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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Balance

There is a new blog called Have You Read Balance Today? http://haveyoureadbalancetoday.blogspot.com/ In his single statement, the author bemoans the fact that the Bible is not accurate on some things, contradicts itself on others, and that Christian dogma does not agree with the Bible on other matters. He finds that his "faith" has vanished and he has to rethink everything that he believes.

While I understand what he is going through, I have several things to say about what he concludes. First, the Bible does not say that it is infallible, nor even the word of G-d. When interpreted as the Jews interpret it, the Bible comes closer to truth. Even the statement in 2 Timothy 3:16 limits the applicability of the Bible to teaching, refutation, correction, and training in HOLINESS. It does not include teachings on natural philosophy and science. Second, those who believe that the Bible is literal truth have fallen into the heresy and sin of deifying a book rather than G-d and therefore have another G-d before the True G-d. Third, Science seems to change daily. All you have to do is read the science sections of magazines and the newspapers and you find ample evidence that science has either had to rethink something it previously believed or has had to expand and explain things it previously believed. Darwinists, true Darwinists, are as benighted as Creationists. NeoDarwinism rejects some basic tenets of Darwins theories, mainly the claim that evolution has to been slow and is consistent.

Scripture, throughout the pages and including those books excised or not included, supports the truth that a Voice speaks to man. Who that Voice is remains to be seen, but people are not inherently insane because they hear Voices, only when they act irrationally because of what they hear. All the Prophets heard G-d's Voice and St. John, the Evangelist, says in Chapter 10 of the Gospel that "his sheep will hear his Voice."

Balance should not been just between Science and the Bible but should have spiritual content as well and that is given by the Voice.

Rational believers should challenge every tenet of their personal faith yearly. They should ask themselves, "do I still believe this?" Rational people grow, learn, discover and that makes them better than other people. Most people do not have critical thought. They believe what they read, hear, and sense as true and never challenge it. Critical thought is not bad. It is from Doubt that Faith arises.

I agree with the conclusion that Balance comes to about the True G-d. He is not here. But he has left many very powerful entities behind that we must work with and acknowledge. The fact that YHVH is not the True G-d should not lead you to the conclusion that you can ignore YHVH, for He is In Charge. He is the King of Heaven, the Creator, the Sustainer, and the Destroyer. Now, He may not be the Ultimate, the Eternal, the Everlasting, but unlike the True G-d, HE can Learn and Grow and sympathize with those of us doing the same. His Seven Incarnations have taught Him much about Us. I believe all the g-ds of old were real and none of them were G-d. I respect and revere them today, next to YHVH, of course. Why do I come to this conclusion? I have read the same sources that Balance has read, but I have the Voice and got a different conclusion from reading those passages.

Consider if you will, how would it change my faith, based upon the Voice, if it turns out that Adam did not live on Earth and that life was seeded on earth from elsewhere. No change. I am not affected by this knowledge. The Voice that I hear, that tells me to listen to Science and the Bible, is still there. It has not gone away.

So, while I rejoice and support Balance, I urged him today to continue his growth, for it is not over.

Resurrection of the Body

Last week marked the fortieth day after the Resurrection of Yeshua ha Meshiach which is called Ascension Day. This day is important because of what it implies for all of us. I thought it would be good to talk about the doctrine of the bodily resurrection from the dead at the end of time of all persons of which this day is a precursor.

In the earliest written book of the Bible, Job, we find these words according to the New American Bible:

“I know that my Redeemer lives, and that He will at last stand forth upon the dust; whom I myself shall see: my own eyes, not another’s, shall behold Him, and from my flesh I shall see G-d.” Job 19:25-27.

With these words, the discussion of Resurrection must begin. The Prophet Job says that he has faith that he will see G-d in his own flesh and not another’s flesh. This idea does not allow for a resurrection of a spiritual body, which may well occur as well. It proposes a physical resurrection. It is this doctrine of faith that is well attested in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Mormonism.

The Prophet Ezekiel says in Chapter 37:

“Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! See! I will bring spirit into you, that you may come to life. I will put sinews upon you, make flesh grow over you, cover you with skin, and put spirit in you so that you may come to life and know that I am the Lord.” 5-6.

