qaddafi with the words "MURDERER TERRORIST DICTATOR" below it. Interestingly enough, this Libyan protestor was stomping on the poster in front of the Libyan Embassy in Cairo, Egypt (on 21 February 2011). If the Bouazizi-inspired uprisings in Egypt and Libya were being instigated by Islamist terrorists, why would the protestor in the picture be stomping on a face of Qaddafi whilst calling him a "murderer", a "terrorist", and a "dictator"? Would terrorists be upset at Qaddafi for being a terrorist? Would terrorists be publicly equating terrorism with murder? Would terrorists be upset at Qaddafi for imposing himself as a dictator on the Libyan people? If the "protest fires" in Egypt were being fanned mainly by Islamist radicals, why would the protestors in Cairo, Egypt be stomping on Qaddafi for being a "terrorist"? As shown by the AP photo posted in another Daily News story (www.dailynews.com/news/ci_17447196), even children felt emboldened to step on Qaddafi's face in Cairo, Egypt! If the mood in Egypt was being driven by radical extremism, don't you think, oh conservative pundit, that it would be dangerous for parents to allow their children to denounce Qaddafi's terrorism out in public like this?

Consider now this AP photo, posted on daylife.com, showing Jordanian women carrying a large sign in English saying "Gaddafi: No you CAN NOT Stop The Power of The Free People" ("coincidentally", the sign's letters are in green, except for the words "CAN NOT"). Does this sound like your typical Jihadist slogan? Would Islamic radicals allow women to go around denouncing male oppressors and proclaiming freedom? My heart is stirred to wrath at your blind stupidity, oh conservative American fool! Were you as sincere in your love for freedom as you claim to be, your heart would have been stirred the moment you began to hear the typically conformist people of Egypt clamouring for change. If you were as "Christian" and as in touch with the God of Abraham as you claim you are, shouldn't your heart have been stirred to tears at the sight of these precious people longing for freedom and a break from their oppressive history? It is no wonder that the Statue of Liberty fell into the sea in the dream, for you claim to stand up for freedom and justice, but all you stand up for, oh BHS conservative, is yourself.

It is true that there were radical Islamic groups trying to take advantage of the upheavals in Egypt and other places. However, had America's so-called "Christian" conservatives not been so self-immersed, they would have reacted by upholding the Egyptian and Middle Eastern people in prayer, asking God that freedom be given an opportunity to flourish and that this movement not be hijacked by a few bastard opportunists. As conservatives so boldly espouse when it comes to economic matters, freedom involves the risk of failure. Therefore, if the Arab and Muslim people ever rose up to clamour for freedom, there would always be the danger of radical elements using that opportunity to establish their tyranny, but that is no justification to say what American conservatives said:

"It is better that nothing happen; it is better that dictators remain in power, so long as they are 'friendly' to American interests, and so long as they help us to not get attacked by terrorists again. The Arab and Persian people destabilising the current order as they pursue freedom is of no interest to us, for all we care about is maintaining our security".

Shame on you, American conservative!!! Shame on you!!! And twice be the shame on you if you also call yourself a "Christian" who "loves God". Your heart was put to the test through the Jasmine Revolution uprisings, and you failed big time, and your heart has been exposed for what it really is: A heart committed to truth and freedom only when it is in your myopic self-interest. No wonder the utilitarian John Locke is at the foundation of your republic!!!

{As a parenthesis, if you want to know why babi obama was so slow in denouncing Qaddafi's ruthless repression of the uprisings, read the article on startthinkingright.wordpress.com, which details his very real connections to this man.}

