The Prophet Isaiah in Chapter 60, the last chapter in Deutero-Isaiah, opens his prophecy with these powerful words:
Rise up in splendor! Your light has come, the glory of YHVH shines upon you. See darkness covers the earth, and thick clouds cover the peoples, but upon you YHVH shines, and over you appears his glory.
Kabbalists believe that there has always been a Being with the fullness of matter and energy. They believe that for an infinitesimally small time Ten Centers of Sentient appeared within the Body of this Divine Being, called Ain Sof Aur, Neverending Light. These Sentient Intelligences cried out that Ain Sof Aur gave them every thing and they could give nothing back in return. Within that infinitesimally small time, Ain Sof Aur, withdrew from the center of His Being and created a perfect vacuum and into that vacuum He sent forth a Single Ray of His Divine Being into the center thereof. He formed from his own being the Ten Intelligences into a single Being named the Primeval Adam, the Ancient of Days, the Archangel of the Presence.
The Gospel of John begins with a description of this event. It says:
In the beginning was the Logos ... The Logos to the Greeks was the Divine Creative and Controlling Power. This idea of a Supreme Creative and Controlling Power separate from G-d is the essence of Kabbalistic thought.
John continues: And the Logos was with G-d ... While declaring strongly the separateness of the Creative and Controlling Power, the Gospel declares that is was with G-d before all time and into the beginning. The Logos and the Ten Intelligences are the same. We are simply using a separate nomenclature.
But then John goes on: And the Logos was G-d ... In what sense was the Logos G-d. First, the Logos is begotten from the Being of G-d and therefore carries the "DNA" of Godhood. Second, the Logos has the intelligence of G-d in that the 10 Intelligences were part of the Sentient G-d and know every thing that He knows. Third, the Logos is the active part of G-d because G-d remains outside of the Universe. The Logos is therefore Omnipotent, Omniscent, and Omnibenevolent, while it is not Eternal. But unlike G-d, the Logos is dynamic. It is the element of dynamism that gives the Logos its importance, because G-d does not act in this Universe. Only His Proxy, the Divine Logos acts in this Universe.
John continues: "He (meaning the Logos) was in the beginning with G-d. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be." Kabbalists believe that Ain Sof Aur and the Primeval Adam formed the Archangels in their glory and that Adam and the Archangels created the Universe and all that is in it. Literally, they believe that all things came to be through Adam and without Him nothing came to be.
Then John says: "What came to be through him was Life, and this Life was the Light of Mankind; the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it."
As we celebrate the coming of the Seventh Light into the World, in the being of Yeshua ha Meshiach, let us remember that long before His coming, the Light was here in the presence of G-d and that same light still shines on us. Your light has come.
Friday, December 24, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
The Star of Bethlehem
In the Gospel of St. Matthew, the Shem Tov Matthew says:
"It came to pass when Yeshua was born in Bethlehem of Yudah in the days of Herod the King, behold astrologers came from the East to Jerusalem saying: Where is the King of the Jews who has been born. We have seen his star in the East and we have come with important gifts to worship him. ... Then King Herod called the magicians in secret and asked them well concerning the time the Star appeared to them. ... They harkened to the King and went, and behold the star which they saw in the East was going before them until they came to the place. When they entered Bethlehem it stopped before the place where the child was." Matthew 2:1-2, 7, 9.
Professor David Hughes, one of the leader astronomers in the United Kingdom has studied the account and the skies of that period and has concluded that what the Magi were seeing was Jupiter and Saturn in an unusual conjunction which occurred three times in 7 B.C. and during which the conjunction would appear to move due to the retrograde appearance of the planets during the conjunction. This would have occurred during the spring and summer of 7 B.C. This event would occur in the sign of Pisces which was associated with the Jewish people by Zoroastrian astrologers.
Dr. Michael Molnar of New York, a leading American astronomer, is an authority on astronomically related coins. He has a coin from Antioch which shows a star in the sign of Aries. He found that on April 17, 6 B.C. Jupiter would have been occulted in the early morning by the Moon in Aries and the appearance would have been noted by expert astronomer-astrologers. He concludes that this event is the Star of Bethlehem.
Dr. Mark Kidger, an authority on supernovas, believes that at the time of the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in 7 B.C. a nova event occurred on or near Dio Aquila. It was observed in 1927 to have another nova event and he was able to predict that a similar event had occurred in 7 B.C. So he believers that this nova event occurring with Jupiter and Saturn made a very bright star that would move.
The Arian Archbishop of York Most Reverend Brian Mackenzie-Hanson said this about his belief:
"A star rising in the East" (Matthew 2:2): Jupiter (the King Planet) and Regulus (the King Star: "Prince" or "Little King") came into conjunction for the first time on 11-Sep-3BC. Then over a period of 9 months, two more conjunctions of Jupiter and Regulus took place in the constellation Leo (the Lion, which the Old Testament of the Bible specifically associated with the Jewish people) for a total of 3 conjunctions. Because Jupiter goes into retrograde, its apparent motion through the background stars draws a halo (or Crown) over Regulus. Then, at the end of this nine month period on **17-June-2BC** appears the Star of Bethlehem in the western skies when looking from Babylon toward Jerusalem as Jupiter with Venus (the Planet of Love, harmony and Beauty; also Nativity when associated with Jupiter) and Regulus come into conjunction. Babylon being where the Magi where looking from.
- The Magi (the Wise Men, Matthew 2:1-12), being the Astronomers and Astrologers of the time were in no doubt as to what these signs (Genesis 1:14) in the sky meant!
There has not been a brighter, closer conjunction of Venus and Jupiter in Leo so near to Regulus in the 2,000 years before or since.
The problem I have with Archbishop Mackenzie-Hanson's theory is Herod the Great was dead in 4 B.C. Although he argues that there is a minority view allowing Herod to have lived until 2 B.C. or 1 B.C., the vast majority of scholars put his death at 4 B.C. The problem I have with the astronomical theories is that they are looking for an actual star in the sky. Everyone acknowledges that the observers were astrologers. But no one seems to know anything about astrology.
The astrologers ask Herod: Where is the King of the Jews who has been born. We have seen his star in the East. Everyone on earth has a Star in the East. The question that they ask is an astrological one. One must know that exact moment of birth in order to determine where to set the beginning of a horoscope. That place is called the Star in the East. My star is in Libra. In the seventh verse, Herod asks the astrologers "well concerning the time the star appeared." That question is also an astrological question. Herod did not know that the Meshiach had been born. He deduced that in watching the predictive horoscope the Magi had concluded from what was on the chart that a king had been born in Yudah. So, he asked the time. By knowing the time, he could deduce the moment of the child's birth in his area and theoretically could predict the exact place. He then acting on insufficient evidence had some boys killed in Bethlehem.
Many will claim that Josephus, who was no lover of Herod, did not mention a massacre in Bethlehem, but it might not have been a massacre. Herod knew the characteristics of the child. One, it must be a descendant of David; two, the child must have been born in the last two years; three, the child might have other indications of importance. According to one source, Herod had killed Zachariah in order to discover where St. John the Baptist was hiding. It is therefore likely he was already aware of the Bethlehem as a potential trouble spot and no stupid man, he already had spies on the ground.
So my conclusion is there never was an actual Star in the sky. The Star was on a predictive horoscope and predicted the coming of King.
It is important to note that St. Luke's Gospel which shows some Marian knowledge and is said to have originated at least partially from discussions with Mary makes no mention of the Magi. Mark, the earliest Gospel, does not make mention of the Magi. And, of course, John makes no mention of the Magi. So where do we get the Magi. I think that can be deduced from another scripture. Isaiah 60 specifically mentions the bringing of three gifts from kingdoms in places to the east and south of Bethlehem; it mentions camels; and it mentions sheep. I think that Matthew, so interested in proof-texts merely invented the Magi to give Yeshua a fantastical origin.
I could go on and on about other problems with the Infancy Narratives, but this blog is about the Star.
"It came to pass when Yeshua was born in Bethlehem of Yudah in the days of Herod the King, behold astrologers came from the East to Jerusalem saying: Where is the King of the Jews who has been born. We have seen his star in the East and we have come with important gifts to worship him. ... Then King Herod called the magicians in secret and asked them well concerning the time the Star appeared to them. ... They harkened to the King and went, and behold the star which they saw in the East was going before them until they came to the place. When they entered Bethlehem it stopped before the place where the child was." Matthew 2:1-2, 7, 9.
Professor David Hughes, one of the leader astronomers in the United Kingdom has studied the account and the skies of that period and has concluded that what the Magi were seeing was Jupiter and Saturn in an unusual conjunction which occurred three times in 7 B.C. and during which the conjunction would appear to move due to the retrograde appearance of the planets during the conjunction. This would have occurred during the spring and summer of 7 B.C. This event would occur in the sign of Pisces which was associated with the Jewish people by Zoroastrian astrologers.
Dr. Michael Molnar of New York, a leading American astronomer, is an authority on astronomically related coins. He has a coin from Antioch which shows a star in the sign of Aries. He found that on April 17, 6 B.C. Jupiter would have been occulted in the early morning by the Moon in Aries and the appearance would have been noted by expert astronomer-astrologers. He concludes that this event is the Star of Bethlehem.
Dr. Mark Kidger, an authority on supernovas, believes that at the time of the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in 7 B.C. a nova event occurred on or near Dio Aquila. It was observed in 1927 to have another nova event and he was able to predict that a similar event had occurred in 7 B.C. So he believers that this nova event occurring with Jupiter and Saturn made a very bright star that would move.
The Arian Archbishop of York Most Reverend Brian Mackenzie-Hanson said this about his belief:
"A star rising in the East" (Matthew 2:2): Jupiter (the King Planet) and Regulus (the King Star: "Prince" or "Little King") came into conjunction for the first time on 11-Sep-3BC. Then over a period of 9 months, two more conjunctions of Jupiter and Regulus took place in the constellation Leo (the Lion, which the Old Testament of the Bible specifically associated with the Jewish people) for a total of 3 conjunctions. Because Jupiter goes into retrograde, its apparent motion through the background stars draws a halo (or Crown) over Regulus. Then, at the end of this nine month period on **17-June-2BC** appears the Star of Bethlehem in the western skies when looking from Babylon toward Jerusalem as Jupiter with Venus (the Planet of Love, harmony and Beauty; also Nativity when associated with Jupiter) and Regulus come into conjunction. Babylon being where the Magi where looking from.
- The Magi (the Wise Men, Matthew 2:1-12), being the Astronomers and Astrologers of the time were in no doubt as to what these signs (Genesis 1:14) in the sky meant!
There has not been a brighter, closer conjunction of Venus and Jupiter in Leo so near to Regulus in the 2,000 years before or since.
The problem I have with Archbishop Mackenzie-Hanson's theory is Herod the Great was dead in 4 B.C. Although he argues that there is a minority view allowing Herod to have lived until 2 B.C. or 1 B.C., the vast majority of scholars put his death at 4 B.C. The problem I have with the astronomical theories is that they are looking for an actual star in the sky. Everyone acknowledges that the observers were astrologers. But no one seems to know anything about astrology.
The astrologers ask Herod: Where is the King of the Jews who has been born. We have seen his star in the East. Everyone on earth has a Star in the East. The question that they ask is an astrological one. One must know that exact moment of birth in order to determine where to set the beginning of a horoscope. That place is called the Star in the East. My star is in Libra. In the seventh verse, Herod asks the astrologers "well concerning the time the star appeared." That question is also an astrological question. Herod did not know that the Meshiach had been born. He deduced that in watching the predictive horoscope the Magi had concluded from what was on the chart that a king had been born in Yudah. So, he asked the time. By knowing the time, he could deduce the moment of the child's birth in his area and theoretically could predict the exact place. He then acting on insufficient evidence had some boys killed in Bethlehem.
Many will claim that Josephus, who was no lover of Herod, did not mention a massacre in Bethlehem, but it might not have been a massacre. Herod knew the characteristics of the child. One, it must be a descendant of David; two, the child must have been born in the last two years; three, the child might have other indications of importance. According to one source, Herod had killed Zachariah in order to discover where St. John the Baptist was hiding. It is therefore likely he was already aware of the Bethlehem as a potential trouble spot and no stupid man, he already had spies on the ground.
So my conclusion is there never was an actual Star in the sky. The Star was on a predictive horoscope and predicted the coming of King.
It is important to note that St. Luke's Gospel which shows some Marian knowledge and is said to have originated at least partially from discussions with Mary makes no mention of the Magi. Mark, the earliest Gospel, does not make mention of the Magi. And, of course, John makes no mention of the Magi. So where do we get the Magi. I think that can be deduced from another scripture. Isaiah 60 specifically mentions the bringing of three gifts from kingdoms in places to the east and south of Bethlehem; it mentions camels; and it mentions sheep. I think that Matthew, so interested in proof-texts merely invented the Magi to give Yeshua a fantastical origin.
I could go on and on about other problems with the Infancy Narratives, but this blog is about the Star.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
First Contact Soon
A scientist announced today that there are 300 sextillion stars in the universe. Now assuming that one out of every two star has planets circling it, which is what astronomers are finding in the solar systems near us, then there are an estimated 150 sextillion star systems in the universe and some 750 sextillion planets in the universe.
Assuming that there is one earth-like planet in every 500 (which is what scientists are finding), then there are 1.5 sextillion earth-like planets in the universe.
Science has found on Earth, life is pervasive and tenacious. It is therefore logical to assume that there is life of at least primitive forms on half of these planets or on about 750 quintillion planets. If we assume that only 1 out of 1000 of these planets has intelligent life at the level of at least a dog, then there are 750 quadrillion planets which have intelligent life.
Now, if we assume that 1 out of 1,000,000 of those planets which have intelligent life have developed civilization, then there are 750 billion planets that have civilization. Now, if we also assume that of the planets which are civilized one in one million have obtained space flight then there are 750,000 planets which have obtained space flight.
Now assuming that one out of four of these 750,000 civilizations that have obtained space flight are looking for us, then there are 187,500 civilizations that are looking for us.
Assuming that only one in ten thousand civilizations that are looking for us will find us in the next 100 years, then 19 civilizations will find us in the next 100 years. Therefore there will be about one contact every six years in the next 100 years. Knowing our government and seeing the impressive evidence for at least some UFO contact, our government has been in contact with alien civilizations for about 50 years and makes contact with a new species every six years.
First contact with someone other than the government is inevitable and should occur in the next six years. Shall I predict that first contact will occur on December 21, 2012? Seems as reasonable as any other time.
Assuming that there is one earth-like planet in every 500 (which is what scientists are finding), then there are 1.5 sextillion earth-like planets in the universe.
Science has found on Earth, life is pervasive and tenacious. It is therefore logical to assume that there is life of at least primitive forms on half of these planets or on about 750 quintillion planets. If we assume that only 1 out of 1000 of these planets has intelligent life at the level of at least a dog, then there are 750 quadrillion planets which have intelligent life.
Now, if we assume that 1 out of 1,000,000 of those planets which have intelligent life have developed civilization, then there are 750 billion planets that have civilization. Now, if we also assume that of the planets which are civilized one in one million have obtained space flight then there are 750,000 planets which have obtained space flight.
Now assuming that one out of four of these 750,000 civilizations that have obtained space flight are looking for us, then there are 187,500 civilizations that are looking for us.
Assuming that only one in ten thousand civilizations that are looking for us will find us in the next 100 years, then 19 civilizations will find us in the next 100 years. Therefore there will be about one contact every six years in the next 100 years. Knowing our government and seeing the impressive evidence for at least some UFO contact, our government has been in contact with alien civilizations for about 50 years and makes contact with a new species every six years.
First contact with someone other than the government is inevitable and should occur in the next six years. Shall I predict that first contact will occur on December 21, 2012? Seems as reasonable as any other time.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Federal Government Is Filled With Sex Perverts
Sexual Battery is defined in Kansas as:
The intentional touching of the person of another who is 16 or more years of age, who is not the spouse of the offender and who does not consent thereto with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of the offender or another.
Sexual battery in Kansas is a class A person misdemeanor.
The law in Missouri is similar.
Under the federal regulation, passengers have a choice of being observed by a person they cannot see with a device that strips away their clothes and subjects them to derision, humiliation, and exposure. They may opt out of the full body scan. Then people touch them in very inappropriate places. They are compelled to accept this humiliation if they want to use a public airplane. If they start the process and then opt out and walk away, the passenger may be fined $11,000. It is hard to say that this process is not compelled and it is certain that many do not give consent.
It is amazing to me that the so-called war on Terrorism has cost us our civil right to be free of UNREASONABLE searches and seizures. If every fear results in a loss of civil rights, why keep any of them. Saddam Hussein's Iraq was much safer than the Iraq today. The growing dictatorship in the United States is perhaps safer, although that is far from clear, but is safer from foreign terrorists who choose to bomb planes.
The polls say that 81% of America while not liking the new rules will submit to them. Eighty one percent of Nazi Germany went along with Hitler. Civil Rights are not determined by the majority. What is happening in America is criminal and totalitarian. If it happened in North Korea, we would expect it. However, what happens here in our airports is not even condoned in Iran.
The justification for the criminal acts which are occurring in the name of security is that more of the TSA employees will be able to get their jollies by playing with women's breasts and pussies and men's dicks. If any of us did what these perverts do in the name of security, we would be arrested.
I have made the only possible decision open to me. I will not fly a public jet. If I cannot take the time to drive or ride a train, I will not go.
The intentional touching of the person of another who is 16 or more years of age, who is not the spouse of the offender and who does not consent thereto with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of the offender or another.
Sexual battery in Kansas is a class A person misdemeanor.
The law in Missouri is similar.
Under the federal regulation, passengers have a choice of being observed by a person they cannot see with a device that strips away their clothes and subjects them to derision, humiliation, and exposure. They may opt out of the full body scan. Then people touch them in very inappropriate places. They are compelled to accept this humiliation if they want to use a public airplane. If they start the process and then opt out and walk away, the passenger may be fined $11,000. It is hard to say that this process is not compelled and it is certain that many do not give consent.