In this graphic form, Ezekiel continues the discussion of Resurrection. There must have been many who doubted Job, but Ezekiel added to his words and told us with graphic certainty that the resurrection would be of our bodies, just as we have them today, not some other body, not some spirit body, but the body we have today.

Paul, the heretic, raises the question again in 1 Corinthians 15:12-17 where he says:

“But if Christ is preached as raised from the dead, how can some among you say there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then neither has Christ been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then empty too is our preaching; empty, too, your faith. Then we are also false witnesses to G-d, because we testified against G-d that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, neither has Christ been raised, and if Christ is not raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins.”

He raises the question even higher. He says that the ultimate proof of the doctrine of resurrection is found in the resurrection of the Meshiach. For if the Meshiach is raised, then the doctrine is true and all of us shall be raised as well. While I consider the way in which Paul presents the argument as spurious, nonetheless, the point is well taken. We are not saved by resurrection, nor solely by the resurrection of Yeshua, but rather his Ascension into Heaven and his ministry as High Priest of Heaven. However, that High Priesthood is dependent on the Resurrection of Yeshua and without it, we are still in our sins. Why would we fear death if we are not going to meet the Supreme Judge sometime in the future? Why would we fear death if there is no judgment on our very bodies? The judgment is reserved for the end and will not occur except in our own bodies. Therefore, the Resurrection is the proof that we will have a final reward or punishment.

In the Book of Revelation, St. John the Revelator says:

“I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Yeshua and for the word of G-d, … They came to life and they reigned with Meshiach for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were over.” 20:4-5.

St. John assures that those who were the highest of saints would be resurrected first and only later would everyone be resurrected. However, his testimony is entirely consistent with the teaching of ages.

Why is this doctrine important for us? Without this doctrine the threat of judgment would have no meaning and it is the threat of judgment that keeps the world in check. Ultimately, the fear that after death is the judgment keeps the most hardened tyrants in check for fear that they will suffer the pains of Hell. Many say that this threat is bad because it creates a false appearance of holiness and makes people be good from fear. I do not agree. There is no lack of mercy in the threat, but there is a promise of justice and G-d is equally Just and Merciful.

This event of Ascension Day therefore brings to mind the real import of Resurrection which most of us ascribe to at least in passing.

El Elyon = Shang Di?

It always seemed strange to me that if G-d was truly universal, that is, the G-d of the whole world that he would not speak as clearly to one people as to another. In reality, YHVH was never a G-d for the whole world. He was the particular G-d of the children of Israel. See Deuteronomy 32:8-9. But, YHVH’s father, El, the Highest and Almighty G-d claims to be the Lord of All the World and Father of the G-ds. Surely, if this claim is true, others would have heard about Him as He would have spoken to them and would have sent his Prophets to them as well.

The Hebrew culture although ancient was not the only ancient culture. The people of Mesopotamia and of Egypt were certainly as ancient and also the people of the Indus Valley were ancient. One other people were very ancient as well: the people of that area of the world now known as China.