Unbeknownst to both conservatives and liberals in America, the door of opportunity for freedom in the Middle East was opened through George W. Bush's intervention in Iraq. Despite the fact that Bush hesitated so much to enforce the international resolutions against Iraq, America's eventual overthrow of the Saddam Hussein stronghold opened a spiritual door over the Arab and Muslim world in the spirit realm, paving the way for God's future revival of the Arab and Persian people (that was the fundamental raison d'être behind God's motivation for the Iraq war). None of what has been happening in the Arab and Muslim worlds would be happening had that door not been opened. God's plan was to set the table for the move of His Spirit across that region of the world after America, the UK, and Europe had come alive. As the 7-year period of revival preparation (that began in 2005) was to come to a close, the Lord's intention was to have the Arab and Muslim world open up spiritually so that, when the 2012 climax was reached, that part of the world would be hit with an impartation of God's Spirit as it had never experienced in its entire history. Unfortunately, America (and the UK) "fell asleep" on the job, and the revival for this generation was aborted. The partial opening of the Arab and Muslim world eventually happened as planned, but, since the other part of the puzzle (i.e.- America and Europe's awakening) was not in place, this partial opening of the Arab and Muslim world will only have limited blessings, and it will in no way reflect the magnitude of what would have happened had America not become "BHS". Therefore, this partial opening now stands mostly as testimony of God's plan, as proof that God's faithful remnant were really opening great doors in the spirit realm, and as indicting evidence in the spirit realm of the opportunity that this American generation so negligently and stupidly let slip through their fingers. Because of its foolishness, this American generation is now forced to wander through the dry sand dunes of the black-horse desert until it perishes; ironically, this is happening as the sand dunes of the Sahara and the sandy terrain around the pyramids are getting a sip of the refreshing waters of God's freedom.

It is no coincidence whatsoever that the Jasmine Revolution began in Tunisia and is continuing to develop in Libya, even as we are writing this, given that Syrtis Minor is off the coast of Tunisia and Syrtis Maior is off the coast of Libya. Let him who has ears hear what the Lord is saying.

{Fellow believer, this dream points to the "Sand dunes" prophetic word posted on August 3, 2008. We strongly recommend that you reread that posting.}

The missing green eyes

Why did BHS Americans completely misinterpret the Jasmine Revolution uprisings? Because they failed to see things that the eyes of green-horse riders could clearly see. For one, they were unable to "see the trees for the forest":

"²² And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. ²³ And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought. ²⁴ And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. ²⁵ After that he put his hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly." (Mark 8:22-25)

As we have studied before, when the man said, "I see men as trees walking" (v24), it was a figure of his once-simplistic soul finally seeing the God-potential in men. The natural mind (especially if gripped by the Perizzite spirit of village isolationism) is quick to reduce "little people" to generic cogs in some big machine run by the "truly important" people. Therefore, when they see a "small person", they cannot visualise the growth potential in that person. When they gaze upon "little people", all they see are small and replaceable grains of sand, without realising that those "grains of sand" are actually grains of mustard that have the potential to grow into great and mighty trees of God. Hence, natural man can see a "forest", but only in the context of the world's "power players", but they cannot see the individual trees. They can in no way comprehend how a single person has the potential to shake the world just on account of him or her being a human being, full stop. When they read the phrase "son of man" used by Yeshua in Scripture, they can only think of the historical figure of Jesus, without ever understanding what Yeshua truly meant when He used that phrase and why He used such a phrase to begin with. All of this explains why, as America's conservative pundits glanced over the drama being acted out in the Middle East, they could only shrug their shoulders and claim,

"We don't know who is behind all of this, but we sure as hell don't want to take any risks. There must be some radical group behind all of this. Otherwise, how could it be stirring people so?"

Even when America's conservative pundits admitted that they did not know what was happening in the Middle East, they could not help but suspect that it "must be" a bad thing. Just like Thomas the sceptic, they chose to stand by the choice that was more familiar to their limited understanding. This is why they were unable to comprehend that all of this was happening as the result of one "insignificant vegetable seller" in a remote Tunisian city setting himself alight in utter indignation over the status quo. How could one "little man" shake the world so? "It was impossible", a few of them muttered to themselves in Thomas-like incredulity, and they continued searching for the "true cause"; the great majority who muttered nothing did so because they did not even know about the "little vegetable seller"; he was way too insignificant to appear on their mental radar.