It is amazing to me that the so-called war on Terrorism has cost us our civil right to be free of UNREASONABLE searches and seizures. If every fear results in a loss of civil rights, why keep any of them. Saddam Hussein's Iraq was much safer than the Iraq today. The growing dictatorship in the United States is perhaps safer, although that is far from clear, but is safer from foreign terrorists who choose to bomb planes.
The polls say that 81% of America while not liking the new rules will submit to them. Eighty one percent of Nazi Germany went along with Hitler. Civil Rights are not determined by the majority. What is happening in America is criminal and totalitarian. If it happened in North Korea, we would expect it. However, what happens here in our airports is not even condoned in Iran.
The justification for the criminal acts which are occurring in the name of security is that more of the TSA employees will be able to get their jollies by playing with women's breasts and pussies and men's dicks. If any of us did what these perverts do in the name of security, we would be arrested.
I have made the only possible decision open to me. I will not fly a public jet. If I cannot take the time to drive or ride a train, I will not go.
Scott Roeder
Confessor Scott Roeder has been transferred to the Kansas State Prison at Lansing. Cards, letters and messages of support are needed to help keep the Confessor's spirits up in these trying times. Remember his blessings are powerful and you should ask him to bless you as he has carried the cross to Calvary and has suffered for the little children.
Let us not forget Blessed Scott Roeder in our prayers and thanksgivings.
Let us not forget Blessed Scott Roeder in our prayers and thanksgivings.
Monday, November 15, 2010
The Facts About Roman Catholic Exorcisms
Archbishop Naumann sent word to me today indicating that there were few requests for exorcisms within his diocese. Apparently he is not on the ground with his people as I have done three exorcisms on Catholics in the last year. He argues that a person must go through a battery of testing by doctors and psychiatric personnel before an exorcism is performed. While such tests are surely helpful, I have performed exorcisms on people who came great distances for the exorcism and there was no time for such interventions. He argues that exorcism is always a major affair because one is fighting with the Devil. Such opinions are laughable. The Devil neither has time nor desire to possess any body. It is demons, elementals, ghosts, and evil spirits which possess people. His ignorance is surpassed only by his arrogance.
In fact, exorcisms can be as simple as described in scripture, a mere force of the exorcist will commanding the demon to leave. Acts 5:16. Or an exorcism can take great effort as is seen in such movies as the Exorcist, the Exorcism of Gail Bower, or other popularized accounts. The person doing the exorcism must have the gift of faith, a strong gift beyond mere childhood belief, and sufficient holiness that the demon will fear the presence of G-d's person. Most priests today do not have such accoutrements. Many do not even believe in the Devil or demons.
If people are going to be increasingly looking at exorcisms, they are going to have to depend upon people like me to do them.
In fact, exorcisms can be as simple as described in scripture, a mere force of the exorcist will commanding the demon to leave. Acts 5:16. Or an exorcism can take great effort as is seen in such movies as the Exorcist, the Exorcism of Gail Bower, or other popularized accounts. The person doing the exorcism must have the gift of faith, a strong gift beyond mere childhood belief, and sufficient holiness that the demon will fear the presence of G-d's person. Most priests today do not have such accoutrements. Many do not even believe in the Devil or demons.
If people are going to be increasingly looking at exorcisms, they are going to have to depend upon people like me to do them.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Roman Catholics Want Exorcists
For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church believed in the existence of ghosts, demons, evil spirits, and exorcism. Then for a period of time Bishops within the Church and priests with little spirituality denied the very existence of these things and even the Devil's existence was denied. Now, as the real world encroaches upon the turn of the Roman Catholic Church to psychology, the Church has had to rethink its position.
In 1999, the Church revised the Ritual on Exorcism and began to appoint priests to the office of Diocesan Exorcist. It is difficult to understand why the Church would have ever lost the office. Every priest must first be ordained to the office of acolyte and then exorcist followed by subdeacon, deacon, and then priest. What does one do if one is appointed as an exorcist? Nothing apparently. The Church leaves to an official diocesan exorcist the office.
Exorcism is an ancient gift that came to all believers. In the longer ending of Mark its says: "These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will drive out demons..." Mark 16:17. So, originally every person in the church could cast out demons. Then, apparently, the true believers became fewer in number, the church found it necessary to ordain people to the office of exorcist. It is presumed that they chose people who already had demonstrated that they were true believers by casting demons. Eventually, the Church came to see that those who could cast demons already were anointed by G-d to the office of Priest. The Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus says: "If any one among the laity appear to have received a gift of healing by a revelation, hands shall not be laid upon him, because the matter is manifest." Part II, Section XV. As exorcism has always been seen as a form of healing, the person who acted as an exorcist was therefore already ordained as a priest, not by laying on of hands, but by the gift of G-d. So the church began to acknowledge that a priest should be an exorcist and an exorcist was already a priest. As the time passed, and fewer and fewer of the priesthood had an actual spiritual calling to the Priesthood, it became necessary for the Bishops to appoint a specific person of renowned holiness to perform the acts of an exorcist. Eventually, with the advent of psychology, the Church trained its priesthood in psychology and not exorcism.
Eventually, psychologists began to see that exorcisms worked on their patients. See Historical and Folk Techniques of Exorcism: Application to the Treatment of Dissociative Disorders, by Jean Goodwin, M.D., M.P.H., Sally Hill, M.S.W., Reina Attias, Ph.D. They, following the teachings of Dr. William James, the father of Religious Psychology, began to use exorcism as a technique of healing again.
Now it appears that the Roman Catholic Church has come full circle. According to Reuters and AP, the Roman Catholic Church is holding a special training workshop in Baltimore this weekend to teach clerics the Rite of Exorcism. The Church has signed up 56 Bishops and 66 priests for the two-day workshop that began on Friday, seeking to boost the small group of just five or six American exorcists that the Church currently has on its books. Catholic Church law stipulates that only properly trained priests can perform the rite -- and then only with the permission of their bishops.
Having performed over 100 exorcisms in the last 38 years, I would suggest that the norms that Rome is setting down are ridiculous. First of all, every believer has this gift, if called to use it. Apparently, there are not many believers in the huge Roman Catholic Church. Second, only people with the gift can perform exorcisms. The intervention of the Bishops to choose someone they want to do the exorcisms will avail them nothing. The book Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist, by Father Matt Baglio demonstrates not only the ineptness of Roman exorcists who allow gross activities to occur during exorcisms despite the commands of the Rite, but it also shows that the persons who are chosen do not have sufficient spiritual development to accomplish the task. Third, if a person has the gift, it does not take an act of Rome or anyone else to make a person an exorcist. Fourth, there is no scriptural requirement that a Bishop be informed or be involved in an exorcism. I think this attempt on the part of the Church will fail, falling flat on its face.
The reality of demons is real. The reality that there are few qualified to expel them is also real. The certainty that the people appointed to perform exorcisms must have the supernatural gift of G-d before they attempt to perform exorcisms is also a certainty. I hope that the priests involved do not get harmed by this inept and foolish attempt to circumvent G-d's methods.
In 1999, the Church revised the Ritual on Exorcism and began to appoint priests to the office of Diocesan Exorcist. It is difficult to understand why the Church would have ever lost the office. Every priest must first be ordained to the office of acolyte and then exorcist followed by subdeacon, deacon, and then priest. What does one do if one is appointed as an exorcist? Nothing apparently. The Church leaves to an official diocesan exorcist the office.
Exorcism is an ancient gift that came to all believers. In the longer ending of Mark its says: "These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will drive out demons..." Mark 16:17. So, originally every person in the church could cast out demons. Then, apparently, the true believers became fewer in number, the church found it necessary to ordain people to the office of exorcist. It is presumed that they chose people who already had demonstrated that they were true believers by casting demons. Eventually, the Church came to see that those who could cast demons already were anointed by G-d to the office of Priest. The Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus says: "If any one among the laity appear to have received a gift of healing by a revelation, hands shall not be laid upon him, because the matter is manifest." Part II, Section XV. As exorcism has always been seen as a form of healing, the person who acted as an exorcist was therefore already ordained as a priest, not by laying on of hands, but by the gift of G-d. So the church began to acknowledge that a priest should be an exorcist and an exorcist was already a priest. As the time passed, and fewer and fewer of the priesthood had an actual spiritual calling to the Priesthood, it became necessary for the Bishops to appoint a specific person of renowned holiness to perform the acts of an exorcist. Eventually, with the advent of psychology, the Church trained its priesthood in psychology and not exorcism.
Eventually, psychologists began to see that exorcisms worked on their patients. See Historical and Folk Techniques of Exorcism: Application to the Treatment of Dissociative Disorders, by Jean Goodwin, M.D., M.P.H., Sally Hill, M.S.W., Reina Attias, Ph.D. They, following the teachings of Dr. William James, the father of Religious Psychology, began to use exorcism as a technique of healing again.
Now it appears that the Roman Catholic Church has come full circle. According to Reuters and AP, the Roman Catholic Church is holding a special training workshop in Baltimore this weekend to teach clerics the Rite of Exorcism. The Church has signed up 56 Bishops and 66 priests for the two-day workshop that began on Friday, seeking to boost the small group of just five or six American exorcists that the Church currently has on its books. Catholic Church law stipulates that only properly trained priests can perform the rite -- and then only with the permission of their bishops.
Having performed over 100 exorcisms in the last 38 years, I would suggest that the norms that Rome is setting down are ridiculous. First of all, every believer has this gift, if called to use it. Apparently, there are not many believers in the huge Roman Catholic Church. Second, only people with the gift can perform exorcisms. The intervention of the Bishops to choose someone they want to do the exorcisms will avail them nothing. The book Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist, by Father Matt Baglio demonstrates not only the ineptness of Roman exorcists who allow gross activities to occur during exorcisms despite the commands of the Rite, but it also shows that the persons who are chosen do not have sufficient spiritual development to accomplish the task. Third, if a person has the gift, it does not take an act of Rome or anyone else to make a person an exorcist. Fourth, there is no scriptural requirement that a Bishop be informed or be involved in an exorcism. I think this attempt on the part of the Church will fail, falling flat on its face.
The reality of demons is real. The reality that there are few qualified to expel them is also real. The certainty that the people appointed to perform exorcisms must have the supernatural gift of G-d before they attempt to perform exorcisms is also a certainty. I hope that the priests involved do not get harmed by this inept and foolish attempt to circumvent G-d's methods.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
"Muslim" Lands
Faisal Shahzad, during his sentencing hearing, made the following statement:
"We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace.
The problem I have with this statement is the claim that any land in which there is a Muslim majority is a Muslim land. I have a problem with claiming that America is a Christian land and Italy is a Catholic land and China is a Marxist land as well. Religions do not own countries anymore. One might have able to say that the Papal States was a Catholic land because the Pope owned them, but to call Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, and Afghanistan "Muslim" countries is to ignore the people and history of those countries.
There is a dominant majority in each of these countries of one sect or another of Islam. However, Iraq has had a Jewish presence since 530 BCE and a Christian presence since 45 A.D. It is home to the Mandaeans, the disciples of John the Baptist and has Ba'hai religionists as well. No religion can claim it. Lebanon was home to the Ca'anites, the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Druze, the Ba'hais, the Gnostics, the Nazoreans, the Alawi, and numerous other religious groups. Syria is dominated today by a heterodox group called the Nusairyi or Alawi. If Shahzad and many liberals who claim that America is attacking Islam were to have to prove the point, they would find that they are wrong. The war against Arabs is real. The war against Islam is not. The largest Muslim population lives in Indonesia, not in the Middle East.
Shahzad would claim that Israel is an occupied country, a Muslim country under Zionist domination. Someone forgot to tell him that there has never been a time when there were not religionists of other faiths in Israel. Judaism has existed in Israel at least 3000 years and Christianity for at least 1987 years. The United Nations declared Israel to be the homeland of the Jews, not the Palestinians.
Therefore, Muslims in predominately Muslim countries have no more right to maim, destroy, murder, and hate than any one else.
The Koran however teaches Muslims to hate. It is not a book of love. Its virulent attacks on Christianity and Judaism cannot be called loving. Is it a surprise that this virulent, violent religion engenders such hatred and warfare.
I hope that in my lifetime Afghanistan will become a multicultural mecca. I also believe in the spirit of Santa Claus and the idea that a bunny lays chocolate eggs. Don't hold your breath. It is not going to happen. Hate is strong and we have not even started loving yet.
"We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace.
The problem I have with this statement is the claim that any land in which there is a Muslim majority is a Muslim land. I have a problem with claiming that America is a Christian land and Italy is a Catholic land and China is a Marxist land as well. Religions do not own countries anymore. One might have able to say that the Papal States was a Catholic land because the Pope owned them, but to call Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, and Afghanistan "Muslim" countries is to ignore the people and history of those countries.
There is a dominant majority in each of these countries of one sect or another of Islam. However, Iraq has had a Jewish presence since 530 BCE and a Christian presence since 45 A.D. It is home to the Mandaeans, the disciples of John the Baptist and has Ba'hai religionists as well. No religion can claim it. Lebanon was home to the Ca'anites, the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Druze, the Ba'hais, the Gnostics, the Nazoreans, the Alawi, and numerous other religious groups. Syria is dominated today by a heterodox group called the Nusairyi or Alawi. If Shahzad and many liberals who claim that America is attacking Islam were to have to prove the point, they would find that they are wrong. The war against Arabs is real. The war against Islam is not. The largest Muslim population lives in Indonesia, not in the Middle East.
Shahzad would claim that Israel is an occupied country, a Muslim country under Zionist domination. Someone forgot to tell him that there has never been a time when there were not religionists of other faiths in Israel. Judaism has existed in Israel at least 3000 years and Christianity for at least 1987 years. The United Nations declared Israel to be the homeland of the Jews, not the Palestinians.
Therefore, Muslims in predominately Muslim countries have no more right to maim, destroy, murder, and hate than any one else.
The Koran however teaches Muslims to hate. It is not a book of love. Its virulent attacks on Christianity and Judaism cannot be called loving. Is it a surprise that this virulent, violent religion engenders such hatred and warfare.
I hope that in my lifetime Afghanistan will become a multicultural mecca. I also believe in the spirit of Santa Claus and the idea that a bunny lays chocolate eggs. Don't hold your breath. It is not going to happen. Hate is strong and we have not even started loving yet.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Dominionism and the Seven Mountain Mandate
Dominionism is a virulent religious theology rooted in Calvinist theology. It presupposes that the promises of the Scripture are the unique property of an elite called the "Saved" and that all others must bend the knee to their authority and power.
Dominionist theology begins with these words from Scripture:
"Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the creeping things that move on the earth." Genesis 1:28b.
Because the word living appears as part of a phrase "living things that creep", the dominionists ignore the word "rimas" and say just living things. Then they argue that the passage gives them dominion over other men, which was, of course, never the intent of the Divine author.
Now Dominionists on the basis of their supposed dominion have concluded that the Law of G-d, that is, what they say the Law of G-d is, not the Torah, should exclusively govern society, to the exclusion of secular law, especially the Constitution. The most prominent members of this group are the Christian Reconstructionists, founded by R.J.Rushdoony in the 1970's. Examples of Christian Reconstructionists and Dominionists are Lou Engle of the Call for Conscience, Mike Bickle of the International House of Prayer Movement, Cindy Jacobs, Rick Joyner, and Loren Cunningham of Youth With A Mission. In order to establish this Dominion, these men propose to take control of what they call the Seven Mountains which are 1) religion; 2) education; 3) the family; 4)the economy; 5) the arts and entertainment; 6)the news media; and 7)government. They seek to unleash a Christian Kingdom with someone like a Pope or Ayatollah ruling over the United States, Canada, and Europe and eventually the world.
Throughout the 2000 year history of Christianity there has always been a vein of dominionism embedded in the strata of doctrines. This seam has ebbed and flowed for 20 centuries, sometimes submerged, sometimes exposed. Whenever out in the open, it has given rise to horrible abuses done in the name of Christ. In the early 21st century, once again this vein is now showing and active. The first Dominionist was Judas Iscariot who tried to force Jesus' hand by arranging for his arrest. He thought that Jesus would resist and call down angels to defend himself. He was wrong and ultimately seeing that he was wrong, commited suicide, thus damning his soul. Keep in mind:
Dominionism is always an aberration of true Christian theology. A remnant of believers has always opposed it, often suffering a martyr’s fate at the hands of intolerant dominionists.
Traditional Christianity teaches:
The Gospel of Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ and His shed blood on the cross. The emphasis is placed upon repentance and conversion of individual souls. The Kingdom of God in this age is spiritual and grows through efforts of evangelism based on teaching the Bible. It is “not of this world” (John 18:36), but a spiritual rule in the hearts of men (Luke 17:20-21). Furthermore, the Kingdom of God is only finally realized upon Christ’s second return to Earth, whereby He Himself establishes His literal and physical reign.
Dominionism teaches:
The Gospel of Salvation is achieved by setting up the “Kingdom of God” as a literal and physical kingdom to be “advanced” on Earth in the present age. Some dominionists liken the New Testament Kingdom to the Old Testament Israel in ways that justify taking up the sword, or other methods of punitive judgment, to war against enemies of their kingdom. Dominionists teach that men can be coerced or compelled to enter the kingdom. They assign to the Church duties and rights that belong Scripturally only to Jesus Christ. This includes the esoteric belief that believers can “incarnate” Christ and function as His body on Earth to establish His kingdom rule. An inordinate emphasis is placed on man’s efforts; the doctrine of the sovereignty of God is diminished.
One might truly say that this movement is the epitome of the False Prophet and in these times of difficulty that virulent totalitarianism begins to grip the souls of those who are hurting.