Ethel Nelson published an interesting article on this subject in Creation 20(3): 50-53. Here is a partial reprint of her article:
ShangDi, the Creator-God of the Chinese, surely appears to be one and the same as the Creator-God of the Hebrews. In fact, one of the Hebrew names for God is El Shaddai, which is phonetically similar to ShangDi. Even more similar is the Early Zhou pronunciation of ShangDi which is ‘djanh-tigh’ [Zhan-dai].4 Another name for their God which the ancient Chinese used interchangeable with ShangDi was Heaven (Tian). Zheng Xuan, a scholar of the early Han dynasty said, “ShangDi is another name for Heaven (Tian)”.5 The great philosopher Motze (408-382 BC) also thought of Heaven (Tian) as the Creator-God:
‘I know Heaven loves men dearly not without reason. Heaven ordered the sun, the moon, and the stars to enlighten and guide them. Heaven ordained the four seasons, Spring, Autumn, Winter, and Summer, to regulate them. Heaven sent down snow, frost, rain, and dew to grow the five grains and flax and silk so that the people could use and enjoy them. Heaven established the hills and river, ravines and valleys, and arranged many things to minister to man’s good or bring him evil.’ 6
How did ShangDi create all things? Here is one further recitation from the ancient Border Sacrifice rite:
‘When Te [ShangDi], the Lord, had so decreed, He called into existence [originated] heaven, earth, and man. Between heaven and earth He separately placed in order men and things, all overspread by the heavens.’ 7
Note that ShangDi ‘called into existence,’ or commanded heaven and earth to appear.
Compare this with the way the Hebrew text describes the method of creation by El Shaddai, who, we suspect, is identical with ShangDi, and the similarity in name and role would suggest:
‘… by the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. … For He spake, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast’ (Psalm 33:6, 9).
The New World Encyclopedia says:
Shangdi (上帝, pinyin: Shàngdì, Wade-Giles Shang Ti), or simply Di (帝), is the High God (or Clan Ancestor) postulated in the earliest-known religious system of the Han Chinese people. The term can literally be translated as "Emperor (or Sovereign) Above," "Lord On High," "Highest Lord," "the Supreme God," or "Celestial Lord." While such terminology implies parallels with the divinities of the world's monotheistic traditions, two important differences must be acknowledged: first, while Shangdi was understood as a patriarchal ruler deity, this conception was not conflated with a role in the cosmogony; second, He was seen as one deity (ancestor) among many.[1] In this way, Shangdi bears more similarities to the dyeus figures in Indo-European religions (e.g., Zeus, Jupiter, Tiwaz) than to the God of Jews, Christians and Muslims.
However, when we look at the statements in Exodus 6:2 and Deuteronomy 32:8-9 we see that this view of G-d was held by the earliest Hebrews and was transmitted to us in the Torah. El Elyon is Highest G-d literally and El Shaddai means G-d the Almighty. (Note from Rabbi Albin.)
This being said, Shangdi is also the name given for God in the Standard Mandarin Union Version of the Bible, though shen 神 (lit. spirit or deity) was also adopted by Protestant missionaries in China to refer to the Christian God. Much like the ancestors, Shangdi is never represented with images or idols in Chinese tradition.
Just as the descendants of Jacob have conflated the power and authority of the Father G-d El to his Son YHVH, so we find that the Father G-d Shang Di has his power and authority conflated to Tian, the Lord of Heaven.
What conclusions can be drawn? First, that the true G-d is El or Di; that YHVH and Tian are children of El or Di: that the people of Earth have been misled into worshipping the Son and not the Father, who is the True G-d; and that we have a duty to restore the Truth to the world and worship again as was intended.

Amen

The word Amen in Hebrew means "to be true." It has come to mean, "I agree." The spiritual condition that believers must be in with the Divine Voice within them is described by the word Amen. One must accept that the Voice is speaking for G-d and react to the Voice with the kind of certainty that allows one to say, Amen.

In 1991, my family took a vacation to Hot Springs, Arkansas. We stayed in a nice condominium on the lake there. On August 26, 1991, the thirteenth Covenant Day, the Voice told me to celebrate the day by climbing Lookout Mountain in pilgrimage to the Lord. I went into the quaint downtown of Hot Springs and found a formal path a the bottom of the mountain. I knew I could have driven up to the top, but I was on pilgrimage and wanted to walk. I knew that there were less onerous paths to the top, but I chose to walk up the side of the mountain on the footpath that was most strenuous. I huffed and I puffed to the top.

When I got to the top, there was a large parking lot in front of the visitor center and the look out. I sat down on a wall that surrounded the parking lot and waited for the Voice to speak to me. After 45 minutes of waiting, I said to the Voice, "What do you have to say to me on this Covenant Day?" The Voice said, "I told you to go to the top of the mountain and the top of the mountain is on the other side of the parking lot." So I went to the other side and sat down and waited for the Voice. Finally, after 45 minutes more, I said to the Voice, "I am here. What do you want to say to me?" The Voice said, "You must quit your job."

I liked working as the Social Services Attorney for the State Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services. I had worked part-time for them for five years. I did not want to quit. In addition, I was concerned about what my wife would say. I came back to the condo very troubled. I sat on the porch overlooking the lake and rocked. It began to rain, harder and harder, still I sat there. My son, Thomas, came out and asked what the Voice had said. I said, "Don't tell your mother, but the Voice said to quit my job." He said, "What are you going to do?" I said, "I don't know."