Besides not understanding the God-potential in man, the BHS mind is unable to comprehend the transcendental power of sacrifice. Whereas liberals go around telling other people to make sacrifices at the altar of big government, American conservatives do not believe in sacrifice at all. In typical Lockean fashion, they believe that self-preservation (the antithesis of self-sacrifice) is the driving force behind peace and prosperity. They shun the very thought of a higher power dragging them to a sacrifice unpleasant to their souls (John 21:18); they shun the very notion of losing their black-horse independence and becoming subject to the will of others. Many times, I have heard American conservative pundits shout with anger, "Why should I have to make a sacrifice?" Lurking behind that question lies a more sinister question that asks, "Why should I stop the pursuit of my personal happiness in order to shed my life for a higher principle?". With the exception of the military, the police, and emergency service personnel, any type of life-shedding sacrifice is utterly meaningless to them. A small number of them may agree with making some big personal sacrifices for the sake of a cause, but never, never to the point of death. They can agree to sacrifice, as long as it is "orderly" sacrifice within very clearly defined hierarchical structures, and as long as it produces very tangible results that preserve the status quo (this is why "military" and "police" sacrifice is so pleasant to them). They absolutely abhor any sacrifice that may contain any elements of "chaos" in it or any sacrifice that may trigger any type of significant or transcendental change (ironically, this is the reason why Americans were so, so, so excruciatingly slow in embracing and fully supporting the Revolutionary effort to become free from British rule). They also abhor sacrifice that is spurred by personal conviction and not by institutionalised decrees, not only because of the "chaos" they perceive it spawns but because it makes the sacrifice seem so useless. They need the sacrifice to be supported by some well-established institution or tradition in order for its results to feel more "tangible", more "real". Hence, a total sacrifice of self for the sake of an "ethereal" cause with little or no support from others is as useless to them as the idea that you must die in order to live. Because of this very limiting understanding of sacrifice, American conservatives do not understand the transcendental power of sacrifice. Therefore, when faced with a sacrifice that goes outside their limited confines, their first question is, "Why should I sacrifice?" It is no wonder, therefore, that Bouazizi's self-immolation was as irrelevant to them as the death of a sheep in the countryside, and as lamentable to them as the daily deaths of promise-filled teenagers in America's black ghettos.

{It is also worth noting that Bouazizi did not even alert his family before carrying out his act. This means that he was not interested in measuring the amount of "public" support behind his act before carrying it out. In green-horse fashion, he faced his sacrifice in "Naphtali" loneliness, uninterested in the "tangible" short-term benefits that his act might or might not have. This utter lack of "self-interest" and "self-preservation" is utterly abhorrent and repugnant to the BHS American conservative.}

Another aspect that America's BHS conservatives are totally oblivious to is the spiritual makeup of the Arab people. As we have shared before, Scripture clearly reveals that there is a strong prophetic anointing and calling on the Arab people. Unfortunately, this prophetic calling has been suppressed and distorted by the enemy for centuries, but it is there, waiting for a full-blown manifestation in the latter days. Therefore, it is not surprising that the spirit of prophetic boldness and sacrifice slumbering inside of Arabs was deeply stirred to life by the sacrificial death of one man in Tunisia. American BHS conservatives know nothing of the earth-shaking prophetic anointing of God, much less the prophetic anointing inside Arabs. Thus, it is not surprising that they would see no linkage between the Middle East uprisings and the "Bouazizi incident" and why, as they beheld all the unrest, they were unable to see the wind that was stirring all the trees, for that wind can only be seen with the "green eyes" that they so dismissively chucked into the sea.

Because of the BHS Americans' spiritual ignorance, America's entire latter-day calling was almost cast off completely (the way Latin America's already has). This is why the tidal wave in the dream almost capsized the green ship. However, the Leonidas remnant did enough to prevent America's calling perishing altogether, for which reason the green ship remained afloat, even though the green remnant on board were forced to go through much unnecessary peril and heartache, just as Paul did when he and the others on board his ship were forced to crash-land in the trapped-by-simplicity isle of Malta.