The Seven Mountain Mandate then is a conspiracy within the Christian Dominionist movement to put people that agree with the extreme Calvinist theology in charge of the seven spheres of influence in the world: religion, government, education, the arts, the media, the banking and financial industries, and the family. Already we are witnessing attempts in each of those areas. Good examples are Rick Warren in California and Pope Benedict XVI in Rome who are trying to reform Christianity around non-biblical principles; the Texas and Kansas State School Boards which are trying to redefine history and science; the rise of the Fox Television News and Rupert Murdoch; and the Mel Gibson's of the world who are trying to change Hollywood. We must take this challenge seriously as it is secretly attacking the very foundations of America in such groups as the C Street Residence and the Foundation.
Few organizations are as open about their mission as the International House of Prayer in Kansas City. On the section in their website dealing with the organization it says:
The International House of Prayer of Kansas City is an evangelical missions organization that is committed to praying for the release of the fullness of G-d's power and purpose, as we actively win the lost, heal the sick, feed the poor, make disciples, and impact the seven sphere of society -- family, education, government, economy, arts, media, and religion...
The believers of Christ are under attack and we must be aware of the hideous and insidious nature of that attack.
Dominionist theology begins with these words from Scripture:
"Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the creeping things that move on the earth." Genesis 1:28b.
Because the word living appears as part of a phrase "living things that creep", the dominionists ignore the word "rimas" and say just living things. Then they argue that the passage gives them dominion over other men, which was, of course, never the intent of the Divine author.
Now Dominionists on the basis of their supposed dominion have concluded that the Law of G-d, that is, what they say the Law of G-d is, not the Torah, should exclusively govern society, to the exclusion of secular law, especially the Constitution. The most prominent members of this group are the Christian Reconstructionists, founded by R.J.Rushdoony in the 1970's. Examples of Christian Reconstructionists and Dominionists are Lou Engle of the Call for Conscience, Mike Bickle of the International House of Prayer Movement, Cindy Jacobs, Rick Joyner, and Loren Cunningham of Youth With A Mission. In order to establish this Dominion, these men propose to take control of what they call the Seven Mountains which are 1) religion; 2) education; 3) the family; 4)the economy; 5) the arts and entertainment; 6)the news media; and 7)government. They seek to unleash a Christian Kingdom with someone like a Pope or Ayatollah ruling over the United States, Canada, and Europe and eventually the world.
Throughout the 2000 year history of Christianity there has always been a vein of dominionism embedded in the strata of doctrines. This seam has ebbed and flowed for 20 centuries, sometimes submerged, sometimes exposed. Whenever out in the open, it has given rise to horrible abuses done in the name of Christ. In the early 21st century, once again this vein is now showing and active. The first Dominionist was Judas Iscariot who tried to force Jesus' hand by arranging for his arrest. He thought that Jesus would resist and call down angels to defend himself. He was wrong and ultimately seeing that he was wrong, commited suicide, thus damning his soul. Keep in mind:
Dominionism is always an aberration of true Christian theology. A remnant of believers has always opposed it, often suffering a martyr’s fate at the hands of intolerant dominionists.
Traditional Christianity teaches:
The Gospel of Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ and His shed blood on the cross. The emphasis is placed upon repentance and conversion of individual souls. The Kingdom of God in this age is spiritual and grows through efforts of evangelism based on teaching the Bible. It is “not of this world” (John 18:36), but a spiritual rule in the hearts of men (Luke 17:20-21). Furthermore, the Kingdom of God is only finally realized upon Christ’s second return to Earth, whereby He Himself establishes His literal and physical reign.
Dominionism teaches:
The Gospel of Salvation is achieved by setting up the “Kingdom of God” as a literal and physical kingdom to be “advanced” on Earth in the present age. Some dominionists liken the New Testament Kingdom to the Old Testament Israel in ways that justify taking up the sword, or other methods of punitive judgment, to war against enemies of their kingdom. Dominionists teach that men can be coerced or compelled to enter the kingdom. They assign to the Church duties and rights that belong Scripturally only to Jesus Christ. This includes the esoteric belief that believers can “incarnate” Christ and function as His body on Earth to establish His kingdom rule. An inordinate emphasis is placed on man’s efforts; the doctrine of the sovereignty of God is diminished.
One might truly say that this movement is the epitome of the False Prophet and in these times of difficulty that virulent totalitarianism begins to grip the souls of those who are hurting.
The Seven Mountain Mandate then is a conspiracy within the Christian Dominionist movement to put people that agree with the extreme Calvinist theology in charge of the seven spheres of influence in the world: religion, government, education, the arts, the media, the banking and financial industries, and the family. Already we are witnessing attempts in each of those areas. Good examples are Rick Warren in California and Pope Benedict XVI in Rome who are trying to reform Christianity around non-biblical principles; the Texas and Kansas State School Boards which are trying to redefine history and science; the rise of the Fox Television News and Rupert Murdoch; and the Mel Gibson's of the world who are trying to change Hollywood. We must take this challenge seriously as it is secretly attacking the very foundations of America in such groups as the C Street Residence and the Foundation.
Few organizations are as open about their mission as the International House of Prayer in Kansas City. On the section in their website dealing with the organization it says:
The International House of Prayer of Kansas City is an evangelical missions organization that is committed to praying for the release of the fullness of G-d's power and purpose, as we actively win the lost, heal the sick, feed the poor, make disciples, and impact the seven sphere of society -- family, education, government, economy, arts, media, and religion...
The believers of Christ are under attack and we must be aware of the hideous and insidious nature of that attack.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Loyalty Oath
A bill was voted out of the Israeli cabinet this morning that would require all new citizens to swear loyalty to a Jewish and democratic Israel. There are those who are complaining, mainly among the Israeli Arabs who may marry among the non-Israeli marriage pool. The question is especially important both in Israel and the United States.
The State of Israel was founded in 1948 as a Jewish homeland. There were non-Jews in the territory from the beginning, but everyone understood that this would be a homeland for Jews, not for any one else. Nonetheless, Israel extended civil rights and citizenship to all who lived in the land or were later born in the land. Such an act was unusual in the Middle East as Arab nations do not extend full citizenship to Jews and Christians. Israel has 12 Arab members of the 120 member Knesset, the Israeli congress that governs the state. These members have repeatedly made it clear that they are opposed to the State whose congress they serve in. What other nation on earth allows such openly treasonous persons to serve in its legislature? However, the Jews took a stand today saying that at least new persons coming to the State should be loyal and should have to swear that loyalty.
If the Arabs were to take control of Israel, based upon the Jewish treatment in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria, the Jews would lose both citizenship and civil rights. Therefore, it is not wrong for the Jews to demand a commitment to the cultural views of the State before one becomes a citizen and those culture views include keeping the State a Jewish homeland and democratic.
What would happen if the 22,000,000 Hispanics in the United States were asked to declare their loyalty to America and our cultural values of civil rights? The so-called Reconquista seems to want to take away everything that is American and substitute a Mexican failed state for the United States. Perhaps it would be appropriate to start listening to those who complain about our country and if we find that they are proposing Reconquista they should be charged with Treason and expelled from the country with all their little bambinos. There is no alot of difference between the Reconquista movement and Hamas; neither group wants to recognize what the rest of the world sees.
A loyalty oath is worthless if not enforced. Let us hope that if a person becomes a citizen of Israel or the United States and proves disloyal that they are expelled forthwith.
The State of Israel was founded in 1948 as a Jewish homeland. There were non-Jews in the territory from the beginning, but everyone understood that this would be a homeland for Jews, not for any one else. Nonetheless, Israel extended civil rights and citizenship to all who lived in the land or were later born in the land. Such an act was unusual in the Middle East as Arab nations do not extend full citizenship to Jews and Christians. Israel has 12 Arab members of the 120 member Knesset, the Israeli congress that governs the state. These members have repeatedly made it clear that they are opposed to the State whose congress they serve in. What other nation on earth allows such openly treasonous persons to serve in its legislature? However, the Jews took a stand today saying that at least new persons coming to the State should be loyal and should have to swear that loyalty.
If the Arabs were to take control of Israel, based upon the Jewish treatment in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria, the Jews would lose both citizenship and civil rights. Therefore, it is not wrong for the Jews to demand a commitment to the cultural views of the State before one becomes a citizen and those culture views include keeping the State a Jewish homeland and democratic.
What would happen if the 22,000,000 Hispanics in the United States were asked to declare their loyalty to America and our cultural values of civil rights? The so-called Reconquista seems to want to take away everything that is American and substitute a Mexican failed state for the United States. Perhaps it would be appropriate to start listening to those who complain about our country and if we find that they are proposing Reconquista they should be charged with Treason and expelled from the country with all their little bambinos. There is no alot of difference between the Reconquista movement and Hamas; neither group wants to recognize what the rest of the world sees.
A loyalty oath is worthless if not enforced. Let us hope that if a person becomes a citizen of Israel or the United States and proves disloyal that they are expelled forthwith.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Islam
I have been reading the Koran. While it has some lofty words, it is difficult to call it a Holy Book. It is filled with the prejudices of a seventh century meglomaniac who speaks of Judaism and Christianity without any real knowledge. Let me give you some examples of its idiocy:
Sura V, 44: "Or it be among the Jews, -- Men who will listen to any lie, -- will listen event to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their right times and places; they say, "If ye are given this, take it, but if not, Beware!" ... For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the hereafter a heavy punishment.
This book declares all Jews liars and accuses them of changing the words of Scripture to suit themselves. And yet, when the Coptic Bishop accused Muslims of adding words to the Koran, they took offense at his words. Typical of the guilty.
Sura V, 23: "O my people! enter the holy land which G-d hath assigned to you, and turn not back ignominously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin."
This book declares the Holy Land, all of it, to be Jewish territory, and yet today we continue to fight over who owns the land because the Muslims are liars and read not the Koran themselves.
Sura V, 36: "The punishment of those who wage war against G-d (put in Islam here) and His Apostle (Mohammed), and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, crucifixion or cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land..."
The true intent of Islam is seen here. Those who do not convert will be executed, crucified, or lose their hands and feet. This religion is grossly evangelistic and forces the people to believe or suffer terrible retribution. This so-called religion is merely an agenda to wipe out Christianity and Judaism. They claim we are angry at them and want to wipe them out, when it is clear that it they, the Muslims, that are the aggressor.
I will be bringing more of the words of the Koran to you. I want to see that it is not a religion as much as a political philosophy that masks its evil in high sounding words but encourages murder, maiming, and religious intolerance while claiming that the very people who follow Christianity and Judaism are good.
Sura V, 44: "Or it be among the Jews, -- Men who will listen to any lie, -- will listen event to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their right times and places; they say, "If ye are given this, take it, but if not, Beware!" ... For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the hereafter a heavy punishment.
This book declares all Jews liars and accuses them of changing the words of Scripture to suit themselves. And yet, when the Coptic Bishop accused Muslims of adding words to the Koran, they took offense at his words. Typical of the guilty.
Sura V, 23: "O my people! enter the holy land which G-d hath assigned to you, and turn not back ignominously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin."
This book declares the Holy Land, all of it, to be Jewish territory, and yet today we continue to fight over who owns the land because the Muslims are liars and read not the Koran themselves.
Sura V, 36: "The punishment of those who wage war against G-d (put in Islam here) and His Apostle (Mohammed), and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, crucifixion or cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land..."
The true intent of Islam is seen here. Those who do not convert will be executed, crucified, or lose their hands and feet. This religion is grossly evangelistic and forces the people to believe or suffer terrible retribution. This so-called religion is merely an agenda to wipe out Christianity and Judaism. They claim we are angry at them and want to wipe them out, when it is clear that it they, the Muslims, that are the aggressor.
I will be bringing more of the words of the Koran to you. I want to see that it is not a religion as much as a political philosophy that masks its evil in high sounding words but encourages murder, maiming, and religious intolerance while claiming that the very people who follow Christianity and Judaism are good.
Sins of the United States
"If the whole community of Israel inadvertently and without even being aware of it does something that the Lord has forbidden and thus makes itself guilty, should it later on become known that the sin was committed, the community shall present a young bull as a sin offering. They shall bring it before the meeting tent, and here, before the Lord, the elders of the community shall lay their hands on the bullock's head." Lev. 4:13-15.
U.S. scientific researchers infected hundreds of Guatemalan mental patients with sexually transmitted diseases from 1946 to 1948 -- a practice that only came recently to light thanks to the work of an academic researcher. On Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued a formal apology to the Central American nation, and to Guatemalan residents of the United States.
"Although these events occurred more than 64 years ago, we are outraged that such reprehensible research could have occurred under the guise of public health," said Clinton and Sebelius in a joint statement. "We deeply regret that it happened, and we apologize to all the individuals who were affected by such abhorrent research practices."
I am sorry, a sorry just won't do it. The requirements of G-d are reparation and sacrifice. What was done to these Guatemalans was a crime against humanity and so reprehensible that it recalls the habits of Mongols to throw plague ridden corpses into cities to start the plague therein. How can any nation which dares to call itself civilized be responsible for such evil acts? How can the mere saying of I am sorry be sufficient.
This country through its leaders (elders) must choose a scapegoat. Some person who is most representative of what is best in this country must be punished for the whole country. The leaders must gather and declare their sin before the Guatemalan people and the whole world. They must ask for forgiveness for this horrible act. There must be a monetary payment. But more than this, G-d demands a sacrifice. This young man, this perfect American, must die for the sins of the nation. As we have rejected Judaeo-Christian ethics, we must consort with pagan ideals and kill a person, rather than a bull. We must weep. We must lament. We must agonize over our acts. We must wear sackcloth.
How can we judge others when we do crimes of this sort? Ideally, the person dying should be someone important, may be Beau Biden, or Malia Obama, or John McCain. But they must die for the sake of the nation. You say, we do not have human sacrifice; well, the Mayan people, the ancestors of the Guatemalans did, and we should turn this person over to Mayan justice so that their living heart might be ripped from their chest in payment of this crime.
Is it a wonder that people hate America when these crimes come forth? Any nation which for the sake of "science" will infect people with disease to study their reaction without their knowledge deserves to be hated. As a religious people, we must demand sacrifice by those in charge to right this wrong.
However, despite my ranting, I stand ready to make the offering necessary on the true HaKapporet, the Mercy Seat, if the President will come and ask forgiveness for the nation. I will act as High Priest in the Order of Melchizedek to save our nation, if the President will acknowledge our sin before G-d.
May G-d have mercy on our evil leaders.
U.S. scientific researchers infected hundreds of Guatemalan mental patients with sexually transmitted diseases from 1946 to 1948 -- a practice that only came recently to light thanks to the work of an academic researcher. On Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued a formal apology to the Central American nation, and to Guatemalan residents of the United States.
"Although these events occurred more than 64 years ago, we are outraged that such reprehensible research could have occurred under the guise of public health," said Clinton and Sebelius in a joint statement. "We deeply regret that it happened, and we apologize to all the individuals who were affected by such abhorrent research practices."
I am sorry, a sorry just won't do it. The requirements of G-d are reparation and sacrifice. What was done to these Guatemalans was a crime against humanity and so reprehensible that it recalls the habits of Mongols to throw plague ridden corpses into cities to start the plague therein. How can any nation which dares to call itself civilized be responsible for such evil acts? How can the mere saying of I am sorry be sufficient.
This country through its leaders (elders) must choose a scapegoat. Some person who is most representative of what is best in this country must be punished for the whole country. The leaders must gather and declare their sin before the Guatemalan people and the whole world. They must ask for forgiveness for this horrible act. There must be a monetary payment. But more than this, G-d demands a sacrifice. This young man, this perfect American, must die for the sins of the nation. As we have rejected Judaeo-Christian ethics, we must consort with pagan ideals and kill a person, rather than a bull. We must weep. We must lament. We must agonize over our acts. We must wear sackcloth.
How can we judge others when we do crimes of this sort? Ideally, the person dying should be someone important, may be Beau Biden, or Malia Obama, or John McCain. But they must die for the sake of the nation. You say, we do not have human sacrifice; well, the Mayan people, the ancestors of the Guatemalans did, and we should turn this person over to Mayan justice so that their living heart might be ripped from their chest in payment of this crime.
Is it a wonder that people hate America when these crimes come forth? Any nation which for the sake of "science" will infect people with disease to study their reaction without their knowledge deserves to be hated. As a religious people, we must demand sacrifice by those in charge to right this wrong.
However, despite my ranting, I stand ready to make the offering necessary on the true HaKapporet, the Mercy Seat, if the President will come and ask forgiveness for the nation. I will act as High Priest in the Order of Melchizedek to save our nation, if the President will acknowledge our sin before G-d.
May G-d have mercy on our evil leaders.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Happy Sukkoth
The ancient feast of Sukkoth or Booths was originally a harvest feast celebrated throughout Canaan and Lebanon and perhaps much further away. It predates Judaism and Abraham by at least a thousand years. It is the one eternal feast as it has always been a feast in Judaism and will be a universal feast during the Messianic Era. See Zechariah 14:16.
Sukkoth or Temporary Structures are built of wood and branches so that we learn the dependence on G-d. When we were traversing the wilderness of Sin, we had to leave in tents and temporary structures and during that time we learned that G-d would provide us with food and water as well as a place to stay. The feasts of Judaism always help us to contemplate the important things in life and this feast powerfully demonstrates the need to be dependent on the Divine. During the feast in Israel, the people live in temporary structures for seven days and eat better than usual food. The first two days are Shabbot and no work is done, but much prayer and joy is manifested. The remainder of the days while not full Shabbot are still more important than regular days and the activity is limited. This is a time for many families to go on vacation.
The feast is also called the Feast of the Ingathering. Now, the normal meaning is harvest and farmers throughout the world are harvesting food at that time, whether from winter or summer. The spiritual ingathering is of the believers as this is the prime feast of the Lord. It is believed that the Meshiach will return on this day to regather Israel together.