I did not quit my job. My wife blew up at me in October and demanded that I leave. I told her I could not at that time, but that I would on December 1, 1991. On November 19, 1991, I was fired from the job I loved so much. I often wonder how things would have turned out had I obeyed the Voice and quit my job. Would I have lost my wife? Who knows.

I learned that I had not yet perfected my Amen. I did not say yes. I just waited because what the Voice wanted conflicted with what I wanted. It is like that in life. Sometimes what we want and what the Lord wants for us conflict. We have a choice to say Amen or not. I failed that time and have tried, now that I have not had a wife for 19 years, to always say Amen. Let G-d deal with the consequences.

Smooze

In our society, sophisticated people know that other sophisticated people do not speak the truth. It is acceptable in that stratification for people to say pleasant things to lull the unsuspecting person into believing that you want what they want. It is acceptable to make promises that one cannot keep. It is acceptable to say one thing to one person and tailor what was just said to another in a different way, that is, to spin it. Sophisticated people do not rely upon smooze or sweet talk or whatever you call it. If they want a serious answer to a serious question, they resort to writing things down and having someone sign what was said. But how would Jesus look at that and how should we look at smooze.

Matthew's Gospel reports that Jesus said, "Let your 'Yes" mean 'Yes', and your 'No' mean 'No. Anything more is from the evil one. Matthew 5:37. In the early Church, there was a sin called double-tongued. The Didache at 2:4-5 says, "You shall not be double-minded or double-tongued; for duplicity of tongue is a snare of death. Your speech shall not be false or vain, but fulfilled by deed."

Our President and Senator John McCain sparred with each other in the last election. Each made promises and statements about how they believed. Neither has done what they said and some of what they promised to do, each could have done with a proper vote or the stroke of a pen. Yet, these men are the role models for us and our children. They are some of the worse offenders of the commands of Jesus and any claim that they are not vicious and viral sinners is false. But we put up with this activity, because we do it ourselves. People who get ahead in this world must learn to smooze. You can be assured that he who is successful in people oriented professions must be double-tongued and double-minded.

But on the day of Judgment, the Lord will say to these people, I never you because you promised great things to many people and did none of them.

Let me urge my readers to reject the teachings of this world. Tell people what you really mean, and do not allow silence to be misinterpreted. Turn away from a environment of lies and seek the truth. I know a man who is convinced that he is a saint and yet he does evil every day with his mouth. It is not surprising that Ephesians calls the only offensive weapon in the armory of the Christian, the Word of G-d that will splint flesh from the bone.

Should Governments Be Involved With Religion?

The first answer to this question from a biblical perspective is yes. From the earliest time, religion supported the ruler and thus the ruler supported religion. Such an arrangement seemed natural to the people from the beginning and those who made up the majority of any locality expected the government to support their religion. In those rare cases in which the government or the ruler converted to a new religion, inevitably the government forced a new religion on the people. Such an event occurred in Israel after the accession of David as King. Scripture does not record what occurred in clear terms, but we see in the pronouncements of the Yahwist a state interest. Certainly, we see a strong state interest in the Deuteronomist.

Up until the accession of David, the people of Israel believed that YHVH was the G-d of Israel. There were other gods in Egypt, among the Canaanites, in Chaldea, in Babylon, in Assyria, in Hatti and other countries. Everyone knew that YHVH was the son of El and that he was appointed to rule over Israel. Deuteronomy 32:9 confirms this fact. But after the accession of David, we see the government moving for centralized control of the state and as it did, it sought to control the religion as well. The people who worshiped YHVH as their King also worshiped Ba'al who claimed Kingship in Lebanon; Asherah, their sister; and El who is called Elyon, the Highest, and Shaddai, the Almighty. Slowly, in the time after David and up until the reign of Josiah, we see what is called conflation in which the nature, power, and interests of first El, then Ba'al and finally Asherah are attributed not to them but to YHVH. He becomes the only G-d, not just the G-d of Israel. This conflation supported the centralization of the government which eventually suppressed religious sites at Arad, Bethel, Shechem, Nob, and Samaria in favor of Jerusalem.