The feast is also called the Feast of Gentiles because Scripture tells us to offer 13 bulls in the Temple on the first day, 12 on the second, and so on, 11, 10, 9, 8, and 7. When the numbers are added together, we find that there are a total of 70 which is the number of the nations in the world - 69 from Genesis 10 and 1 being Israel, the latest in time. So this feast was to ingather the believing Gentiles, the G-d-fearers as well. And Zechariah says that in the Messianic Age, all nations will come to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast.
This feast is ended by Shemini Atzeret, a feast uniquely Jewish and in thanksgiving for the blessings of the Jewish people. It is followed by Simchat Torah, which means, rejoicing in the Torah. The Jewish People rejoice that G-d in his infinite Mercy wrote down the 613 Mitzvoth or Laws on the Tablets of Stone with his Own Finger and gave us the Law that would direct us in this world. It is the covenant that G-d made with us, that we would keep these Mitzvot and He would be Our God, that makes us Chosen, makes us special, makes us the latest nation, a nation set apart, a royal priesthood.
It is appropriate at the end of this small sermonette to say Happy Thanksgiving, because the feast is all about Thanks.
Sukkoth or Temporary Structures are built of wood and branches so that we learn the dependence on G-d. When we were traversing the wilderness of Sin, we had to leave in tents and temporary structures and during that time we learned that G-d would provide us with food and water as well as a place to stay. The feasts of Judaism always help us to contemplate the important things in life and this feast powerfully demonstrates the need to be dependent on the Divine. During the feast in Israel, the people live in temporary structures for seven days and eat better than usual food. The first two days are Shabbot and no work is done, but much prayer and joy is manifested. The remainder of the days while not full Shabbot are still more important than regular days and the activity is limited. This is a time for many families to go on vacation.
The feast is also called the Feast of the Ingathering. Now, the normal meaning is harvest and farmers throughout the world are harvesting food at that time, whether from winter or summer. The spiritual ingathering is of the believers as this is the prime feast of the Lord. It is believed that the Meshiach will return on this day to regather Israel together.
The feast is also called the Feast of Gentiles because Scripture tells us to offer 13 bulls in the Temple on the first day, 12 on the second, and so on, 11, 10, 9, 8, and 7. When the numbers are added together, we find that there are a total of 70 which is the number of the nations in the world - 69 from Genesis 10 and 1 being Israel, the latest in time. So this feast was to ingather the believing Gentiles, the G-d-fearers as well. And Zechariah says that in the Messianic Age, all nations will come to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast.
This feast is ended by Shemini Atzeret, a feast uniquely Jewish and in thanksgiving for the blessings of the Jewish people. It is followed by Simchat Torah, which means, rejoicing in the Torah. The Jewish People rejoice that G-d in his infinite Mercy wrote down the 613 Mitzvoth or Laws on the Tablets of Stone with his Own Finger and gave us the Law that would direct us in this world. It is the covenant that G-d made with us, that we would keep these Mitzvot and He would be Our God, that makes us Chosen, makes us special, makes us the latest nation, a nation set apart, a royal priesthood.
It is appropriate at the end of this small sermonette to say Happy Thanksgiving, because the feast is all about Thanks.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Social Darwinism
Social Darwinism in the political sphere is defined as:
A term not widely used in Europe and America until after 1880 and then almost invariably employed as a pejorative tag, to mean the belief, based on a (?mis-)reading of Darwin, that natural selection entails the elimination of weak societies, or people, by strong ones. Popular in the innocent 1890s, social Darwinism seemed wholly discredited after Nazism. Some have seen its recurrence in sociobiology, which has therefore been controversial; but the ‘new social Darwinism’, if that is what it is, is based on the new genetics, which shows that Darwinism entails none of the racist or eugenicist inferences that were widely made between the 1890s and the 1930s (that one part of the human race is genetically superior to another, or that it is feasible and desirable to breed exceptionally good offspring from exceptionally good parents).
Part of the difficulty in establishing sensible and consistent usage is that commitment to the biology of natural selection and to ‘survival of the fittest’ entailed nothing uniform either for sociological method or for political doctrine. A ‘social Darwinist’ could just as well be a defender of laissez-faire as a defender of state socialism, just as much an imperialist as a domestic eugenist. Many of the foremost thinkers conventionally labelled ‘social Darwinist’ established their arguments independently of the findings and methods of Darwinian biology. This is the case, for instance, with Spencer and W. G. Sumner, the former being an unrepentant Lamarckist and dedicated believer in the inheritance of acquired characteristics, the latter an enthusiastic disciple of Malthus. With all of this in mind, it may very well be that the term ‘social Darwinism’ has merely a narrow rhetorical and ideological usage and consequently is of only passing historiographical interest.
Conservative Republicans and fundamentalists in every religion tend to look at spiritual things from a social Darwinist perspective. Darwinism says that the race progresses by eliminating the weakest members of society. In America, we have gone to extreme to prolong life, to keep alive those who cannot survive on their own, and to encourage those who pass on recessive and destructive genes. These ideals are supported by liberal and moderate politicians and voters because they value each individual life. They see a responsibility to allow each person to develop to their own potential.
The Scripture makes clear its position. It supports the intervention of G-d and the Holy Spirit to heal and to perform miracles. Miracles ignore Darwinism and support the ideal that every individuals interaction with the world will bring something of importance lost if that individual is gone. Healing is a vital method of frustrating Darwinism. There is no question that many of the diseases that use to kill are now controlled and, theoretically, those least able to survive are allowed to live. Paul goes so far as to say that if we give even our organs, our bodies, to the support of others with love we have done a good act. Organ transplanting is the absolute antithesis of Social Darwinism.
Underlying Conservative and Tea Party philosophies of triumphalism. We have made it, say the Tea Partiers, and we want to keep what we made. As a group they would allow the poor to die, would help only those within their church, and would condemn the oppressed to slavery. President Johnson said that America, the richest country on earth could spend enough to eliminate poverty. Yes they could, but they did not and now poverty ranks higher than ever before numerically. Over 45 million people are poor in America; that number is greater than most nations and Khruschev said what good is our democracy if people are dying and starving in America. What would Jesus do? What would Moses do?
The issue is best put before us when Cain asks G-d, "Am I my brother's keeper?" Genesis 4:9. The answer for G-d was yes. We are our brother's keeper and we owe it to him to help without destruction of his dignity. Social Darwinism is the religion of Cain. It ignores the duty to care.
This is not a political statement. I am a libertarian, not a conservative, but I do not like what is going on in America either. However, the solution is not to turn our backs on the poor, but to stop our adventurism in foreign countries.
A term not widely used in Europe and America until after 1880 and then almost invariably employed as a pejorative tag, to mean the belief, based on a (?mis-)reading of Darwin, that natural selection entails the elimination of weak societies, or people, by strong ones. Popular in the innocent 1890s, social Darwinism seemed wholly discredited after Nazism. Some have seen its recurrence in sociobiology, which has therefore been controversial; but the ‘new social Darwinism’, if that is what it is, is based on the new genetics, which shows that Darwinism entails none of the racist or eugenicist inferences that were widely made between the 1890s and the 1930s (that one part of the human race is genetically superior to another, or that it is feasible and desirable to breed exceptionally good offspring from exceptionally good parents).
Part of the difficulty in establishing sensible and consistent usage is that commitment to the biology of natural selection and to ‘survival of the fittest’ entailed nothing uniform either for sociological method or for political doctrine. A ‘social Darwinist’ could just as well be a defender of laissez-faire as a defender of state socialism, just as much an imperialist as a domestic eugenist. Many of the foremost thinkers conventionally labelled ‘social Darwinist’ established their arguments independently of the findings and methods of Darwinian biology. This is the case, for instance, with Spencer and W. G. Sumner, the former being an unrepentant Lamarckist and dedicated believer in the inheritance of acquired characteristics, the latter an enthusiastic disciple of Malthus. With all of this in mind, it may very well be that the term ‘social Darwinism’ has merely a narrow rhetorical and ideological usage and consequently is of only passing historiographical interest.
Conservative Republicans and fundamentalists in every religion tend to look at spiritual things from a social Darwinist perspective. Darwinism says that the race progresses by eliminating the weakest members of society. In America, we have gone to extreme to prolong life, to keep alive those who cannot survive on their own, and to encourage those who pass on recessive and destructive genes. These ideals are supported by liberal and moderate politicians and voters because they value each individual life. They see a responsibility to allow each person to develop to their own potential.
The Scripture makes clear its position. It supports the intervention of G-d and the Holy Spirit to heal and to perform miracles. Miracles ignore Darwinism and support the ideal that every individuals interaction with the world will bring something of importance lost if that individual is gone. Healing is a vital method of frustrating Darwinism. There is no question that many of the diseases that use to kill are now controlled and, theoretically, those least able to survive are allowed to live. Paul goes so far as to say that if we give even our organs, our bodies, to the support of others with love we have done a good act. Organ transplanting is the absolute antithesis of Social Darwinism.
Underlying Conservative and Tea Party philosophies of triumphalism. We have made it, say the Tea Partiers, and we want to keep what we made. As a group they would allow the poor to die, would help only those within their church, and would condemn the oppressed to slavery. President Johnson said that America, the richest country on earth could spend enough to eliminate poverty. Yes they could, but they did not and now poverty ranks higher than ever before numerically. Over 45 million people are poor in America; that number is greater than most nations and Khruschev said what good is our democracy if people are dying and starving in America. What would Jesus do? What would Moses do?
The issue is best put before us when Cain asks G-d, "Am I my brother's keeper?" Genesis 4:9. The answer for G-d was yes. We are our brother's keeper and we owe it to him to help without destruction of his dignity. Social Darwinism is the religion of Cain. It ignores the duty to care.
This is not a political statement. I am a libertarian, not a conservative, but I do not like what is going on in America either. However, the solution is not to turn our backs on the poor, but to stop our adventurism in foreign countries.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
City Life
"Cain also became the founder of a city, which he named after his son Enoch." Genesis 4:17.
Nomads, which we call hunter gathers today, lived together in small groups of a family or at best a clan and moved with the wild herbivores and with the changing seasons. They spent roughly 3 hours per day in getting the food for the day, four hours preparing it, and ten hours sleeping. The spent the remaining seven hours of the day contemplating nature, talking to each other, exploring, and leading a life-style called happy-go-lucky today.
The first real effort to organize nomads to do something was at Gobekli Tepe in Turkey. There, aliens, the sons of heaven from Genesis 6:4, induced the nomads to build a temple. From that organization flowed the idea of settling down and tending crops. Cain was a farmer and lived in an organized society. Genesis 4:4. The inevitable result of farming and sedentary lifestyles is technology. See Genesis 4:20-22. The sedentary lifestyle is subject to many things which we like today, but which G-d calls evil. Evidently some thought that the city life was so reprehensible that G-d would destroy that world with water in the great flood. There is nothing left of that great civilization which lasted from 9500 BCE until 7200 BCE. It was swept away by some cataclysm, may be a flood, but whatever it was the people about 7200 years ago decided to bury the cause of their troubles and buried Gobekli Tepe with many tons of earth.
The situation in the Americas was no different. At least three civilizations were destroyed by climatic events: the Mayans, the Anasazi, and the Mississippians. These people built great cities and multiplied due to much increased crops, but G-d sent drought or other cataclysms and destroyed their civilizations.
It is amazing that in every case, the very same people who once lived in a sedentary lifestyle made use to luxuries and order easily devolved after the destruction and that devolution in most cases was worse than the problems which justified the destruction of their civilizations.
In cities of today, we see those who live in trailers, in trailer parks, as the most itinerant and most red-neck. We much fun of them and say bad things about them. And yet, I just witnessed the descendants of the Anasazi in the four corners area of the United States. Many descendants of the Anasazi have opted for an American lifestyle complete with city life and high incomes. They in giving up their devolved lifestyles and returning to city life like their ancestors live in fine houses and enjoy the benefits of modern society. While their country cousins live in squalor, complete with trailer houses, broken trucks and cars, trash, and garbage, they claim to be spiritual people following the teachings of their ancestors. Apparently, they do not mean their Anasazi ancestors of the high culture, but some devolved ancestor who was a rube even to the Anasazi.
What I conclude from my High Mountain is that G-d must be the center of your life and then it does not matter where you live.
Nomads, which we call hunter gathers today, lived together in small groups of a family or at best a clan and moved with the wild herbivores and with the changing seasons. They spent roughly 3 hours per day in getting the food for the day, four hours preparing it, and ten hours sleeping. The spent the remaining seven hours of the day contemplating nature, talking to each other, exploring, and leading a life-style called happy-go-lucky today.
The first real effort to organize nomads to do something was at Gobekli Tepe in Turkey. There, aliens, the sons of heaven from Genesis 6:4, induced the nomads to build a temple. From that organization flowed the idea of settling down and tending crops. Cain was a farmer and lived in an organized society. Genesis 4:4. The inevitable result of farming and sedentary lifestyles is technology. See Genesis 4:20-22. The sedentary lifestyle is subject to many things which we like today, but which G-d calls evil. Evidently some thought that the city life was so reprehensible that G-d would destroy that world with water in the great flood. There is nothing left of that great civilization which lasted from 9500 BCE until 7200 BCE. It was swept away by some cataclysm, may be a flood, but whatever it was the people about 7200 years ago decided to bury the cause of their troubles and buried Gobekli Tepe with many tons of earth.
The situation in the Americas was no different. At least three civilizations were destroyed by climatic events: the Mayans, the Anasazi, and the Mississippians. These people built great cities and multiplied due to much increased crops, but G-d sent drought or other cataclysms and destroyed their civilizations.
It is amazing that in every case, the very same people who once lived in a sedentary lifestyle made use to luxuries and order easily devolved after the destruction and that devolution in most cases was worse than the problems which justified the destruction of their civilizations.
In cities of today, we see those who live in trailers, in trailer parks, as the most itinerant and most red-neck. We much fun of them and say bad things about them. And yet, I just witnessed the descendants of the Anasazi in the four corners area of the United States. Many descendants of the Anasazi have opted for an American lifestyle complete with city life and high incomes. They in giving up their devolved lifestyles and returning to city life like their ancestors live in fine houses and enjoy the benefits of modern society. While their country cousins live in squalor, complete with trailer houses, broken trucks and cars, trash, and garbage, they claim to be spiritual people following the teachings of their ancestors. Apparently, they do not mean their Anasazi ancestors of the high culture, but some devolved ancestor who was a rube even to the Anasazi.
What I conclude from my High Mountain is that G-d must be the center of your life and then it does not matter where you live.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Bucket Lists
Matthew says: "So too, you also must be prepared, for at any hour you do not expect, the Son of Man will come." 24:33. We are to be ready for the coming of the Meshiach when he comes, but there is a corollary to this commandment; we are to have done everything in preparation for his coming. We are not to sit idly by and wait for his coming, but we are to do everything we can to prepare. The list of things that must be done before we meet our Maker is called a bucket list, from a movie of the same name.
How do we know what is on the bucket list? It differs for each person. Over your life you have felt a desire or duty to do things, like forgive people, make amends, see sites, read books, serve others, etc. and you have put them off. You put them off for a variety of reasons including finances, schedule, and more pressing duties and responsibilities and yet you continue to feel the need to do these things. What if you never get to do these things? Will your life seem complete? If the answer is no, that thing, that event, that duty, that undone compulsion is on your bucket list.
My passion is old things. I have a degree in history. I have spent much of my adult life trying to understand the origins of Judaism and Christianity. Now, I am busy trying to understand the underlying principles of western religion, both the Cult of Angels and the primitive Hebraic theology. I love archaeology. I love to visit ruins. My bucket list includes many trips to archaeological sites.
Number one on my bucket list for 25 years was a visit to Israel. Through many miraculous events and with the command of the Voice, I visited Israel for 16 days in 1997. The trip changed my way of looking at many things. I understood why seeing what I saw was important to my life.
Number two on my bucket list is visiting the Mayan and Toltec ruins. I want to understand a people who never were infected with the ideas of the West or East and developed a civilization without reference to those ideas. I am sure that visiting these sites will open my mind to whole new vistas not previously encountered. However right now, it is too dangerous to visit these sites, IMHO.
Number three on my bucket list is visiting the sites of the Ancient Pueblans (previously called the Anasazi). I intend to leave on an eleven day trip to see Mesa Verde, the Anasazi Cultural Center, Hovenweep, Chaco Canyon, Salmon Ruins, Aztec Ruins, and other Pueblan sites on August 27, 2010. In addition, I hope to understand why the Marranos, the remnants of the Nasoreans, came to Taos, New Mexico after the expulsion from Spain.
Number four on my bucket list is visiting Provence, Narbonne, and the Pyrenees to understand the influence of the Nasoreans and the Cathari on the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth century world.
I remember when reading 1 Enoch was on the bucket list. It just seemed to be impossible to read it. Then seven years ago the Voice spoke and said that if I would understand the Essenes, I must read Enoch. I did and it changed my world view.
Everyone of you has a bucket list, even if you do not know it. Try to do at least one thing on that list this year. Plan to do them all. Make clearing that list a priority. You will not be ready for the Coming if you have not finished your bucket list.
How do we know what is on the bucket list? It differs for each person. Over your life you have felt a desire or duty to do things, like forgive people, make amends, see sites, read books, serve others, etc. and you have put them off. You put them off for a variety of reasons including finances, schedule, and more pressing duties and responsibilities and yet you continue to feel the need to do these things. What if you never get to do these things? Will your life seem complete? If the answer is no, that thing, that event, that duty, that undone compulsion is on your bucket list.
My passion is old things. I have a degree in history. I have spent much of my adult life trying to understand the origins of Judaism and Christianity. Now, I am busy trying to understand the underlying principles of western religion, both the Cult of Angels and the primitive Hebraic theology. I love archaeology. I love to visit ruins. My bucket list includes many trips to archaeological sites.
Number one on my bucket list for 25 years was a visit to Israel. Through many miraculous events and with the command of the Voice, I visited Israel for 16 days in 1997. The trip changed my way of looking at many things. I understood why seeing what I saw was important to my life.
Number two on my bucket list is visiting the Mayan and Toltec ruins. I want to understand a people who never were infected with the ideas of the West or East and developed a civilization without reference to those ideas. I am sure that visiting these sites will open my mind to whole new vistas not previously encountered. However right now, it is too dangerous to visit these sites, IMHO.
Number three on my bucket list is visiting the sites of the Ancient Pueblans (previously called the Anasazi). I intend to leave on an eleven day trip to see Mesa Verde, the Anasazi Cultural Center, Hovenweep, Chaco Canyon, Salmon Ruins, Aztec Ruins, and other Pueblan sites on August 27, 2010. In addition, I hope to understand why the Marranos, the remnants of the Nasoreans, came to Taos, New Mexico after the expulsion from Spain.
Number four on my bucket list is visiting Provence, Narbonne, and the Pyrenees to understand the influence of the Nasoreans and the Cathari on the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth century world.
I remember when reading 1 Enoch was on the bucket list. It just seemed to be impossible to read it. Then seven years ago the Voice spoke and said that if I would understand the Essenes, I must read Enoch. I did and it changed my world view.
Everyone of you has a bucket list, even if you do not know it. Try to do at least one thing on that list this year. Plan to do them all. Make clearing that list a priority. You will not be ready for the Coming if you have not finished your bucket list.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Cheat, Lie and Steal
In our modern age, we take cheating, lying and stealing for granted. Our politicians do it. Our wholesalers and retailers do it. We tolerate it in our families. We eventually are corrupted and begin to do it ourselves. However, that is not the way that YHVH taught us nor the way that Yeshua taught us. At Leviticus 19:11, the Torah says:
You shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.
The word for steal is ginab which literally means to get anything by stealth. Stealing is not just taking something that does not belong to you, it is also tricking someone into giving up something that is theirs through fraud and stealth. Our elections sound like they are being stolen. Certainly, the barrage of advertising that tells less than the whole truth about a product is stealing. When we tell a woman or a man that we love them so that they will sleep with us, that also is stealing.
The word for deal falsely is kachash which literally means deceive, deny, dissemble, and lie. So this word also talks about deceit, but here the deceit is in the way that we deal with someone. When we really do not mean what we say and seek to gain an advantage by our actions, we are dealing falsely. When you say that you make a certain amount of money to get a loan for a house, when in fact you do not make enough to afford the house, that is dealing falsely. The bank that helps you, the realtor that helps you, and the loan officer that turns the blind eye also are guilty of dealing falsely. The politician that tells lies about his opponent is dealing falsely with the people.
The word for lie is shakar which literally means deceit, dissemble, and lie.
The intent of the Divine Author of this mitzvot was to foreclose all forms of lying. Our laws foreclose many of the same forms of lying, but we tolerate lying in our society. We tolerate the lie and even teach the lie. My daughter-in-law tells her child who is neither overly precocious nor slow that he is the brightest child in the world and can do anything he wants. When he discovers that he is not the brightest or the most talented, what will he think. Rather than attack his mother, he will conclude that fudging on the truth is alright.
Lies bite. They eventually come back to haunt. They can cause great harm. What is the value of the testimony of a witness who regularly fudges on the truth. And what is the value of a government that hides behind the word classified to keep its lies from being found out.
The society that existed before the Flood was a society like ours. It did the same crimes that we do. Finally, it was destroyed and if we do not change, we will fall as well.
Perhaps the greatest liars are the evangelical ministers who claim that the teach the bible and yet leave out the Torah. It is no surprise that 1/3, about 100,000,000 of our fellow citizens have refused to be part of churches which do not live up to their own standards.
My advice, stop cheating, lying and stealing.
You shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.
The word for steal is ginab which literally means to get anything by stealth. Stealing is not just taking something that does not belong to you, it is also tricking someone into giving up something that is theirs through fraud and stealth. Our elections sound like they are being stolen. Certainly, the barrage of advertising that tells less than the whole truth about a product is stealing. When we tell a woman or a man that we love them so that they will sleep with us, that also is stealing.
The word for deal falsely is kachash which literally means deceive, deny, dissemble, and lie. So this word also talks about deceit, but here the deceit is in the way that we deal with someone. When we really do not mean what we say and seek to gain an advantage by our actions, we are dealing falsely. When you say that you make a certain amount of money to get a loan for a house, when in fact you do not make enough to afford the house, that is dealing falsely. The bank that helps you, the realtor that helps you, and the loan officer that turns the blind eye also are guilty of dealing falsely. The politician that tells lies about his opponent is dealing falsely with the people.
The word for lie is shakar which literally means deceit, dissemble, and lie.
The intent of the Divine Author of this mitzvot was to foreclose all forms of lying. Our laws foreclose many of the same forms of lying, but we tolerate lying in our society. We tolerate the lie and even teach the lie. My daughter-in-law tells her child who is neither overly precocious nor slow that he is the brightest child in the world and can do anything he wants. When he discovers that he is not the brightest or the most talented, what will he think. Rather than attack his mother, he will conclude that fudging on the truth is alright.
Lies bite. They eventually come back to haunt. They can cause great harm. What is the value of the testimony of a witness who regularly fudges on the truth. And what is the value of a government that hides behind the word classified to keep its lies from being found out.
The society that existed before the Flood was a society like ours. It did the same crimes that we do. Finally, it was destroyed and if we do not change, we will fall as well.
Perhaps the greatest liars are the evangelical ministers who claim that the teach the bible and yet leave out the Torah. It is no surprise that 1/3, about 100,000,000 of our fellow citizens have refused to be part of churches which do not live up to their own standards.
My advice, stop cheating, lying and stealing.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
The Laws of Prayer
As you already know, sometimes what I say here is controversial. It is controversial because I do not speak the opinion of a religious organization, but rather what I see from my high mountain. Prayer is a universal activity, even among so-called atheists. Its laws are therefore universally true. Let us look at those laws and try to make some sense out of what happens.
William James, the father of religious psychology, argues in his Varieties of Religious Experience that we should not center on the why of an event as much as the event itself. We know little of why electrons move to cause electricity. We know little about how a plant actually metabolizes photons. They do. We use it. Likewise, prayer is a thing we do not understand, but it works, it has worked for millenia and will continue to work for millenia to come. However, we can deduce from observation and conversation its laws and some of our holy works tell us succinctly why prayer works, if we can read between the lines.
First of all, I want to say that I believe in El, the True G-d, and in many additional divine beings. While El is self-sufficient and unconcerned with this multiverse, many of the beings that live in this multiverse are dependent on prayer for sustenance. The draw energy and life from prayer. How that works is a mystery no less than how photons are changed into plant food through the mystery of photosynthesis. I agree with Neil Gaiman in American Gods, a 'god' is sustained by prayer. So that is the quid of the equation. Let us look at how we get the quo of the equation.
First, 1 John 5:14-15 sets forth an important law of prayer:
"And we have this confidence in him, that if we ask anything ACCORDING TO HIS WILL, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in regard to whatever we ask, we know that what we have asked for is ours."
So, the first law of prayer is praying in accordance with the Will of the Universe. I do not put the divine name of a being there because all evidence shows that the many beings in the universe that are elemental in character can do things when they grant prayer. How do we harmonize with the Universe, that is, how do we know what to prayer for. It is this corollary to the first law that causes all the problem. We do not. Those who are sensitive may sense the will of the Universe, but they do not know the will of the Universe. Why is it important to know the will of the Universe? Because the laws of chance are alterable. Scientific studies have watched mind control change the normal chance on a set of dice. It works at many levels. Those things that are in the will of the Universe when prayed for can change the normal laws of chance so that it is less likely or more likely that an event will occur. Sensitive people can sense the movements of chance and effect them. Prayer is a force that effects chance. For example, there is a 20% chance of rain. A person who is sensitive and has other sensitivity to the laws of prayer can actually increase the chance of rain to one hundred percent. We call that weather working. It is reputed that saints have this power.
The next law of prayer is a mental condition called faith. Faith comes in three varieties. When some event has always happened in a given way in our lives, we have faith from observation that it will occur again. This subjective belief is a form of faith. But there is a higher form of faith, which allows the person who believes in it to use the power for prayer. When an unusual event occurs, that is, when we ask for something in prayer and it happens, we try to recall that event and what we were doing at the time and replicate it. If we successfully replicate the event, the laws of prayer will allow the result to be the same. This level of faith creates a template in the soul which can be used for many things in the science of prayer. Constant use of prayer, that is, directed prayer, increases ones ability to pray meaningfully. The last form of faith is a result of becoming sensitive to the will of the universe and praying not only for ones own needs, but the needs of others, and using the second level to hone ones ability to saintly levels thus increasing the chance of success just as a athlete by training increases his chances of success in the games.
The third law of prayer involves multiple parties of prayers. When more than one person who has learned to pray prays, then the combined power of prayer increases exponentially, rather than arithmetically. So the power of two people praying is three, the power of three people praying is five, and so forth. That is why orders of prayers, monks and nuns, are more successful at prayer than ordinary people.
The fourth law of prayer is concentration. The concept of visualization is helps to concentrate ones intentions. Likewise, statues, pictures, congregation meetings, drugs, and other concentration devices can be used to concentrate on the object of the prayer.
Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, the being that one prays to makes a difference. Today, prayers are more likely prayed to Allah, Jesus, Buddha, and Mary than any other divine being. Naturally, as they have a surplus of power, they can alter chance more effectively and cause events to happen regularly so that the believers can benefit. However, determined cults of believers in Horus, Isis, Jupiter, Mithras, or Cernunnos, the Hag, whatever, can also be effective in altering chance and gaining results with prayer. For the atheist, even strong faith in the wisdom of man can effect things.
All prayer works. Most prayer is not useful because most people are selfish. Learning to pray is an art form. Because our prayers are heard, sometimes we raise conflict between the various beings who can ingest the energy of prayer and we will be more or less successful. One good piece of advice is to hitch your prayer life to a popular 'god' or in the alternative, find a 'god' who agrees with you regularly and hitch your wagon to them. All divine beings set forth rules for their aid and you will have to pay for it not only in prayer, but by helping others whose prayers they are answering. For instance, if you god is Mammon, the god of money, you may have to give some of your money to another as part of the requirements of getting aid from your god. Not all gods are as formal as YHWH who has set forth his rules in the Torah, but all gods require aid on earth for them to achieve the ends which gets them fed.
While I may have offended many, truth is truth. Keep praying. It works.
William James, the father of religious psychology, argues in his Varieties of Religious Experience that we should not center on the why of an event as much as the event itself. We know little of why electrons move to cause electricity. We know little about how a plant actually metabolizes photons. They do. We use it. Likewise, prayer is a thing we do not understand, but it works, it has worked for millenia and will continue to work for millenia to come. However, we can deduce from observation and conversation its laws and some of our holy works tell us succinctly why prayer works, if we can read between the lines.
First of all, I want to say that I believe in El, the True G-d, and in many additional divine beings. While El is self-sufficient and unconcerned with this multiverse, many of the beings that live in this multiverse are dependent on prayer for sustenance. The draw energy and life from prayer. How that works is a mystery no less than how photons are changed into plant food through the mystery of photosynthesis. I agree with Neil Gaiman in American Gods, a 'god' is sustained by prayer. So that is the quid of the equation. Let us look at how we get the quo of the equation.
First, 1 John 5:14-15 sets forth an important law of prayer:
"And we have this confidence in him, that if we ask anything ACCORDING TO HIS WILL, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in regard to whatever we ask, we know that what we have asked for is ours."
So, the first law of prayer is praying in accordance with the Will of the Universe. I do not put the divine name of a being there because all evidence shows that the many beings in the universe that are elemental in character can do things when they grant prayer. How do we harmonize with the Universe, that is, how do we know what to prayer for. It is this corollary to the first law that causes all the problem. We do not. Those who are sensitive may sense the will of the Universe, but they do not know the will of the Universe. Why is it important to know the will of the Universe? Because the laws of chance are alterable. Scientific studies have watched mind control change the normal chance on a set of dice. It works at many levels. Those things that are in the will of the Universe when prayed for can change the normal laws of chance so that it is less likely or more likely that an event will occur. Sensitive people can sense the movements of chance and effect them. Prayer is a force that effects chance. For example, there is a 20% chance of rain. A person who is sensitive and has other sensitivity to the laws of prayer can actually increase the chance of rain to one hundred percent. We call that weather working. It is reputed that saints have this power.
The next law of prayer is a mental condition called faith. Faith comes in three varieties. When some event has always happened in a given way in our lives, we have faith from observation that it will occur again. This subjective belief is a form of faith. But there is a higher form of faith, which allows the person who believes in it to use the power for prayer. When an unusual event occurs, that is, when we ask for something in prayer and it happens, we try to recall that event and what we were doing at the time and replicate it. If we successfully replicate the event, the laws of prayer will allow the result to be the same. This level of faith creates a template in the soul which can be used for many things in the science of prayer. Constant use of prayer, that is, directed prayer, increases ones ability to pray meaningfully. The last form of faith is a result of becoming sensitive to the will of the universe and praying not only for ones own needs, but the needs of others, and using the second level to hone ones ability to saintly levels thus increasing the chance of success just as a athlete by training increases his chances of success in the games.
The third law of prayer involves multiple parties of prayers. When more than one person who has learned to pray prays, then the combined power of prayer increases exponentially, rather than arithmetically. So the power of two people praying is three, the power of three people praying is five, and so forth. That is why orders of prayers, monks and nuns, are more successful at prayer than ordinary people.
The fourth law of prayer is concentration. The concept of visualization is helps to concentrate ones intentions. Likewise, statues, pictures, congregation meetings, drugs, and other concentration devices can be used to concentrate on the object of the prayer.
Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, the being that one prays to makes a difference. Today, prayers are more likely prayed to Allah, Jesus, Buddha, and Mary than any other divine being. Naturally, as they have a surplus of power, they can alter chance more effectively and cause events to happen regularly so that the believers can benefit. However, determined cults of believers in Horus, Isis, Jupiter, Mithras, or Cernunnos, the Hag, whatever, can also be effective in altering chance and gaining results with prayer. For the atheist, even strong faith in the wisdom of man can effect things.
All prayer works. Most prayer is not useful because most people are selfish. Learning to pray is an art form. Because our prayers are heard, sometimes we raise conflict between the various beings who can ingest the energy of prayer and we will be more or less successful. One good piece of advice is to hitch your prayer life to a popular 'god' or in the alternative, find a 'god' who agrees with you regularly and hitch your wagon to them. All divine beings set forth rules for their aid and you will have to pay for it not only in prayer, but by helping others whose prayers they are answering. For instance, if you god is Mammon, the god of money, you may have to give some of your money to another as part of the requirements of getting aid from your god. Not all gods are as formal as YHWH who has set forth his rules in the Torah, but all gods require aid on earth for them to achieve the ends which gets them fed.
While I may have offended many, truth is truth. Keep praying. It works.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
How Hath Thou Fallen?
"How have you fallen from the heavens, Venus, son of the Dawn!" The Prophet Isaiah asks this question of Nebuchanezzar, but it is a question that is still appropriate today. Luke says: "He (meaning YHVH) has thrown down the rulers from their thrones but lifted up the lowly." Luke 1:52. Again, that is a situation that we see today. Then Luke says: "But lifted up the lowly." Luke 1:52.
In Kansas City, an attorney, a Mr. Logan, a partner in a major law firm was caught sending nude pictures of himself to an undercover agent posing as a 14 year old girl. He was too good to help the poor and brought in a large salary. He was busy making a name for him and trying to get big. Now he faces a $250,000 fine and 10 years in jail.
Gen. McChrystal had long been a general in the United States Army. He had been arrogant and constantly felt that he knew better than the civilians how to run a difficult war. He chose to arrogantly give an interview to a leftist newspaper, The Rolling Stone, and he criticized his superiors. He fell far in one night. He ended his career in disgrace.
Former Governor Vilsack is Secretary of Agriculture. He fired a mid level bureaucrat for having made racist statements without even looking at the speech from which her statements came. He found that he had been duped by a "conservative" translate arrogant blogger. He was forced to make a formal and humble apology to the President and the woman and he may lose his job.
Congressman Rangel, one of three congressmen who have long overstayed their welcome in the House of Representatives, arrogantly broke many ethical rules. He thought because he came from a district that returned him, a black man from a black district, to congress without thinking about it, that he was beyond the law. He had been the fourth ranking Democrat and Chair of the Ways and Means Committee, the most powerful committee in Congress. Now, he will be lucky if the House does not expel him.
All of these men are an object lesson to us about arrogance that becomes unbridled, just as Nebuchanezzar's arrogance became unbridled. He sought to sit his throne next to G-d's throne, they sought to become above the law. See how the mighty have fallen.
On the other hand, Ms. Sherrod admitted that she was human, that once she had had racist thoughts against a white farmer, and then had an epiphany and helped him and his wife save their family farm. She used her recognition that she was a racist to help alert other minorities to the racism that is so rampant among minorities. Fired by Vilsack, she now has been offered another, tailor made job. One might ask why. Well does wrongful discharge, slander, and libel sound familiar. She has a good suit against the blogger, Fox TV, commentators, Vilsack, and the government. Of course, they want to quiet her down. But her honesty may well allow her to retire in style and I wish her well. The lowly have been raised up.
Let these lessons be remembered by my readers and may they take them to heart.
In Kansas City, an attorney, a Mr. Logan, a partner in a major law firm was caught sending nude pictures of himself to an undercover agent posing as a 14 year old girl. He was too good to help the poor and brought in a large salary. He was busy making a name for him and trying to get big. Now he faces a $250,000 fine and 10 years in jail.