In America, there was no supreme G-d. Jehovah was certainly the G-d of the Protestants. The Lord was the G-d of the Catholics. YHVH was the G-d of the Jews. Manitou was the G-d of the Iroqois and other Great Lakes Indians. Allah of the Muslims was here as well. Also, there was the Great Architect of the Masons and the Deist G-d who was far away.

The Masonic point of view held sway in America. Every man should believe in a supreme deity and no man should discuss in public that belief. Such a position became the official position when the Constitution forbade the establishment of one G-d over another. No preference was made for any g-d and certainly the Founding Fathers had no truck with atheists as Masons considered atheists as morally degenerate. The Constitution does not establish a religion, but neither is it inimical to religion. However, even the Declaration of Independence, the most radical of documents, treasonous in the new nation, mentions Nature's G-d and gives sway to his right to know why a people would separate themselves from another people who have the same G-d.

The American Government is not supported by religion per se although Mormonism makes Americanism religious. Because many people, motivated no doubt by the same natural empathy as those early Hebrews, feel that the state and the church should uphold each other, want the American government to be controlled by religious opinions, we have seen an upsurge of religious involvement in matters of the state. Such a position is biblical. Such a position is well within the spectrum of what the people in America felt in the time when the Constitution was made. However, the founding fathers lived in States which had a state religion. The Constitution did not seek to disestablish any of the State religions and there is no indication that it did. In our unique system, the 10th Amendment reserved to the States the power to influence religion. I recognize that the Supreme Court has not dealt directly with this question and its rulings about the 10 Commandments on the courthouse steps have been inimical to this concept. But, the Supreme Court has a long history of usurping the 10th Amendment and needs to be re-educated. The current Sovereignty Movement is the first step towards re-establishing the limited sovereignty of the States and ultimately State Religion.

The situation is better now than it has been. When I first started practicing law, a new congregation, a non-denominational congregation, had to jump through many hoops to declare its existence for purposes of taxation. The congregation had to have a method of educating its clergy, had to have a process of ordaining its clergy, had to maintain strict records of giving, had to account for its money, and was generally overseen by the government. When the Servants of G-d Evangelical Mission was formed in 1981, it received some substantial support from one person and thus as that one person gave more than half of its support, the congregation was deemed a private foundation and subjected to significant public scrutiny and control. All of that has changed. Now, a group of people may ask the government for a federal employer identification number declaring that they are a religious congregation and the granting of that number is sufficient to exempt that new congregation from further scrutiny. They use that number to gain exemption from state sales tax and local sales tax. They use that number to open bank accounts which are not subject to federal review. While the Supreme Court was busy throwing the Ten Commandments out of every courthouse, but its own, Congress was reaffirming the separation of Church and State by removing the previous controls. Nonetheless, the actions at Waco and with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of LDS show the government still involved with the suppression of religion.

In a pluralistic society, morality must be decided by the Church. There is no room for 536 legislators in Washington and 9 Jurists on the Supreme Court to dictate what is religious and what is not. If we are to avoid the inherent dangers of a state church, dangers well documented in the histories of all the continents, we must allow a full separation of Church and State with a clear understanding that the State will neither encourage nor discourage belief, not just religion, but belief. The right to be an atheist must be supported so that those who are on the other side may exist. Plural marriage is biblical and must not be stopped. Bigamy laws are inherently Christian and date from Roman times, when Rome set the rules for religion. Morality must be controlled by the Church. At the same time, as the State steps back from Church control, the Church must step back from political actions such as the accumulation of guns and participation of the church in politics. Separation is complete only when both sides desist from attempting to control the other. All laws governing marriage must be abolished. Only the Church should support the institution of marriage. The State cannot support this institution without becoming involved in issues of who can perform marriage and who may be married. Let the Churches decide who they will marry and how many they will marry.

The State has a legitimate interest in registering and understanding the stated positions of every religious group, for the sole purpose of defining the boundary between the two. The State has a legitimate right to require the Church to stay out of politics. The State must desist from morality. The State must not adopt the morality of the majority and make it law. Few people would want to follow my strict rules of morality, forbidding the showing of any part of the body by either sex in public; forbidding the sale of pork in America; stripping the seafood industry of its right to exist; strictly governing the sale of meat and the treatment of animals; and numerous other acts which the Torah requires. Likewise, dancing, drinking, and gambling are not problems in same gender situations are always allowable, in my view. Religious prostitution should be exempt from state oversight. No one thinks that the biblical injunctions should be strictly enforced, but the State should not become involved with deciding which ones are allowable and which ones are not.

The legitimate concerns of the State are the maintenance of a system of order, the protection of the property rights, the guarantee of human rights, and support of parental rights. In doing those important acts, it may need to have a standing defense force, a foreign policy, and post and defense roads. The clear gifts of authority from the States to the Federal government should be respected. But, the States should begin a new dialogue not only with the Federal Government but with Religion to define their role in the declaration of morality. Some states with a strong history of religious tolerance like Rhode Island may support new religious ideas more easily than Maryland with a strong Catholic bent. People may move to those states where their religion is most free, like California for instance. But for the most part, the Federal government should not be involved with religion and the State government should become more involved with religion.

As in all things, these musings come from my background as both a religious person and a lawyer. Feel free to comment.

Immanent Return?

In Acts 1:11, Luke records that some people had gathered together about 40 days after Passover and Yeshua had ascended into heaven on a cloud and then two men appeared and said, "Men of Galilee, why are you standing there looking at the sky? This Yeshua who has been taken up from you into heaven will return in the same way as you have seen him going into heaven."

Luke is the only person making this claim that Yeshua would return. He never knew Yeshua and relies entirely upon the statements of others. The alleged persons who were present at the Ascension are unnamed. Mark's Gospel has two endings, neither of which is considered original. John has no Ascension nor does Matthew. The doctrine of the return of Yeshua to the earth rests upon the veracity of Luke in reporting what others have said. No jury would believe him.

The Apostles including Paul believed that Yeshua would return in their lifetimes to change the world. It did not happen. As late as the second century, when 2 Peter was written, the idea of the return was firmly established and yet had not happened. The author cautions the believer not to be hasty. The time of Yeshua's return has been set many times in history and he has not shown.

With all due respect, the belief is false. We have waited almost two thousand years and Yeshua has not returned. Yeshua would not even recognize the religions that still say his name.

However, I do not attack the Christians for their belief. Based upon the Prophets, Jews still await a Messiah who was prophesied to be here even longer ago than the prophecy of Yeshua's return. That event has not happened either. By the standards of Deuteronomy 18:20, it is permissible to ignore the claim of Yeshua's return and the coming of the Messiah. Based upon the same statement, we can ignore the statement in Chapter 18 that G-d will send someone like Moses. That has never happened either.

In reality, the expectation of an end time and an ultimate destruction of the earth is silly. Not only are we certain that the event will occur, it frankly has nothing to do with religion or spirituality. Only recently have scientists (Stephen Hawking) and politicians (Barack Obama) understood the real issue which is we must leave this planet and establish humanity elsewhere to protect the continuity of the species and we must begin to plan for the deflection of space rocks that can destroy us.

Believers live in the present. They do not live in the past or the future. Belief in the immanent return is not conducive to faith or reason. It justifies cruelty of man to man and justifies sinfulness based upon the length of time one believes he or she has until some prophetic event occurs.

As an article of faith, the belief in the coming of the Messiah and in the return of Yeshua should be eliminated. Frankly, this world is inhabited by millions of beings who know the truth, but are not seen or recognized by most humans, owing to a lack of the ability to see into their light spectra.

We should live our lives as if today were the last day on earth and we will meet our maker tomorrow. We should remain as sinless as possible in preparation for that event. It is certain. All of us will die. Waiting for some long expected, but non-occurring event, is not a way of life; it is a way of insanity.

Shavuot Celebration

There is a strong following for this blog in the Kansas City area. I want to invite all of you to come to a Shavuot (Pentecost) celebration on the evening of May 20, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. CDT. Each participant should feel free to bring fresh fruits, new vegetables either cooked or raw, kosher meats, desserts, and drink. We will have a potluck meal. Those wishing to come must rsvp at netseri@kc.rr.com and I will respond with telephone number, address for the event, and answer any questions. Your early response for purposes of planning would be encouraged and appreciated.