Gen. McChrystal had long been a general in the United States Army. He had been arrogant and constantly felt that he knew better than the civilians how to run a difficult war. He chose to arrogantly give an interview to a leftist newspaper, The Rolling Stone, and he criticized his superiors. He fell far in one night. He ended his career in disgrace.
Former Governor Vilsack is Secretary of Agriculture. He fired a mid level bureaucrat for having made racist statements without even looking at the speech from which her statements came. He found that he had been duped by a "conservative" translate arrogant blogger. He was forced to make a formal and humble apology to the President and the woman and he may lose his job.
Congressman Rangel, one of three congressmen who have long overstayed their welcome in the House of Representatives, arrogantly broke many ethical rules. He thought because he came from a district that returned him, a black man from a black district, to congress without thinking about it, that he was beyond the law. He had been the fourth ranking Democrat and Chair of the Ways and Means Committee, the most powerful committee in Congress. Now, he will be lucky if the House does not expel him.
All of these men are an object lesson to us about arrogance that becomes unbridled, just as Nebuchanezzar's arrogance became unbridled. He sought to sit his throne next to G-d's throne, they sought to become above the law. See how the mighty have fallen.
On the other hand, Ms. Sherrod admitted that she was human, that once she had had racist thoughts against a white farmer, and then had an epiphany and helped him and his wife save their family farm. She used her recognition that she was a racist to help alert other minorities to the racism that is so rampant among minorities. Fired by Vilsack, she now has been offered another, tailor made job. One might ask why. Well does wrongful discharge, slander, and libel sound familiar. She has a good suit against the blogger, Fox TV, commentators, Vilsack, and the government. Of course, they want to quiet her down. But her honesty may well allow her to retire in style and I wish her well. The lowly have been raised up.
Let these lessons be remembered by my readers and may they take them to heart.
Friday, July 16, 2010
The Nephilim: A Racial Memory
Those who attack the Torah because they disagree with the history put forth in it do not recognize that the historical sections are not the memories of G-d, but the traditions of those people who inherited the commandments. No one, in their right mind, would argue that history in the Scriptures meets the standards used by modern historians to record the events of the past. First and foremost, the historical sections of scripture are not history as such as much as remembered events that have been explained and colored by time. However, for each and every historical statement in the Torah there is a kernel that remembers a real event and tries to present it to us for our consideration.
One of the most powerful ideas in the book of Genesis is the pastoral ideal. It argues that hunter-gathers and shepherd nomads are more moral than people who live sedentary lives. While all of Genesis supports this principle, I want to look at the kernel of this idea and see if I can make some sense for you from it.
Genesis 6 says:
“And it came to pass, that when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, the Sons of the Archangels, saw the daughters of mankind that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And YHVH said, ‘My Ruach shall not always contend with mankind, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’
There were Nephil (Giant bullies) in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the Sons of the Archangels came in unto the daughters of mankind, and they bare children to them, and the same became powerful, which were of old, men who had made a name for themselves.
And YHVH saw that the wickedness of man was great in the land, and that every imagination of his heart was always evil. And it YHVH repented that he had made man in the land, at it grieved him in his heart.”
The passage implies that humans lived much longer in the ideal world of the hunter-gathers than now. It suggests that there were giant bullies in the earth. Now, we might well ask if this was a story about giants in general as they always seem to be bullies. But, there is another passage that adds to our knowledge of the Nephilim. Deuteronomy 3:11 introduces us to Og, King of Bashan. It says:
“For only Og, King of Bashan, remained of the Nephilim; behold his bestead was a bedstead of iron; … nine cubits was the length thereof and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.”
So these tyrants, these bullies, were truly huge. A cubit is about 20.6 inches so the bed would have been 6’10” wide and 15’6” long. Truly a man needing such a bed would be huge and it is normally thought that this man was about 9 feet tall and appropriately wide for a muscular person. According to Torah, there were an entire race of these people. Now, the Torah does not say that the Nephilim are the descendants of a union between angels and women. It says that the children of the angelic-human hybrid were like the Nephilim in that they were likewise huge and became famous. What is the basis for this story?
Author Tom Knox in the Genesis Secret offers his opinion, but he does not go far enough in my opinion. He argues that the Nephilim came from the north because genetic science has shown that the competition for survival in colder climates produces taller, smarter people. He argues that survival has made the northerners more aggressive and violent. He argues that the hominid Giganthropus may well have been the origin of the legend. He argues that the Nephilim may have separated due to warfare and one part came to a place called Gobekli Tepe where they taught the hunter gathers to be sedentary. They also taught them how to farm, to domesticate animals, to dominate the surrounding peoples, to worship, and to kill and eat other humans. Thus, all that is evil in the world today, war, competition, and cannibalism, both real and symbolic, was a result of the Nephilim’s influence. The Book of Enoch greatly expands on the sins of the Nephilim and that book was a central theological document for the Essene-Nasorean faith. Enoch goes so far as to say that the Nephilim were the sons of the angelic-human hybrid.
What he does not say and what should be added is that the religion of the Nephilim may still exist. It is called the Cult of Angels and has three distinct denominations: the Yezidi, the Alawi-Nusairi, and the Alevi. The argument is made by the scholars of the Cult of Angels that the Cult is at least 8000 years old and that it has influenced all the major world religions, from Zoroaster and Hinduism, to Bahai and Mormonism. Further, it should be noted that Gobekli Tepe is the oldest known temple built by hominids and that all domestication of wheat and the early domestication of pigs took place within close proximity of Gobekli Tepe in the area of Kurdistan more anciently known as Edessa.
It is therefore appropriate to argue that perhaps these Giganthropi came from elsewhere. After all, geneticists have confidently said that all humanity came from Africa, even though Jomon pottery in Japan implies a separate origin of humanity. Dr. Zechariah Sitchin, a man who has been much reviled, has shown that there is a great connection between the concept of the Anaki, that is, the ancient gods of Sumer, and the archaeological and philological data in southern Iraq. He concluded from his study that man may have been influenced some 12000 to 30000 years ago by travelers from a twelfth planet. When he said these things, Pluto, the alleged ninth planet was the fartherest out of planets. We now know of additional planetoids out further and larger than Pluto. Is it possible that we could have been visited by beings from another planet, the so-called Sons of the Elohim and that those left behind were gigantic and bullies. No one can say for sure, but the racial memory recorded in Scripture claims that it happened and it is on this basis that the anti-urban bias arose in the Scripture. Clearly, mankind’s interaction with these beings was not good for mankind.
I do not endorse nor refute Tom Knox’s story. I do consider knowledge of what he says and the scientific evidence which he interprets to be interesting, illustrative, and worthy of contemplation.
One of the most powerful ideas in the book of Genesis is the pastoral ideal. It argues that hunter-gathers and shepherd nomads are more moral than people who live sedentary lives. While all of Genesis supports this principle, I want to look at the kernel of this idea and see if I can make some sense for you from it.
Genesis 6 says:
“And it came to pass, that when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, the Sons of the Archangels, saw the daughters of mankind that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And YHVH said, ‘My Ruach shall not always contend with mankind, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’
There were Nephil (Giant bullies) in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the Sons of the Archangels came in unto the daughters of mankind, and they bare children to them, and the same became powerful, which were of old, men who had made a name for themselves.
And YHVH saw that the wickedness of man was great in the land, and that every imagination of his heart was always evil. And it YHVH repented that he had made man in the land, at it grieved him in his heart.”
The passage implies that humans lived much longer in the ideal world of the hunter-gathers than now. It suggests that there were giant bullies in the earth. Now, we might well ask if this was a story about giants in general as they always seem to be bullies. But, there is another passage that adds to our knowledge of the Nephilim. Deuteronomy 3:11 introduces us to Og, King of Bashan. It says:
“For only Og, King of Bashan, remained of the Nephilim; behold his bestead was a bedstead of iron; … nine cubits was the length thereof and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.”
So these tyrants, these bullies, were truly huge. A cubit is about 20.6 inches so the bed would have been 6’10” wide and 15’6” long. Truly a man needing such a bed would be huge and it is normally thought that this man was about 9 feet tall and appropriately wide for a muscular person. According to Torah, there were an entire race of these people. Now, the Torah does not say that the Nephilim are the descendants of a union between angels and women. It says that the children of the angelic-human hybrid were like the Nephilim in that they were likewise huge and became famous. What is the basis for this story?
Author Tom Knox in the Genesis Secret offers his opinion, but he does not go far enough in my opinion. He argues that the Nephilim came from the north because genetic science has shown that the competition for survival in colder climates produces taller, smarter people. He argues that survival has made the northerners more aggressive and violent. He argues that the hominid Giganthropus may well have been the origin of the legend. He argues that the Nephilim may have separated due to warfare and one part came to a place called Gobekli Tepe where they taught the hunter gathers to be sedentary. They also taught them how to farm, to domesticate animals, to dominate the surrounding peoples, to worship, and to kill and eat other humans. Thus, all that is evil in the world today, war, competition, and cannibalism, both real and symbolic, was a result of the Nephilim’s influence. The Book of Enoch greatly expands on the sins of the Nephilim and that book was a central theological document for the Essene-Nasorean faith. Enoch goes so far as to say that the Nephilim were the sons of the angelic-human hybrid.
What he does not say and what should be added is that the religion of the Nephilim may still exist. It is called the Cult of Angels and has three distinct denominations: the Yezidi, the Alawi-Nusairi, and the Alevi. The argument is made by the scholars of the Cult of Angels that the Cult is at least 8000 years old and that it has influenced all the major world religions, from Zoroaster and Hinduism, to Bahai and Mormonism. Further, it should be noted that Gobekli Tepe is the oldest known temple built by hominids and that all domestication of wheat and the early domestication of pigs took place within close proximity of Gobekli Tepe in the area of Kurdistan more anciently known as Edessa.
It is therefore appropriate to argue that perhaps these Giganthropi came from elsewhere. After all, geneticists have confidently said that all humanity came from Africa, even though Jomon pottery in Japan implies a separate origin of humanity. Dr. Zechariah Sitchin, a man who has been much reviled, has shown that there is a great connection between the concept of the Anaki, that is, the ancient gods of Sumer, and the archaeological and philological data in southern Iraq. He concluded from his study that man may have been influenced some 12000 to 30000 years ago by travelers from a twelfth planet. When he said these things, Pluto, the alleged ninth planet was the fartherest out of planets. We now know of additional planetoids out further and larger than Pluto. Is it possible that we could have been visited by beings from another planet, the so-called Sons of the Elohim and that those left behind were gigantic and bullies. No one can say for sure, but the racial memory recorded in Scripture claims that it happened and it is on this basis that the anti-urban bias arose in the Scripture. Clearly, mankind’s interaction with these beings was not good for mankind.
I do not endorse nor refute Tom Knox’s story. I do consider knowledge of what he says and the scientific evidence which he interprets to be interesting, illustrative, and worthy of contemplation.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
A Jealous God?
Exodus 20:1-5 sets forth the first two commandments according to the earliest account. It says: "And Elohim spoke all these words saying, I am YHVH, your Elohim, which have brought you out of the Land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other Elohim before my face. You shall not make yourself any graven image, or any likeness of anything in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for YHVH, your Elohim, am a jealous El, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me."
YHVH tells us through the authors of the Torah that he is a jealous G-d 9 times. It is interesting that YHVH makes a point of telling us not to worship other g-ds, not because they do not exist, but because He is Jealous. One cannot be jealous without something to be jealous of. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that there are other Elohim. And yet, all of the Elohim are children of El, the Highest. When Moses gave the Torah, he believed in other G-ds. He believed in the G-ds of Egypt and Mesopotamia, and Cana'an and other people's g-ds. In fact, he did not claim that we should not believe in other gods. He merely said that we should not worship them. Deuteronomy 32:8-9 specifically admit that YHVH is the god of Jacob's people, and not any others.
The Pharisees claim that there is only one G-d. I do not disagree with them on that point. But, they claim that the only G-d is YHVH when neither he nor the Torah say that it is true. Rather, we are taught repeatedly that there are other G-ds and that the Highest G-d is El, his title being Elyon, the Highest. El is one. He is not five, seventy or any other number. But, he is not known either. Our only interface with him, according to Scripture, is YHVH in the form of Yeshua ha Meshiach. Is it wrong for people to worship other G-ds. The answer is no. If they are not the children of Jacob, they should worship their own g-ds and not YHVH. The one thing that is true from a scriptural point of view is that while YHVH is jealous, he does not deny the existence of other gods nor claim those who belong to other gods.
Yeshua was a xenophobe. He wanted to free Israel. He did not want to convert gentiles. Why? They had their own gods and he did not want to interfere with their worship. So where did we go wrong. How did we get to the place that there was only one Elohim and it was not El. Paul, as usual, did not understand Nasorean tradition or scriptural interpretation. He did not know that most Jews believed that there were other G-ds. He mistakenly thought that if one converted to Judaism, one affirmed not only that YHVH was your g-d but that there were no other g-ds. There is no evidence that Jews in the time of Yeshua ever thought such an idea.
Fortunately, the True G-d El is not jealous. He lets us believe in Allah, YHVH, Yeshua, Brahma, Vishnu, Krishna, Marduk, Isis, Horus, etc. without becoming alarmed. Why? One is not jealous of ones children, if they are they sane. El tries not to get involved in the interpersonal relationships of the Elohim. He appointed YHVH their King and expects that he will run the Universe well. Be not confused. El is G-d, there is no other. The others who call themselves G-ds are Elohim, the sons and daughters of El.
YHVH tells us through the authors of the Torah that he is a jealous G-d 9 times. It is interesting that YHVH makes a point of telling us not to worship other g-ds, not because they do not exist, but because He is Jealous. One cannot be jealous without something to be jealous of. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that there are other Elohim. And yet, all of the Elohim are children of El, the Highest. When Moses gave the Torah, he believed in other G-ds. He believed in the G-ds of Egypt and Mesopotamia, and Cana'an and other people's g-ds. In fact, he did not claim that we should not believe in other gods. He merely said that we should not worship them. Deuteronomy 32:8-9 specifically admit that YHVH is the god of Jacob's people, and not any others.
The Pharisees claim that there is only one G-d. I do not disagree with them on that point. But, they claim that the only G-d is YHVH when neither he nor the Torah say that it is true. Rather, we are taught repeatedly that there are other G-ds and that the Highest G-d is El, his title being Elyon, the Highest. El is one. He is not five, seventy or any other number. But, he is not known either. Our only interface with him, according to Scripture, is YHVH in the form of Yeshua ha Meshiach. Is it wrong for people to worship other G-ds. The answer is no. If they are not the children of Jacob, they should worship their own g-ds and not YHVH. The one thing that is true from a scriptural point of view is that while YHVH is jealous, he does not deny the existence of other gods nor claim those who belong to other gods.
Yeshua was a xenophobe. He wanted to free Israel. He did not want to convert gentiles. Why? They had their own gods and he did not want to interfere with their worship. So where did we go wrong. How did we get to the place that there was only one Elohim and it was not El. Paul, as usual, did not understand Nasorean tradition or scriptural interpretation. He did not know that most Jews believed that there were other G-ds. He mistakenly thought that if one converted to Judaism, one affirmed not only that YHVH was your g-d but that there were no other g-ds. There is no evidence that Jews in the time of Yeshua ever thought such an idea.
Fortunately, the True G-d El is not jealous. He lets us believe in Allah, YHVH, Yeshua, Brahma, Vishnu, Krishna, Marduk, Isis, Horus, etc. without becoming alarmed. Why? One is not jealous of ones children, if they are they sane. El tries not to get involved in the interpersonal relationships of the Elohim. He appointed YHVH their King and expects that he will run the Universe well. Be not confused. El is G-d, there is no other. The others who call themselves G-ds are Elohim, the sons and daughters of El.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
BEFORE THE GREAT WHITE THRONE
There is a song that like a few others of the same genre speaks so loudly to a person of faith that we find ourselves transformed by the words. David wrote the Psalms in this way. They were words that came from deep within a heart that was transformed by the light of the Holy Spirit. It is perhaps significant that the writer of the song that has captured my imagination is a Cohen, a priest of the People.
The song goes like this:
There was a time you let me know
What's really going on below
But now you never show it to me, do ya?
And remember when I moved in you
The holy dove was moving too
And every breath we drew was Hallelujah.
You say I took the Name in vain
I don't even know the Name
But if I did, well really, what's to ya?
There's a blaze of light
In every word
It doesn't matter which you heard
The holy or the broken Hallelujah.
I did my best, it wasn't much
I couldn't feel, so I tried to touch
I've told the truth, I didn't come to fool ya
And even though
It all went wrong
I'll stand before the Lord of Song
With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah.
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah.
Hallelujah, Hallelujah.
The song although it is about the failed mission of Yeshua, failed in the view of some at least, applies to all of us. Each of us will approach the Great White Throne with all our successes and all our failures. Any failures are total failures and none of us has a right to heaven, a right to bliss. Yet, Hallel, the Accuser, will claim that every indiscretion, every mistake, is sufficient to deny us bliss. Ultimately, we must stand before the Lord of Mercy who sits on the Great White Throne and listen to our crimes and failures. What can we say? What words can change the truth? The song gives us the answer: With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah.
Ultimately, the job of all of us is to meet life with the words: Praise You the Lord, Hallelujah. Don't quibble. Stand before that Throne knowing that we deserve whatever we get and simply say: Hallelujah.
The song goes like this:
There was a time you let me know
What's really going on below
But now you never show it to me, do ya?
And remember when I moved in you
The holy dove was moving too
And every breath we drew was Hallelujah.
You say I took the Name in vain
I don't even know the Name
But if I did, well really, what's to ya?
There's a blaze of light
In every word
It doesn't matter which you heard
The holy or the broken Hallelujah.
I did my best, it wasn't much
I couldn't feel, so I tried to touch
I've told the truth, I didn't come to fool ya
And even though
It all went wrong
I'll stand before the Lord of Song
With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah.
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah.
Hallelujah, Hallelujah.
The song although it is about the failed mission of Yeshua, failed in the view of some at least, applies to all of us. Each of us will approach the Great White Throne with all our successes and all our failures. Any failures are total failures and none of us has a right to heaven, a right to bliss. Yet, Hallel, the Accuser, will claim that every indiscretion, every mistake, is sufficient to deny us bliss. Ultimately, we must stand before the Lord of Mercy who sits on the Great White Throne and listen to our crimes and failures. What can we say? What words can change the truth? The song gives us the answer: With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah.
Ultimately, the job of all of us is to meet life with the words: Praise You the Lord, Hallelujah. Don't quibble. Stand before that Throne knowing that we deserve whatever we get and simply say: Hallelujah.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Seafood vs. Marijuana, Man's Law vs. G-d's Law
As you know, this blog is dedicated to looking at the world situation from a higher place, a place that is removed from the emotions of the world and set clearly in Scripture. Tonight I wish to speak again about what I call popular and increasingly Evangelical Protestant morality and to compare that morality with the Torah, the only law given by G-d.
Before we start, I want to briefly talk about one of the largest misconstructions in the many false statements found in Pauline writings, because it provides the basis for much of this false morality. In 1 Corinthians, Paul says: “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the holy Spirit within you, whom you have from G-d, and that you are not your own?” 6:19. Now the passage is arguing against prostitution and seeks to convict the believers to avoid prostitutes and argues that a prostitute and person who has the Holy Spirit are incompatible and that believers should not have intercourse with prostitutes, not because it is wrong, but because it defiles or makes unclean the body which is owned by the Holy Spirit. However, in Ephesians, the Pauline writer says that the believer is only one of the many who are being built together into a temple. Ephesians 2:21-22. Likewise, in 1 Peter 2:4-5 we are told that we are living stones being built into a spiritual house. The result of looking more carefully at what Paul is saying is that the believer is not by himself a temple, but merely a stone which may be rough or perfect depending on his spiritual growth. Paul, like the writer of Ephesians and 1 Peter, agrees that we should avoid things that are bad for us, but he does not insist that the State forbid those things which are bad for us. His letter in 1 Corinthians was not a new law, but merely an explanation why believers should not do that which is temporally lawful, because it is spiritually bad for them.
With that said, the Torah tells us some foods which are lawful to ingest and some foods which are not lawful to ingest. Genesis 9 lays down some general laws that are applicable to all the children of Noach, which, of course, all of us are. G-d says: I give them all (meaning the living creatures) as I did the green plants. Genesis 9:3. Moses tells us that G-d forbade to the Hebrews these animals that came from the water: “But the various creatures that crawl or swim in the water, whether in the sea or in the rivers, all those that lack either fins or scales are loathsome for you and you shall treat them as loathsome. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall loathe.” Leviticus 11:10-11. Now, Jesus made these laws effective on Gentile believers when he said in Matthew 5:19-21 that the law was still effective and had not passed away.
The Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach says: “G-d makes the earth yield healing herbs which the prudent man should not neglect; … he endows men with the knowledge to glory in his mighty works, through which the doctor eases pain and the druggist prepares his medicines…” Sirach 38:4,6-7. Marijuana comes from a green plant and has many medicinal qualities. Opium, heroin, and hashish come from a green flower and have long been used as pain killers. Cocaine comes from a plant many of us like very much, the coca plant, the source of chocolate. All of these plants are lawful to the believer. Using them and eating them is lawful. On the other hand, shrimp, lobster, crab, mussels, scallops, oysters, squid, and octopus are not lawful and are called loathsome and forbidden to man.
In our society, we have denied the civil rights of persons, we have incarcerated person, we have forbidden the sale of green plants, we have allowed warfare in our streets and neighborhoods and we have brought Mexico to civil war for the sake of interdicting something that is lawful under G-d’s Torah. At the same time, we wring our hands and cry foul against the destruction of the seafood industry in the Gulf of Mexico, an industry altogether loathsome to the Almighty. We want to break a mighty company and limit resources of this country rather than stop this unwholesome and loathsome industry. Evangelical morality makes marijuana illegal and shrimp legal. Evangelical morality makes the murder of babies legal, but the execution of criminals illegal. Evangelical morality seeks to impose its view of what is good against G-d’s view of what is good. From where I sit, high on my mountain, I shake my head and try to understand how G-d’s law is rejected and man’s law is adopted.
The eating of forbidden seafood desecrates the Temple of G-d much more than using cigarettes and marijuana. The eating of forbidden seafood is loathsome to G-d, but marijuana, cocaine, heroin, etc. are not.
Before we start, I want to briefly talk about one of the largest misconstructions in the many false statements found in Pauline writings, because it provides the basis for much of this false morality. In 1 Corinthians, Paul says: “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the holy Spirit within you, whom you have from G-d, and that you are not your own?” 6:19. Now the passage is arguing against prostitution and seeks to convict the believers to avoid prostitutes and argues that a prostitute and person who has the Holy Spirit are incompatible and that believers should not have intercourse with prostitutes, not because it is wrong, but because it defiles or makes unclean the body which is owned by the Holy Spirit. However, in Ephesians, the Pauline writer says that the believer is only one of the many who are being built together into a temple. Ephesians 2:21-22. Likewise, in 1 Peter 2:4-5 we are told that we are living stones being built into a spiritual house. The result of looking more carefully at what Paul is saying is that the believer is not by himself a temple, but merely a stone which may be rough or perfect depending on his spiritual growth. Paul, like the writer of Ephesians and 1 Peter, agrees that we should avoid things that are bad for us, but he does not insist that the State forbid those things which are bad for us. His letter in 1 Corinthians was not a new law, but merely an explanation why believers should not do that which is temporally lawful, because it is spiritually bad for them.
With that said, the Torah tells us some foods which are lawful to ingest and some foods which are not lawful to ingest. Genesis 9 lays down some general laws that are applicable to all the children of Noach, which, of course, all of us are. G-d says: I give them all (meaning the living creatures) as I did the green plants. Genesis 9:3. Moses tells us that G-d forbade to the Hebrews these animals that came from the water: “But the various creatures that crawl or swim in the water, whether in the sea or in the rivers, all those that lack either fins or scales are loathsome for you and you shall treat them as loathsome. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall loathe.” Leviticus 11:10-11. Now, Jesus made these laws effective on Gentile believers when he said in Matthew 5:19-21 that the law was still effective and had not passed away.
The Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach says: “G-d makes the earth yield healing herbs which the prudent man should not neglect; … he endows men with the knowledge to glory in his mighty works, through which the doctor eases pain and the druggist prepares his medicines…” Sirach 38:4,6-7. Marijuana comes from a green plant and has many medicinal qualities. Opium, heroin, and hashish come from a green flower and have long been used as pain killers. Cocaine comes from a plant many of us like very much, the coca plant, the source of chocolate. All of these plants are lawful to the believer. Using them and eating them is lawful. On the other hand, shrimp, lobster, crab, mussels, scallops, oysters, squid, and octopus are not lawful and are called loathsome and forbidden to man.
In our society, we have denied the civil rights of persons, we have incarcerated person, we have forbidden the sale of green plants, we have allowed warfare in our streets and neighborhoods and we have brought Mexico to civil war for the sake of interdicting something that is lawful under G-d’s Torah. At the same time, we wring our hands and cry foul against the destruction of the seafood industry in the Gulf of Mexico, an industry altogether loathsome to the Almighty. We want to break a mighty company and limit resources of this country rather than stop this unwholesome and loathsome industry. Evangelical morality makes marijuana illegal and shrimp legal. Evangelical morality makes the murder of babies legal, but the execution of criminals illegal. Evangelical morality seeks to impose its view of what is good against G-d’s view of what is good. From where I sit, high on my mountain, I shake my head and try to understand how G-d’s law is rejected and man’s law is adopted.
The eating of forbidden seafood desecrates the Temple of G-d much more than using cigarettes and marijuana. The eating of forbidden seafood is loathsome to G-d, but marijuana, cocaine, heroin, etc. are not.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Apostolic Succession
Roman society valued things with a long history. They liked antiques and antique philosophies. They wanted pedigree. Judaism had a pedigree. It stretched back long before there was a Rome and so Rome put up with the idiosyncracies of Judaism until 70 CE with the exception of plural marriage. Rome saw the sects of Judaism as one church, not 21 churches and so they did not make great distinctions between the sects based upon the distinctions that the sects made between themselves.
The Nasorean Movement as I have said before started between 168 BCE and 97 BCE. No one today can be sure as to when the Teacher of Righteousness began his exile and when he began to form a new philosophy within Judaism. However, by the time of Yeshua, three young men had been prepared to be the Three Pillars of the Nasorean movement; they were Yohannan (John) called the Baptist who was to be the High Priest, Yeshua bar Yotsef (Jesus) who was to be the King, and Ya'akov (James the Just) who was to be the Prophet. When Yohannan was executed, many of his disciples remained loyal to his teaching of strict asceticism and obedience to the Essene theology. Many more of his disciples came over to Yeshua who had discovered during his faith crisis that he was Melchizedek returned. Melchizedek was considered Divine and a Heavenly Being by the Essenes. The followers of Yohannan became the Mandaeans of today and even now they call there leadership, Nasoreans, but the followers of Yeshua coalesced around the apostles and especially the Apostle James Alphaeus called the Just One after Yeshua's death.
While the Apostles were alive, Paul and his heresy were not successful. The Apostolic tradition was Jewish with the addition of belief in Yeshua as the Meshiach. The idea of a succession was completely different for the early church, because when an Apostle began to travel and to spread the faith, another was appointed to sit on the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem. Eusebius records there names in his Ecclesiastical History as Richard Bauckham argues in his Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church. Thus, the Apostolic Succession took place during Ya'akov's 34 year reign, by replacing the Apostles who were now gone from Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the source and center of the Nasorean movement and of the true faith.
After the destruction of Jerusalem and the removal of the church leadership to Pella, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria and even Byzantium began to have significance in establishing norms upon which the church would function. As James Tabor has said, with the destruction of Jerusalem, being a Jew fell into disfavor in Rome and gentile believers sought to separate themselves from any Jewish taint. One of the first things to go was the Sabbath. After making the initial decision to break with Judaism, in its form as the Nasorean sect, the Paulines created a doctrine which became known as supercessionism which said that the Pauline heresy superceded Judaism. The idea was contrary to the teachings of the Apostles and the stated teachings of Jesus. It even contradicted the later teachings of Paul in Romans 11. Nonetheless, this idea further separated the Apostolic Church that descended from Jerusalem and the apostles from the false and unJewish teachings of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria.
In the late second century, a Pauline theologian who lived in Africa, one of the most famous, Tertullian, became a follower of Montanus and Prisca and Priscilla, a prophet recognized by the Church and later anathemized when he started teaching that Prophets were superior to Bishops. The Didache had already settled this issue. Prophets are superior to Bishops. Tertullian considered that issue settled as well. The Church responded that the Bishops were the successors to the Apostles and that their succession was the only legitimate church. Tertullian responded in the following way: he wrote the Pope of Rome, who was his Patriarch, that the early bishops were in communion with Jerusalem and each other, an idea he called Communio. He said that the early Bishops also had traditio, for him that traditio or tradition was probably the teachings of Origen and eventually Arius. They certainly were not the teachings of the Apostles, for the Pauline Heresy had deviated too much from Judaism at that time to find the true Tradition of the Apostles. Lastly, and most tellingly, he argued that Peter and the Apostles had potestas or charismatic power. They could heal, teach with power, prophesy, perform miracles, raise the dead, and do the things that Yeshua had done. Montanus could do those things as well. Tertullian said that the Pope was wrong to support Montanus as he was well within the Apostolic tradition. From his writing, the ancient churches: the Nestorians, the Monophysites, the Orthodox, the Romans, the Anglicans, and the Lutherans derive the doctrine of Apostolic Succession.
While I do not deny that there is a valid Communio or Communion of the Bishops in these churches with the Apostles, I deny that they have either Tradition or Power and therefore while not denying the possibility of Apostolic Succession, I do deny that anyone has it today.
The Nasoreans would allow their Patriarch to be ordained by a Bishop within the Communion of the Apostles. As we have a Jewish tradition, consistent with the early Church in every way, we have Tradition already. As our Patriarch regularly heals the sick, casts out demons, and performs miraculous acts, and whereas, he has raised the dead and picked up the snakes, and multiplied objects, he has performed all the acts of Potestas or Power. We teach that our Patriarch if ordained would be the beginning of a new Apostolic Succession.
However, it would be unfair of us not to mention another form of succession, one which a particular church has, and to note that although that church lacks tradition, it does have a succession of importance. Likewise, there is another church, an ancient church, which maintains much of the ancient tradition and many of its bishops may have performed some acts of Power. It wish to mention without fully commenting on them. The first church was founded by a Prophet and in accordance with Ephesians 2 can claim that it rests upon the foundations of the Temple not made with hands in that its Prophet was ordained a Bishop and laid hands on the subsequent bishops of his Church. That church is called the Church of God in Christ. The other church likewise mainly composed of black people is Ethiopian Coptic Tahwedo Orthodox Church which maintains many of the Jewish traditions including the kosher rules.
To reiterate, I believe in Apostolic Succession. I deny that any bishop in the world has it. I propose a method to re-establish it.
The Nasorean Movement as I have said before started between 168 BCE and 97 BCE. No one today can be sure as to when the Teacher of Righteousness began his exile and when he began to form a new philosophy within Judaism. However, by the time of Yeshua, three young men had been prepared to be the Three Pillars of the Nasorean movement; they were Yohannan (John) called the Baptist who was to be the High Priest, Yeshua bar Yotsef (Jesus) who was to be the King, and Ya'akov (James the Just) who was to be the Prophet. When Yohannan was executed, many of his disciples remained loyal to his teaching of strict asceticism and obedience to the Essene theology. Many more of his disciples came over to Yeshua who had discovered during his faith crisis that he was Melchizedek returned. Melchizedek was considered Divine and a Heavenly Being by the Essenes. The followers of Yohannan became the Mandaeans of today and even now they call there leadership, Nasoreans, but the followers of Yeshua coalesced around the apostles and especially the Apostle James Alphaeus called the Just One after Yeshua's death.
While the Apostles were alive, Paul and his heresy were not successful. The Apostolic tradition was Jewish with the addition of belief in Yeshua as the Meshiach. The idea of a succession was completely different for the early church, because when an Apostle began to travel and to spread the faith, another was appointed to sit on the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem. Eusebius records there names in his Ecclesiastical History as Richard Bauckham argues in his Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church. Thus, the Apostolic Succession took place during Ya'akov's 34 year reign, by replacing the Apostles who were now gone from Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the source and center of the Nasorean movement and of the true faith.
After the destruction of Jerusalem and the removal of the church leadership to Pella, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria and even Byzantium began to have significance in establishing norms upon which the church would function. As James Tabor has said, with the destruction of Jerusalem, being a Jew fell into disfavor in Rome and gentile believers sought to separate themselves from any Jewish taint. One of the first things to go was the Sabbath. After making the initial decision to break with Judaism, in its form as the Nasorean sect, the Paulines created a doctrine which became known as supercessionism which said that the Pauline heresy superceded Judaism. The idea was contrary to the teachings of the Apostles and the stated teachings of Jesus. It even contradicted the later teachings of Paul in Romans 11. Nonetheless, this idea further separated the Apostolic Church that descended from Jerusalem and the apostles from the false and unJewish teachings of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria.
In the late second century, a Pauline theologian who lived in Africa, one of the most famous, Tertullian, became a follower of Montanus and Prisca and Priscilla, a prophet recognized by the Church and later anathemized when he started teaching that Prophets were superior to Bishops. The Didache had already settled this issue. Prophets are superior to Bishops. Tertullian considered that issue settled as well. The Church responded that the Bishops were the successors to the Apostles and that their succession was the only legitimate church. Tertullian responded in the following way: he wrote the Pope of Rome, who was his Patriarch, that the early bishops were in communion with Jerusalem and each other, an idea he called Communio. He said that the early Bishops also had traditio, for him that traditio or tradition was probably the teachings of Origen and eventually Arius. They certainly were not the teachings of the Apostles, for the Pauline Heresy had deviated too much from Judaism at that time to find the true Tradition of the Apostles. Lastly, and most tellingly, he argued that Peter and the Apostles had potestas or charismatic power. They could heal, teach with power, prophesy, perform miracles, raise the dead, and do the things that Yeshua had done. Montanus could do those things as well. Tertullian said that the Pope was wrong to support Montanus as he was well within the Apostolic tradition. From his writing, the ancient churches: the Nestorians, the Monophysites, the Orthodox, the Romans, the Anglicans, and the Lutherans derive the doctrine of Apostolic Succession.
While I do not deny that there is a valid Communio or Communion of the Bishops in these churches with the Apostles, I deny that they have either Tradition or Power and therefore while not denying the possibility of Apostolic Succession, I do deny that anyone has it today.
The Nasoreans would allow their Patriarch to be ordained by a Bishop within the Communion of the Apostles. As we have a Jewish tradition, consistent with the early Church in every way, we have Tradition already. As our Patriarch regularly heals the sick, casts out demons, and performs miraculous acts, and whereas, he has raised the dead and picked up the snakes, and multiplied objects, he has performed all the acts of Potestas or Power. We teach that our Patriarch if ordained would be the beginning of a new Apostolic Succession.
However, it would be unfair of us not to mention another form of succession, one which a particular church has, and to note that although that church lacks tradition, it does have a succession of importance. Likewise, there is another church, an ancient church, which maintains much of the ancient tradition and many of its bishops may have performed some acts of Power. It wish to mention without fully commenting on them. The first church was founded by a Prophet and in accordance with Ephesians 2 can claim that it rests upon the foundations of the Temple not made with hands in that its Prophet was ordained a Bishop and laid hands on the subsequent bishops of his Church. That church is called the Church of God in Christ. The other church likewise mainly composed of black people is Ethiopian Coptic Tahwedo Orthodox Church which maintains many of the Jewish traditions including the kosher rules.
To reiterate, I believe in Apostolic Succession. I deny that any bishop in the world has it. I propose a method to re-establish it.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
One Nation Under G-d?
As I have demonstrated in the past, the G-d of Israel is YHVH, but He is not the True G-d. The True G-d is El who is Shaddai and Elyon, that is Almighty and the Highest. There are additional G-ds which the Scripture calls "foreign G-ds". Deuteronomy 32:12. Each nation listed in the Table of Nations (See Genesis 10) plus Israel have their own G-ds. So which of these G-ds is the one that our country is under?
This nation is a melting pot. There are people from all seventy of the ancient nations that live here. But the Highest G-d, El, is Lord of all the G-ds; he is the True G-d and it is under him that we live, under Him that we exist. Does he care about any nation or people? There is no evidence in Scripture for that claim.
So is there someone else that cares about us? In Psalm 82:1, it says that YHVH stands in the Assembly of the G-ds and makes judgment. Now, judgment is the prerogative of the King or Viceroy. Psalms 82:6 says that the Assembly is the composed of the Sons of El. So we can presume that the judgment is made in the name of El, by his viceroy or prime minister. The name of the King of Heaven, the Viceroy of G-d, is YHVH. So, He cares about us, not just his inheritance, the Jews, but about all of us, in the same way that the Queen of England cares about her people as well as her family.
The answer then to the question which G-d is the Nation under is all of them and which one is in charge, YHVH, for He is the King of Heaven. In fact, Psalm 24:1 denies the constant claim that the earth is Satan's domain. It says the earth is YHVH's and not just part of it, but all of it. So, the earth is YHVH's domain as he is King and he is the G-d that we are under.
Well then, is America a Christian nation? No. It is not. It is a nation under the protection of all the g-ds and especially of the G-d of Israel, YHVH. If you must say that this nation is under one G-d, which it is not, then you would have to say it was a Jewish nation, because it is under the Jewish G-d. America is therefore unique. It is inextricably connected to Israel. As goes the people of Israel, so goes America.
Are there foreign policy implications to this truth? Well, sort of. While there is no need to support the false secular state calling itself Israel, there is a need to support the Children of Israel who live there. They are being oppressed by the Children of Ishmael and Esau in an age old war. We must choose which side we are on in this war. If the so-called Palestinians, in reality, the Edomites, had demonstrated that they could control the borders, provide peace and security and respect human rights, we should support them. But, this is not true. The atheist and secular government of the so-called state of Israel has done a much better job of protecting the borders, providing peace and security and respect for human rights. At this time, our country should demonstrate the required prayfullness for Judah and Jerusalem by supporting Israel. The time may come when that is not true.
One Nation Under G-d -- that we are, but may be it should be ONE NATION UNDER ALL THE GODS.
This nation is a melting pot. There are people from all seventy of the ancient nations that live here. But the Highest G-d, El, is Lord of all the G-ds; he is the True G-d and it is under him that we live, under Him that we exist. Does he care about any nation or people? There is no evidence in Scripture for that claim.
So is there someone else that cares about us? In Psalm 82:1, it says that YHVH stands in the Assembly of the G-ds and makes judgment. Now, judgment is the prerogative of the King or Viceroy. Psalms 82:6 says that the Assembly is the composed of the Sons of El. So we can presume that the judgment is made in the name of El, by his viceroy or prime minister. The name of the King of Heaven, the Viceroy of G-d, is YHVH. So, He cares about us, not just his inheritance, the Jews, but about all of us, in the same way that the Queen of England cares about her people as well as her family.
The answer then to the question which G-d is the Nation under is all of them and which one is in charge, YHVH, for He is the King of Heaven. In fact, Psalm 24:1 denies the constant claim that the earth is Satan's domain. It says the earth is YHVH's and not just part of it, but all of it. So, the earth is YHVH's domain as he is King and he is the G-d that we are under.
Well then, is America a Christian nation? No. It is not. It is a nation under the protection of all the g-ds and especially of the G-d of Israel, YHVH. If you must say that this nation is under one G-d, which it is not, then you would have to say it was a Jewish nation, because it is under the Jewish G-d. America is therefore unique. It is inextricably connected to Israel. As goes the people of Israel, so goes America.
Are there foreign policy implications to this truth? Well, sort of. While there is no need to support the false secular state calling itself Israel, there is a need to support the Children of Israel who live there. They are being oppressed by the Children of Ishmael and Esau in an age old war. We must choose which side we are on in this war. If the so-called Palestinians, in reality, the Edomites, had demonstrated that they could control the borders, provide peace and security and respect human rights, we should support them. But, this is not true. The atheist and secular government of the so-called state of Israel has done a much better job of protecting the borders, providing peace and security and respect for human rights. At this time, our country should demonstrate the required prayfullness for Judah and Jerusalem by supporting Israel. The time may come when that is not true.
One Nation Under G-d -- that we are, but may be it should be ONE NATION UNDER ALL THE GODS.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
How Kosher?
In the time of Yeshua, a major issue between the Zaddoki (Sadducees), the Farsi (Pharisees) and the Nazori (Essenes)was the issue of how to put the Torah Mitzvot (Ordinances) into practice. The Zaddoki said that the Mitzvot should be read literally and put into practice as the Torah commanded. The Pharisees said that the Mitzvot must be made to fit practice and so they prescribed rules, traditions of practicing the Mitzvot so as to fulfill the Torah. The Nazori stood in the middle. They believed that the Mitzvot had to be interpreted to fully understand the meaning between ever ordinance, but they objected to the so-called "fence" around the Torah that would further legislate how a Mitzvot was to be carried out in practice.
Today, thanks to the Nazori, Karaism continues the Zaddoki tradition. The rabbinical Jews have continued the Farsi tradition. We, the Nasorean Orthodox Qahal seek to continue the Nazori tradition.
In the restatement and codification of the Mitzvot that we call Deuteronomy, we find this overriding principle:
"In your observance of the Mitzvot of YHVH, your G-d, which I enjoin upon you, you shall not add to what I command you nor subtract from it." Deut. 4:2.
This overriding principle is the essence of the difference between the Jewish sects. The Nasoreans teach that all regulations of any sort must be interpreted to put them into practice. On that point, we agree with the Rabbinical Jews. But, we believe that we must interpret the regulations with the help of the Voice. So, we oppose the codification of the methods that each individual person or congregation uses to carry out the Mitzvot. The Voice interprets the Torah in such a way as to make it meaningful to every believer. It is inherently wrong to force the method that seems right to one on another who likewise hears the Voice. Let us see how that affects the practice.
Deuteronomy 14:21 says: "You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk." The passage is self-explanatory. It involves boiling a goat in milk from its mother. It does not involve boiling a calf in its mother's milk. It does not involve putting cheese on meat. It does not involve gravy in general. Yet the passage is mentioned three times in the Torah and must have been important to the Divine One. The Zaddoki would forbid the boiling of a kid in its mother's milk, nothing more. The Pharisees have constructed an entire legal system based upon separation of milk and meat. Neither is correct. One, by failing to ask the Voice why such a law exists, fails to understand the regulation. The other by building an entire legal system has firmly sentenced rabbinical orthodoxy to eventual death.
We, Nasoreans, teach that there is a spiritual bond that exists between a child and its mother. In Leviticus 22:28 it says: "You shall not slaughter an ox or a sheep on the same day with its young." The principle of boiling a kid in its mother's milk and of killing the child and the mother on the same day imply a spiritual bond between the animals based upon blood. We reject the separation of milk and meat, but we support investigation into the spiritual bond between a child and its mother. We think it is that bond that is spoken of in Torah.
Another passage that gives concern is Deuteronomy 6:8-9 which says: "Bind them (meaning the Mitzvot) at your wrist as a sign and let them be as a pendant on your forehead. Write them on the doorposts of your houses and on your gates." The Farsi would have us put on tefellin each morning with prescribed prayers and much effort. They prescribe that a phylactery must be put on the wrist and on the forehead and the leather strap which holds them must be from a kosher animal and wrapped a certain way around the arm and the head. The passage does not require such specification. The Nasoreans say a simple prayer each morning and don a mezuzah. The point is the same, the mezuzah rests on the breast over the head and arm. How is that any different from the intent of the passage.
All in all, the Nasoreans reject the simple literalism of the Zaddoki and the complicated codifications of the Farsi in favor of a recognition of the Mitzvot and a declaration from the Voice as how to keep it.
Ultimately, it is not the act but the spirit of the act that makes any act holy. Many of the Mitzvot of the Torah are no longer important nor relevant. One has to specifically wear a robe upon which tallits or tassels may be added. But the tassels should remind us of the Mitzvot and the G-d who gave them. Are people any less observant in the simplicity of our ways than in the formalism of the Farsi ways. I would argue that we have the same spirit as they do in our concern for the Mitzvot if not in the much expanded practice. So is wrong to do what the Farsi do. There the passage is undeniable. Declaring that it is sin to eat a hamburger with cheese on it is heresy. It violates the letter of the overriding principle that one may not add to the law. How Kosher? That is for you to decide.
Today, thanks to the Nazori, Karaism continues the Zaddoki tradition. The rabbinical Jews have continued the Farsi tradition. We, the Nasorean Orthodox Qahal seek to continue the Nazori tradition.
In the restatement and codification of the Mitzvot that we call Deuteronomy, we find this overriding principle:
"In your observance of the Mitzvot of YHVH, your G-d, which I enjoin upon you, you shall not add to what I command you nor subtract from it." Deut. 4:2.
This overriding principle is the essence of the difference between the Jewish sects. The Nasoreans teach that all regulations of any sort must be interpreted to put them into practice. On that point, we agree with the Rabbinical Jews. But, we believe that we must interpret the regulations with the help of the Voice. So, we oppose the codification of the methods that each individual person or congregation uses to carry out the Mitzvot. The Voice interprets the Torah in such a way as to make it meaningful to every believer. It is inherently wrong to force the method that seems right to one on another who likewise hears the Voice. Let us see how that affects the practice.
Deuteronomy 14:21 says: "You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk." The passage is self-explanatory. It involves boiling a goat in milk from its mother. It does not involve boiling a calf in its mother's milk. It does not involve putting cheese on meat. It does not involve gravy in general. Yet the passage is mentioned three times in the Torah and must have been important to the Divine One. The Zaddoki would forbid the boiling of a kid in its mother's milk, nothing more. The Pharisees have constructed an entire legal system based upon separation of milk and meat. Neither is correct. One, by failing to ask the Voice why such a law exists, fails to understand the regulation. The other by building an entire legal system has firmly sentenced rabbinical orthodoxy to eventual death.
We, Nasoreans, teach that there is a spiritual bond that exists between a child and its mother. In Leviticus 22:28 it says: "You shall not slaughter an ox or a sheep on the same day with its young." The principle of boiling a kid in its mother's milk and of killing the child and the mother on the same day imply a spiritual bond between the animals based upon blood. We reject the separation of milk and meat, but we support investigation into the spiritual bond between a child and its mother. We think it is that bond that is spoken of in Torah.
Another passage that gives concern is Deuteronomy 6:8-9 which says: "Bind them (meaning the Mitzvot) at your wrist as a sign and let them be as a pendant on your forehead. Write them on the doorposts of your houses and on your gates." The Farsi would have us put on tefellin each morning with prescribed prayers and much effort. They prescribe that a phylactery must be put on the wrist and on the forehead and the leather strap which holds them must be from a kosher animal and wrapped a certain way around the arm and the head. The passage does not require such specification. The Nasoreans say a simple prayer each morning and don a mezuzah. The point is the same, the mezuzah rests on the breast over the head and arm. How is that any different from the intent of the passage.
All in all, the Nasoreans reject the simple literalism of the Zaddoki and the complicated codifications of the Farsi in favor of a recognition of the Mitzvot and a declaration from the Voice as how to keep it.
Ultimately, it is not the act but the spirit of the act that makes any act holy. Many of the Mitzvot of the Torah are no longer important nor relevant. One has to specifically wear a robe upon which tallits or tassels may be added. But the tassels should remind us of the Mitzvot and the G-d who gave them. Are people any less observant in the simplicity of our ways than in the formalism of the Farsi ways. I would argue that we have the same spirit as they do in our concern for the Mitzvot if not in the much expanded practice. So is wrong to do what the Farsi do. There the passage is undeniable. Declaring that it is sin to eat a hamburger with cheese on it is heresy. It violates the letter of the overriding principle that one may not add to the law. How Kosher? That is for you to decide.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
American Morality vs. Scriptural Morality
In America, we talk about morality, but in reality we mean popular morality, which changes with the season. The Scriptures provide a more certain morality, one that stands the test of time. We have to be aware that when we stand judgment before that Throne on High, it will not be by the morality of America, but the morality of Scripture that we will be judged.
I want to talk about two areas of Scriptural morality that are in direct contradiction to American morality at this time and place. First, I want to talk about an oil spill. Whoever is responsible for that oil spill is being required to pay for the costs of the oil spill. In the front line asking for payment are the shrimp, crab, and lobster fishermen. The scripture specifically forbids the eating of shrimp, crab, and lobster alone with all crustaceans. So, asking the oil companies to pay them for their loss of profits is sort of like asking the road construction company to pay the prostitutes for messing up their street corners. The shrimpers were immoral to be fishing for shrimp, crab, lobster, clams, oysters, etc. paying them for their lost earnings, earnings based upon immoral activity, is wrong, just plain wrong. In stead, we should rejoice that this immoral activity has ceased in the same way that we do not fret over the loss of income for a prostitute.
Second, Numbers 35:30 according to the New American Bible says:
Whenever someone kills another, the evidence of witnesses is required for the execution of the murderer. The evidence of a single witness is not sufficient for putting a person to death.
Matthew 18:16 says the words of Jesus on the subject and he says:
If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, sot that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’
In Kansas City, right now, we have just had a man arrested for murdering his wife; his name is Shon Pernice. His wife’s body has never been found and no one was a witness to her alleged murder. There is apparently enough evidence that, without the challenge of critics, it shows a circumstantial case indicating that she was murdered and that more than likely Shon Pernice was the murderer.
In the ancient times, it was always required that one have a “corpus delicti” in order to try a person for murder. Not so today. And even worse, despite the fact that there is no body, there is no witnesses. Scripture is clear. There must be a witness to the murder and further, for you Christians, there must be two witnesses to the murder. Trying Shon Pernice is immoral, let me say it again; TRYING SHON PERNICE FOR MURDER IS IMMORAL. We should be concerned about what is happening because there have been more than 200 people released from death row after clear evidence was presented showing that they did not commit the murder. Our system of trying people is not particular successful already and to try people without witnesses, solely on circumstantial evidence, is wrong and immoral.
The question should be asked. On the day of judgment who will be sent to Hell, the judge and jury or Shon Pernice. I trust that the Great Judge in Heaven will be just and follow His own law. The Judge and the Jury will go to Hell.
Do not mistake my desire to see morality in my country for coddling criminals. If a man or woman is convicted of murder, he or she should be punished by death, but they should not be convicted unless the State has at least two witnesses to the murder. I would rather that these people go free than stand before the Great Judge and say that I have assisted in the violation of his Law.
I want to talk about two areas of Scriptural morality that are in direct contradiction to American morality at this time and place. First, I want to talk about an oil spill. Whoever is responsible for that oil spill is being required to pay for the costs of the oil spill. In the front line asking for payment are the shrimp, crab, and lobster fishermen. The scripture specifically forbids the eating of shrimp, crab, and lobster alone with all crustaceans. So, asking the oil companies to pay them for their loss of profits is sort of like asking the road construction company to pay the prostitutes for messing up their street corners. The shrimpers were immoral to be fishing for shrimp, crab, lobster, clams, oysters, etc. paying them for their lost earnings, earnings based upon immoral activity, is wrong, just plain wrong. In stead, we should rejoice that this immoral activity has ceased in the same way that we do not fret over the loss of income for a prostitute.
Second, Numbers 35:30 according to the New American Bible says:
Whenever someone kills another, the evidence of witnesses is required for the execution of the murderer. The evidence of a single witness is not sufficient for putting a person to death.
Matthew 18:16 says the words of Jesus on the subject and he says:
If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, sot that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’
In Kansas City, right now, we have just had a man arrested for murdering his wife; his name is Shon Pernice. His wife’s body has never been found and no one was a witness to her alleged murder. There is apparently enough evidence that, without the challenge of critics, it shows a circumstantial case indicating that she was murdered and that more than likely Shon Pernice was the murderer.
In the ancient times, it was always required that one have a “corpus delicti” in order to try a person for murder. Not so today. And even worse, despite the fact that there is no body, there is no witnesses. Scripture is clear. There must be a witness to the murder and further, for you Christians, there must be two witnesses to the murder. Trying Shon Pernice is immoral, let me say it again; TRYING SHON PERNICE FOR MURDER IS IMMORAL. We should be concerned about what is happening because there have been more than 200 people released from death row after clear evidence was presented showing that they did not commit the murder. Our system of trying people is not particular successful already and to try people without witnesses, solely on circumstantial evidence, is wrong and immoral.
The question should be asked. On the day of judgment who will be sent to Hell, the judge and jury or Shon Pernice. I trust that the Great Judge in Heaven will be just and follow His own law. The Judge and the Jury will go to Hell.
Do not mistake my desire to see morality in my country for coddling criminals. If a man or woman is convicted of murder, he or she should be punished by death, but they should not be convicted unless the State has at least two witnesses to the murder. I would rather that these people go free than stand before the Great Judge and say that I have assisted in the violation of his Law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)